I think the terminology you're using ("be okay") is so vague it doesn't mean anything here. You seem to be arguing your own personal value set without telling the rest of us what your values are or what ethical framework you are arguing in.

The only thing I can infer from this comment is that you aren't arguing within a legal framework (although I suspect you might be wrong because "unfair competitive advantage" is something that can be enforced under US and EU law).

I'm not a lawyer, anti trust law and monopoly law a rather complex and subtle things.

Especially if we consider the difference between the intend behind a law and it's current legal interpretations.

Because of this I try to avoid arguing using the actual laws.

I also believe many of this laws need some degree of adaption to the modern world. Sometimes with changes in the law and sometimes with changes in the interpretation of the law.

So yes it's no accidentally vague.

More concrete would be : It should be illegal but might not be due to the law not being adapted to the dynamics of many modern markets.

But that's still pretty vague tbh.

The usual answer is that people who buy the phones must think it’s ok, otherwise they’d buy a competitor’s phone.

And of course opinions differ on the good and bad aspects of their policies.

It’s not like all the competitors who are complaining are ‘fair’ in any particular way.

Also, your description fits a department store, or Amazon, or pretty much any other store for that matter.

All store owners get to stock what they want, charge what they want, and give their own products advantages.

If your argument is that no store should be able to do these things, then that seems like a reasonable position to hold.

Perhaps we do need to overhaul the notion of marketplaces and intermediaries in general. That seems like a relevant idea to explore.

The people arguing about monopolies are saying that everyone else should be allowed to do these things, but not Apple because they have too much power.

> The usual answer is that people who buy the phones must think it’s ok, otherwise they’d buy a competitor’s phone.

People don't realize what's actually going on with the policies and practices of the app stores. They just buy the phone and use it. If they did know, they would probably be more opposed to it too. They don't realize how these practices actually impact them and their choices on the platform.

> The usual answer is that people who buy the phones must think it’s ok, otherwise they’d buy a competitor’s phone.

I think plenty of people might think on reflection "That's not cool but I still want that phone".

That pretty much sums up my continuing commercial relationship with Google as well.

And my feelings about most modern meat production practices.

We don't always vote with our wallets.

> We don't always vote with our wallets.

We do, it's just not 100% of the weight of the decision, but it's rarely 0%.