At that time virtually everyone was using windows though. There wasn't a competitor like Android is for iOS.
That’s just incorrect on the face of it. Linux and Mac have existed for as long as Windows, or longer. It’s pure opinion to say there were no competitors.
With monopoly cases, it's all about market share. In the late 90s, Windows had 95%+ of the market[0]. I believe (but may be mistaken) that the legal threshold often used is 75%. Apple isn't there, but Windows certainly was.
I don't need to use third-party software to enable UAC in Windows or sudo in Linux.
Their security model is different. They are multiuser OSes protecting users against each other, while Android started as a single user OS (despite what goes on with uids underneath) protecting users from themselves. Users running their own apps as uid 0 goes directly against the security model. Nothing stops them from changing or completely discarding the security model on their own devices, but once again, that is c…
It's not completely orthogonal, though. Both things are, in practice, means by which Google can control what kind of apps most users will be exposed to and will install.
That’s just incorrect on the face of it. Linux and Mac have existed for as long as Windows, or longer. It’s pure opinion to say there were no competitors.
With monopoly cases, it's all about market share. In the late 90s, Windows had 95%+ of the market[0]. I believe (but may be mistaken) that the legal threshold often used is 75%. Apple isn't there, but Windows certainly was. [0] https://cdn.arstechnica.net/articles/culture/total-share.med...
since when does market share determine what competitors there are? competitors are businesses competing against each other for the same market share. so your chart actually proves my statement since both linux and apple existed at this time.