What if the platform strategy is inherently flawed from the perspective of a public good, and is inherently monopolistic and anticompetitive? How does this not reach the absolute definition of a de facto monopoly, especially if you’ve read about the powers that monopolies already broken up we’re using to keep theirs? No monopoly ever will admit it is one.

I would like to see a world where platforms are forcibly opened - it seems like any downside could be easily mitigated with competition or regulation. If Apple wants to be a privacy platform great. But they don’t get to take an arbitrary cut out of every companies bottom line with no recourse because they own the hardware. I think anyone saying the potential bad effects don’t have enough imagination as to how well things can work when everything isn’t owned by one company. You could even argue it’s anti capitalist if you wanted.