Hopefully that won’t effect us here in England Thank god for Brexit.
Certainly hope it won't affect us, else I will need to change my Apple ID to a different country. Will that work?
Why would it affect England? You've left the EU, it only affects the EU…
A big part of post-Brexit awakening has been the realisation that in order to do business with the EU, which they kind of need to in order to survive, their products and services need to comply with EU regulations. So a lot of laws remain the same or become needlessly more complicated, because multiple standards need to be followed now. Of course, major parts of EU legislation were actually written by the British...
Also, the UK is — of course — running its own, similar investigation into Apple's conduct, even without the DMA. As are Japan, Australia, and — yep — even the United States.
All of those places are watching very closely, and you can BET that it's a matter of a few years before remarkably similar legislation shows up in those other countries…
Or those places see what the EU’s shenanigans have wrought and don’t bring about similar legislation.
LOL. The EU shooting itself in the foot with their nonsense.
Am I correct that China accounts for less Apple revenue than the EU? Last report I saw was China @15%.
Apple seems eager enough to work within Chinese rules, agreeing to roll over on RCS, "that iPhone owners aren't demanding", giving access to Chinese user data to Chinese entities on Chinese-owned and operated servers with the keys to the kingdom in hand, even abandoning privacy (obviously not an Apple "core value"), all market requirements which are far more restrictive than anything the EU has mandated. But the EU is too demanding?
That's because China is not forcing Apple to use Google proprietary RCS. (AFAIK) Of course China government is not going to use RCS with E2EE. Notice that even in the US, Apple is not going to be adapting to Google proprietary RCS. Apple is going with the standard RCS and guess what, the mobile telecoms that wants to have RCS on iPhones must also adapt to the standard RCS, even if they were going to use Google proprietary RCS.
And also notice that the China government, which also controls all the mobile networks in China, mandated that all mobile phones must be capable of receiving and sending RCS messages. AFAIK, China did not mandate that all messaging services must be able to receive and send RCS messages or be interoperable with RCS. So Apple could allow RCS messaging apps on China iPhones to be in compliance or incorporate RCS in iMessage. Like how they incorporate SMM in iMessage now.
But iMessage itself will still be E2EE. China government still can not intercept and see iMessages in their servers. They don't need to. What China government is able to do is to have all their mobile carriers install apps in all the mobile phones of China citizens, that allows them to see all messaging, after it becomes unencrypted in the users phones. (And probably even before its sent.) They don't need to see the unencrypted messages in their servers. Apple and all the other phone makers, can't do anything about that. And neither can the citizens of China. But if you are a tourist visiting China and use your iPhone to iMessage someone back home, China still can not read that iMessage.
On the other hand, the EU is pushing for a ban on E2EE. So to be more like China. Will the EU citizens fight back? Or will they be like China citizens and accept what ever their government decides?
BTW- Once again, statistic is not your strong point. Revenue-wise, 15% of China smartphone market is much larger than 20% (or even 25%) of the EU smartphone market. China is a much larger pie to begin with. You need not look any where else but here, to know that China is Apple second largest smartphone market. And I'm sure it means in terms of revenue and not their market share. There are more than a handful of countries where Apple have more percentage of the market share, than the 15% in China.
>To bring Apple Intelligence to its second-largest smartphone market, Apple is going to have to sign deals with local providers, but so far has had no luck.<
Dear Apple, then why am I able to use ChatGPT 4o with all features just fine? You know, the one that isn’t as focused on privacy concern as yours?
Sounds like you are posturing…
Huh? This is confusing. What does ChatGPT have to do with iPhone Mirroring, SharePlay Screen Sharing or Apple Intelligence?
You also seem to cheer on that ChatGPT has weaker privacy concerns than Apple has as some sort of positive.
Did you post in the wrong thread?
I don’t see posturing. I see Apple trying to take a slow approach trying to figure out how to implement these features in the EU while avoiding the many hidden land mines the DMA has.
Dear Apple, then why am I able to use ChatGPT 4o with all features just fine? You know, the one that isn’t as focused on privacy concern as yours?
Sounds like you are posturing…
Obviously you're not very educated on the subject.
Let's review so you can be more informed.
