There is some truth behind Apple's report. Already, residents in the EU are unable to access certain features they otherwise could have (I am taking Apple at their word here that they are not deliberating withholding said features out of malice; there are legitimate legal concerns if they tried to bring them to the EU), and this trend will like continue in the near future.
I would believe Apple, if they actually explicitly stated that they have spoken to the EC and the feature is not allowed. So far it is all, it may not be allowed or it could possibly be banned. Neither are definitive statements that they have spoken to the EC and the EC has said they can't do that.
The wording suggests, "we want to hold our users hostage, so they go to the EC and complain, although that could backfire. And most of the things they are talking about make absolutely no sense at all.
"We might have to add Android to iPhone mirroring," why? Google/Samsung/Oppo etc. could simply write a display program for the Mac that displays the notifications from the phone, mirrors the screen (they already have Dex or the Google equivalent, so it would be a cut down version of that) and uses the keyboard and mouse to input information into the phone. The hard part is on the Android side and they already have part of that for the equivalent feature in Windows, it might not be as tightly integrated, but they could certainly easily add a simple app to do 99% of what iPhone Mirroring does with little effort.
Likewise the Live Translation, they "might have to make it available to other manufacturers," why? They don't even make it available to all of their own AirPods, let alone Beats headphones, from at least 9 models of wireless headphones, more if you include the old cabled headphones, Live Translations is supported on 2 models (AirPods Pro 2 and 3), if they can't even support it on their own "other" hardware, including the current versions of AirPods 4 and AirPods Max 2, I can't see how the EC would have a leg to stand on to force it to be available on other headsets. If Apple made it available on
ALL AirPods and current Beats headsets, yes, there is an argument about allowing it for other manufacturers, but I see a strong case for Apple in this one, which makes it sound like they aren't really interested in finding a solution, just trying to blackmail the EC into repealing the DMA.
There are always going to be unforeseen circumstances with any new piece of legislation, no matter how well crafted the authorities feel it is (think Microsoft and and how EU legislation prevented them from patching a "flaw" in Windows that would eventually lead to Crowdstrike years down the road), and I don't think there is any shame in admitting that sometimes, you really just don't know.
I do blame Microsoft for this one. Pushing everything out of the Kernel and making it signed and secure was such an obvious solution and one that benefitted everybody, that they had a very strong argument to stick to their guns, but they were at a point where they capitulated too easily, after having lost the long fight with the EU and the US justice systems.
Again, this was one that made so much sense that it would have been easy to justify, but they caved without even really putting up a fight, at least not publicly. Working in corporate cybersecurity at the time, the move was so obviously good, I was seething that they didn't even put up a fight.
It's also interesting that iOS is generally considered the more secure platform compared to android (eg: we see way more scam apps on android compared to iOS), and the EU's solution is to force iOS to become like Android in the name of fostering more competition for users in the EU.
Again, this was Apple's fight to lose. If they had cooperated over the last 10 years, this would have all blown over, but they were so arrogant and stubborn in defending the indefensible that they forced the EU to come down on them even harder.
They literally dug out the biggest Streisand spotlight they could find and shined it on themselves. If they had quietly allowed 3rd party stores with restrictions, but done it quietly, hardly anyone would have noticed and hardly anyone would have used it, they wouldn't be profitable and Apple could have said, "see, nobody wanted this," when they failed, but they made such a fuss about it, that it was forced on them with fanfare. To be honest, living in the EU, I've not seen anyone yet to has said they are using these 3rd party stores and I've never seen them advertised.
So far, the loudest voices in favour of the DMA have come from developers such as Epic, but I suspect that if we were to poll the average person on the street, reactions will be a lot of mixed and you will not see the consensus online discourse would have you believe. That's because developers, like any other person, is only looking out for their own self-interests. It is not the job of Tim Sweeney or Spotify or even the average app developer in the EU to ensure the safety, security or privacy of the iOS platform or its users, which is why it is easy for them to champion policies that line their own pockets, regardless of the cost to the end user.
As an average person on the street, I think the DMA is a good thing, but I also think Big Tech forced it upon themselves by being too greedy and refusing to do the right thing on multiple occasions over the years. They could have easily avoided this and gone the self regulation route.
Another one is the Micro-USB self-regulation. The EU said, "industry, sort yourselves out, use a single adapter for all devices, at the moment Micro-USB is the front runner, and we won't have to get involved, but we want a single adapter for all devices." What did the industry do? 90% went Micro-USB, but Apple went Lightning, some other went with other proprietary adapter to force customers into buying their cables and power bricks and after nearly a decade the EU said, enough is enough and forced USB-C on the industry.
The benefits? I have 3 USB-C power bricks in the house instead of a couple of dozen with USB-A or other ports, or hard-cabled bricks with different adapters, and 2 wireless charging stands, 4 USB-C cables and the Apple Watch wireless puck. I threw out a huge box of adapters and cables when I made the last move, left over from tech I no longer used or had. I also don't get drawer fulls of new adapters when I buy new devices, at most the USB-C cable drawer fills up and need to be emptied on a semi-regular basis.
At the end of the day, life is but a bundle of compromises, but I doubt we will hear any government official publicly release a statement claiming "Yes, you won't be able to access iPhone mirroring or live translation as a result of our policies, but I think that's a small price to pay for your children to be able to sideload questionable apps onto their iOS devices or the privilege of managing 6-7 app stores on your device". This, however, is not an EU issue, but a worldwide government quirk. No one will jeopardise their career by admitting that their laws are flawed and that yes, everything is a tradeoff.
Users won't have to manage 6-7 app stores on their devices. I still just have the Apple App Store and I am not interested in other stores, but if others want to use them, that is their prerogative and not Apples. The stupidity in this case is on both sides (Apple and 3rd Party stores), a lot of the apps seem to go for one side or the other, if an app is only in a 3rd party store I won't be using it, likewise if they choose to use an alternate payment method only, I probably won't use it (companies that I trust, where I already have a payment method set up, like Amazon, Alternate, Kobo etc.) being the exception.
