Sounds like this is a plan to force Apple into "thinking the same" as everyone else. I suppose they think this would help them compete against Apple’s superior hardware and software. They are so green with envy at Apple’s loyal customer base who they have been trying in vain to lure away from Apple. In their minds if Apple’s products are just versions of their own people might switch.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Rivals Unite to Promote Open Ecosystems Using EU Law
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I want to stay in my orchard where Google can’t see me.
What will EU do once Apple opens up the iPhone for everything, and people still buy iPhones? What will other vendors ask for then?
WhatsApp will be forced to open up, iMessage doesn't have to because it hasn't reached a wide enough market in Europe. Totally fair.Google, Meta, Qualcomm go to lengths forcing others to open up. Let's put the focus and pressure on some one else, while we enforce our stronghold. I am waiting for WhatsApp to open for other developers
Sure, but until they do they have to play by the rules.
The DMA is mandating that gatekeepers allow others to implement the things they are gatekeepers for, they are not forcing anyone to do so. It's just recognising that when systems have grown very large the regular market forces stop working like they usually do, because enough of the market becomes forced to use the platform whether they like it or not. At that point they need to open it up, to reduce their gatekeeper advantage which naturally reduces innovation.Yes let them all start by making their programs open and interacting to show us how it will work... Let Google track all interactions with Facebook, make Microsoft implement all Adobe file formats, make Microsoft release Access for Macs and iOS... let's see how they like sharing before they rope others into it.
Samsung has entered the chat.
If by everyone you mean a few zealots, yes we remember.
I'd rather they promote universal cross-platform encryption regardless of app, by default. All texting, all email, all calls, no exceptions.
Why? I enjoy the fact we have different protocols because options.
Different protocols are fine, but each and every one of them should be encrypted.
It's one of the reasons I think SMS should be deprecated, at minimum, and replaced with encrypted RCS.
Gotta laugh at the criticism here, as if Apple was a member, or joined, it would be the best thing ever. I love my apple products, but they make it hard to use non-apple products, or communicate with android users in the US, as sms is king.
How about adding a financial responsibility provision to the EUs legislation combined with specific hard and enforceable standards on security and privacy? That way victims of data breaches and crappy security leading to hacks and stolen data could receive compensation from the app developers/ platforms responsible? Don't see google supporting anything like this, I wonder why? Oh, they might find themselves liable, that does makes sense.
So come on Google, I don't disagree with your stance entirely, just make it better for security and privacy instead of pretending
So come on Google, I don't disagree with your stance entirely, just make it better for security and privacy instead of pretending
It's pretty clear they want unfettered access to Apple's user base for tehir own purposes. I suspect if Apple would decide to charge flat fees for access to teh App Store if they don't use IAP from Apple they'd scream as well becasue they couldn't use Apple's infrastructure for free.
I suspect they will come up with some minimum standard, aimed mainly at Apple, while trying to protect what they see as their own key money makers.
As others have suggested, Apple should join and drive serious hard security and privacy standards so tehy can't hoover her data for tehir own profit. I suspect they'd balk at such a standard.
The EU is no more Marxist than the US, just their regulatory scheme approach is different then the US.
In the US, you could cover about the same area as the EU without paying roaming fees before the EU took action against them, and can move out of area without facing fair use limits still today.
Care to elaborate?
The US never banned the Concorde, and it flew from NY to Europe for a while.
The US was not alone in banning supersonic flight over land, it was joined by Canada, Ireland (EU), the Netherlands (EU), Norway, Sweden (EU), Switzerland, and West Germany (EU).
The Concorde, although technology impressive, never really took off for reasons beyond the US limiting flights over land.
While I don't count the EU as 'Marxist' (come on), perhaps Apple should trot out the 1984 commercial if this monopolistic alliance of Google et al. gains traction with the EU. This is really starting to sound like the bad old days of IBM, but with conformity enforced by an overzealous and over-reaching EU government. They should be focused on privacy and resilience, not interfering with a market that is functioning properly.
- Apple hasn't "thought differently" for quite some time now.
- I fully expect the opposite, many people I know will switch from Android to iPhone because the user will finally truly own their hardware when proper sideloading is enabled.
Honestly, one of the main reasons I use Apple devices is really for the privacy and confidentiality stuff that is, presumably, baked into the software. In our age of the Internet and as our everyday interactions become increasingly digital, it's really important to me that my privacy and data be kept safe and confidential unless I want to share some of it. I don't hear much from these various Android-based companies talking much about this kind of stuff.
If Apple are forced to do this they should develop a version of the App Store for Android.
Only in the sense that they put profits above the user at every step.
They've been free to do so for a long long time now had they wanted to.If Apple are forced to do this they should develop a version of the App Store for Android.
And "forced closeness" (restrictions on sideloading, alternative app stores, alternative browser engines, etc.) is not openness either.
I do remember when the Mac was just a drop in the PC ocean. That was some decades ago! Back then, my main reason for sticking with Macs was because overall its various devices operated well with each other and didn't have the hardware headaches that the Windows world experienced. I did become a little disillusioned around the mid and late 90s though when the Mac hardware was so diluted and confusing, and the software like System 7 and System 8 weren't that great. And over time, Windows did become more user friendly and robust.
At this point, privacy and confidentiality features of Apple devices is a main draw for me.
Some examples of companies that did put profits over customers:
- enron
- Bernie madoff
Now if you want to honestly lump apple into that pack, we’ll go ahead.
If you had told me 20 years ago when I bought my first Mac and iPod in 2003 that Apple would be this giant behemoth that other Fortune 500 companies and tech behemoths keep trying to take out I would have called you crazy.
Interesting side note, when Apple initially revealed FaceTime they wanted it to be Open Source and used by other companies. A company that makes its money being a patent troll blocked this from happening initially so Apple had to figure out another way to have it work. By the time they figured it out FaceTime had become such an important part of the ecosystem that Apple just decided to keep it for themselves.
Interesting side note, when Apple initially revealed FaceTime they wanted it to be Open Source and used by other companies. A company that makes its money being a patent troll blocked this from happening initially so Apple had to figure out another way to have it work. By the time they figured it out FaceTime had become such an important part of the ecosystem that Apple just decided to keep it for themselves.
Nobody said that it was. The antitrust crowd thinks it’s okay for this type of regulation, well because antitrust.