Apple to Let EU iPhone Users Delete Safari and More Easily Transition to Android

[Piggie]

It's funny how some people will defend one rule in some areas, but would not accept the same rule in others.

Apple make the iPhone, so it makes the rules, and if you don't like it, then make your own phone and leave Apple alone for those who like it that way.

Ok then.......

So, I make a White only park area, no blacks allowed, its my park, I used my money to make it, I make the rules, if the black people don't like it, then they can make their own park area, leave me and my white folks alone.

We see this as unacceptable.....

So, I make a male only park area, no women allowed, its my park, I used my money to make it, I make the rules, if the woman don't like it, then they can make their own park area, leave me and my male folks alone.

We see this as unacceptable.....

Why can't some people understand, that saying it's my park I made so I make all the rules, and if you don't like it, then make your own park "IS" seen as unacceptable.

Yet they use exactly the same logic to defend Apple constantly?

 

[Manzanito]

The EU is making a mess of Apple's carefully-crafted ecosystem.

Consumers *always* had choice. If they didn't like Apple's model, they go buy an Android. That choice is not being fixed by this DMA. It's just trying to turn iOS into Android, and that should be illegal.

How is making it easier to migrate to android a bad thing? Following the logic of some chaps in these forums, a sizeable portion of iPhone users should be switching to android, so it’s the first nice gesture apple has had in all this drama.

 

[hagar]

Yep, we are waiting for Apple to be forced to allow Android to be run on our iPhones.

That’s just ridiculous and illstra

I have plenty of freedom and choice in the Apple ecosystem. Overwhelmed with choice, in fact. I prefer the integrity of the design and its functionality. The EU does good work on privacy. These sustained assaults on Apple have only to do with EU generating cash for itself with fines and bolstering the greed of other companies.

Seems like a lot of people here are so deep in the Apple bubble they forget the DMA also targets Facebook, Google and Microsoft. These are not sustained assaults targeted specifically at Apple.

 

[svish]

Expecting to see similar option in other countries too in the future.

 

[hagar]

It's funny how some people will defend one rule in some areas, but would not accept the same rule in others.

Apple make the iPhone, so it makes the rules, and if you don't like it, then make your own phone and leave Apple alone for those who like it that way.

Ok then.......

So, I make a White only park area, no blacks allowed, its my park, I used my money to make it, I make the rules, if the black people don't like it, then they can make their own park area, leave me and my white folks alone.

We see this as unacceptable.....

So, I make a male only park area, no women allowed, its my park, I used my money to make it, I make the rules, if the woman don't like it, then they can make their own park area, leave me and my male folks alone.

We see this as unacceptable.....

Why can't some people understand, that saying it's my park I made so I make all the rules, and if you don't like it, then make your own park "IS" seen as unacceptable.

Yet they use exactly the same logic to defend Apple constantly?

While I’m a proponent of the DMA, I don’t think your analogy’s make any sense.

 

[Sertrand Berlet]

Yet the rest of the iPhone us? Bizarre

If only you'd read a thing or two about DMA. iMessage as a service can't be seen as a gatekeeper because of the lack of clout on the European market. iOS as a platform and Safari as a browser are completely different beasts.

 

[Jumpthesnark]

Two choices for an operating system isn't a competitive market.

What's the number then? If two isn't a choice, is three? Four? When is it competition?

I'm not picking on you, @NicosAccount. I've seen this statement several times in this thread, that somehow two platforms, Apple and Android, isn't competition. The statement is just presented as if it's a fact, but clearly there is competition between the two. It sounds completely arbitrary.

So for those of you who say that having two platforms isn't enough for competition, what's the number?

 

[Sertrand Berlet]

So for those of you who say that having two platforms isn't enough for competition, what's the number?

Ask a random procurement guy or gal. Three is the magic number (as a bare minimum).

 

[Abazigal]

I would never understand people speaking for Apple, a trillion dollar company with an army of lawyers able to bankrupt you in seconds should you make them angry. Also, phantom of choice is a thing, and there’s the discontent of both. And what choice do those folks have?

My stance here basically comes down to this - do you want to spend your time making statements that are right, or making statements that are rooted in ideology?

Case in point - the Apple / Epic trial. It may have been cool then to use this opportunity to bash Apple and gloat about how the walls of the App Store would come crashing down for some cheap internet points, but then you would have been dead wrong in hindsight. I stated categorically why Epic stood no chance of winning their lawsuit, and how their reckless gamble would prove disastrous for the developer community as a whole.

Till today, there are people who still cannot wrap their heads around why Apple won the lawsuit against Epic, while Google lost, and attempt to resolve this cognitive dissonance with all manner of excuses. But if people could just look past their own subjective biases, they would have realised right from the start that this was a fool's endeavour on Epic's part.

