3 ms·

> I wonder wether they will comply at all. Of course they will try not to. They will do everything to prolong the appeal process and so on - it's unthinkable t

> I wonder wether they will comply at all. Of course they will try not to. They will do everything to prolong the appeal process and so on - it's unthinkable they would allow any other app store on their devices, that's the very core of their identity - to be as closed and unified as possible. I don't believe the EU has enough power to fight Apple. I'll believe it when I see the first iPhone with an USB-C charger.

ethbr0 4y ago
The other side of the coin is "Does Apple have enough brand goodwill to spend it on X years of 'Apple fights EU to keep monopoly' news articles?" Kind of hard to claim you're all unicorns and rainbows, when you're actively involved in a court case to defend anti-user practices...
- dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
  I think you underestimate them. Off the top of my head: 1. EU bureaucrats are threatening one of the most successful business models ever. 2. Jealous EU tries to punish successful American tech companies as they can't compete with them in the market. 3. The EU attempts to lower the value of tech stock, threatening pensions of millions of Americans. 4. Apple will need to fire thousands if the malicious plan of EU bureaucrats succeeds. Etc. etc.
  - toyg 4y ago
    1. Who cares, it's an American company contributing very little to the EU market - in fact, siphoning billions of euros to tax havens 2. see point 1 3. see point 1 4. see point 1
    - dodobirdlord 4y ago
      The EU has a bunch of reciprocal trade agreements with the USA to not engage in punitive harassment of each other’s companies. Of course they still can, but that’s what’s called a “trade war” and it’s generally not a good thing for all involved. Public perception of these changes in the US is also very important, since if the US government chooses to view these actions as punitive harassment calculatedly targeted only at US companies, it will respond with tariffs etc on EU goods.
      - unity1001 4y ago
        > but that’s what’s called a “trade war” Yeah. That has been going on since 2005, and the US started it. It even adopted the whitepapers of think-thanks that advocated that exact trade war, elaborating how to sink the Eu's economy. This has been escalating since then. This law basically says that the Eu is going full-out.
  - frostburg 4y ago
    They have to convince the EU power structure, which truly doesn't care about any of that on any level.
    - dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
      It would seem so, yes. But in fact they need to convince the US government that the issue is worth exercising some pressure on the EU. And the USA has a wide array of options here. When Chelsea Manning released her cables, there were too many of them for any journalist to read or even glance not to mention understanding what is going on. But I spent several weeks grepping and reading many fragments. My conclusion is that the US government cares a lot about their business in other countries, especially in Europe. Ambassadors reported a great deal about how things are going for American companies, what threats are (like European citizens realizing what's better for them), how to neutralize them and so on.
      - unity1001 4y ago
        If the US was able to exert sufficient influence on the Eu, the trade war that the US itself started in 2005 would not reach such a point in which the Eu basically placed a kick in the balls of the US tech monopolies. Which should never have happened and those companies should have never been let to dominate the Internet and everyone's lives to this extent. Especially considering how they are private tyrannies that decide whatever is the best for them, not their users.
  - jeltz 4y ago
    1. Yes, and they do not care. 2. If true that is an argument in favor of the EU. That means no member countries will undermine the act. 3. The EU buteacrats do not care. 4. The EU buteacrats do not care.
  - unity1001 4y ago
    Wow. All of those points that you listed ARE the reasons why nobody in Europe will take Apple's side when left-wing European MPs start telling their constituents about all those stuff. Actually they do - thats the reason why that law was passed. That kind of thing may fly in the US, but not elsewhere.
    - dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
      Of course. But these points aren't aimed at the EU (they don't have a leg to stand on, at most they can say they need more time but they can't really find good arguments against the new law). The way I see it, Apple has 3 options: 1) Appeal to infinity, using all resources they can. 2) Comply but make things so difficult for the user that they effectively retain the control over the device as before. (Anybody remembers browserchoice.eu?) 3) Convince the US government the law goes too far and they should intervene. Given the war in Ukraine, it would be extremely easy to convince the countries bordering with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine they should support the USA in this case.
ko27 4y ago
> I don't believe the EU has enough power to fight Apple Of course they do. EU Commission, with parlament and member state approval (which they have), has supreme sovereign power over these matters. Market regulation is basically the main point of EU. Because it's a new targeted law, Apple has zero chance of appealing this to a higher court. Thank god that companies don't have "power" over countries and sovereign bodies. I don't want to live in a cyberpunk world.
- visarga 4y ago
  > I don't want to live in a cyberpunk world. Snow Crash was like that, companies > countries.
iainmerrick 4y ago
I don't think USB-C is a good yardstick. Apple could (and I think should) move to USB-C voluntarily. They already switched laptops and tablets over to USB-C, and most phone peripherals these days are wireless, so why should phones stick with Lightning?

