“After initially dismissing the notion that Apple could ever break its way past entrenched rivals and make any significant impact on the smartphone industry, tech pundits are now aghast that Apple is running its business the way its executives see fit. Critics charge that the iPhone and its mobile software store amount to a monopoly and a restriction of free trade. They’re wrong,” Daniel Eran Dilger writes for RoughlyDrafted.
Dilger asks, “How is it that those who were skeptical that the iPhone would take off, or even hopeful that it wouldn’t, are now taking the position that Apple shouldn’t be allowed to chart its own destiny, but should instead be run by the community of pundit opinion that tried to destroy it?”
“The reality is that Apple has earned its success, not by being granted a monopoly by fate that it turned around as a weapon to stop competition, but by actually competing to deliver a better product,” Dilger writes.
“Daniel Lyons, the Fake Steve Jobs who went to Newsweek to write up absurdities about how Apple is like Microsoft because Vudo is going out of business because Apple sells movies in iTunes, is a great example of why the tech media needs to educate itself on the difference between successful competition in a functional market, and Microsoft’s abuse of its monopoly position to prevent competition,” Dilger writes.
“Apple doesn’t have a moral obligation to grant other companies success,” Dilger writes. “[Apple] has already provided them an example of how to attack monopolists and win. If they can’t compete, that’s their problem.”
Full article – recommended – here.