Apple Rivals Unite to Promote Open Ecosystems Using EU Law

[rolphi]

Next year at this time, European iPhone users will be able to install whatever apps they want onto devices that they paid for, with no content review, security review, or app category bans to stand in their way.

That used to be the kind of thing that was celebrated by the tech people that populated forums like these. I can’t tell you how weird it is to see that 90% of the reaction here is making fun of the regulators or the companies that are pushing for greater digital openness (even if they’re doing it out of self-interest).

I just want the choice to have a private, secured option. Now we all have a choice: open or closed and vote with your wallet. The EU wants to make all platforms open, and that is the opposite of choice.

Why do regulation advocates constantly insult users who actually want what Apple is selling by claiming that "everyone" is better off when they compel companies to open up. You have Android. Just be happy with that.

 

[scorpio vega]

1% is not a majority.. 49% is not a majority. My wife has been using Pixel's since the 2. She has never pirated an app, or even used an alternative app store, and doesn't care to learn how.

I stick with what I said.

I gave a small number. It's definitely more than one percent. I even did a quick google search about it.

Kudos to your wife not pirating. But considering the different avenues for Android users to get apps, yes piracy is a problem/

Several users on MR even bragged about pirating games to 'screw the companies'

Android users pirate. I said what i said.

 

[StellarVixen]

Google, Meta, Qualcomm, Nothing, Lenovo, Opera and several other tech companies have announced a collaborative effort to push for "open digital ecosystems" in what appears to be a pointed move against Apple (via Reuters).

The group, calling itself the Coalition for Open Digital Ecosystems (CODE), seeks to encourage more open platforms and systems in Europe. Other members include Motorola, Chinese smartphone brand Honor, French augmented reality start-up Lynx, and German messaging service provider Wire. Apple is noticeably absent from the organization's members.

CODE's formation comes in response to new EU rules such as the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which designates major tech companies as "gatekeepers" and compels them to open up their various services and platforms to other companies and developers. The DMA is expected to force Apple to make significant changes to the way the App Store, FaceTime, and Siri work in Europe. For example, Apple will next year be obliged to allow users to install third-party app stores and sideload apps, as well as give developers the ability to promote their offers outside the ‌‌‌App Store‌‌‌ and use third-party payment systems.

CODE plans to work with companies, legislators, and academics to promote digital openness and present pathways for this to be achieved in Europe using the DMA and future EU legislation. Members have discussed how digital ecosystems should work in Europe and what positively impacts competitiveness and openness. The organisation aims to open up major digital ecosystems using cross-industry collaboration to promote seamless connectivity and interoperability between systems.

While the likes of Google and Meta have been officially designated as gatekeepers by the EU just like Apple, rivals are increasingly attempting to use EU law to prompt major changes to Apple's ecosystem. For example, last month, Google and European telecom groups urged EU regulators to designate iMessage a "core" service that would force Apple to make the communications platform interoperable with competing chat services.

Article Link: Apple Rivals Unite to Promote Open Ecosystems Using EU Law

That image made me think something was wrong with my eyes

 

[jlc1978]

or pirate like most android users do.

I suspect side loading will work well for large companies that rely on subscriptions to make money and simply let you download the app for free while smaller developers will find piracy now is taking a serious chunk of their revenue away.

Thye will have to find ways to combat privacy, whether it is a subscription only model or some other form of DRM. Apple could, perhaps, establish a SetApp type of offering where, much like Arcade, subscribing allows access to a large amount of apps but only while you subscribe. I suspect, if they wanted to, they could develop an App Store based DRM where apps have to log in to function and developers have the option of using it or not. Such.a scheme could still allow sales instead of subscriptions but protect the developer's IP. Since it would be teh developers choice there should be no issue with Apple offering it.

There are over 3 billion active users of Android. Do you really want to try and sit here and act like that even 1 percent of 3 billion users (which is 30 million) is not a lot of illegal downloads from up and coming developers.

From what I've read, piracy has resulted in many apps being free but requiring subscriptions to unlock many features.

We've already seen the dividends with the USB-C movement.

