Apple runs the only store on iOS, but that’s not a monopoly on smartphones or mobile software. Android crushes iOS globally and offers sideloading and other stores. People choose iOS because they value Apple’s model, not because they lack alternatives. You’re arguing “Target has a monopoly on Target customers, so Walmart should be allowed to sell its house products in Target without paying Target anything”.They certainly do for distribution of application software to iOS consumers.
I’d argue the reason Apple Pay is trusted by consumers, banks, transit systems, and even governments for IDs is in large part because Apple doesn’t let third‑party wallets hook into the secure element. If anyone could, adoption would be slower, fraud risk higher, banks would be less willing to partner, we’d have more CurrentC type situations, etc. Limiting it to just Apple is actually MASSIVELY better for consumers. The fact that regulators don’t understand that is just proof they aren’t qualified to decide how iOS works.Also, what other NFC card payments do they allow except Apple Pay?
There are plenty of options with a screen and that provide notifications. Smart watch makers don’t have an inherent right to get the same access to Apple’s property that Apple does. Especially when providing said access has legitimate risks to Apple’s customers.Watches have displays to show something. Message notifications, in the case of smart watches. That’s a core feature.
Rings usually don’t have a display.
It’s indeed different.
PlayStations don’t double as
Lots of reasons indeed.
- driving licenses
- toll booths
- transit tickets
- ticketing machines
- event tickets
- GPS/navigation systems
- phones
- phone books
- calendars
- cameras
- payment instruments
- keys and keychains
- identification devices
- home automation controls
- primary communication devices
- alarm clocks
- scientific calculators
- document scanners
- dictionaries and thesauruses
- …
- …and that’s without even mentioning the gaming and media playback functionality that the console also has.
PlayStations are devices that provide entertainment.
Whereas smartphones are used to communicate and manage big parts of everyone’s every-day lives.
I agree the iPhone is more important to modern life than PlayStation. But that doesn’t mean Apple should forfeit control over its platform. Cars are also critical to daily life, but the government doesn’t require Ford to let you install a Toyota infotainment system in a Mustang, or force Tesla to allow anyone who wants to install an app on the car’s computer, or make its Supercharger network fully interoperable with all brands.
Apple is still one of several major smartphone vendors globally (Samsung, Google, Chinese OEMs, etc.), and people have a choice if they want a more open device. Regulation shouldn’t be about punishing the most successful company in a sector because its products are widely adopted, or declaring its platform a public utility just because a profitable subset of users rely on it.
I’d argue that the fact that iPhones handle payments, IDs, and sensitive communications actually strengthens the argument for Apple keeping things locked down, because the risks of opening system‑level APIs to every third‑party accessory or app are much higher than on a PlayStation. And if you don’t like it, there’s an easy way to avoid it: just buy an Android!