I have no idea what you are saying. I don't think we are having an exchange about the same things, or at least not the same context.

ie The reason AAPL's board doesn't want to support 3rd party hardware, which is usually based around the newest gaming technology from potential competitors, is some opposite reason?

> it doesn't make it (MSFT) a not-monopoly that its competitors are not able to compete effectively for various reasons.

My assertion is that AAPL could, but won't. The monopoly of MSFT in the gaming sphere is because of a sort of happy coincidence between a massive company willing to support third party hardware (MSFT) and another massive company that depends on not supporting it, to maintain a stranglehold on their market (AAPL) and all the minor players who can't afford to support hardware at scale for a prolonged period of time, to compete with MSFT...even thought a few have for a short time and fell behind or were acquired.