Technology
Apple’s iPhone is not a monopoly like Windows was a monopoly

The U.S. Department of Justice and attorneys general from 16 states and the District of Columbia sued Apple this morning in federal court for violating antitrust laws. The lawsuit alleged that the corporate has a monopoly within the premium smartphone market and uses a number of illegal tactics to perpetuate this monopoly.
Leaving aside the main points of this tactic and its legality (should you’re interested, you possibly can read all the lawsuit here) the case has many similarities to the Justice Department’s antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft from the Nineteen Nineties, which I wrote about on the web site Microsoft Tips from 2000 to 2010. Even Attorney General Merrick Garland noted these similarities, saying: “The landmark Microsoft case found the monopolist liable under antitrust laws for using its market power to undermine technologies that would make it easier for users to choose a different computer operating system.” Today’s grievance alleges that Apple used lots of the same tactics that Microsoft used.
However, there is one fundamental difference between these cases: Microsoft had a clear monopoly within the relevant marketplace for PC operating systems. Apple’s monopoly position is not so clear.
Having a monopoly is not illegal, Garland noted at her news conference. However, it is illegal to make use of certain tactics to perpetuate or maintain this monopoly – but to prove this, it have to be proven that the defendant has sufficient market power to exclude competitors from the market.
Microsoft Windows had well over 90% of the relevant market share for notebook computer operating systems. In fact, it was so dominant within the pre-smartphone era Goldman Sachs estimates In 2000, Microsoft operating systems were reportedly installed on 97% of all computing devices.
Although the actual end result of the Microsoft antitrust case might be described as a mixed victory for the Justice Department, with lots of the penalties – including dissolving Microsoft into two corporations – being thrown out on appeal, the factual findings on this case clearly established that Microsoft had monopoly power. This paved the way in which for a series of personal lawsuits, which Microsoft has mostly ended.
Looking purely numerically, Apple’s market share is much lower.
In its lawsuit, the Justice Department argues that Apple has greater than 70% of the U.S. smartphone market, if revenue is counted. This is different than measuring by units shipped – based on statistics from the last quarter of 2023, Apple’s share is closer to 64% counterpoint research, well ahead of second-place Samsung with 18%. But the Justice Department argues that there are other indicators that support the iPhone’s dominance, corresponding to the undeniable fact that most young users select iPhones over Samsung phones running Google’s Android operating system. Households with higher demographics are also keen to decide on the iPhone.
The government also argues that the United States is an appropriate market, amongst other things, because most consumers buy smartphones through carriers and since potential latest market entrants must comply with U.S. telecommunications regulations, amongst other things. This argument is essential because Apple’s market share worldwide is much lower (only 23%, with Samsung second with 16%). In first place is the “Other” item, which mainly includes low-cost Android phones. It is clearly still a fragmented global market, which actually changes the competitive dynamics – developers have a significant incentive to create applications for Android, for instance. Contrast this with Microsoft’s market dominance, which was global – there was almost no real alternative on the time.
A key section within the Justice Department case begins on page 66, titled “Apple Has Monopoly Power in the Smartphone and Performance Smartphone Market.” The argument comes all the way down to barriers to entry.
First, the Justice Department argues that the majority people have already got a smartphone and are purchasing a latest one, and since most of those users have already got an iPhone, they usually tend to select one other iPhone. The Justice Department says Apple has introduced many artificial barriers to vary, corresponding to the difference between blue and green messaging bubbles for iPhone and Android phone users and allegedly limiting the functionality of third-party cross-platform video apps, somewhat than directing people to FaceTime. which only works on Apple products. If users change, they’ll incur costs and difficulties corresponding to learning a latest interface, purchasing latest applications, transferring data, etc.
Second, the DOJ cites a whole list of technical barriers to entry, corresponding to ordering expensive components, designing sophisticated hardware and software, securing distribution agreements, etc. There is also a variety of circumstantial evidence, corresponding to Apple’s huge and sustained profit margins on iPhone sales.
