Earlier quoted context omitted.
Antitrust doesn't really on reason. It's a completely subjective law. In one breath you can be guilty because you have prices too low, in another because you have prices too high. Ultimately, it relies on how much pull you can exercise of politicians and bureaucrats. I am not saying it's a good situation, just that that's reality.
That is likely the case, but technical fora tend to be overly concerned with "tying" (e.g. Internet Explorer or iTunes), while overlooking the indisputable fact that Microsoft did run a "trust". MS had a set of legal contracts which gave them total control over PC distribution and pre-installed software. (And, they even had deals with their main competitors, Apple and IBM.) That was a much lower bar and easier for th…
Tying laws, and antitrust broadly are a way for regulators to forcibly dictate what companies create. As stated above what's really revolting is this typically comes as a result of competitors lobbying to cripple the top player in the industry.