iPadOS Identified as Digital 'Gatekeeper' Under New EU Tech Rules

[vipergts2207]

Enlighten everyone as to where companies get the money that is used to pay the fines. Fines only hurt the company's customers, not the actual company.

Instead the CEOs with their multi-million dollar salaries should be responsible for a major portion of the fine. Then work the way down the company executive ladder to include VPs and COOs. They are the ones that violated "whatever" to cause the fine, not the workers or the customers.

Fines don't work, and the cost is passed on to the consumer.

Hey if you want to fine the C-suite instead, I'd be all for it. That being said, until that paradigm is changed, they'll have to keep fining companies. And none of this takes placed in a vacuum. Fines do impact the company because if they decide to pass those costs along to customers then that means the products of their competitors who follow the law become more attractive because they don't have to price their products in a way that passes fines along to their customers. That means fewer sales for the company being fined.

 

[SanderEvers]

😡 grrrrrr, some people are so angry I am starting to worry about their health.

Countries have rules about conducting business on their territory:

- China demands censorship.

- The US demands ownership of foreign companies, with a particular penchant for Chinese ones (see Huawei and TikTok)

- The EU introduces rules to ensure fair trade (as they see it) and protect the right of its citizens (as they see it).

Deal with it.

😡 Grrrrr 😂😂😂

Except the EU is not a country. It's a group of countries created to decrease the ability for the citizens of these countries to have any effect on the democracy. The EU is one big anti-democracy where nobody ever voted for. Honestly it should be illegal, but they made themselves legal. And they gave themselves power to a. make laws, b. enforce those laws and c. appoint judges if someone ever tries to question their laws.

 

[TechnoTiger3000]

And blacksmiths making horseshoes didn't do as well once cars came on the scene. It is in Apple's best interest to make sure developers create apps for their devices, but their devices are not created to provide jobs to developers. They are created for users; income for developers is the happy side-benefit of a healthy, competitive ecosystem.

It is in Apple's interest to ensure that developers create apps. But it's even more in Apple's interest when those apps follow tight rules that they create with only their interests in mind. And that's okay; it's what companies do. The EU wants to set rules for companies that consider everyone's needs, not just those of the company.

Imagine the blacksmith over the years becoming so powerful that he built his own road system (the App Store) mostly on top of the old system (the Internet; an open environment where Apple could flourish due to regulations against older regulated giants like Microsoft). This road was so efficient that older roads disappeared. He now restricts access to these roads to eliminate competition. This way, he can prohibit cars from driving on his roads and becoming the next big thing. While the blacksmith's road system is dominant, there are still other roads where innovative cars are being developed, but they face barriers in accessing the main roads controlled by the blacksmith.

The EU values innovation and believes that regulating if innovation is stuck is a good way to protect their beliefs. In the case of the blacksmith, they would likely implement rules to ensure fair access to roads without hindering the blacksmith's ability to profit from them.

Edit: Ensuring clarity through spellchecking and refining sentence structure

 

[Wando64]

Except the EU is not a country. It's a group of countries created to decrease the ability for the citizens of these countries to have any effect on the democracy. The EU is one big anti-democracy where nobody ever voted for. Honestly it should be illegal, but they made themselves legal. And they gave themselves power to a. make laws, b. enforce those laws and c. appoint judges if someone ever tries to question their laws.

European elections occur every 5 years.
Next elections scheduled for 6-9 June 2024.

What are European elections and how do they work?

Find out what the European elections are about, how they work and when they take place.

elections.europa.eu

 

[jimothyGator]

End users are locked-in to iPadOS. Apple leverages its large ecosystem to disincentivise end users from switching to other operating systems for tablets.

In other words, iPad users like the iPad, and Apple has deviously come up with ways to keep them liking the iPad. The EU is bravely determined to stop this injustice.

FU, EU.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

I disagree with the commission on this one. The way I see it, the iPad is not a gatekeeping device. It may be in the future or not, but it is not at the moment.

PS: Apple could have avoided all this if the App Store offered a basic plan just for the hosting and certification of the App (say like hosting files or website). On top of this base, businesses would be able to select add-ons: payment & billing, listing and marketing, or offer all of it in a bundle ... say Apple Commerce One at 15% fee or whatever, simple (yes, similar to Apple One, get the picture?). That is all.

But no, instead they went on with this fishy scheme of reader apps vs non reader apps, charge or not based on how the service or good is delivered (subjective), if its free to use or not (also subjective because in the end nothing is free, Facebook et all aren't really free ... ), over a million or less then a million, and many other ifs and ifs to come, charge for the sale of digital content or the app, subscription or not ... a swamping mess to hide the actual cost of things and protect house made digital services by artificially creating barriers of entry of many kinds.

