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 Says Meta is Making Unreasonable Interoperability Requests Under Europe's DMA Requirements
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Your os shouldn't grant access to Meta if you don't approve it... But the point is: do you trust ios security?
The EU needs to break up META. whatsapp and instagram do not belong with the trash that is facebook.
Speaking of only having a hammer: “Buy something else” is such a tired argument and is used as a defense against any and all criticism against Apple on this forum. No product or company is perfect, and it’s ok to like some aspects of what a company does and dislike others.
Try broadening your toolbox, or maybe just accept that a $3 trillion company will obviously engage in anti-competitive practices wherever they can get away with it. You don’t get to that valuation through altruism.
It’s ok to like the products a company creates, but still criticize the company where appropriate. Does meta respect user privacy? No. Is Apple blocking feature interoperability primarily due to privacy concerns? Also no. This is the company that takes billions from Google for being the default search option after all. If they were privacy first, the default would be something like DuckDuckGo.
Does Apple have a generally good privacy record? Yes, but they also have storied record of using “privacy concerns” to shield themselves from competition. This forum has an excellent track record uncritical acceptance of Apple’s talking points.
Reality is more complex than Apple good, Meta bad. I’m waiting for Valve’s deckard headset. It’s going to face the same interoperability challenges that Meta has.
For sure. Can’t disagree with the above.
No, it’s not obvious any company will engage in illegal practices where they believe they can get away with it.
False logic. It is not proof that:
1. Apple claims its privacy minded
2. Apple takes billions for google to be the default
3. Ergo apple is not privacy minded
Reality is people throw high level generalizations at apple. There isn’t a lot of reasoned discussions. Something like “apple isn’t innovative anymore”. The only reply against that is: “no it isnt”.
What the forum has a great track record of is a criticizing apple for each and everything while twisting the truth.
When there is an option that does exactly as you want, the correct answer is to buy that product, not force a private company to change how they operate just so you get to have your cake and eat it too. Everything comes with tradeoffs. When I bought my PS5, I knew it would never play xbox games. I don't need the EU to come in and demand that xbox games work on my PS5. If you want xbox games, buy an xbox, if you want an OS that isn't vertically integrated and doesn't seamlessly integrate with products made by the same company that made the OS, buy an Android device.
Agreed Apple doesn't get where they are without playing hardball, but I fundamentally disagree that there's anything wrong with Apple's practices. I'd also argue they don't get to a $3 trillion valuation without taking significant risk about operating a closed ecosystem when everyone and their mother told them it'd kill them AND without their products working better together. They shouldn't be punished for that risk by making them give their competitors free help.
Companies should be allowed to prefer their own offerings and should not be required to help their competitors as long as they are not a monopoly, and Apple is far, far away from being a monopoly. While I personally wish they'd do a couple of things differently (anti steering inside apps, more options for default apps) I strongly believe the government has no business mandating those things. If it's that important to me, I'll switch devices. All this is going to lead to is a worse OS designed by regulators who wouldn't get through a screening call to work at a big tech company, let alone should be overruling product designers and company management on how their software operates.
That is your opinion. I think it's very clear that Apple doesn't trust third party operators as far as they can throw them (rightfully so, in my opinion). I suspect Apple thinks they make the best products bar none and they don't need to hobble their competitors product to compete - just that they shouldn't have to give their competitors' products free help - particularly when those competitors have long track records of being terrible actors.
If Apple didn't allow you to change the default option to DuckDuckGo you might have a point. But having used both search engines, Google is clearly superior to DuckDuckGo from a results standpoint, and while I personally am ok with using a worse product for increased privacy (hell, I pay for Kagi), I suspect the majority of Apple's customers would disagree. Yes, I am sure the money helps keep Google there, but there isn't a better option.
I think the past year of DMA threads have shown that there isn't a record of uncritical acceptance of Apple's talking points. There are, however, a lot of users who don't understand they are not Apple's target customer, that the target customer is significantly less technically sophisticated than people who care enough about tech to post on an enthusiast forum, and who absolutely would grant Meta to completely absorb all of their data without realizing that's what they're doing.
Last edited:
I said anti-competitive. I didn’t say illegal. I can bring more examples, but it’s probably not worth my time.
You can’t argue that of one hand that the user should be smart enough to change the default search, and on the other, not smart enough to know what Meta is requesting access to in a dialogue popup.
