The threshold the US government uses is 50% market share, with exclusionary behavior. 100% is not required (and would be a crazy requirement to have; even Microsoft in its heyday couldn't have been prosecuted with that kind of threshold).
The question isn't whether Apple has a large enough market share in the US for the courts to get involved — it very clearly does — the question is does it exhibit exclusionary behavior to the extent courts should get involved.
(I think it does exhibit exclusionary behavior, but I can see that being much more open to interpretation than the simple fact that it clears the 50% threshold.)
Regardless, my comment was just correcting the statement that Apple doesn't have a majority market share in any market, when in fact it has majority market share in the US market.
Your comment does not correct that statement, and uses erroneous data to claim otherwise.
Apple does not have more than 50% marketshare of smartphones in the US. In most analyses it is between 41-43%, with an absolute high of 46%. Android accounts for the rest. And of course worldwide iOS is dwarfed by Android.
EDIT: Of course this was down-arrowed. The citation of StatCounter is akin to claiming that the rodeo's parking lot has 80% pick-up trucks, therefore pick-up trucks have 80% of the market. It's absolute nonsense but it somehow appears on HN repeatedly. Never change, HN. Never change.
That's a fair point that I didn't realize. That being said, it looks like the Apple App Store has well over 50% of the market (assuming "the market" means percentage of sales by revenue), so I think it's a moot point anyway; Epic is suing Apple for its monopolistic practices with the App Store, and it looks like app sales on that do clear the 50% threshold even if device sales don't. https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/03/apples-app-store-...
The question isn't whether Apple has a large enough market share in the US for the courts to get involved — it very clearly does — the question is does it exhibit exclusionary behavior to the extent courts should get involved.
(I think it does exhibit exclusionary behavior, but I can see that being much more open to interpretation than the simple fact that it clears the 50% threshold.)
Regardless, my comment was just correcting the statement that Apple doesn't have a majority market share in any market, when in fact it has majority market share in the US market.