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.
EU Approves Landmark Legislation to Regulate Apple and Other Big Tech Firms
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There should be choice in OS (sadly there’s not much).
And there should be choice in apps (where you download/buy them from) when using a given OS. Especially when and because there’s a lack of viable options and choice in operating systems themselves.
Put differently: there shouldn’t be a monopoly or duopoly of one or two companies that control the entire market for Office or image editing apps. And there shouldn’t be only one or two that control the market distribution of apps.
Also, gatekeepers shouldn’t be able to leverage their market power to „freeload“ at will by charging commissions for third-party services they’re not engaged in or providing (dating apps, Spotify streaming) or self-preference their own competing services and products.
In practical terms, the latter - open, competitive distribution of apps and in-app purchases - is easily achievable through legislation. The technical means exists and are being used today.
Incentivising the markets to establish more operating system choices is hardly achievable through regulation - and that’s exactly why we should regulate the behaviour of the few operating system developers.
You know what drives me crazy, especially with regards to sideloading?
1. „I want a lack of choice. If you give me more choice, you‘re taking choice away from me“.
2. „But I need to have this particular app! Being forced to download even one app from the developer is such a huge problem. But being forced to download every through a third party (Apple) instead isn’t an issue at all.“
There was, they died.
We have choice in apps. You can pick app A or B or C. Or all in the case of some apps. Some are free, some are paid for. How many operating systems do App developers need to develop for? I mean, if we had 10 OS's in the mobile space to choose from. Unique and distinct OS's. Developers would be complaining that they have to develop for 10 OS's because they all have ruffly the same marketshare (in a perfect world). Lord help them if the hardware was also "different" enough between them. SDK/programing languages/etc.
But there isn't. Just that "few" are the top makers of said apps and stores. Again, you can't force this to be more "fair" or evenly spread out. People will pick what they want. When we use the words like "Control" it does suggest that it is being manipulated to favor ONE or FEW outcomes. When Apple started this, they had ZERO control over anything other than what they made. People came and purchased, and developers followed. Risk, and Reward. Failure was equally possible. And being or becoming a monopoly/duopoly was and is not part of their plan. They are very happy with the success they have with the iPhone and their massive 30% marketshare. People like what they make, and plenty more DON'T and have a choice to pick something else.
Here we go again, those words that suggest things that aren't happening. "Leverage".
WOW, OK, so it's the owner of the store that's freeloading??? You're full on backwards. It's Apples building. It's bought and fully paid off by Apple. Your renting space, you owe what the landlord says you owe. If you don't like living there, you can MOVE to another place that you like BETTER. Those Apps exist on the web just fine, and don't even require the iPhone to make money. They can leave if they don't like the rules in the store.
BUT THEY LIKE OUR PAYING CUSTOMERS THOUGH RIGHT?!?!?! Yeah, thought so.
Can stores not advertise their own products? I mean, I know we like to go back and forth between digital and physical. But, when I go to the Appstore. I see apps from ALL OVER. Not just Apples. Most apps on my phone are not Apples apps. It's not like I go to buy and app or download a free one and something pops up that says "Hey, Apple's version of this app is cheaper better faster more fun, don't buy this app it sucks!". Or anything even remotely close to that. Maybe this is the case in the EU.
Legislation is not the same as programing. I mean I guess it similar. Lots of words that don't always make sense and you need to be educated in how that laguage translates into something useful. Yeah, I guess its like programing. But in any event, just because something exists doesn't mean it exists for the platform for which your trying to legislate into having. iOS was not built to be exactly the same as macOS. Similar technologies, but for a much smaller less powerful device (at the time). That was mostly always connected (cellular network, GPS). So many things that, while it existed in macOS. Couldn't be put into iOS due to space, processing, battery, UI interface, etc. What you and others seem to want is full macOS on the iPhone and that's it. Problem solved. But, that's not what Apple built, nor wanted to build. What you want, they don't make in the manner in which you want it. So buy something else.
If both OS's were closed. Maybe. But, one is more successful and it's OPEN. Why mess with the lower one that is closed and will never be much bigger than it is today?
We don't suffer from a lack of choice. If we wanted MORE than what we have, we can go buy any Android phone for our next mobile device. You're having a hard time believing we actually want it the way it is. Hence why we purchased it.