I suspect the iPhone would be USB-C at some point absent the EU action; the EU rule gives Apple cover to blame them for obsoleting all those lightning accessories or selling you an expensive adaptor.

 

[scorpio vega]

Hopefully I can finally be able to buy a movie on iTunes on a Chromebook / Windows soon. Absolutely annoying when I find a nice sale but don't have my Macbook.

Why does every software need to be open? This is not android nor should it be.

I shouldnt be able to use a gift card from Burger King at Mcdonald's simply because i have the right to eat food.

 

[downpour]

Yes, it just isn't very widely utilised, which will be the case on iOS as well.

I imagine it wouldn't be very easy to accomplish without some kind of emulation. I doubt Apple are going to want to start using Android studio and Kotlin to redevelop all their apps. I'm sure they would be happy to take Google's customers away from them though. Perhaps they could just make a copy of the Play store but brand it with an Apple logo and take all the money.

This whole concept seems weird to me though, you wouldn't expect to walk into a store and see their competitors there selling you stuff... Why should it be any different with phones?

If this is about choice, then people are already free to buy an Android phone with all the dodgy unregulated stuff that comes with it.

 

[scorpio vega]

Thye will have to find ways to combat privacy, whether it is a subscription only model or some other form of DRM. Apple could, perhaps, establish a SetApp type of offering where, much like Arcade, subscribing allows access to a large amount of apps but only while you subscribe. I suspect, if they wanted to, they could develop an App Store based DRM where apps have to log in to function and developers have the option of using it or not. Such.a scheme could still allow sales instead of subscriptions but protect the developer's IP. Since it would be teh developers choice there should be no issue with Apple offering it.

I like this idea.

I just hope we are not about to make IOS anything remotely like Android.

 

[Naraxus]

If it's a fight they want, then I hope it's a fight Apple gives them.

I often disagree with you on things but in this instance I agree with you and hope Apple tells the EU to pound sand.

BTW, kudos on the Donnie Yen reference!

 

[erikkfi]

I just want the choice to have a private, secured option. Now we all have a choice: open or closed and vote with your wallet. The EU wants to make all platforms open, and that is the opposite of choice.

Why do regulation advocates constantly insult users who actually want what Apple is selling by claiming that "everyone" is better off when they compel companies to open up. You have Android. Just be happy with that.

I don’t have Android, I have iOS, and I want to install whatever I want onto my devices just like I can with slightly larger devices we call computers.

The App Store will still be there even when it has competition. You’ll have to go into some obscure Settings option just to escape your closed environment to begin with.

 

[downpour]

This is like forcing Amazon to put an AliExpress store on their website... Customers who trust Amazon would go on there thinking it's safe, then end up buying a fake watch. 😁

 

[Dionte]

If you change the company names to people names all you would end up with is a plethora of assault charges. They want to take advantage of apple and its users by force.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Customers who trust Amazon would go on there thinking it's safe, then end up buying a fake watch. 😁

That happens all the time on Amazon via 3rd party sellers, and Amazon claims they can't do anything about it since they aren't the one supplying the goods.

 

[downpour]

That happens all the time on Amazon via 3rd party sellers, and Amazon claims they can't do anything about it since they aren't the one supplying the goods.

Yeah I thought about putting a "never trust Amazon anyway" disclaimer on that post LOL. The 3rd party sellers are probably 'more' trustworthy, as at least their delivery drivers don't tend to steal your items like the Amazon ones do 😁

 

[johnsc3]

I imagine this is how Ip Man felt when he was facing 10 opponents simultaneously.

It truly is impressive how so many companies (some of which are tech giants in their own rights) feel threatened by a company which has minority share in each product category. That said, while greater regulation is one of the risks that Apple faces, it won't play a major role in Apple's future.

If anyone has time, I would recommend reading an article written by Neil Cybart a few years ago, detailing why he believes so many competitors are turning to guerrilla warfare tactics to wage war against Apple and its App Store.

