Personally speaking, I don’t think users will sue Apple, but I absolutely think they will blame Apple, and Apple’s competitive advantage will suffer because of something that it didn’t want and warned would happen.
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.
Apple Calls Out EU for Contradictory App Store Rules Under DSA and DMA
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Safe from collisions or any kind of vehicle accident. Though anything else goes out the window, not literally, just saying. I know you already know that. That has been going on for well over 10 years.
You can’t point to anything saying my statistics are wrong, you can’t articulate a single reason why Android has a malware problem and Apple doesn’t, therefore you can’t legitimately argue Apple is lying when they say they are concerned about security and privacy. You’re arguing based off of feelings, no facts.
Any post hoc made up reasons are just that, post hoc made up reasons. Apple’s market cap has literally nothing to do with this anywhere other than your head.
It’s a strawman argument. It may have been said in the thread, but no one thinks Apple will get sued.
Facts: Android has million of devices impacted by malware a year. Millions. Apple has maybe hundreds, which are probably related to jailbreaking to install apps from outside the App Store. The EU is making Apple adopt Android’s, less safe model - taking safety away from millions who want it and reducing consumer choice. Facts. Not FUD.
And Apple isn’t obligated to make things safe from users doing non-standard things either. But they do have an obligation for a safe Apple iOS App Store. As safe as it can be just like car manufacturers make cars as safe as can be.
It doesn’t mean it’s a good law or that the eu doesn’t rail against influential American tech corporations.
Wrong. The valuation of the company is irrelevant. If apple were to suddenly shrink down to $1T the DMA wouldn’t go away. It’s a law designed to hobble influential American tech companies, notably Apple. Whose users still buy the products in spite of the closed ecosystem, in spite of the fact the commission is 30%, in spite of the fact the nfc is closed, in spite of the fact it can’t be rooted, in spite of the fact the o/s can’t be downgraded beyond a certain period.
In spite of the fact that Apple hasn’t listed to its most ardent critics.
Does sound a bit whiney tbh.
Why are Apple still selling Macs if they are so concerned about this? Why haven't they locked it down to protect grandma?
We know why $$$$$
It’s about economics
And that is all it’s about
This is all these individuals understand it’s not about android or malware or spyware
Agree 100%. You summed up EU regulators perfectly. It’s not about protecting users for them - they just want to get Apple because they’re successful!
I agree with you the DMA is clearly not about what’s best for users, otherwise the EU wouldn’t be forcing a model even their own cybersecurity experts have repeatedly said it’s less safe. It’s why they (and you) waive away clear and compelling evidence it will harm users.
Glad we agree the EU doesn’t care who gets hurt, are not looking out for their citizens, and just out to get Apple because they’re successful (and not European)!
Maybe you should actually watch what the economist expert actually says in the video and then you will maybe understand why apple as a company is getting regulated
I'm following you guys on the back and forth and have the video up now, thanks for sharing it.
That's not the consumer choice they are going for.
It's not to choose between a walled garden or not, it's to be able to choose what to do with your own device.
So privacy and security only become essential once the userbase is big enough? Weird. Apparently if granny buys a Macbook Air she's on her own.
No, we know why. Apple doesn't have a big enough market share with the mac to pull this kind of thing.
Good video. His point about Apple's tax dodging is one i've made on here numerous times.
I kind of wish they would go ahead with the Mac lock down, as that would at least make them consistent.
I wouldn't love it as a user of the Mac, but I'm already worrying they're going to ruin eventually anyways.
The direction they keep taking it, keeps making it less and less appealing to me. 😞
I said Apple represents the users. I didn't say they care. Users vote with their wallets. Apple responds accordingly to the votes. There's a check every fiscal quarter to see if voters are still voting for Apple or for Google. If Apple is doing something against the voters, we will see a massive decline in revenue.
Apple got a similar App Store lawsuit going through the motions in China, but I don't hear Apple preaching much about what's best for citizens of China (like their data stored within Great Firewall, which privacy crusader Apple consented to no problem) or throwing a fit and threatening to pull out of China entirely.
and if you measure success by market capitalisation only, you're either a shareholder yourself, or just easily impressed.
Maybe Apple should consider selling iPhones that are allowed, at the firmware level, to work with sideloading & 3rd party App stores?
Then folks could still choose a "normal" iPhone that's as it is now, or purchase a "Pro" or "unlocked" or w/e they would call the one that could run software in the way a user might on the Mac?
(still sandboxed, signed by Apple and safe by design of the system, just with 3rd party App stores, direct from Dev and self signed Apps all an option .. or even not signed if one wanted)
A true iPhone Pro, if you will?
Then folks could still choose a "normal" iPhone that's as it is now, or purchase a "Pro" or "unlocked" or w/e they would call the one that could run software in the way a user might on the Mac?
(still sandboxed, signed by Apple and safe by design of the system, just with 3rd party App stores, direct from Dev and self signed Apps all an option .. or even not signed if one wanted)
A true iPhone Pro, if you will?
Freedom and rights aren’t required to be used by everyone to be available for everyone to use if they want. Competition is improved if barriers for entry is removed while preventing existing entities to erect new ones to entrench themselves. Just because someone abuses the freedom doesn’t warrant its removal
Or would you suddenly support the EU chat spying law to read everyone’s chats? Because it Wii objectively make us safer while our privacy effectively ending. Sometimes you allow free guns despite the harm like the states, or restrictive policies like Europe were its not as valued etc
So here market freedoms are pushed more for undertakers while individual larger companies lose some of that same rights. And citizens are given more freedoms but also more opportunities for harm to happen.
The notion that using their primary source because it’s safer isn’t contradicting the push for opening it up for competitors. Eu tells you should eat less meat and not drink alcohol, and they aren’t
This devious Android malware spoofs WhatsApp, TikTok and more - here's how to stay safe
ClayRat poses as different apps to steal SMS data and morewww.techradar.com
For those continuing to insist the EU isn’t making its citizens less safe with this law, note the line in the article “To protect against these sorts of threats, you should only download apps from trusted sources, such as Google’s Play Store, or Apple’s App Store.”
Well fraud is probably much more profitable as that’s where the majority of the revenue is generated in the market. Alongside the copycat apps and kid gambling gatja.
Eu can’t get Apple on market share because they don’t care for it and lack laws to do so, as well as no motivation to even consider that important enough to implement. And the practices and behaviors you can measure and observe is perceived more useful 🤷♂️
Honestly i have a hard time perceiving the utility of market share when a market share of 80% that consists of 100 customers vs 100 million users are the same monopoly but not the same impact.
Apple can make their AppStore as safe as they want, but they don’t have any obligation or responsibility for 3rd party stores. And should in my mind do the equivalent of a legal shoulder shrug.
Well it’s outside the question if it’s bad or good, it’s just the continued logic of existing law written half a century ago with decades of legal precedent that has shaped the philosophical interpretation.
Same reason why American companies do a disproportionate number of sofisticated tax planning and profit shifting internally because of their local corporate laws.
Last edited:
It has absolutely zero to do with that. Eu cares about EU. Everything outside that is mostly not interesting unless that thing operates in/ with EU.
Its competition. And with that some risk can occur as a direct consequence of increased competitive markets.
Yeah, it was a targeted attack on Apple. Study Apple for years. Study their financials, their customers, customers buying habits. Develop laws that ensnare apple without risking the ire of the United States.
It’s about influence and power of American tech. If Apple, google and Facebook closed up shop and left the eu it would be an ouch moment for the eu.