Apple Intelligence Features Not Coming to European Union at Launch Due to DMA

[surferfb]

Do you pay with cash in restaurants and shops or use CC? Do you shop everything from Apple, all your necessities for life? In my country, businesses cannot store CC information, even Apple.

Of course I pay with credit cards for things like restaurant and groceries. That doesn’t mean I want to give it out to a random developer I don’t know anything about for a subscription that will persist in perpetuity. I don’t know how hard they’ll make it to cancel the subscription, if they’ll sell my transaction data to a data aggregator, etc.

I much prefer Apple to handle that for me. They’ve earned my trust. But the EU is taking that option away from its citizens.

 

[I7guy]

I think many don't realize, how long we have to wait for localization of features outside the US. I can live without most of them. But the two above, are really painful. The typing experience has not changed in meaningful ways in a long time. Dictation has improved somewhat, but typing not so much.

I hate typing on a glass screen. I can type over 100 wpm, but can’t type for the life of me in a screen. And autocorrect is hit or miss.

 

[I7guy]

Do you pay with cash in restaurants and shops or use CC? Do you shop everything from Apple, all your necessities for life? In my country, businesses cannot store CC information, even Apple.

Yes. The one time I used a debit card at a legitimate website the card number was stolen. It took months to clear up the issues. That has only happened one time at a restaurant and AMEX was on the ball with this. One reason I use my Amex card for almost everything. Their fraud detection is top notch.

 

[psingh01]

Apple didn't invent emulators, game or music streaming.
They in fact unscrupulously copied Spotify's and Netflix' products, muscling themselves into these markets by bundling their apps with their iOS devices.


Nonsense.

…

Apple had been streaming its keynotes for years on QuickTime when Netflix only mailed DVDs. One of the main streaming protocols (HLS) was developed by Apple. They joined the streaming service later as they expanded their business into services. Before their focus was only products that enabled others.

 

[MilaM]

Of course I pay with credit cards for things like restaurant and groceries. That doesn’t mean I want to give it out to a random developer I don’t know anything about for a subscription that will persist in perpetuity.

No sane software shop runs their own credit card processing. There are essentially two, maybe three services that all apps on macOS use. It's either FastSpring or Paddle. Both with a good reputation and I have no problem giving them my credit card. It has been working very well for years.

Many if not most app developers will also very likely just stay inside the App Store and use Apple's payment processing, because as you say it is quite convenient and customers already are used to it. So I don't really see what the big deal is.

Sometimes all devs will ask for is a small donation. This can be done with PayPal or similar services, maybe even Apple Pay. Easy.

 

[surferfb]

The word overcharging, like overpriced, is subjective. It shouldn’t be the function of government to interfere in a free market. Yes, it is a free market. Nobody has to use the App Store. The app store is apples property. Etc. there is no duopoly. There is no monopoly. (Don’t know if I got all of the talking points)

No, apparently creating mobile apps on a platform with <30% market share is so important now that developers get to develop for iOS without paying Apple anything for their IP. Software developers deserve it, because Android users don’t like paying for software, or something.

Not sure why the EU isn’t nationalizing the App Store as a public utility.

 

[surferfb]

No sane software shop runs their own credit card processing. There are essentially two, maybe three services that all apps on macOS use. It's either FastSpring or Paddle. Both with a good reputation and I have no problem giving them my credit card. It has been working very well for years.

Many if not most app developers will also very likely just stay inside the App Store and use Apple's payment processing, because as you say it is quite convenient and customers already are used to it. So I don't really see what the big deal is.

Sometimes all devs will ask for is a small donation. This can be done with PayPal or similar services, maybe even Apple Pay. Easy.

Because I have a philosophical disagreement with the government telling a private company what they can and cannot do without a legitimate reason. And I don’t find “I want to write software on Apple’s OS, for Apple users and not play by Apple’s rules or pay Apple for their Intellectual Property” a legitimate reason when Apple has a <30% market share in the EU.

That doesn’t even get into the fact that what Apple can and cannot do under the DMA is as clear as mud. And if Apple guesses wrong, their choices are “get fined for billions of dollars” or “compromise the security and privacy of their OS/users”. Which, to get back on topic, is why the EU are not getting these features

 

[AppliedMicro]

Developers are ALWAYS going to complain about fees - even if it’s 1%. When the App Store launched 30% was considered very generous - physical stores charged 70%. Now 15% is considered an outrageous form of rent-seeking.

It's not 15%. It's 30% for bigger developers, the authors of the most popular apps - and therefore for most transactions conducted on iOS.

I do agree that Apple's 30%, with no minimums or fixed costs, and with Apple taking care of payment processing and VAT could be considered generous in 2008. But...

👉 What was generous back 15 years ago is not generous anymore in 2024!

