Apple to Let EU Users Set New Defaults for Multiple Apps, Delete App Store, Photos, Messages and More

[AppliedMicro]

Competition by taking a piece of someones business and giving it to someone else for free is the epitome of the "robin hood" effect.

When someone has a monopoly on something, competition being enabled and actually emerging is "taking away" something from that monopoly operator. At least market share.

It it was your business you would be singing a different tune.

Possibly - but I don't have a monopoly or duopoly business catering to millions of consumers.
Anyways, government should not base its legislation on the tune the dominant market participant is singing.

Where is the case law to support that opinion?

Case law? What are you talking about?

Can or could any business distribute iOS apps to consumers, without going through Apple's App Store?
No - Apple doesn't allow it. And they've implemented technical measures to prevent others from doing so.

That's all. Doesn't need case law to determine Apple has (had) a monopoly on distributing iOS apps to consumers.

government is very capable of making bad laws, unless one has blinders on.

Absolutely.
They're capable of making bad laws.
That doesn't negate that market failure is to be addressed by government regulation.

But I am totally against taking away a company's business and giving it for free to all comers, especially bad actors.

It's not being given away for free.
The EU has merely enacted certain restrictions on monetisation by the gatekeepers.
And they haven't given it away "especially to bad actors".

 

[MilaM]

Now to be fair, I think some of what the DMA is forcing apple should have allowed anyway as a matter of course. But I am totally against taking away a company's business and giving it for free to all comers, especially bad actors.

The irony is, that the DMA is actually a very tame regulation. If the competition situation was more dire, they could have forced Apple to spin-off and sell the App Store and maybe even some parts of the services business. It would have been tough to defend that in courts, but it would also not be without precedent. The outcome of the current law will likely be, that Apple can mostly continue expanding their current businesses by only adjusting their practices slightly. It will mostly be the same experience of a walled garden that you cherish so much. OK, maybe you'll have to replace one or two apps because they won't be available at the App Store any more. But hey, that's nothing life-threatening, is it ?

 

[I7guy]

The irony is, that the DMA is actually a very tame regulation. If the competition situation was more dire, they could have forced Apple to spin-off and sell the App Store and maybe even some parts of the services business. It would have been tough to defend that in courts, but it would also not be without precedent. The outcome of the current law will likely be, that Apple can mostly continue expanding their current businesses by only adjusting their practices slightly. It will mostly be the same experience of a walled garden that you cherish so much. OK, maybe you'll have to replace one or two apps because they won't be available at the App Store any more. But hey, that's nothing life-threatening, is it ?

Apple would have had a more proportional response imo to an escalating set of regulations. It could be the EU is left without american tech as the proportionality of the regulations ramp up. it's not about being life threating as @AppliedMicro first started down the path of the app needed for existence.

 

[I7guy]

When someone has a monopoly on something, competition being enabled and actually emerging is "taking away" something from that monopoly operator. At least market share.

It's not a monopoly.

Possibly - but I don't have a monopoly or duopoly business catering to millions of consumers.
Anyways, government should not base its legislation on the tune the dominant market participant is singing.

It's not a monopoly.

Case law? What are you talking about?

What are you talking about monopoly. It's a legal definition, not a meme.

Can or could any business distribute iOS apps to consumers, without going through Apple's App Store?

Can you buy a new Honda accord manufactured by Toyota?

No - Apple doesn't allow it. And they've implemented technical measures to prevent others from doing so.

it's their business and they are justified in doing so.

That's all. Doesn't need case law to determine Apple has (had) a monopoly on distributing iOS apps to consumers.

Yes you do.

Absolutely.
They're capable of making bad laws.
That doesn't negate that market failure is to be addressed by government regulation.

Well no it doesn't.

It's not being given away for free.

It absolutely is.

The EU has merely enacted certain restrictions on monetisation by the gatekeepers.
And they haven't given it away "especially to bad actors".

The EU threaded the needed, very carefully I might add to entrap Apple. You keep using gatekeeper as a justification for a bad set of regulations. And yes they have given it away for free to bad actors. I guess to some it's irrelevant if a dev attempted to defraud apple and had their membership revoked -- because it's totally a non-issue. But apples "so-called monopoly" is a big issue.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Most of your replyt is mere countering by stating the opposite of what I said without even attempting to make a factual point or argument, so I'm going to ignore that.

Can you buy a new Honda accord manufactured by Toyota?

