Apple’s DMA malicious compliance explained.

[Timo_Existencia]

It's a bit more complicated than that:

• iOS was responsible for 66% of app consumer spending in 2023
• Subscription revenues increased to $45.6 billion in 2023, iOS was responsible for 76% of that revenue

Source: https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/

You're quoting global numbers. We're talking about the EU.
https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/

So if you're an app developer, iOS is the no.1 game in town. Mostly because that's where all the rich users are. Sure, you can choose to ignore it, but realistically you wouldn't want to.

And this is bad for developers because of? Apple has developed a market and a customer base that is of very high value to developers. Explain to me how this is harmful to developers?

The competition I'm referring to is the App Store. Apple obviously want a free run there, and would rather not face competition from companies that might provide the same services at lower cost, whether to themselves or others.

First of all, there's no such thing as a monopoly inside of your own store. Costco isn't considered to have a monopoly inside of costco stores. And no, even in the so-called "duopoly" Apple doesn't have monopoly power. They just don't.

But, let's take one small example: Weather Apps. Apple bundles a free weather app in IOS. They even work to improve it regularly. But there is no shortage of highly regarded weather apps on IOS. Apps that charge money and have a loyal following.

There's this notion that Apple's own apps have no fees, and thus Apple is competing unfairly. But let's return to the example of Costco I just used. Costco has their own brand (Kirkland) that often competes with 3rd party brands directly. But the idea that costco has no fees is silly; they've had to spend to develop the stores, the customers, everything. And, they have to spend money to develop that Kirkland-branded product. That's why 3rd parties pay a commission to Costco. Well, it's exactly the same on IOS. Apple is not getting the IOS store for free on their apps; they are spending billions to provide the platform. Ongoing and constant costs.

The notion that Apple gets it for free and the competitors have to pay is a wholly laughable misunderstanding of how business works. The EU has been trapped (knowingly, I'd argue) in bad thinking in this regard.

 

[dk001]

Those aren't EU numbers. But more to the point, it's almost as if the walled garden approach is better for developers than the open approach being pushed on Apple.

Adding @mode11

Good back and forth - asking a quick question On your walled garden approach - would that include Apple relaxing some of the constraints they currently have on submissions? Thx.

 

[Timo_Existencia]

Really? Got a source for that? Genuinely, I'm looking for one myself.

Review the arguments made by the OP on this thread.

 

[mode11]

Since rent seeking is not the correct term for what we are talking about, I'm asking you what you actually meant.

Digital platforms are obviously central to modern life. The intention of the DMA is to prevent a situation where platform holders have so much control that they can never lose. The danger is that the present market will just calcify, because the incumbents are in a position to head off any new challenge. It doesn't just apply to Apple - all the usual suspects are in the frame.

Those aren't EU numbers.

Feel free to find alternatives; my point was that its disingenuous to act like little old Apple has no control, just because only 27% of smartphone users have iPhones. iPhones are premium products, so it's unsurprising that the majority of revenue follows those users.

But more to the point, it's almost as if the walled garden approach is better for developers than the open approach being pushed on Apple.

Perhaps. There's a lot about iOS that makes it a popular, premium platform. As with the Mac, the walled garden approach has benefits and drawbacks for users. Arguably, it's something one puts up with to get the good stuff.

 

[BaldiMac]

Good back and forth - asking a quick question On your walled garden approach - would that include Apple relaxing some of the constraints they currently have on submissions? Thx.

I'm not sure what you are asking here. My point was just that Apple's approach was generating far more money for developers than the alternative. Of course, we don't know if that is because of the single App Store vs traditional model. We will get a good idea if iOS app revenue in the EU begins to trail the rest of the iOS app revenue globally.

 

[mode11]

Review the arguments made by the OP on this thread.

It's a bit of a wall of text. I did a search for 'cost', but couldn't find anything that said platform holders should provide all services for nothing. I would find that a bit odd in any case.

 

[Timo_Existencia]

Digital platforms are obviously central to modern life. The intention of the DMA is to prevent a situation where platform holders have so much control that they can never lose.

If you believe many of those who frequent these forums, Developers are fleeing IOS and Apple is on the verge of bankruptcy. The business world is rife with examples of companies that many thought could never lose, and then does. The mobile phone market is highly competitive. Losing is always a possibility.

The danger is that the present market will just calcify, because the incumbents are in a position to head off any new challenge. It doesn't just apply to Apple - all the usual suspects are in the frame.

In the EU, where Apple has only 27% to Android's 70%, when you're worried about calcifying power, what sense does it make to try to hobble the only real competition to Android that exists?

