So, the moral of the story is, if you want to do something anti-competitive, you need to improve the user experience at the same time, then the abuse is null and void.

One reason why I've never used Apple. I generally don't like being locked in.
You might well say 'Then why you have a Kindle'. But at least Amazon release free apps for almost every popular OS out there so you aren't just tied to Amazon devices. If you were I wouldn't have bought one.

Yes. In America anti-competitive behaviour is judged according to whether it is bad for consumers. In Europe it is judged by whether it hurts competitors. That might sound like it should be the same thing overall, but it can lead to different judgments here and there.

Err.. no, the moral of the story is if you want to go to court, make a decent effort of it. Apple has certainly done things to stifle competition at various times, but we'll never know if this was actually one of them because if you read the details of what went on, the plaintiff's case was utterly shambolic.

But hey, nothing like guilty until proven innocent, eh?