Well, that's what happens when it is an emotional response and not a principled response.
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.
EU Asks iMessage Users and Rivals If Service Should Be Regulated
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A trillian-like app would be cool. You could still use iMessage but then connect other services like whatsapp and things and they all just kind of show up within the Messages app. A message thread would have that app's icon or a different color to differentiate what service you're messaging someone on. You could link services to Contacts in the Contacts app and then choose which service to message with when messaging them. iMessage would still be separate but it'd be like a central hub to send messages for any service, sort of like how email lets you email via any service. I don't see the need to open iMessage itself to other services though, every person has the choice of what service to use for messaging be it Telegram, WhatsApp, or whatever. Of course this is just a pipe dream. Companies like meta would never allow it because they wouldn't have access to track you like they do now...
If Apple banned all non-iMessage messaging apps from the App Store, then I could see it being a monopoly but users definitely have a choice. If SMS isn't working that great between iPhones and Android, use a different app.
And it isn't working. It's an effort. Ergo, there is no lock in.
If it weren't for the EU, we wouldn't have USB-C on our iPhones.
Apple will always make decisions that enhance their profitability even if they're not best for the consumer.
Why don't they make themselves useful and "investigate" and "collect data" about companies that sell devices without including chargers for those devices?
But, by that same logic, don’t governments make decisions that they feel enhance their powers, even if they’re not best for the citizen? Should we expect governments to be the one altruistic force in society, especially given the 20th Century’s numerous examples of abusive regimes that displaced democratically elected regimes? Governments have an incentive to appear to be on consumers’ side, but they aren’t necessarily. And if pro-consumer comes at the expense of state power, you’d have to be delusional to think they’d take the pro-consumer perspective. But, as long as they can appear to be on the consumer’s side by bullying market enterprises, they will. Much of the responsibility for currently high rates of inflation rest solely on the shoulders of central banks, but they’ll gladly scapegoat businesses for raising prices (to reflect the devaluation of currency the central banks performed).
Some iMessage is considered a minority player in the EU it should be exempted…or maybe apple will just pull it.
It's time for all the major tech companies to just exit the European markets.
The revenue is not worth the cost of compliance, and the regulatory fines when the CNIL decides "No, actually you aren't in compliance, because we changed how we interpret it."
The revenue is not worth the cost of compliance, and the regulatory fines when the CNIL decides "No, actually you aren't in compliance, because we changed how we interpret it."
Ultimately, regulations are capricious, much like tax rates. Because they’re unilaterally imposed by the state, and your only recourse if you don’t agree is to launch an appeal with the same body that set the regulations/tax rate in the first place. There is no rule of law in such a system since the rules can be changed with little to no notice and with minimal oversight. It amuses me how people defend technocracy as being democratic when technocracy is all about restricting the power of the demos and privileging perceived experts at the expense of normal everyday people.
Apple is right on this one. iMessage is not a market and doesn't hinder anybody to communicate with whom he wants. WhatsApp is a horrible platform infested by scammers. Being distinct from that is a benefit of using iMessage. This gate should be kept closed.
We also have independent courts, who interpret the laws and their application. That's why Apple could object the classification of iMessage as a gatekeeper and the EU commission is asking companies whether they indeed do rely on iMessage for their business? You know, the separation of powers, checks and balances. I don't know if they still teach them in Brexitannia. ⚖️
We’ll iMessage might not be doing that completely,
But the Commission defines the product market and the geographic market.
- Product market: the relevant product market is made of all products/services which the consumer considers to be a substitute for each other due to their characteristics, their prices and their intended use.
- Geographic market: the relevant geographic market is an area in which the conditions of competition for a given product are homogenous.
The important part is the large extent acting independently from pressure from competition and consumers.
I just listed the legal requirement as a monopoly isn’t criminal. Just as an example small company in EU who had a small market share but was considered abusing its position and anti-competitive is as follows:
Well EU agrees that WhatsApp or messenger etc is preventing effective competition. Hence the point of this law.
Considering that outside of North America, iMessage use is a tiny number compared to WhatsApp which by far dominates everywhere else, it seems like another misguided EU regulatory action.
If anything, they should be all over Meta. Pursuing Apple over this is rather pathetic when there are plenty of other issues with Apple that actually have some meat on their bones.
No need to wonder why most people view EU regulators as a group determined to punish success and support mediocrity. This is just another demonstration of their commitment to do so.
If anything, they should be all over Meta. Pursuing Apple over this is rather pathetic when there are plenty of other issues with Apple that actually have some meat on their bones.
No need to wonder why most people view EU regulators as a group determined to punish success and support mediocrity. This is just another demonstration of their commitment to do so.
The carriers only want RCS to succeed as long as they don't have to maintain it.
That seems potentially overly broad. Look at Spotify’s podcast exclusivity, signing in demand hosts arguably gives it power to behave independently of its competitors. Any sort of blue ocean effort would also “behave to an appreciable extent independently of its competitors”, as that’s the whole idea of disruptive innovation. Is it any wonder the EU tech scene is so stagnant?
I do think cross-app messaging or sideloading have direct negative impact on end users, but let’s take one step back to the root point.
Even if the only reason is “profit” (I think it’s a necessary part of the reason), we need to defend what we believe. And I think regulation is justified in cases like safety, data protection, etc. but otherwise it’s harmful. It will have indirect negative impact on end users, because who is going to build a great company and think about good ideas if the return is this?
But I don’t even want to highlight that utilitarian point: I’m “up in arms” because I defend some people who have put the effort to create a great app many people love, with a business model in mind, and some regulator body comes to bring it down without a critical reason.
Last edited:
So, by your logic, I am forced to use a third-party app because Apple refuses to keep up with global security standards. Yeah, no.
Unlike Americans? Sorry Nicolas, but that simply is not a correct statement at all.