A Honda accord is merely one particular make or brand of car.
Whereas the hundreds of thousands of iOS apps are a whole category of products for a platform that consumers have committed by by buying into it.

The Honda manufacturer and its Accords don't account for about half of the entire car market relevant to consumers.
Whereas iOS apps do (less than half of downloads, but more than half of revenue).

Even if the two of Honda and Toyota combined controlled 95%+ of the car market...:
The fact that there are dozens or hundreds of local or regional road/street operators - that provide the ways for these cars to run on - does not mean that there'd be "plenty of competition in the car market", as you're so often suggesting with regards to mobile OS/app markets ("But... but... but... there are so many smartphone manufacturers/brands!")

 

[I7guy]

Most of your replyt is mere countering what I said without even attempting to make a factual point or argument, so I'm going to ignore that.

A Honda accord is merely one particular make or brand of car.
Whereas the hundreds of thousands of iOS apps are a whole category of products for a platform that consumers have committed by by buying into it.

Honda Accords don't account for about half of the entire car market relevant to consumers.
Whereas iOS apps do (a little bit less than half of downloads, a bit more than half of revenue).

The difference is, again, obvious.

I get it. You believe the dma is the best legislation since sliced bread and will make any pretzel logic to defend it.

You use words that have no legal meaning and don’t believe that government is playing Robin Hood.

I believe the opposite and will float my points.

 

[AppliedMicro]

I get it. You believe the dma is the best legislation since sliced bread and will make any pretzel logic to defend it.

I get it:
You're now resorting to straw men to attack.

Sad. Really sad.

You use words that have no legal meaning

👉 How many companies does Apple allow to operate app stores and/or distribute iOS apps directly to consumers?
👉 How many companies can consumers download or buy their apps for their iOS smartphones from?

Outside of where or before the DMA entered into force, I mean.
Just state a number. And we'll see how economists would describe your answer.

 

[I7guy]

I get it:
You're now resorting to straw men to attack.

Sad. Really sad.


👉 How many companies does Apple allow to operate app stores and/or distribute iOS apps directly to consumers?
👉 How many companies can consumers download or buy their apps for their iOS smartphones from?

Outside of where or before the DMA entered into force, I mean.
Just state a number. And we'll see how economists would call the answer.

Straw man argument.

Where is the case law that says apple operates a monopoly as you have claimed multiple times.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Where is the case law that says apple operates a monopoly as you have claimed multiple times.

I see you're merely rehashing your questions rather than trying to engage.

A monopoly is a legal concept. And it's also a term in any economics 101 class and textbook. No "case law" is needed to conclude that Apple economically acts as a monopoly seller/distributor of iOS applications to consumers.

Honestly, I'm not getting why it's so bloody hard to accept and admit.
It's certainly debatable whether the monopoly Apple has on app distribution

• is justified
• benefits consumers
• should be regulated or prohibited, and if so, how.

I'd rather do that and discuss the merits and drawbacks of it - than spend my time on such inane word games.

This is getting beyond ridiculous - and you are merely trolling at this point.
Good bye! 🐟

 

[BaldiMac]

First of all, the answer is: No, iPhones will never accept anywhere near 240W. We’re talking 2023 Mac Pro-levels of energy here.

Great! You made a prediction that has nothing to do with my point. Does that make you an oracle?

Why on earth would they change the connector again? What are these benefits? How can Apple spin a new connector change into a good thing — will it spin around?

I mean, the obvious reasons to change the size and shape of the connector would be because the size and shape of the connector don't work with the design of the device or you need a different size and shape connector to enable new features.

 

[I7guy]

I see you're merely rehashing your questions rather than trying to engage.

We're going around in the proverbial circle at this point in time.

A monopoly is a legal concept. And it's also a term in any economics 101 class and textbook. No "case law" is needed to conclude that Apple economically acts as a monopoly seller/distributor of iOS applications to consumers.

So apple has a monopoly on it's products the same way Honda has monopoly on their products.

Honestly, I'm not getting why it's so bloody hard to accept and admit.

I'm not getting why it's "so bloody" hard to admit how bad the legislation of the DMA is.

It's certainly debatable whether the monopoly Apple has on app distribution

• is justified
• benefits consumers
• should be regulated or prohibited, and if so, how.

Yes, apple has a monopoly on it's products. The debate on all things apple, and on topic to the thread is justified, but many of the posts seem like conclusions rather than opinions.