All to clutter the fact that in the end of the day at its most basic, the App Store is just a glorified File Distribution System. Technically not even close to the complexity and cost as say streaming videos or even HiRes audio... get the picture?

 

[Hazmat401]

"Companies that do not adhere to the new regulations risk facing EU investigations, substantial fines, and the imposition of "behavioral or structural remedies." The fines can amount to 10 percent of a company's global revenue, with a 20 percent penalty for repeat violations."

Looking forward to Apple pulling out of the EU.... they can have android

 

[alchemistmuffin]

Companies that do not adhere to the new regulations risk facing EU investigations, substantial fines, and the imposition of "behavioral or structural remedies."

I will not be surprised if the orange haired guy becomes president, he will retaliate against EU in kind by imposing stiff tariffs until they get rid of the “gatekeeper” nonsense.

 

[picpicmac]

It's a group of countries created to decrease the ability for the citizens of these countries to have any effect on the democracy.

That's a bit... off.

The EU grew out of earlier efforts to have a common market.

A market needs laws to preserve the well being of the whole and the individual.

All polities do this, through whatever means.

The EU is also likely the single dominant reason that dampens down intra-European warfare.

 

[ilikewhey]

Or maybe before they decide to just pull out of the EU altogether.

and watch AAPL drop 15% overnight, no way tim gonna keep his job with that many angry investors

 

[Abazigal]

and watch AAPL drop 15% overnight, no way tim gonna keep his job with that many angry investors

Well, you all have always wanted him to step down. May as well go out with a bang.

 

[gregmancuso]

The goal of the DMA isn't to ban closed ecosystems but to ensure that dominant companies don't use their position to unfairly limit competition or consumer choice. Even if millions prefer a closed system, the regulation seeks to prevent these preferences from stifling innovation from other potential market entrants. Apple's market share, while not as dominant as Nokia's was, is still significant enough in a high-value market to influence market dynamics profoundly. The EU’s approach is about balancing consumer preferences with the broader need for a competitive market that fosters innovation and offers choices beyond a single ecosystem.

That really does not make any sense. The DMA is not intended to ban the closed ecosystem? Exactly how is any company with a closed ecosystem supposed to comply when step one is allow alt stores" and step two is "allow side loading". That, by definition, results in the elimination of the closed ecosystem.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

John Gruber raises a valid point here.

European Data Protection Board Goes There, Rules Against Meta’s ‘Pay or OK’ Model

If Meta caves and complies with this ruling by offering a free tier with significantly lower ARPU, that opens the door for regulators and legislative bodies around the globe to demand the same.

daringfireball.net

Under the current rules, Facebook has to offer a free version of their service that doesn't serve targeted ads (and simply offering a paid version which allows subscribers to opt out of it isn't enough). Yet EU companies are apparently not affected by this ruling at all.

This “ruling” is related to GDPR and not DMA. And it’s an opinion asked by national authorities.

The European Data Protection Board | European Data Protection Board

www.edpb.europa.eu

Executive summary


The Dutch, Norwegian and German (Hamburg) supervisory authorities requested the EDPB to issue an opinion on the question of under which circumstances and conditions 'consent or pay' models relating to behavioural advertising can be implemented by large online platforms in a way that constitutes valid, and in particular freely given, consent, also taking into account the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in C-252/21. The scope of this opinion is indeed limited to the implementation by large online platforms (which are defined for the purposes of this opinion) of


'consent or pay' models where users are asked to consent to processing for the purposes of behavioural advertising.


In this respect, the EDPB highlights the need to comply with all the requirements of the GDPR, in particular those for valid consent, while assessing the specificities of each case. Of particular importance is the principle of accountability. The EDPB recalls that obtaining consent does not absolve the controller from adhering to all the principles outlined in Article 5 GDPR, as well as the other GDPR obligations. It is key to comply with the principles of necessity and proportionality, purpose limitation, data minimisation, and fairness.

Spotify, in particular, is famous for its free ad tier, hasn't been shy about its intention of building a global ad platform for podcasts, and yet wasn't designed "gatekeeper" status because the EU commission knows that forcing them to do so is only going to drive the final stake into what was never a sustainable business model in the first place.

The DMA may as well be renamed the "Spotify Boost Act" at this point. If you tell me "Oh, Spotify is not big enough to come under the DMA", bear in mind who came up with those thresholds in the first place, and who now is demonstrating their utter willingness to completely disregard those thresholds when it's convenient to do so?