When using Apple Intelligence if YOU wish to go outside of your personal 'intelligence' that Apple has created for you ON DEVICE you can. You will be asked for permission to allow ChatGPT to answer your request.
This is just Apple being spiteful. A temper tantrum, and an attempt to stop DMA-like policies from spreading to other countries’ markets, which there are already signs of it happening. I support the EU mostly. We’d still have Lightning if it wasn’t for them.
And Phil, I’m happy to make the judgement call on what I deem safe to install on my devices, thank you. And I accept the consequences. It’s not like the App Store hasn’t had its share of security threats and dodgy apps.
Fine buy an Android. I’m a EU citizen while simple laws I applaud USBC is one of them (PS Apple was long before moving to USBC, the fact the iPhone took longer is accessories, just went to dump a box full of them at the recycle park, perfectly good, useless now), the DMA is a hot mess, creating uncertainty all over the place. The EU should have taken another approach, informing people, I would have preferred that they just marked products, Apple = Gatekeeper, Samsung = open etc … so that people can make an informed decision. You read in the comments that lots of “Apple” people prefer a closed system as do others prefer an “open” system, let them we don’t need babysitting by politicians that do not understand tech. The only reason we have a DMA act is that some frustrated EU CEO’s lobbied very well and have wapenized it through legislation instead of innovation.
This is just Apple being spiteful. A temper tantrum, and an attempt to stop DMA-like policies from spreading to other countries’ markets, which there are already signs of it happening. I support the EU mostly. We’d still have Lightning if it wasn’t for them.
And Phil, I’m happy to make the judgement call on what I deem safe to install on my devices, thank you. And I accept the consequences. It’s not like the App Store hasn’t had its share of security threats and dodgy apps.
Fine buy an Android. I’m a EU citizen while simple laws I applaud USBC is one of them (PS Apple was long before moving to USBC, the fact the iPhone took longer is accessories, just went to dump a box full of them at the recycle park, perfectly good, useless now), the DMA is a hot mess, creating uncertainty all over the place. The EU should have taken another approach, informing people, I would have preferred that they just marked products, Apple = Gatekeeper, Samsung = open etc … so that people can make an informed decision. You read in the comments that lots of “Apple” people prefer a closed system as do others prefer an “open” system, let them we don’t need babysitting by politicians that do not understand tech. The only reason we have a DMA act is that some frustrated EU CEO’s lobbied very well and have wapenized it through legislation instead of innovation.
The DMA/DSA were absolutely necessary.
They are the first attempts at tackling a major problem: the ever increasing dependence of everyday life on digital platforms and the ever increasing abuse by those platforms on everyday life through using dominance to shore up the barriers of entry and stifle competition.
They will change over time to tackle the situation as it develops.
Informing people would be an excellent option and might have been enough to soften the extent of the blow but that should have been offered by Apple as a preemptive solution. It's too late for that now.
iPhone NFC accessbshould never have been limited to Apple. Anti-steering should never have existed. One app store with one company controlling commissions should never have happened. Idem Wallets, WebKit obligations etc.
All this in a duopoly platform situation.
Feathers will be ruffled because Apple is now choosing the bumpy road and dragging its feet on compliance. It probably won't end well but its Apple’s decision.
And perhaps mostly importantly, it isn't an Apple only directive.
The DSA/DMA will likely be the models for legislation elsewhere (possibly Including the US).
avon b7 said: They are the first attempts at tackling a major problem: the ever increasing dependence of everyday life on digital platforms and the ever increasing abuse by those platforms on everyday life through using dominance to shore up the barriers of entry and stifle competition.
----
iPhone NFC accessbshould never have been limited to Apple. Anti-steering should never have existed. One app store with one company controlling commissions should never have happened. Idem Wallets, WebKit obligations etc.
People like to throw the "abuse" term around but never provide any evidence that rises to that level.
