4 ms·

Not trying to start a flame war, I'm asking this earnestly. Where does this command over hardware (USB-C mandate), software (sideloading/AppStore), and prices (

Not trying to start a flame war, I'm asking this earnestly. Where does this command over hardware (USB-C mandate), software (sideloading/AppStore), and prices (recent 2bn decision) end?

justinclift 3y ago
Personally, I've like to get the old audio jack socket added back to iPhones and laptops. Maybe that's just me though. ;)
layer8 3y ago
Where smartphones end effectively being a public utility, is my guess.
koolba 3y ago
You want to sell in their house, you gotta play by their rules. It’s that simple.
- HacklesRaised 3y ago
  If only it were that simple!! Isn't the central problem that you're not allowed to sell in anybody elses house. I mean, if you're prepared to accept that you are leasing the device and that the lease will dictate what you can add can't do with the device, then I think your position holds, otherwise, it's a little tenuous.
  - jprete 3y ago
    I interpreted the parent comment as referring to the EU's house and rules?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- pmontra 3y ago
  Their house is in part in the EU so they have to play by the rules of the EU there, or remove that part of the house.
- grishka 3y ago
  It's not their house. Someone bought an iPhone (not leased, bought, they own it now). Someone else made an app that that person wants to install on their iPhone (solely thanks to app developer's own marketing efforts). But Apple thinks it's appropriate to have their finger in the pie too.
  - catlikesshrimp 3y ago
    Now there are fewer (or none) apple followers defending the old argument: Apple is entitled to profit for their platform. Thank EU for Striking some sense on that.
  - Aloisius 3y ago
    Nobody bought the Apple SDKs or OS though and every app depends on them. I get people are use to free, but plenty of companies license software for royalties that does a lot less.
    - grishka 3y ago
      > Nobody bought the Apple SDKs That's what the $99/year fee is for. Apple set that price themselves. It can also be argued that some of the cost of the SDKs is included into the price of the Mac that any iOS developer has to have. > or OS That's included into the price of every iPhone because you can't even buy an iPhone without an OS or install your own, like you can do with PCs.
  - its_ethan 3y ago
    Does apple having designed, developed, and manufactured the phone as well as having built, maintained, and serviced the App store mean nothing? The App store is a highly trusted place to download things on your phone, and that's a value that apple provides and that costs money to maintain. Pretending that it's as isolated as you pretend feels very disingenuous.
    - grishka 3y ago
      I'm an Android developer myself, but the app store is commonly seen by my iOS colleagues just as a stupid hurdle they must clear to get their app out to the world. Not as the godsend that Apple portrays it. If the app store is truly as immensely useful as Apple wants everyone to believe, why not enable full-on Android-style sideloading on iOS and let the app store compete with that on its own merits? Surely everyone would still prefer it if it's so great?
- tebbers 3y ago
  This argument is trotted out frequently and it misses the point. These are NOT Apple’s customers. Yes they bought the phone from Apple but they are Epic’s customers. No one wants Apple inserting themselves in the middle of the transaction. It is not necessary.
- radley 3y ago
  If it were really that simple, we'd all be leasing AT&T cell phones. The only reason Apple can sell iPhones and run an app store is because AT&T got broken up 40 years ago for similar issues.
bondarchuk 3y ago
Why would it end? Governance is a continuing process.
SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
When devices aren't sold in the EU. If it's sold in the EU, the EU can regulate that model.
mopsi 3y ago
It ends when Apple learns to balance the interests of their shareholders and the interests of their customers better. I would go as far as saying that the way Apple banned even any mention of alternative payment methods for in-app services was clearly abusive and faudulent.
- qeternity 3y ago
  > It ends when Apple learns to balance the interests of their shareholders and the interests of their customers better. The interests of their shareholders are literally the interests of their customers. Apple makes incredible products, that billions of people pay significant money for, with many competitors that are much cheaper. Their shareholders reap the rewards of this. If Apple customers hated Apple, they would not be Apple customers, and Apple would not be one of the most valuable businesses in human history.
  - mopsi 3y ago
    > The interests of their shareholders are literally the interests of their customers. There would be no need hide information from customers if that was true. Their censorship, the fact that Apple desperately wants to hide what they are doing, is very revealing and incriminating.
    - qeternity 3y ago
      What information are they hiding/censoring?
      - inspector-g 3y ago
        Per Apple’s rules, app developers are not allowed to explain the App Store rules and pricing models within their apps, leaving customers in the dark - a form of censorship, to be sure.
KomoD 3y ago
It shouldn't end, we shouldn't let them do whatever they want.
TheRealPomax 3y ago
Not where, when. And the answer is never, because the EU regulates what companies themselves either can't regulate themselves because no one's willing to adopt the other's standard, or there's a position of dominance that doesn't even require collaborating with anyone else. And they do that for a pretty simple reason: to ensure that businesses do right by the EU citizenship. And they do that across _all_ sectors of industry, you only noticed the tech one because it's in the news you pay attention to, but everything from farming to textiles to tech to pharmaceuticals are heavily regulated so that the people that live in the EU can enjoy a reasonable standard of living.