It's far simpler to go to the Appstore and get everything. Verses going to the developers site and downloading it from there. Even if it was one app. And we don't want other stores to have to go back and forth finding apps we want. We want simple, easy, fast, secure, private, and it works great with other things Apple sells. That we also tend to have. And buy, of our own free will. If we wanted something more or else. Believe us when we tell you, we know how and where to go.
It’s not like we already have this possibility.
Enterprise-signed iOS apps on unmanaged devices is a pain. How should we proceed? | TechTarget
Organizations continue to struggle with how to handle unmanaged devices accessing and running enterprise apps for iOS. If the device cannot be managed, here are some options for how to proceed.
All we ask is for it to be more accessible.
one big difference is that developers can choose to develop their app for different platforms. But Apple uniquely prevents developers from developing for iOS.
Every company starts with zero influence. And now apple have emerged with massive and complete control over iOS developers and can dictate to make or break companies completely independently of the market.
Apple might not have planed for the control but now they have it and will bear the responsibilities.
They have according to the legal definition of dominant position in EU from 2004
If this was true you would have a point. But unfortunately it’s not true. iOS developers selling their apps can only do it on the iOS AppStore. Or be locked away from 100% of iOS customers.
There is nothing wrong to advertising your own apps, but you shouldn’t give them an advantage over competitors, they should be treated as independently from apple. Ands not Apples customers, they don’t own them
In this case it already exists. It’s legal text instructing apple to not hide side-loading behind a paywall and restrictive TOS.
Nobody wants full macOS. Only iOS but less restrictive as macOS. This button is all that is needed for ios
This is dishonest framing. Android isn’t iOS, and they aren’t compatible. Android apps physically can’t run on iOS. And iOS apps can’t run on android.
To make an extreme example for you.
You have an iPad, and you wish it had the ability to act like a HomeKit hub. But it can’t as it lacks this feature( will be removed in iOS 16). So you buy a HomePod mini. Losing 99.999% of the features of the iPad just to gain one different one.
And you can continue to do so. Even more apple will be forced to compete and innovate how their AppStore is constructed.
And your last point is 100% speculation with zero evidence or reason to believe it’s true. If the market becomes more competitive then we will see what happens as people will act according to their interests.
Yes you can.
That's exactly what legislation does.
...out of the choices they've been given (few OS).
Doesn't matter. It's not about guilt or plans. It's about current market conditions.
The brick-and-mortar analogy fails at more than one point:
Yes, it's Apple's store. But in this case, they're also the manufacturer that makes the technological platform.
And their and Google's Store control what ...95% of the market.
To keep with your analogy, the Apple App store is like a TV/Radio store.
And they're not only selling the TV sets and radios - they're also making them.
And they own the TV radio towers as well, the technological platform on which everything runs.
And these networks are proprietary platforms - the user has to buy a new TV set, if he wants to switch to other networks.
And together with a single competitor, they control 95%+ of the market.
And not only are they - perpetually - charging 30% (15% long-term) of any TV channel's revenue that gets broadcast/received through their platform. No, they're only preventing certain types of TV channels from being available (for moral reasons or their own business and user experience reasons).
👉 Does a TV store force you to subscribe to TV channels on the TV sets they're selling (not only selling but also manufacturing) - and then perpetually charge a subscription on that?
You can't do offline watching/listening without an app (not in practice).
Still way less choice than in application software, such as office software.
I'm assuming you mean developing for each and every part of the device. Which, if that is what you meant. I still don't see why they have to allow it.
Which would have happened unless they failed, and or had to sell it or make it public (open source).
The responsibilities the EU just made up? Big thanks for that.
The issue is, you're seeing it as fair and competivite. We see it as punishment for success.
I've already stated the EU is wrong. They are allowed to be wrong, but wrong none the less.
YES that is correct. You sell via the AppStore, or you don't. If that doesn't work for you, OK no problem. Google will very much like to have your business. IN FACT, ANDROID HAS MORE DEVICES OUT IN THE WILD! More customers to reach in more places. Forget 30%, lets go for 60%+
Again, I have yet to see anything like this when I visit the App Store. I see all apps. And generally I know what I'm looking for so I don't even notice the home page, I go straight to search. And I almost never get an Apple App first because they don't make the app I'm looking for. YMMV I suppose.
