This feels like false equivalency. Sure, it would be great if consumers had better visibility into how data is used, but one company is an ads company where the users are the product and the other sells hardware and services.
When it comes to antitrust for platforms, equivalency is exactly what's being tested. That is: are 3rd party applications treated the same as 1st party ones?
No it doesn't. Antitrust comes down to if there's harm to the consumer from the behavior of the company. If Apple's tracking is sufficiently different than Facebooks (because one is a hardware and services company collecting data to improve the hardware and services and the other is selling the data for ads), then it's a false equivalency to group them together.
In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, that is how antitrust has been treated in US law, yes. But the law, including this definition of antitrust, is socially constructed, which means it can be changed.