mik1998 3y ago
In Europe unlike in America the government makes regulations that benefit the general public. That's it.
- arlcode 3y ago
  That's probably to generalised since the EU is still a political entity with lots of lobbying from different sides. But in this case benefiting the general public is easy because it does not hit a European company ( production in China, development in America) that is working hard to extract money which it sends abroad while avoiding paying taxes here (probably legally). A good opportunity to reign Apple and friends in and score some "greater good" points in particular since the US government is also sceptical and mostly concerned with internal affairs at the moment.
  - Muromec 3y ago
    Different sides there being Microsoft.
dale_glass 3y ago
Why should it end? So far it's awesome.
lozenge 3y ago
Where does the command over minimum wages, minimum maternity leave and minimum consumer warranty end? Where democracy decides it ends.
- ziddoap 3y ago
  Apple is in the wrong here, at least in my opinion, but equating the ability to have a 2nd app store on your iPhone and the end of democracy is... wow. Edit: Misread the comment, sorry.
  - Negitivefrags 3y ago
    He didn't say anything about the end of democracy. Apparently the media zeitgeist is so strong with this now that even just saying "Democracy" triggers the thought. All he said is that it's the democratically elected officals that decide what laws companies have to obey. Just as they decide everything else about what what laws people have to obey.
    - ziddoap 3y ago
      >He didn't say anything about the end of democracy. You're right! I misread. >Apparently the media zeitgeist is so strong with this now that even just saying "Democracy" triggers the thought. Or I just misread the comment.
eaglefield 3y ago
I'm no lawyer, but it seems like it ends and begins at wanting to sell in the european market. It doesn't seem that different from mandating that cars obey certain emission standards, contain digital radios etc. Or how food packaging contain nutritional information. Mandating 2-year guarantees for sold goods. There's quite a lot of legislation on specific requirements on sold goods. One can argue whether this specific legislation is wise, but legally i don't think there's any limit to what the EU can mandate for goods sold in their market.
ygjb 3y ago
Ideally, as a consumer, in a market where commodity computer hardware is not arbitrarily restricted to extract the maximum attainable profit from consumers? It has been shown time and again that both volunteers and competitors can quickly and easily build and ship software, including entire OS's that run on the hardware, the only thing preventing them from doing so is anti-consumer and anti-competitive controls. It's asinine that I, as a consumer, can pay over $1000 for a device and not be able to choose which software I can run on it because the developer of that device locks out access. It's even worse that the company I bought it from can arbitrarily disable the device, features, and services that I have paid for, and I have little to no recourse.
zarzavat 3y ago
The USB-C mandate is nothing to do with Apple. It’s ensure interoperability and reduce waste. Setting standards is one of the oldest forms of regulation, ever since weights and measures were standardized to ensure people could trade more easily, ensuring that when you bought a pound of flour from one vendor it would be the same pound as the vendor across the street.
fxtentacle 3y ago
It probably ends with happy consumers :) At least, I'm very happy that the EU is trying to avert the worst anticompetitive behaviour and restoring my control over the hardware that I purchased.
rchaud 3y ago
If enough shareholders vote in favour of Apple leaving the EU and its overbearing regulations, that's when it would end. They won't because they know Apple exiting would simply hand the market to those that can bear the harsh yoke of consumer regulation.
- skydhash 3y ago
  I think tech, particularly the digital landscape, is one of the few industry that are not regulated. Everything else from transport to food has strict regulation. It's not like anyone can build housing whenever and however he wants in the US.
Aldo_MX 3y ago
It won't end, Apple is too big now, the alternatives are: 1. Split Apple into smaller companies 2. Operate Apple like an utility company They did this to themselves, and it's only downhill from this point.
- KomoD 3y ago
  > Split Apple into smaller companies Curious, how would you split them up? A lot of their stuff is very intertwined, I guess Beats, Shazam are easy to split into their own, but the rest?
  - Aldo_MX 3y ago
    My expectation is that a government would do an investigation first, but I believe that a split would look like this: - The computing hardware company - The accessory hardware company - The operating system company - The software company - The cloud services company - The app store company - The music & video company - The messaging company So yeah, a split looks scary.
  - Muromec 3y ago
    For starters, it's Apple the phone making company, Apple the software making company and Apple the (software) distribution company. The cloud, the payment processing, the bank whatever else is there. They can still be quite integrated, they just have to a allow a different distribution company compete without using the phone company's monopoly as a leverage against them and not use distribution company as a leverage to compete with other software developers i.e. pay the same 30% fee, bid for promotion in the store and use fair ranking in the search. It's not the first time a huge corp gets split up once they reach end game and can't innovate in their own field anymore.
- qeternity 3y ago
  > They did this to themselves What...by being successful?
  - Aldo_MX 3y ago

