Apple essentially owns the mobile application market — and the tablet application market, if you're inclined to separate that out. Apple's position in those markets is at least as strong as Google's in search. (Yes, they make more money from hardware, but remember we're discounting that under the premise that market influence is the decisive competitive factor.)
Apple also has disproportionate influence even in markets where it is not a monopoly.
Re:John Gruber: I'll Tell You What's Fair
by WiseWeasel on Wednesday June 16, 2010 @03:19PM
(#1436680)
It's not clear that those markets have ever been truly competitive or relevant in the first place. To someone like the FTC or the Justice Department, mobile apps are a nascent market, and they're not going to touch it with a 10-foot pole.
As for Apple's skill in managing media exposure and marketing, that's certainly not an area in which they can hope to have any kind of monopoly.
Let's compare to Apple, who doesn't have a majority share in any competitive market besides portable music players and digital music distribution. The actual share of revenues from these businesses is a small and shrinking fraction of Apple's income. The portable music player business is collapsing in the face of evolving consumer smart phones and mobile internet devices like the iPod Touch, and the digital music distribution is an insignificant part of Apple's revenue. All the areas in which Apple is making all their profits are either nascent markets like consumer tablets and mobile internet devices, or Apple is a relatively small player. To imply that Apple can use their position in these markets it doesn't dominate to unfairly move into other established markets needs a bit more supportive evidence than that.