why not? Why sacrificed the security for other USA/China user, and just to comply with EU ruling? All EU citizen should use Nothing Phone from UK, and they should've avoid iPhone at all cost.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
EU Approves Landmark Legislation to Regulate Apple and Other Big Tech Firms
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think so. please....let iPhone alone and stop buying it....
For me....I see EU is just another India country....China is much better than EU and there is no point to keep selling iPhone in EU....let them be
Many EU citizens love using iPhones (though most of them won't love them as much to pay €200/year for basic software/maintenance and an App Store, as you suggested earlier, when you can get that for free on Android).
Apple loves making money by selling iPhones and apps.
Their greed for money is a very good point to keeping selling them in the EU.
If Apple raises it's prices to compensate for the loss of revenue, brand value and brand image...citizens of the EU might have to switch to Android.
They won’t have to, people who doesn’t agree with apple’s value will just switch voluntarily, buy old sets or just keep their existing devices for even longer than today.
Considering a new iPhone cost the same as a maxed out gaming PC it’s quite the price.
But that’s up to apple to decide if it’s worth losing more sales and more market share for just to keep the same revenue or greater.
That's my point. Apple could raise it's prices and people could switch to Android. Or hold onto their phones until they die and then get a used iphone. Maxxed out phones cost more than a PC from other manufacturers as well.
I’m not talking about a maxed out iPhone.
I can build a maxed PC with a RTX 3080 for the same price of the iPhone 13 pro.
And if the GPU prices go down to normal levels then we can go crazy.
Exactly.
You claim they‘ll lose brand value and brand image - and suggest raising prices along with that?
Great idea to erode your market share. But as I said, it‘s a business in which you benefit from having a bigger share of the market. Even though iPhones aren’t cheap compared to the competition, it’s not a luxury business. The product doesn‘t gain value from a lower market (as opposed to a Ferrari or other luxury car that does).
They be shooting themselves in the foot with that and only end up making less money from their business. And that’s why (although the may try to raise prices somewhat), they won’t be pricing themselves out of the market in favour of Android.
It‘s baffling how firmly you cling to the idea that Apple (a for-profit business driven by investors) will - or should? - shoot themselves in the foot by reacting in ways that will only make them off worse and earn less.
Never can tell what might happen.
These new regs are a great idea to kill the apple brand. So if the EU is also contributing to loss of brand image, brand value and revenue, what's a little market share amongst friends.
The product also doesn't gain from governmental regulations opening it up and Apple losing revenue.
The EU is killing off Apple legally. However, if the EU likes Android, it's there for the taking.
It's amazing that you don't see how these impending regulations can cause undesirable downstream effects to Apples business model and how Apple might have to protect itself in someway, shape or form.
To start a business or invest in small businesses. I didn't say "give tax breaks to all or big businesses".
You don't know what you don't know. But there is no guarantee that you get anything more with these laws.
We know this. My question is, what innovation are we losing because one (1) handset maker chooses to not allow access to it? While you have access via another vendor and other handset makers to use NFC as they wish. What's the harm that only 1 vendor limits its access?
But we do have games... Someone is programing for the Mac/iPad/iPhone. Stop pretending these folks/companies don't exist. And that its impossible to port or just straight up code natively for mac/linux/windows/iOS/iPadOS/Android/Nintendo/PlayStation/Xbox. It's not impossible, it takes money and resources, but again invest in this at the federal level so all systems could get a fair shot.
Who is doing this?
It's feeling more commie to me by the day.
Then be stuck with what you have. Let those barriers keep you from any progress.
Then be stuck with what you have,.. left if Apple walks away.
Some, yes. Too big to fail rings a bell.
Cool. I'll stay in the US.
You're just proving my point here.
Go get a loan
Government should stay out of the way as much as possible
Let the market decide
No. Nor do I plan on going to visit. I'll go to the UK instead.
But Apple has to do the exact opposite. Really nice.
Literally talking about Linux/MacOS/Windows/iPad-iOS/Android. It's not insurmountable. They most likely cover 4 of them already. Plenty of users here. And there are games that run the gamut of them already. Just continue that with anything new.
Get a loan, go get investors. Work for it.
How is that at all convoluted? US does it, and we are not that sharp.
So if they end up with JUST Android, how will this have helped clamp down on anti-competitiveness? I mean, it would be less competition after all.
I know, tax breaks shouldn’t be given to anyone. more often than not it will just be abused.To start a business or invest in small businesses. I didn't say "give tax breaks to all or big businesses".![0CB96EC7-EB6A-4C06-9BD5-50431DB7D6B9.png]( "0CB96EC7-EB6A-4C06-9BD5-50431DB7D6B9.png")
We already know. We can look at applications that exist on cydia to know what we can get. We can look at features
iOS is getting currently extremely slowly.
ID in apple wallet for example, other applications have had to solve tho before apple but being limited artificially.
These for example could have used NFC technology or exist in a wallet like app. But can’t for apple’s policy. And general cross compatibil technology will use the lowest common denominator being the QR code.
Cross compatible apps will use the lowest common denominator to lower cost and maximize compatibility. Lowering the quality we get. Apple is the biggest phone vendor and hosts the second biggest OS with a dominant position. If they didn’t have a dominant position they would be ignored.