Example: the EU's $1.8 billion fine per music streaming is centered around anti-steering and they claim that it prevented customers from knowing about cheaper alternatives outside the App Store. The first problem with that claim is that iOS users are not limited to the App Store to get information about apps. They can also use the internet and social media on their iPhone to get information about apps. It really doesn't make sense to focus exclusively on the App Store when it comes to pricing information. The second problem is Spotify. The cheapest version of their app is the ad-supported version that doesn't require a subscription. That version has been available on the App Store since 2008. Only the MORE expensive subscription version requires the customer to go outside the App Store. The third problem is what you see if you look at the music streaming market as a whole. Since Apple Music launched in 2015, the market has continuously grown and Apple Music has not dominated the market. Spotify is the global leader by a wide margin and Apple has a similar market share to Amazon and Tencent.
They are the first attempts at tackling a major problem: the ever increasing dependence of everyday life on digital platforms and the ever increasing abuse by those platforms on everyday life through using dominance to shore up the barriers of entry and stifle competition.
They will change over time to tackle the situation as it develops.
Informing people would be an excellent option and might have been enough to soften the extent of the blow but that should have been offered by Apple as a preemptive solution. It's too late for that now.
iPhone NFC accessbshould never have been limited to Apple. Anti-steering should never have existed. One app store with one company controlling commissions should never have happened. Idem Wallets, WebKit obligations etc.
All this in a duopoly platform situation.
Feathers will be ruffled because Apple is now choosing the bumpy road and dragging its feet on compliance. It probably won't end well but its Apple’s decision.
And perhaps mostly importantly, it isn't an Apple only directive.
The DSA/DMA will likely be the models for legislation elsewhere (possibly Including the US).
What abuse??!!! Most of the App Store apps over payments only outside of the store. Remember iTunes, it’s been surpassed by Spotify, most Spotify users pay outside the AppStore … without the App Store Spotify would have never existed and that is just one example …
In the mean time FB, Instagram (also FB), WhatsApp (also FB), X, … and so on, they abuse you, they damage mental health, that is the real problem. It’s like convicting car manufactures if users are speeding and killing someone … Apple gave us wonderful tools, many are very useful but unfortunately there are also dark sides to this, and those where never addressed, and the DMA will not address them either, on the contrary you will see App stores that will thrive on rotten ethics, thanks to the DMA
avon b7 said: They are the first attempts at tackling a major problem: the ever increasing dependence of everyday life on digital platforms and the ever increasing abuse by those platforms on everyday life through using dominance to shore up the barriers of entry and stifle competition.
----
iPhone NFC accessbshould never have been limited to Apple. Anti-steering should never have existed. One app store with one company controlling commissions should never have happened. Idem Wallets, WebKit obligations etc.
People like to throw the "abuse" term around but never provide any evidence that rises to that level.
Example: the EU's $1.8 billion fine per music streaming is centered around anti-steering and they claim that it prevented customers from knowing about cheaper alternatives outside the App Store. The first problem with that claim is that iOS users are not limited to the App Store to get information about apps. They can also use the internet and social media on their iPhone to get information about apps. It really doesn't make sense to focus exclusively on the App Store when it comes to pricing information. The second problem is Spotify. The cheapest version of their app is the ad-supported version that doesn't require a subscription. That version has been available on the App Store since 2008. Only the MORE expensive subscription version requires the customer to go outside the App Store. The third problem is what you see if you look at the music streaming market as a whole. Since Apple Music launched in 2015, the market has continuously grown and Apple Music has not dominated the market. Spotify is the global leader by a wide margin and Apple has a similar market share to Amazon and Tencent.
Abuse has been all over the place.
It is why the upshot of everything was the DSA/DMA. To increase competition and level the playing field.
With an almost never ending stream of complaints, Apple has loosened its grip on certain elements but, make no mistake, the abuse was (and remains) there.
Why was iCloud the only cloud backup option for iOS Whatsapp users for so long?
Can you tell me why it was impossible to take a picture and simply direct transfer it to another non-iOS user via Bluetooth?
I know the answer. Apple didn't include the Bluetooth file transfer profile on iPhones but it did on Macs.
It isn't limited to Apple either, although you would be forgiven for thinking that from reading some comments here.
The next stop should be opening up cloud migration. Another huge barrier to switching platforms.
There is still a very long way to go but at least the EU is slowly forcing the gatekeepers to open up. Users must have access to choice on platforms and if you are deemed a gatekeeper, your responsibilities go up a notch.
Next stop is to see if a fine is deemed necessary by the EU, how much, and on what specific grounds.