Do you use macOS? Cause if you did. You would know how ridiculous it is to have to use this. As it requires more than just this one image to get some applications on the mac installed and working properly. Nothing like a bunch of pop up asking for permission 3 4 5 times to install your app. Then we will have to go through, do you want it to have access to your camera? And Blu-tooth? and your mic, and your network, and your exact location, and and and.
So what are you saying, they should be able to?
This is a bit different than losing the application you had been getting from the Appstore.
Plus you can still do HomeKit the old way with your iPad. Just don't upgrade it to the new way. And if you want to use the new way, buy the new thing that will make the new way work. It's like going from Wi-Fi 5 to 6. 5 can't do 6, but it can still do 5, and 6 can do 5 too.
I can continue to do so with phone that looks more like Swiss cheese. Thank you. I appreciate you.
It's absolutely not speculation. We had MANY options in the before times. We are down to Android and Apple due to peoples purchase/choice of those products. We all had a choice, and we made it.
In this case, and in many of others opinion. It just makes our purchase of iOS and iPhone less secure and more like Android. Which takes away our choice to have a different product than what already exists and is larger by the way.
Not Apple or Googles fault unless it's illegal to be successful. The others failed, these 2 won. People, not governments made it this way.
Ok. 30% in the EU. Not the leader. And a different product than the competition. Open vs Closed. And Open is winning and it's not Apple.
This is why they can charge developers to be on it.. Apple made the widget, if you want in you pay! Unless your app is free. Then enjoy.
People made this happen. Sorry the other companies failed.
OK.
Well, here it breaks down. Apple doesn't own the cell service or the internet service you have, or choose to have.
BYOS (S is for service!)
Ok, again one company builds the whole widget. If you don't like it, on your next mobile device purchase. You can switch to another carrier, brand, device, system.
TO MY GRAVE. People made this happen. You're asking for more choices when the world said NO. We like Apple and Android. And Android more than Apple (Globally). Their success was gained by consumers choice not malice.
Again, I don't like the use of the word control. Why not say they enjoy 95% of the market due to their enormous success? I guess it lacks any teeth...
System has to be maintained no? Electricity ain't free! Storage/Processing/Networks/Security/Updates-Upgrades.
They are not a charity.
Disney does this. If you're looking for porn or game emulators, you have other means.
Force, no. But, I'm not forced to signed up for the Apple subscriptions. I don't have to use an Apple email for iCloud. I don't have to use an Apple credit card to make ApplePay purchases. I don't have to use iMessage to chat with my friends. Or FaceTime. Or Apple Music or TV+, or Mail. I can pick another option in many cases. Not all, and I get that. But, I and others wanted the iPhone. If we wanted something MORE customizable, we could have bought Android.
Sounds like something they should improve upon.
Again, people made the choice. Just like back in the day people would say "Xerox" for anything copy related. It was like "google it" is today. Sometimes things just work out that way. It's not always bad thing. I guess for some, it is.
Again: Irrelevant. The fact is: There's only two that control 95% of the mobile app market.
50%+ for mobile app revenue. I recently linked to it in this thread.
That's why they can technically charge them, yes. But...
I'm not talking about cell service.
I'm talking about mobile apps - the ones that contain and deliver content.
(TV networks deliver media content - so do streaming apps)
I can - realistically - switch to only one system: Android.
And realistically,
And no, if there's only that one alternative
And it the market has become so important to everyday life and businesses as it has...
👉 I'll say it point-blank:
If there's only two companies controlling (Google, Apple) that control an market (mobile app downloads) in a duopoly fashion (enjoying unilateral pricing power, little to no pricing competition, forced commissions) that has become so important to society and the overall economy (smartphones, business users, consumers) in everyday life...
- I don't give a thing if they're guilty of having become a duopoly
- I don't give a thing how much they've spend to become it and develop their platforms
- I don't give a thing if they have a 25%, 50% or 75% market share
- And frankly, I don't give a thing how much they're spending to operate
- ...or how much new regulation will cost them (they're hugely profitable no matter what)
- And neither do I give a thing if you tell me to suck it up and "just use/switch to something else"
👉 I'll be advocating and regulate their business conduct by law anyways.
For the greater good of the economy, businesses and consumers.
