50 ms·

EU tells Apple to open everything up to its rivals

• hunglee2 3y ago
  [flagged]
  • gostsamo 3y ago
    With all due respect, but you don't see the irony in your comment.
    • account-5 3y ago
      Was about to say the same thing.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • curiousgibbon 3y ago
    The EU gets to decide their local tech market. Should apple stop selling phones there on principle?
  • IntelMiner 3y ago
    Extraterritoriality? If you sell something in the EU (or Asia, or Australia etc) you have to abide by their laws. Just because the company is headquartered somewhere else doesn't absolve them of that
  • hutzlibu 3y ago
    I agree that the EU has no buisness telling US what to do or vice versa. But we can regulate our market as we see fit. So Apple can just withdraw if they don't like the local rules.
• tick_tock_tick 3y ago
  Good! This is the kind of anti-trust action we need to see and focus on.
• mungoman2 3y ago
  Everything? I don't understand from this article or it's links what this is actually about.
  • pera 3y ago
    This is the actual quote from Breton, EU Commissioner for Internal Market: > The next job for Apple and other Big Tech, under the DMA (Digital Markets Act) is to open up its gates to competitors, be it the electronic wallet, browsers or app stores, consumers using an Apple iPhone should be able to benefit from competitive services by a range of providers
• smithcoin 3y ago
  I for one am excited at the prospect that I might be able to install Firefox with ublock origin on my iPhone.
  • astrange 3y ago
    You won't, because once Chrome becomes available it will kill every other browser vendor.
    • mattnewton 3y ago
      how? I can still install Firefox on desktop and android despite chrome’s dominance.
      • Tagbert 3y ago
        What is the user base of Firefox now? Single digits, last I hear. Chrome just keeps growing. Once iOS no longer uses WebKit as it’s base, the Chrome Blink will dominate.
        • nickthegreek 3y ago
          So what? That does not affect those of us using Firefox.
          • astrange 3y ago
            You don't know how many websites you're using do totally different things under an if (Chrome) though, or will in the future.
            • mattnewton 3y ago
              I think I maybe get the broader argument you are trying to make, but in the context of gp’s comment, forcing web devs to test in and fix bugs in mobile safari because of its forced 100% iOS market share isn’t making people test in Firefox. And it currently not possible to run actual Firefox on your iphone, just a branded WebKit wrapper.
• andersa 3y ago
  Good. It's high time to end these gigacorps trying to place an unnecessary toll booth in front of entire markets.
• barelysapient 3y ago
  I guess iPhone will soon be as awesome and open as Android!
  • Dah00n 3y ago
    Apple would likely rather delete the code and stop releasing phones than do that.
  • mardifoufs 3y ago
    If anything, it's android that is turning into a more closed and restricted environment.
    • hindsightbias 3y ago
      I'm sure the Fortune 500 sans Apple will play ball a do what's best for us.
  • SpaceManNabs 3y ago
    as long as the first party iOS experience is still solid, I don't care. If apple has to prevent updates / services to 1p services because 3p cannot keep up, then I'd be pretty incensed. There is a reason i left android last year!
    • robertlagrant 3y ago
      I doubt it can be if more apps are allowed. E.g. allowing one browser means they can control very tightly the performance characteristics of it and any other apps that use its renderer. If third party browsers are allowed then it's much harder to do that. I know Android does it, but Android's got many years of experience doing it, and it's generally not as smooth as iOS.
• account-5 3y ago
  About time. Never understood how apple seemed immune to this when the likes of Google and Microsoft were targeted for their monopolistic behaviour.
  • jjoonathan 3y ago
    Yes, but we need more anti-trust for all of them. Edge has been repeating the old Explorer tricks and Google pay-for-play is even worse (if Apple didn't get a cut, would they be as willing to push the increasingly ad-infested google search?)
    • robertlagrant 3y ago
      Google's thing is just a default, no? Consumers can change it?
      • colonwqbang 3y ago
        Yes it is, so it isn't really comparable to what Apple is doing.
        • robertlagrant 3y ago
          Apple is doing it. Google is paying Apple to set a default.
      • 728ee0f3 3y ago
        but most dont
      • threeseed 3y ago
        Except this has all played out before. Consumers do what they are told to do. If a website says install this app in order to use it they will. If an app says approve this permission to use this app they will. And so you will inevitably end up with websites that only support Chrome which will increase its market share up until the point it is an IE style monopoly. And aspects like the cost of testing apps/sites on multiple diverging browsers will further entrench this monopoly. People go on about how this is great for competition as they can finally install Firefox etc. No. This is going to cement Google's control over the browser market and wipe out third party browsers like Firefox for good. And then we will end up with pro-advertising features that are built into the browser that you can't block.
• froggertoaster 3y ago
  [flagged]
  • andersa 3y ago
    It just shows you how important of an issue this is.
  • lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
    It's kinda noticeable when that happens but it also makes sense that a lot of people will individually read the article and post similar sentiments at similar times, even all within 3 minutes. If they were all green names there's probably a point but it's another matter to think that some anti-Apple organization is just sitting on these accounts for years waiting for their moment to strike.
• sccxy 3y ago
  Current iOS browser situation is quite a joke. Recently they added possibility for other browsers to "Add page to Home Screen". But this shortcut later opens in Safari...
  • olliej 3y ago
    Indeed, it will be so great when web developers can just force everyone to use chrome.
    • johnzim 3y ago
      The inexplicable need to make the browser a second OS with worse everything boggles my mind. Especially on mobile devices which prize battery life. It won't give users choice because we as an industry have again and again just chosen what's easiest for us instead of best for the customer. We'd 100% still be using Flash if Apple hadn't refused to support it because of the battery and performance issues. This forum spends a lot of time talking about the E**ification of everything and how user hostile many companies business practices are and then cheers tearing down the one walled garden a non-nerd can, by default, have a reasonable experience in.
      • smoldesu 3y ago
        > We'd 100% still be using Flash if Apple hadn't refused to support it I mean, that's hyperbole. Even in a flash-dominated web, there was still tons of non-flash technology being developed and distributed. In 2023 it would definitely be obsoleted, if for no reason other than Adobe having no incentive to keep it around. Apple's decision feels tangential relative to the progress of internet bandwidth, delivery technologies and even just the plain advent of YouTube obceleting 90% of the places Flash was used. Flash would be dead today even if Apple did adopt it, because nobody in the industry wants to pay arbitrary taxes or kiss the proprietary ring. Their freedom on the web let them evolve and pick competitive replacements; Flash's death is hardly a defense of iron-fist ecosystem enforcement.
        • theshrike79 3y ago
• ericbarnes 3y ago
  > "EU regulation fosters innovation, without compromising on security and privacy," Breton told Reuters. I had to lol at that one.
  • smoldesu 3y ago
    Without compromising any of the security or privacy Apple cares to defend. There's words to mince here, but they're not in Apple's defense.
  • pb7 3y ago
    What innovation?
    • parski 3y ago
      Sending an iMessage to an Android phone. Only the EU can do that.
• olliej 3y ago
  Does this apply to PlayStations, Xbox, Nintendos, etc?
  • Dah00n 3y ago
    There's always one like you.
    • SpaceManNabs 3y ago
      Is it not a valid question? Very curious.
      • robertlagrant 3y ago
        If it weren't valid, the previous commenter would attack the question, not the person writing the question.
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    • nickthegreek 3y ago
      I hope there are a lot more like him. How dare we have consistency in our legislation!
  • lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
    Logically, probably. They may choose to change their operations based on this ruling because they could expect a similar ruling against them in the future. I would personally expect them to continue operating as they do until/unless there is a such a ruling.
  • andersa 3y ago
    Those are not considered general purpose computing devices under the current legislation, so no. It's currently targeted at mobile phones.
    • 3y ago
• 6510 3y ago
  From no way in hell it seems I'm gradually getting an iphone. I cant be bothered to buy my own prison. (If you don't agree I have a cage to sell you.)
  • Tagbert 3y ago
    A cage with windows and doors is not much of a cage.
