The End of the iPhone as We Know It

Apple seems to be very worried about the Department of Justice’s new antitrust lawsuit, which landed Thursday with the backing of 16 state attorneys general and the District of Columbia—and you know what? But iMessage’s grip on the text-messaging ecosystem makes for just one plank of the government’s case, which also targets four other areas: multiservice “super apps” that can run their own internal marketplaces and programs outside of App Store fees and surcharges, cloud-streaming apps that reduce energy dependence on Apple’s built-in premium hardware, non-Apple-brand smartwatches that may be cheaper than the Apple Watch, and non-Apple-brand digital wallets that may be more secure, and more directly connected with one’s bank, than the Apple Wallet. Not fun to watch.” The suit continues: “Jobs was clear in his response: Apple would ‘force’ developers to use its payment system to lock in both developers and users on its platform.” All of this blocking has another negative effect on consumers, the suit continues: “Apple itself has less incentive to innovate because it has insulated itself from competition,” making it “not surprising that Apple spent more than twice as much on stock buybacks and dividends as it did on research and development.” One more: “In a 2019 email the Vice President of Product Marketing for Apple Watch acknowledged that Apple Watch may help prevent iPhone customers from switching. But such gatekeeping is excellent for Apple’s bottom line at a time when it’s spurned any Jobsian innovation: “iPhone sales have made up a majority of Apple’s annual revenue every year since 2012,” with “some of the largest drivers” being the Apple Watch and the App Store. “People buy an iPhone and then buy another iPhone and then stay within the Apple family with Apple Watches,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a co-litigator, in an interview.