Spotify isn’t even in the listed category to qualify for the DMA, just like Apple Music, YouTube music, or Amazon music can’t qualify

You want to know who the DMA was designed to benefit? Observe who has been the loudest proponent of it since its inception. Well, it won't save them.

Epic has been the loudest proponent. The ruling Spotify had was for the anti steering clause in a legal case older than the DMA.

 

[Abazigal]

That really does not make any sense. The DMA is not intended to ban the closed ecosystem? Exactly how is any company with a closed ecosystem supposed to comply when step one is allow alt stores" and step two is "allow side loading". That, by definition, results in the elimination of the closed ecosystem.

Their objective is simple. They know they can’t compete, so they can only poke holes in the ecosystems of more established tech companies so as to give their own businesses a fighting chance.

I guess the EU may not bother with a closed ecosystem like the Nintendo switch if they think it is too small to be an issue. But then again, they can always wake up one day and decide arbitrarily that your platform is an issue, just for existing.

Open or closed is not the issue. The issue is - what’s to their advantage, and what isn’t.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

And blacksmiths making horseshoes didn't do as well once cars came on the scene. It is in Apple's best interest to make sure developers create apps for their devices, but their devices are not created to provide jobs to developers. They are created for users; income for developers is the happy side-benefit of a healthy, competitive ecosystem.

Is the blacksmith prevented from making tier rims and other metal components to the customers who owns these new cars?

Or must he suddenly sell through the official car deal ships fromtstore? Or can he still sell it though is shop and towards any stores unaffiliated with the brand targeted.

Hey EU, why isn't Spotify paying more to artists for streaming music? They are 'dominant' in that space? Doesn't that seem 'anti-competitive'? Or does this qualify as just the right amount of competition?
View attachment 2373143
(I kid, of course. Spotify should pay the artists/labels whatever amount have have negotiated. And users can choose to use their services, or not, as they see fit. Just as Apple's customers should.)

So why aren’t anyone else in that list classified as a gatekeeper? Could it be because they are outside the scope of the DMA?

You keep trying this rhetorical trick of substituting "same" for my words "more like".

You can use the word more like, still they aren’t more similar as how they allow side loading is different as well as the depth of access software have to do changes.

 

[Krizoitz]

The rules hasn’t changed. Apple filed In information that showed that the iPad likely wasn’t a gatekeeper, EU made an investigation just how they investigated Samsung.

Samsung was shown not to be a gatekeeper but iPad is shown to be a gatekeeper. Simple as that.

Samsung doesn’t make an OS, so yeah not the same at all. What a ridiculous argument.

 

[Krizoitz]

this doesn't hurt the platform in any way. it hurts the profitability of the platform, which doesn't affect users like you or me.

It absolutely hurts the platform AND has a negative affect on users like you and me.

First, it weakens security and privacy protections that Apples approach provides.

Second, it reduces ease of use and increases complexity.

One reason I CHOOSE iOS over Android is specifically because I don’t WANT to have to deal with multiple AppStores and payment systems.

“But you can just keep using the Apple ones if you want”.

********. When key apps start pulling out of the Apple App Store to only show up in their own it means I no longer have that choice. Further they can now start avoiding the privacy and security protections Apples store requires, meaning I have to compromise my privacy and security more when I didn’t have to before.

But setting aside those rather important points it also means Apple has to devote significant resources to dealing with all the EU ********, resources id rather they use making other parts of iOS better or adding new features users actually want.

The overwhelming majority of Apple users are HAPPY with the way things are. Most of us actively choose iPhones and iPads BECAUSE we prefer the Apple approach. If we didn’t want that we could easily use an Android device (as many people do).

There is one and only one reason that the EU is doing this and it’s because Apple (and Google) are not EU companies and the EU developers are bitter about it. Companies like Spotify want all the benefits of being on smartphone platforms without having to shoulder any of the cost. It’s a protection racket, plain and simple.

 

[Hazmat401]

and watch AAPL drop 15% overnight, no way tim gonna keep his job with that many angry investors

Well… the EU investors can piss off. The American investors will understand

 

[Beautyspin]

I am the first to point out greedy corporations and the fact that they should all pay their fair share of taxes (including Apple) and I am for most regulatory measures by governments when they make sense for the people (not lobbyists). But we are not talking about the price of groceries and necessities that corporations and mega farms are currently price gouging under the guise of inflation.

