Apple Has 'Very Serious' DMA Issues, EU to Enforce Rules 'Soon'

[davide_eu]

Apple was forced to add code that allow other stores. Any code or change to methodology opens up more vectors for attack. Thats true of any code. You know that.

No, that's not possible! A$$le marketing has always stated that "there are no virus" on their devices.

So, please stop doing FUD on thier platform that is the safest in the universe... 😉

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

thank you for being one of the sane voices on here lately.

This thread has turned into the Apple AGM.

 

[wbeasley]

This thread has turned into the Apple AGM.

dont like when people dont agree with things you post?

 

[I7guy]

So no, and you’ll just make up whatever justification you need to in order to maintain that Apple isn’t breaking the law, regardless of actual legal outcomes. How very honest and reasonable lmao.

In that vein, in closing, make up the rational you want to in your mind that apple is breaking the law. So much cognitive dissonance around here.

Apple had to work much of this out with the EU prior to implementation.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

dont like when people dont agree with things you post?

Some of the people on here own more stock than Tim Cook. Their objectivity is very questionable.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

In that vein, in closing, make up the rational you want to in your mind that apple is breaking the law. So much cognitive dissonance around here.

Apple had to work much of this out with the EU prior to implementation.

They are aware of what they are doing.
Just take the fact when Apple tried to argue that safari isn’t actually the same to EU and why it’s shouldn’t be counted as the same thing across their platforms….

While also at the same time advertised on their website safari was the same thing

 

[Infinity Vortex]

In that vein, in closing, make up the rational you want to in your mind that apple is breaking the law. So much cognitive dissonance around here.

Apple had to work much of this out with the EU prior to implementation.

Questionable claim considering Apple is under investigation for having “serious issues” with their compliance. Talk about cognitive dissonance.

They are aware of what they are doing.
Just take the fact when Apple tried to argue that safari isn’t actually the same to EU and why it’s shouldn’t be counted as the same thing across their platforms….

While also at the same time advertised on their website safari was the same thing

Any response you get will be akin to the hosts’ reponse from Westworld when they’re presented with something that would cause them to realize they’re robots.

“Doesn’t look like anything to me.”

 

[macfacts]

just stop lying... every system has hackers working overtime to crack. Apple offers rewards to those who find ways around their security.

Apple designed their systems to be less crackable.

So there's no need to make up words claiming something they dont. Pitiful reply.

Except apple doesn't always pay bounties, so they end up selling to criminals.

Apple refused to pay bounty to Kaspersky for uncovering vulnerability in 'Operation Triangulation' - 9to5Mac

Kaspersky reported one of the iOS vulnerabilities found in Operation Triangulation. However, in a bizarre update, Apple reportedly refused to pay the security bounty.

9to5mac.com

 

[I7guy]

They are aware of what they are doing.
Just take the fact when Apple tried to argue that safari isn’t actually the same to EU and why it’s shouldn’t be counted as the same thing across their platforms….

While also at the same time advertised on their website safari was the same thing

Advertising is not the same as legal matters. Similar in vein to “what happens in the iPhone stays in the iPhone”. That is an advertised slogan, not an absolute statement of truth.

 

[I7guy]

Questionable claim considering Apple is under investigation for having “serious issues” with their compliance.

It’s a supposition, thus the phase “had to”. Nobody wanted the iPhone to become a ne’er do well paradise where illicit and immoral apps could be circulated without controls. Some of this, I’m assuming had to be discussed. But who knows.

Talk about cognitive dissonance.

It’s rampant.

Any response you get will be akin to the hosts’ reponse from Westworld when they’re presented with something that would cause them to realize they’re robots.

“Doesn’t look like anything to me.”

Forgot the “/s”.

 

[wbeasley]

Except apple doesn't always pay bounties, so they end up selling to criminals.

