Apple and anti-competitive practices

After reading that the latest version of iTunes blocks other devices from syncing with it, I'm wondering if Apple will start attracting attention from regulators similar to what Microsoft has had to deal with. They've gotten away with a closed system in other aspects of their business model because their market share is not dominant. However, the iTunes Store has roughly 80 percent of the online music market -- placing it roughly at the same market share in online music as the combined top two Windows OSs are in operating systems. At that point, it seems anti-competitive to me to deliberatelSubmity lock all other hardware out, as 8.2.1 seems to do.

Nobody forces you to use Windows + Internet Explorer, either, and yet it has been the target of legal action. iTunes is the largest music retailer in the world; Apple's action seeks to restrict access to that market to its own proprietary devices.
Intent matters. If the method that allowed the Pre to sync with iTunes was some quirk that got ironed out as part of organic development, there'd be no problem. But the 8.2.1 update changes the functionality of iTunes to specifically exclude other devices. That seems abusive to me. I believe that was Mr. Rockefeller's argument as well. A federal judge ruled against Microsoft in United States v. Microsoft because Windows and Internet Explorer were deemed two separate products. That being the case, Microsoft's integration of Internet Explorer into Windows was held to be illegal. Nothing stopped people from downloading Netscape Navigator or Opera and using them. Nothing stopped people from choosing a completely different operating system.
Apple similarly wants iPod/iPhone + iTunes to be considered as one cohesive product rather than as two separate products. If they are two separate products, iTunes should be completely device-nuetral, just as Windows was forced to be completely browser-nuetral. I swear that was not in there when I hit Reply! This new forum software is very quirky.
I think Palm did see this coming, and used the hack as a means to gain standing for a lawsuit. Yes, it could create a third-party program to read and write to a consumer's iTunes library. But that requires a separate piece of software that iPod customers do not need. Just as having to download a different browser back in the Windows 98 days was considered an onerous burden on the market, I think having to install third-party software to approximate the functionality of iTunes is an onerous burden on this market. And assuming that Palm does create such a tool, who's to say that Apple won't encrypt iTunes libraries or otherwise change how the data is stored and retrieved for 8.2.2?

As a niche player, they could get away with being a completely closed system. As a dominant player, I'm not sure that's still true.

I will grant you that the end of DRM has significantly strengthened Apple's position; when it was completely closed from proprietary DRM in the iTMS, so that iTunes and the iPod were the only things that could read the songs, it formed a sort of vertical integration much like the old studio system.