How much more revenue does Apple App Store make in 2024, compared to 2008?
Ten thousand, hundred thousand, a million times more?

In competitive markets, this leads to economies of scale and drives down prices and commission rates.

The fact that developers of popular apps haven't benefitted from hugely increased economies of scale at all over time makes it very clear that it's not a competitive market. And it strongly suggests that regulating that market is warranted.

On top of that, Apple has begun taken advantage of their commission pricing - and weaponised their ability to prohibiting third parties from even mentioning alternative purchasing options - to compete with their own products in all major categories of digitally distributed content (music, video streaming, eBooks, gaming).

But, as I’ve made it very (and I’m sure for most of you, annoyingly) clear that I don’t think governments should be able to tell a company with ~30% of the market how to run their business. If they had 75% sure - regulate away.

Apple is estimated to control more than 50% of the market (of mobile app user spending).
Market share is either measured by sales revenue or units - and painting Apple, a company that controls about half of sales revenue - as a minor(ity) operator is incredibly disingenuous.

And besides its size, that market being a duopoly, with the single competitor colluding with Apple by charging basically the same rates, furthermore underlines why it needs to be regulated.

 

[AppliedMicro]

The word overcharging, like overpriced, is subjective.

At charging "three times as much" for processing a transaction (not, you know, and actually product used by end users) it's not subjective.

Yes, it is a free market. Nobody has to use the App Store.

When you make a mobile app, such as a dating app, you have to use the App Store in order to have a viable product.

The app store is apples property.

It is - and their conduct in exploiting that product is now regulated in the EU.
Just as many other properties are.

Etc. there is no duopoly. There is no monopoly. (Don’t know if I got all of the talking points)

You got all the nonsense points there. Mobile app markets are either monopolised or duopolised in the legal sense and meaning of the word, and there's no "alternative truth" to that.

 

[AppliedMicro]

That doesn’t mean I want to give it out to a random developer I don’t know anything about for a subscription that will persist in perpetuity. I don’t know how hard they’ll make it to cancel the subscription

That must be because you have non-existing consumer protection laws in the US.
In Europe, unfair practices regarding cancellation of services are prohibited by EU regulation.

That doesn’t even get into the fact that what Apple can and cannot do under the DMA is as clear as mud.

It isn't. The objective is very clear. And it's not hard to comply.
Apple's just testing what it can get away.

But like a petulant child, what they can do under the DMA will become clear to them once they've been handed more fines at the latest.

And if Apple guesses wrong, their choices are “get fined for billions of dollars” or “compromise the security and privacy of their OS/users”.

You're lying. The DMA explicitly allows for measures to ensure security and privacy.
And before they get fined, the EU will work with Apple (as part of their market investigation) to rectify things.

 

[MilaM]

Not sure why the EU isn’t nationalizing the App Store as a public utility.

This has never happened yet at the EU level and is very unlikely. Things like that could maybe happen in a communist country like China. Or in the US in the name of national security (see TikTok) 😉.

 

[MyOwnDrummer]

A little consequences for the punitive regulatory overreach, huh? Hopefully this will lead to a bit less cheering on of regulatory thuggery.

 

[akac]

At charging "three times as much" for processing a transaction (not, you know, and actually product used by end users) it's not subjective.

When you make a mobile app, such as a dating app, you have to use the App Store in order to have a viable product.

It is - and their conduct in exploiting that product is now regulated in the EU.
Just as many other properties are.

You got all the nonsense points there. Mobile app markets are either monopolised or duopolised in the legal sense and meaning of the word, and there's no "alternative truth" to that.

It's not just a transaction processing fee. It's hosting the app, all the downloads, running a review system, support, and a lot more.

I've been in the mobile market since 1999 selling Mobile apps on my own e-commerce store, Handango, PocketGear - even retail stores like Best Buy, Amazon, and eventually on the App Store. I've built all the infrastructure myself multiple times.

While I agree that developers should have the ability to sell on their own stores using actual transaction processors for 1-3% - what Apple charges on it's own stores is not abnormal. It's around what Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo charge for games being sold off their stores.

 

[darkpaw]

Quoting Gruber:

This isn’t about privacy or the fact that Apple Intelligence models were trained on data scraped from the public web. Such factors might play a role in Apple Intelligence’s compliance, but not iPhone Mirroring or the new SharePlay screen sharing. This is about the DMA’s restrictions on designated gatekeepers launching their own integrated services and features.

👉 Apple can introduce iPhone Mirroring and SharePlay screen sharing as features on iOS.

A feature is a feature. Even if other companies can write their own client apps to connect to it. The legal prohibition isn't on the new iPhone feature - it would just be on keeping interoperability and and connecting to it for themselves.