If Apple always puts user privacy first, Apple wouldn’t have the operator of the world’s largest ad network as the default search option. Google is paying Apple so that they don’t a) change the default option or b) develop their own search engine. This is a fair and valid critique. Google isn’t giving Apple billions for something that doesn’t matter.
Replace Meta with Google and the same point applies to search, which I apparently don’t have a point on.
Apple should not be able to leverage their dominance in smartphones into other markets. I would argue that Apple does have a monopoly on the iOS App Store. The Play Store occupies a different market. No one cross-shops the two app stores and developers have to target both. That said, a company does not have to meet the strict definition of a monopoly to engage in anti-competitive practices.
I’m all for Apple’s vertical integration. I’m just not in favor of the barriers Apple places in front of other devices/platforms. Their security argument would be more convincing if they didn’t use it every single time. They should implement better privacy controls on iOS so this isn’t always a problem.
My experience differs. I find macrumors to be the most homer Apple site I visit, although I did stop visiting sites like Apple Insider years ago. It’s really just a comparison between 9to5 mac and mac rumors. Strictly speaking of the comments/forum too. The writers can express nuance, more so than a specific writer at 9to5.
I don't care what search engine someone uses, and I didn't say Apple "always put user privacy first." I think Apple, like anyone, weighs the pros and cons and makes a decision that they think is most advantageous to Apple and their customers, weighing things like privacy, user experience, ROI, etc. I think a case could be made that searching for something is an action that the customer actively makes compared to "I want to use WhatsApp" so I'll click yes on this popup that says "WhatsApp wants access to your calls and messages" without realizing that it gives Meta access to a record of the complete message and call history of everyone I've ever called/messaged with and will call/message for the rest of eternity. Particularly when said company has a long history of abusing users' trust.
But, most importantly, that decision should be Apple's decision. They own iOS, and they shouldn't be forced to change it to appease some regulator who thinks things like browser choice screens and mandating third-party kernel access are good ideas without a very good reason. And "I want to freeload off of Apple's hard work building an ecosystem" isn't a good reason, particularly when Android exists and is open. If developers and customers don't like it, they should vote with their wallet.
(Side note: I actually strongly suspect Google would be the default search even if they didn't pay Apple. And it's almost certainly going away, so I guess we'll see what happens).
I'd also have issues if the EU was telling Apple to bend to a Google demanded that Apple be forced to allow spotlight search competitor that indexed everything on your phone and sent it up to Google. As said above, I suspect Apple sees a difference in a user actively searching for something vs. a service in the background hovering up all data on a device. See the ChatGPT prompts in iOS18 as a good example of that.
And again, the choice should be Apple's to make. They don't have a monopoly in the EU - they have like 25-30% of the market.
I fundamentally disagree that Apple shouldn't be allowed to use their smartphone business to move into other markets. And they absolutely should be allowed to make their products work better together in those other markets than competitors' products - that's what leads to innovation. Should Apple not have been allowed to make Bluetooth pairing better with AirPods than other devices? Should have they been required to immediately turn that innovation over to all their competitors who could then undercut them on price because they didn't have to spend money to develop the feature?
And of course Apple has a monopoly on its own store, like literally every retail store on planet earth. But developers are free to offer subscriptions outside of the App Store, develop for web, or develop for Android. No one is forcing them to use Apple's systems, even if they want access to the customer base Apple built up without paying anything for it.
I fundamentally have philosophical issues with the DMA in that I don't think the EU should be dictating how iOS does or doesn't work. Had they limited it to "you have to have alternate app stores" I'd still be against it, but wouldn't be commenting on it over and over again - I think that part is silly and a bad idea, but it's not preposterous and I can see why others disagreee. However, the "anything you give yourself you have to give to your competitors" is ridiculous and should be laughed out of the room. We already saw how that came back to bite everyone with Crowdstrike - but the EU is pressing on because they know better than everyone, apparently.
Can't argue with your perception/experience - I'd just say that as someone who also visits both, I see way more "Rah Rah Go EU" and "Fight Big Bad Apple" here than I do over there - but maybe it's the articles I'm clicking on.
You don't like the argument because it is effective, and you have no counter. I am a consumer as much as you, whom you presume to speak for, and before this EU action, I had the choice between a walled garden with 20% market share, and a completely open device with 80% market share. Because of people making arguments like yours, I no longer have the choice of open vs. closed. I only get open.
As far as I am concerned this is a taking from me, and I deeply resent all of you who think you are acting in my best interest to prevent me from buying the product from the company like I want to. "Buy something else" and leave my choices alone is the right answer. But there's too much money in it for EU software companies to let that happen, so they use their bully power to get it. But it is not the black and white moral case that you are putting forward.