    • 6510 3y ago
      After the revolution you no longer need those who made the transition happen. Like there is no more use for communist revolutionaries after victory. Independent repair men are useful while you conquer the tractor market. Software shops can iterate over designs while you charge them rent, then you take the popular features and make them part of your platform using superior api's specially intended for it. You cant not update the platform or not notice the popular 3rd party tools. Is this capitalism? Is this how competition should work? You have to fight the undefeated champion 10 000 times your size, but to keep things honest we tie both your arms behind your back? There is no future for programmers here. There is no need to progress beyond owning everything. If there are 2 or 3 owners doesn't really matter. One will have to wait forever for the thing that should logically come after x84 it doesn't make sense to manufacture electric cars. Governments have a monopoly on rent. It's all locked down, there is no competing with them, not even for Apple. There are plenty of other planets if you don't like the EU. Infinite doors and windows.
• ribosometronome 3y ago
  EU should follow the EU's lead and open itself up in the name of openness and fairness. Instead, they're working to make it easier to expel immigrants.
  • suyash 3y ago
    It's open for legal migrants, not for illegals, same logic applies for developers vs hackers.
• TheAceOfHearts 3y ago
  The Reuters article mentions a list of dos and donts but I couldn't easily find this after a quick search, does anyone know where it's available? EDIT: I found it "What are the “dos and don'ts” for gatekeepers?" [0]. [0] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_20_2349 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_...
• nickthegreek 3y ago
  I don't understand if this is an ask or a demand backed by the power of the EU.
  • Rygian 3y ago
    It's a new law already in effect.
  • wmal 3y ago
    I read this as a statement of fact. The Digital Market Act has come into force. The act gives the platforms (Apple included) few months of preparations to comply. Breton just reminds that the clock is ticking.
• vishnumohandas 3y ago
  Looking forward to a healthier background execution framework so apps other than iCloud / Apple Photos can offer a reliable sync experience.
• ROFISH 3y ago
  Good! I'm looking forward to having to uninstall a crypto miner on my mom's phone because it told her the only way to play a slots app is to allow third-party apps.
  • ssklash 3y ago
    The "won't someone think of my mom" argument. Somehow we get by just fine on x86 with arbitrary software being allowed, but for IOS it's unthinkable?
    • kiratp 3y ago
      We don't get by fine on x86. That is the whole point here. My non-technical family are able to make their iOS devices "just work" with 0 support.
      • albert180 3y ago
        [flagged]
        • martimarkov 3y ago
          Nope, my parents had 20 things installed on their Android devices because they clicked yes to something. I insist on the fact that you should respect the end user’s choice of platform and not try to change the platform to earn your 30% more. If you really hate it - don’t develop for Apple. I mean at the end of the day you can tell your customers buy an Android phone and see what they prefer - your app or the Apple eco system.
          • albert180 3y ago
            You need to first go to the settings to allow installations of Third Party Apps, then you get a warning of Google Play Protect that you have to expand, and then you have to confirm that you know the App is a security risk and explicitly go forward with the installation. Your parents did this on purpose
• hedora 3y ago
  I don't think there is any news here. He's saying that Apple should abide by the Digital Markets Act, which goes into effect in November. A summary of the changes the DMA will require would be nice.
  • RIMR 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • hedora 3y ago
      None of the first two screens of hits explain what changes the DMA will force Apple to make. Did you find a document that does?
    • verdverm 3y ago
      perhaps you could provide a link instead of being snarky?
• Dah00n 3y ago
  Is there a better source that isn't a proud apple fan site?
• AlbertCory 3y ago
  I think this is a warning shot. It'll be a while until EU actually files a case, and more time until it's adjudicated. And then Apple will fight it tooth and nail. Do not hold your breath. "Open everything up" -- pretty vague.
• spullara 3y ago
  I for one look forward to there being a franken iphone in EU covered with ads and malware. Apple should give them exactly what they want. Every major software company will have their own app store for their apps. It will be glorius!
  • andersa 3y ago
    Protections against malware are the job of the operating system not an app store. And I don't understand the point about ads. The vast majority of apps currently available on the app store is already plastered with ads?
    • Tagbert 3y ago
      The App Store ads are trivial and not the concern. I’m more concerned about the tracking that apps will be able to do when Apple cannot block them from installing. Hello FaceBook++
    • spullara 3y ago
      Every app asking for every possible access to your stuff no matter if it needs it or not is currently protected against by the app store, not the OS.
    • theshrike79 3y ago
      What apps are you using? Not a single one on my iPhone has any ads.
      • fragmede 3y ago
        App Store is the biggest offender, personally. At the top of every query is an ad.
        • theshrike79 3y ago
          We have a very different definition of "Ad" then. I just opened my App Store and only saw one ad - and that was for a game I already have installed. Do you consider the new content suggestions on ATV+, Netflix, Prime video etc. as "Ads" too?
• rahkiin 3y ago
  I also want to be able to reprogram my oven and washing machine. And also my car. I should be able to run any app on my infotainment system, not just those from the manufacturer. Less tongue in cheek: let me install any game I want from any game store on Xbox and Playstation and Switch. I do not understand why this only focuses on Apple. Is that just the media for clicks?
• iteratethis 3y ago
  Cook is doing a largely undocumented European tour. He was also in the Netherlands to talk about/with ASML and NXP. There's a few dozen critical European suppliers that Apple depends on. He's also not hostile to legislation at all, he openly committed and confirmed to want to apply with legislation in any major market. Contrary to popular belief, legislation is not always perceived as negative by businesses. Without legislation, you're somewhat forced to get as unethical as the law allows, because if you don't, somebody else will. In more cynical cases, companies may even embrace legislation as a competitive advantage. An example would be pro-active copyright detection, the detection of misinformation on platforms like Youtube and Facebook. Very hard and expensive to implement, thus small companies don't stand a chance to compete.
• Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
  It is understandable why Apple wants to keep its current grip on iOS indefinitely. What I don't understand is why some people defend it, on this very forum! One commenter simultaneously defended gay marriages - "if you don't like gay marriages, don't get married to gays" - and defended the Apple's monopoly - "I like that there is only one Appstore and developers won't force me to sideload".
  • andersa 3y ago
    Likely for the same reasons people defend billionaires that are actively doing everything that can to shift more wealth away from them.
  • larme 3y ago
    Lesser of two evils principle maybe? I defend apple in this one appstore topic not because I think apple is good, but just better than google and facebook. Of course the longterm solution is to get better legalization on privacy protection etc. But before that, I really prefer apple as a proxy between me and google/facebook/etc.
    • Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
      If you like Apple's policies, just don't sideload and install everything from their official AppStore. Nothing will change for you then. You can do it on MacBooks as well.
      • theshrike79 3y ago
        When this goes through, you can be 100% sure there will be a Meta-only iOS store along with a Google iOS store and all their apps will move there. After that if you want to use apps to access any Google or Meta service, you'll need to get it from their store - that doesn't have any pesky limitations on user profiling or stupid guidelines for privacy.
        • Apocryphon 3y ago
• organsnyder 3y ago
  I was at [IAPP Global Privacy Summit](https://iapp.org/conference/global-privacy-summit/ https://iapp.org/conference/global-privacy-summit/) 2022, where Tim Cook gave a keynote. He started with highlighting all of the ways Apple protects its users privacy (many of which are great, and the reason I use Apple products!), but then he pivoted to make the case that Apple being forced to allow rival app stores would compromise their ability to protect users' privacy. This fell flat to many in the audience: why can't Apple continue to offer a privacy-by-default experience while allowing more competition?
  • andersa 3y ago
    It's just BS. Privacy and security are OS functions, not part of an app store. iOS has a good base here already - certainly much better than windows where every app can just arbitrarily read every file on the computer...
    • tenebrisalietum 3y ago
      > Privacy and security are OS functions Naive take. Network sockets, remote servers, and data brokers don't care about local file permissions and an OS won't be able to tell me if corp-surveillance.justbuyme.com might be a domain hosting a privacy-disrespecting service without some sort of human-mediated reputation service.
      • Apocryphon 3y ago
        Then we can look forward to an exciting front in the arms race that is computer security. Surely Apple, for all of their engineering and design brilliance, are up to the challenge?
        • tenebrisalietum 3y ago
          It's not too exciting. That front is capability-based operating systems (someday) and application whitelisting (a.k.a. an app store).