It's no different here. Apple will give up control of their platform (especially their 30% cut) only kicking and screaming, and the sooner we accept this, the less shocked and surprised everyone will be when Apple does stuff like this.

 

[JuicyGoomba]

A closed ecosystem. Where you have no choice. It’s so weird that people in the US are so against freedom and choice nowadays. People in the EU are still enjoying the EXACT same ecosystem as before. But have the bonus of more options, which they can ignore.

Careful there, trying to tell an American that their way of life is actually significantly worse than large parts of the world usually doesn't end well.

Afterall, why wouldn't you want to live somewhere that eating pancakes with sugar sauce for breakfast is considered normal.

 

[hydrochloride]

I’ve been advocating Apple quitting EU entirely repeatedly.

Yeah, quit a market with hundreds millions consumers. Let‘s see how that will work out. 😀

 

[Jumpthesnark]

It's funny how some people will defend one rule in some areas, but would not accept the same rule in others.

Apple make the iPhone, so it makes the rules, and if you don't like it, then make your own phone and leave Apple alone for those who like it that way.

Ok then.......

So, I make a White only park area, no blacks allowed, its my park, I used my money to make it, I make the rules, if the black people don't like it, then they can make their own park area, leave me and my white folks alone.

We see this as unacceptable.....

So, I make a male only park area, no women allowed, its my park, I used my money to make it, I make the rules, if the woman don't like it, then they can make their own park area, leave me and my male folks alone.

We see this as unacceptable.....

Why can't some people understand, that saying it's my park I made so I make all the rules, and if you don't like it, then make your own park "IS" seen as unacceptable.

Yet they use exactly the same logic to defend Apple constantly?

Really poor analogy. For many reasons, not the least of which is the history of Civil Rights laws in the U.S. (I have no idea where you may live) that specifically ensured public access to public accommodations, such as the hypothetical park you describe.

If it is private property, you can do with it what you want. But if you open it up to the public, then you can't restrict who in the public is allowed.

To compare legally protected public access to public places with Apple saying that they make the rules for the hardware and software they sell is spectacularly off-base. An iPhone is not a public accommodation, like a park or a school or a lunch counter. It is, quite literally, like a store with a sign that says "no shirt, no shoes, no service." That store is private property that is open to all but with rules that all must abide by if they want to be customers.

 

[Jumpthesnark]

Ask a random procurement guy or gal. Three is the magic number (as a bare minimum).

Why is three the magic number? I'm not a "random procurement" person.

 

[hydrochloride]

That store is private property that is open to all but with rules that all must abide by if they want to be customers.

Yeah, maybe in the U.S. Other parts of the world may have a different view on that. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

[pratikindia]

I hope China asks Apple to strictly implement their version of EU rules, then Apple will learn a lesson.

 

[dampfnudel]

At least here in America it's still the same ol' ecosystem we know and love.

For how long? I can see someone in the US seeing all the new options and conveniences that his European friend or work colleague has on his or her iPhone, get jealous and decide to file a lawsuit against Apple for not giving “all of us” that freedom of choice. Some here will jump for joy when that day comes, others like myself will take more of a “wait and see” approach letting others chart that part of the map well known by Android users, but foreign to iOS users.

 

[pratikindia]

Apple seems to be preparing for a clean exit from the EU.

Apple will have no choice left as they had to switch to USB C after EU and other countries. May be in future China will ask them to implement some strict measures and they have to follow it.

 

[cicalinarrot]

To all the “think of the ecosystem” people… Mac OS X.
You could uninstall Safari, install Linux, run and develop apps freely, and it was great and safe.
Money is the only reason why Apple wants to take user’s freedom.

 

[j26]

What's the number then? If two isn't a choice, is three? Four? When is it competition?

I'm not picking on you, @NicosAccount. I've seen this statement several times in this thread, that somehow two platforms, Apple and Android, isn't competition. The statement is just presented as if it's a fact, but clearly there is competition between the two. It sounds completely arbitrary.

So for those of you who say that having two platforms isn't enough for competition, what's the number?

In order of competitiveness
1. Monopoly (1 player
2. Duopoly (2 players)
3. Oligopoly (a small number of players)
4. Perfect competition

You rarely see actual monopolies, and equally you rarely see perfect competition, but you do see near monopolies, and markets where one player is so dominant that it almost has the power of a monopolist, and can bend the market to suit it's interest, and set up artificial barriers to keep other out. You also see plenty of very competitive markets with no dominant players. The more competition, the better for consumers, as prices and quality tend to be better. Fewer producers usually means higher prices and worse product

EU policy is to try to create more competition and move from 1 towards 4.
Usually, from a business perspective, businesses would like to lever their advantages and move closer to 1. where they can maximise profits.
So it essentially boils down to the more players, and the less dominant any individual player is, the more competitive the market is.