I know they exist, they are just an extreme minority. Just like Linux have games or Amiga, windows ARM etc.
It takes money and resources the government shouldn’t provide. Governments aren’t in the business of running companies. That’s way past a federal government’s responsibilities.
Microsoft did, and lost. Apple did and won.
Considering what you propose I would say not even close
If that’s the reality then That’s the reality. The government isn’t here to remove natural barriers to entry, only artificial ones harming the market.
They are free to do so. Facebook have threatened the same thing over new privacy laws and EU told them to go ahead and leave if they want.
Too big to fail should never be the case. You are never too big to fail. Something the USA should implement
And give your tax money to propping up failing businesses, you are free to do so.
The government not being here to save you doesn’t mean they aren’t leveling the playing fields.
Just how a soccer judge won’t help you, but still enforce the rules. They care about the merit and it should be the dominant reason for companies winning, not the fact they are bigger and more wealthy.
That is also why big companies must ask for permission to buy up smaller companies with the new rules.
That’s the thing, you are commenting about something completely irrelevant and past the goal of the law.
If android becomes the only OS, EU would be completely fine with that. Less competition isn’t the same as anti competitive behavior. A monopoly is completely legal.
And as long as google doesn’t do anything to hamper companies from competing, The EU won’t do anything. We have multiple monopolies in EU that are completely ignored because they won the capitalist game fairly and aren’t hindering new comers.
Wow, way to spin this. It's okay if there is no competition. But if the lone vendor locks down the app store...tsk, tsk, tsk.
So then like I said, you don’t get a say.
What exactly are you referring to that is the exact opposite?
No, follow the conversation. We’re talking about a scenario where vertical integration is required and smartphone makers have to create and utilize their own operating systems, rather than use Android. Under this paradigm developers would apparently be forced to support all these different platforms, some with next to no users.
It’s fine if you want to jump into the middle of an ongoing conversation between others, but at least follow along with what was said.
Nope. Again with trying to place the burden on those who are least capable of carrying it. Sorry, the EU isn’t doing that.
Because you have to implement new tax laws to tax Apple and Google and set up a system for giving out loans or grants on a hope and a prayer that consumers will actually move to the offerings being funded by those grants and loans. And I’m sure Apple and Google wouldn’t be happy about their money being taken to directly fund competitors. This of course being the alternative to simply telling Apple and Google they’re not allowed to do X, Y, and Z, which is far less convoluted.
It won’t end up that way. Apple leaving the EU exists only in the minds of deluded Apple fanatics who are completely detached from reality.
You're not living in reality and your talk about "killing off" Apple and its brand is nothing more than fearmongering.
One should go back and look at the actual regulation and what it regulates - very specifically...
Quoting the MacRumors article from the beginning of this thread:
Under the DMA, gatekeepers may have to:
- Allow users to install apps from third-party app stores and sideload directly from the internet. 👉 Yes, that's a gain for the product and its utility. More apps is better than less apps and Apple prohibiting.
- Allow developers to offer third-party payment systems in apps and promote offers outside the gatekeeper's platforms. 👉 Yes, since they can charge less with external payment methods, that's an advantage for customers.
- Allow developers to integrate their apps and digital services directly with those belonging to a gatekeeper. This includes making messaging, voice-calling, and video-calling services interoperable with third-party services upon request. 👉 Yes, interoperability (between different devices, manufacturers, apps and service) is a gain for the
- Give developers access to any hardware feature, such as "near-field communication technology, secure elements and processors, authentication mechanisms, and the software used to control those technologies." 👉 Yes, apps being able to use hardware features is a gain compared to Apple locking them out.
- Give users the option to change the default voice assistant to a third-party option. 👉 Yes, that's a gain for the product and its utility. You like a different voice assistant, you can use it. That's a gain comparted Apple locking others out.
- Pre-install certain software applications and require users to use any important default software services such as web browsers. 👉 Yes, having a choice of web browser is a gain compared to Apple locking others out.
- Require app developers to use certain services or frameworks, including browser engines, payment systems, and identity providers, to be listed in app stores. 👉 Yes, having a choice of web browser is a gain compared to Apple locking others out.
And you're making it out as if the only good things about Apple products were its restrictions and limitations:
the restrictions
the overcharging
the protectionism
the censorship for content and apps
the self-preferencing itself
the locking-in consumers
the locking out vendors and competitors
the locking out valuable and useful functionality
...
For me, the great thing about computers - and that includes handheld computers like iPhones and iPads - and the internet are their utility, functionality, being able to do so many things, having wide a choice of application(s) and services to use. Innovation and extensibility. And interoperability, yes. That not everything is provided and controlled by one single entity as a sort of dictatorship.
Honestly, I pity people like you that seem to think that a little less power concentration of power, less protectionism, less censorship, less restrictions less locking-in and locking is only designed to or going to "kill off" Apple, its brand, products and overall innovation in the market.
Last edited:
You can’t force competition if the market won’t support it. All you can do is make the market favorable for a competitive company to enter, and that’s by ensuring a fair market free from abuse and anti competitive practices.