    • 3y ago
• yreg 3y ago
  My opinion won't be popular. I think it is nice to have a choice of a walled off platform. If I wanted a "more open" platform, I would get an Android phone. There are plenty of amazing Android phones. I choose the tradeoff of Apple's curation. Yes, I cannot run arbitrary software and sometimes it is a disadvantage. Yes, I don't agree with all of the App Store rules all of the time. Yes, I don't think the App Store revenue split is entirely fair. However, I absolutely love that all the developers including the likes of Meta or Uber have to bow down to Apple's rules, which are mostly beneficial to me. I don't want to download apps from alternative app stores. I want them to be available in App Store and to be submitting to all of the curation rules. Perhaps it might seem ridiculous to you, but I want to have the freedom to choose a closed ecosystem as long as there is a good alternative. ---- On the other hand, I think jailbreaking shouldn't void warranty. Also, I might be fine with a regulation that forces Apple to release an "official jailbreak". But that policy should then also apply to PlayStation, X-box, Tesla infotainment, etc.
  • marcosdumay 3y ago
    > I don't want to download apps from alternative app stores. Then don't. Nobody is forcing you.
    • larme 3y ago
      big corps (including apple itself) are powerful enough to force you to do everything if they really want.
    • EtienneK 3y ago
      If I can only get WhatsApp from the Meta Store then, yes, I’m forced.
      • surgical_fire 3y ago
        That does not happen on Android though.
    • yreg 3y ago
      I want to download them from the App Store. I use Instagram, but I want it to play by Apple's rules. Surely you understand what I mean.
• ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago
  Well, we'll see how it goes. There's good reasons for, and against. The one thing that I know, for sure, is that Apple users are valued a hell of a lot more, by crooks, than Android and Windows users. Those folks are probably rubbing their hands in glee (I would not be surprised if quite a few of them, are on this very forum). Should be interesting...
• camdenlock 3y ago
  Why is the EU so arrogantly, hand-wringingly, mustache-twirlingly evil? It sometimes feels like some kind of comical LARP.
  • Jensson 3y ago
    Stopping anti-competitive practices is one of the least evil thing you can do.
• amadeuspagel 3y ago
  In these discussions I often see a dichotomy between freedom and security. At the limit it's true that if you have complete control over a device, you can screw it up. But you can have a lot more freedom without sacrificing security. For a start, you can have a web browser that supports the latest web APIs. For me, that would be enough, but you could also add a Linux VM. (Then you would have ChromeOS, basically.)
• wizofaus 3y ago
  Will this include the ability to compile apps for iOS without requiring Apple made hardware/software (that specifically must run on MacOS)? Have never understood why developers haven't kicked up more of a fuss over that restriction, but it's why I would never write iOS apps as a hobby.
  • aembleton 3y ago
    I don't think there are enough users of XCode within the EU to trigger it as a gatekeeper. I think the threshold is 45 million MAU
  • extraduder_ire 3y ago
    No. I don't think tooling is included in this. I assume many people are hard at work to get a free version of something like the xcode build system stood up. It's mostly there already, but I haven't seen anyone put the parts all together in a way you can self-host. I think iOS hobbyists these days usually use a SASS build system with a free or cheap lower tier.
  • catiopatio 3y ago
    > Have never understood why developers haven't kicked up more of a fuss over that restriction It’s an innate limitation, not an arbitrary restriction. Should Apple really be forced to port their tooling — and the entire, massive software stack it’s based on — to other platforms? I assume most developers targeting Apple’s platforms don’t kick up a fuss because they’re happy running macOS.
    • wizofaus 3y ago
      Just publish the specs for how to build/sign an iOS binary...
      • catiopatio 3y ago
        That information is already available, and much of the implementation (if not all) is open source. You’re free to produce your own toolchain, developer tools, IDE, etc. This generally isn’t done because it’s a significant amount of work, and you’ll always be playing catch-up to Apple’s comprehensive integrated development stack.
• thund 3y ago
  yes, I want to install My apps, eg developed by me, on My devices, and have full access to all hardware feats, without fake obstacles and limitations
• nunez 3y ago
  Fucking good. It's bullshit that you can only run Safari on iOS or that the App Store is the only store you can use. Yes, I understand the security implications of a third-party browser having deeper integrations into the OS and potential battery life concerns. I also don't care. I want to run Firefox on my phone. The actual thing. With containers and extensions. Let Safari compete on the merits. I want the choice of being able to pay for a great app or use its "good enough" open source equivalent outside of the App Store. iOS is a fantastic operating system. iPhone and iPad are stellar hardware with brilliant physical UX. Apple Watch is leagues beyond anything else in its class. I will keep buying Apple stuff until I can't anymore. But a monopoly on core system functions isn't necessary to keep that high bar high.
  • highwayman47 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • myko 3y ago
      The AltStore apps I've installed are pretty reliable
      • highwayman47 3y ago
        [flagged]
        • idle_zealot 3y ago
          It's a pain in the ass to use, and some permissions are still locked to Apple's first party apps.
          • shuckles 3y ago
            It's really funny that there are hackers arguing sincerely that software freedom is worth any price but think it's a "pain in the ass" to press a couple buttons for software freedom once a week (or annually, for $99).
• 1letterunixname 3y ago
  There will be side-effects of well-intentioned, feel-good policies of supporting multiple app stores: - Malware including ransomware, password theft, and identity theft - Lookalike, counterfeit apps - Software piracy - Lowering of curation standards by Apple Certain other software bits cannot be open sourced, including specific cryptographic keys. There is a great deal of Darwin/XNU that is already FOSS. What would be helpful for r2r would be the availability of schematics and Apple-proprietary custom variants of third-party chips. Certainly, T prefix chips can't be too freely shared without weakening the integrity of the security baked into Apple products (no pie puns intended).
  • seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    Isn't that just evening the playing field with non-Apple phones? Isn't that what the EU is trying to accomplish?
  • Apocryphon 3y ago
    > - Lookalike, counterfeit apps - Lowering of curation standards by Apple That has already been happening on the official App Store! Kosta Eleftheriou has done a ton of scholarship into the proliferation of bad apps. (Not to mention, poor UX such as archaic search.) People imagine multiple app stores on iOS would be shady data-hungry operations from the likes of Meta or Google. But opening things up would just as likely, and perhaps more so, foster curated, transparent app stores such as an iOS equivalent to F-Droid.
• cmdli 3y ago
  I, for one, do not look forward to having to sideload Facebook, Instagram, Google, Gmail, and every single other megacorps app just because they want to track my every click. I would rather give power to Apple than all the other companies.
  • RIMR 3y ago
    I have great news for you: The hyperbolic nonsense you just described will literally never happen.
    • eps 3y ago
      The first thing that will happen is Facebook putting up a "light" version in the AppStore with half of functionality removed and pestering people to sideload the "full" version, that will, naturally, come with tracking, snooping and all other unethical bs that they love so much.
      • ranguna 3y ago
        As I mentioned in another comment: yep, that's just like they did on android, except no, they didn't, everything is on the app store. I'm not sure where people are getting these fantasies from.
      • Moldoteck 3y ago
        So you, as a person concerned with privacy, will not install non appstore version, easy peasy sr even better- not install fb at all. You keep your security, and ppl that want sideload will have what they want, everyone happy. And it's quite ironic that on Android the app works as usual, no crippled version
  • dzhiurgis 3y ago
    If you were that concerned you’d use web version of all of the above. Would be nice if Apple required you to have a functional web app before installing app. I.E.FB Messenger - the only reason why it doesn’t work on mobile browser is so that FB can track you more via their App.
• redder23 3y ago
  Maybe not surprising but if you read the comments on the website there seems to be only Apple fanboys commenting who are butt-hurt about it. You can not make this up, consumers who root for a monopoly. This reminds me of gamers who hate the Epic Games Store with passion even though they give the actual devs of the games a bigger cut. Competition is always good for the consumers. And I get the security part when it comes to Apple BUT it does not justify that they take a cut of 30% from every dev, its basically a money printing machine they do not deserve AT ALL. The same for Valve, they only take 30% because they can, not because they provide any value for it. All the do it provide some servers for distribution and a discussion forum, that hardy costs 30% of a games profits.
