Nope, it’s all about more $$$$.
Spotify is the most dominant music streaming platform in the world and Epic is one of the largest game publisher in the world too.
It’s literally about buying a new yaght or a new private plane.
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Epic Games and Spotify Say Apple's Latest DMA Changes Are 'Illegal' and 'Deliberately Confusing'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nope, it’s all about more $$$$.
Spotify is the most dominant music streaming platform in the world and Epic is one of the largest game publisher in the world too.
It’s literally about buying a new yaght or a new private plane.
So guy buy a phone that’s like that. No one is stopping you.
Why should Apple be forced to make and sell a device they don’t want to? Especially what a competitor tells them to do? Would you do that if your competitor walked in to your workplace and told you to make whatever it is you make or do worse to help them?
Apple makes a device. Apple creates features for that device. Apple tells the customer openly and freely here is what it can do, here is what it can’t do. The customer is then free to buy it or not. If you don’t like it, it’s very simple DONT BUY IT.
Yet somehow you, people like you, and the morons running the EU think that’s not enough.
“But what about monopolies!?”
Ok fine, if you have a monopoly then they can set some rules. Except Apple has nowhere near a monopoly in the EU.
If Apple just sells hardware alone, no one will buy it. More over, Apple hardware are locked to Apple made Operating Systems. Without the OS, no one will buy their devices. Hence they are not like Microsoft where you can buy hardware and software separately. When Apple sells its devices, the cost includes all the software / OS. It is not just free for the users. Their support to the OS is self serving where many of their apps and services will render useless if they fail to keep it updated and safe. Users merely benefiting from this self-serving actions from Apple, hence we cannot make this as a big point.
I'm convinced they'll never be happy. Apple can give them full control of iOS and they'll still find something to complain about.
Tim wants the market for himself. That is all.
Recently my daughter had some problems with her Epic Games account. GTA V that she purchased on it about 4 years ago suddenly stopped working. It would not longer launch. She reinstalled it. Still the same. Contacted Epic Games support and they said that she hadn't bought it and that she needed to buy it to play it. That is despite it being there in the store and installable. Useless support backed up by lock in and revocation.
They told her to go and buy it somewhere else. No joke.
Tim should do the same. Piss off to another store.
Recently my daughter had some problems with her Epic Games account. GTA V that she purchased on it about 4 years ago suddenly stopped working. It would not longer launch. She reinstalled it. Still the same. Contacted Epic Games support and they said that she hadn't bought it and that she needed to buy it to play it. That is despite it being there in the store and installable. Useless support backed up by lock in and revocation.
They told her to go and buy it somewhere else. No joke.
Tim should do the same. Piss off to another store.
For a$$le music the solution is pretty simple and it has already been adopted in many markets: you force to create an indipendent company for that business ("a$$le music ltd") that has to compete on the market like any other competitor (so it has to pay the 30% fee, the infrastructure hosting,...)
Why do I need the Security Exchange Commission permission to sell a financial product? In a free capitalistic country like US there should be freedom, isn't it?
Regulator, compliance, enforcements only applicable for competing brands from China and other countries! LOL! When it involves Apple, free pass is the only desirable solution !
No, because your washing machine is not qualified has "gatekeeper" by EU. If it happens, things will be different.
Correct, but is it the idea of free install whatever you want that is a poison. Their roadmap is clear: pc must become like a phone, not the opposite; they want to squeeze the 30% even from desktop user in the (near) future.
While at the same time, losing what made the Apple platform unique in the first place - its integrated ecosystem. I am not convinced that consumers are better off in this scenario, though supporters of Spotify would certainly be happy that Apple is being forced to "play fair", and I certainly have no vested interests in Apple being compelled to do so.
Sweeney won't be happy until he can use the App Store and Apple's devtools free of charge.
That's in effect nationalisiing Apple's technology.
I think Sweeney should just make his own phones, his own operating system and his own app store for distribution. That'll show Apple!
That's in effect nationalisiing Apple's technology.
I think Sweeney should just make his own phones, his own operating system and his own app store for distribution. That'll show Apple!
in EU Law the spirit of the law is more important than the literal letter of the law as we have 27 languages and 27 difrent version of the exact same law.
The method of teleological interpretation may be defined as the method of interpretation used by courts, when they interpret legislative provisions in the light of the purpose, values, legal, social and economical goals these provisions aim to achieve
And if your interpretaion goes agasint those then it's wrong
there's no such thing as technically legal. The fact the law have multiple possible interpretations doesn't mean that any of those interpretations are legal. i recommend you to read how EU law works..
That's not what makes Apple unique; it's the quality of their integration. There's nothing preventing them from integrating Apple Music; they would simply need to pay Apple a fair market rate for the privilege. If, for instance, Amazon Music or Google Music were willing to pay more to be integrated as the default, then that would seem fair.
Apple music would just be bared from using any revenue from Apple to run their operations nor share in the revenue the appstoer generates etc.
pay the same fees as everyone else.
I don't quite understand how this discussion came up, when it wasn't part of the DMA. If Apple Music is forced to be spun off, I assume it would not be allowed to be integrated with iOS on a system level the same way other options like Spotify aren't. It would also break compatibility with products like the Apple Watch and the HomePod. It becomes just another undifferentiated music streaming service.
You look at the current state of Spotify, where its need to become profitable has forced it to deviate from its original goal of being just a service focused on delivering the best music streaming service to subscribers, to one that is now bloated with podcasts, ads, audiobooks and an impending lawsuit with the music industry over its use of audiobooks to get away with paying less royalties to musicians.
This speaks more about the unsustainable nature of its core business model, rather than any fault on Apple's part (remember that Spotify isn't paying a cent more to anybody that they absolutely have to). In contrast, Apple Music can be all about music and supporting artists instead of being a catch-all basin for everything audio. It's a feature to have its various services spun out into individual standalone apps (eg: podcasts, even classical music), not a bug.
