There is a lot of "not allowed" in your reply. That's the point I'm trying to make: the provider choose to provide service in a particular manner, customers choose it. Yet big brother says no because he knows better.
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 Orders Google to Give Rival AI Apps the Same Android Access as Gemini
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is a lot of "not allowed" in your reply. That's the point I'm trying to make: the provider choose to provide service in a particular manner, customers choose it. Yet big brother says no because he knows better.
alecgold
macrumors 68000
Yes, and in a full market economy I would agree with you. I would prefer that absolutely. But there is no competition between two giants (apple, Google). There is just another “winner takes all” around the corner for AI. And AI might have much more impact then the internet hype we saw a few decades ago. You know the story of Rockefeller/ standard oil/ anti trust movement? I’m seeing a lot of parallels here.
One more thing on a full market economy: the user/ polluter would have to pay all cost. But in most (if not all) economies the user/ producer/ polluter hands the cost to society or future generations. From slave labour to forever chemicals, local pollution and destruction from mining or refining and so many other things: as a European I’am not paying the full price of my wealth, but somebody is/will.
I would presume most replying to this story are Americans shocked at government reducing the rights of the individual. Fair enough. That is A point of view.
But here is the crux. This whole debacle is just fundementalt ideology differences at work.
And I’ll try to avoid saying this in a "you bad, us good" tone.
What Americans seem to not understand is that companies don’t have your best interest at heart. They’re not necessarily better or worse than government, it’s just different type of bad. What Americans completely misunderstand is that not everything government does is bad and everything a company does is good. Left to their own devices, both will abuse their powers.
And as consumers/individuals we’re not always perfectly equipped to, on the surface, correctly evaluate if what government does is good or bad. Or what a company does, on the surface, is good or bad.
But what we do know is AI is completely new, there are no real regulations around it and we have no comprehension of what it can do to our privacy. And I KNOW Americans care a whole lot about privacy (from government). So is it so wrong to want to double check we don’t implement something we can, probably, never really take back?
The EU is fundamentally interested in protecting the consumer AGAINST companies. Either from misuse, warranty, price gouging, lack of service, incorrect pricing, price manipulation etc etc.
American law seems mostly to want to protect companies and that the market will regulate itself.
But with E.U. regulations, you get a level playing field. The rules are equal to all. Which removes barriers for competition. Which companies like Apple don’t want, because they want to introduce walled gardens, because that is in THEIR interests.
And these EU rules just opens things up for competition, which ironisk VERY VERY AMERICAN.
And companies WILL take advantage of a lack of regulation. They will pollute if it isn’t in their interest to not. They will charge too much, if they can. They will try to avoid warranty claims, if they can. And more so the more powerful a company is.
While Europeans are horrified of the apparent lack of regulations, Americans are shocked at the apparent over-regulation in the E.U.
AND I will wager my left pinkie that 98.67% of users here have also no idea of the possible consequences of just letting AI roam completely free on our devices without any regulation.
BUT there should be no debate that in the intersection of these two philosophies, the end result is better for EVERYONE.
AND like it or not, adversity and restriction is what makes stuff (and life) BETTER because we become more effective and creative. Going to the gym is basically adversity and restriction.
AND yes, too much regulation can become too restrictive in the end. But we’re definitely not there yet.
But here is the crux. This whole debacle is just fundementalt ideology differences at work.
And I’ll try to avoid saying this in a "you bad, us good" tone.
What Americans seem to not understand is that companies don’t have your best interest at heart. They’re not necessarily better or worse than government, it’s just different type of bad. What Americans completely misunderstand is that not everything government does is bad and everything a company does is good. Left to their own devices, both will abuse their powers.
And as consumers/individuals we’re not always perfectly equipped to, on the surface, correctly evaluate if what government does is good or bad. Or what a company does, on the surface, is good or bad.
But what we do know is AI is completely new, there are no real regulations around it and we have no comprehension of what it can do to our privacy. And I KNOW Americans care a whole lot about privacy (from government). So is it so wrong to want to double check we don’t implement something we can, probably, never really take back?
The EU is fundamentally interested in protecting the consumer AGAINST companies. Either from misuse, warranty, price gouging, lack of service, incorrect pricing, price manipulation etc etc.
American law seems mostly to want to protect companies and that the market will regulate itself.
But with E.U. regulations, you get a level playing field. The rules are equal to all. Which removes barriers for competition. Which companies like Apple don’t want, because they want to introduce walled gardens, because that is in THEIR interests.
And these EU rules just opens things up for competition, which ironisk VERY VERY AMERICAN.
And companies WILL take advantage of a lack of regulation. They will pollute if it isn’t in their interest to not. They will charge too much, if they can. They will try to avoid warranty claims, if they can. And more so the more powerful a company is.
While Europeans are horrified of the apparent lack of regulations, Americans are shocked at the apparent over-regulation in the E.U.
AND I will wager my left pinkie that 98.67% of users here have also no idea of the possible consequences of just letting AI roam completely free on our devices without any regulation.
BUT there should be no debate that in the intersection of these two philosophies, the end result is better for EVERYONE.
AND like it or not, adversity and restriction is what makes stuff (and life) BETTER because we become more effective and creative. Going to the gym is basically adversity and restriction.
AND yes, too much regulation can become too restrictive in the end. But we’re definitely not there yet.
Haiku_Oezu
macrumors 6502a
obviouslogic
macrumors 6502
First of all, these laws have NOTHING to do with preventing a monopoly… If any company makes a product that brings in more than $5 billion, REGARDLESS of market share, then they are considered a “gatekeeper” to that product’s platform and are subject to these laws.