  • jeroenhd 3y ago
    > if you read the comments on the website there seems to be only Apple fanboys commenting who are butt-hurt about it It makes sense, though: Apple is all about making things easier for the user at the expense of third party developers. Users don't need to deal with app reviewers denying bugfixes because they used the demo credentials on the wrong app, they can just be mad at apps for being buggy. Banks all around the world are paying a secret Apple tax to let Apple users pay with iPay or whatever it's called. I think the situation with Valve is different. Valve has competition and has had competition before; game launchers on Windows (and Linux, I suppose) are perfectly viable, it's just that none of their competition put any effort into making their game launchers as good as Valve's. I think Apple should be able to charge whatever percentages they want, as long as you can install alternative app stores. If their customers accept the higher app prices in exchange for Apple's convenience features, the percentages are perfectly fair.
    • redder23 3y ago
      Valve had a 17 years or so time to develop a launcher b4 Epic entered the market. And even if their laucher would be bad, its just where the people are, where they have their collection, they do not want to leave it. Its actually not such much about how good Steam is, its about the time advantage Valve has. And of course they have the better launcher. But now they are soo big, and they have such a de-facto monopoly that Epic had to go to extreme measures to get some market share. And that is using Fortnite kids parents money to give out free games all the time while actually paying the devs for the games and pay massive amounts of money to devs for exclusive deals. Its all money they have from Fortnite and (Chinese) investors. That also sucks but its better then just one store in town. Bethshitsda has given up on their own distribution and they are back 100% on Steam and they just suck it up and pay the 30% because they failed to compete, no surprise there. I actually think the situations are pretty similar. Except that there is not even a open door to try to compete with the Apples Appstore right now. But they both take 30% and everyone is basically forced to pay it. Game devs can not just release on Epic. They must release on Steam and they must then pay 30% to Valve. If you release a mobile app you must release on Apple and Google play and they take 30%, its the same thing. Even thou there are other stores like Amazons shitty store you are just forced to publish on Google/Apple. I just hope one day decentralization is so mainstream and consumers just buy from creators directly or some blockchain or something without a gatekeeper middlemen that sucks 30% off.
• crop_rotation 3y ago
  I have never owned an iPhone and even I find this a very bad idea. A lot of people buy iPhones because they prefer the choices made by Apple. If there were secondary AppStores, you would have a Metastore and a Googlestore very quickly, since Whatsapp and Google Maps have become indispensable for large parts of the world. You don't even have to take them off Apple store, but make newest features custom store only. The amount of money to be made by precisely targeted advertising by ignoring Apple's rules is immense. Sure Apple is not as open as Google, and neither is as open as Arch Linux, but that doesn't have to be the best solution for every product. Phones are too personal and loaded with tons of personal data. Opening everything to it's rivals is just another phrase that consumer data is now in a free for all, a 21st century gold rush, just offer few bucks/conveniences that are hard to ignore and by the time you blink your entire social group is on 5 custom stores.
  • RIMR 3y ago
    Nobody is forcing anyone to use third-party app stores. The EU is just forcing Apple not to engage in anti-competitive practices. If you want the security of an all-Apple ecosystem, you will still be free to do so. If I want the freedom to install whatever I want to my iPhone, I will be free to do so. Nobody is trying to take away your right to use your phone as you want, they are trying to grant you the right to use your phone as you want.
    • crop_rotation 3y ago
      Yes, nobody wanted virues/malware on Windows, and nobody was forced to install them. We all know how it went. If people didn't want malware, they were free to read carefully and not click on untrusted files/links. What if you want the freedom to install whatever you want on your gaming console? What about your Printer? Your watch? Your car infotainment system? The list is endless. Consumer choice is off course being taken away here, for good or bad I am not sure. But to pretend as if it's not is wrong. Apps like Whatsapp are such must haves that their mere extra features on a diff store will propel that store to stardom.
      • 3y ago
• coldtea 3y ago
  There goes the mobile OS.
• bpye 3y ago
  Does the DMA allow for a distinction between system applications and those that are sideloaded - or do they expect that any sideloaded app should have access to all entitlements, including those that are private today? I've read summaries of the DMA but it's not obvious.
  • ThatPlayer 3y ago
    What's considered a system application? Messages and Siri that come with the system? Well they include those too. They basically define it as "the same entitlements that a competing Apple app gets" > the gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R1925#006.007 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A... So features like the iMessage app being able to send SMS may be the biggest system entitlement? I don't think a settings app may be considered a service.
    • bpye 3y ago
      I wonder how you’d handle something like Siri’s background activation word detection?
• no_wizard 3y ago
  Ironically, I believe all this scrutiny on Apple really started with degraded developer relations and their 30% take on in app sales. If they had invested in better dev relations and dropped their 30% take (instead of coming up with all the weird ways you have to qualify for lower rates, which don't cover all scenarios), I don't think there would have been enough noise from below on this.
  • hexis 3y ago
    One of the biggest own-goals I've ever seen, really breathtaking how Apple botched this.
    • jonhohle 3y ago
      I mean, the original intention was that developers would just write web apps for the phone. It seems like they really scrambled at the beginning to right the ship. That being said, it’s been 14 years.
    • arlcode 3y ago
      It's their hubris that lead to this. For some reasons companies always seem to believe that they have an upper hand over even the most powerful governmental structure. The very powerful people at the helm of Apple, Google and friends seem to forget that on the other side of the table there are powerful people as well and that those are quite similar to themselves. I believe a large contributing factors were the public appearances (or lack thereof) of Tech Execs in front of government bodies (think Zuckerberg in the Senate) where it became clear that they think themselves above the rules of mere mortal man. They committed the capital offence publicly "ridiculing" powerful politicians (and by proxy the people who elected them) all over the world and that is something that won't fly in the long term. Come on Mark, suck in your ego, grovel a bit and agree to some semi-token compromises to keep the money train going. And for the love of god spend some real money in Europe and pay your taxes if you want political leverage. Apparently that was too much of an ask and now that the eyes of the public and regulators are on Big Tech they will be taken down a notch to "just" being profitable companies.
• QuarterReptile 3y ago
  I wonder if they'll force Apple to allow 3rd party SMS. Being forced to use iMessage is probably my biggest reason for not switching to nearly the only small phone on the market, iPhone SE.
• nargella 3y ago
  I do wonder if Tim Apple would be so bold as to stop selling in the EU for all the rules and regulations that they have been required to follow. It would be amazing to see that play out imo. Like a reverse boycott could happen? The secondary strategy Timmy could pull is a dumbed down ecosystem in the EU which I’m sure is even worse for everyone. But hey, you’d be able to buy audible books straight in the app. Is it worth it?
  • pavlov 3y ago
    Sure, there are companies that choose not to be in a particular jurisdiction, like Meta has long chosen not to be in China. But it’s a lot easier to make that choice early when you don’t need to give up on revenue. In Apple’s case, leaving EU would mean losing around $90 billion in annual revenue and ceding a large chunk of their global market share to Android. It’s really hard to justify that kind of thing to shareholders by “we didn’t want to open some APIs in our operating system.”
    • mwint 3y ago
      It might be easier to justify than that, though - the EU has shown an increasing willingness to dictate; Apple may project that out to causing more than $90B/yr in harm or slowed growth in the global business.
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
• perryizgr8 3y ago
  Theoretically it is hard to argue against letting apple configure and manage the devices they sell as they see fit. After all of users don't like iphone they can buy a galaxy. It's not like apple is a monopoly in smartphones. However, the current market situation is definitely limiting customer choice and freedom in a way very similar to a monopoly. There are only 2 options in the market. Iphone or android. So even if I do care about having a device with full control, I literally cannot buy one, without sacrificing the last half decade of tech improvements. If the next version of android totally disallowed side loading, what recourse would people have? Literally nothing. You would be forced to take it. This thing has happened multiple times before with removable batteries, headphone jacks, memory cards, etc. I care about having a headphone jack a little bit, but there is literally no new phone coming out with that feature now. You can still get some, but not without major degradation in areas like CPU/GPU, battery, screen, cameras, etc. So effectively, I do think that iphone and android should be related in some ways like a monopoly. Simply because that's how they are affecting customers.