For us, it means that competitive markets are better for consumers, and non-competitive markets are better for businesses.

What quite frankly astounds me is the number of consumers on here arguing AGAINST their own interest.

 

[rembert]

Yep, we are waiting for Apple to be forced to allow Android to be run on our iPhones.

Now that would be a marvellous idea for obsolete unsupported iPhones and iPads. I have too many such devices doing nothing.

 

[mrgrdn]

Can believe there is so much hate and bs against apple, what about the others. A upcoming feature which will be used less than 1%

 

[Abazigal]

In order of competitiveness
1. Monopoly (1 player
2. Duopoly (2 players)
3. Oligopoly (a small number of players)
4. Perfect competition

You rarely see actual monopolies, and equally you rarely see perfect competition, but you do see near monopolies, and markets where one player is so dominant that it almost has the power of a monopolist, and can bend the market to suit it's interest, and set up artificial barriers to keep other out. You also see plenty of very competitive markets with no dominant players. The more competition, the better for consumers, as prices and quality tend to be better. Fewer producers usually means higher prices and worse product

EU policy is to try to create more competition and move from 1 towards 4.
Usually, from a business perspective, businesses would like to lever their advantages and move closer to 1. where they can maximise profits.
So it essentially boils down to the more players, and the less dominant any individual player is, the more competitive the market is.

For us, it means that competitive markets are better for consumers, and non-competitive markets are better for businesses.

What quite frankly astounds me is the number of consumers on here arguing AGAINST their own interest.

I don't see myself as arguing against my own self-interests. It's known that the DMA is intended to benefit small businesses, but it's a stretch to assume that this will automatically translate into a net benefit for consumers.

For one, the prices in the App Store are already as low as they can be, in part because there really are too many developers (and too many apps) on iOS, which has a downward pressure on pricing. So I don't believe that opening up iOS will result in better pricing. If anything, I would argue that prices need to go up, and consumers need to be willing to pay more, for app development to be a sustainable business model.

Second, I am having a hard time seeing how it is to my advantage to access an app via a third party App Store compared to simply downloading it inside the iOS App Store. If the developer of say, a free app, wants me to download it from the Facebook or epic App Store, I will naturally be suspicious and wonder why. Is there something in your app which normally would not have made it through app review, like say, the absence of ATT?

I guess an argument can be made that this will allow users to access apps otherwise not allowed in the App Store, but they are usually blocked for reasons. I suppose if that is a hill you are all willing to die on...¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I suppose there might be business models like Setapp which otherwise not have been possible? We will see how well that pans out.

I don't think I am wrong in arguing in favour of preserving the very conditions that led me to embrace the Apple ecosystem in the first place, over android. Maybe what my vision of iOS is at odds with what developers would prefer, and well, that's just the way the cookie crumbles.

 

[Jumpthesnark]

That store is private property that is open to all but with rules that all must abide by if they want to be customers.

Yeah, maybe in the U.S. Other parts of the world may have a different view on that. 🤷🏻‍♂️

It seems you selectively quoted what I said, and then replied to only what you selectively quoted. Allow me to repeat the full context of what I said:

An iPhone is not a public accommodation, like a park or a school or a lunch counter. It is, quite literally, like a store with a sign that says "no shirt, no shoes, no service." That store is private property that is open to all but with rules that all must abide by if they want to be customers.

I hope this helps you to understand, or at least I hope it helps to dispel whatever false statement you may have been trying to attribute to me by presenting my quote without necessary context. By purposefully removing the rest of what I said, some people might assume that quote referred to the Apple Store. Who would do such a thing? 🤷‍♂️

 

[Neg4433]

To all the “think of the ecosystem” people… Mac OS X.
You could uninstall Safari, install Linux, run and develop apps freely, and it was great and safe.
Money is the only reason why Apple wants to take user’s freedom.

Don't burst their bubble in which they live inside. One great example of those users and their bubble is this:
Reality distortion field

 

[j26]

I suppose there might be business models like Setapp which otherwise not have been possible? We will see how well that pans out.

That's an important point.
Apple IS an innovative company, but employees of Apple are not the only innovative people in the world.
The current model where Apple dictates the rules is strangling innovation from other parties.

You just may see models of service delivery that nobody else has thought of, or ones people have already thought of, but can't implement that turn out to be exceptionally beneficial to you.

It may be a fiasco. It may be a damp squib. However I believe real competition is the driver of innovation, and the upsides will outweigh the downsides in the long run.