7 ms·

Why would IpadOS not be held to the same DSA rules as IOS? Apple has applied the same model of gatekeeping (walled garden) to both the iPhone and the iPad. DSA

Why would IpadOS not be held to the same DSA rules as IOS? Apple has applied the same model of gatekeeping (walled garden) to both the iPhone and the iPad. DSA attaches requirements to the gatekeepers if they are big enough. Software similarity and market positioning don't really come into consideration once the role of gatekeeper has been established.

threeseed 2y ago
[flagged]
- codetrotter 2y ago
  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_2363 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_... They had valid reasons for it.
  - threeseed 2y ago
    It doesn't change the fact that it's arbitrary at this point. There are no rules that are governing what is or isn't a gatekeeper. It's just whatever EC decides that day.
    - lastdong 2y ago
      I believe it follows the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a European Union legislation designed to promote fairness and competition in digital markets. You can find more information here: https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/index_en https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/index_en
    - idle_zealot 2y ago
      The EC decides what the rules for defining a gatekeeper are, they invented the designation. You can call that arbitrary if you want, but they set their rules and are sticking to them. Deciding that iPads and iPhones are the same platform seems pretty common-sense to me.
      - threeseed 2y ago
        a) EC isn't following the pre-defined rules for what is a gatekeeper. They just made up new ones. Hence my point. b) EC never said that iPads and iPhones are the same platform.
        littlestymaar 2y ago
        No they don't and if they did Apple could bring the case in front of CJEU.
        shuckles 2y ago
        If the unqualified existence of judicial remedy justified any arbitrary bureaucratic action, the world would be a much worse place (and indeed countries where bureaucrats make up rules to suit their whims and your only recourse is the judiciary tend to be dysfunctional).
        littlestymaar 2y ago
        You are making things up: there is no arbitrary action at all here. The EC must abide to the DMA and have no power to overcome it. If they did it would basically be a coup from the Commission against the Parliament and the Council, and you can be sure that member states would not stay silent against it (but don't worry it's not going to happen, as the balance of power is clearly not in favor of the Commission). I'm just using the CJEU as an illustration that Apple themselves doesn't believe in the “arbitrary rules” narrative as they aren't even fighting in court. Also, you're trying to use the “bureaucrates” card here, but Apple executives are bureaucrates too, and Apple's management of sanctions and their habits of shutting down user accounts without recourse shows that their own bureaucracy is closer to the one from authoritarian regimes than anything else.
      - littlestymaar 2y ago
        > The EC decides what the rules for defining a gatekeeper are, they invented the designation. It's more complicated than this: the EC has the initiative for legislation in the EU but the text they submit is later amended and voted by both the European Parliament and the Council (representing member states) so it's not true that the EC defines the rules. And both the member states and the European Parliament are pretty jealous of their prerogatives in the decision process so you can be sure that the EC cannot have arbitrary power that bypasses the Council and the Parliament.
    - toyg 2y ago
      > There are no rules that are governing what is or isn't a gatekeeper. Tell me you've not actually read the regulation without telling me you've not read the regulation.
    - wasmitnetzen 2y ago
      There's literally a law, in a functional democracy. Doesn't get more rules-based than that.
- beretguy 2y ago
  Why are you defending having less ownership over devices that you own? It’s like your employer wants to give you a salary increase but you complain and say you don’t want more money.
  - massysett 2y ago
    Because I should have that choice. Government should not make this decision for me. If it’s important to me that I have devices I fully own, I should seek that out. If I like the products and prices that result from walled-garden business models, I should be able to choose them.
    - lupusreal 2y ago
      You will have the choice of installing or not installing the software you wish. The "choice" as you're describing it is a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome.
      - massysett 2y ago
        I might not want that choice. That requires that I use my brain as I use the device and not do the harmful thing. Or maybe I want to hand the device to my child and be assured that she cannot install software, or use it as a publicly-accessible kiosk and be assured members of the public can’t break it. People who have handed Windows PCs to software illiterates and have to constantly return to eradicate crapware understand this problem. Also, it costs the vendor to implement support for installing other software - resources the vendor could have spent on features I value, rather than features I don’t want. If only a government didn’t dictate to the vendor what it should do, stripping the vendor and the user of the power to decide for themselves.
        beretguy 2y ago
        > That requires that I use my brain There, you fell into a trap of your own making.
        2y ago
- prmoustache 2y ago
  > In this case the iPad is actually not big enough but the EU has chosen to regulate anyway. They just realized that Apple was full of shit and trying to circumvent the law by differenciating iPadOS and iOS in the same arbitrary way you think the EU is working. It is rarely a good strategy to play the smart ass in front of authority.