  • aembleton 3y ago
    > This thing has happened multiple times before with removable batteries, headphone jacks, memory cards, etc. I care about having a headphone jack a little bit, but there is literally no new phone coming out with that feature now. You can still get some, but not without major degradation in areas like CPU/GPU, battery, screen, cameras, etc. I think the whole Sony Xperia line has headphone jacks. For example, their latest one the Xperia 5 V: https://www.sony.co.uk/smartphones/products/xperia-5m5 https://www.sony.co.uk/smartphones/products/xperia-5m5
• allenrb 3y ago
  Good lord, this is the whinge that never ends, isn’t it? If you want an Android phone, dozens if not hundreds of companies will sell you one. You can quite literally choose the level of openness you desire. Personally I prefer the Apple ecosystem where things just tend to work well. It would be difficult to care less about running something other than Safari on an iPhone. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy Apple’s products. I truly don’t understand treating them as some kind of monopoly.
  • hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
    I downvoted this because you're ignoring iMessage. The fact that Apple purposefully not only gives Android users a shitty experience when communicating with iOS users, but also ensures that the presence of an Android user can break the experience for everyone else in a group chat (e.g. degraded videos now for everyone) in iMessage is a blatant attempt to abuse their monopoly power (in the US at least where iMessage dominates). I've been an Android user for years and am reluctantly seriously considering getting an iPhone solely because my friends bitch at me all the time when I'm in a group chat. Apple doesn't even need to make an Android version of iMessage, they just need to support RCS instead of SMS/MMS: https://www.android.com/get-the-message/ https://www.android.com/get-the-message/
    • 8zah6q7 3y ago
      The green bubbles break Apple's accessibility guidelines - making it more difficult to read (especially for visually impaired users). The better option is switching to Signal, but some people have strange hangups.
      • ProfessorLayton 3y ago
        Accessibility > Display & Text Size > Increase Contrast If there’s one thing Apple is doing right, it’s building excellent accessibility options right into their OS.
    • nicbou 3y ago
      iMessage is pretty rare. Europe is on WhatsApp
• ralusek 3y ago
  I love my Galaxy phones. I draw with the stylus constantly. I think they have better cameras. I love the Android back button. After almost 15 years of Android, I'm buying an iPhone specifically for iMessage. I had a daughter, and I'm so tired of getting and sending videos of her and her peers over SMS. I'm constantly uploading to Google drive and sending links, or asking people to get on an alternative chat platform. All Apple needs to do is support RCS. They don't do it because they want everybody else to inconvenience iPhone users with their green bubbles. They want tiny garbled videos and no read receipts. Everyone thinks that this is Android holding back Apple users when it's specifically the exact inverse. Accept the open standard for communication! It's one of their most nefarious business moves. "Get your mom an iPhone."
  • junofan 3y ago
    A glaring problem with RCS is that Google sells a way to run ads on it: > RBM is a messaging platform that brands use to send One-Time Passwords (OTPs) and engage customers in dialog about transactions, customer service, promotions, and more. RBM is provided through a Google API and delivered to end users through Google servers. [1] Google should work with carriers to increase MMS size limits for the sake of their users rather than end-run around SMS/MMS marketing laws. [1]: https://developers.google.com/business-communications/rcs-business-messaging/support/data-security https://developers.google.com/business-communications/rcs-bu...
• WanderPanda 3y ago
  Next feat after blessing us with the cookie banner and an inferior plug: making iOS so unsafe that everyone has to use physical branches for banking again
  • v7n 3y ago
    If you don't spy on people you don't need to ask for such permission.
  • tristan957 3y ago
    If the plug was superior, why wouldn't Apple use it on all their devices? Apple could have also opened the plug up for everybody if they really felt it was superior. Wasn't it Volkswagen that allowed all manufacturers to use the 3 point seat belt because of how safe it was? Volkswagen did something for the common good of humanity. Why couldn't Apple do the same if the plug was so insanely good as you say? > making iOS so unsafe that everyone has to use physical branches for banking again Yep, me the Android user has to go to physically go to the bank instead of installing my bank's app off the Play Store.
    • callalex 3y ago
      You’re thinking of Volvo. Volkswagen is the one that poisoned and killed untold people by lying and cheating.
• boringg 3y ago
  Is this just one big protectionist move? Opening the doors for more EU app companies to rake more money? I'm not even sure which EU companies are spending the big lobbying dollars for this one? Anyone? Conceptually I'm on board in practice I'm not. Once we actually look at what the other side looks like it's going to be super disappointing. And like everyone else said -- if you don't like the platform go shop for another one theres others out there. No one forced you into the Apple ecosystem. Can't wait for more Pegasus like exploits.
  • DaiPlusPlus 3y ago
    > Opening the doors for more EU app companies to rake more money? EU technology companies are not known for their profiteering compared to American ones. Just saying.
    • pb7 3y ago
      They're not known for it because they don't have the ability, not because they don't have the willingness. It's not a matter of culture or policy as evidenced by the profiteering of European luxury goods monopolies. Europe can't compete in tech so it has its lunch eaten by American companies.
      • DaiPlusPlus 3y ago
        > It's not a matter of culture or policy as evidenced by the profiteering of European luxury goods monopolies I'm sorry but what?
        • pb7 3y ago
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LVMH https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LVMH https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica And many others. For example, Luxottica is an eyewear monopoly that owns 80% of brands selling $5 worth of plastic for hundreds.
  • 3y ago
• absoluteunit1 3y ago
  Is it just a coincidence or does it seem like governments (mostly EU and US) are cracking down hard on tech companies lately ?
  • spicycode 3y ago
    Nah, monopolies haven't been broken up in years. If anything they are barely regulated at all.
• osti 3y ago
  It's complete bs that Microsoft gets anti monopoly lawsuit just for having IE as default browser, but Apple can just force everyone to only be able to install software thru their own app store.
  • firecall 3y ago
    > just for having IE as default browser That's not what it was about. The FTC accused MS of Monopoly Abuse. MS gave away IE in a deliberate attempt to destroy Netscape, and they succeeded. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#:~:text=The%20central%20issue%20was%20whether,had%20a%20copy%20of%20IE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
    • osti 3y ago
      So if Apple were Microsoft, they just wouldn't let Netscape in their app store in the first place.
  • NegativeK 3y ago
    Windows had a vast majority of consumer installs. Microsoft was slapped around for using that monopoly position to push out other competitors. Without even approaching whether it's a good case or not, Apple's situation is different: The monopoly claims against Apple are that they have complete dominance on their platform, not on all consumer platforms.
• cm2012 3y ago
  Every regulation the EU puts on Apple delights me.
  • pb7 3y ago
    It's the only thing it can do. It's not like it's going to suddenly become competent in technology and create viable competitors.
    • cm2012 3y ago
      Oh yeah, I think 90% of EU tech regulations are overall hurtful to EU citizens in the long run. But Apple acts very high and mighty in the tech industry and throws a lot of stones, so its nice to see Apple hit in their glass house.
    • no_time 3y ago
      EU citizen here, I'd prefer to have these regulations instead of a third digital serfdom. Be it EU based or not.
• apatheticonion 3y ago
  I think this is a great thing for Apple customers and customers of all platforms as it will increase the experiences available to iPhone customers and give non-iPhone customers a new reason to move to the iPhone (I know I would certainly consider buying an iPhone if I could do more with it). This doesn't prevent high quality apps from being distributed on iOS - this just means that Apple needs to compete with other developers on its own platform, something it doesn't need to do currently. It's unlikely consumers would install an alternative app store or side-load apps without a compelling reason to do so. If we see that enough customers are motivated to learn and undergo the process of sideloading an app or installing an alternate app store, then we can view that as an indicator that Apple's existing ecosystem is lacking and restricting experiences customers desire - or that developers cannot publish using Apple's existing channels. In other words, it indicates that Apple customers want more than Apple can provide meaning that Apple either needs to compete with the alternatives or lose software customers - fostering competition and engaging Apple on a level they haven't felt in a long time. Apple can still justify its app store as the place to go to find the best quality "Apple certified" apps. Go there if you want to find an app free of tracking, and approved by Apple for quality - justifying their app store developer pricing through the marketing apps receive. Would love to see how the legislation develops in the long term. Will this eventuate in MacOS/iOS apps being cross-compilable (from Linux) through disarming license terms restricting libraries from being used on all platforms? What about preventing the installation of iOS/MacOS on non Apple hardware? What about banning locked bootloaders - allowing people to port Android to iPhones (which I assume is feasible given the cross over from the Asahi project) - or allowing root access as an opt-in feature for customers. Or something like rules requiring vendors to provide minimal public software or hardware schematics to aid in repairability, or reuse through efforts to maintain software beyond the vendors support schedule (or support porting efforts like Asahi). Considering how much effort dedicated people put into these endeavours today out of passion - overcoming the most immense artificial roadblocks - imagine how many crazy projects would emerge by breaking down these barriers... otherwise known as innovation ;) I would buy my MacBook Pro again right now if I could run Linux on it with full hardware acceleration, hardware support and battery life. The desire to innovate is there.