Apple refused to pay bounty to Kaspersky for uncovering vulnerability in 'Operation Triangulation' - 9to5Mac

Kaspersky reported one of the iOS vulnerabilities found in Operation Triangulation. However, in a bizarre update, Apple reportedly refused to pay the security bounty.

9to5mac.com

Given what's going on in Russia I would think "Apple internal policy" would cover not engaging with Russians.

Pay them and you would be called out for assisting them, dont pay them, get called out.
Probably best ignore and not cite any reason - which they did.

 

[macfacts]

Given what's going on in Russia I would think "Apple internal policy" would cover not engaging with Russians.

Pay them and you would be called out for assisting them, dont pay them, get called out.
Probably best ignore and not cite any reason - which they did.

Read the story, they were planning to give the reward to charity.

 

[wbeasley]

It’s a supposition, thus the phase “had to”. Nobody wanted the iPhone to become a ne’er do well paradise where illicit and immoral apps could be circulated without controls. Some of this, I’m assuming had to be discussed. But who knows.

It’s rampant.

Forgot the “/s”.

I'm thinking a few on here actually want the "ne'er do well paradise ... without controls". Every post is antiApple having any say on what goes "on their phone".

Forgetting it also opens OUR PHONES TOO... but that's 2024, and few care about others anymore...

At least, given the number of people on this forum, it's only a few. Which is a pleasant surprise. 🙂

 

[wbeasley]

Read the story, they were planning to give the reward to charity.

I read the story. Still opened Apple to someone saying something negative.

And you used it as a counter argument.
Paying for bounties is indeed the norm.
Apple had a policy reason to reject this offer. That's their prerogative.
It doesnt cancel the other 99.9% of the time they pay for exploits found.

 

[AppliedMicro]

If Apple is forced into opening iOS to the 3rd party apps bypassing the AppStore in one market, they will find it all but impossible to defend the same practice on their home turf.

So, if the EU keeps making rules that erode Apple's ability to make money, at some point they would need to chose between selling in the EU or making money. It's really a simple math problem.

I posit another math problem:
When is Apple going to run out of (high-income) markets that do not allow bypassing the App Store? 😄

Europe has its Digital Markets Act.
Japan has its Act on Promotion of Competition for Specified Smartphone Software.
The United Kingdom has its Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.

I'm thinking a few on here actually want the "ne'er do well paradise ... without controls". Every post is antiApple having any say on what goes "on their phone".

I believe you're totally off base here. I don't see many of such posts.

For instance, I have no qualms about Apple's sandboxing requirements for iOS (them "having a say").
I just take issue with their monopolising software installation against third-party developers and consumers.

 

[Infinity Vortex]

I posit another math problem:
When is Apple going to run out of (high-income) markets that do not allow bypassing the App Store? 😄

Europe has its Digital Markets Act.
Japan has its Act on Promotion of Competition for Specified Smartphone Software.
The United Kingdom has its Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.


I believe you're totally off base here. I don't see many of such posts.

For instance, I have no qualms about Apple's sandboxing requirements for iOS (them "having a say").
I just take issue with their monopolising software installation against third-party developers and consumers.

It seems to me at some point there will eventually be a critical mass of countries enforcing laws or enacting new ones to where Apple will simply implement a more open app policy globally. It only makes sense to maintain two different ways of doing things as long as the income is worth the trouble.

 

[AZhappyjack]

Honest question: How can the EU do this? Apple created the market and built the tools and the platform. It was a closed platform, by design, for the sake of security. I truly don't understand how a governmental agency can force Apple to open anything. If Apple doesn't allow you to do the things that you want to do, or to operate the way you want to operate, go to a different platform. Let the free market dictate it - if enough people believe that they don't want the Apple ecosystem, go somewhere else, and hit Apple in the pocketbook.

However, from where I sit, I see Apple being successful at what they are doing. Now these governmental agencies are coming along and forcing changes that dilute Apple's environment, take away a lot of what they built and introduce opportunity for security issues.