- wiseowise 2y ago
  iPad is as dominant in tablet space as iPhone in phones, why is it not big enough?
  - jonplackett 2y ago
    Just that less people buy tablets than phones. As a percentage of market share iPad probably the same or higher (guess). But in absolute numbers lower.
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
  It wasn't arbitrary at all. >The Commission's investigation found that Apple presents the features of a gatekeeper in relation to iPadOS, as among others: >Apple's business user numbers exceeded the quantitative threshold elevenfold, while its end user numbers were close to the threshold and are predicted to rise in the near future. >End users are locked-in to iPadOS. Apple leverages its large ecosystem to disincentivise end users from switching to other operating systems for tablets. >Business users are locked-in to iPadOS because of its large and commercially attractive user base, and its importance for certain use cases, such as gaming apps. >On the basis of the findings of the investigation, the Commission concluded that iPadOS constitutes an important gateway for business users to reach end users, and that Apple enjoys an entrenched and durable position with respect to iPadOS. Apple has now six months to ensure full compliance with the DMA obligations as applied to iPadOS.
- littlestymaar 2y ago
  The distinction between both OS and app stores is entirely arbitrary as well, and the EC is just not buying the argument that this is a different product and should be treated differently. Edit: looks like the EU didn't even bother challenging the arbitrary distinction between both OS, since the iPad crosses the threshold for business users by itself, it's submitted to DMA on its own.
  - Kbelicius 2y ago
    > looks like the EU didn't even bother challenging the arbitrary distinction between both OS, since the iPad crosses the threshold for business users by itself, it's submitted to DMA on its own. While it does pass the threshold for business user the threshold, I think, is end users and business users. But that doesn't matter at all since the EU commission can declare a service as a gatekeeper, after an investigation, even if it had both business and end users bellow the threshold.
- flohofwoe 2y ago
  If you squint enough, iPhones and iPads are really the same thing (along with all other 'iXXX' devices).
- rsynnott 2y ago
  I mean, I think they're just not buying Apple's claim that iOS on the phone and iOS on the iPad are different things. If they _were_ to accept this, it would be a slippery slope - coming soon: iOS Smol for the smaller phones. It's totally different, we promise.
- wasmitnetzen 2y ago
  It's purely arbitrary to say iPadOS is a separate thing. They could just say there's an iPadAirOS, and an iPadProOS, or an iPadAir64GBOS, or ...
Moldoteck 2y ago
Doesn't this mean that game consoles should be gatekeepers too like from sony/nintendo/microsoft?
- riffraff 2y ago
  I 100% think this is the case, my guess as to why they're not targeted yet is just that they're less visible to regulators. I'd like to know if there's another explanation.
  - mschuster91 2y ago
    Consoles are not defined as general-purpose computers (except for a time, the PS3), and there aren't many complaints from the game industry at large about access discrimination or unaffordable devkits any more, there's tons of indie games for just about every major platform these days. So, too much effort for too little gain, there is no artificial competition impediments any more. The only complaints tend to come from gamers - DRM, "console exclusive" titles and lootboxes, mostly, but of these three the only realistic field where the EU can/will/should intervene is the lootbox crap.
    - throwaway290 2y ago
      It's the same for iPad, not defined as general purpose, no complaints about unaffordavle devkits (xcode is free), tons of indie apps.
      - physicsguy 2y ago
        Xcode is free but a developer account isn't (nor is an Xbox Dev account either for that matter)
        bpye 2y ago
        You can sideload apps with a free account, but only 3 signed at once and for a max of 7 days. There are also some entitlements you can’t use.
ghusto 2y ago
Because it doesn't meet the criteria. To summarise heavily, they are: - Size criteria: Have an annual turnover in the European Economic Area (EEA) of at least €7.5 billion in each of the last three financial years, or Have a market capitalization of at least €75 billion, and Provide the same core platform service in at least three EU countries. - Control an important gateway: Provide a core platform service which is an important gateway for business users to reach end users. - Entrenched and durable position: Enjoy an entrenched and durable position on the market, operationalized by having had at least 45 million monthly active end users and 10,000 yearly business users of the same core platform service in the EEA in the last three years. In fact, the EU has admitted that iPads do not meet the criteria, and are making an explicit exception to include them. Don't get me wrong, I'm _very_ happy about this, but you asked ;)
- Kbelicius 2y ago
  EU isn't making an exception in this case. DMA empowers the commission to investigate, and even declare as gatekeepers, products that do not meet the quantitative thresholds on the basis of qualitative assessment. Following this decision EU Commissioner Thierry Breton said: “We continue monitoring market developments and will not hesitate to open new investigations should other services below the thresholds present characteristics to be considered important gateways for business users,”. per the commission iPad passes the threshold for business users elevenfold.