• bitwize 3y ago
  One thing that Nintendo learned in the 80s is if you want to sell a platform with a sustainable perception of quality, you take responsibility for ensuring that garbage doesn't run on that platform. That means restrictions. Opening everything up on iOS/iPadOS will severely compromise Apple's ability to maintain its value-add in the marketplace as the best quality, most end-user-friendly mobile platform, as well as their security posture.
• hk1337 3y ago
  I doubt it will ever happen but it’d be interesting if this somewhat backfired and Apple says EU is too much trouble and pulls everything out.
• snow_mac 3y ago
  [flagged]
• gigatexal 3y ago
  I’m going to get pilloried for this but I like the rather draconian heavy handed way Apple keeps iOS locked down. It’s an appliance. I can trust it. If or when it gets opened up I’ll still stick to all the Apple or first party stores and things. That the iPhone is locked down and android is open is a feature and difference that consumers choose I think.
  • seydor 3y ago
    I dont agree with it at all, but you are right, people buy apple because need to trust somebody and they trust apple to keep making the right product for them. I don't even consider them superior but certainly trustworthy. Whatever changes apple implements would have to be easily revertable so people can go back to their golden prison.
    • FredPret 3y ago
      It’s not a prison to keep me in. It’s a wall to keep bad things out.
      • jabiko 3y ago
        And so is my apartment door. But I can open the door whenever I want and its not up to my landlord to decide which guests I invite.
        • PartiallyTyped 3y ago
          Except that it is certainly up to everything you consume to demand that you install their app through their shitty third party store. Imagine if your appliance manufacturer could dictate that you kept your door open for them.
          • laniakean 3y ago
            So why do you think this hasn't happened in android yet?
• singularity2001 3y ago
  Is my browser blocking parts of the article or is the article low on details? like what does it mean if the law becomes effective in November, how much time will Apple have to open up, will side loading be allowed immediately, how? etc
• gorgoiler 3y ago
  A lot of this feels like it overlaps with the right to repair. Repairing a physical device is really about changing it and being able to change it — in particular, not being obstructed from doing so. That feels very close, in spirit, to being able to run one’s own software on the device. Another natural extension is if one can run one’s own apps then that right ought also to extend to the entire device — the OS and the firmware. The app / OS boundary is of interest to the computer scientists, but functionally there isn’t any distinction to the end user between the code that renders the heart under the cat video, the code that notices me touch the screen, the code which sends the JSON “{like:10295892983}” over the network, and the code which turns that message into radio waves.
• turquoisevar 3y ago
  People that scoff at the security argument as well as the argument against the proliferation of shitty third party stores clearly haven’t read Nokia’s annual threat intelligence reports of the past couple years. Pretty much every year they show Android to have a sizable market share in malware and it’s almost always accompanied with the context that people got these from third party stores filled with Trojans posing as legitimate apps. Yeah sure, you could try to cut this off at the pass with system level mitigations but it’s not like Google hasn’t made headway in improving this on Android. People are also quick to forget that system level mitigations are but one layer of a Swiss cheese model with App Review, while not infallible, being a very important part of that model. ETA: Below some information from said reports that I copy pasted from a different comment of mine Where 2020[0] “only” saw Android come in at 26.64% with iOS coming in at 1.72%, in 2021[1] Android accounted for a whopping 50.31% of the infections while iOS didn’t even register on the charts. Let me repeat that again: over half of all infections in 2021 were on Android devices. Were these super sophisticated attacks? Let’s see, because Nokia, understandably so, dedicated significant sections of their reports to Android. In 2020 they stated (emphasis mine): > In the smartphone sector, the main venue for distributing malware is represented by Trojanized applications. The user is tricked by phishing, advertising or other social engineering into downloading and installing the application. The security of official app stores, such as Google Play Store, has increased continuously. However, the fact that Android applications can be downloaded from just about anywhere still represents a huge problem, as users are free to download apps from third-party app stores, where many of the applications, while functional, are Trojanized. iPhones applications, on the other hand, are for the most part limited to one source, the Apple Store. In 2021 they stated (emphasis again mine): > Among smartphones, Android devices remain the most targeted by malware due to the open environment and availability of third-party app stores. > […] > The number of Trojans targeting banking information through Android mobile devices has skyrocketed, putting millions of users around the world at financial risk. > […] > Banking Trojans can arrive on smartphones in a variety of ways, often disguised as common and useful apps. When run, they request a variety of permissions needed to perform their desired behavior, then often remove their icon from the application pane, effectively disappearing from the device. In many cases, the apps never provide the promised functionality that enticed the phone's owner to install them and are forgotten quickly after disappearing. However, they remain installed and continue to run as background tasks, using a variety of tricks to collect user information. These may include capturing keystrokes, superimposing their own transparent overlays onto bank login screens, taking screenshots and even accessing Google Authenticator codes. So it looks like in most cases users are being tricked to install malware and grant permissions. This all also explains why the whole “muh sandbox” argument carries little weight. Not only is the sandbox but a single layer of a bigger Swiss cheese model, the sandbox isn’t gonna help your mom if she’s tricked into granting permissions. On top of that you can bet your ass that iOS users will be prime targets, certainly more desirable targets than random Android and Windows users, because of potential ill gotten gains. 0: https://vpnoverview.com/wp-content/uploads/nokia_threat_intelligence_report_2021_report_en.pdf https://vpnoverview.com/wp-content/uploads/nokia_threat_inte... 1: https://onestore.nokia.com/asset/i/210088 https://onestore.nokia.com/asset/i/210088
• rgreekguy 3y ago
  This is an important detail that makes iPhone a viable option for me. I thought the problem would be the elapsed time until E.U. actually passes/forces that, but I had forgotten about the full glass backs.
• jd24 3y ago
  Just use android if you care about things being open. Apple products are good because of the walled garden. Most people just want things to work out of the box, not to tinker with options.
  • pomstazlesa 3y ago
    And yet most people use Android. Let's be honest, apple is not making products for the most people. It's very much a status thing of "those who have Apple and those who don't"
  • zmmmmm 3y ago
    "Just use X if you don't like Y" works up until the point where the choice carries significant cost to the user. For example, "choosing" not to use iPhone means you can't Facetime or iMessage with your friends. It's no longer "just choose not iPhone", it's "just choose not to communicate with friends and family". Essentially, Apple gave up the right to assert this argument when they decided to abuse their control with iMessage as an explicit way of locking users into their system (which is just one example).
    • wpm 3y ago
      Your friends and family can be asked to use any of the cross-platform messaging apps that are available, or use any of the still working and universal contact methods like SMS and phone calls. I have an iPhone and manage just fine to message my friends who have Android phones (even sending pictures and videos!), and use Discord, Signal, WhatsApp, Slack, Teams, Twitter, etc etc etc to talk to lots of different groups of people who are using "I don't care" device. If I got sick of Windows, I could easily get rid of all of my Windows installations. But some of my games, even ones I bought and paid for, are not available on Linux. That is part and parcel a consideration I have to make regarding my choices. There are positives and negatives in every choice, and sometimes the negatives outweigh the positives. It's frustrating, and sometimes to make a choice you have to give up things you like, but that's life. Not getting to use FaceTime is not a significant cost, it's an emergent property of "I choose not to use iOS devices". I do concede however that the "default messaging app" be just another "slot" in the OS that I can configure any way I want, no dark patterns a la Edge on Windows 10/11. But then again, I don't think iMessage has a URL handler anyways, so really it'd just be a few additions to the contacts card so I can share some link/picture/whatever to a contact's WhatsApp handle instead of their iMessage handle. Thankfully, the law in question from the OP does seem to shift us towards that future. Apple's walled-garden is fine, but if you play by the rules in that walled-garden, there shouldn't be favoritism for the gardener's services, and the gardener shouldn't be able to abuse their position to push their services either. I'd personally prefer to just break up the gardener's company so their TV and Music streaming arm is a separate company.
