EU Asks iMessage Users and Rivals If Service Should Be Regulated

[Chazak]

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.

You are not forced to use any messaging platform. You choose to do so and you chose to do so with full knowledge of limitations and restrictions on whatever your choice was. "Forced" is a falsehood.

I would absolutely prefer a universal standard were adopted and think it is ridiculous of Apple to take the position they have so far. That said, regulators should absolutely stay out of it. It is a business decision Apple has made. It may come back to bite them on their rear end, but it is their choice. EU regulator are a plague that supports mediocrity and wishes to enshrine it in marketplace law.

 

[AlexESP]

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.

Of course they do. Then the EU could also regulate that the base iPhone 15 needs the A17 Pro, third camera and ProMotion because it would be the best for the consumer (we can agree on that). But regulating to benefit the user is a very shortsighted view of what “the best for the consumer” means.

Ah, and there’s not even a universal definition of what’s “the best for the costumer”. Because to me, that would be keeping Lightning, not USB-C.

 

[kc9hzn]

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.

RCS is as insecure as SMS/MMS. It does not have encryption, full stop. Google Messages has encryption but that’s a feature that they’ve bolted onto RCS and is only available if both users are using Google’s messaging service. People need to quit regurgitating this false talking point.

 

[Howyalikdemapls]

Messaging is so core to modern communication, that there should really be a modern secure facility that’s platform-independent and non-proprietary.

This thread is so different from the thread about Samsung wanting Apple to adopt RCS.

Personally I was surprised by the other thread at how much everyone was against Apple adopting RCS. I’m more in favor of having RCS as an option on iPhones than I am of opening up iMessage to Android and other platforms.

 

[5232152]

RCS is as insecure as SMS/MMS. It does not have encryption, full stop. Google Messages has encryption but that’s a feature that they’ve bolted onto RCS and is only available if both users are using Google’s messaging service. People need to quit regurgitating this false talking point.

I never mentioned RCS.

 

[kc9hzn]

This thread is so different from the thread about Samsung wanting Apple to adopt RCS.

Personally I was surprised by the other thread at how much everyone was against Apple adopting RCS. I’m more in favor of having RCS as an option on iPhones than I am of opening up iMessage to Android and other platforms.

Thing is, I agree with the text of the post you’re quoting, it’s just that I don’t feel that it describes RCS. RCS is not simultaneously modern and secure and platform-independent and non-proprietary. If you want security, you sacrifice non-proprietary. If you want modern features, you have to use Google’s proprietary implementation of/on RCS.

 

[@Brett]

Straight up get lost EU. Bigger things going on in the world. Many on your doorstep. Fix them. Messaging on iPhone is not broken. Sounds like Google may have been doing some lobbying. If you want to make RCS a default standard you need to go after the carriers. Because Google’s RCS is not a standard.

 

[kc9hzn]

I never mentioned RCS.

In that case, we’re probably more in agreement, then. An open secure standard would be great. RCS isn’t that, but people persist in claiming that it is. You didn’t mention RCS, but it echoed popular talking points for RCS, which lead me to believe that you were an RCS advocate.

 

[unrigestered]

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.

No one is forcing you to use something else. But if the system tools alone don’t satisfy your needs, you can readily install everything you like. Most professional photographers are probably using something else than Apple photos and Preview, musicians often something else than GarageBand, which shouldn’t stop anyone else from using those stock tools. And of course there’s nothing wrong in using these even by professionals on the right occasion

 

[Sophisticatednut]

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?

Well no a dominant position is not in itself an infringement of EU competition law, and the holders of such positions are allowed to compete on merit, like any other company.

You can have a dominant position at 5% marketshare or 99% marketshare. As long as you aren’t abusing it you are completely fine.

If you want more you can read here :

Competition rules

Check EU rules on cartels, mergers and state aid, antitrust cases, how to report anti-competitive behaviour, find competition cases.

commission.europa.eu

Examples of behaviour that may amount to an abuse include: requiring buyers to purchase all units of a particular product only from the dominant company (exclusive purchasing); setting prices at a loss-making level (predation or predatory pricing); refusing to supply input indispensable for competition in an ancillary market, and charging excessive prices.

 

[5232152]

No one is forcing you to use something else. But if the system tools alone don’t satisfy your needs, you can readily install everything you like. Most professional photographers are probably using something else than Apple photos and Preview, musicians often something else than GarageBand, which shouldn’t stop anyone else from using those stock tools. And of course there’s nothing wrong in using these even by professionals on the right occasion

Your logic is American and won't hold up in the EU. Apple has indicated that Android users are secondary the entire time iMessage has been around. Hard to deny. On top of that, Apple has refused to help develop, discuss, or adopt any kind of security protocols that go outside its own monopoly as a way to force more consumers to make a choice that has nothing to do with Apple but with the people they communicate with.
Why you fearless want to defend a trillion-dollar company that does not care about you makes little to no sense to me.

 

[DoogH]

I love iMessage and its features. But today's lack of compatibility with non-Apple devices is not ideal. I'm glad they are looking into it. And I'm also glad they are not forcing change without proper research. Hurray! (so far)

Agree. I don’t understand how the consumer benefits from the platform being closed?

I suppose it makes Apple less willing to improve the feature, because there is less potential for a competitive advantage.