Unnecessary straw man. Not good.
Not going to continue this back and forth. My only comment with respect to the DMA is that it came into existence because of the behavior of companies like Apple (and sure, lobbying by European companies like Spotify had an effect).
Whether the DMA is good or bad can certainly be debated (I think it’s too vague, and non-specific); but the DMA exists because of the actions that the companies identified as gatekeepers have taken to keep competitors out.
If Apple didn’t want to be regulated they shouldn’t have operated in a manner that invited regulation. I like Apple’s products (have many) but I don’t have any sympathy for Apple the corporation. Their goal is to maximize the money they take from me after all. If I’m giving Apple my money, I want it to be because they are better than the competition, not because they blocked it.
My unnecessary straw man is a genuine distaste for this forum. I take many breaks from it. But I will say that I actually appreciate the poster that was quoting me. We completely disagree but they did consider my arguments, and I appreciate that.
Onto your post:
“Buy something else”, or the more common “just buy Android” is a straw man too. That’s why I dislike it, not because I have no counter. I like more things about Apple’s product ecosystem than Google’s, so why would I go to Google? I bring up concerns with Apple products and their corporate behavior specifically because I buy them, and those decisions impact me.
The App Store business model is but one aspect of the device. There is no real way to “speak with your wallet” on product features because you can only buy a bundle of features (even if there are some in the bundle that you don’t like). You have to balance the pros and cons, and buy what best fits your needs. For me, that is an iPhone. But if I buy a product for its pros, I’m under no obligation to be silent about its cons. Nor do I believe people should be. Purchasing a product isn’t tacit support for everything a company does.
PS. From my perspective, you still have the same choice you always had in in the EU. There’s just an extra one now. I’d happily trade choices with you if I could. Sadly for me, no third party stores in Canada.
You’re still free to shop exclusively on Apple’s App Store and never allow a third party store on your iPhone. To my knowledge there’s been no mass exodus of apps from the App Store to become exclusive to a third party store. What apps have left the App Store that made your day to day iPhone experience worse? Do you deeply resent me for something hypothetical or for something real?
PPS: You may hate that I “speak for you,” but consider what you’re arguing here. You’re telling me to buy something else instead of speaking ill of Apple, aka not to speak at all.
People “like me” had nothing to do with the EUs actions. EU regulators looked at Apples actions and formed opinions based on those actions. While I may have formed similar opinions, that’s only because it’s a logical position to arrive at when looking at Apple’s actions. If you want to blame anyone for the DMA, blame Apple. They are the primary party responsible for challenging the EU to regulate them, through their actions.
If you think Spotify’s complaint is the cause, it still falls on Apple. Wanting a cut of Spotify’s subscription revenue has nothing to do with iOS security; it’s only about profit. If you feel iOS is less secure in the EU now, it’s that way because Apple used anti-competitive measures to grow their own revenue and competing music service, and the EU regulated them in response. Sorry I’m out of sympathy cards for the companies being bullied by the EU.
If Apple has no choice but to capitulate to Meta's privacy requests, then perhaps the next best alternative is to make those APIs accessible to Meta for products and services available in the EU only (like what they are doing with third party app stores). Let's see how well a VR headset by Meta will sell when it contains functionality that will work only for 1 region of the world, and how many companies are willing to engineer a specific version of a product that will work with that part of the world, and nowhere else (or at least, not as well).
Moving forward, probably consider making new software features not available in the EU to avoid having to invest the additional time and resources needed to create public APIs for them. I mean, it's not like News and Fitness are available in my country either.
We already have a precedent with iPhone mirroring, and you can only regulate what has been built (like Apple Pay), but you can't regulate what won't exist in the EU (eg: new features that Apple may announce in the future) if they never reach the EU's shores.
Moving forward, probably consider making new software features not available in the EU to avoid having to invest the additional time and resources needed to create public APIs for them. I mean, it's not like News and Fitness are available in my country either.
We already have a precedent with iPhone mirroring, and you can only regulate what has been built (like Apple Pay), but you can't regulate what won't exist in the EU (eg: new features that Apple may announce in the future) if they never reach the EU's shores.
“If Apple were to have to grant all of these requests, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp could enable Meta to read on a user's device all of their messages and emails, see every phone call they make or receive, track every app that they use, scan all of their photos, look at their files and calendar events, log all of their passwords, and more.”
