Its Apples product so they design it they make the OS for it its their product. if it ever goes that far that the goverment dictates what OS u have to put on the Device u make thant that has become a Dictatorship. Already forcing Apple to use USB C on the iPhone is ********. since when can the government tell al company how to design their devices? The government should only make sure the company doesn't pollute the environment producing the products. Even forcing ever manufacture to adopt USBC will pollute the environment extremely cause everyone will trow now away their other cables and have to buy new cables all at ones
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.
Other What if regulators push for an iPhone without iOS?
- Thread starter Jarutais
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Will the government accept responsibility for devices subject to hacking and loss of private information and money if they come from software forced upon devices by their regulations - no way they will. They will cause problems but take no responsibility for those problems.
Your creative edit of my statements and presenting them as you did takes away the context. Two different statements. Hence the two paragraphs.
I think that regulators have got a bit up their own asses when it comes to this stuff, and frankly I think the EU in specific is mostly just salty that the mobile phone market ended up being dominated by American, Korean, and Chinese companies. You can bet that if Apple was German or French they would be more than happy to look the other way (just look at how they ignored emissions cheating by European car manufacturers).
That being said, I also wouldn't care if other OS's could be run on iPhones or whatever. I dual booted my old MacBook with OS X and Windows 7 for years. It was nice to be able to do so. I hope that dual booting MacOS and Windows eventually becomes possible on Apple Silicon. I just don't think any regulator should force something like it.
The problem that hardware platforms built on Apple Silicon (as opposed to something like Intel) is that Apple isn't just using ARM64; it's using highly customized ARM64. So, dual-booting with Android isn't an easy task.
That said, would I love Apple to, perhaps under a different name, design, engineer, and produce an Android phone? Absolutely! I'd buy that thing day one just out of curiosity! And also because I believe that the more players trying to make a really nice Android experience, the merrier (it can't all be just Google and OnePlus).
But you're not going to see iPhones as they are running Android. That would require Apple to engineer their own version of Android, which wouldn't really accomplish anything.
Do you have a source for that? As far as I'm aware the ARM license doesn't allow you to change the instruction set much, if at all. The challenge would be everything surrounding the actual processor cores.
What Apple could do to strengthen the ARM ecosystem, in which they are heavily invested, against RISC-V is to work with the Raspberry Pi foundation to make a Raspberry Pi SoC with Apple processor cores.
There is no “Europe”. The European countries are very different. I use iMessage all the time here in Denmark. Of course, since I’m not a child, I also don’t care about colors of bubbles.
The fact any government can force any of this is a problem. USB-C will be obsolete and everyone can enjoy being stuck with it in 2098. Government is quick to pass laws but immovable objects when it comes time to update them. People will come to regret this crap.
They should all be forced to allow Linux to be installed and have to put some resources toward making that option available to all with no proprietary stuff - all open source.
We all rely on our phones for daily life, that only two commercial options being available should be illegal!
We need that third option to keep things honest if Google and Apple start to take advantage of their positions. I have a Linux phone - it’s a Pinephone sitting on my bed. I think one person in the world is currently working on the Kernel part time now. I’m all for forcing both big tech companies to give us that third open source option!
We all rely on our phones for daily life, that only two commercial options being available should be illegal!
We need that third option to keep things honest if Google and Apple start to take advantage of their positions. I have a Linux phone - it’s a Pinephone sitting on my bed. I think one person in the world is currently working on the Kernel part time now. I’m all for forcing both big tech companies to give us that third open source option!
This whole discussion kinda silly, but the government should not be mandating what OS a device has to you. Why Linux, and not FreeBSD, or or windows, or some flavor Unix? What version open-source? GPL, MIT, BSD, etc.?
I'm not even a fan of the GPL open source license and prefer BSD. None of this "should be illegal".
As for daily life. My MacBook is vastly more important than my iPhone.
Your digital life will soon be a right. Two operating systems running it all for a profit does not fit this right…
I didn't say there should be only two OSs. I said the government shouldn't decide what OS, such as Linux as you suggested, said phones should be able to run.
I'm more concerned about in-person rights than online. And no, online access won't be a right in the US for years, if ever.
In addition, you don't need a phone, at all, to be online. My computer gets more online time than my iPhone ever has.
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackberry had the third and it’s gone due to “business”. What happens if Apple goes the same way?
Governments will step in to protect its citizens. We need a global OS with apps to ensure continuity of our daily lives. Only governments can do this now. Maybe the United Nations also
The United Nations has zero authority and aren't able to do anything that a country doesn't allow. They aren't a world government; there is no such thing.
You want a global OS? Use a computer. They are infinitely more useful and important than mobile phones.
Online access, in the US, is not a right.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Apple/Google duopoly alone is not necessarily the (legal) issue, it's that plus the potential anticompetitive behavior such as restricting alternative app stores, alternative browser engines, sideloading, etc. Regulators are addressing these types of activities but I doubt they would also move to require the availability of different/other operating systems on each phone.
It's not going to happen in the US for years, if ever. At best, it's a generation (25ish) years away.
The balkanization of the internet is already happening. Within a few years, you might see countries start to voluntarliy disconnect from the global internet.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow... there's a little too much heat in here. Can we all cool it down a little?
https://www.imore.com/mac-moving-apple-silicon-not-arm <--- This one covers it well. There are others, but this one explains it decently.
You're not going to see Apple's processor cores running on anything that isn't an Apple Silicon SoC. And you won't see an Apple Silicon SoC in anything that isn't Apple branded hardware.
A well-written article, thanks. And I'm not really expecting Apple to license or sell their processor cores or entire chip designs to anybody or do anything else to strengthen the ARM ecosystem. Just daydreaming about an A16 powered Raspberry Pi. Would make a nice small Minecraft server.