Surely the consumer should be allowed to decide not the EU. I don't want this opened up to anyone. I am happy locked behind Apple's gates. Shine on. EU Policing. Someone is doing deals in the backrooms to make this sort of rubbish a policy.
You can decide. Just decide not to use the future options that you don't already have.
The DMA/DSA (and more that is still in the pipe) is a way level the playing field for everyone and give consumers more rights and choice.
That’s not how this works. Enabling the OS to have those options could very well mean breaking specific security models, opening the platform to many issues whether you choose a future option or not.
If by ”level” you mean creating a homogeneous market where one platform is pretty much the same as the other… where’s the choice? These laws suppress innovation and platform competition/differentiation. The ONLY real choice and innovation will have to come from smaller players that are still allowed to do whatever they want, because they don’t fall within these boundaries. This is NOT a level playing field.
You’re living in a pipe dream if you think this is heading towards some utopian market dynamic where the consumer has all the choices… This is actually headed down a dark dystopian rabbit hole, where more and more laws will be created/changed to push out foreign companies and create a single government run platform, because “the government knows what’s best for their citizens.” Which is exactly what they’ve started doing… “You don’t really want iOS… you NEED this instead.”
This is how free markets thrive, it puts the innovation in the companies hands, and the choice in the consumers hands. The only time a government should step in, is when there’s a blatant abuse. iPhone is not a monopoly in the EU, far from it, with only a 25% share, yet they are being treated as if there is no competition or alternative. Even though 3 out 4 EU citizens choose Android. This is obviously just an attack to break a successful (lucrative) platform.
The fact that the limit is a monetary amount and not a market share amount is very telling of what’s in play here.
The EU wants a reshuffle in tech, regionalized devices for the EU? The EU only represents 19% of Apples App revenues worldwide and the EU with all the countries combined is only generating as much revenue for Apple as the single country of Japan. The number of iPhones Apple is selling in Europe in comparison to Japan, is also about the same, the EU is basically 80% Android which is why they want freebies. The EU is on its way to being a Linux and Android playground and that is life in the tech slow lane aside from a few one %’s who will use Apple devices on the side as the ruling classes everywhere always do.
How many times do people have to be told that every ridiculous law you support sets a precedent for what they can get away with, and future laws will be even more ridiculous as a result?
This is how you end up taking away choice by offering a choice. Microsoft was famous for this. When you offer something that becomes ubiquitous, common logic says just use it instead of anything else.
Funny that you should mention Microsoft, of all things…
But what I haven't seen mentioned here is that the failure to fully interoperate in the MESSENGER space just means that virtually nobody uses iMessage here in Europe.
It's WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, FB Messenger, Threema, whatever. I use the Apple Messages app, but there's like three people that I occasionally use iMessage features with — like tapback, or the occasional cheesy balloon effect or so. Literally everyone else is on WhatsApp, Signal, and FB Messenger for me — sometimes all three.
How is it funny I mentioned Microsoft?
And not sure what you’re getting at here? Are you saying it’s bad that messaging apps can’t interoperate? I agree to that, but it’s not as easy as you think, especially when E2E comes into play. I don’t think they should be forced to “open” up though, that will just kill competition. There should be an alternative standard (replacing SMS/MMS - and not Google’s RCS) though that can be used to chat with others using a different platform, while still allowing platforms to retain their unique features when messaging inside the same platform.
Oh really? So the EU should just open up the common market to 3rd countries to be nice?
You don't see the irony in this comment. Go on, read it again and see if you can see it? The socialists in the EU want Big Tech to "open everything up to spur competition" Yet the EU wants to remain "closed". They don't want to follow the very example they are trying to set (typical with socialists)
This is how you end up taking away choice by offering a choice. Microsoft was famous for this. When you offer something that becomes ubiquitous, common logic says just use it instead of anything else.
Funny that you should mention Microsoft, of all things…
But what I haven't seen mentioned here is that the failure to fully interoperate in the MESSENGER space just means that virtually nobody uses iMessage here in Europe.
It's WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, FB Messenger, Threema, whatever. I use the Apple Messages app, but there's like three people that I occasionally use iMessage features with — like tapback, or the occasional cheesy balloon effect or so. Literally everyone else is on WhatsApp, Signal, and FB Messenger for me — sometimes all three.
How is it funny I mentioned Microsoft?
I seem to recall them having got in hot water with the EU precisely for reducing choice, and the remedy (which worked) was to force them to offer a choice.
You're not posting from Internet Explorer, are you?
Well then, I suppose there is finally real incentive to actually create one, now.
And you know, I somehow suspect that this is precisely the goal.