Not trying to start a flame war, I'm asking this earnestly. Where does this command over hardware (USB-C mandate), software (sideloading/AppStore), and prices (recent 2bn decision) end?

justinclift 3y ago

Personally, I've like to get the old audio jack socket added back to iPhones and laptops. Maybe that's just me though. ;)

layer8 3y ago

Where smartphones end effectively being a public utility, is my guess.

koolba 3y ago

You want to sell in their house, you gotta play by their rules. It’s that simple.

HacklesRaised 3y ago
If only it were that simple!! Isn't the central problem that you're not allowed to sell in anybody elses house. I mean, if you're prepared to accept that you are leasing the device and that the lease will dictate what you can add can't do with the device, then I think your position holds, otherwise, it's a little tenuous.
- jprete 3y ago
  I interpreted the parent comment as referring to the EU's house and rules?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
pmontra 3y ago
Their house is in part in the EU so they have to play by the rules of the EU there, or remove that part of the house.
grishka 3y ago
It's not their house. Someone bought an iPhone (not leased, bought, they own it now). Someone else made an app that that person wants to install on their iPhone (solely thanks to app developer's own marketing efforts). But Apple thinks it's appropriate to have their finger in the pie too.
- catlikesshrimp 3y ago
  Now there are fewer (or none) apple followers defending the old argument: Apple is entitled to profit for their platform. Thank EU for Striking some sense on that.
- Aloisius 3y ago
  Nobody bought the Apple SDKs or OS though and every app depends on them. I get people are use to free, but plenty of companies license software for royalties that does a lot less.
  - grishka 3y ago
    > Nobody bought the Apple SDKs That's what the $99/year fee is for. Apple set that price themselves. It can also be argued that some of the cost of the SDKs is included into the price of the Mac that any iOS developer has to have. > or OS That's included into the price of every iPhone because you can't even buy an iPhone without an OS or install your own, like you can do with PCs.
- its_ethan 3y ago
  Does apple having designed, developed, and manufactured the phone as well as having built, maintained, and serviced the App store mean nothing? The App store is a highly trusted place to download things on your phone, and that's a value that apple provides and that costs money to maintain. Pretending that it's as isolated as you pretend feels very disingenuous.
  - grishka 3y ago
    I'm an Android developer myself, but the app store is commonly seen by my iOS colleagues just as a stupid hurdle they must clear to get their app out to the world. Not as the godsend that Apple portrays it. If the app store is truly as immensely useful as Apple wants everyone to believe, why not enable full-on Android-style sideloading on iOS and let the app store compete with that on its own merits? Surely everyone would still prefer it if it's so great?
tebbers 3y ago
This argument is trotted out frequently and it misses the point. These are NOT Apple’s customers. Yes they bought the phone from Apple but they are Epic’s customers. No one wants Apple inserting themselves in the middle of the transaction. It is not necessary.
radley 3y ago
If it were really that simple, we'd all be leasing AT&T cell phones. The only reason Apple can sell iPhones and run an app store is because AT&T got broken up 40 years ago for similar issues.