Honestly, it doesn't look like you read or understood what Gruber was saying.

"A feature is a feature." Really? So Apple can just launch Apple Pay in a country and not have to adhere to banking regulations in that country?

 

[I7guy]

At charging "three times as much" for processing a transaction (not, you know, and actually product used by end users) it's not subjective.

It’s a historical value. It subject to regulation. It’s like the slotting fees at supermarkets. If a dev doesn’t want to pay it, go somewhere else.

When you make a mobile app, such as a dating app, you have to use the App Store in order to have a viable product.

No you don’t.

It is - and their conduct in exploiting that product is now regulated in the EU.
Just as many other properties are.

Well sure. Since the EU couldn’t beat apple down with lawsuits, it threaded the needle to regulate their business model to death.

You got all the nonsense points there. Mobile app markets are either monopolised or duopolised in the legal sense and meaning of the word, and there's no "alternative truth" to that.

Where Is that definition that an App Store(any App Store) is an illegal monopoly? Prior to the dma?

 

[AppliedMicro]

It's not just a transaction processing fee. It's hosting the app, all the downloads, running a review system, support, and a lot more.

That's what Apple pivoted to saying as justification for their commissions.
Whereas in reality it's covered by the yearly developer subscription.
Apple has no issue whatsoever with reviewing and hosting all of the many free apps on the App Store - for free.

Either way, large players like Spotify, Netflix or Epic Games, don't require hosting, download traffic, the review system or support really - they can do it themselves. And neither do they require Apple's promotion.

For these developers, it amounts to an in-app "revenue tax" of sorts.

It's around what Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo charge for games being sold off their stores.

...yet much more than processors for other software payments charge. Either way...

While I agree that developers should have the ability to sell on their own stores using actual transaction processors for 1-3%

This.

I don't take issue issue with Apple charging 30% on their own store.
They can charge 50% or whatnot - it's their store and their pricing.

But the combination of
1. charging 30% to very popular third-party apps and their in-app sales while
2. not passing on any economies of scale in more than 15 years and
3. prohibiting them from even mentioning other purchase options with draconian terms
is what I consider economic terms that can only result from monopolisation-

And
4. Apple beginning to compete for most major categories of digital content with its own services
5. That they're advertising aggressively to device purchasers with dark design patterns
strikes me as being anticompetitive. For which they've been fined by the EU under antitrust law in effect before the DMA.

 

[MilaM]

Where Is that definition that an App Store(any App Store) is an illegal monopoly? Prior to the dma?

If you would like to become an expert in EU competition law, there is a Wikipedia article discussing it. Can't really say if it's a good starting point, because I'm not a lawyer.

European Union competition law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Contrary to what some may believe, the EU acts on the basis of laws and previous court decisions. All companies impacted by the DMA of course can take their case to court, which will have the final say on the matter.

 

[Philip_S]

probably they are worried that the EU will decide that Apple has to open up the screen sharing APIs to other hardware manufacturers, and there are probably security/privacy concerns in doing so.

If their worries aren’t completely baseless, it would rather strongly suggest that either they’re relying on security through obscurity (which seems unlikely, but perhaps they realised they’d screwed up but don’t have time to redesign it and hope to patch it before anyone finds out), or they’ve received a National Security Letter forcing them to add a backdoor. Either way, it’s a giant “look at this attack surface” for any security researchers out there.

 

[mejsric]

Apple is estimated to control more than 50% of the market (of mobile app user spending).

probably they use iPhone to buy things is for security.. i have iPhone and Android phone, when i buy things, pay things etc.. credit card transaction info is on my iPhone, i dont do that on my Android phone, my Android phone particullary used for hacks, pirates games. fake social media accounts, one account was hacked and now posting spamming bitcoin in reddit and tiktok lol

 

[AppliedMicro]

So Apple can just launch Apple Pay in a country and not have to adhere to banking regulations in that country?

Absolutely. As far as I'm aware, Apple does not offer products or services subject to financial regulations.
They let independent financial institutions do it.

It’s a historical value. It subject to regulation. It’s like the slotting fees at supermarkets. If a dev doesn’t want to pay it, go somewhere else.

You - again and as so many others - fail to recognise that the competitive situation for both supermarkets and grocery manufacturers is not the same as for digital content and services on mobile devices. They are much different:

• market concentration
• barriers hindering consumers to switch
• market entry barriers for businesses
• barriers on manufacturers directly selling to consumers
• technical dependence on platforms provided in a duopoly

No you don’t.

You do.
Even more so for a music streaming service

Why do you think is Apple Music available on Android?

Well sure. Since the EU couldn’t beat apple down with lawsuits, it threaded the needle to regulate their business model to death.

If their business model is extortionate, yes, that'll be limited going forward.