👉 If these companies - or you - think they're free to do anything as they please on the platforms they created:
No. If necessary we'll make new laws that they aren't free to do what they want anymore. To curtail their power and fine them to hell if they don't comply!
👉 And that's what's been and is happening.
And it's happening legislative proposals and bills that are remarkably across several developed economics around the globe.
These proposals aren't emerging for no reason.
When Netflix streams a video to me, Apple does exactly ...nothing.
And the costs for the online storage and networks to deliver apps is negligible.
They're more than compensated for by the hundreds of dollars they're making on any iPhone sale.
Yes, they do.
Apple force all developers for their OS to distribute apps to the public using only their own app store - and consumer to download only from it.
Limited by browser technology.
Last edited:
I'll make this one short.
You don't care anything about how it got to where it is. So long as it is what it is now. Total disregard to the progress made to get to this point. Only focusing on the negative (if that) 30%-15% to any %. Because according to folks such as yourself. Apple doesn't deserve anything. Except what they earn from the devices. That's all they need. Thanks now F off, the minions will take it from here.
I truly hope Apple walks away from the EU. Let them eat cake.
Yes. Let the "cancel culture" crowd enjoy their 30 sec showers and then eat cake if they don't have bread.
No, I mean developing for the device as a whole. I can build a Firefox browser or an emulator or a graphically violent game and it will not run on iOS without apples blessing, or breaking developer tos.
It follows normal anti competitive laws. And these laws are as any law, made up to fix a problem. We don’t punish a company for being a monopoly or even being profitable. What’s targeted is the undue influence and control over the market
But wrong in what? Their definition of dominant isn’t an illegal position. Only a state where some actions are no longer allowed as it would impact everyone else negatively.
You see that’s the problem. Apple prevention any contact between iOS owners and the business that would like to sell iOS software.
Android doesn’t need google. You can have a direct contact between consumer and provider without google as a middleman.
Isn’t that good then? Other companies does it. Amazon and google for example. Meaning apple won’t be affected and continue on as they where.
We already do this on iOS.
Klick accept to give access to photos, to the clipboard and Bluetooth etc etc. and unless macOS have changed drastically since 2018, changing this setting to allow everyone I only need to right klick to open once and be done with it.
They should never be compatible as it would be absurd. And this is a limitation of “just go to android”. You must develop a unique android app and a unique iOS app.
It would be the equivalent of selling goods as Walmart would be physically impossible to be put on the shelves of a different store, and you would have to create specific product for everyone.
Or the fact diesel cars can only run on diesel, and gas cars can only run on petroleum. And petroleum producers would only be allowed to sell on apple gas stations as all gas cars are apple cars.
And then tell petroleum makers to just go and sell to diesel cars instead who have a diverse option of gas stations and not only google play diesel stations for any brand of diesel cars.
I know, hence it was a hyperbolic example. Wi-Fi 6 can always do Wi-Fi 6< and any earlier version.
But it would be absurd to buy an HomePod or iPhone or Mac etc just to get one simple function but loose everything the iPad could specifically do.
It would be like going from a car to a bicycle, because you want an electric car. And it’s absurd to argue.
Your phone is Swiss cheese already. Only difference is apple needs to flick a metaphorical switch to allow anyone to use enterprise developer certificate. This is all that’s stands between side loading and no side loading.
It is. Because not a single person buys a phone for one reason.
There is a million things that are unique to iPhones and iPads. Just as how MacOS is extremely unique compared to windows.
The user interface, settings being user friendly, privacy focused, iMessage ability, iTunes library, iOS neural network functions. The apple processor. Compatibility with Apple Watch. Encryption to the iCloud relay. Find my network, Apple Maps, interoperability of iOS and MacOS. Etc etc. it could very well that the closed ecosystem was a negative part but worth the cost compared to all the other great stuff.
My significant other got an iPhone just for the Apple watch being such a great device after she tested my watch. But she absolutely hate it being limited to the AppStore and some other small things, but the overwhelming part is better than android offers as a whole.
Same for me, I have hated the locked down feature and arbitrary denial of features since iPhone 3G, and I have used jailbreaks for every iPhone I have to ether get feature that was missing(such as the control panel) or seeing Wi-Fi passwords saved(finally coming to iOS 16).
And even downloaded apps that was banned from the store (Nintendo emulators) or install applications that didn’t exist in my store region etc etc.
