Neat. So the OS allowed you to choose alternatives and to avoid Chrome wholly. So you're fully of the opinion that the EU argument has no merit then, right?

Of course, saying it's a part of the Android/Google Experience is from the average consumer. You know that you have the Chrome browser if you so choose. Yes, you can go to the Play Store and install Firefox. Unlike on iOS where the browser alternatives are facades.

It's the same argument as with Microsoft vs. the EU regarding IE: Defaults are important when you have a monopoly.

I'm pretty sure that an important part of the Microsoft argument was that you couldn't uninstall ie and it was used by certain system functions even if you set a different default. That's an important distinction.

(Im a Googler, but that's not particularly relevant to this comment)

I can't uninstall Chrome on my LG Android phone either.

No, but you can fully disable it (and that's equivalent to uninstalling, and wasn't possible on windows).

That is certainly not the equivalent as it still occupies storage.

Also, you could actually uninstall IE. That only uninstalled the shell, not the libraries (as there were dependencies) but it was gone in terms of the application.

An "app" on Android is not a traditional executable. It's really a library and a collection of OS hooks that execute code from that library on various events.

The home screen icon is one of those hooks but by far not the only one. If I hide it or never press it, that implies exactly nothing about whether or not code from the app gets executed while I use the phone.

I've never gone into the Bluetooth settings on my phone, that doesnt mean it's abusive that it was already there on my phone when I bought it.

OEMs can change the Bluetooth settings though.

Same. The Android experience is being able to choose your own browser, media player, email app etcetera.

I know ecosystems make corporations a lot of money and some people prefer them. And they can choose an iPhone or Pixel.