No it's not a terrible thing to say; it's accurate. So many folks always pipe in with "competition is good!" like some kind of a mantra. If I have a product to market, I want to dominate that market, not kindly split it down the middle with my competitors: I want them out of business. You may or may not benefit from that, and any assumption on the part of consumers is just that, an assumption.
With all due respect, dismissing the original poster as a shareholder is a dubious assertion: he/she might be a small business owner who knows better.
a) Blackintosh is just here to troll, so no point in giving him any reinforcement.
b) I don't mean it's not good for Apple, or for myself, I mean that competition, like natural selection (a form of competition) is an essentially goalless force. Natural selection does not drive the evolution of species toward some perfect, "good" design, it merely results in some individuals, best adapted to their conditions of life, reproducing in greater numbers and dominating the future genome.
Likewise, competition in business does not necessarily result in the "best" companies being successful (unless you define "best" as successful), or in the "best" products succeeding in the marketplace, or even necessarily the "best" outcomes for consumers. It is merely a process wherein some companies succeed at the expense of others, but the effects of that success, in product quality, consumer benefit, or any other measure, are not necessarily good or bad, except perhaps for the successful and unsuccessful companies.