Apple doesn't ship harmful products - if they did, I'd be behind banning them. Apple does not force anyone to buy their products or services, and they have very strong competition who sells competing products for less in just about every market they are in. Apple makes the most money because their margins are higher, not because they own any market they are in (in terms of units, users, etc.)

Apple is a higher-end hardware, software and services company. I think governments should put more focus on tax cheats, and the data harvesting and selling by Google, FB/Meta and 4chan 2.0 (Free Speech if it's Elon's Speech Twitter or 'X'). If we want to talk about being harmful, let's not fail to mention the disinformation that these platforms spread - especially as AI takes off.

My take was that corporations are greedy for profits and left unchecked, they will care little for consumers and more for their own profits. The posters here think that Apple is benevolent. It is not. The number of class action suits that have gone against Apple are clear testimony to it. That it took a class action suit for Apple to redress a mistake committed by Apple shows how sleazy Apple's behavior is. If it were a respectable company, it would not do harm or if there is a mistake, it would address it immediately without the need for a class action suit. I rest my case.

 

[Beautyspin]

To play devils advocate here - I do somewhat like the Safari / WebKit engine requirement. It forces sites to limit the Chrome-only support that has been happening on other platforms. Let's be honest, Chrome is to the Internet today what IE / ActiveX was back in the day and while I would like to use Firefox / Gecko for certain high-performance sites I really hate having to stop my workflow to open a Chrome / Chromium browser for specific sites or pages.

Chrome is on top because people perceive it to be the best. It is on top on those OSes that it does not control such as Windows and MacOS. People are voting. Safari is on top only in iOS. The minute the requirement goes, Safari will become a dead browser. Safari is surviving because Apple is supporting it. Let it proliferate because it is the best, not because it is being supported by some sleazy means.

Google has a market share of only 65% on desktops. That means something else can come and take the market share away from Chrome. Unfortunately, it is not Safari in its current form. Let Safari compete on merit.

 

[ilikewhey]

Well… the EU investors can piss off. The American investors will understand

good luck with the shareholder voting lol

 

[Analog Kid]

You can use the word more like, still they aren’t more similar as how they allow side loading is different as well as the depth of access software have to do changes.

If there are fewer differences, they are more alike. That there are remaining differences is why I object to your attempts to substitute "same". If you're going to argue basic semantics then there's no point in arguing anything requiring nuance.

 

[Analog Kid]

My take was that corporations are greedy for profits and left unchecked, they will care little for consumers and more for their own profits. The posters here think that Apple is benevolent. It is not.

My take is that greed for profits has driven Apple to create products that people want. There are other products, by other greedy companies, that are equally accessible to the consumer and yet many selfish consumers buy products from greedy Apple.

Or you can say Apple works hard to make products that people will value, in competition with other companies with their own approaches to providing value, and many customers find more value for themselves in the Apple product.

They're both the same mechanism with the cynicism slider set to a different setting. Your tone suggests that you are using "benevolent" in place of "altruistic". Nobody thinks Apple is altruistic.

 

[Darth Tulhu]

So the Mac isn’t secure? I doubt Apple would agree with that.

Not implying that, but iPadOS seems like a mobile OS at its core. I was just keeping things simple without having to retool iPadOS's security profile.

I'm not an expert in OS design, so I'm leaning back on my armchair here, but macOS seems to be more open by design. And you still have to agree to a "you break it you buy it" approach to installing non-vetted apps on it.

iPadOS (and iOS before it) were DESIGNED to be locked down.

That said, as long as my devices' operation and security aren't compromised in any way, I really don't care what Apple does here, or how.

 

[Darth Tulhu]

No one is ‘forced’ in theory, but we all know how hard it is to abandon iOS once you’re locked in the ecosystem.

Absolute nonsense. I have been a Mac user since 2001, and my first and only iPhone was the 4s. After that I went Samsung until the iPhone 12. I used my multiple Sammies with my Macs, my iPads, my PCs over the years. Both Samsung and Google made switching EASY AS HELL.

After so many years in the wild, I missed the interoperability that Apple brought to the table (it got better and better over time, not overnight). And once both iOS and iPadOS gained enough comparable capability to my Sammies, I came back.

No one is locked-in. NO ONE.

Your complaint about Apple here is WHY the juice that Apple makes is so sweet: The ecosystem.

Apple can (arguably) tune their own products better that Samsung, Microsoft, or Google, BECAUSE they're Apple's products.

You want DIY? DON'T buy Apple.

And Google's and Samsung's offerings in the computing space are EXCELLENT, just not a match for a Mac (yet). So here I'll stay, snug and comfy in my 4-walled garden (until the EU and whomever else knocks the walls down).