bondarchuk 3y ago

Why would it end? Governance is a continuing process.

SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago

When devices aren't sold in the EU. If it's sold in the EU, the EU can regulate that model.

mopsi 3y ago

It ends when Apple learns to balance the interests of their shareholders and the interests of their customers better. I would go as far as saying that the way Apple banned even any mention of alternative payment methods for in-app services was clearly abusive and faudulent.

qeternity 3y ago
> It ends when Apple learns to balance the interests of their shareholders and the interests of their customers better. The interests of their shareholders are literally the interests of their customers. Apple makes incredible products, that billions of people pay significant money for, with many competitors that are much cheaper. Their shareholders reap the rewards of this. If Apple customers hated Apple, they would not be Apple customers, and Apple would not be one of the most valuable businesses in human history.
- mopsi 3y ago
  > The interests of their shareholders are literally the interests of their customers. There would be no need hide information from customers if that was true. Their censorship, the fact that Apple desperately wants to hide what they are doing, is very revealing and incriminating.
  - qeternity 3y ago
    What information are they hiding/censoring?
    - inspector-g 3y ago
      Per Apple’s rules, app developers are not allowed to explain the App Store rules and pricing models within their apps, leaving customers in the dark - a form of censorship, to be sure.

KomoD 3y ago

It shouldn't end, we shouldn't let them do whatever they want.

TheRealPomax 3y ago

Not where, when. And the answer is never, because the EU regulates what companies themselves either can't regulate themselves because no one's willing to adopt the other's standard, or there's a position of dominance that doesn't even require collaborating with anyone else. And they do that for a pretty simple reason: to ensure that businesses do right by the EU citizenship. And they do that across _all_ sectors of industry, you only noticed the tech one because it's in the news you pay attention to, but everything from farming to textiles to tech to pharmaceuticals are heavily regulated so that the people that live in the EU can enjoy a reasonable standard of living.

mik1998 3y ago

In Europe unlike in America the government makes regulations that benefit the general public. That's it.

arlcode 3y ago
That's probably to generalised since the EU is still a political entity with lots of lobbying from different sides. But in this case benefiting the general public is easy because it does not hit a European company ( production in China, development in America) that is working hard to extract money which it sends abroad while avoiding paying taxes here (probably legally). A good opportunity to reign Apple and friends in and score some "greater good" points in particular since the US government is also sceptical and mostly concerned with internal affairs at the moment.
- Muromec 3y ago
  Different sides there being Microsoft.

dale_glass 3y ago

Why should it end? So far it's awesome.

lozenge 3y ago

Where does the command over minimum wages, minimum maternity leave and minimum consumer warranty end? Where democracy decides it ends.