And you to claim it’s simply a binary choice of those who likes to side load and those who doesn’t is plainly falsehood.
I believe 95%+ of android downloads are only from the google play store.
At the moment, you can use Apple Pay by:
- Adding your bank cards to your Wallet.
- Double-pressing the sleep/wake button to access your cards.
- Use the default card, or pick which card you want to pay with.
There are three options that I can see could become available:
1. Your bank app can access NFC: To pay for something with that bank's card you'd launch that bank's app, navigate to wherever you initiate the payment feature, and pay via NFC.
2. Each bank's app lets you pick how you want to pay, via some payment portal like Apple Pay or Samsung Pay; or directly via the bank. So, you could use Apple Pay for your debit card, and pay directly via the bank with your credit card (which isn't something you can do anyway, as your card is either Mastercard or Visa (and others) and already goes through a payment processor).
3. You want to use something like Samsung Pay on your iPhone instead of Apple Pay: This means replacing Wallet and Apple Pay with whatever Samsung uses, so the same setup: a wallet with all your cards and a double-click gets you access to them.
In options 1 and 2 you have more steps. You have to locate the bank's app, access the payment feature, and pay. And, if you picked the wrong card, you have to go and find that other banking app and start again.
If you instead simply want to be able to use Samsung Pay on your iPhone (option 3) then it'll be the same as using Apple Pay.
I don't see any positives in opening up NFC for banking apps.
I see this as no different than Disney not having any pornographic or highly sexual in nature movies. A company can choose to partake or not. They should not be under any obligation or forced to allow anything and everything.
I get people may or may not like that. But, it's Apples business and freedom to be able to do so. Just like it's everyone else's to use it or not.
Again, I don't see a problem. I see a potential problem if Apple or Google really wanted to "Control" & "Dominate" the market. If these laws was designed to prevent abuse. Truly prevent it. It would also not force a company to change how they do business. If they broke the law, you bring them to court and prove it and win. Not change the rules so that they "are" breaking the law.
It's not illegal in the EU. That's not what I'm arguing. EU's rules are what they are. Doesn't mean I have to agree with them.
I've stated this before that I didn't agree with this. I don't see any reason for Apple to prevent a developer from contacting via Email or social media/internet so long as the customer wishes it. However, I don't think they should be able to do so via the AppStore or the APP directly. So in this instance I do agree.
Which again, you have a choice as the consumer. You can pick the closed one (again I don't agree with the rule Apple has in this regard), or the open Android way. Which provides almost everything the EU wants. And any other government or that matter.
It's not once. It's not twice. There used to be a time on the Mac that you could just click and go or drag and drop and that's it. At some point it became exactly what they made fun of Microsoft being. A bunch of pop ups asking for your password, are you sure? Go here to add it to the allows, check the box. If you have installed AV software (I work for a financial company), security monitoring software etc. It's a process to get something like that installed. Easy to miss the pop up, hides behind another window and you totally miss it or you even up having to reinstall it cause you just missed it altogether. In any event, i'm not trying to have the same experience on the iPhone/iPad. it's already too "ask-y" for permissions.
OK.
But we do have cars that operate on different fuels. And in the US, not every station has diesel.
We live in a world where both can be. You can make something that operates similarly enough to another but, not the exact same way. And I do feel as though this is what's being missed here. Apple is similar to Android. But, I don't think it's fair that Apple has to operate practically the same as Android. I like the benefits I get from Apple vs Android. Gas or Diesel. I'm seeing this as the EU wasn't a universal engine that can run both fuels same time. And it's easy cause most of the mechanics are all there right? I mean just add some of this and some of that, and your good!
Not my phone, maybe your phone, but not my phone.
And boom Swiss cheese.
So let's break it? I'm not game for this.
Apple has always had rabid fan(boys/girls/people). In favor of the way they do what they do. They do things their way, not the way everyone else (Google/Microsoft) does it. It's what makes them unique and holds them back.
If it was all about the money (like some think it is). Apple would license macOS X a long time ago. iOS and iPad OS too. Make very inexpensive high margin computers that undercut everyone else. Just to get product out there and make as much as possible. It's just not what they do. Being closed has it's limitations and they seem pretty fine with it.
Everything has trade offs.
Seems like you have had more reasons to not be a customer than to be one.