Above Avalon: Attacking the App Store

Apple competitors have turned to guerrilla warfare tactics to wage a battle against Apple and the App Store. Based on what is being written and said about the App Store, one would think we have an entered a tech dystopia in which 27 million iOS developers and a billion Apple users are being taken ad

www.aboveavalon.com

What it all just shows is how Apple has been successful in pulling away from the competition, and this is perhaps their best (and last) chance to reshape the mobile industry to their liking.

If it's a fight they want, then I hope it's a fight Apple gives them.

Yeah- but you remember how Ip dispatched those black belts. 👊🏻

 

[koil]

I imagine it wouldn't be very easy to accomplish without some kind of emulation. I doubt Apple are going to want to start using Android studio and Kotlin to redevelop all their apps. I'm sure they would be happy to take Google's customers away from them though. Perhaps they could just make a copy of the Play store but brand it with an Apple logo and take all the money.

This whole concept seems weird to me though, you wouldn't expect to walk into a store and see their competitors there selling you stuff... Why should it be any different with phones?

If this is about choice, then people are already free to buy an Android phone with all the dodgy unregulated stuff that comes with it.

I think something was lost in translation here, or you're deliberately jumping through some serious mental hoops to construct this argument.

What we're talking about is the device owners freedom to choose what software they run on their device, that's it.

We're not talking about the Play Store being on iPhones suddenly, Android apps require a runtime and OS APIs that will never exist in iOS so they would have to be translated, and the runtime bundled, which, while possible, is super inconvenient and just probably isn't going to happen, and if it does it won't be a pleasant experience for anyone (it will never be on the App Store, this kind of shenanigans is what third party app stores are for).

What I'm talking about is me being able to build a tiny crummy app that does something only I care about, and then run that on my own device without having to pay the piper yearly, I've already paid Apple a ton of money for the device, they are not entitled to a yearly subscription just so that I can have the privilege of running my own code on my own fully purchased device.

Yeah, some people (Epic and Spotify for example) will probably publish IPAs for installation from their own websites, along with documentation for how to enable installing such IPAs.

What they won't do is stop publishing their apps on the App Store, because only a tiny minority of users will ever actually install any apps from third party app stores. I will, but I'm a software engineer. Regular people won't.

It was really really stupid of Apple not to provide a sensible mechanism for all this on their own terms, because now it won't be under their own terms, which is a shame, but they brought that on themselves.

 

[Born Again]

If by everyone you mean a few zealots, yes we remember.

*Head exploded*

What?! What?! What?!

We love USB C

 

[SpotOnT]

Apple also profits from “personalized” ads.

a) It is not black and white, it is to various degrees. Lets not pretend all companies are equally as invasive.

b) The goal for privacy is to have as few companies collecting your data as possible. Just because you let Apple or Microsoft or Google collect data on you, doesn’t mean you want 1 or 100 other companies collecting your data as well.

 

[Ctrlos]

As an aside, it was my father sitting at the end of the runway with a sound meter and a crew of acoustic engineers that resulted Concorde being banned from Dulles Airport. Concorde was simply too loud - it violated laws regarding noise pollution. It's high angle of attack, nearly twice that of other jets, simply directed too much acoustic energy toward the ground. The people around the airport hated Concorde's noise, and I must admit that my father, who was a local politician at that time, looked like a cat that swallowed a canary when the sound measurements were verified. And, FWIW, this had nothing to do with sonic booms, which Concorde only created over the Atlantic.

Anyway to add to your list of government-funded achievements, I'd add the internet and HTML. Government isn't always bad, but in this case I think the EU is caving in to nonsense about Apple's walled garden.

The FAA's 50-year old law has now prevented the development of new supersonic planes though that do not disturb the ground.

 

[webkit]

You mean like Google and Meta joining forces to lobby the EU to go after their competition through legislation?

I mean like laws that try to prevent dominant companies from being able stifle competition in particular markets such as blocking alternative app stores and sideloading on a major mobile OS platform.

I assume lobbying is legal in the EU. Apple does it too, directly or by funding other lobby groups.

 

[iPay]

[...] I suppose they think this would help them compete against Apple’s superior hardware and software.