Feel free to find alternatives; my point was that its disingenuous to act like little old Apple has no control, just because only 27% of smartphone users have iPhones. iPhones are premium products, so it's unsurprising that the majority of revenue follows those users.

I'd say Apple has influence. Not control.

 

[Jim Lahey]

I've lost track of this debate now. It feels like people are just defending their position at any cost. Bottom line is that buyers buy and developers develop. They choose Apple because they a) like it and b) profit from it.

Remind me again what the issue is? 🤨

 

[BaldiMac]

Digital platforms are obviously central to modern life. The intention of the DMA is to prevent a situation where platform holders have so much control that they can never lose. The danger is that the present market will just calcify, because the incumbents are in a position to head off any new challenge. It doesn't just apply to Apple - all the usual suspects are in the frame.

That has nothing to do with what you said. The DMA does nothing to encourage challenges to Apple and Google. Allowing alt app stores will most likely benefit Google. Moving to iOS? The Play Store comes with you. The browser regulation will most likely benefit Google. No app store review? More ads that will benefit Google.

My opinion is that the best thing that the EU could do to create more real competition is end Google's anticompetitive agreements with all of its competitors outside of Apple to install Google Play Services. Force manufacturers to choose or develop their own services and store on top of android.

Feel free to find alternatives; my point was that its disingenuous to act like little old Apple has no control, just because only 27% of smartphone users have iPhones. iPhones are premium products, so it's unsurprising that the majority of revenue follows those users.

No one said they have no control. But they only have control of their own platform. There are plenty of comparable platforms to compare their fees with. Google, Xbox, Playstation, Amazon, etc. Again, their fees are inline with the market.

Perhaps. There's a lot about iOS that makes it a popular, premium platform. As with the Mac, the walled garden approach has benefits and drawbacks for users. Arguably, it's something one puts up with to get the good stuff.

Which is why I think the EU's ham-handed approach in the DMA is bad in several areas. (Some aspects of the DMA are great. Particularly around data collection.) The DMA doesn't recognize the benefits of the walled garden approach. It tries to cloak what it wants in confusing and counterproductive nonsense instead of identifying real issues and addressing them directly. Much like many posters here.

 

[mode11]

You're quoting global numbers. We're talking about the EU.
https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/

Feel free to counter with EU numbers, if they're meaningfully different. I think the general point stands; the money is in iOS.

And this is bad for developers because of? Apple has developed a market and a customer base that is of very high value to developers. Explain to me how this is harmful to developers?

The mobile app market is obviously great for developers. The DMA is not about victimising Apple specifically though, it's about keeping markets from becoming dominated by a handful of entrenched players. The rules affect Google, Meta, Microsoft and others just as much. The only reason Android happens to be less affected than iOS is due to its intrinsically more open business model (i.e. Google primarily sell ads not hardware, so anything goes as long as they can mine your data).

First of all, there's no such thing as a monopoly inside of your own store. Costco isn't considered to have a monopoly inside of costco stores. And no, even in the so-called "duopoly" Apple doesn't have monopoly power. They just don't.

I think you're getting too hung up on the concept of monopoly (which isn't even used by the DMA); it's a bit of a straw man. Even if Apple never has more than 50% of the market (even by revenue), this is still an enormously powerful position if it's essentially unassailable. The argument that consumers can always go to the other company, who are in a similarly powerful position, doesn't really solve the problem. In extremis, 100% of consumers could go to one of the companies, but that wouldn't be any improvement. The DMA is about trying to provide a (somewhat) more level playing field for new entrants.

 

[mode11]

In the EU, where Apple has only 27% to Android's 70%, when you're worried about calcifying power, what sense does it make to try to hobble the only real competition to Android that exists?

Again, you keep quoting market share by number of phones rather than app revenue, because it makes Apple look weaker. Plus, you're acting like the DMA was specifically crafted to attack Apple, or that it's purely about iOS vs Android. It's wider than that.

Whether the DMA is an effective solution to the concerns of the EU or not, only time will tell. All I know is I need to stop procrastinating and get on with some marking.

 

[Timo_Existencia]

you're acting like the DMA was specifically crafted to attack Apple, or that it's purely about iOS vs Android. It's wider than that.

I wholly believe that the DMA was specifically crafted with a very few specific companies in mind, and that specific clauses in the DMA were specifically crafted to hit specific companies. The EU knew who they were going after.

 

[Jim Lahey]

I wholly believe that the DMA was specifically crafted with a very few specific companies in mind, and that specific clauses in the DMA were specifically crafted to hit specific companies. The EU knew who they were going after.

Definitely agree with this. Next time I believe a politician will be the first. I suspect the endgame after seizing enough power is total user surveillance. Google and Microsoft probably sold us all down a river a long time ago in this regard, which leaves Apple as a major hurdle.