How odd would it be for the affected companies to try and figure out a sensible solution — one that you yourself just came up with —, even though it is so obvious that the EU is merely a technology-envious entity whose only purpose is, of course!, to screw over our Holy Apple any chance it gets, out of pure hatred for American economic clout?
I mean, that would REALLY show those EUreaucrats, wouldn't it!
Apple is not forced to do business in the EU. If it does, it'sit was for a reason. It makesmade business sense.
People are not forced to buy an iPhone, if they do, it’s for a reason. It makes personal sense.
Fixed that for you.
Enacting laws that turn your business model upside down and force you to basically rewrite your operating systems is not reasonable by any measure. It’s not a simple matter of just opening the ”gate”, when the changes are foundational - it’s more like, knocking down the wall and rebuilding it. Furthermore, Apple is not going to do anything to break security or privacy… they’re just going to work under it, which will probably mean limiting everything, even their own services and features, to enable 3rd parties to offer an alternative.
Apple will have to create a forked version of their OS to comply with EU laws and regulations. The EU is a big enough market that will allow for the cost. This will lead to more expensive devices with less features. But at least Europeans will be to use “local” alternatives to some features, which is what the EU wants - to prop up local technologies. And there’s nothing wrong with that, but I have a feeling this leads to future laws…
- All websites must be compatible with [EU] browser and all devices must ship with said browser, if those devices come with built in browser - All stores must accept [EU] wallet app and all devices must ship with said wallet app if those devices come with built in wallet app
This is how you end up taking away choice by offering a choice. Microsoft was famous for this. When you offer something that becomes ubiquitous, common logic says just use it instead of anything else.
Bottom line, if Apple is forced to break security and sacrifice user privacy to comply with these laws, then my choice of having a secure platform is gone. But everyone else who wanted an “open” platform already has that choice, there are literally hundreds of Android models. And that’s the real problem here… neither of those options is EU based, and the EU is butt-hurt about it. Let me know, are there are any EU companies that these laws affect? If not, this is simply “nationlism”. These laws were made to punish successful foreign companies in the hopes that it will allow a few “local” companies to thrive.
For over 40 years Apple has been able to make the products the way they want and sell them in Europe… that is now no longer the case.
Apple has always limited choice. In mails that have already come out in previous investigations we know the have used the words 'lock in'. They are more careful now but the spirit of lock in remains and it's not good for consumers.
The EU is against lock in. It causes harm to consumers.
On top of that, Apple has plenty of other, lesser known, tricks up its sleeve that your average consumer is not aware of. Obligatory use of web kit for example on the developer side.
Default Google Search, not as Eddy Cue suggests (because Google is better) but because Google pays Apple billions to have it that way! Apple says it defaults to Google and let's users change it easily. How about just asking which search engine the user wants and have Google Search among the options? Choice from the get go. Nope. Because that big fat paycheck from Google is blurring Apple's vision here.
It also cajoles users into accepting options via carefully worded language.
Having recently gone through a full setup of a modern iPhone, I was alarmed at how the setup process almost pushed the user into adding cards to Apple Wallet.
Apple has long been hauled over the coals and fined for not clearly explaining exactly what is offered via AppleCare.
The EU is going to straighten a lot of things out. Apple can consider itself lucky that it has got away with so much up to now. That is primarily a result of legislation being notoriously slow in arriving and having to wait for complaints to come in before acting via investigations.
We have literally no idea how Apple will deal with the requirements. EU users are used to paying more so that won't be a potential problem until the cost makes too expensive to buy iPhones then it will be Apple’s problem.
The vast majority of users are completely unaware of how far Apple goes to prevent users from switching away and denies choice outright with the likes of Apple Pay.
This isn't an Apple specific issue of course and it isn't an Apple specific set of directives either.
There are more things in the pipe so fasten your seatbelt. Among draft proposals are up front information on software support (together with a minimum time frame), the ability to roll back firmware upgrades that provide more 'features' and choose not to upgrade them from the outset if the user so chooses. More informative labeling, design for repair etc.
Other provisions are basically already in place, such as being able to cancel subscriptions as easily as you contract them. The battery directive is basically a done deal.
Our house. Our rules is what the EU might say. Apple has a simple path to follow: toe the line and comply. That is why these directives exist.
I'd wager much of what the EU is pushing will end up being implemented in the US and further a field. The US is the land of the lobby so things might get watered down there.
Oh really? So the EU should just open up the common market to 3rd countries to be nice?
You don't see the irony in this comment. Go on, read it again and see if you can see it? The socialists in the EU want Big Tech to "open everything up to spur competition" Yet the EU wants to remain "closed". They don't want to follow the very example they are trying to set (typical with socialists)
I can buy things from literally ANYWHERE on the planet — unless there are specific sanctions, of course, and provided ownership is legal (no nuclear weapons, for example) — and have them sent to the EU. They'll make me pay import duties and local taxes on the goods, but I can buy them.