ziddoap 3y ago
Apple is in the wrong here, at least in my opinion, but equating the ability to have a 2nd app store on your iPhone and the end of democracy is... wow. Edit: Misread the comment, sorry.
- Negitivefrags 3y ago
  He didn't say anything about the end of democracy. Apparently the media zeitgeist is so strong with this now that even just saying "Democracy" triggers the thought. All he said is that it's the democratically elected officals that decide what laws companies have to obey. Just as they decide everything else about what what laws people have to obey.
  - ziddoap 3y ago
    >He didn't say anything about the end of democracy. You're right! I misread. >Apparently the media zeitgeist is so strong with this now that even just saying "Democracy" triggers the thought. Or I just misread the comment.

eaglefield 3y ago

I'm no lawyer, but it seems like it ends and begins at wanting to sell in the european market. It doesn't seem that different from mandating that cars obey certain emission standards, contain digital radios etc. Or how food packaging contain nutritional information. Mandating 2-year guarantees for sold goods. There's quite a lot of legislation on specific requirements on sold goods. One can argue whether this specific legislation is wise, but legally i don't think there's any limit to what the EU can mandate for goods sold in their market.

ygjb 3y ago

Ideally, as a consumer, in a market where commodity computer hardware is not arbitrarily restricted to extract the maximum attainable profit from consumers? It has been shown time and again that both volunteers and competitors can quickly and easily build and ship software, including entire OS's that run on the hardware, the only thing preventing them from doing so is anti-consumer and anti-competitive controls. It's asinine that I, as a consumer, can pay over $1000 for a device and not be able to choose which software I can run on it because the developer of that device locks out access. It's even worse that the company I bought it from can arbitrarily disable the device, features, and services that I have paid for, and I have little to no recourse.

zarzavat 3y ago

The USB-C mandate is nothing to do with Apple. It’s ensure interoperability and reduce waste. Setting standards is one of the oldest forms of regulation, ever since weights and measures were standardized to ensure people could trade more easily, ensuring that when you bought a pound of flour from one vendor it would be the same pound as the vendor across the street.

fxtentacle 3y ago

It probably ends with happy consumers :) At least, I'm very happy that the EU is trying to avert the worst anticompetitive behaviour and restoring my control over the hardware that I purchased.

rchaud 3y ago

If enough shareholders vote in favour of Apple leaving the EU and its overbearing regulations, that's when it would end. They won't because they know Apple exiting would simply hand the market to those that can bear the harsh yoke of consumer regulation.

skydhash 3y ago
I think tech, particularly the digital landscape, is one of the few industry that are not regulated. Everything else from transport to food has strict regulation. It's not like anyone can build housing whenever and however he wants in the US.

Aldo_MX 3y ago

It won't end, Apple is too big now, the alternatives are: 1. Split Apple into smaller companies 2. Operate Apple like an utility company They did this to themselves, and it's only downhill from this point.

KomoD 3y ago
> Split Apple into smaller companies Curious, how would you split them up? A lot of their stuff is very intertwined, I guess Beats, Shazam are easy to split into their own, but the rest?
- Aldo_MX 3y ago
  My expectation is that a government would do an investigation first, but I believe that a split would look like this: - The computing hardware company - The accessory hardware company - The operating system company - The software company - The cloud services company - The app store company - The music & video company - The messaging company So yeah, a split looks scary.
- Muromec 3y ago
  For starters, it's Apple the phone making company, Apple the software making company and Apple the (software) distribution company. The cloud, the payment processing, the bank whatever else is there. They can still be quite integrated, they just have to a allow a different distribution company compete without using the phone company's monopoly as a leverage against them and not use distribution company as a leverage to compete with other software developers i.e. pay the same 30% fee, bid for promotion in the store and use fair ranking in the search. It's not the first time a huge corp gets split up once they reach end game and can't innovate in their own field anymore.
qeternity 3y ago
> They did this to themselves What...by being successful?
- Aldo_MX 3y ago