That's not what I meant by "safeguards". By definition, if an EU company could meet the criteria for the conspiratorial DMA you're depicting, then it doesn't have safeguards.
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 Sued by U.S. Department of Justice, Says Lawsuit is 'Wrong'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Do you really think its a co-incidence that no EU companies made the list?
I think this argument conveniently ignores that TikTok is a Chinese company and it's a gatekeeper. I do think it's about time companies get regulated.
(Yes, I know I haven't answered your question, but it's a misleading question meant to siderail the discussion further than it already is)
Hah! I understand that there is no due process. That was my point. Evidently, you're okay with bypassing due process as long as you give it a name. I disagree.
If the government passed a law depriving everyone who lives at your address on this date of their property rights because they think you will do something wrong with it, that's "ex-ante law". I don't think that's okay.
You've just moved the goalposts. I never said "exclusively" or "because they are American".
Note that there not being a "due process" (with the American meaning as I've been using it so far) doesn't mean that there hasn't been a study behind this. I don't know how you do things on the other side of the pond, but over here you can't just throw laws around willy-nilly.
That's not a passable law. Mind you, the DMA uses previous laws.
You implied it. Otherwise it wouldn't make sense to say:
Because it's either: 1) the DMA targets US companies specifically (meaning they are called out by name) or; 2) the DMA imposes a set of criteria that just so happen to include some US companies (in which case it's correlation, but not causation). You can't have it both ways.
That's just nonsense. I asked a a simple question that you are trying to avoid answering.
Of course you can have it both ways. I can target shrimp with my fishing net while still catching a few fish.
You can't simultaneously be wanting to catch shrimp and not shrimp. That's an elementary level logic flaw
I did; you don't want to accept my answer. That's fine, we have differing POVs. I see no point in continuing further in circles.
That's not what I said. (And of course you can "simultaneously be wanting to catch shrimp and not shrimp". I can want to catch different things.)
So is your POV that as long as the prosecution does it's research there is no need for a trial?
You are totally missing the point. If it was that simple it would be a non-issue. Even my Garmin I can do more on Android than iOS. IOS does not allow access to a lot of API functionality they reserve for their watches only.
Not disagreeing with anything you wrote.
I am one of the “few?” who has been using both OS’s since close to release. For someone who has been only iPhone (Apple) and now to move on to Android find the migration financially challenging. This especially holds true if they have Apple peripherals. This was designed by Apple to “lock in” users or make switching difficult at best. In that sense Apple is correct IMO. I have been moving to multi-OS peripherals and finding myself leaving the Apple world. Primarily due to Apple’s restrictions, things work better in the majority of cases on Android.
The DOJ (and 16 State AGs) has been investigating this for 5 years and has now filed suit. It will be an interesting watch as it is very different from the EU path. I wonder what else the DOJ has up its sleeve.
Analogies aside, Apple’s operational freedom is enshrined in law, as long as it steers clear of explicit legal breaches. Our personal views are immaterial; Apple is under no obligation to cater to every whim or preference. It may adopt practices that seem adversarial or anti-competitive, and it may choose to engage—or not—with any entity, barring discrimination against protected classes. Such actions are within the bounds of legality. The Department of Justice’s grievances, unless they constitute direct legal infractions, remain within the realm of lawful conduct. The crux of a Section 2 lawsuit hinges on proving monopolistic intent and dominance—this is where the DOJ faces a formidable challenge. To establish Apple’s monopoly, the DOJ must navigate a complex legal landscape, potentially reframing market perspectives through flawed legal arguments. It’s a steep ascent, and glaring mistakes in the DOJ’s initial complaint may suggest they’re already at a disadvantage.
This isn’t an Apple problem. I will end up getting little when Unity and Steam take their cuts on my game.
Agreed. This will set a precedent to affect EVERYTHING. People say Apple isn’t fair with their App Store cut. But Steam and Epic Games Store isn’t better. Unity and Unreal cost when you make a certain amount. Moving from PS5 to Xbox is very expensive if you have many games like I do. It is an entire industry problem.
It is literally that simple. People have written apps on Mac that can grab iPhone notifications to display it on Mac. Even Microsoft implemented this feature for Windows. Fact is, basic notifications is technically a possibility. Not an Apple problem.
Then carriers should force to use the most recent version of MMS. Carriers are degrading by accepting such an old standard.
Then Unreal and Unity should NOT be asking for recurring payments/percentage either. This is an industry problem, not an Apple one.Except, they paid the Developer fee, please stop saying they want it free
I can make more money selling my game on iOS vs using Unity/Unreal and selling it on Steam.
Source? What exactly are you referring to and which carriers support it?
I think that Unity/Unreal have a more coherent case since they do not really monetize their the Unity or Unreal Engine dev costs other than by licensing (though I think Unity's per download/install fee should be illegal as it double monetizes the same user).
Comparatively Apple monetizes iOS primarily by selling you an iPhone. That is mostly how they monetize the costs to develop iOS. Asking for a percentage of revenue earned from the IP is not necessarily bad but Apple has shot itself in the foot because for a very long time it has not engaged in a fair licensing but discriminatory licensing that seems to put extra financial pressure on companies that compete with Apple.
Forgot to respond to this:
Since Unity/Unreal are game engines vs Steam which is a sales platform this comparison doesn't make sense. Many many games on iOS also use Unity/Unreal so pitting iOS vs Unity/Unreal seems an odd comparison to be making.
That’s is where a misunderstanding occurs. It isn’t so simple.
IF you own an Apple watch you get functionality A-T in iOS. Full functionality on iOS.
IF you own a smartwatch that connects to iOS you get A-J. You don’t get access to K-T as they are Apple APIs you cannot use. (these are just example values). So the OEM has to decide whether or not to invest in a crippled version on iOS. Some do. Some don’t.
So is it simple? Yes in the fact that Apple prohibits full functionality and won’t consider allowing an AW to work on anything other than iOS.
Simple? Yes. and No.
You said "Basic notifications would be cool." which I responded to here https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...e-says-lawsuit-is-wrong.2422451/post-33033912. You thumbs down the post for whatever the reason despite it being true.
We're discussing basic notifications. Not functionality "A-J" and "K-T". I don't think it's me that's misunderstanding this.
on the upside, they can only thumbs down so many posts a day
Basic notifications.
- Messaging
- calls
- music
- calendar alerts
- basic exercise - calories, steps, etc…
- basic health - heart rate etc…
- weather alerts
- map info
- etc…
Basic stuff that I don’t need to carry around my smartphone to get this stuff and can get at a glance. If I need additional interaction I can grab my phone.
’I thumbed down it because your statement was not true.
i like how some people's ideas of "BASIC" are quite specific to the hardware...
Health (which would actually depend on the watch hardware sensors specific to that watch). Maps. Weather Alerts...
Messages... Almost like you should buy the watch that is designed as the accessory that goes with the OS, isnt it?
But that would be a solution and they dont want that.
I buy nice pens.
But I have to buy refills specific to that pen. I'm only writing. That's a basic function. Surely all pens should support the same refills...
Or razors. Damn, the replacement blades only fit one specific brand. It's control. It's a conspiracy. It's anticompetitive...
I'm surprised Facebook Messenger arent on the list - oh they stopped doing notifications themselves, didnt they? Although mine still seems to work.