threeseed 2y ago

[flagged]

codetrotter 2y ago
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_2363 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_... They had valid reasons for it.
- threeseed 2y ago
  It doesn't change the fact that it's arbitrary at this point. There are no rules that are governing what is or isn't a gatekeeper. It's just whatever EC decides that day.
  - lastdong 2y ago
    I believe it follows the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a European Union legislation designed to promote fairness and competition in digital markets. You can find more information here: https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/index_en https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/index_en
  - idle_zealot 2y ago
    The EC decides what the rules for defining a gatekeeper are, they invented the designation. You can call that arbitrary if you want, but they set their rules and are sticking to them. Deciding that iPads and iPhones are the same platform seems pretty common-sense to me.
    - threeseed 2y ago
      a) EC isn't following the pre-defined rules for what is a gatekeeper. They just made up new ones. Hence my point. b) EC never said that iPads and iPhones are the same platform.
      - littlestymaar 2y ago
        No they don't and if they did Apple could bring the case in front of CJEU.
        shuckles 2y ago
        If the unqualified existence of judicial remedy justified any arbitrary bureaucratic action, the world would be a much worse place (and indeed countries where bureaucrats make up rules to suit their whims and your only recourse is the judiciary tend to be dysfunctional).
        littlestymaar 2y ago
        You are making things up: there is no arbitrary action at all here. The EC must abide to the DMA and have no power to overcome it. If they did it would basically be a coup from the Commission against the Parliament and the Council, and you can be sure that member states would not stay silent against it (but don't worry it's not going to happen, as the balance of power is clearly not in favor of the Commission). I'm just using the CJEU as an illustration that Apple themselves doesn't believe in the “arbitrary rules” narrative as they aren't even fighting in court. Also, you're trying to use the “bureaucrates” card here, but Apple executives are bureaucrates too, and Apple's management of sanctions and their habits of shutting down user accounts without recourse shows that their own bureaucracy is closer to the one from authoritarian regimes than anything else.
    - littlestymaar 2y ago
      > The EC decides what the rules for defining a gatekeeper are, they invented the designation. It's more complicated than this: the EC has the initiative for legislation in the EU but the text they submit is later amended and voted by both the European Parliament and the Council (representing member states) so it's not true that the EC defines the rules. And both the member states and the European Parliament are pretty jealous of their prerogatives in the decision process so you can be sure that the EC cannot have arbitrary power that bypasses the Council and the Parliament.
  - toyg 2y ago
    > There are no rules that are governing what is or isn't a gatekeeper. Tell me you've not actually read the regulation without telling me you've not read the regulation.
  - wasmitnetzen 2y ago
    There's literally a law, in a functional democracy. Doesn't get more rules-based than that.
beretguy 2y ago
Why are you defending having less ownership over devices that you own? It’s like your employer wants to give you a salary increase but you complain and say you don’t want more money.
- massysett 2y ago
  Because I should have that choice. Government should not make this decision for me. If it’s important to me that I have devices I fully own, I should seek that out. If I like the products and prices that result from walled-garden business models, I should be able to choose them.
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    You will have the choice of installing or not installing the software you wish. The "choice" as you're describing it is a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome.
    - massysett 2y ago
      I might not want that choice. That requires that I use my brain as I use the device and not do the harmful thing. Or maybe I want to hand the device to my child and be assured that she cannot install software, or use it as a publicly-accessible kiosk and be assured members of the public can’t break it. People who have handed Windows PCs to software illiterates and have to constantly return to eradicate crapware understand this problem. Also, it costs the vendor to implement support for installing other software - resources the vendor could have spent on features I value, rather than features I don’t want. If only a government didn’t dictate to the vendor what it should do, stripping the vendor and the user of the power to decide for themselves.
      - beretguy 2y ago
        > That requires that I use my brain There, you fell into a trap of your own making.
      - 2y ago
prmoustache 2y ago
> In this case the iPad is actually not big enough but the EU has chosen to regulate anyway. They just realized that Apple was full of shit and trying to circumvent the law by differenciating iPadOS and iOS in the same arbitrary way you think the EU is working. It is rarely a good strategy to play the smart ass in front of authority.
wiseowise 2y ago
iPad is as dominant in tablet space as iPhone in phones, why is it not big enough?
- jonplackett 2y ago
  Just that less people buy tablets than phones. As a percentage of market share iPad probably the same or higher (guess). But in absolute numbers lower.
HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
It wasn't arbitrary at all. >The Commission's investigation found that Apple presents the features of a gatekeeper in relation to iPadOS, as among others: >Apple's business user numbers exceeded the quantitative threshold elevenfold, while its end user numbers were close to the threshold and are predicted to rise in the near future. >End users are locked-in to iPadOS. Apple leverages its large ecosystem to disincentivise end users from switching to other operating systems for tablets. >Business users are locked-in to iPadOS because of its large and commercially attractive user base, and its importance for certain use cases, such as gaming apps. >On the basis of the findings of the investigation, the Commission concluded that iPadOS constitutes an important gateway for business users to reach end users, and that Apple enjoys an entrenched and durable position with respect to iPadOS. Apple has now six months to ensure full compliance with the DMA obligations as applied to iPadOS.
littlestymaar 2y ago
The distinction between both OS and app stores is entirely arbitrary as well, and the EC is just not buying the argument that this is a different product and should be treated differently. Edit: looks like the EU didn't even bother challenging the arbitrary distinction between both OS, since the iPad crosses the threshold for business users by itself, it's submitted to DMA on its own.
- Kbelicius 2y ago
  > looks like the EU didn't even bother challenging the arbitrary distinction between both OS, since the iPad crosses the threshold for business users by itself, it's submitted to DMA on its own. While it does pass the threshold for business user the threshold, I think, is end users and business users. But that doesn't matter at all since the EU commission can declare a service as a gatekeeper, after an investigation, even if it had both business and end users bellow the threshold.
flohofwoe 2y ago
If you squint enough, iPhones and iPads are really the same thing (along with all other 'iXXX' devices).
rsynnott 2y ago
I mean, I think they're just not buying Apple's claim that iOS on the phone and iOS on the iPad are different things. If they _were_ to accept this, it would be a slippery slope - coming soon: iOS Smol for the smaller phones. It's totally different, we promise.
wasmitnetzen 2y ago
It's purely arbitrary to say iPadOS is a separate thing. They could just say there's an iPadAirOS, and an iPadProOS, or an iPadAir64GBOS, or ...

