tenchi71

I have only ever owned iPhones as far as "smart" phones are concerned; The Apple ecosystem works great and I don't mind staying in it. I also don't mind being 'confined' to validated and verified apps through Apple's own marketplace, VS getting random 3rd party stuff elsewhere like you can on an Android-based phone. Also, SMS text issues between Android and Apple devices simply doesn't matter to me; I have friends with Android phones and they can send me a photo if they need to and it still works.
 
I also like that as an iPhone user, my OS support is going to be longer than most Android devices, and since I take care of my phone I can keep them for quite a few years without worrying about it. I'm not a 'green bubble hater' or anything, but the Android people I know buy garbage-tier phones that are basically worthless in a short period of time, but they think they're getting a great deal because they're cheap. They could keep an iPhone SE over a longer duration of time than several of those cheap Androids, spend less money in that period of time, and not have a bad experience soon after they open the box. I think a lot of Android support comes from people that believe buying cheap crap is good because it's cheap, a phone isn't an investment but just like buying computer parts, getting the cheapest thing on the market is rarely a good deal.

Relating iMessage usage/adoption to a smartphone monopoly has to be one of the stupiest things I've heard in a long time.

Exactly, what is the point for me to go back to android to get if I am lucky 3 years of updates when Apple can offer me double the length at the same price. 
 
it's funny over my years, I have actually left android for iPhone and it's honestly a better experience. I still use an android device but for a very limited use case, recording videos, as the thermals for that are much better. Beyond that, its not worth getting an android device because their software update support is that bad whereas I finally parted with my iPhone 8 in September after it wasn't going to be updated anymore. We've been seeing a push to iPhone because and this is in my opinion, people want a device that will last more than two years, which software support side, android fails to deliver, such as the laughable joke that was the pixel pass program.
 
Here has been my personal phone history since my Blackberry 8820. 
Blackberry 8820 HTC Dream Google Nexus 4 iPhone 6s iPhone 8 Samsung S10e (Only used for video these days; the phone functionally was a used for a short time) iPhone 15 Pro Max So my S10e a $749 smartphone hit EOL in April 2023 after a lifespan of 4 years and 1 month with a sole security update about 7 months ago. My iPhone 8 at $849 dollar phone at the time just got today an security update, 6 and a half years later, and 6 months after the last software update. 

Apple users don't avoid switching Android because they're being blocked from doing it.  They don't because they don't want to.
 
The entire strength of the Apple ecosystem comes from it being centrally managed by Apple.  iMessage is good because it's run by Apple.  Apple Pay is good because it's run by Apple.  The app store is good.....because it's run by Apple.  You open this shit up and you end up with the Android shitshow where nothing works with anything else and a 5 year old can hack it because there's more gaping holes than a BDSM porn set.
 
If the DOJ is bored why don't they sue Nvidia...who has an actual monopoly on everything GPU compute right now.  Oh yeah because it's harder to explain that in a press release when it's an election year vs. "iPhone bad"

Wow... so having a high market share means you are a monopoly apparently. Want to know something funny, that 39.66% of other, shows that Apple indeed does not have a monopoly by definition. By that logic, Boeing has a monopoly too on the 700 series, or that Youtube is the monopoly on video streaming.
 
If you want to see a real monopoly, check out Luxotica. 
 
Also, dear DoJ, We are we going after google next?

by these figures nvidia has a monopoly on GPU's, intel has a monopoly on CPU's, and lays has a monopoly on potato chips.

Interested in how courts would differentiate malicious deliberate monopoly to keep competitors down or simply a natural consequence of winning and being the nr 1 choice for most consumers. At what point do companies start suffering from success.

She would make a good agent for Secret Shopper next go around.

But can it run Crysis?

But can it run Crysis?