Agreed. So far, noone in the Android world has managed to reduce display frequency down to 60Hz...
Of course, Apple's greatest strength is how they tie people into their ecosystem (some call it Customer Lifetime Value). No wonder competitors weigh in when they can "help" Europe break the walled garden. But then, this CODE association is just an opportunistic group trying to lobby the EU, they don't make the rules and EU owes them no favors.

 

[webkit]

Apple isn’t a dominant company. The EU threaded the needle to ensnare apple in its regulations. (And here we go in the same circles)

Apple is one of only two major players (part of a duopoly) in the app store market and generates more app store revenue than any other company. Apple is one of only two major players (part of a duopoly) in the mobile OS market. Apple has the largest share of the device vendor market for tablet and mobile. Etc. Yes, Apple is a dominant company.

 

[Ctrlos]

Care to elaborate?

This.

I'll admit the Panama Canal comes close.

The Apollo Program was not terrestrial.

 

[CarAnalogy]

Yeah, Google and Meta, everyone's best "friends" lol

"This whole open thing has nothing to do with ads, we promise. Don't be Evil. Cambridge Analytica. Bla-bla-bla."

Apple should have made iMessage with built-in FaceTime feature and cross-platform payments a holistic Android app years ago. They would be the messaging and payments defacto platform outside of China right now, obliterating Square, PayPal, WhatsApp, Revolut and everyone in between, while having to lock nothing down at the same time.

Apple couldn’t make FaceTime open because of…wait for it…software patents.

If these regulators want to do actual good for the world, make software patents illegal like they should have been in the first place.

 

[CarAnalogy]

I imagine this is how Ip Man felt when he was facing 10 opponents simultaneously.

It truly is impressive how so many companies (some of which are tech giants in their own rights) feel threatened by a company which has minority share in each product category. That said, while greater regulation is one of the risks that Apple faces, it won't play a major role in Apple's future.

If anyone has time, I would recommend reading an article written by Neil Cybart a few years ago, detailing why he believes so many competitors are turning to guerrilla warfare tactics to wage war against Apple and its App Store.

Above Avalon: Attacking the App Store

Apple competitors have turned to guerrilla warfare tactics to wage a battle against Apple and the App Store. Based on what is being written and said about the App Store, one would think we have an entered a tech dystopia in which 27 million iOS developers and a billion Apple users are being taken ad

www.aboveavalon.com

What it all just shows is how Apple has been successful in pulling away from the competition, and this is perhaps their best (and last) chance to reshape the mobile industry to their liking.

If it's a fight they want, then I hope it's a fight Apple gives them.

Ip Man in that scene was motivated by vengeance for his murdered friend.

This is more like the assassination of Julius Caesar. Bunch of bureaucrats and former allies ganging up.

 

[koil]

This is nonsense. You're arguing as though there's some universal moral law at play here, and Apple is purposefully operating against human nature. None of which is true. The EU is doing an overreach here because it finds itself largely outside of being able to influence the future of tech. I get it. The EU has lost in this regard, and are attempting to play catchup.

...and if you wanted an open system that let you do whatever you want, then you shouldn't have bought an IOS device. As you say, you're a software engineer, and I'm guessing you fully understood what you were buying when you bought it. Trying to complain that Apple has wronged you somehow after you knowingly bought their device with their restrictions is rich.

I bought my iPhones expecting that those rules would eventually be relaxed, yes, and was prepared to wait because the platform and hardware is so much better than the competition. It took some time, and didn't arrive in the manner I expected, but here it finally is (I think, we'll know for sure in march 2024 whether Apple tries to exploit some loophole to get out of it).

But yes, you are right, I'm arguing as though I have a right as the devices owner to run whatever code I want on it. I believe I should have that right on any device I own that claims to be a general purpose computing device, which the iPhone unequivocally is.

I don't care if Apple delivers that in the form of an unlocked bootloader telling me "do it yourself then", that's fine for me, but I 100% believe that buying a device means it's mine and I can do whatever the hell I want with it. Elbow grease required or not.

If you disagree with that, then I would like to hear clear arguments as to why you believe some corporation has the right to sell you a device and then tell you what you can and can't do with it.