Apple to Remove iPhone-Apple Watch Wi-Fi Sync in EU With iOS 26.2

[turbineseaplane]

Like don’t get me wrong I get both sides of the argument here and for the most part I’m glad the EU is at least on paper doing something about lock in or whatever, it just sucks that they’re doing it in such a way that allows/encourages Apple to just hold features hostage

This is why I don't want to let Apple off the hook with how they are choosing to respond here, with malicious compliance.

They are choosing methods of complying that do more harm to their own customers in the EU.

They are using their own customers as pawns in a fight over revenue lockdown.

We should never lose sight of that, especially when folks insist that Apple is doing things in service of customer interests.

 

[Runaway Train]

Can you please tell us who’s doing food regulation in the way you like?

The US basically bows completely to industry, real people be damned, and apparently the solution to everything is to take a pill from whatever pharmaceutical company has bought out regulators.

Well, the EU is supposed to be doing that. However when they sign treaties that have next to zero compliance with the regulations they impose intra-community, it defeats the purpose. So now EU consumers can consume low cost meat and grain products full of hormones and genetically modified, imported across the ocean as opposed to favoring their own agriculture. In the name of « fair » competition.

The economic and trade ideology of the EU is straight out the playbook of Friedrich von Hayek - they’ve taken neo-liberalism to a religious, and I would say self-destructive level. As an EU citizen, I wish it were not so.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Well, the EU is supposed to be doing that. However when they sign treaties that have next to zero compliance with the regulations they impose intra-community, it defeats the purpose. So now EU consumers can consume low cost meat and grain products full of hormones and genetically modified, imported across the ocean as opposed to favoring their own agriculture. In the name of « fair » competition.

The economic and trade ideology of the EU is straight out the playbook of Friedrich von Hayek - they’ve taken neo-liberalism to a religious, and I would say self-destructive level. As an EU citizen, I wish it were not so.

I will defer to you and respect your opinion as an EU citizen, of which I am not (but wish I were!)

Could be on the horizon, as I have a path to it via family lineage!

 

[surferfb]

This is why I don't want to let Apple off the hook with how they are choosing to respond here, with malicious compliance.

They are choosing methods of complying that do more harm to their own customers in the EU.

They are using their own customers as pawns in a fight over revenue lockdown.

We should never lose sight of that, especially when folks insist that Apple is doing things in service of customer interests.

I don't understand why you and others assume Apple is lying when it says there are serious privacy issues it can't solve AND remain compliant with the DMA. The lack of these features almost certainly costs Apple sales, normal users don't care about them and aren't going to write their representative about it.

I honestly don't think there is a way to do iPhone mirroring that is DMA compliant AND protects users' privacy to Apple's standards. Now you may look at that and think "I think Apple's standards are too high" and that's fine, but the idea that Apple is just withholding the feature to "stick it to the EU" when they've spent hundreds of millions of dollars and made changes to so many other aspects of their OS to comply just doesn't hold water to me.

Did we think Apple was "sticking it to their UK users" when they withdrew Advanced Data Protection rather than comply with the UK's attempt to break encryption? Or did we think "Apple can't comply with that law, so they obviously needed to remove the feature." Why are we so convinced that Apple could find a way to give third-party hardware complete and total access to a user's iPhone, without physical access, without knowing the security features of said hardware, and keep their users safe?

 

[I7guy]

[…]

Like don’t get me wrong I get both sides of the argument here and for the most part I’m glad the EU is at least on paper doing something about lock in or whatever, it just sucks that they’re doing it in such a way that allows/encourages Apple to just hold features hostage

I think the correct word is forces.

 

[ProbablyDylan]

I don't understand why you and others assume Apple is lying when it says there are serious privacy issues it can't solve AND remain compliant with the DMA.

I refuse to believe that Apple's software engineers cannot solve this. This is the company that builds phones that talk to satellites and watches that detect signs of hypertension. I will not insult their capability or intelligence by assuming they don't know how to make this work.

There's no lack of ability at Apple, only a lack of desire.

 

[I7guy]

This is why I don't want to let Apple off the hook with how they are choosing to respond here, with malicious compliance.

They are choosing methods of complying that do more harm to their own customers in the EU.

They are using their own customers as pawns in a fight over revenue lockdown.

We should never lose sight of that, especially when folks insist that Apple is doing things in service of customer interests.

It’s the eu that is forcing apples hand. The eu has chosen to write regulations thusly.

 

[surferfb]

I refuse to believe that Apple's software engineers cannot solve this. This is the company that builds phones that talk to satellites and watches that detect signs of hypertension. I will not insult their capability or intelligence by assuming they don't know how to make this work.

There's no lack of ability at Apple, only a lack of desire.

You sound like governments who think big tech can create an encryption backdoor that only good guys can use. "They're smart enough, they'll figure it out." I don't think it's humanly possible. I mean, they've spent hundreds and millions of dollars complying with this law, changed a ton of features but they're holding the line on this one, niche issue to make their last stand? It just doesn't make sense.

And even if they could spend a ton of money to figure it out, there's probably not a ROI in doing it. Apple knows how much the feature is used elsewhere, and I see people on MacRumors post all the time that they don't care about it or use it. So what's in it for Apple to spend a ton of time and money to make its competitors products better, for a feature not many people use, when they can just not offer the feature.

This is what I talk about with regulations having consequences. Apple isn't a charity. If the ROI isn't there to make the feature DMA compliant, they're just not going to do it. That's not "punishing" EU customers or "spiting" the EU or "maliciously complying" - it's a just rational business decision that results from having people who thought making all phones use MicroUSB was a good idea design Apple's software for them.

 

[Abazigal]

This is why I don't want to let Apple off the hook with how they are choosing to respond here, with malicious compliance.

They are choosing methods of complying that do more harm to their own customers in the EU.

They are using their own customers as pawns in a fight over revenue lockdown.

We should never lose sight of that, especially when folks insist that Apple is doing things in service of customer interests.

Why do you expect that Apple is obligated to bend over backwards to adhere to the terms of the DMA regardless of the cost to its ecosystem and its long term strategic interests?

 

[hagar]

That’s because the EU regulators didn’t legislate “stop tracking us”. Because, in the end, big companies with deep pockets still have a say into any law that will impact their profits.

The EU did legislate “stop tracking us.”
It’s literally the baseline: no tracking without consent. Companies chose pop-ups because they’d rather pressure people into accepting than redesign their business model.

And sure, big companies lobby everywhere. The difference is that in the EU, independent regulators and the courts have already fined them billions precisely for ignoring these privacy rules.

 

[turbineseaplane]

The EU did legislate “stop tracking us.”
It’s literally the baseline: no tracking without consent. Companies chose pop-ups because they’d rather pressure people into accepting than redesign their business model.

This 👆

The companies chose the "consent" part instead of the "no tracking" part.

For some reason people are mad at the EU instead of the companies who want to track and monetize every breath you take.

🙃

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I assume you mean ARM? Was a UK company, actually.

And ARM received a good amount of funding… from Apple. So.

 

[MilaM]

And sure, big companies lobby everywhere. The difference is that in the EU, independent regulators and the courts have already fined them billions precisely for ignoring these privacy rules.

People wonder why the fines need to be so high. It's because for some companies it's more profitable to pay billions, instead of doing their business in compliance with existing laws.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

The EU did legislate “stop tracking us.”
It’s literally the baseline: no tracking without consent. Companies chose pop-ups because they’d rather pressure people into accepting than redesign their business model.

And sure, big companies lobby everywhere. The difference is that in the EU, independent regulators and the courts have already fined them billions precisely for ignoring these privacy rules.

You say “The EU did legislate “stop tracking us”

then follow that with “No tracking without consent.”

So, as I said, the EU did NOT legislate “stop tracking us”. Mainly because there are large companies that said, “Hey, no, we don’t want to stop, soooo make sure we can track them if they say we can. That way, we’ll just make it confusing so that they’ll say yes.”

 

[Unregistered 4U]

This 👆

The companies chose the "consent" part instead of the "no tracking" part.

For some reason people are mad at the EU instead of the companies who want to track and monetize every breath you take.

🙃

Which means they didn’t legislate “stop tracking us”. Which is what I wrote.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

You sound like governments who think big tech can create an encryption backdoor that only good guys can use. "They're smart enough, they'll figure it out." I don't think it's humanly possible. I mean, they've spent hundreds and millions of dollars complying with this law, changed a ton of features but they're holding the line on this one, niche issue to make their last stand? It just doesn't make sense.

There’s a lack of desire at Apple to share trackable information with third parties… and folks seem to have a problem with that. Apple should use reverse psychology “We’re going to give all the info we have to third parties” and watch people’s brains explode. “They shouldn’t but, if they didn’t they should be forced to, so they should definitely do it though they certainly shouldn’t…” >pop<

 

[Wowfunhappy]

I live in the US, and my Apple Watch does not do this. I always have to enter the wifi credentials on my watch, which is really annoying. Is there something I need to enable for this to work?

 

[turbineseaplane]

I live in the US, and my Apple Watch does not do this. I always have to enter the wifi credentials on my watch, which is really annoying. Is there something I need to enable for this to work?

It's probably a bug.
Apple software quality these days is a very mixed bag.

 

[Radeon85]

The EU has to go, it's causing nothing but problems. I'm glad the UK left that dump, so hopefully this stupid rule won't apply to us UK users, as the other ridiculous EU iPhone rules never did.

 

[Unggoy Murderer]

What often gets overlooked in the "free roaming" is that it is often capped so you don't get unlimited free data if you are outside your normal service area; unlike say in the US where you can move and keep the same number and you get the same data/text/phone as you did in your old service area. No need to change numbers if you move 2000 km away.

I'm sure that's useful to the tiny number of people that would want that. If I moved abroad, I'd probably expect to have a local number.

 

[Unggoy Murderer]

And ARM received a good amount of funding… from Apple. So.

Yes definitely, among others. Not sure what your point is?

 

[jlc1978]

I'm sure that's useful to the tiny number of people that would want that. If I moved abroad, I'd probably expect to have a local number.

It really depends on the situation and how mobile plans are structured. In the US, it is not uncommon for someone to have a non-local number because that was the number they had before they moved; and since plans allow coast to coast calling keeping a number makes perfect sense. It doesn't cost more to call, and you don't have to give people your new number when you move. People are used to calling a different area code; you could have the same number for life and still move multiple times. One of my family's US number has been in the family 60+ years, even though no one lives in that area code.

EU plans are more restrictive, so having a local number is needed or else you could wind up with hefty bill or canceled service. The EU still, in many respects, considered each country as a separate entity and thus distinguishes between national and international. For example, in Portugal, a letter within it is at the national rate, one to Germany is an international letter; unlike the US where one can send a letter across the street or coast to coast for the same rate.

Neither way is inherently better, just different.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Yes definitely, among others. Not sure what your point is?

Apple’s investment was crucial for their formation and Apple was their first customer. No Apple interest, likely no ARM.

 

[Unggoy Murderer]

Apple’s investment was crucial for their formation and Apple was their first customer. No Apple interest, likely no ARM.

Apple definitely was not their first customer, not by a long shot. They might have been an early large customer, but ARM were just fine before Apple.

The demand for efficient chips wasn't created by Apple, they just happen to be among the best at making them just now.