These arguments may prove convincing to the judge presiding over the case. However, on the subject of barriers to entry, Apple could argue that product differentiation and integration is not the identical as foreclosing competitors. A totally integrated platform with built-in apps for specific features corresponding to web browsing and video conferencing is easy and convenient, and customers select and proceed to decide on it because they like it, not because they’d like to modify to Android and are blocked by artificial barriers.
In the second case, Apple could point to the big investments it has made during the last 15 years in constructing these supply chains and relationships with carriers and developers, and rightly ask why it ought to be penalized now for doing the mandatory work to construct a lead.
This is often the case in antitrust cases within the tech world. An innovator rises to the highest through a combination of exertions, luck, and difficult business tactics. They construct an undeniable advantage largely because of network effects. Competitors complain. Governments are intervening. A dominant player stays in business long enough that latest competitors find a technique to enter the market – much as Apple and Google did against Microsoft within the 2000s, when their smartphone operating systems made desktop computers and Windows less essential.
And then the cycle starts again.
Technology
This is the shipping of products from China to the USA

The Chinese retailer has modified the strategy in the face of American tariffs.
Thanks to the executive ordinance, President Donald Trump ended the so -called de minimis principle, which allowed goods value 800 USD or less entering the country without tariffs. It also increases tariffs to Chinese goods by over 100%, forcing each Chinese firms and Shein, in addition to American giants, similar to Amazon to adapt plans and price increases.
CNBC reports that this was also affected, and American buyers see “import fees” from 130% to 150% added to their accounts. Now, nevertheless, the company is not sending the goods directly from China to the United States. Instead, it only displays the offers of products available in American warehouses, while goods sent from China are listed as outside the warehouse.
“He actively recruits American sellers to join the platform,” said the spokesman ago. “The transfer is to help local sellers reach more customers and develop their companies.”
(tagstotransate) tariffs
Technology
One of the last AI Google models is worse in terms of safety

The recently released Google AI model is worse in some security tests than its predecessor, in line with the company’s internal comparative test.
IN Technical report Google, published this week, reveals that his Flash Gemini 2.5 model is more likely that he generates a text that violates its security guidelines than Gemini 2.0 Flash. In two indicators “text security for text” and “image security to the text”, Flash Gemini 2.5 will withdraw 4.1% and 9.6% respectively.
Text safety for the text measures how often the model violates Google guidelines, making an allowance for the prompt, while image security to the text assesses how close the model adheres to those boundaries after displaying the monitors using the image. Both tests are automated, not supervised by man.
In an e-mail, Google spokesman confirmed that Gemini 2.5 Flash “performs worse in terms of text safety for text and image.”
These surprising comparative results appear when AI is passing in order that their models are more acceptable – in other words, less often refuse to answer controversial or sensitive. In the case of the latest Llam Meta models, he said that he fought models in order to not support “some views on others” and answers to more “debated” political hints. Opeli said at the starting of this yr that he would improve future models, in order to not adopt an editorial attitude and offers many prospects on controversial topics.
Sometimes these efforts were refundable. TechCrunch announced on Monday that the default CHATGPT OPENAI power supply model allowed juvenile to generate erotic conversations. Opeli blamed his behavior for a “mistake”.
According to Google Technical Report, Gemini 2.5 Flash, which is still in view, follows instructions more faithfully than Gemini 2.0 Flash, including instructions exceeding problematic lines. The company claims that regression might be partially attributed to false positives, but in addition admits that Gemini 2.5 Flash sometimes generates “content of violation” when it is clearly asked.
TechCrunch event
Berkeley, California
|.
June 5
Book now
“Of course, there is a tension between (after instructions) on sensitive topics and violations of security policy, which is reflected in our assessment,” we read in the report.
The results from Meepmap, reference, which can examine how models react to sensitive and controversial hints, also suggest that Flash Gemini 2.5 is much less willing to refuse to reply controversial questions than Flash Gemini 2.0. Testing the TechCrunch model through the AI OpenRoutter platform has shown that he unsuccessfully writes essays to support human artificial intelligence judges, weakening the protection of due protection in the US and the implementation of universal government supervisory programs.