The places that are part of the common market get special treatment by default (other countries may, too, but those are dependent upon trade deals), but they must abide by common regulations and laws of the common market.
I am acutely aware of that, having plenty of friends in the UK or who have (rather, had) regular business dealings with the UK, and who continue to get royally fucked by the shitshow that is Brexit.
But the fact is, I CAN buy anything from literally ANYWHERE — including the UK. It may not be feasible, especially for a business: too expensive, customs duties, shipping costs, added taxes, tariffs, literally WEEKS of delays due to bureaucracy, etc. But this is not "closed" — this is the DEFAULT. This is literally how international commerce has always been.
It is trade agreements and common markets that BROKE with this default and made lots of trade cheaper and more feasible, enabling a bunch of business decisions and markets that were just inaccessible due to bureaucratic hurdles and cost, before.
That was the ENTIRE POINT of the initial "European ECONOMIC Community" that became the EU.
As I've been saying for many years, Apple could comply with the EU's unendingly growing requirements by simply allowing the users to choose to install either iOS or AndroidOS at time of setting up the phone. If users choose to opt for Apple's closed ecosystem, they weren't really forced into it. Right? They were given the choice of a completely open OS supported by Google (Apple could pay Google an annual fee to get Google to support AndroidOS on iPhones) or a standard Apple closed ecosystem. I wonder which OS would be the most popular one. I really don't know, but it would put Apple in control of its own OS again.
I don't really like it, but it's an interesting idea. It breaks Apple's business model of not selling generic hardware for non-Apple operating systems. Even now, some people do that anyway. I'd modify the idea by simply including instructions for how to replace the pre-installed iOS with Android, with language that explicitly says that doing so doesn't void Apple's hardware warranty. Also include explicit language that directs people to Google's contact info for all non-hardware concerns. The question is, would Google give away Android for free? Maybe. Their money comes from collection of user data anyway.
Pricing of the devices would probably be the catch. One big reason that Apple devices are more expensive than the competition is because the bespoke OS is included in the price of the device, along with six or seven years of OS upgrades. If Apple were to pursue this strategy, the EU could then require Apple to sell iPhones a la carte at a lower price, without iOS installed. Then the user would have to purchase Android or iOS separately. That can of worms could then lead to a mandate forcing Apple to sell iOS separately, and allowing it to be installed on non-Apple devices, which then completely breaks down Apple's entire business model.
So the entire argument that destroyed your point never happened, or what?
Let me spell it out, since it was apparently too many words, before;
I’m in the EU. I can order ANYTHING I WANT from outside of the EU. It’s allowed, and it’s always been possible, long before the EU.
It’s just EASIER to stay within the economic union.
I see your checkmate and raise you a full house.
I'm guessing english is not your first language, because none of that made any sense. Full House? You seem to know even less about poker than trade. The EU are protectionists - which goes against the "free and open" stance they think others can take. Do you think Nintendo games should be playable on a Playstation? If you do, then you are about as smart as the socialists in the EU.
Royal Flush! Hahaha you are as bad at poker as you are at EU protectionist trade laws!
Comments
That’s not how this works. Enabling the OS to have those options could very well mean breaking specific security models, opening the platform to many issues whether you choose a future option or not.
If by ”level” you mean creating a homogeneous market where one platform is pretty much the same as the other… where’s the choice? These laws suppress innovation and platform competition/differentiation. The ONLY real choice and innovation will have to come from smaller players that are still allowed to do whatever they want, because they don’t fall within these boundaries. This is NOT a level playing field.
You’re living in a pipe dream if you think this is heading towards some utopian market dynamic where the consumer has all the choices… This is actually headed down a dark dystopian rabbit hole, where more and more laws will be created/changed to push out foreign companies and create a single government run platform, because “the government knows what’s best for their citizens.” Which is exactly what they’ve started doing… “You don’t really want iOS… you NEED this instead.”
This is how free markets thrive, it puts the innovation in the companies hands, and the choice in the consumers hands. The only time a government should step in, is when there’s a blatant abuse. iPhone is not a monopoly in the EU, far from it, with only a 25% share, yet they are being treated as if there is no competition or alternative. Even though 3 out 4 EU citizens choose Android. This is obviously just an attack to break a successful (lucrative) platform.
The fact that the limit is a monetary amount and not a market share amount is very telling of what’s in play here.
https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/
The EU is utterly batshit.
How is it funny I mentioned Microsoft?