Informed opinion rather than fact, but there’s enough evidence out there to lend credence to the theory 👍

 

[dk001]

Definitely agree with this. Next time I believe a politician will be the first. I suspect the endgame after seizing enough power is total user surveillance. Google and Microsoft probably sold us all down a river a long time ago in this regard, which leaves Apple as a major hurdle.

Informed opinion rather than fact, but there’s enough evidence out there to lend credence to the theory 👍

Add @Timo_Existencia

That makes sense as the EU is generally reactionary. The EU saw a couple of companies with “Z” behavior and looked to see how broad this is amongst a certain class or scope of companies. Then they developed and implemented regulations/laws accordingly. DMA.

Apple has been selling or providing for a while now based on what I have seen since the CSAM debacle.

 

[Jim Lahey]

Add @Timo_Existencia

That makes sense as the EU is generally reactionary. The EU saw a couple of companies with “Z” behavior and looked to see how broad this is amongst a certain class or scope of companies. Then they developed and implemented regulations/laws accordingly. DMA.

Apple has been selling or providing for a while now based on what I have seen since the CSAM debacle.

Yeah the CSAM thing was the first warning shot across the bow that all may not be well with Apple. My issue at the time was that any state could later expand the scope to include memes and the like. See Ireland for further information, where the government (de facto EU) is trying to criminalise the mere possession of "hate speech" material. This in itself is obviously nebulous and can be expanded at any time to mean absolutely anything. Got a meme making fun of the current thing? JAIL. Then there's the UK who have already spoken of intent to demand that big tech companies submit software updates to them for approval. I would laugh if it wasn't so serious.

The intent of all this stuff is real. It's in the works right now. It's unknown to what extent Apple already does, or some day will comply, but the EU gaining ever more control over them will definitely not do any of us any good.

 

[Timpetus]

Malicious compliance is only possible with badly designed laws. Almost all laws are badly designed, because at this point they're hundreds of layers abstracted from basic ethical and moral principles.

 

[cupcakes2000]

Informative. Thanks. I am mentally preparing to potentially switch to a de-Googled Android should I choose to fully detach from my Life Invader account (Apple ID in my case).

Go and have a look at GrapheneOS. I use it along side my iPhone (iPhone - Mac - iPad for work, GrapheneOS and QubesOS for my stuff).

Anyway, GrapheneOS, I think you’ll appreciate it. It’s degoogled Android and ironically it only runs on a Google Pixel, but it’s super secure and really a lot of fun to play with. Very stable too. Worth a read up - as for me it’s the only viable alternative. I will never run any type of standard Android over an Apple device, but Apple are becoming more and more less like a company I’ll bet on in the future.

 

[Jim Lahey]

Go and have a look at GrapheneOS. I use it along side my iPhone (iPhone - Mac - iPad for work, GrapheneOS and QubesOS for my stuff).

Anyway, GrapheneOS, I think you’ll appreciate it. It’s degoogled Android and ironically it only runs on a Google Pixel, but it’s super secure and really a lot of fun to play with. Very stable too. Worth a read up - as for me it’s the only viable alternative. I will never run any type of standard Android over an Apple device, but Apple are becoming more and more less like a company I’ll bet on in the future.

More great info. Thanking you kindly. I share your sentiment and feel my trust in Apple slowly ebbing away. Particularly as they appear to be stonewalling the issue that some are having with Ventura force-updating to Sonoma.

 

[Jim Lahey]

https://reclaimthenet.org/privacy-companies-push-back-against-eu-plot-to-end-online-privacy

"Made public on January 22, 2024, this shared open letter argues that the EC’s draft provision known as “Chat Control,” mandating the comprehensive scanning of encrypted communications, may create cyber vulnerabilities that expose citizens and businesses to increased risk. Further inflating the issue, the letter also addresses a stalemate amongst member states, the EC, and the European Parliament, who haven’t yet reconciled differing views on the proportionality and feasibility of the EC’s mass-scanning strategy in addressing child safety concerns."

 

[haunt]

Good info, thanks.

 

[Jim Lahey]

https://www.macrumors.com/2024/01/30/apple-deeply-concerned-uk-surveillance-law/

 

[Abazigal]

Which is why I think the EU's ham-handed approach in the DMA is bad in several areas. (Some aspects of the DMA are great. Particularly around data collection.) The DMA doesn't recognize the benefits of the walled garden approach. It tries to cloak what it wants in confusing and counterproductive nonsense instead of identifying real issues and addressing them directly. Much like many posters here.

