The anti-competitiveness is even before that: when Apple decided not to allow sideloading.

Remember when Microsoft was sued for bundling IE with Windows? Now imagine if they blocked other browsers from existing on Windows back then.

And in the US, that lawsuit went nowhere and they never stopped bundling IE.

MS was sued for a number of things including forcing OEMs to pay a license fee for each PC sold whether or not it was shipped with Windows and not allowing third parties to ship alternative browsers.

Yes, not allowing third parties to ship alternative browsers, that was anti-competitive behavior because MS was in the browser business. Now if Apple had a loot box in their game and wouldn't allow Epic to have a loot box in Epic's game, that too would be anti-competitive. But not allowing anyone to have a loot box at all, isn't.

> And in the US, that lawsuit went nowhere and they never stopped bundling IE

Your specificity of “in the US” suggests you know that’s not how it went down in the rest of the world, and that they did infact have to stop bundling IE (and other components) in other countries / regional blocs.

And that also did little good in the EU where they had browser choice...

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/11/technology/11eubrowser.ht...

What did it look like a year after, two years after, five years after, when compared to the US market?

A single datapoint doesn’t tell the whole story.

Yes Chrome started taking over. Do you think that was because of browser choice or because it was heavily advertised on the home page of the most visited site on the internet and it was included as bundleware on unrelated products?