It not inconceivable for someone to call for complete severance of Apple services from Apple hardware.
As a way to stimulate competition it is quite normal for infrastructure providers to not be allowed control of the services that run on them or in the case that they do, be severely monitored and forced to open up.
The childish comments against the EU in this thread are pathetic, and once more show how low intellectual level has fallen in the US.
Agree some are over the top, but the sentiment is directed against an EU bureaucracy that is out of control, and attention seeking politicians like Vestager who have projected her personal vendetta against Apple (after she was embarrassed in the Apple-Irish tax case) into huge arbitrary fines that are not related to defined laws but her own 'feelings' of whether Apple is compliant. Don't take it personally but don't be a cheerleader for EU government mediocrity. That is pathetic. And don't mistake Apple's decisions to withhold features as some sort of retaliation. Companies run on profit, not retaliation. If fines exceed profit, it would make NO sense to stay in EU.
Why was iCloud the only cloud backup option for iOS Whatsapp users for so long?
Privacy?
Can you tell me why it was impossible to take a picture and simply direct transfer it to another non-iOS user via Bluetooth? Trivial issue. Many ways to transfer.
The next stop should be opening up cloud migration. Another huge barrier to switching platforms.
Comparison of features vs price, I am not seeing a huge win by transferring. I like that full backup of private data is encrypted and not outside of Apple
Next stop is to see if a fine is deemed necessary by the EU, how much, and on what specific grounds.
Vestager makes it up as she goes along. Fines based on feelings not defined laws is unacceptable in business. She is really out of control
It not inconceivable for someone to call for complete severance of Apple services from Apple hardware.
Apple will be gone from EU if that was ever pushed. Apple does not need EU member countries (not the often referred 'Europe' market) to remain a very profitable company.
Apple might very well shoot itself in the foot with here. There are economic reasons for once. Apple products are already sold with a premium in Europe. European customers are very price conscious. This makes Apple products less popular in Europe, i.e. Apple's market share in Europe is considerable but not as big as in the US. If Apple withholds features it might make competitors devices more desirable when those all of a sudden see an opportunity and decide to implement popular AI features. On top of this would be the fact that most of the competitions devices are still cheaper. Taking all of this in consideration and add to it the economic headwinds Apple is experiencing in China it might turn out not to be the smartest move.
On the other hand and apart from economic reasons this is also about loosing credibility for Apple. I have lived in a couple of country in my life and I can say that no matter how critical people are towards their institutions they don't like it if someone from outside criticizes the same thing. Big cooperations need to learn to respect local customs and institutions no matter how worthy of criticism they are. Apple's wording is quite condescending, though.
avon b7 said: They are the first attempts at tackling a major problem: the ever increasing dependence of everyday life on digital platforms and the ever increasing abuse by those platforms on everyday life through using dominance to shore up the barriers of entry and stifle competition.
----
iPhone NFC accessbshould never have been limited to Apple. Anti-steering should never have existed. One app store with one company controlling commissions should never have happened. Idem Wallets, WebKit obligations etc.
People like to throw the "abuse" term around but never provide any evidence that rises to that level.
Example: the EU's $1.8 billion fine per music streaming is centered around anti-steering and they claim that it prevented customers from knowing about cheaper alternatives outside the App Store. The first problem with that claim is that iOS users are not limited to the App Store to get information about apps. They can also use the internet and social media on their iPhone to get information about apps. It really doesn't make sense to focus exclusively on the App Store when it comes to pricing information. The second problem is Spotify. The cheapest version of their app is the ad-supported version that doesn't require a subscription. That version has been available on the App Store since 2008. Only the MORE expensive subscription version requires the customer to go outside the App Store. The third problem is what you see if you look at the music streaming market as a whole. Since Apple Music launched in 2015, the market has continuously grown and Apple Music has not dominated the market. Spotify is the global leader by a wide margin and Apple has a similar market share to Amazon and Tencent.
Abuse has been all over the place.
It is why the upshot of everything was the DSA/DMA. To increase competition and level the playing field.
With an almost never ending stream of complaints, Apple has loosened its grip on certain elements but, make no mistake, the abuse was (and remains) there.
Why was iCloud the only cloud backup option for iOS Whatsapp users for so long?