I'd rather do that and discuss the merits and drawbacks of it - than spend my time on such inane word games.

There's a concept called "eat your own dogfood".

This is getting beyond ridiculous - and you are merely trolling at this point.
Good bye! 🐟

I'm just stating my opinion on the legislation, the downstream impact it has, the impact to the consumers and developers and the fact that the EU has taken apples business model and given it away. If you don't want to discuss that then don't. But I did say above I thought apple should incorporate some of the things they did in ios 18, earlier. It would have cost apple nothing but goodwill.

 

[mrat93]

Great! You made a prediction that has nothing to do with my point. Does that make you an oracle?

… you made a point?

I mean, the obvious reasons to change the size and shape of the connector would be because the size and shape of the connector don't work with the design of the device or you need a different size and shape connector to enable new features.

Ok yeah sure. That’ll happen.

 

[wbeasley]

The irony is, that the DMA is actually a very tame regulation. If the competition situation was more dire, they could have forced Apple to spin-off and sell the App Store and maybe even some parts of the services business. It would have been tough to defend that in courts, but it would also not be without precedent. The outcome of the current law will likely be, that Apple can mostly continue expanding their current businesses by only adjusting their practices slightly. It will mostly be the same experience of a walled garden that you cherish so much. OK, maybe you'll have to replace one or two apps because they won't be available at the App Store any more. But hey, that's nothing life-threatening, is it ?

tame?

by fining Apple based on WORLDWIDE income?

hardly... and well beyond the financial impact of sales within their border...

 

[wbeasley]

It's not a monopoly.

It's not a monopoly.

What are you talking about monopoly. It's a legal definition, not a meme.

Can you buy a new Honda accord manufactured by Toyota?

it's their business and they are justified in doing so.

Yes you do.

Well no it doesn't.

It absolutely is.

The EU threaded the needed, very carefully I might add to entrap Apple. You keep using gatekeeper as a justification for a bad set of regulations. And yes they have given it away for free to bad actors. I guess to some it's irrelevant if a dev attempted to defraud apple and had their membership revoked -- because it's totally a non-issue. But apples "so-called monopoly" is a big issue.

your posts read much better with Ignored Content blocked out...

much shorter without the distracting tangents.

given only three or four of us bothered to answer those two or three EU DMA supporters, there is an easy way to take the wind out of the repetitive sails.

after months, we've exhausted any meaningful discussion. we know alt apps stores in Android World dont get much traffic and cause more issues. As much as we think the EU forcing their change is wrong for all of us, there's probably still enough Apple controls in place to ensure these stores arent the runaway success Epic would like. Business needs to make money and if there isnt a pot of gold waiting there, these sideloaders arent going to last or prosper. Having broken free of Spotify paid subscription, I wont be returning given their continued lobbying of EU to prop them up. Companies that whinge rather than innovate only alienate customers. Spotify and Epic have spent plenty on legal challenges rather than customer focus.

 

[MilaM]

So apple has a monopoly on it's products the same way Honda has monopoly on their products.

This would only be true, if iPhones had no app store and no third party apps. Smartphones are not dumb applicances anymore though. Therefore your comparison is apples to oranges.

Maybe that's a solution for Apple. Just kick out all third party apps, they would not be a Gatekeeper anymore and the DMA problem is solved.

 

[I7guy]

This would only be true, if iPhones had no app store and no third party apps.

I disagree. Apple would still have a “monopoly” on the app store.

Smartphones are not dumb applicances anymore though. Therefore your comparison is apples to oranges.

I disagree, it’s a valid comparison, imo.

Maybe that's a solution for Apple. Just kick out all third party apps, they would not be a Gatekeeper anymore and the DMA problem is solved.

That would make it even worse imo as them apple would get sued for a host of other things.

 

[wbeasley]

This would only be true, if iPhones had no app store and no third party apps. Smartphones are not dumb applicances anymore though. Therefore your comparison is apples to oranges.

Maybe that's a solution for Apple. Just kick out all third party apps, they would not be a Gatekeeper anymore and the DMA problem is solved.

Hahaha no.

Funny how iOS has existed with apps since just after it launched.
And then Android changed from built in apps to allowing third party apps as well.
That was the defining moment for Smart Phones.

a smart phone that can do additional things with apps.