The adage used to be "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em"... these days, it's "if you can't beat them, make them let you play your way".

 

[I7guy]

[…{

For instance, I have no qualms about Apple's sandboxing requirements for iOS (them "having a say").
I just take issue with their monopolising software installation against third-party developers and consumers.

I’m a vote with your $$$ person and have no qualms with apple monopolized their software according to current laws. (Excluding the dma). YMMV.

 

[davide_eu]

Honest question: How can the EU do this? Apple created the market and built the tools and the platform. It was a closed platform, by design, for the sake of security. I truly don't understand how a governmental agency can force Apple to open anything. If Apple doesn't allow you to do the things that you want to do, or to operate the way you want to operate, go to a different platform. Let the free market dictate it - if enough people believe that they don't want the Apple ecosystem, go somewhere else, and hit Apple in the pocketbook.

Dear friend, if after so many articles and posts you still don't understand...

 

[Infinity Vortex]

Dear friend, if after so many articles and posts you still don't understand...

You mean to tell me that companies don't just get to ignore the laws of where they operate? 🤯

 

[AZhappyjack]

You mean to tell me that companies don't just get to ignore the laws of where they operate?

It’s not a matter of Apple ignoring the laws where they operate. The lawmakers are specifically targeting Apple’s business model and forcing them to change in the name of competition.

Apple is successful, arguably because they are good at what they do. Rather than allowing everyone to compete on a level playing field, the EU (and soon others) are forcing Apple to open things up and allow others to compete within Apple’s environment, watering down their intellectual property and weakening their built in security.

 

[Infinity Vortex]

It’s not a matter of Apple ignoring the laws where they operate. The lawmakers are specifically targeting Apple’s business model and forcing them to change in the name of competition.

Apple is successful, arguably because they are good at what they do. Rather than allowing everyone to compete on a level playing field, the EU (and soon others) are forcing Apple to open things up and allow others to compete within Apple’s environment, watering down their intellectual property and weakening their built in security.

My comment was in response to your question of “how can the EU do this.” They can do it because they write the laws and Apple follows them or faces consequences.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Advertising is not the same as legal matters. Similar in vein to “what happens in the iPhone stays in the iPhone”. That is an advertised slogan, not an absolute statement of truth.

Advertising absolutely is a legal matter. Hence why safari was deemed one and the same thing on iOS, iPadOS and MacOS.

You can’t make false advertisement.

 

[I7guy]

Advertising absolutely is a legal matter. Hence why safari was deemed one and the same thing on iOS, iPadOS and MacOS.

You can’t make false advertisement.

A slogan is not a false advertisement. Hence why apple was never sued over this apparently “false fact”.

 

[AppliedMicro]

I’m a vote with your $$$ person and have no qualms with apple monopolized their software according to current laws. (Excluding the dma). YMMV.

I'm also a vote with your $$$ person.

If a developer isn't happy with the conditions imposed by Apple for in-app purchases, they should be able to choose a different provider - or roll out their own solution.

Without having to abandon the iOS platform altogether (because that's forming a duopoly with Google's Android and there's considerable customer lock-in). And without Apple making that choice unviable.

The lawmakers are specifically targeting Apple’s business model and forcing them to change in the name of competition.

They're not targeting Apple specifically.

But they are targeting the business model of tying thousands of developers and millions of consumers and thousands to a platform (that itself is part of an established duopoly) - and then charging and imposing rules as its suits, including preferencing their own competing services.

Apple to open things up and allow others to compete within Apple’s environment, watering down their intellectual property

And that's the right thing 👍 to do, given how large the market is, how high the market concentration and market power and how many smaller businesses depend on them.

Given how it has "only" made them the world's largest and most profitable company within just a decade, nobody needs to cry about their "intellectual property" being (slightly, at best) watered down.

Societies have no reason to continue letting the (Apple's) exploitation of their intellectual property run rampant any further - particularly as the underlying technology and markets continue to mature.