As a consumer all-in on the Apple ecosystem, I fail to see how that is a net benefit for me as the end user. The reality is that Spotify is increasingly dependent on concessions from the music industry and a diversification away from music streaming just to improve its financial performance, which is not what I want. And because of the nature of those revenue sharing deals, even a higher subscription price may not necessarily flow to Spotify's coffers.
Fair and open competition will not get you the outcome you all want. It just means everyone loses in the end. In this regard, I wouldn't shed a tear if Spotify were to be acquired tomorrow and music streaming becomes just another bullet point on some tech giant's list of platform feature offerings.
And in case any of you are thinking that Apple would allow all alternatives access to iOS just so Apple Music can get the same treatment, you clearly haven't been paying attention to what they are currently doing with Apple Intelligence.
Here is a missed opportunity. The DMA should have mandated, that Apple's commission be charged separately on every transaction. People would very quickly ask questions about the Apple Tax when they check their credit card statements.
Apple, like any other for-profit business, will happily bend over backwards several many times and compromise any part of its products to please the owners of a specific market, like the EU, as long as profits are good enough.
The EU has, rightly, named several tech giants "gatekeepers" because they essentially own the "gates" that all EU citizens have to go through to access our increasingly digital markets and digital "lives" at large.
If complying with the DMA ends up "destroying" the Apple ecosystem that you love then you should blame Apple for choosing profits over keeping iOS intact -It's Apple's decision to pick the money over sticking to its (supposed) principles of its product/OS ecosystem(s) and ideas about privacy. Apple doesn't have to comply if it leaves the EU.
I also doubt Apple will ever bring these changes to the US unless forced by the blatantly pro-business U.S. government. So, you really have nothing to worry about. You're "free" to have big tech dominate and control your digital markets.
3 Things:
My mouth waters at a gorgeous aluminum handset with the Windows logo on the back. Everyone would jump ship because Microsoft is the UNDISPUTED KING of "Hey, y'all wanna make some real **********ing money? We have 4th and 5th party app stores, bruh....come on....Windows....it means WIDE OPEN. Azure cloud, Gamepass Cloud Streaming built in native, 48-64 MP cameras based on pro or not, Fortnite BUNDLED, mature and lax fee models based on time used not quantities downloaded, OEM licensing, bundling, advertising based on contracts, easy porting from Windows 10-11 Desktop OS, Akamai secure user creation, tech support that takes an hour to fix a clock problem, unbelievably strong emotional connection with PC gaming. We also got Clippy, come on..."
- Tit for tat: Epic and Spotify need to understand they are punching way above their weight. The EU is struggling enough to get Apple to comply and Apple has no motivation to deal with kindly or cooperate with entities threatening it. Apple also has, as a result of their founder's libertarian world view, a DEEP DISTRUST of governments. Steve Jobs once said of the Microsoft trial, "Of course they're a monopoly! The government's a monopoly! Takes one to know one." Apple will obfuscate and confuse, using all legal tactics available to it, to make the EU, Spotify, and Epic constantly REACT, REPLY, and RESPOND to what they do, rather than be in a position of leverage and initiative.
- Be Careful What You Wish For: They got what they wanted, and are now stupidly fighting a simple argument: They don't wanna owe Apple a dime. Which is not how you do business. Epic and Spotify are late stage publicly traded companies where "growth" is all their business boils down to. Wall Street dictates their success, not users. Users are a number they use to satisfy Wall Street. The amount of money Epic has wasted in court is minuscule to the amount of revenue lost in not being on the App Store. And it has been so long since Fortnite has been on the App Store, its user base has long term adjusted to another platform such as Sony, Microsoft, or PC, or even Android given the amazing deals you can get on beautiful handsets such a the Galaxy S24 ultra.
- Criticize the Manner in Which Provided: This reminds me o A Few Good Men. Do not ask me to stand the wall and guard the city from harm and then get upset when I kill the ones who are intending to harm you. Do not hire a guard and then criticize the guard for the manner in which protection is provided. Apple is complying how they want to. Make the law strict as hell then. However, strict laws provide malicious compliance. And vague laws avoid malicious compliance, but allow for intentionally obtuse interpretations. It's like the 2nd Amendment in the States: Strictly interpreted, you should only have a gun in a militia. Ok....and some say it is to overthrow the government if it is bad. OK? How? Aircraft carriers. 11 of them. Apple is basically just saying, "Ok. I am allowed my rules, too. Or is this a dictatorial power grab to make me an arm of the government? Am I not allowed to express my capitalist self interest to make money off of the product WE CREATED? The EU doesn't design, develop and manufacture the iPhone. APPLE DOES. If the EU/Spotify/Epic wants to control every step of the process, they should MAKE THEIR OWN PHONE.
My mouth waters at a gorgeous aluminum handset with the Windows logo on the back. Everyone would jump ship because Microsoft is the UNDISPUTED KING of "Hey, y'all wanna make some real **********ing money? We have 4th and 5th party app stores, bruh....come on....Windows....it means WIDE OPEN. Azure cloud, Gamepass Cloud Streaming built in native, 48-64 MP cameras based on pro or not, Fortnite BUNDLED, mature and lax fee models based on time used not quantities downloaded, OEM licensing, bundling, advertising based on contracts, easy porting from Windows 10-11 Desktop OS, Akamai secure user creation, tech support that takes an hour to fix a clock problem, unbelievably strong emotional connection with PC gaming. We also got Clippy, come on..."
Last edited:
Omg, the mental gymnastics you've just done to justify apple double dipping, people already paid a premium for the hardware, they didn't license the hardware.