Can you tell me why it was impossible to take a picture and simply direct transfer it to another non-iOS user via Bluetooth?
I know the answer. Apple didn't include the Bluetooth file transfer profile on iPhones but it did on Macs.
It isn't limited to Apple either, although you would be forgiven for thinking that from reading some comments here.
The next stop should be opening up cloud migration. Another huge barrier to switching platforms.
There is still a very long way to go but at least the EU is slowly forcing the gatekeepers to open up. Users must have access to choice on platforms and if you are deemed a gatekeeper, your responsibilities go up a notch.
Next stop is to see if a fine is deemed necessary by the EU, how much, and on what specific grounds.
It not inconceivable for someone to call for complete severance of Apple services from Apple hardware.
As a way to stimulate competition it is quite normal for infrastructure providers to not be allowed control of the services that run on them or in the case that they do, be severely monitored and forced to open up.
The childish comments against the EU in this thread are pathetic, and once more show how low intellectual level has fallen in the US.
Agree some are over the top, but the sentiment is directed against an EU bureaucracy that is out of control, and attention seeking politicians like Vestager who have projected her personal vendetta against Apple (after she was embarrassed in the Apple-Irish tax case)
Why was iCloud the only cloud backup option for iOS Whatsapp users for so long?
Privacy?
Can you tell me why it was impossible to take a picture and simply direct transfer it to another non-iOS user via Bluetooth? Trivial issue. Many ways to transfer.
The next stop should be opening up cloud migration. Another huge barrier to switching platforms.
Comparison of features vs price, I am not seeing a huge win by transferring. I like that full backup of private data is encrypted and not outside of Apple
Next stop is to see if a fine is deemed necessary by the EU, how much, and on what specific grounds.
Vestager makes it up as she goes along. Fines based on feelings not defined laws is unacceptable in business. She is really out of control
It not inconceivable for someone to call for complete severance of Apple services from Apple hardware.
Apple will be gone from EU if that was ever pushed. Apple does not need EU member countries (not the often referred 'Europe' market) to remain a very profitable company.
So what has changed now that iCloud isn't the sole option? Obviously not privacy as all the major players adhere to global privacy regulations.
Direct file transfer was most certainly NOT a trivial issue. For a time it forced users to use AirDrop which wasn't 'direct' as it required Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and iCloud to be activated. Plus it was a simple profile (supported on Macs) and, to my knowledge never ever supported on Apple mobile. A classic example of 'our way or the highway' and easy to do if you have total control of what the user base can or can't do.
Cloud migration is another huge battleground waiting to get moving. The EU basically forced cloud operators to 'unlock' things with solutions like Google Takeout but that involves first downloading everything and then uploading everything again.
I have a Google account for my building community affairs that required stricter compliance as a result of the GDPR so I decided to move everything over to my personal Google accounts but Google informed me that no such cloud-to-cloud (even within Google) existed. I'd have to jump through the download/upload hoop.
Imagine trying to do that between to different cloud providers. I fully expect that to get looked at eventually.
Vestager definitely doesn't make things up as she goes. It's an entire team and its famous old name was 'Max Force', not because of Vestager but because of Max Lienemeyer who was the actual lead on many antitrust cases. Vestager is a tough character though and Tim Cook has squirmed through many a meeting with her (especially over the Irish tax situation).
Separation of infrastructure and the services that run on them is pretty common. I wouldn't rule out someone throwing that into the ring and if Apple goes, that's up to them. If any such obligation came to pass though, it's highly likely it would be seen as a model for other areas. Would Apple pull out of all of them?
I’m enjoying this thread because everyone has offered up opinions and perspectives that need to be heard. As long as the ad hominem cards stay out of play this should continue to be interesting and enlightening.
I’m probably more sympathetic to Apple’s case only because I know how difficult it is to reach the level of success that Apple has achieved. Product development is insanely difficult. Many try but few succeed. A lot of Apple’s approaches were based on trying to differentiate their product from what was considered the norm prior to the iPhone’s arrival. They also wanted a tightly integrated solution that was open to extension but closed to modification. Apple prides itself on being able to deliver turnkey solutions. That’s what separated them from the Microsoft / Intel dominated commodity herd.