The reason for this is simple. The DMA is designed to benefit other businesses, not consumers. It's thinly-veiled protectionism. The EU is not going to acknowledge something they know won't help their case at all.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Your Rights to do with your house or computer are indeed restricted by law under the conditions of the sale. Computer manufacturer's license you to use hardware and software for restricted purposes (read your T&Cs and EULA. Houses can be restricted based on CC&Rs and on an ongoing basis by mandatory obligations to HOAs. So, you may wish your fundamental principle were true, but it isn‘t.

You are wrong to assume that the T&C and EULA can restrict my rights to do with my computer as I please. I have read my T&C and EULA, but i also know my EU legislation EU and Sweden consumer law where I live, and contrary to the you, I’m not bound by the U.S. legal jurisdiction, but to the statutory law and the codification we are in the EU legislation and national legislation which are based on the civil law tradition, which is the oldest and most widespread legal system in the world.

The civil law tradition is characterized by the use of legal codes, which are comprehensive and systematic collections of interrelated legal rules that cover all matters subject to legal regulation. The legal codes are the primary source of law in the civil law tradition, and the judges are bound by them. The judges have a limited role in interpreting and applying the law, and they do not create new law through their decisions. The legal code also emphasizes one of the key concepts in the civil law tradition is culpa in contrahendo, which means fault at the conclusion of a contract and the principle of pacta sunt servanda, which means that contracts must be honored and enforced by the law.

It means that the parties have a duty to disclose relevant information and act in good faith during the pre-contractual phase, which is the period of negotiations before the contract is formed. One pre-contractual disclosure obligation is the requirement to make the contract available to the user before concluding a contract.
If a party breaches this duty, it may be liable for damages or the contract may be invalidated.

An end-user license agreement (EULA) is a legal document that sets out the terms and conditions of using a software or service. According to the principle of culpa in contrahendo, a EULA must be made available to the user before concluding a contract. If the EULA is not shown to the user before the contract is formed, this constitutes a violation of culpa in contrahendo and renders the EULA invalid or unenforceable.

Therefore, users have the right to see and agree to the EULA before purchasing or downloading a software or service.​

The U.S. common law tradition, on the other hand, is characterized by the absence of legal codes, and the reliance on judicial decisions and does not recognize the principle of culpa in contrahendo, and does not impose a general duty of good faith and fair dealing on the parties during the pre-contractual phase. The U.S. applies the parol evidence rule, which excludes oral or written statements made before or at the time of the contract from affecting its interpretation.

The civil law tradition is more strict and regulated, and it protects the rights and interests of the users more than the providers. The U.S. law tradition is more flexible and liberal, and it protects the freedom and autonomy of the parties more than the law. Therefore, you cannot apply the U.S. legal tradition to EU, and you cannot claim that the T&C and EULA can restrict my rights to do with my computer when we aren’t even working under the same legal framework


And when you speak about HOAs(Homeowner association?) they don’t exist as a thing in EU as they seem to work in the US would be very illegal.
That would be something you purchase the right to live in a property ”Condominium”. You never own the “house” because you only purchase the right to live in the property.
EU equivalent to your HOAs are extremely weak in what they can actually do.

Claim you buy a house and also be legally required to follow the HOAs rules would be contradictory in terms

 

[Timpetus]

I haver actually been questioning the need for everything to be up in the cloud where its not in my house. Ripping thrift store CDs is cheaper than a music sub. Time Machine is still a really great way of backing up everything. This way all my data is on my property and I cannot get locked out of by a third party.

I've never bought into the cloud. I have my own media libraries backed up multiple places, served to me by my Mac Mini server running Plex. Every bit of data I have that matters to me is on my devices, either on my person/carried with me or at my house. I use Ubiquiti security cameras as the data is stored locally, no cloud ever touches my video and no ongoing subscription BS to use my cameras on my network.

Next step is going to be migrating my email away from google, because I have no trust in them whatsoever and gmail is really the last of their products I'm still using for any data I care about at the moment. Trying to decide whether to use iCloud mail or another provider...

 

[dk001]

I've never bought into the cloud. I have my own media libraries backed up multiple places, served to me by my Mac Mini server running Plex. Every bit of data I have that matters to me is on my devices, either on my person/carried with me or at my house. I use Ubiquiti security cameras as the data is stored locally, no cloud ever touches my video and no ongoing subscription BS to use my cameras on my network.

Next step is going to be migrating my email away from google, because I have no trust in them whatsoever and gmail is really the last of their products I'm still using for any data I care about at the moment. Trying to decide whether to use iCloud mail or another provider...

Just a thought but if you are worried about “oversight” I would choose an email service that is secure and not one from any of the big corps. Personally I went with Proton but there are a number of really safe/secure ones out there.