EU Chief Calls on Apple CEO Tim Cook to Open Hardware and Software Ecosystem

[bcortens]

I don’t see anything wrong with forcing developers to make apps available for all platforms if it prevents one platform from being able to gatekeep certain apps.

Sounds like we need to nationalise these operating systems since competition has failed.

Why? Nationalizing something is usually done only when it doesn't make sense to try and operate it based on a profit motive. Simply nationalizing things because there is only one or two of them is a weird criteria that isn't used by any European democracy that I know of.

Forcing developers to make their apps for all platforms is bad in one primary way (and many secondary ways), it makes it much more difficult to enter the app development market. Right now a single person can build an app for either iOS or Android and have some small success at it. Requiring them to support two platforms would force them to hire additional staff or slow them down and make them less competitive vs larger teams.

 

[mrochester]

It doesn't matter that it's only available on iPhones, it's about the portion of the mobile OS market and the fact there is only one other major player. As such, both would/could be required to follow the same laws.

If there were more competitors to iOS and android I'd say there's a good chance both would have a smaller portion of the market and therefore no further action would be required.

 

[mrochester]

Why? Nationalizing something is usually done only when it doesn't make sense to try and operate it based on a profit motive. Simply nationalizing things because there is only one or two of them is a weird criteria that isn't used by any European democracy that I know of.

Forcing developers to make their apps for all platforms is bad in one primary way (and many secondary ways), it makes it much more difficult to enter the app development market. Right now a single person can build an app for either iOS or Android and have some small success at it. Requiring them to support two platforms would force them to hire additional staff or slow them down and make them less competitive vs larger teams.

Something has to be done to create more competition. That seems to be what the EU want to do.

 

[bcortens]

Something has to be done to create more competition. That seems to be what the EU want to do.

Short of forcing Microsoft, Meta, or Amazon to enter the OS market there is nothing that can realistically be done to create more OS competition. Since this creating more OS competition is an extremely difficult problem with no feasible solutions the EU has taken the more reasonable approach of regulating what the different OS makers can do with their dominant position.

If Apple didn't want to be regulated in this way they should have behaved more ethically. They could have made the App Store more permissive w.r.t. payment processing and competition with built in system utilities but they didn't. They could have actually made sure the App Store was free of scam apps and predatory behaviour but they didn't. Instead they treat the App Store as a revenue centre and then obfuscate with the public and utilities and make it all out to be about privacy and security when it clearly isn't.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

Only an idiot of the highest order would pee on the electric fence twice.😤

I tried that once and quite liked it. It gave me a nice tingly feeling. I no longer need to tweeze my nether region. It's all gone now, permanently.

 

[mcnallym]

Good question, one for the regulators to tackle. We certainly have a distinct lack of anyone trying, so it indicates there is a problem.

So should they not also be tackling Pepsi and Coca-Cola as don't they have a dominant position in the Cola market.
Don't see anyone else trying to enter the Cola market.

Just because someone is not trying does not mean that there is an issue that requires regulation.

 

[mcnallym]

Short of forcing Microsoft, Meta, or Amazon to enter the OS market there is nothing that can realistically be done to create more OS competition. Since this creating more OS competition is an extremely difficult problem with no feasible solutions the EU has taken the more reasonable approach of regulating what the different OS makers can do with their dominant position.

If Apple didn't want to be regulated in this way they should have behaved more ethically. They could have made the App Store more permissive w.r.t. payment processing and competition with built in system utilities but they didn't. They could have actually made sure the App Store was free of scam apps and predatory behaviour but they didn't. Instead they treat the App Store as a revenue centre and then obfuscate with the public and utilities and make it all out to be about privacy and security when it clearly isn't.

And at that point you are trying to define a single product as in iPhone as a distinct separate market, and thus requiring competition within a single product, as opposed to iPhone being part of a larger Mobile Phone Market.

 

[mcnallym]

I very much agree that forcing Google to divest Android would be beneficial to the market. I don’t see the same benefit from forcing Apple to divest iOS since iOS is self-limiting by only being available on Apple hardware.

iOS would just sell itself back to Apple again so there’d be no difference there.

But if Android had to start charging a license fee because it couldn’t be subsidised by Google’s advertising business, I think that would generate an opening in which competition could thrive.