But on the other hand, they’ll have to compete with other messaging services more explicitly.

 

[GalileoSeven]

USB-C was one thing. This is entirely different. EU Bureaucrats needs to wake up and realize that iMessage is a bit player and most folks in EU countries have been using different services for a longggggg time now.

They're just trying to squeeze more money out of Apple at this point.

 

[unrigestered]

Your logic is American and won't hold up in the EU. Apple has indicated that Android users are secondary the entire time iMessage has been around. Hard to deny. On top of that, Apple has refused to help develop, discuss, or adopt any kind of security protocols that go outside its own monopoly as a way to force more consumers to make a choice that has nothing to do with Apple but with the people they communicate with.
Why you fearless want to defend a trillion-dollar company that does not care about you makes little to no sense to me.

I don’t want to defend a multi trillion dollar company, but i don’t think people will benefit too much, as they can always choose the services they like.
I’m not a programmer, but some tacked on interoperability will result in a mess and possibly will open more doors for vulnerabilities to be exploited for everyone involved instead of closing them, except for maybe Google, who will walk away even more empowered than ever before, thanks to people who think that this is a good idea.

And I’m European btw

 

[Naraxus]

I love iMessage but enough is enough there should be integration with other non iPhone users. It’s annoying to me when I can’t sent proper media to my green friends.

Phil Schiller did not suggest opening it up at one point? It doesn’t sound like Apple can’t but won’t.

Tough. Either get your friends iOS devices, get an Android device or suck it up and deal with the green messages.

Apple is under no obligation to cater to you or anyone else pouting over message incompatability.

 

[Gudi]

I never mentioned RCS.

Neither did the EU commission. Apple could easily increase interoperability and competition by releasing an iMessage app for Android.

EU spares Apple from mandatory RCS, for now

 

[Naraxus]

On top of that, Apple has refused to help develop, discuss, or adopt any kind of security protocols that go outside its own monopoly as a way to force more consumers to make a choice that has nothing to do with Apple but with the people they communicate with..

First, there is no message monopoly and secondly, Apple is under no obligation to cater to those who are not their customers.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

First, there is no message monopoly and secondly, Apple is under no obligation to cater to those who are not their customers.

1: EU don’t care about monopoly
2: nobody said anything about monopolies.
3: Apple is under legal obligations to follow the law.
4: They asked to be excepted from the requirements and EU is looking in to the legitimacy to that request

 

[Gudi]

Apple is under no obligation to cater to you or anyone else pouting over message incompatability.

Yes, they are obliged by law:

Digital Markets Act: Ensuring fair and open digital markets*

Examples of changes that gatekeepers will have to implement include ensuring end users can easily uninstall pre-installed applications or stop the installation of applications by default and provide for choice. On the other side, gatekeepers will need to ensure that business users can get access to performance data about advertising campaigns and ad pricing information, allow developers to use alternative in-app payment systems and provide for interoperability options for messenger systems.

 

[Naraxus]

Yes, they are obliged by law:

Digital Markets Act: Ensuring fair and open digital markets*

Examples of changes that gatekeepers will have to implement include ensuring end users can easily uninstall pre-installed applications or stop the installation of applications by default and provide for choice. On the other side, gatekeepers will need to ensure that business users can get access to performance data about advertising campaigns and ad pricing information, allow developers to use alternative in-app payment systems and provide for interoperability options for messenger systems.

No they are not. At least not at this point in time. Down the road then yes but as current, they're not classified as a "Gatekeeper"

 

[Sophisticatednut]

No they are not. At least not at this point in time. Down the road then yes but as current, they're not classified as a "Gatekeeper"

They are classified as gatekeepers: they are just currently under investigation to see if iMessage should be excluded and the requirements are paused until the investigation is done within 5months.

 

[AndiG]

Short answer? The EU should kill this piece of 💩. The only reason why Apple doesn‘t integrate RCS is fear. The fear that parents will give their children some cheaper Android phones.

This is at least what Apple says
https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/9/2...-lock-in-epic-games-filings-app-store-dispute

 

[trusso]

Just because I like the Mac doesn't mean I think Apple should hoard all its goodies to itself. If the C-suite truly cared about security, privacy and empowering people, they would make iMessage (and perhaps even macOS) available to the masses.

Apple makes a killing on their hardware, but it's their software (bugs notwithstanding) that are their Crown Jewels. Just imagine a world where macOS (with its Unix and NeXTSTEP underpinnings) held the marketshare of Windows.

But Apple chooses to be selfish.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

EU Regulators to EU Carriers: Please adopt RCS at the carrier to provide interoperability!
EU Carriers: <Appropriate language response that effectively means “get bent”.>
EU Regulators: Oh, right, as EU Regulators we only regulate non-EU companies, sorry!

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Short answer? The EU should kill this piece of 💩. The only reason why Apple doesn‘t integrate RCS is fear. The fear that parents will give their children some cheaper Android phones.

This is at least what Apple says
https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/9/2...-lock-in-epic-games-filings-app-store-dispute

Simple solution is to just require all EU carriers to adopt RCS. Sure, those carriers will have to pay to have their infrastructure updated for no financial benefit, but EU regulators don’t exists to make sure that what they’re requesting is financially viable.