But what about Apple? iOS is designed such that a third party app store is impossible. Why should Google have to allow a third party app store and Apple be able to "walk free" in their walled garden.
Android would not have been so big if it were not an open platform. There were many other closed source OS's available ie. Windows Phone.
If Google backs off, it would be a bait and switch, and this tactic should be illegal.
Imagine if Samsung had its own OS, Apple with its own, Nokia (now with Android) and others with their own. We would not have much choice if Android were not open between phones because many of our apps would not be compatible.
iOS from the beginning was not open. It was known, so everyone knew. Android is expected to remain open because it was initially open.
TL;DR: Android would have been dead it were not an open platform. No device manufacturer should have give up control to Google, which Samsung regrets to date.
So if this is Samsung "pushing", they're truly a very sucky company.
This is lack of will on Samsung's part, not some magical market advantage on Google's part.
If google wants to make a phone that’s locked to an operating system with only their store they can do that, no issue. But that’s not what they are doing. They are distributing their operating system across the market and abusing that to force out any competing stores. That’s not ok.
If Ford decides to sell all their cars with Michelin tires that’s not an issue, however if Michelin decides that every company who uses their tires must also use their new expensive brand of windscreen wipers that’s a problem.
(You can't buy a license for any Apple OS for use on other hardware. You can buy a Android OS phone from any participating vendor. The vendor can refuse to pay Google and install any store.)
Tying is legal for non monopoly’s.
I don't see Pixel phones being exempted from this judgement, so I don't understand why you're claiming this.
Now if someone created an app store on MacOS (Homebrew for example) and Apple started prompting users to uninstall Homebrew I'd reason they'd be subject to losing a lawsuit.
Not completely true: corporate users can get special distribution licenses to be able to distribute to their employees. https://developer.apple.com/programs/enterprise/
Microsoft had the problem a few years ago with bundling their Internet Explorer on Windows (and making it hard for the competition to have a chance). For Apple, the situation is a bit easier, as they don't allow any third party app stores at all, so any competition would probably encourage their users to break Apples 'Terms of Use', which in turn would make a lawsuit even more difficult.
In my opinion, platform providers should be obliged to open their platform for all kinds of third-party services & tools but I am sure, Apple/Google/Microsoft/etc. will find other ways to discriminate others on their platform and push their services.
1) the ability to install their own apps, no restrictions (IF approved by owner)
2) the ability to get apps from wherever they want
I would be much happier.
You might argue Google is dominant in advertising worldwide, but Facebook is a contender in many countries (e.g. in the Philippines, Facebook is "the internet" as an approximation).
If you want to pick and choose subsectors, I am sure we could pick markets where mobile is one of the words and the second word is also something Apple absolutely dominates.
The world is a big place to make sweeping generalisations about.
Edit: parent article is about Portugal, not the world. A friend said to me: working in antitrust, on either side, a key is defining the market.
Having a smaller market share doesn't mean you can get away with breaking the law.