According to the article, the main points are:

Disrupting “super apps” that encompass many different programs and could degrade “iOS stickiness” by making it easier for iPhone users to switch to competing devices

Blocking cloud-streaming apps for things like video games that would lower the need for more expensive hardware

Suppressing the quality of messaging between the iPhone and competing platforms like Android

Limiting the functionality of third-party smartwatches with its iPhones and making it harder for Apple Watch users to switch from the iPhone due to compatibility issues

Blocking third-party developers from creating competing digital wallets with tap-to-pay functionality for the iPhone

The enforcers are asking the court to stop Apple from “using its control of app distribution to undermine cross-platform technologies such as super apps and cloud streaming apps,”

I’m somewhat conflicted. As much as I despise Apple, they have complete rights on their operating systems and thus can tell what they want or don’t want there, kinda like how videogame consoles work. Far from ideal for both consumers and developers, obviously, especially with how Apple hates both.

As a court case, this sounds dumb and likely to go nowhere. If it was a law proposal that would force them and any future wannabes to open up like PCs, however, I’d be fully behind it.