If the EU was really concerned with fair market operation they would have laughed at Spotify's complaints. Spotify was an early adopter of the App Store model and only made the free ad-supported version of the app available on the store. Upgrading to the premium subscription version was done via the internet. So in both cases Apple was not making a dime from them for commission. That strategy was Spotify's choice right from the beginning. And yet the EU is trying to fine Apple $1.8 billion for supposed abuse of the music streaming market.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Has 'Very Serious' DMA Issues, EU to Enforce Rules 'Soon'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That’s even less clever than what they already tried to do. Apple isn’t going to get out of complying with the law by trying to be cute.
If they keep up these shenanigans they'll be kicked out of the EU. I'm sure the shareholders won't mind if literally 1/4 of Apples revenue just shuts off overnight. I mean sure, 1/4 of their revenue is more than Mac, iPad, wearables and home devices combined but if you think loosing that much money just to make a point is a good idea then more power to you.
Hard disagree, and I grew up in a winemaking region of Europe.
Californian wines can be excellent - and it doesn’t have to be expensive.
So are many Australian and some Chilean wines.
You can't be that naive. Are you really arguing that any corporation is going to do anything other than the bare minimum, less if it can get away with it, to comply with something that might hurt its interests?
Apple are free to take whatever course of action they think is smartest. This includes trying to wriggle through loopholes. If there's large sums of money involved, it's potentially worth putting a lot of thought into doing so. At some point though, when you're already among the richest companies on Earth, resisting legislation that simply aims to loosen your stranglehold on app store profits, it just becomes a bad look. Their hardware upgrade pricing is already notoriously greedy. If they're not careful, they'll stop being seen as the 'cool' company, and just become Micro$oft 2.0.
If EU regulations mean that Apple is losing 1/4 of their revenue by complying (and they would have to be doing this globally) they may just pull out.
Then the Chinese phone makers take over the market.
I am sure the EU (whose income heavily depends on trade with China) will be just as ready to take on the state-backed Chinese OEMs.
Yes. If you can’t innovate, then tax and regulate. That seems to be their motto.
(Not defending Apple.)
Well..dance around answers
you seem to think your personal needs outweigh the needs of every other iOS device user.
you might control whatever code you write. you dont control what code bad agents will write and others will install.
there are more than enough personal stories i've encountered with non tech users "accidentally" installing dodgy software. most tech people will have similar stories.
you can code your own thing and run it on your dev account on you device.
that's called testing.
if it works and passes the conditions clearly set out by Apple for over a decade you can release and monetize it.
just like millions of other devs do.
The DMA is vague. Show me the "dont do this" that Apple did...
it's more EU thinks there words mean something and other people interpret it differently.
Apple is breaking
Article 5
Point 3, 4, 7 8
Article 6
Point 7, 12
For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions apply as stipulated in the Digital Markets act and in relevance to Apple:
Obligations for gatekeepers
1. The gatekeeper shall comply with all obligations set out in this Article with respect to each of its core platform services listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9).
4. The gatekeeper shall allow business users, free of charge, to communicate and promote offers, including under different conditions, to end users acquired via its core platform service or through other channels, and to conclude contracts with those end users, regardless of whether, for that purpose, they use the core platform services of the gatekeeper.
7. The gatekeeper shall not require end users to use, or business users to use, to offer, or to interoperate with, an identification service, a web browser engine or a payment service, or technical services that support the provision of payment services, such as payment systems for in-app purchases, of that gatekeeper in the context of services provided by the business users using that gatekeeper’s core platform services.
8. The gatekeeper shall not require business users or end users to subscribe to, or register with, any further core platform services listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9) or which meet the thresholds in Article 3(2), point (b), as a condition for being able to use, access, sign up for or registering with any of that gatekeeper’s core platform services listed pursuant to that Article.
Article 6
7. The gatekeeper shall allow providers of services and providers of hardware, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same hardware and software features accessed or controlled via the operating system or virtual assistant listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9) as are available to services or hardware provided by the gatekeeper.
Furthermore, the gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services.
12. The gatekeeper shall apply fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory general conditions of access for business users to its software application stores, online search engines and online social networking services listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9).
Wrong.
As long as enough (a number higher then the threshold defined by the DMA) consumers and business users choose iOS, it’s a core platform service covered by the DMA. Choice of Android or not.
…according to whom?
I mean, you have just shown (by your claim that providing the choice of Android would “perfectly meet EU demands”) to fail to understand even very basics of the DMA.
Phones come with a serial numbers - and Apple tracks country of first sale of the iPhones. I mean, sure, once they resort to encouraging consumers to import (or resellers to import on the grey market), they’ll presumably not share that data with EU customs.
Also, if in doubt, the importer (the traveller) has to prove that import tax was paid - not customs.
FUD. Apps can’t not simply log keystrokes outside of their own sandboxed environmen.
Sandboxing is an OS feature. And the controls are system-wide in Settings, not in-app.