• rickdeckard 3y ago
  Or rather: EU tells Apple to separate their platform from their applications to allow fair competition. Noone asks them to open "everything", i.e. their hardware design or application-architecture.
• sixstringtheory 3y ago
  I see a lot of people downplaying the claimed downsides of “Meta/Google will just build their own app store and force you to use that” or that malware will proliferate via 3rd party app stores by saying “well nobody is going to make their own app store, it doesn’t really happen on android either”. So if no 3rd parties are going to make their own app stores, why force Apple to provide the ability at all? It’s a huge engineering cost to do so.
  • ranguna 3y ago
    Going from "meta/google will build their own app store" to "no 3rd parties are going to make their app store" is a long stretch. On android there's f-droid, which is an open source version of the app store with lots of great apps.
• 0xDEF 3y ago
  But why? Apple doesn't have anything resembling a monopoly in the EU.
• tyiz 3y ago
  Mark my words: It will kill ALL small businesses who _depend_ on lock in. #CollateralDamage #Ooopsie
• jbverschoor 3y ago
  But my benefit IS the walled garden… You can get an android if you want more access Why don’t the govts set a good example and open up everything themselves?
• switch007 3y ago
  What does the EU want to distract us from this time?
• idkwhoiam 3y ago
  Hey EU, can you please ask BMW to open everything up to its rivals so that I can use Toyota's infotainment system instead of BMW's iDrive. I also want to be able to run PS games on XBox & vice versa without having to buy separate copies. And lastly, how about you open up your very own market to everyone by lifting protectionist taxes
  • Moldoteck 3y ago
    That would be really nice, allow ps store on xbox(if they want) and viceversa And for car infotainment that would be a godsend. Classic car companies do a terrible job with their infotainment systems I'm hoping for smartwatch revision too: almost all smartwatches don't allow sideload/alternate stores(well technically you can, but cumberstone) or even firmware replacement But i guess one step at a time
  • FieryTransition 3y ago
    I live in one of the myriad of countries in the eu, so I'm confused about what you mean when you say protectionist taxes and which country you are referring to or just something else?
    • Mashimo 3y ago
      I think he is talking about import tarifs for certain goods that enter the EU. But I would also to know what exactly he means.
  • ranguna 3y ago
    That's like saying that the EU is asking apple to allow iPhones to run android apps. That's not what's going on at all.
  • rad_gruchalski 3y ago
    Right? I'd also like to have an alternative to the EU parliament. And an alternative to my local tax office. Let's stop the monopoly on the government services. Open it all up.
  • etiennebausson 3y ago
• jokethrowaway 3y ago
  Awesome, let's force Playstation and Xbox to become open platforms next
• runeks 3y ago
  I support forcing open standards on tech giants. But I don’t support singling out a specific tech giant (in this case Apple), since it means Apple’s also-tech-giant competitors get an upper hand. For example, why not force Google to open up Chrome, to increase interoperability? I want to be able to export saved passwords from Chrome and import them into the macOS keychain, and vice versa. If the EU focuses on Apple and forgets, say, Chrome, it might gain an even greater market share because Apple has to open up features while Google doesn’t have to open up Chrome.
  • Skinney 3y ago
    EU did the same to Microsoft by forcing them to allow setting other browsers than IE as the default. As for Chrome, it's already pretty open. Anyone can build extensions for it and distribute it freely. The same cannot be said for iOS.
  • Rygian 3y ago
    No one was singled out. The DMA applies to anyone with a "gatekeeper" role. Part of the criteria for the role are: having more than 45 million monthly active users and more than 10,000 yearly active business users established in the EU, for the past three years. Six companies (and in particular, 22 services offered by those companies) are currently listed as gatekeepers. [1] [1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_23_4328 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_23_...
  • Kipters 3y ago
    DMA is not singling out a specific tech giants, it targets all platform holders of a certain size. Google is hit too, they'll have to open up too.
  • zik 3y ago
    He did say "Apple and other Big Tech" so I don't think he's singling them out especially. It's just that they're the most obvious example of a closed ecosystem right now.
  • e12e 3y ago
    > For example, why not force Google to open up Chrome, to increase interoperability? I want to be able to export saved passwords from Chrome You can? https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95606?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform=Desktop#zippy=%2Cshow-edit-delete-or-export-saved-passwords https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95606?hl=en&co=GENI...
• pojzon 3y ago
  Im reading this whole discussion and Im totally buffled by ppl trying to FORCE their way of thinking on others. Nobody forces ppl to use Apple products, nobody forces ppl to use Google products. Ppl do so because they have no options to choose from. So - Instead of fixing the issue of "there is no options to choose from" we try to force OUR rules on companies that operate totally within the rules of open market. The issue we have should be solved by GOVERMENTs to make it easier for others to build and grow as competitors to Apple and Google. But that requires donations, easier access to market, good conditions on the market. THIS is not something that can be easly done. So GOVERMENTs try to convince ppl the "big bad IT" is at fault for how the world works. Tho they play only following the rules created by GOVERMENT in the first place.. So instead of being mad at GOVERMENT, ppl are mad at random companies. What a joke.
  • precommunicator 3y ago
    Government to which these "random" companies spend millions on lobbying and donations to re-elect. Sure.
  • Sayrus 3y ago
    > Nobody forces ppl to use Apple products, nobody forces ppl to use Google products. Ppl do so because they have no options to choose from. If I use neither Google nor Apple, I loose access to banking apps and other third-party apps. I have a choice not to use them, but that means I loose access to products that were developed by neither of those. Hell, even if I use Google's hardware (Pixels) but not Google software (Play Services), I loose these apps. Same goes for Instant Messaging, you can choose to use a competitor, but then you won't be able to discuss with other persons unless you convince them to use the same software as you do. > The issue we have should be solved by GOVERMENTs to make it easier for others to build and grow as competitors to Apple and Google. > Tho they play only following the rules created by GOVERMENT in the first place.. You say that the government should change the rules to ensure competitions is possible. But isn't that what DMA creates? It (in part) allows new competitors by reducing network effect and enforcing interoperability.
    • pojzon 3y ago
• al_be_back 3y ago
  I think it makes sense to diversify, and if that means open-up so be it (for Apple or similar). what worked well in last ~20 years isn't guaranteed to continue in that trajectory in the next 5 or 10 years even, since polarized Geo-political shifts make it more dangerous for a tightly-coupled enterprise [1] (enterprise-to-product coupling). short-term makes sense to couple-tightly with a product, but not mid-term or long-term, for that it's better to focus on the market - think of the effects that sanctions (political or economical) or shortages (human or materials [chips, metals, oil etc]) could have on the enterprise's trajectory. if you've got a monopoly, it's a good time to diversify [2], and sooner rather than later [1] [1] enterprise could be a company or even a government [2] hint "alliances"
• sensanaty 3y ago
  I tend to drop the bot/shill-detector part of my brain when I'm on HN, but whenever this topic crops up it's always a deluge of people with the same exact arguments saying "ohh my poor grandma will be coerced to install a Virus if we allow the owner of an iDevice any freedom whatsoever with hardware they bought!!!", and it's quite interesting to me the volume of comments with the exact same identical sentiment copy/pasted ad nauseam. Hope this passes the same way the USB-C thing passed. All these parasitic megacorps with more money than many countries need to be whipped into submission for their shenanigans
  • ragazzina 3y ago
    People will blame everyone for their grandma's virus before blaming the real cuplrit: Apple.
  • janandonly 3y ago
    The App Store is not perfect, but what was the last time you actually installed a virus on iOS or iPadOS? It's working Good Enough™ I wish/hope that as the default family IT guy, I will be able to set policies on my parents devices that block 3rd party apps.