That is not going to give someone else the resources required to develop and market and get user acceptance of a new mobile platform. Which is the actual issue for someone attempting to get into the mobile phone market.

You need developers to actually develop the OS
You need developers to develop the hardware for it to run on
You then need independent developers to sign up to develop for the platform for which they have to be convinced that is worth there investment.

None of that would be achieved by separating Android from Google or iOS from Apple.

There are many mobile phone such as Samsung, Xiaomi, Honor, even Nokia on top of Google itself that developed handsets for Android. So the license fee would increase the cost to them but wouldn't make it any cheaper for Samsung to start developing a seperate independent Mobile OS and persuade developers to do apps for there new OS.

 

[mcnallym]

It's not about the smartphone market, it's about the mobile OS market with Apple (iOS) and Google (Android) being the only two major players. One thing that may be somewhat comparable in the automotive world related to tech would be telematics and if CarPlay and Android Auto somehow became the only two major players in that space, it possibly could raise regulatory issues but we're not there and may never be. We are there in the mobile OS market.

How is the Smartphone market different. iPhone and Android Phones ARE smartphones.

 

[mcnallym]

I don’t see anything wrong with forcing developers to make apps available for all platforms if it prevents one platform from being able to gatekeep certain apps.

Sounds like we need to nationalise these operating systems since competition has failed.

Might work in China or North Korea but not in Europe.

There is nothing in App Store for either Android or iOS that they can only develop for the one platform, so if developers are only developing for iOS or Android with there App then is because they don't have the resources required or don't believe will make a Return on Investment.

Should regulators now subsidise the developers to cover costs of developing for additional platforms? if the developers don't believe worth developing for other platforms.

 

[I7guy]

It's not about the smartphone market, it's about the mobile OS market with Apple (iOS) and Google (Android) being the only two major players. One thing that may be somewhat comparable in the automotive world related to tech would be telematics and if CarPlay and Android Auto somehow became the only two major players in that space, it possibly could raise regulatory issues but we're not there and may never be. We are there in the mobile OS market.

Thus far there are no overall regulatory issues. Of course you can pick the universe of your benchmark but in the US apples business model is still standing.

 

[I7guy]

Doesn’t matter to the market regulations in the EU… the US judicial system is pretty bad at preventing predatory behaviours and market abuse so I wouldn’t use it as an exemplar of sound decision making.


Yes - but what regulation could possibly lower them? You can’t change history and any company that has had 15 years to invest in their platform is going to be at an advantage over a startup. You shouldn’t be able to force developers to build their apps for platforms they don’t want to. What regulation could you actually use to lower those barriers?

Microsoft has a dominant position in the desktop market and it is nearly impossible for a new OS to gain significant market share. The steam deck has a niche but it really is more of a gaming console than a proper desktop OS. macOS has a small but profitable share but has never been able to claw much more (this is half on Apple though since they don’t care to compete at the low end).

The barriers to entry are always going to be high or near impossible in some markets - and in those markets the companies that control the market should be regulated. Electricity distribution is another market that the barrier to entry is too high to actually expect competition to occur.

In markets where the barrier to entry is too high for regulation to address the companies that control the market get regulated to ensure a healthy market.

When pure competition fails due to every reason other than monopolistic actions regulating the market is the EU way.

 

[bcortens]

And at that point you are trying to define a single product as in iPhone as a distinct separate market, and thus requiring competition within a single product, as opposed to iPhone being part of a larger Mobile Phone Market.

Thus far there are no overall regulatory issues. Of course you can pick the universe of your benchmark but in the US apples business model is still standing.

In the EU there are regulatory issues, the US market is irrelevant to whether or not the EU finds these companies in non-compliance with their anti-trust laws. The mobile app market is the market in question, not the phone market, not the OS market. The mobile app market has two dominant forces (Apple and Google) which limit how users can buy apps and how developers can sell into the market and the EU has determined that these two forces are abusing their position and harming competition, hence the regulation.

 

[mrochester]

Short of forcing Microsoft, Meta, or Amazon to enter the OS market there is nothing that can realistically be done to create more OS competition. Since this creating more OS competition is an extremely difficult problem with no feasible solutions the EU has taken the more reasonable approach of regulating what the different OS makers can do with their dominant position.

