foregoneconclusion said:

avon b7 said: It's all completely unnecessary on Apple's part. Why not simply ask the EU and wait for a reply? 

That's what they're doing: putting the new AI features on hold while they communicate with the EU per the DMA requirements. Note that Apple was in communication with the EU about the anti-steering changes in the DMA and now the EU is saying there's something wrong with what Apple did. 

What was unnecessary was the need to make a fuss out of things. Totally unnecessary. 

If they had simply asked and waited for a reply we wouldn't even be talking about this now. No one would have brought the question up in the first place. Vestager wouldn't have said anything. 

But no, Apple decided to FUD things up. 

That's their call but it's pretty foolish, petty and probably won't help in the bigger scheme of things. 

Apple’s going for friction so... so be it. 

rob53 said:

avon b7 said:

This:

"Specifically, we are concerned that the interoperability requirements of the DMA could force us to compromise the integrity of our products in ways that risk user privacy and data security," said Apple. "We are committed to collaborating with the European Commission in an attempt to find a solution that would enable us to deliver these features to our EU customers without compromising their safety."

And then this:

"From previous statements including ones to AppleInsider, it's known that Apple has been continually working with the EU on its responses to the DMA, so it's reasonable to assume that will continue.

Leads to the question: Why even bother putting the subject into the public domain if communication and clarification are ongoing? 

Far better to say as little as possible until things are clarified. All it takes is clarification and all for a roll out that isn't even planned for this year! 

Basically FUD on Apple's part and Vestager has a valid point in her response to a question that wouldn't have been asked if it weren't for Apple. 

Basically FUD on the part of EU-loving commenters. Apple has a right to provide whatever capabilities it wants to in whatever country/region it wants to. You're buying a product with certain features. There's nothing that says Apple has to provide the EU with everything it has the capability of including. The EU can demand Apple provide everything but that's not the way companies work. This is a brand new Apple capability and Apple has the right to provide it when they feel it's ready, not when a corrupt EU demands it. At this point, I feel Apple is well within its rights to start charging for features in countries it wants to. As far as I'm concerned, Apple should start charging for macOS, iOS, tvOS, iPadOS along with every Apple app and feature it wants to. I'd like to see the EU try and force Apple to provide everything for free. It isn't going to happen.

No one is disputing Apple's right to bring or not bring certain features to the EU. That is up to them and is irrelevant here. 

The point is 'making a meal out of something' and putting it down to the DMA even when Apple itself claims it's in contact with the EU on the subject and also claims not to know what is possible or not. 

It's all completely unnecessary on Apple's part. Why not simply ask the EU and wait for a reply? 

This:

"Specifically, we are concerned that the interoperability requirements of the DMA could force us to compromise the integrity of our products in ways that risk user privacy and data security," said Apple. "We are committed to collaborating with the European Commission in an attempt to find a solution that would enable us to deliver these features to our EU customers without compromising their safety."

And then this:

"From previous statements including ones to AppleInsider, it's known that Apple has been continually working with the EU on its responses to the DMA, so it's reasonable to assume that will continue.

Leads to the question: Why even bother putting the subject into the public domain if communication and clarification are ongoing? 

Far better to say as little as possible until things are clarified. All it takes is clarification and all for a roll out that isn't even planned for this year! 

Basically FUD on Apple's part and Vestager has a valid point in her response to a question that wouldn't have been asked if it weren't for Apple. 

netrox said:

I am curious, why does the iphone have to be locked to use the mirroring feature? 

Probably for security reasons. This is a feature Huawei phones have had for years but the phone does not have to be locked to use it. It will lock itself though if you aren't using it via touch or looking at it. 

I suppose Apple will do the same if it isn't already possible. 

One thing the Huawei system does do that Apple might not make you do is when something needs to be biometrically opened for the first time you have to use the sensor on the phone to unlock it. 

For example, I have some apps that require biometrics to use. If my phone is charging somewhere else and I want to open one of those apps on my phone 'mirrored' to my tablet for example, I have to unlock it from the phone first.

The connection is NFC authorised so it's tap and go.

Actually my phone is an Honor device with MagicOS but it still works seamlessly with a tablet running HarmonyOS. 

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

Deleted - my bad.

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/eismea/items/826237/en

Why Europe is losing the race for innovation

Die Welt | 10/04/2024 | Europe - The European Union (EU) continues to lose ground in the global race for promising technologies. When it comes to research and development expenditure in growth sectors such as biotechnology or the digital economy, the USA is far ahead. The Chinese have also risen to become a global power factor in some future technologies in just ten years.

But... 

https://tech.eu/2023/11/28/the-state-of-european-tech-2023-consistent-long-term-growth/

Swings and roundabouts

My link was an EU Commission report.

Your source is a Venture Capitalist, and frankly, the report relies on some pretty "flakey" metrics. Then again, the intent is to entice investors, so, maybe it will work.

I'll go with the EU Commission report. 

Your link was NOT to an EU commission report. It was to the EISMEA newsroom which focuses on SMEs and picked up on the news item because it mentioned SMEs.

The news item was from Die Welt (a German newspaper) which seems to have had early access to a report by something called the European Policy Analysis Group (EPAG). 

With that out of the way... 

As far as I can tell, the report originated at the Toulouse School of Economics, Università Bocconi and CESifo/EconPol and was presented under the umbrella of EPAG. 

It included the following:

"The three participating institutions do not take an institutional position. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors." 

I'll leave it to the AI readers here to decide whether your link, or my source, is the most likely scenario, but thanks for outlining the fact that one was generated by multiple academic institutions, and the other, a venture capital source.

Swings and roundabouts. Like I said. 

The report specifically mentions VC so a VC take is very relevant. 

The EU is doing fine in some areas, not so fine in others and great in others. Just like pretty much any other advanced country or bloc of countries.