Microsoft couldn't compete themselves out of a wet paper bag (it may be a slightly different script, but they're anti-competitivists just like Apple).

Apple technology is "great" as long as you you're rich enough to afford it, and buy into the whole ecosystem. And, most crucially: contort yourself yourself enough. (="If it's not working for you, you're not holding it right.")

The hardware seems pretty good.

The software has taken a nosedive though and Android has overtaken iPhone in many (most?) aspects.

> ...but the Apple ecosystem has the best tech

You aren't in any position to make that call, since you have no opportunity to try competing products due to being locked in to an anticompetitive ecosystem. European iOS users will soon be able to decide if Apple really does have the best tech or not.

I just wish that they didn't feel the need to block out competitors to compete on an even playing field - I agree that their hardware is great, but if it's so great it should be able to dominate the market without hobbling competitors on iOS.

Best individual hardware components perhaps, but their software is shit enough that I don't consider their tech to be best. macOS and its weird limitations are enough for me to accept Windows 11 before I'll buy an Apple laptop.

Apple is monopolizing lots of things. You aren't allowed to make software for the iPhone without distributing exclusively thru the App Store. This whole post is about how they restrict third party watches.

"Best tech" in a general sense doesn't really mean anything, since it depends on use-cases