If Apple didn't want to be regulated in this way they should have behaved more ethically. They could have made the App Store more permissive w.r.t. payment processing and competition with built in system utilities but they didn't. They could have actually made sure the App Store was free of scam apps and predatory behaviour but they didn't. Instead they treat the App Store as a revenue centre and then obfuscate with the public and utilities and make it all out to be about privacy and security when it clearly isn't.

But if the OS market were competitive none of that would matter.

 

[bcortens]

But if the OS market were competitive none of that would matter.

But it isn't and there are no feasible regulatory paths to making it competitive so it's kind of a moot point.

 

[mrochester]

But it isn't and there are no feasible regulatory paths to making it competitive so it's kind of a moot point.

Great so let’s just accept no competition!

 

[bcortens]

Great so let’s just accept no competition!

One of the aims of this set EU regulations is to make Apple and Google have to compete with each other by taking away some of their lock in power. Again, you cannot force a market to support a wide variety of competitors (the OS market) but you can regulate a market if you believe some people are taking advantage of their market to stifle competition.

 

[mrochester]

One of the aims of this set EU regulations is to make Apple and Google have to compete with each other by taking away some of their lock in power. Again, you cannot force a market to support a wide variety of competitors (the OS market) but you can regulate a market if you believe some people are taking advantage of their market to stifle competition.

But that’s pointless because none of that achieves what we actually need, which is more competition at the OS level. People switching from Android to iOS and vice versa does not create any less of a duopoly.

 

[bcortens]

But that’s pointless because none of that achieves what we actually need, which is more competition at the OS level. People switching from Android to iOS and vice versa does not create any less of a duopoly.

Why is that what we actually need? As I have tried to make clear, the EU can use regulations to create more competitive markets when there are large dominant players that are abusing their position. The EU cannot create new players in a market by fiat declaration, no one can. The EU can only lower barriers caused by bad corporate behaviour they cannot lower barriers that amount to things like "time has passed".

Another thing that isn't clear is why you want more OS players, the argument you're making seems to be that if we had more OS choice then the App Store lock in and abuse would be just fine and nothing to worry about. However there is nothing to say that the market couldn't end up just being iOS - 40% Android - 40% then a bunch of companies with 5% each, then App Store lock in and abuse would be just as big of a problem as it is today.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

Break them up.

 

[webkit]

If there were more competitors to iOS and android I'd say there's a good chance both would have a smaller portion of the market and therefore no further action would be required.

And, again, one way to potentially achieve that would be to have Android split off from Google and iOS split off from Apple and force both to have to "fend for themselves" more which might put other companies in a better position to want to come into the mobile OS market although the costs and risk are still high.

 

[webkit]

How is the Smartphone market different. iPhone and Android Phones ARE smartphones.

No. iPhones are smartphones but Android is a mobile operating system like iOS.

 

[webkit]

Thus far there are no overall regulatory issues. Of course you can pick the universe of your benchmark but in the US apples business model is still standing.

Just because there may or may not have been anything officially charged doesn't mean there are no regulatory issues. Each country has its own laws and enforcement policies. This article happens to be about the EU but the U.S. and some states have also been investigating Apple for a while and may individually or collectively file formal lawsuits against them within the next year or so. The law, especially at the federal/country levels, can move quite slowly.

 

[I7guy]

In the EU there are regulatory issues, the US market is irrelevant to whether or not the EU finds these companies in non-compliance with their anti-trust laws. The mobile app market is the market in question, not the phone market, not the OS market. The mobile app market has two dominant forces (Apple and Google) which limit how users can buy apps and how developers can sell into the market and the EU has determined that these two forces are abusing their position and harming competition, hence the regulation.

Yep. The EU couldn’t get apple in anti trust, so they threaded the needle to come out with a set of regulations with parameters that ensarenap.

 

[I7guy]

Just because there may or may not have been anything officially charged doesn't mean there are no regulatory issues. Each country has its own laws and enforcement policies. This article happens to be about the EU but the U.S. and some states have also been investigating Apple for a while and may individually or collectively file formal lawsuits against them within the next year or so. The law, especially at the federal/country levels, can move quite slowly.

I’ve never heard of a Fortune 500 country without one single regulatory issue, it’s the nature of the beast. It’s not all or nothing. Sure and since were in the team of hypotheticals apple may win these hypothetical lawsuits or it may lose.