But as the parent comment you're replying to said, the situations aren't comparable.
Microsoft had over 90% of the market in the 90s. You could not stop using Windows, because there was simply no credible alternative for most consumers. That's not true for iOS.
If Microsoft at the time had, say, 50% of the market the outcome would likely have been extremely different.
I doubt ms had 90% of consumer electronics market or even os.
> I doubt ms had 90% of consumer electronics market or even os.
You should probably look that up then, instead of "doubting": https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-courts-findings-f...
Government worked out the correct action a long time ago. When you see a trust, you destroy it, when you still get collusion between the separate companies that is manageable since collusion has prisoners dilemmas.
I’m sure the government has to technical wherewithal to make sure that Apple is compliant with browser standards....
In the US, "The proposed settlement required Microsoft to share its application programming interfaces with third-party companies and appoint a panel of three people who would have full access to Microsoft's systems, records, and source code for five years in order to ensure compliance."
By having full access to the API, MS could no longer give IE special privileges (for example, being the only default browser choice when a link is clicked to be opened). At any rate, it's not a stretch to imagine similar movements towards Apple's app store. The parallels are quite similar.
The parallels aren’t similar. Apple has less than 50% market share in the US and even less in Europe. Every console maker does the same as Apple.