Smart phones were never dumb appliances. That's why they succeeded.
Its been that way for more than decade.
Dumb devices were the old candybar and flip feature phones the EU (Nokia) made and couldnt transition to smarter phones...

BUT suddenly, EU decides they dont like Smart phones. Boo hoo. Why?
Because a few failing companies lobby them.
And they can see an easy cash grab to prop themselves up.
And disguise it as being pro-consumer choice. LOL.

There is choice now.
There is an open add any app you want option.

What happens after the EU DMA still sees more people buying Apple devices AND no huge money maker in alt app stores (which is the Android experience) and letting Spotify put a "how to pay" splash screen doesnt get them any more customers? Horses to water... the EU cannot make us drink what they offer.

You remember Jobs didnt want on device apps. He wanted WebApps.
How would that have panned out?
Lets see how EU users feel when their DMA restrictions start to bite and Apple decide to very slowly roll out new features to them to avoid further grief from EU. Happy then?

 

[webkit]

So apple has a monopoly on it's products the same way Honda has monopoly on their products.

It's not about having a "monopoly" on its own products. Apple's situation would be about having a "monopoly" on the distribution of other companies' products (apps).

 

[I7guy]

It's not about having a "monopoly" on its own products. Apple's situation would be about having a "monopoly" on the distribution of other companies' products (apps).

Apple owns the iphone, ios and the ios app store.

 

[AppliedMicro]

So apple has a monopoly on it's products the same way Honda has monopoly on their products.

No.
Apple controls about half of the entire mobile app market.
Honda controls nowhere near half of the entire car market.
That is the difference.

given only three or four of us bothered to answer those two or three EU DMA supporters, there is an easy way to take the wind out of the repetitive sails.

…with stubborn repetition that fails or refuses to make any argument or present any coherent though? lol.

Funny how iOS has existed with apps since just after it launched.
And then Android changed from built in apps to allowing third party apps as well.

You got your facts wrong.
Google released their first version of the Android SDK months before Apple released theirs.

BUT suddenly, EU decides they dont like Smart phones. Boo hoo. Why?

The EU likes smartphones so much that they’re levelling the playing for third-party developers - and put restrictions on gatekeepers’ ability to stifle innovation.

What happens after the EU DMA still sees more people buying Apple devices AND no huge money maker in alt app stores (which is the Android experience) and letting Spotify put a "how to pay" splash screen doesnt get them any more customers? Horses to water... the EU cannot make us drink what they offer.

You’re missing the part where Apple themselves have begun to allow apps in a sensible way that they previously didn’t (such as emulators and game streaming apps).

Apple knew that at least emulators are popular with consumers. The horses would gladly drink that. And rather than it successfully being provided by someone else, Apple decided to (finally) do it themselves, too. Cause they din’t want emerging competition - but clearly felt or feared its effects.

And that’s exactly what we need: Possible competition to be enabled. And Apple feeling it - by making their own offer or service more competitive. That‚s just what they did.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Apple owns the iphone, ios and the ios app store.

… but they don’t own third-party apps - or third-party services delivered by apps to iOS users.

Yet they reserve the right to be the only distributor of them to consumers - hence a monopoly.
(one doesn’t need “case law” to see that)

 

[I7guy]

… but they don’t own third-party apps - or third-party services delivered by apps to iOS users.

Third party apps contract with apple to distribute their applications. They opt-in to the process.

Yet they reserve the right to be the only distributor of them to consumers - hence a monopoly.
(one doesn’t need “case law” to see that)

Apple owns the iOS App Store, hence they control it. An illegal monopoly has not been found for the iOS App Store up to this point.

 

[I7guy]

No.
Apple controls about half of the entire mobile app market.
Honda controls nowhere near half of the entire car market.
That is the difference.

It’s a world wide minority by market share and an even lesser percentage by manufacturer.

…with stubborn repetition that fails or refuses to make any argument or present any coherent though? lol.[…]

 

[AppliedMicro]

An illegal monopoly has not been found for the iOS App Store up to this point.

The DoJ has found just that - and the EU has fined them for abuse of dominant market position.

We’ll see their findings ultimately confirmed, narrowed down or rejected in courts.

It’s a world wide minority by market share

Not by European revenue though.

 

[webkit]

Apple owns the iphone, ios and the ios app store.

The point is that Apple doesn't own other companies' iOS apps or alternative app stores. Again, Apple's situation would be about having a "monopoly" on the distribution of other companies' products (apps).