But otherwise, nothing it regulated to death.
I guarantee you that:
Apple will still operate their App Store business in 5 or 10 years in the EU.
Successfully.

 

[steve09090]

That's what Apple pivoted to saying as justification for their commissions.
Whereas in reality it's covered by the yearly developer subscription.
Apple has no issue whatsoever with reviewing and hosting all of the many free apps on the App Store - for free.

Either way, large players like Spotify, Netflix or Epic Games, don't require hosting, download traffic, the review system or support really - they can do it themselves. And neither do they require Apple's promotion.

For these developers, it amounts to an in-app "revenue tax" of sorts.

...yet much more than processors for other software payments charge. Either way...

This.

I don't take issue issue with Apple charging 30% on their own store.
They can charge 50% or whatnot - it's their store and their pricing.

But the combination of
1. charging 30% to very popular third-party apps and their in-app sales while
2. not passing on any economies of scale in more than 15 years and
3. prohibiting them from even mentioning other purchase options with draconian terms
is what I consider economic terms that can only result from monopolisation-

And
4. Apple beginning to compete for most major categories of digital content with its own services
5. That they're advertising aggressively to device purchasers with dark design patterns
strikes me as being anticompetitive. For which they've been fined by the EU under antitrust law in effect before the DMA.

I’ll leave your other opinions aside, because they're simply baseless opinions., and as usual, barely based on facts.

But do you really think leaving Spotify and Epic and Netflix could all be left to do their own review systems. Because if you answer yes then you clearly have not been paying attention to (particularly) Epic and Spotify and continue to have credibility here.

 

[AppliedMicro]

But do you really think leaving Spotify and Epic and Netflix could all be left to do their own review systems

Spotify and Epic provide their own apps for other operating systems such as macOS and Windows.
As far as I'm aware, they are not reviewed by Apple - and yet they're trusted by millions of customers.
I haven't seen public outcry about them either.

They need as much app review on iOS as they need for their desktop clients.
If you don't trust them, don't use their products.
Simple as that.

I’ll leave your other opinions aside, because they're simply baseless opinions., and as usual, barely based on facts.

They are certainly my own opinion. And I've outlined and supported my assessment of Apple's terms being anticompetitive and unfair by supporting facts, observations and comparisons. If you think there baseless, that's your opinion.

I can't hep but mention...

But do you really think leaving Spotify and Epic and Netflix could all be left to do their own review systems. Because if you answer yes then you clearly have not been paying attention to (particularly) Epic and Spotify

Not sure what you're trying to insinuate here?
But there's even less "base" - actually no base whatsoever - to your insinuations here than my own post above.

👉 If you have a point to make, at least spell it out, provide a link or whatever.

 

[steve09090]

They are certainly my own opinion. And I've outlined and supported my assessment of Apple's terms being anticompetitive and unfair by supporting facts, observations and comparisons. If you think there baseless, that's your opinion.

Well to take Spotify as the first example, they rip of artists and fail to pay them anything with less than a certain number of downloads because they don’t want to pay transaction fees. Meanwhile artists are required to pay a distributor to put those songs up in the first place. You think that is scrupulous? Links are abundant.

Epic take a 12% cut of every game sale they host. The hypocrisy is vomit inducing.

Why do people defend them for their business models?

They need as much app review on iOS as they need for their desktop clients.
If you don't trust them, don't use their products.
Simple as that.

You would trust them to put an unreviewed app on the App Store?

 

[I7guy]

[…]

You - again and as so many others - fail to recognise that the competitive situation for both supermarkets and grocery manufacturers is not the same as for digital content and services on mobile devices. They are much different:

• market concentration
• barriers hindering consumers to switch
• market entry barriers for businesses
• barriers on manufacturers directly selling to consumers
• technical dependence on platforms provided in a duopoly

You do.
Even more so for a music streaming service

Why do you think is Apple Music available on Android?


If their business model is extortionate, yes, that'll be limited going forward.

But otherwise, nothing it regulated to death.
I guarantee you that:
Apple will still operate their App Store business in 5 or 10 years in the EU.
Successfully.

We do have a difference of opinion of how the iOS App Store is viewed. Obviously there is not one universal opinion or set of regulations.

 

[I7guy]

If you would like to become an expert in EU competition law, there is a Wikipedia article discussing it. Can't really say if it's a good starting point, because I'm not a lawyer.

European Union competition law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Contrary to what some may believe, the EU acts on the basis of laws and previous court decisions. All companies impacted by the DMA of course can take their case to court, which will have the final say on the matter.

As I said above there isn’t one universal opinion or set of regulations on this particular topic. The DMA is a set of regulations designed to bust open the App Store and make it into a public utility. A concept foreign to me and one which I don’t support. (Not that my opinion matters but it is what it is)