ethbr0 4y ago

The other side of the coin is "Does Apple have enough brand goodwill to spend it on X years of 'Apple fights EU to keep monopoly' news articles?" Kind of hard to claim you're all unicorns and rainbows, when you're actively involved in a court case to defend anti-user practices...

dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
I think you underestimate them. Off the top of my head: 1. EU bureaucrats are threatening one of the most successful business models ever. 2. Jealous EU tries to punish successful American tech companies as they can't compete with them in the market. 3. The EU attempts to lower the value of tech stock, threatening pensions of millions of Americans. 4. Apple will need to fire thousands if the malicious plan of EU bureaucrats succeeds. Etc. etc.
- toyg 4y ago
  1. Who cares, it's an American company contributing very little to the EU market - in fact, siphoning billions of euros to tax havens 2. see point 1 3. see point 1 4. see point 1
  - dodobirdlord 4y ago
    The EU has a bunch of reciprocal trade agreements with the USA to not engage in punitive harassment of each other’s companies. Of course they still can, but that’s what’s called a “trade war” and it’s generally not a good thing for all involved. Public perception of these changes in the US is also very important, since if the US government chooses to view these actions as punitive harassment calculatedly targeted only at US companies, it will respond with tariffs etc on EU goods.
    - unity1001 4y ago
      > but that’s what’s called a “trade war” Yeah. That has been going on since 2005, and the US started it. It even adopted the whitepapers of think-thanks that advocated that exact trade war, elaborating how to sink the Eu's economy. This has been escalating since then. This law basically says that the Eu is going full-out.
- frostburg 4y ago
  They have to convince the EU power structure, which truly doesn't care about any of that on any level.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
    It would seem so, yes. But in fact they need to convince the US government that the issue is worth exercising some pressure on the EU. And the USA has a wide array of options here. When Chelsea Manning released her cables, there were too many of them for any journalist to read or even glance not to mention understanding what is going on. But I spent several weeks grepping and reading many fragments. My conclusion is that the US government cares a lot about their business in other countries, especially in Europe. Ambassadors reported a great deal about how things are going for American companies, what threats are (like European citizens realizing what's better for them), how to neutralize them and so on.
    - unity1001 4y ago
      If the US was able to exert sufficient influence on the Eu, the trade war that the US itself started in 2005 would not reach such a point in which the Eu basically placed a kick in the balls of the US tech monopolies. Which should never have happened and those companies should have never been let to dominate the Internet and everyone's lives to this extent. Especially considering how they are private tyrannies that decide whatever is the best for them, not their users.
- jeltz 4y ago
  1. Yes, and they do not care. 2. If true that is an argument in favor of the EU. That means no member countries will undermine the act. 3. The EU buteacrats do not care. 4. The EU buteacrats do not care.
- unity1001 4y ago
  Wow. All of those points that you listed ARE the reasons why nobody in Europe will take Apple's side when left-wing European MPs start telling their constituents about all those stuff. Actually they do - thats the reason why that law was passed. That kind of thing may fly in the US, but not elsewhere.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago
    Of course. But these points aren't aimed at the EU (they don't have a leg to stand on, at most they can say they need more time but they can't really find good arguments against the new law). The way I see it, Apple has 3 options: 1) Appeal to infinity, using all resources they can. 2) Comply but make things so difficult for the user that they effectively retain the control over the device as before. (Anybody remembers browserchoice.eu?) 3) Convince the US government the law goes too far and they should intervene. Given the war in Ukraine, it would be extremely easy to convince the countries bordering with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine they should support the USA in this case.

ko27 4y ago

> I don't believe the EU has enough power to fight Apple Of course they do. EU Commission, with parlament and member state approval (which they have), has supreme sovereign power over these matters. Market regulation is basically the main point of EU. Because it's a new targeted law, Apple has zero chance of appealing this to a higher court. Thank god that companies don't have "power" over countries and sovereign bodies. I don't want to live in a cyberpunk world.

visarga 4y ago
> I don't want to live in a cyberpunk world. Snow Crash was like that, companies > countries.

iainmerrick 4y ago

I don't think USB-C is a good yardstick. Apple could (and I think should) move to USB-C voluntarily. They already switched laptops and tablets over to USB-C, and most phone peripherals these days are wireless, so why should phones stick with Lightning?