Alright, come on… at this inning of the game, just give people what they wish and ask for times a hundred.
Can’t circumvent DMA rules, the EU has been quite clear about what they want, just feed it quickly, comply and be done with it.
If META is under fair play grounds able to ask for all of that, then there’s nothing to discuss.
Apple just has to make sure that it doesn’t spill over other countries that don’t have to do any of it.
Alright, come on… at this inning of the game, just give people what they wish and ask for times a hundred.
Can’t circumvent DMA rules, the EU has been quite clear about what they want, just feed it quickly, comply and be done with it.
If META is under fair play grounds able to ask for all of that, then there’s nothing to discuss.
Apple just has to make sure that it doesn’t spill over other countries that don’t have to do any of it.
Unsurprisingly, given how Apple operates one of the biggest audio/music streaming services in the world.
A much more important business than their speaker business.
Why would they prop up a competing headset by offering “native”-level content for it? 🤷🏾
Why would Apple follow crazy interoperability demands from Meta ...
Nothing prevented or is preventing a European based company from making a smartphone OS or platform. They could go the easier route and fork Android or build their own. Rather than push the make it up as they go along DMA our why not incentivize European companies to do that?
BTW, why is it that Spotify, the one dominant European company in tech, is exempted from the DMA?
Maybe it’s because the DMA isn’t about “moderation” or users, it’s about protectionism and harming foreign companies to help EU ones.
It absolutely works, which is why the iPhone has a sky high user satisfaction rating. Most of us PREFER the way Apple makes the iPhone. People like yourself who want the walls torn down are the tiny tiny tiny vocal minority.
And if a dragon ate my house and all my loved ones that would suck too. But since both scenarios are complete fantasies why even bring it up? A lot of “if X happened it would suck” are true but are nowhere close to reality.
See this argument you have posited is a strawman. Completely made up, easy to knock down, with no relevance to the situation.
Spotify isn’t exempted, they already complying as they don’t gatekeepers anything as they don’t run a store, more do they sell anything.
You are correct, it’s not about moderation or users, and it has never been about that.
But it’s nether protectionism or harming foreign companies to help EU ones.
It’s strictly about the function of the market to allow proper competition of goods and services.
I challenge you to point to how it’s protectionist or even harms foreign companies.
Heck one of the criticisms is that chrome will take over the browser market. Steam, microsoft store, Epic store, GOG, galax store etc will all have a much easier time competing with apple’s services.
Meanwhile,
www.politico.eu
But I suppose that for some of you, Meta's products not being available in the EU might actually be a feature, not a bug. 😛
Zuckerberg: It’s ‘sad’ that EU is left behind on AI
Meta’s chief executive points to EU regulation for delaying or halting the Big Tech rollout of artificial intelligence services.
www.politico.eu
But I suppose that for some of you, Meta's products not being available in the EU might actually be a feature, not a bug. 😛
As long as they don’t count the UK as in Europe “Which we are” but not IN European community.I guess Apple could geofence this request and give Facebook unfettered access to user data only to users residing in the EU. I am sure that pro-EU crowd should have no issues with surrendering their data in the name of “fair and open competition”.
Well if it’s Facebook, I would rather have anyone else’s AI before their toxic crap tries to scrape peoples private information without consent again xDMeanwhile,
Zuckerberg: It’s ‘sad’ that EU is left behind on AI
Meta’s chief executive points to EU regulation for delaying or halting the Big Tech rollout of artificial intelligence services.
But I suppose that for some of you, Meta's products not being available in the EU might actually be a feature, not a bug. 😛
They have had 6 years to understand GDPR and how it affects AI, but Facebook do have issues understanding consent or that NO means NO…
There isn‘t. I prefer Apple‘s phones and iOS over Android‘s for various reasons.
And no consumer chooses their phone or OS for just one reason or functionality.
It‘s a duopoly. And Apple hasn‘t only not „helped“ their competitors - they‘re actively holding them back and blcking them out.
And that‘s what they are allowed.
They are - or more specifically, their Core Platform Services that have and enable monopoly power - are merely required to allow others to also make their products work well with them.
It‘s not when you‘re providing a „can‘t ignore it“ platform service in a duopoly.
There’s nothing crazy about it. If Apple‘s own headset has access to certain data or functionality of your phone, so can a competing headset from Meta. This ensures healthy competition in the market for AR/VR headsets.
No one wants every streaming service, AR/VR headset manufacturer or app developer have to „make their own phone“.
Last edited: