Microsoft bailed out Apple with an investment entirely because of anti monopoly regulations.
More importantly, MS kept producing versions of Office and even Internet Explorer IIRC that allowed the Mac to remain an option because of their fear of being regulation.
Then after that it was EU anti monopolist regulations that struck down MS and prevented it from strangling the open web, which allowed the web to become an open platform which made it possible for both the Mac and iPhone (which didn’t even have an App Store on launch and relied entirely on web apps) to exist.
The only success Apple can claim credit that wasn’t directly the result of anti monopoly regulation was the iPod and even that wouldn’t have happened because Apple would have folded if Apple hadn’t been protected by anti monopolist regulations.
And then when it eventually did allow a gimped version of iTunes charged Apple 30% of all the music and movies sold on it.
If they were being Apple like they would probably have even started charging 20% of the album price of every music CD users ripped to their iPods using iTunes.
And MS was a far more ruthless company. If it wasn’t afraid of anti monopolistic regulation it would have come up with other ideas I can’t imagine in a 1000 years to have absolutely destroyed Apple.
not for smartphones: https://www.counterpointresearch.com/insights/global-smartph...
not for macs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_share_of_personal_compu...
not for operating systems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_syste...
not for web browsers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
Even Atari and Commodore were somehow more open to third party vendors in that regard.
Not "entirely", it was a lawsuit settlement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company
Not disputing anything you're saying, but in hindsight, the web as an open platform was only viable from ~2005-2010 in the window where most people had at-home broadband, but smart phones hadn't taken over.