And this just proves the point that Apple has been this way forever. Wasn't wrong then why should it be wrong now? Cause everyone else fell thru? Sorry, 30% don't seem that dominate to me. When they actively since jump not trying to satisfy everyone. And because of that will never be "that" dominant. It's crazy they have the popularity they enjoy now with everything they don't let you do.
So why bother with all this then? To do all that for 5% of the Android using customers out there?
Waste of time, money, energy, and security.
For some, having the options is all they want. They may never actually use those extra options. Because, it's more complicated. When 95% of Android users download from the play store even though they have the option to side load. Tells you everything you need to know. Most people given these extra options, will choose to keep it simple which is what they had in the first place. But with more security holes for the trouble.
1. In Android, you can choose your default app at the time of opening an App and you have an option not to choose a default app so that the same choices pop up every time you use an app. It will probably be emulated in some form once NFC opens up. So, the problem of double click will be there even for Apple pay unless you set it as default, if NFC access is allowed for any app.
2. Why would banks allow access to your account through Apple pay, when it is better for them to operate directly? Apple is not doing it out of concern for users, it is either getting a cut or traction with users because of it. Banks would rather operate directly. Any commission they pay to Apple automatically becomes zero, which should benefit users.
3. Banks are heavily controlled in most countries and subject to many regulations such as SOX, NIST, PCI DSS, BSA, GLBA, FINRA, PSD2, Bill C-11, OSFI self-assessment and several others. So, they are as good as or better than Apple at security so no additional issues. In fact, If I am a customer of, say Citi Bank, I would rather be comfortable using official Citibank app than some third-party app like Apple Pay. And the official app probably lets me do far more than Apple Pay, such as other banking transactions.
4. Once NFC access is given to all, the onus is on the banks to differentiate themselves, which could lead to better products. Apple Pay being the only one available, it is my way or highway with Apple. That is going to change.
A Disney consumer can go anywhere. Apple consumers can’t. Big difference.
Here your mistake, it’s google and apple etc are dominant. And they are abusing their position to harm the market. The harmful effects have been objectively measured and identified.
In the same way safety regulations work, you don’t need to prove they broke the law, but observations of the market have shown that everyone should use a security helmet by law or restaurants should force their personal to wash their hands etc or be prevented from working is beneficial to the market, workers and consumers.
That’s completely fair.
That includes doing a sale without Apple standing in the way.
Ironically google is the one who breaks the most of these rules. Apple only break 2-3 of them at most while google breaks everyone, and have been lost Many court cases to prove it.
For me it feels more like iOS. And iOS is the one who have all these asks. But then again I haven’t used MacOS since 2018, and will get an M2 or M3 Mac eventually again.
I would say EU do not want the engines to work on the same fuels. But to use normal screws, open standard fuel port for any gas station to sell fuel. Any car can work with a wide range of octane fuels, and it’s up to the owner what they tank.
I have an iPhone just like you (I presume ) and its just as locked as ever but I run on iOS 16.
Seems overly dramatic as macOS isn’t swisscheese.
If it was about the money then apple would do exactly what they are doing currently. You don’t become the richest company by licensing out things like everyone else. They would just compete amongst 100 other companies and make little to no profits. That’s why with less than 30% of the market they collect 60% of the profits of all phones sales.
Then isn’t now. Doing harmful acts when you’re small isn’t the same as doing it when you’re big.
Eu don’t have rules for an arbitrary percentage number.
Article 82 (former Article 86) of the European Union Treaty states: “any abuse by one more undertakings of a dominant position within the common market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the common market in so far as it may affect trade between Member States.
A firm is in a dominant position if it has the ability to behave independently of its competitors, customers, suppliers and, ultimately, the final consumer. A dominant firm holding such market power would have the ability to set prices above the competitive level to sell products of an inferior quality or to reduce its rate of innovation below the level that would exist in a competitive market. Under EU competition law, it is not illegal to hold a dominant position, since a dominant position can be obtained by legitimate means of competition, for example by inventing and selling a better product. Instead, competition rules do not allow companies to abuse their dominant position. A dominant position may also be enjoyed jointly by two or more independent economic entities being united by economic links in a specific market. This situation is called collective (or joint or oligopolistic) dominance. As the Court has ruled in Gencor, there is no reason in legal or economic terms to exclude from the notion of economic links the relationship of interdependence existing between the parties to a tight oligopoly within which those parties are in a position to anticipate each one another’s behaviour and are therefore strongly encouraged to align their conduct in the market
Apple fulfill this to perfection with google.