And not sure what you’re getting at here? Are you saying it’s bad that messaging apps can’t interoperate? I agree to that, but it’s not as easy as you think, especially when E2E comes into play. I don’t think they should be forced to “open” up though, that will just kill competition. There should be an alternative standard (replacing SMS/MMS - and not Google’s RCS) though that can be used to chat with others using a different platform, while still allowing platforms to retain their unique features when messaging inside the same platform.
You're not posting from Internet Explorer, are you?
Well then, I suppose there is finally real incentive to actually create one, now.
And you know, I somehow suspect that this is precisely the goal.
How odd would it be for the affected companies to try and figure out a sensible solution — one that you yourself just came up with —, even though it is so obvious that the EU is merely a technology-envious entity whose only purpose is, of course!, to screw over our Holy Apple any chance it gets, out of pure hatred for American economic clout?
The EU is against lock in. It causes harm to consumers.
On top of that, Apple has plenty of other, lesser known, tricks up its sleeve that your average consumer is not aware of. Obligatory use of web kit for example on the developer side.
Default Google Search, not as Eddy Cue suggests (because Google is better) but because Google pays Apple billions to have it that way! Apple says it defaults to Google and let's users change it easily. How about just asking which search engine the user wants and have Google Search among the options? Choice from the get go. Nope. Because that big fat paycheck from Google is blurring Apple's vision here.
It also cajoles users into accepting options via carefully worded language.
Having recently gone through a full setup of a modern iPhone, I was alarmed at how the setup process almost pushed the user into adding cards to Apple Wallet.
Apple has long been hauled over the coals and fined for not clearly explaining exactly what is offered via AppleCare.
The EU is going to straighten a lot of things out. Apple can consider itself lucky that it has got away with so much up to now. That is primarily a result of legislation being notoriously slow in arriving and having to wait for complaints to come in before acting via investigations.
We have literally no idea how Apple will deal with the requirements. EU users are used to paying more so that won't be a potential problem until the cost makes too expensive to buy iPhones then it will be Apple’s problem.
The vast majority of users are completely unaware of how far Apple goes to prevent users from switching away and denies choice outright with the likes of Apple Pay.
This isn't an Apple specific issue of course and it isn't an Apple specific set of directives either.
There are more things in the pipe so fasten your seatbelt. Among draft proposals are up front information on software support (together with a minimum time frame), the ability to roll back firmware upgrades that provide more 'features' and choose not to upgrade them from the outset if the user so chooses. More informative labeling, design for repair etc.
Other provisions are basically already in place, such as being able to cancel subscriptions as easily as you contract them. The battery directive is basically a done deal.
Our house. Our rules is what the EU might say. Apple has a simple path to follow: toe the line and comply. That is why these directives exist.
I'd wager much of what the EU is pushing will end up being implemented in the US and further a field. The US is the land of the lobby so things might get watered down there.
rubbing my hands together here
fantastic to see apple schooled.
The places that are part of the common market get special treatment by default (other countries may, too, but those are dependent upon trade deals), but they must abide by common regulations and laws of the common market.
If there are no sanctions or other kind of restrictions you are pretty much free to buy what you want, where you want.
There will probably be more red tape (cost) involved.
Most developed countries have dedicated offices to help businesses find other businesses and establish commercial ties.
But the fact is, I CAN buy anything from literally ANYWHERE — including the UK. It may not be feasible, especially for a business: too expensive, customs duties, shipping costs, added taxes, tariffs, literally WEEKS of delays due to bureaucracy, etc. But this is not "closed" — this is the DEFAULT. This is literally how international commerce has always been.
It is trade agreements and common markets that BROKE with this default and made lots of trade cheaper and more feasible, enabling a bunch of business decisions and markets that were just inaccessible due to bureaucratic hurdles and cost, before.
Are you sure YOU are up to speed on this topic?
Pricing of the devices would probably be the catch. One big reason that Apple devices are more expensive than the competition is because the bespoke OS is included in the price of the device, along with six or seven years of OS upgrades. If Apple were to pursue this strategy, the EU could then require Apple to sell iPhones a la carte at a lower price, without iOS installed. Then the user would have to purchase Android or iOS separately. That can of worms could then lead to a mandate forcing Apple to sell iOS separately, and allowing it to be installed on non-Apple devices, which then completely breaks down Apple's entire business model.
So the entire argument that destroyed your point never happened, or what?
Let me spell it out, since it was apparently too many words, before;
I’m in the EU.
I can order ANYTHING I WANT from outside of the EU. It’s allowed, and it’s always been possible, long before the EU.
Royal Flush! Hahaha you are as bad at poker as you are at EU protectionist trade laws!