Last edited:
Judging by the top comments here, it looks like this site is a now a full on Apple cult. Sad.
I don't think you understood what @mike2q was saying. Complying would mean properly implementing alternative app stores and suchlike. There may be some revenue hit, but Apple would likely carry on making the vast majority of their app store and services profits, and 100% of their hardware profit.
Non-compliance would result in a huge fine, but the solution would be to comply, unless the fine is less than the benefits of non-compliance. Which is unlikely, given the fine is sized to avoid just that tactic.
Leaving the EU in a hissy fit would obviously cost them vastly more than either option, so won't happen. They'll eventually straighten things out with the EU, whilst ceding the minimum possible amount of control.
You mean Apple split off their European App Store business into a separate European ”distributor” company?
I wonder what would happen if Apple closed the App Store in the EU. All apps would then be web apps or those available through a closed Apple Service like "Apple Arcade."
Not sure if that is true. There are many here that are always quite critical of Apple. And there are many that are quite happy with the current rules and regulations around the Apple Store and are mad that a government entity is changing it. Arguably it is no different than rampant NIMBYism or populist nationalism. All that is happening here is that some believe that Apple should be allowed to have control over the iPhone and that the government should not be allowed to force Apple to change their business model. And there are those that vehemently disagree.
It would be nice if there was some type of compromise solution but the DMA seems to not be open to that option.
Sorry, I wasn’t clear enough. It’s not just about this one ruling. The EU seems to be determined to milk any sector of their economy that they aren’t dominant in, basically a “pay to play” approach. At some point this will make doing business there too expensive, and will also result in tit-for-tat sanctions in other markets.
Do you have any credible source saying that most customers would love the option of choice? Because I've never once, outside of MacRumors, had a single friend or relative express this desire to me.
Again, nothing Apple is doing is illegal or even frowned upon in the EU for every other company but Apple. You and others keep trying to paint these practices a universally evil and obviously bad.
But if I were to open a company today selling apps and hardware, I could very easily build it as a walled-in garden, and nobody would care at all.
What would be the point of doing that?
Losing out on billions of game (and other app) sales, just to give the EU the finger?
If anyone has a pay to play business model, it’s no one else than Apple.
Whereas the outcome of the DMA is unclear. Competition in app markets and lower commissions for app sales mean that the EU/EU countries take in less taxes. Not more.
The only scenario where the EU may get to “milk” someone is if Apple obstinately refuse to comply with the law and get fined. That’s their choice. It isn’t that hard.
Other companies (more or less) silently comply.
They allow third-party apps to be installed on their general purpose operating systems.
They will be providing third-party interoperability.
Without throwing much of a public fit or getting as “creative” as Apple at (malicious) sham compliance.
People would stop buying iPhones.
And the market will be taken over by Chinese OEMs, which is hardly the outcome the EU wants.
The trick is to keep milking Apple without making it too expensive to keep doing business in the EU. EU requirements tend to have global implications - Apple can’t open up the AppStore in one market only, they will be expected to do it globally.
There’s probably a larger picture here. The EU, the US and China are playing games.
German companies flock to US with record pledges of capital investment
Strong American economy and tax incentives lure investors as Berlin frets over deindustrialisation
This is a fair point. Also a fair point is that nobody I know outside of Macrumors has expressed that they love their iPhone because they can only gets apps through Apple. The reality is that most of the population does not care one way or another about this stuff so it’s kind of funny to see either side claim to be on the side of the masses.
Only by virtue of the fact that Apple is the only one doing what they’re doing. If Google decided to suddenly only allow Android apps through the Play Store and forced devs to pay commissions for the privilege, the EU would be taking the same actions against them as well.
Well when your company doesn’t effect billions of dollars in global commerce, yeah nobody will probably pay you much mind.
Apple won't have anything to do with them, so they really couldn't do **** to Apple.
dance around answers
you seem to think your personal needs outweigh the needs of every other iOS device user.
you might control whatever code you write. you dont control what code bad agents will write and others will install.
there are more than enough personal stories i've encountered with non tech users "accidentally" installing dodgy software. most tech people will have similar stories.
you can code your own thing and run it on your dev account on you device.
that's called testing.
if it works and passes the conditions clearly set out by Apple for over a decade you can release and monetize it.
just like millions of other devs do.
The DMA is vague. Show me the "dont do this" that Apple did...
it's more EU thinks there words mean something and other people interpret it differently.
FUD. Even with third party stores. All apps installed on the iPhone are notarized. That means they have to be a developer registered with Apple and Apple can revoke their notarization (and access to the iPhone) at any time. Apple knows how to manage security on an open platform because they've done it for decades on the Mac. The EU isn't pushing us into a wild west era for apps on the iPhone.
Going to repeat my question:
Are you suggesting Apple split off their EU App Store business into a separate, independent(ly operating) company?
Last edited:
Other companies and their core platform services comply by (among other things) allowing installation of third-party apps. This is an obvious and verifiable fact.