Was Apple wrong to pursue the tight path they chose? As a product owner I would say “hell no” but as a competitor I would say that Apple has created an impenetrable barrier that is nearly impossible to compete against. All of this is directly attributable to Apple’s massive success and customer loyalty. If Apple fell flat on their face like some of their competitors predicted they would, we not be talking about this today.
Apple is to some degree a victim of their own success. Unfortunately, not everyone loves a winner when they feel like the win wasn’t achieved on a level playing field. We are now at a point where we’re still arguing about the level playing field part and more and more influential people are engaging in revisionism to right what they believe was a wrong.
If you really want to get to the root cause of the EU’s problems in this debate it’s not even Apple. It’s Apple customers. The EU and like minded state controllers could all circle their wagons around Android and provide huge incentives to try to push EU buyers towards Android solutions. Subsidies, tax credits, lapel pins, … whatever it takes to make EU customers leave Apple for the perfectly flat, green, totally open, and restriction free playing field of Android devices all of whom would build their devices with government mandated max profit margins by deeply inspired and compliant manufacturers.
So Apple is worried that the EU might force them to give 3rd party apps access to your personal data in Apple Intelligence?
Then why not make it so that apps need permission from the user to get that data? Just like they need permission for location and all other things that affect your privacy.
Remember how they wouldn't let you have a different browser engine, even though this isn't a problem on Android? Or web apps on the home screen in the EU?
They're just looking to annoy customers and get them to blame the EU.
Hopefully that won’t effect us here in England Thank god for Brexit.
I hope England isn’t grouped with “Europe” anyway. British tech people need to lobby Apple to make sure this is understood.
Too late, by several hundred if not a thousand years!
England is part of the UK … which is in Europe. We are very regrettably no longer in the EU but of course still have to abide by their rules to sell to them even though, unlike prior to 2016 when we were actually involved in drafting them.
Lobbying Apple? Apple, being a smart global company, are well aware we are not in the EU which is why the multiple browser choices in 17.5 and the like never appeared for me during my OS updates.
Britain has a new opportunity to rise in the tech world because of EU dropping the ball.
Comments
You also seem to cheer on that ChatGPT has weaker privacy concerns than Apple has as some sort of positive.
Did you post in the wrong thread?
I don’t see posturing. I see Apple trying to take a slow approach trying to figure out how to implement these features in the EU while avoiding the many hidden land mines the DMA has.
YOUR choice.
The more you know!
They are the first attempts at tackling a major problem: the ever increasing dependence of everyday life on digital platforms and the ever increasing abuse by those platforms on everyday life through using dominance to shore up the barriers of entry and stifle competition.
They will change over time to tackle the situation as it develops.
Informing people would be an excellent option and might have been enough to soften the extent of the blow but that should have been offered by Apple as a preemptive solution. It's too late for that now.
iPhone NFC accessbshould never have been limited to Apple. Anti-steering should never have existed. One app store with one company controlling commissions should never have happened. Idem Wallets, WebKit obligations etc.
All this in a duopoly platform situation.
Feathers will be ruffled because Apple is now choosing the bumpy road and dragging its feet on compliance. It probably won't end well but its Apple’s decision.
And perhaps mostly importantly, it isn't an Apple only directive.
The DSA/DMA will likely be the models for legislation elsewhere (possibly Including the US).
Example: the EU's $1.8 billion fine per music streaming is centered around anti-steering and they claim that it prevented customers from knowing about cheaper alternatives outside the App Store. The first problem with that claim is that iOS users are not limited to the App Store to get information about apps. They can also use the internet and social media on their iPhone to get information about apps. It really doesn't make sense to focus exclusively on the App Store when it comes to pricing information. The second problem is Spotify. The cheapest version of their app is the ad-supported version that doesn't require a subscription. That version has been available on the App Store since 2008. Only the MORE expensive subscription version requires the customer to go outside the App Store. The third problem is what you see if you look at the music streaming market as a whole. Since Apple Music launched in 2015, the market has continuously grown and Apple Music has not dominated the market. Spotify is the global leader by a wide margin and Apple has a similar market share to Amazon and Tencent.