    • sensanaty 3y ago
      I've literally never had an infected Android device, and neither has any member of my family despite the existence of sideloading. Also, when's the last time anyone's installed a virus on Macs? They're infinitely more open than their mobile counterparts, yet there's barely any issues there. I'm willing to bet the large majority of people don't even know what sideloading is in the first place, and even if you somehow accidentally happen upon an APK you need to go through some scary warning screens before it even lets you do it. I genuinely don't see this ever being an issue, it just sounds like shilling for Apple to keep their dominance and closed APIs
      • mbreese 3y ago
        > They're infinitely more open than their mobile counterparts, yet there's barely any issues there. That are marginally more open than mobile, but by default, there are still a lot of protections that (certain) developers complain about. Really, this is probably the model that you’re going to see — a phone that is locked down with a bright red shiny button that says “if you click this, you can run unsigned programs, but don’t ask us for help if you get hacked”. That’s basically how it works on Macs, except the button is grey. However, the OS is still far from open — certain developer rights are still blocked by signing keys/privileges.
• anhner 3y ago
  I remember years ago, when the EU first announced they would force Apple to switch to USB-C (well, not specifically Apple, but mandate a single cable type), there were droves of users on HN wailing that "what business does EU have to dictate which cable companies should use?" Yet here we are, everyone praising iPhone 15 for having a USB-C connector. I am looking forward to a couple of years down the line when we can say the same about the App Store. Worldwide, Android has a bigger market share than iPhone and it also allows alternative stores, and lo and behold, none of the things that users here complain about have come to pass.
  • a-user-you-like 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • amelius 3y ago
      > to coerce men to do what you want You make it sound as if it's their god given right to make products as they please but that is not how the law works, and it's a good thing, because without laws we'd end up with stuff that works only in the vendor's best interest and ends up as e-waste sooner than necessary. It is also fair, because society is what ultimately allows these companies to exist.
      • a-user-you-like 3y ago
        Of course it’s their God given right. It shouldn’t be their right to violate God’s law, but “my totes fav phone provider totes doesn’t have side loading” is just entitled, and an unjust use of coercion.
        • amelius 3y ago
          Fundamentally, no. Because in many EU countries people have given their lives for freedom. These people and their offspring have the right not to be bullied by large companies. If Apple wants 100% freedom in producing what they want, then Apple can start/fight for their own country with its own army, education system etc. This whole idea of a free market existing in a vacuum must stop.
• 0dayz 3y ago
  I wonder how long this will go? It would be nice if apples ecosystem was available for non hardware users.
• iamgopal 3y ago
  Does this also means App Store is coming to android ?
• globular-toast 3y ago
  I don't care one bit about what Apple users can and can't use on their devices. Those consumers don't want general purpose computers, that want iDevices and Apple is quite right to exploit that market. If I ever thought this was a threat to general purpose computing I would fight it tooth and nail. But Microsoft is and always has been the biggest threat there. What I do care about is stupid shit like Apple messages, Air Drop, Air Play etc being locked up Apple stuff. What's really stupid is I can run an Air Play server on a raspberry pi and it works well with Apple devices but not at all with Android. It's utterly ridiculous that these things are locked up. Just let things be better for everyone you absolute fucking cunts. Of course Apple are by far not the only cunts in the world. People will be cunts unless we don't let them. Thank fuck for the EU (writing this as an embarresed UK citizen who no longer contributes).
• gehsty 3y ago
  It’s a difficult balance, what would stop someone like Facebook requiring you to install their AppStore with all the tracking that could entail to access some key software like WhatsApp…
• tarokun33 3y ago
  Thanks EU. Please teach them how to time-stamp images and basic USB usage : how to send images to Windows/Linux via USB at normal speed.
• meindnoch 3y ago
  [flagged]
  • diogenes4 3y ago
    I mean I don't know a single apple user that trusts apple but maybe I understand the concept differently than what you're implying. I love my iphone but that's in SPITE of apple's app store meddling, not because of that. The one exception I can think of is apple forcing twitter to keep the block functionality.
    • meindnoch 3y ago
      I trust Apple that if I subscribe to some paid app from the AppStore, the subscription can be cancelled anytime from a unified place. And Apple is forcing every shady company to adopt this system if they're offering subscriptions. Apple is forcing every shady company to disclose their tracking practices in the AppStore page of their app. Apple is forcing every shady company to provide good reason to the app review board why their app needs permission for background execution, bluetooth usage, location permissions, and any other sensitive stuff. They can't just ask for a ton of permissions and count on the user blanket-approving them due to popup blindness. Apple is forcing every shady company to offer pseudonymous Apple login if they require registration, so they can't harvest my email address or spam me after I stopped using their app.
      • diogenes4 3y ago
        > Apple is forcing every shady company to disclose their tracking practices in the AppStore page of their app. I mean, who gives a shit about awareness if they knowingly allow and even put resources towards enabling the tracking practices? The real boon would be forcing apps to not track. The fact that apple has gotten into selling ads and has not offered any functionality to the user controlling the internet access of particular apps should clue you in to the fact that you're getting fucked. IMO, any alternative to the App Store can only strengthen apple's ecosystem. It would help if we had anti-trust legislation from this century but it's gonna take a lot more pain to get there.
• jimmyk2 3y ago
  Apple should open up the boot loader and let you install an alternate OS. Can’t get any more open than that. But I think we will find people actually want access to Apple’s audience and dev tools for free. I’m loathe to stump for megacorp like Apple, but in the same vein as iMessage, I don’t think we should drag iOS down to Android’s level just because Googles messaging strategy has been a turd for a decade.
  • tristan957 3y ago
    Apple can just charge for the SDKs/XCode/etc. if they really care about their $100/yr/developer revenue stream for publishing on the App Store.
  • RGBCube 3y ago
    > I don’t think we should drag iOS down to Android’s level just because Googles messaging strategy has been a turd for a decade. Wdym? Google Messages supports RCS, which has been a thing for a while, it's also an open standard. Apple still doesn't support it, they're stuck with SMS.
    • OrangeMusic 3y ago
      Messages is like the 10th iteration/variation of an Android chat app. Google's lack of cohesiveness and long term vision is why we have WhatsApp.
• mensetmanusman 3y ago
  This will improve driving safety. Currently any recognized address is an advertisement for Apple Maps in the App Store (which I can’t use due to how dangerously inaccurate it is in rural areas) This makes the copy paste activity opening google maps, etc. much more likely to go away.
• entropyie 3y ago
  If this goes through then I will move from Android to IPhone as a result.
• 3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
  Bureaucrats and their good intentions. Apple is not even close to being a monopoly on the market of smartphones. And the reason their products work so well (despite some lapses in last 6-7 years) is integration. Creating the whole banana as Jobs used to say. This makes me feel sick, as sick as I was having to jump through hoops installing European Windows which had its browser and media player removed because of European Union's bureaucrats and their good intentions. I don't even like Microsoft. But what I like even less is people with zero technical skill and understanding of managing ecosystems forcefully ruining the efforts of those who succeeded with theirs through incompetent regulation.
• stevefan1999 3y ago
  So you are telling a company with a close affiliation to CCP and architected their OS exactly like China to open up. I only hope you good luck.
• Mikho 3y ago
  The real problems of the Apple Tax — it ruins value-chain. For every value created a customer receives there is value captured by a company paid by this customer. Let say a company creates a service valued as 1X by customer and customer pays 1X for that. This balance guarantees accessibility and interest among many customers. Apple tax demands for a customer to pay 1.43X for the same value of 1X (0.43 = 30% of 1.43). It means that the balance is ruined, and customers do not get enough value for what they pay. In value they still get 1X despite paying for 1.43X. Hence, a company gets significantly less customers and at the same time it’s unable to benefit from additional 0.43X customers paid. Drop in the revenue is significant. That makes business unsustainable. So, what a company could do? It could provide more value by letting go own margin in favor of only Apple benefitting from the service or it could increase marketing expenses to attract more users. But then again that additional marketing budget eats into a company’s margin. And again, makes it uneconomical. Maybe it used to be acceptable to pay the Apple Tax in 2008 when it was enough to just create a simple non-cloud app like calculator, submit to AppStore, and forget about it. In those days there were no expenses to actually run the service. Now the core of mobile services happen outside Apple ecosystem and an iPhone is a mere access point and interface to them. Nothing more. It’s a mere mobile browser for 3rd party services. Wonder how many great businesses weren’t realized due to Apple making them uneconomical.