And if you want to talk about dominant position, apple have a 100% of the iOS market, and this is the relevant market. Android developers and iOS developers doesn't compete with each other.
Why? Because the policy harms the market’s normal way to compete. And if the market is happy then nothing will change. But if the market does change, then this shows it was artificially propped up with an inferior product. Same way carrier locking phones are illegal(in EU it is), as consumers might buy an iPhone from ATnT just for their price but hate the network, but now being stuck forever with a carrier locked
Phone.
EU don’t care about google or apple, it care about the market being competitive with a level playing field. EU tries to act proactively, not after the fact something bad has happened as then it’s too late.
The DMA intends to ensure a higher degree of competition in the European Digital Markets, by preventing large companies from abusing their market power and by allowing new players to enter the market.
There is no reason that steam or epic game store shouldn’t be able to compete against apple AppStore or google play store.
But I would bet you would love the digital Service act
Most android phones today are just as locked down as iOS.
Side loading isn’t possible(or very hard to do) rooting is impossible (like jailbreaking)
Security wise android seems to be winning. Android 12 is more secure than iOS 15
iOS vs. Android: Which OS Is More Secure in 2022?
iOS vs. Android: Which OS is more secure? To find out, we have to consider vulnerabilities found in each operating system’s updates over the years.
clario.co
But what tips it in iOS favor is iOS ability to update everyone faster while android is fragmented
Most android phones today are just as locked down as iOS.
Side loading isn’t possible(or very hard to do) rooting is impossible (like jailbreaking)
Security wise android seems to be winning. Android 12 is more secure than iOS 15
iOS vs. Android: Which OS Is More Secure in 2022?
iOS vs. Android: Which OS is more secure? To find out, we have to consider vulnerabilities found in each operating system’s updates over the years.
But what tips it in iOS favor is iOS ability to update everyone faster while android is fragmented
colour me surprised
It ain’t much. Android have become more and more secure overtime and iOS seems to have become less secure over time with more dangerous exploits
To this point, not true. Example: Affinity Photo or CleanMyMac are two popular apps available both in Apple's App Store and their respective stores. Also, CleanMyMac has some features that are not available when getting from Apple's App Store.
Don't play dumb, this is aimed towards mobile market.
1. So when you double-click and have chosen to use Bank A's app, every time you double-click Bank A's app launches to the payment page ready to pay by NFC. That sounds good, but when you want to use Bank B instead to pay, you can't double-click because it launches the wrong app. Apple Pay lets you choose from a wallet of cards. Defaulting to a particular app only gives you one option (unless you can install a "Samsung Pay" app that has the same functionality as Apple Pay, and then, why bother?).
2. I was giving you the options. Either the bank's app invokes some smaller version of Apple Pay just for your bank card, or they pay directly. But they aren't paying directly anyway because your cards are all issued by a particular payment processor: Mastercard, VISA, Amex etc.
3. Apple Pay isn't a third-party app in the way you describe it. It's a built-in means of paying for things, and do you really think it would be in use if it weren't safe and secure? Would banks allow their customers' card details to be stored on their phone if they hadn't themselves approved the security? It passes a token to the merchant, not your actual card details. Do bank apps pass a token, or your actual card details when you pay via NFC? Your point about being able to do other things in your banking app is moot. Apple Pay isn't a banking app, it's a way of paying for things. Using Apple Pay does not negate your need to use the bank's app to look at transactions, cancel direct debits etc.
4. What innovation would there be when NFC is open to all? Would it change the way you pay for things on your phone? What do you need NFC for within your banking app? What would it allow you to do?
Items in stores won't become cheaper based on who you choose to pay with, so the fees are neither here nor there. In giving you a Mastercard a bank is already agreeing that Mastercard will take a small percentage of the transaction.
Also, no one seems to be telling Mastercard, Visa and Amex to open up their payment systems to all and sundry. Why not? Why can't I go into a store that doesn't accept Amex and buy stuff with my Amex card via their Mastercard link? Because the technologies are separate and have been developed through the investment of those companies' money over many years. Why shouldn't Apple be allowed to have their own payment processor?