There are phones running alternative versions of Android with no google dependency, and there are phones running linux.

Furthermore, if we lived in a world where the two main OS's were locked down to an insane degree, we would also have plenty of alternative operating systems. The reason we don't today is because we don't really have a need for it, in the same way linux has a monopoly on servers and nobody really cares.

▲

FinnKuhn 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> There are phones running alternative versions of Android with no google dependency, and there are phones running linux.

Those make up 0% of the market [1], which classifies Apple and Google as gatekeepers.

[1] https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/europe/

▲

slopinthebag 2 hours ago | parent [-]

No, they would be gatekeepers if it wasn't possible to get a phone which didn't run their operating systems. You can, it's just that they suck and nobody wants it. You have cause and effect backwards.

If you have a market with a handful of companies producing good products, and a handful of companies producing shit products nobody wants or buys, you cannot claim that the companies producing the good products are "gatekeeping", and that's the reason why nobody buys the shit products.

▲

FinnKuhn 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Them making the only phones anyone uses makes them the gatekeepers on what people do on their phones -> Apple and Google are gatekeepers under the DMA.

It doesn't matter how they became gatekeepers.

	▲	slopinthebag an hour ago \| parent [-]
		If people cared they would use something else. People don't care. That doesn't make them gatekeepers.