Thomas Woodside, co -founder of the Secure AI Project, said that the limited details given by Google in their technical report show the need for greater transparency in testing models.
“There is a compromise between the instruction support and the observation of politics, because some users may ask for content that would violate the rules,” said Woodside Techcrunch. “In this case, the latest Flash model Google warns the instructions more, while breaking more. Google does not present many details about specific cases in which the rules have been violated, although they claim that they are not serious. Not knowing more, independent analysts are difficult to know if there is a problem.”
Google was already under fire for his models of security reporting practices.
The company took weeks to publish a technical report for the most talented model, Gemini 2.5 Pro. When the report was finally published, it initially omitted the key details of the security tests.
On Monday, Google published a more detailed report with additional security information.
(Tagstotransate) Gemini
Technology
Aurora launches a commercial self -propelled truck service in Texas

The autonomous startup of the Aurora Innovation vehicle technology claims that it has successfully launched a self -propelled truck service in Texas, which makes it the primary company that she implemented without drivers, heavy trucks for commercial use on public roads in the USA
The premiere appears when Aurora gets the term: In October, the corporate delayed the planned debut 2024 to April 2025. The debut also appears five months after the rival Kodiak Robotics provided its first autonomous trucks to clients commercial for operations without a driver in field environments.
Aurora claims that this week she began to freight between Dallas and Houston with Hirschbach Motor Lines and Uber Freight starters, and that she has finished 1200 miles without a driver to this point. The company plans to expand to El Paso and Phoenix until the top of 2025.
TechCrunch contacted for more detailed information concerning the premiere, for instance, the variety of vehicles implemented Aurora and whether the system needed to implement the Pullover maneuver or the required distant human assistance.
The commercial premiere of Aurora takes place in a difficult time. Self -propelled trucks have long been related to the necessity for his or her technology attributable to labor deficiencies in the chairman’s transport and the expected increase in freigh shipping. Trump’s tariffs modified this attitude, not less than in a short period. According to the April analytical company report from the commercial vehicle industry ACT researchThe freight is predicted to fall this yr in the USA with a decrease in volume and consumer expenditure.
Aurora will report its results in the primary quarter next week, i.e. when he shares how he expects the present trade war will affect his future activity. TechCrunch contacted to learn more about how tariffs affect Auror’s activities.
For now, Aurora will probably concentrate on further proving his safety case without a driver and cooperation with state and federal legislators to just accept favorable politicians to assist her develop.
TechCrunch event
Berkeley, California
|.
June 5
Book now
At the start of 2025, Aurora filed a lawsuit against federal regulatory bodies after the court refused to release the appliance for release from the protection requirement, which consists in placing warning triangles on the road, when the truck must stop on the highway – something that’s difficult to do when there isn’t a driver in the vehicle. To maintain compliance with this principle and proceed to totally implement without service drivers, Aurora probably has a man -driven automotive trail after they are working.
(Tagstranslate) Aurora Innovation
-
Press Release1 year ago
U.S.-Africa Chamber of Commerce Appoints Robert Alexander of 360WiseMedia as Board Director
-
Press Release1 year ago
CEO of 360WiSE Launches Mentorship Program in Overtown Miami FL
-
Business and Finance11 months ago
The Importance of Owning Your Distribution Media Platform
-
Business and Finance1 year ago
360Wise Media and McDonald’s NY Tri-State Owner Operators Celebrate Success of “Faces of Black History” Campaign with Over 2 Million Event Visits
-
Ben Crump1 year ago
Another lawsuit accuses Google of bias against Black minority employees
-
Theater1 year ago
Telling the story of the Apollo Theater
-
Ben Crump1 year ago
Henrietta Lacks’ family members reach an agreement after her cells undergo advanced medical tests
-
Ben Crump1 year ago
The families of George Floyd and Daunte Wright hold an emotional press conference in Minneapolis
-
Theater1 year ago
Applications open for the 2020-2021 Soul Producing National Black Theater residency – Black Theater Matters
-
Theater11 months ago
Cultural icon Apollo Theater sets new goals on the occasion of its 85th anniversary