Moldoteck 2y ago

Doesn't this mean that game consoles should be gatekeepers too like from sony/nintendo/microsoft?

riffraff 2y ago
I 100% think this is the case, my guess as to why they're not targeted yet is just that they're less visible to regulators. I'd like to know if there's another explanation.
- mschuster91 2y ago
  Consoles are not defined as general-purpose computers (except for a time, the PS3), and there aren't many complaints from the game industry at large about access discrimination or unaffordable devkits any more, there's tons of indie games for just about every major platform these days. So, too much effort for too little gain, there is no artificial competition impediments any more. The only complaints tend to come from gamers - DRM, "console exclusive" titles and lootboxes, mostly, but of these three the only realistic field where the EU can/will/should intervene is the lootbox crap.
  - throwaway290 2y ago
    It's the same for iPad, not defined as general purpose, no complaints about unaffordavle devkits (xcode is free), tons of indie apps.
    - physicsguy 2y ago
      Xcode is free but a developer account isn't (nor is an Xbox Dev account either for that matter)
      - bpye 2y ago
        You can sideload apps with a free account, but only 3 signed at once and for a max of 7 days. There are also some entitlements you can’t use.

ghusto 2y ago

Because it doesn't meet the criteria. To summarise heavily, they are: - Size criteria: Have an annual turnover in the European Economic Area (EEA) of at least €7.5 billion in each of the last three financial years, or Have a market capitalization of at least €75 billion, and Provide the same core platform service in at least three EU countries. - Control an important gateway: Provide a core platform service which is an important gateway for business users to reach end users. - Entrenched and durable position: Enjoy an entrenched and durable position on the market, operationalized by having had at least 45 million monthly active end users and 10,000 yearly business users of the same core platform service in the EEA in the last three years. In fact, the EU has admitted that iPads do not meet the criteria, and are making an explicit exception to include them. Don't get me wrong, I'm _very_ happy about this, but you asked ;)

Kbelicius 2y ago
EU isn't making an exception in this case. DMA empowers the commission to investigate, and even declare as gatekeepers, products that do not meet the quantitative thresholds on the basis of qualitative assessment. Following this decision EU Commissioner Thierry Breton said: “We continue monitoring market developments and will not hesitate to open new investigations should other services below the thresholds present characteristics to be considered important gateways for business users,”. per the commission iPad passes the threshold for business users elevenfold.