As EU commission have state. They aren’t in the business to prop up failing ideas.
Competition encourages companies to offer consumers goods and services on the most favourable terms. It encourages efficiency and innovation and reduces prices.
👉To be effective, competition requires companies to act independently of each other, but subject to the pressure exerted by their competitors.
This is what apple is fundamentally going against
That's exactly what the EU is doing. They are regulating competition.
Making the market favorable by regulating competitors is a bad way, imo, to go about this.
I don't think the EU knows what it wants. The littany of nanny regulations are going to come back to haunt them.
Bottom line: This is apple ecosystem. They spent the r&d, the innovation, the development, testing and etc. If you want apple to be as open as android, then buy an android. Dont regulate american tech companies into the ground because that will come back to haunt you.
Google is the one that is entering into agreements with their own horizontal competitors in the smartphone market to limit competition. Not Apple.
The EU is indeed regulating competition. They aren’t forcing companies with few consumers to exist for the sake of creating “competition” which is what some folks here are asking for.
Yes, it's Apple's ecosystem.
And it has become too vital and important for society and the overall economy to leave it unregulated, to allow Apple unlimited and unchecked gatekeeping power and just do (or lock in and out people) as they please.
And becoming regulated it will.
In the EU. In the US. Elsewhere.
This hyperbole and fearmongering is laughable.
It's not driving companies "into the ground".
It's diligent regulation to regulate just a few narrowly defined business practices of gatekeepers - to ensure a fair market and competition.
They aren't prohibited from selling smartphones at the prices and margins they like.
They aren't prohibited from operating their own first-tier app store.
They aren't prohibited from operating their own payment wallet scheme.
They can operate and offer products and services just as before.
Their platforms will just become a bit more open and interoperable.
It won't drive them “into the ground”.
Just as sideloading - and even piracy - didn't drive the Google Play Store into the ground.
PS: I won’t be making this discussion any more circuitous by dignifying another instance of “Well, if Apple are too sternly regulated, they’ll have to withdraw from the EU” with an answer.
Last edited:
In the EU.
I bolded it.
Was this not done pre iOS and Android? Did we not have exactly that before iOS and Android?
Didn't Samsung make their own (Tizen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tizen )? Heuwei as well ( HarmonyOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HarmonyOS )?
Next to no users? Really, Linux has next to no users? MacOS has next to no users? Dude...
You see burden. I see opportunity.
I don't think I said they need to create a new OS for mobiles (Even-though there are). At least I don't think I said that. But in any event. Programing for Linux/MacOS/Windows/Android/iOS-Pad so that their applications run on as many "things" as possible. They are not tied to one or 2 streams of income. They can make a ton from Windows, and Android since it's the biggest of the group. If it's a great app/game. Users on Mac and Linux will purchase it. Maybe they don't make a killing from those "other" platforms, but they are available. And those of Us/You that want to be on another platform because you know "choices" and all. Can still get everything you want on it. People program for all those systems so it's not like we are baking a cake without the ingredients here. Things exist. Fund it if you want it, it's not that complicated.
Depends on what X, Y, Z are/is. If it goes against what Apple believes they should be doing, they very well may walk.
Again, if the UK can vote to leave the EU, why would it be so much harder for Apple? With 2 products?
UK.
There are products I can't get in Canada from the US, and it's next door. Stupid things like Wine and Cookies. Nothing to the level of a mobile phone. And I can get other products from the same manufactures that don't sell the Wine or Cookies in Canada. It's not impossible. However, unlikely it may be.
You don't run Apple any more than I do. So please, you have zero idea if they will or will not. We are just providing a reasonable assumption based on what's happening in the EU. If it is worth it for Apple to continue or not.
I think I have provided a reasonable set of alternatives to solve this perceived issue.
1) EU Tax the "gatekeepers" past "X" Euro's/Dollars made and extra "X" %
2) Use those tax revenues to fund a program to develop within the EU. Existing small companies/freelancers.
3) That pool of money can be grants or loans or tax breaks for said companies/freelancers to develop within the EU
4) They can be paid back over "X" years at either low or no interest.
5) They can be provided to Universities/Colleges/trade schools for free to create development/programing classes
6) Invite the world of talent to come to the EU and learn or use your skills to create the next big thing.
Something similar to:
"What is in chips act?
The bulk of the CHIPS Act is a $39 billion fund that will subsidize companies that expand or build new semiconductor manufacturing facilities in the US. The Commerce Department will determine which companies receive the funding, which will be disbursed over five years".
Something similar for development of new applications on all platforms.
I don't think Apple or Google would mind this much. It would be cheaper than them changing their OS or way of doing business. And they would gain from the expanded talent pool of those making new apps and programs for MANY different platforms.
You don't agree. That's fine. But seriously, to think that a developer could not because it's too hard. I'd like to point you to Apple. They started in a garage. It doesn't have to happen overnight, but if you limit yourselves it will never happen.
This is exactly what apple does on the AppStore with developers who compete against apples first party solutions
No, it’s not. Apple doesn’t enter into an agreement with horizontal competition to limit competition. Spotify is free to make deals outside the App Store.
Last edited: