nutritious
macrumors 6502
how dare you talk about the oligarchy!!11 for the market is our god and will lead us unto all truth!1111
Epic Games and Spotify Say Apple's Latest DMA Changes Are 'Illegal' and 'Deliberately Confusing'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
in those cases you pay Adobe or Microsoft , the creator of the product. In their eyes, it is the equivalent to Microsoft having to pay DELL to run Microsoft office on your DELL computer. Developers paying Apple for the "privilege" of having their software on their platform.
I really don't realize, and posting two minor niggles from this year really did not help.
If that is the price for consumer rights maybe it is worth it.
Wrong, there are tons of free software
They cant, at least not really. you would be pulling the plug on a major segment of monetization for Apple and Google. if you pull the plug on this then apple will make you buy a developer license, or some other thing that will be a barrier to entry. the App Store had a low barrier to entry but a high cost if you did well. the alternative is going to be a high bar to enter but a low cost if you do well. That means less apps, less developers and less innovation all around. Apple is NOT going to give up their money. Does not matter how hard the EU tries it will just shift the burden somewhere else in the system.
In epic games case they are using the phone as a games platform, akin to a switch. Nintendo charges licensing fees on developers and they have to pay for a development kit that is only sold by Nintendo. (barrier to entry). So apple could say that the phone is a form of a console and they have a right to licensing fees. the licensing fee can be anything, just like Nintendo can charge anything for a switch license. Nintendo has their e-shop. I am sure they make royalties on it and you can't go buy switch games somewhere else.
A totally different ecosystem would be that you could buy a mobile computer and license a "phone app" instead of the other way around. then you could have the open ecosystem most people think they want. Right now the phone comes with a mobile computer. cost on something like this would be CRAZY high.
You sure know about the internet in the EU. 😏
How much do you pay for the internet, 24/365, unlimited usage, download etc for your home connection? And, how much for mobile internet connection, in the US?
Yeah, crazy high just like computers... oh wait nope, it wouldnt be crazy high at all.
I was jealous when my american friend said he had 1000/1000 meg internet, then he said the price and i wasn't anymore.
surferfb
Contributor
You know I was talking about the user experience of using the internet. The inability to buy a museum ticket or book a restaurant recommendation online without having to give the restaurant/museum buckets of personal information; the constant barrage of popups asking to "accept / reject cookies" on literally every website; etc. Literally all the GDPR did was make the internet more annoying for everyone who isn't sophisticated enough to install extensions to block them (i.e., almost everyone not commenting on tech forums).
But I'll humor you - I pay $75 a month for gigabit fiber up and down, and have unlimited usage at home. I pay $120/month for three lines unlimited 5G data for cellular, but I knowingly pay for a more expensive plan as I require extremely reliable service due to my work, who reimburses me for $100 of the $120.
FWIW, I actually agree with you that telecom firms should be more strongly regulated in the US, because they're ACTUALLY monopolies where often consumers literally have no choice in provider. I'm not against all or even most regulation, just bad regulation like GDPR and the DMA. And again, there are parts of the DMA that are good, just the bad far, far, far outweighs the good and is actually going to hurt EU citizens in the long run.
Again - I'm a big fan of Europe. I lived in the EU, speak a major EU language fluently, my brother is about to become an EU citizen, and I hope to buy property and potentially retire there. It's part of the reason I care so much that they're making tech worse for their citizens!
That's called RODO, and we have nothing against it. We were somewhat against it at the beginning, but now we see the plus sides of that.
Well, I don't need gigabytes, even though I work from home. 2 random tests at peek time at home connection.
For 2 mobile phones with unlimited calls, mobile internet etc, 4K cable TV connection with multi room, stationary internet phone and unlimited internet 24/7, we pay all told ~ 45.70USD, out of which the home internet is ~15USD/month, or the value of ~11 loaves of excellent rye bread.
Nuno Lopes
macrumors 65816
I think you may be confused about what a market is. There is a difference between a market and a shop/store.
A market implies that there are multiple sellers (multiple shops if you will) and buyers. A shop on the other hand is one seller, multiple buyers. Now a shop may in both instances have one or more suppliers.
The App Store only has one seller, Apple, it’s one Shop. The rest are either suppliers serving the shop or customers of the shop. There is no market going on here. This can be easily verified by looking at the invoices people receive when they click buy In App or on the App Store. The policies and Apple attitude towards other businesses as servants of the shop just reflect this notion. The rest is fireworks just to make the pill easier to swallow.
The idea of a, iOS app market its an illusion created around a very clever story line, also invented by Apple paired with the amount of suppliers. Now like any illusion it has material consequences. Some of them may be beneficial for some others aren't for some ...
Have not read it. I think I missed it. Can you share a link to the post where you have explained it?
Well, the DMA as far as I understand it is requiring that prominent internet connected devices and operating systems to actually facilitate a digital market along, continuing all the technological work done on Internet for such purposes. A place anyone can legally sell their goods to their customers. A place where everyone can choose their suppliers for digital goods and whatnot, regardless of their internet connected device of choice (prominent, not niche). Single shops built on the back of prominent internet connected device will simply not be allowed.
Until prominent devices / OS do this, and steering measures to their own Shop are shown not to be in place, OEMs and what to will face regulators prosecutions, fines, etc etc.
Everyone is focusing on supporting other App Stores inline with Apple. It is not the case. Say you make an App. The regulation gives you to right open a store for your App, distribute and sell, regardless of the device people use, or the technology used to build it. Furthermore, sell whatever through your App. If you want to use a third party shop, say Apple App Store or any other, you can. The regulation protects that right.
The customer has a choices to be made, whether you are customer buying an Apps (buy what to whom), or a customer developing software using a prominent device API (a choice on how to market and their your products). Prominent internet connected devices should promote the continuity of the open market place fostered by Internet and Governments, case in case the EU governments.
EU regulators mistake in my opinion is that they letting other drag them into also regulate Apple App Store kinds of stores, a single Shop for a single device ... which is irrelevant. They are getting distracted with this. They should forget this, they will only get their feet full of cr...
They should stop and think rather than going after every single complaint or Apple counter measures, instead think of the market has a whole. Effective regulations for internet shops already exist and are sufficient.
They should instead focus on regulating internet connected devices operation in the EU marketplace in this context. In particular, requiring OEMs to decouple their prominent internet connected devices from any shop regardless of shop owner, and check for attempts of steering, that is all there is to it. Some prominent devices and OS already do this, others still don't this ... oh and others although already doing this, following the lead of you know whom, seam to be trying drift away from doing this ...
So how iOS effectively support what is known as a market is akin to Apple giving away its IP? I honestly don't understand your explanation. It looks more like a statement after a statement, rather than an explanation.
Check for instance Amazon.COM.
Amazon.COM is both a shop and a market place. Some goods found on it are sold by Amazon, other goods are sold by other sellers. This can be clearly established by looking at the invoices. Furthermore, if a good listed in Amazon.COM, yet is facilitated and sold outside Amazon.COM, no fees are required. It may happen that the user found the good first on Amazon.COM but found a better deal elsewhere (there is why Price Comparators exist, some of them point to Amazon ... ). Furthermore, if Amazon.COM happens to sell a third party device or software, say an iPhone, and the user buys other goods through such device, it does not require a fee, even if it using AWS. Unless of course Amazon.COM is used in such device. This unlike Apple App Store policies ... after buying the device/app ... whatever is sold through that device/app (In App sale) is also charged a fee.
Amazon also has another business. AWS. AWS is a platform to build and serve software applications. Amazon charges developers its use independently of Amazon.COM. Unlike iOS platform and App Store, Amazon.COM and AWS policies are entirely unrelated.
Is Amazon giving up any of its IP for free? If it is, shareholder should tell them, it's inadmissible, bad management. It seams that Amazon in this context has no IP problems.
They had other kinds of problems: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/20/amazon-reaches-settlement-with-eu-on-antitrust-case.html
It depends on what is a big marketshare for you. I would say a OEM supplier an internet connected device with 18% of market share ... world wide ... is a pretty large marketshare. This is of course an average, some regions are way over 50% market share, others may be bellow 4%.
But that is not so much the issue here.
You see, Verizon has 37% marketshare in the US yet does not charge Apple a fee for their devices ability to connect to their network. Vodafone for instance, as 20% and 30% in the Germany, same thing.
Not that they wouldn't mind doing so, is not if they did not invented the Verizon Network or the Vodafone Network …. In fact, especially in the US they have been campaigning hard for regulations to be drop so they could do this … but damn regulations and regulators … they know nothing. Maybe with Trump they will be able to achieve their intents.
Absolutely. The DMA does not affect at all such a premise. It just making sure that prominent Internet connected devices actually foster a market on the back of the Internet ecosystem. Continuing the work for which such ecosystem was built for.
Now you seam to be applying a different logic here. Because people buy a specific smartphone, case in case, they are voting for the companies practices as a whole. Including policies that don’t affect them specifically. That is silly mate. Most people just focus on the product they just bought, if it works well etc etc. Consumers aren’t required to be activists, thank the lord for that.
For instance:
- just now you thought that Apple has created a market. Well it has not. It created an internet connected device and put a Store or its back. Most Apple Ads, market the devices well rounded user experience and its ability to run Apps and access the Internet. That is why people buy it , and will keep on buying.
- Some people, may think that they have customers under such regime. Well they do not. They are simply suppliers of a single shop, the App Store. The customers aren’t theirs. Some learned that the hard way and expanded to other platforms were they could sell themselves, getting some claw … the ones that didn’t, some very successful, vanished to the oblivion.
Others, simply still do not know that and don't care as far as they feel nice because bought a car and house , employed some people, ... they will worry when they face the fact that the IP in practice is not theirs
- Some people may think that the App Store just sells Apps they don't. They sell of books, videos, dating arrangements, video conferences, tutoring lessons, you name it ... al on the back of third party IP. What they do not sell is down to the simple fact they do not want to sell. The infrastructure, policies and agreements is there to sell whatever ... all they need to enforce is the use of some OS API. If policies aren't there yet, well these can always be unilaterally change at any time. For instance, recently they required each game stream to be published and charged independently, and be subject to their approval ... compare that with Apple Arcade mate. They don't charge for Uber rides, but they could, everything is there at the distance some new lines in the policy.
Since inception has been the source of several lawsuits regarding its practices. Simply because, some businesses were caught of guard given the perception fostered by the company. The only ones who haven't reached the wall, are the ones that don't think that have much IP to protect.
The name itself, App Store, conveys an illusion, not reality.
Have fun.
PS: Talking about what a market actually is. The EU is a market so big that hosts markets. It has been there before iOS/IPhones and Apple App Store came to town. The digital market has whole has been before these things were thought. Heck, the software market has been before. The Internet ecosystem has been before. No one is forcing Apple to be or produce things for this.
Not taking merit out of Apple innovations. But I do think you maybe taking far greater achievements for granted you maybe too easily inclined to let be siphoned for by a smartphone and then maybe a laptop, and than maybe some glasses … who knows. Achievements that touch lives in way more profound ways. You know, the difference between Ambulances and its tripulants, saving lives every second of the day, and the occasional achievement of the Apple Watch alerts. You may take this for granted as the air you breathe, but be careful, without it … Perceptions, perceptions.
Cheers.
Last edited:
surferfb
Contributor
I used to live in the EU - I'm well aware you get better prices/service on telecom services over there. Some of that is due to the size of the countries; some of that is due to stricter regulation. Again, I am all for stricter regulation of US telecom companies. They are actually monopolies in most locations over here.
But Apple isn't anywhere close to a monopoly with ~25% of the smartphone market in the EU. If Google had the same "no side loading, no alternate App Store" stance that Apple does, I would agree with all of you that regulation opening up both App Stores would be appropriate. However, Google does allow exactly what you and the EU are asking for, so developers and users who want that sort of marketplace have a choice. And the DMA does far, far more than just opening up app stores, (the far, far more part is where the majority of the regulation's harm is done).
ric22
Suspended
Excruciating? Methinks you're exaggerating.
I currently live inside the EU, though I didn't before last year. There's no meaningful downsides at all. I do use StopTheMadness which does make the internet less annoying in general, though.
Drop in the bucket compared to paid software counts. This is why I said “nearly” and not “every”.
surferfb
Contributor
StopTheMadness is great. Highly recommended to everyone inside and outside of the EU.
The whole thing in the EU is consumer comes first. In the US, the company, business comes first. That's pretty hard for us in the EU to understand that. We don't like to hand over our rights to companies, to business.
The word DMA is troubling the Americans, who can't or won't understand consumer rights. They understand company rights and ready to fight for the company, while at a loss themselves. They don't understand that as consumers they should demand the features, not just be happy with what a company thinks you should have. They also don't understand, if you buy a device, it is yours and you are free to whatever you want, whenever you want with it. You add any apps to it, or delete them. Apps should not be blocked in the device, so the owner cannot get rid of them.
The EU is a massive market, much bigger than the US and Canada taken together. It is an educated market. Only a fool will leave it. You say, Apple isn't anywhere near 25% of the smartphone market in the EU. That tells something, doesn't it?
maxoakland
macrumors 65816
Thanks for the correction
maxoakland
macrumors 65816
The EU’s directives are very clear. Clarity isn’t the issue
The issue is that Apple is treating EU law like US law. EU law states a goal and the rules exist to enforce that goal. In the US, laws state very explicit rules and the goal isn’t a concern. Companies do whatever they can to follow the letter of law law while avoiding the goal in order to enrich themselves
That doesn’t fly in the EU, which is great for customers because Apple’s pathetic malicious compliance would pass muster in the US despite the fact that they’re purposely doing whatever they can to avoid doing things that will benefit customers
BaldiMac
macrumors G3
That's reductionist nonsense. As usual there's plenty of nuance. Both the US and the EU balance consumer and business priotities. The US simply leans further towards business than the EU. Both policies have advantages and disadvantages.
More stereotypical nonsense. I certainly understand and support consumer rights as an American.
The problem is that the parts of the DMA that I disagree with don't benefit me as a consumer. They primarily benefit large corporations. I value the benefits of the single App Store model that has led to low prices, a wide variety of apps and straightforward pricing.
Sigh. The EU has a larger population, but it is a significantly smaller market than the US. And Apple's smartphone market share in the EU is around 30%.
surferfb
Contributor
I fundamentally disagree the consumer comes first in the EU. COMPETITION comes first, even if the EU needs to make things worse for consumers in order to "support" competition.
That's why I said, you won't fathom it. You are sold to the company, we are not.
Excellent, then fight for it!
Sure, you can have it the US, we can have multiple ones in the EU.
The EU is an educated market. We can even buy Huawei. And, Huawei knows how to access Play Store for its customers.
Last edited:
ProbablyDylan
macrumors 68020
To be fair, increasing competition is very much a means to an end. Forcing Apple, or any big tech company, to compete means they need to make a better product or better services, which ultimately benefits the consumer.
We can see this happening with Laptops as of late. AMD and Intel are doing everything they can to beat Apple's chips while Microsoft, Asus, Samsung, et. al flirt with Qualcomm / ARM chip companies to hopefully build a better laptop than Apple's. The winner, ultimately, is the consumer. There's now a bunch of excellent laptops to choose from, made by a bunch of different companies using a bunch of different components.
ric22
Suspended
Hmm, nah, not overall. The EU are doing a LOT for consumers, especially when it comes to recent tech laws.
Sure, people come first is a terrible thing.😏
In other words, you failed to:
1) Read, since at no point was I singling out chinese suppliers. Apple is an equal-opportunity strong-armer and does this to everyone they can.
2) Do even the most basic of Google searches on the subject. Which would reveal you very specific instances.