In the mean time FB, Instagram (also FB), WhatsApp (also FB), X, … and so on, they abuse you, they damage mental health, that is the real problem. It’s like convicting car manufactures if users are speeding and killing someone … Apple gave us wonderful tools, many are very useful but unfortunately there are also dark sides to this, and those where never addressed, and the DMA will not address them either, on the contrary you will see App stores that will thrive on rotten ethics, thanks to the DMA
It is why the upshot of everything was the DSA/DMA. To increase competition and level the playing field.
With an almost never ending stream of complaints, Apple has loosened its grip on certain elements but, make no mistake, the abuse was (and remains) there.
Why was iCloud the only cloud backup option for iOS Whatsapp users for so long?
Can you tell me why it was impossible to take a picture and simply direct transfer it to another non-iOS user via Bluetooth?
I know the answer. Apple didn't include the Bluetooth file transfer profile on iPhones but it did on Macs.
It isn't limited to Apple either, although you would be forgiven for thinking that from reading some comments here.
The next stop should be opening up cloud migration. Another huge barrier to switching platforms.
There is still a very long way to go but at least the EU is slowly forcing the gatekeepers to open up. Users must have access to choice on platforms and if you are deemed a gatekeeper, your responsibilities go up a notch.
Next stop is to see if a fine is deemed necessary by the EU, how much, and on what specific grounds.
It not inconceivable for someone to call for complete severance of Apple services from Apple hardware.
As a way to stimulate competition it is quite normal for infrastructure providers to not be allowed control of the services that run on them or in the case that they do, be severely monitored and forced to open up.
Maybe Apple would prefer that?
There are economic reasons for once. Apple products are already sold with a premium in Europe. European customers are very price conscious. This makes Apple products less popular in Europe, i.e. Apple's market share in Europe is considerable but not as big as in the US.
If Apple withholds features it might make competitors devices more desirable when those all of a sudden see an opportunity and decide to implement popular AI features. On top of this would be the fact that most of the competitions devices are still cheaper.
Taking all of this in consideration and add to it the economic headwinds Apple is experiencing in China it might turn out not to be the smartest move.
On the other hand and apart from economic reasons this is also about loosing credibility for Apple. I have lived in a couple of country in my life and I can say that no matter how critical people are towards their institutions they don't like it if someone from outside criticizes the same thing. Big cooperations need to learn to respect local customs and institutions no matter how worthy of criticism they are. Apple's wording is quite condescending, though.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/nov/09/apple-suffers-setback-in-fight-against-eu-order-to-pay-11bn-tax-bill-in-ireland
Direct file transfer was most certainly NOT a trivial issue. For a time it forced users to use AirDrop which wasn't 'direct' as it required Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and iCloud to be activated. Plus it was a simple profile (supported on Macs) and, to my knowledge never ever supported on Apple mobile. A classic example of 'our way or the highway' and easy to do if you have total control of what the user base can or can't do.
Cloud migration is another huge battleground waiting to get moving. The EU basically forced cloud operators to 'unlock' things with solutions like Google Takeout but that involves first downloading everything and then uploading everything again.
I have a Google account for my building community affairs that required stricter compliance as a result of the GDPR so I decided to move everything over to my personal Google accounts but Google informed me that no such cloud-to-cloud (even within Google) existed. I'd have to jump through the download/upload hoop.
Imagine trying to do that between to different cloud providers. I fully expect that to get looked at eventually.
Vestager definitely doesn't make things up as she goes. It's an entire team and its famous old name was 'Max Force', not because of Vestager but because of Max Lienemeyer who was the actual lead on many antitrust cases. Vestager is a tough character though and Tim Cook has squirmed through many a meeting with her (especially over the Irish tax situation).
Separation of infrastructure and the services that run on them is pretty common. I wouldn't rule out someone throwing that into the ring and if Apple goes, that's up to them. If any such obligation came to pass though, it's highly likely it would be seen as a model for other areas. Would Apple pull out of all of them?
Then why not make it so that apps need permission from the user to get that data? Just like they need permission for location and all other things that affect your privacy.
Remember how they wouldn't let you have a different browser engine, even though this isn't a problem on Android? Or web apps on the home screen in the EU?
They're just looking to annoy customers and get them to blame the EU.
Britain has a new opportunity to rise in the tech world because of EU dropping the ball.