Apple ships iMessage in the default messaging app. A large portion users are probably unaware what "iMessage" even is, just that blue bubbles are "better."
Microsoft got dinged for shipping IE by default, and so should Apple. Maybe you can argue Apple's not big enough yet, but I reckon we just need to wait a few years (87% of US teens use iPhones [0]).
Fair enough, agreed that social groups dominate the dynamic more-so (e.g. any country other than US). But being the default, pre-installed, and only app with SMS integration on iOS is an unfair position to compete from, especially when iOS is now slowly gaining dominant market position in the US.
It's not really how it works for a lot of users in the US. As I get it with the more social demographics, most use different apps for messaging for different contexts. social media like twitter or instagram for more public casual chatting with strangers, maybe private messages on said apps for growing relationships, then for more personal stuff some mutual messenger app.
social demographics just use the chat that is closest to whatever they like to do online. iMessage is more of a "it's always there if I need it" thing as I get it, not so much something chosen out of confusion -- the social demographic is quite good at compartmentalizing their lives across many apps.
I agree. Something other people aren't mentioning - the default iOS Contacts app will automatically switch your messaging and voice call shortcuts to use an alternate platform, per-contact. There's no user interaction required to do this. A lot of people in these threads conflate iMessage, SMS, and MMS - the idea that iPhone users are "locked into" iMessage is absurd. This feature has been in place for many years. [0]
IMO, the buy-in for iMessage is an iPhone. If you contrast a $429 new iPhone with the buy-in required for other mainstream apps (share and license your private data + metadata with advertising companies in perpetuity), $429 doesn't seem unreasonable at all; but if you prefer to pay with your data instead, all platforms (including the iPhone) provide an option to do so via options like FB Messenger[1] and WhatsApp[2].
If Apple were to remove these alternative options, along with SMS/MMS, and support only iMessage communication - there would be a much better support for the claim that they "lock in" their users.
iMessage is competing unfairly, as the default, pre-installed, SMS-integrated app on iOS. Being hardware-attested and limited to the dominant US smartphone OS exacerbates this.
Most other countries are using some other messaging app, so clearly these aren't super significant hurdles. I agree "lock-in" is strong wording that probably doesn't apply to iMessage. But you cannot argue that iMessage is competing fairly with the likes of FB Messenger / Whatsapp / Telegram / Signal.
Microsoft barely got a slap on the wrist from the DoJ in the end. Market competition from Firefox, Opera, Safari, and Chrome, along with industry and cultural support for browser standards, was the ultimate remedy, and that would have happened with or without the DoJ. The original suit was brought by Netscape who were charging $40 for a browser license at the time. It was a dead end business model and MS was ultimately right when they argued in the nineties that browser tech was so fundamental it needed to be integrated into the OS.
I love iMessage because it has a good feature set for family group chats (photo sharing is stellar), but I’m also happy with all the innovation, choice, and competition on features and governance provided by Signal, WhatsApp, Telegram, et al, each of which have their own strengths and have to respond to improvements by the others. The worst thing that could happen to innovation is if we were all using the same iMessage protocol forced into the stewardship of a DoJ mandated standards body.
I really can’t understand the obsession with default SMS functionality. Other than 2FA codes or setting up Uber on a new phone who gets an SMS more than once a month?
Microsoft didn't get dinged for shipping IE by default. They got dinged because, to promote IE, they engaged in a lot of fairly nefarious things, forcing their OEM partners not to install other browsers, for instance.
It wasn't just "you can't have a default web browser in IE", and reducing that case to that is ahistorical.
You literally cannot install another default messaging app on iOS with SMS integration. There are no OEM partners to speak of on iOS. If iOS reaches 90%+ market share, why shouldn't it be treated the same as Microsoft?
It's not the same thing. If Microsoft was selling both the hardware and the software. IIRC the US antitrust case was mainly based on restrictions MS imposed on the OEMs. No OEMs, no issue really.
Which sort of makes sense. You don't technically don't have the obligation to make your platform open or support specific APIs regardless of your market share.
MS was prosecuted because they pressured OEMs into not installing a different browser by making that a requirement to be able to buy Windows licenses.
The alleged illegal act here was the combination of them 1) leveraging the power they had over OEMs to 2) prevent them from installing a different browser in an effort to 3) kill competing browsers.
It was never just about having a default browser, it was about the combination of 1, 2 and 3. There were some other incidents other than the browser that involved elements 1, 2 and 3, but the logic behind it was similar.
I say “alleged” because MS won on appeal and the DOJ decided to settle.
Apple on the other hand, just has a default messaging app. They’re not using their power to block other messaging apps with the intent to kill them, nor are they pressuring other parties to do or not do an act to protect their default messaging app.
The only thing that comes closest to the MS case is that Apple told carriers that they can’t have their bloatware preinstalled from the get go with the first iPhone. The problem however is that Apple, when they imposed that restriction, had no power over carriers, they were just entering the phone market after all.
If anything the carriers had power over Apple, but they still choose to play ball despite this restriction.
I’d they’d tried to do that now, then it’d be a different story, because now Apple has quite some market dominance and it could be an antitrust issue.
That’s why carriers are free to impose limitations on certain functionality like hotspot use, because if Apple would force carriers, especially in a heavy handed way, then it could be explained as abusing their power.
Apple is mainly lucky for always having done Apple things, even when they were small in the respective market.
A lot of what Apple does, Apple has done from the beginning when they were insignificant in the context of a market. They couldn’t do introduce many of those things now while they’re so big.
So for all intents and purposes Apple is treated the same as MS.
Microsoft got dinged for shipping IE by default, and so should Apple. Maybe you can argue Apple's not big enough yet, but I reckon we just need to wait a few years (87% of US teens use iPhones [0]).
[0] https://www.axios.com/2021/10/14/teen-iphone-use-spending-ha...