Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Acquiring SigScalr

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster


Apple-Event-Logo.jpeg
In March, Apple informed the EU that it had agreed to acquire certain assets and hire employees from SigScalr, according to a notice published today on the European Commission's website.

SigScalr created the open-source observability platform SigLens, which companies can use to aggregate and analyze logs, metrics, and traces at massive scales for monitoring and debugging purposes. SigLens was known for being a cost-effective and fast solution compared to many competing platforms.

Article Link: Apple Acquiring SigScalr
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2026/07/13/apple-acquires-sigscalr-assets/
  • Angry
Reactions: Z-4195
MacRumors said:
​
In March, Apple informed the EU that it had agreed to acquire certain assets and hire employees from SigScalr, according to a notice published today on the European Commission's website.
Click to expand...

“Certain asserts” means they are not acquiring the company . There is likely some subset ‘tool’ in set of solutions/‘tools’ that the company has .

Decent chance Apple wants to ‘fork’ some tool and are picking up developer(s) closest associated with the tool.
Or it is a tool that sigScalr was considering phasing out or walking away from , but Apple likes it .


There are a number of Apple acquires non-exclusive license entries on that EU commission link also , if take some open source code private then pragmatically about the same thing .


This is VASTLY distant from anything that would get anywhere near the monopoly/antitrust zone .
 
  • Like
Reactions: T'hain Esh Kelch and Samplasion
knappeduivel said:
Monopoly is usually about market dominance, not assets and employees.
Click to expand...
Usually doesn’t apply to the EU. 🙂

In the EU Apple only has a monopoly over products/services that contain their trademarked names (in other regions, referred to as “products/services made by that company”. Which is why “gatekeeper” was invented… to deal with the “problem” of there being legal method in existence at the time that would allow them to punish Apple for the crime of “having made successful things that their citizens wanted to buy.”
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: extrachrispy, psingh01, SFjohn and 1 other person
Let's hope this is what makes Apple resolve years old bugs because user feedback clearly hasn't. Although the Dark Sky acquisition didn't make Apple Weather better.
 
Good to know. Think this will have no role in the consumer side of business and will be used only internally within Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mganu
Unregistered 4U said:
Usually doesn’t apply to the EU. 🙂

In the EU Apple only has a monopoly over products/services that contain their trademarked names (in other regions, referred to as “products/services made by that company”. Which is why “gatekeeper” was invented…
Click to expand...

Gatekeeper stats has criteria more than it is just a service . The scale of the deployment of the serves is a major factor ; not that you have a service that has a trademarked name .


“
There are three main quantitative criteria that create the presumption that a company is a gatekeeper as defined in the DMA: (i) when the company achieves a certain annual turnover in the European Economic Area and it provides a core platform service in at least three EU Member States;(ii) when the company provides a core platform service to more than 45 million monthly active end users established or located in the EU and to more than 10,000 yearly active business users established in the EU; and (iii) when the company met the second criterion during the last three years. .”

ec.europa.eu

Digital Markets Act: Commission designates six gatekeepers

The European Commission has today designated, for the first time, six gatekeepers, under the Digital Markets Act (DMA).
ec.europa.eu ec.europa.eu

Unregistered 4U said:
to deal with the “problem” of there being legal method in existence at the time that would allow them to punish Apple for the crime of “having made successful things that their citizens wanted to buy.”
Click to expand...

Safari on iOS is in part so dominantly successful because Apple does allow anything but the core of Safari (WebKit) on iOS at all.

It is rules banning options that it is a tool for .

P.S. the EU is a bit too vague and slippery slope expansive . The internal to the core services of an operating system … more option completion there is kind of silly. The balance of security impacts to ensbke a vendor frenzy at that level is dubious. This gatekeeper thing is a bit too siloed from the privacy and I’d protection rules that also need to be balanced against. And the fines are large enough to be abused as revenue seeking device .
 
Last edited:
canadianreader said:
Instead of contributing to the open source code Apple chose to make it proprietary.
Click to expand...
SigLens is archived as open source: https://github.com/siglens/siglens and anyone is welcome to use what exists. It was released under the Apache 2.0 license, which allows others to fork and build on it. If Apple uses it to make improvement on the code and Apple's products/services, that's something Apple is allowed to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
I don't know which Apple Exec has been reading my comments but I want to say thanks for listening. You essentially done everything I've beens saying Apple needs to do to for the past several years.
 
deconstruct60 said:
Gatekeeper stats has criteria more than it is just a service . The scale of the deployment of the serves is a major factor ; not that you have a service that has a trademarked name .
Click to expand...
One must remember that “gatekeeper” ONLY exists because the companies involved (and many millions of other smaller businesses) were following the complex legal structure of the region so well, that there was nothing they could do. The quantitative criteria didn’t arise from an exhaustive analysis into what problems existed, a deep understanding of the source of those problems and then reasoned steps which would apply to all companies regardless of size to ensure the situation didn’t recur. It was rushed legislation (faster than the GDPR) focused on ensuring those companies labeled “gatekeepers” were punished. They looked at the market size of those companies, spent several iterations crafting and re-crafting the numbers so that they perfectly matched the companies they wanted to impact (and still missed the iPad) and left out entire markets in order to avoid anyone in the EU rejecting it OR making it take longer to pass (didn’t want anyone paying too much attention to “at least three EU Member States” because they might have realized that it was so France and Germany didn’t fight too hard against it!).

I understand what they SAID the DMA and “gatekeepers” were for (and Vestager said otherwise once it was clear that higher office was not in the cards for her and she was on her way out). In reality, they simply didn’t have any regulation they could use which would punish simple legal “success” in a way that would affect ONLY the six companies they wanted to target. Not allowing anything but WebKit was not illegal. It’s a feature that some may not like and choose a different product as a result, but there’s nothing illegal about someone buying a different product, either. And, even after working on a solution and providing it to developers, no non-WebKit browser has been released. Are they now going to attach “browskeepers” to the DMA in order to force browser developers to release non-WebKit browsers to quicken the rise of an all chromium internet in the EU? 🙂 In the name of competition? LOL
 
963852741 said:
If it was GPL Apple wouldn't touch it with a stick.
Click to expand...

It was GPL. ( AGPLv3 ) .



Touched it with a large stack of money and turned it back to Apache ( initial commit was Apache , then relatively quickly off that. ) . Apple’s stack of money to put it back.


P.S. after poking in GitHub it looks like Apple gutted the company. The corporate business asserts and structure dumped , but expect the investors got paid off so walk away with something as shell goes comatose.
 
deconstruct60 said:
P.S. after poking in GitHub it looks like Apple gutted the company. The corporate business asserts and structure dumped , but expect the investors got paid off so walk away with something as shell goes comatose.
Click to expand...
SOP. Valuable employees will be integrated and the rest will go away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back