Any claim they make can be validated through discovery. I doubt they would lie, and I’m sure they’d love to increase Watch revenue by addressing the other half of the duopoly.
It doesn't have to be a lie to be a poor excuse. The technical limitations could be something along the lines of they couldn't find a way to provide an app that wouldn't allow third parties to bypass apple gatekeeping of apple watches. Technically truthful, but in an antitrust context maybe less of a valid reasoning, but still allows them to redirect the public narrative.
Edit: Sounds like it was about privacy concerns, so probably something like there not being a completely foolproof way of preventing a third party from grabbing health data from the android app.
> Any claim they make can be validated through discovery. I doubt they would lie
The claim would hold up even if it were a lie. "We concluded that Androids API wasn't compatible with the Apple Watch". Not a lie, but obviously still a complete lie.
> and I’m sure they’d love to increase Watch revenue by addressing the other half of the duopoly.
What they would love way _more_ is lock-in. You want this new shiny? It's only in the Apple ecosystem.
