Microsoft was forced to ship competitive browsers in the OS to avoid monopoly claims, but Apple - unlike Microsft, they won't even allow 'un-blessed' apps to RUN on the phone. Seems patently illegal
How about how they spent $1 billion to market IE (a free product) in order to cut into a potential (though indirect) competitor's product (Netscape). Netscape's browser was reaching the point (as early as this was in the WWW days) of being a potential host for cross-platform software applications. This terrified MS as it would eliminate a lot of their foothold in the business market, in particular.
How about how when Compaq and others wanted to sell non-Windows OSes, Microsoft threatened them with increased Windows licensing fees. They had access to OEM rates which meant they could participate in the cut-throat and very low margin PC business. Without those rates, they would have to raise their prices. Even an extra $100-200 would price them above their competitors. This was done to eliminate the OS competition (or constrain it).
What has Apple done that is equivalent to these actions? And how has Apple's (minority) marketshare enabled them to do these things?
That must not be true. Atari had to patent a mechanical mechanism that its cartridges used in order to prevent others from developing for their system.
And Microsoft's situation was quite different from this one. For one, they had an overwhelming monopoly in desktop operating systems (something like 95% marketshare), and they had several times been caught intentionally breaking competitors' offerings.