You cannot have a monopoly over your own product, that’s an extremely ridiculous notion and not sure where that idea came from. “monopoly” applies to markets, not products. If Apple had a monopoly of the mobile device market, then there would be an issue if they disallowed others to compete within their platform. But Apple does not have a monopoly, in fact Apple stands at about 20% market share worldwide.
What the EU is actually doing is trying to force a mono-technological market. Where there is nothing left but a single “open” platform–by the time they’re done, there will be no difference between iOS and Android. They are in fact stripping away that choice; An iPhone won’t be functionally any different from an Android phone. They fail to see that some users prefer a walled-garden approach, because all those “choices” aren’t necessary for a device to work properly.
Instead of forcing a company like Apple to turn their OS into some open Android-like OS, why don’t they create that stripped down, completely open OS, and force vendors and retailers in the EU to carry and sell devices with their EUtopia OS? But, that would take actual effort and be costly… It doesn’t cost them anything to create laws (that even they cannot consistently interpret), and collect money when they eventually decide which way to actually interpret those laws.
What’s interesting to me is that it appears the EU believes its existing privacy laws are sufficient to keep consumers safe in these situations, and is therefore justified in forcing google and Apple to allow AI assistants access.
My view would be that EUs privacy laws do not go anywhere near far enough to project citizens, is rarely enforced, and we need companies like Apple to provide additional protections to consumers that the EU don’t. I don’t think the EU likes that concept.
My view would be that EUs privacy laws do not go anywhere near far enough to project citizens, is rarely enforced, and we need companies like Apple to provide additional protections to consumers that the EU don’t. I don’t think the EU likes that concept.
ECHLN
macrumors newbie
The talent isn’t there. And when it is there, they end up moving
Apple asked for opinion and pre-approval. They got their answer and chose not to move forward regardless.
Google did not ask, they just chose to fight. They will get that.
Now that Google is already selling "system AI phones" on the market, they will have harder time pulling back. If they end up losing in court in ~ 2 years, they might be liable to refund consumers for the product they are forced to pull back.
Apple chose not to take that risk.
The risk might be worth taking, Google will be winning marketshare in EU by being the only one with system AI phone. It is clearly an important feature and Apple has chosen not to match the feature.
Last edited:
CarlJ
Contributor
And this right here is why Apple is not enabling their AI version of Siri in the EU - that was a good call.
sos47
macrumors 6502a
i think thats true.
we (in the EU) will get “chat control” soon and are not far away from “social points”
Last edited:
rocknrollme
macrumors member
I really don’t understand the amount of hate towards the EU here. They’re regulating for the benefit of the end consumer. If it weren’t for them, we’d still be running Internet Explorer and using iPhones with Lightning ports.
LET THE USER DECIDE for gods sake. I’m from Germany and since the EU cancels us everything that’s fun, I guess in a short period of time we move so much backwards that we start using horses and carriages again
Apps from third party app stores still need to use APIs that limit what they can do. The EU here is asking AIs to have unfettered access to the entirety of your devices.
That’s a shortsighted view of AI. What is usually called slop is generative AI. AI that summarizes content and explains things is not slop and is useful for millions to learn and work. SiriAI is that kind of AI. That the usefulness of an assistant needs to be explained in 2026 is kind of absurd when every company uses AI, and not always for useless things but for actual work.
- Alternative app doesn't access your data systemwide nor agentically control your device.
- If user decides to use a walled garden product, that's on them.
Rockanrolero
macrumors member
SanderEvers
macrumors 6502a
maszaikasza
macrumors regular
I'm not sure "we should keep a big-tech monopoly because customers are stupid" should count as a valid argument in this discussion. If there were no law demonopolizing the PC/Mac browser market, 95% of users would still be using Internet Explorer. Users should have a say in who gets access to their data.
iccb
macrumors member
Apple or Google want that only their own AI tools is used. EU want's that user (OWNER of the device) can choose what AI tool to use. Of course Apple or Google does not want that.
So, what is so scary with companies like Openai or Anthropic compared to Apple or Google? Every different AI company wants users to use their AI and pay that.
I don't see giving users options to choose is not bad.
So, what is so scary with companies like Openai or Anthropic compared to Apple or Google? Every different AI company wants users to use their AI and pay that.
I don't see giving users options to choose is not bad.
SanderEvers
macrumors 6502a
That's not going to happen. We will, however, get gimped products with half the features disabled or removed entirely.
For our 'protection'. Also you will be forced to use a digital Id on the internet and all your chats can bee seen by the EU in the same process.
uller6
macrumors 65816
Lightning ports were much easier to clean out with a toothpick than usb-c. And, they were designed to break the cable in cases where the cable got yanked, not the device. I miss lightning.
SanderEvers
macrumors 6502a
And now everyone using a Chromium fork or FireFox is a better solution? Chrome has become the new IE.
Also Apple was moving away from lightning YEARS before the EU mandated it. The EU mandate only is going to achieve that in 20 years time we will still be stuck with using USB-C while faster ports will be used outside the EU.
TracerAnalog
macrumors 65816
That jailbreak argument is just as absurd. Bad actors will have new vectors with these rules. It is precisely the 'normies' and not the 'nerds' that will be targeted by going through a badly protected alternative store, unfettered AI access and what not. Popular apps that are cloned, paying methods that are shady, reroutes via web links, improper access to personal data... Apple and Google will be fighting to fix loopholes and exploits because they no longer control the whole chain. The EU is betting these companies will do the work, but it is tricky. Overregulation is a thing in the EU (endless cookie pop-ups😱), just as the opposite seems to be true in the USA where 'go fast, go hard, break things and than fix it' seems to be the norm. Which is why AI got to be where it is today, and why the EU cannot follow, so there's that.
maszaikasza
macrumors regular
Chromium-based browsers are indeed much better solution. People choose to use Chrome - that's fine. Apple/Google deciding what users can or cannot use - is it fine too?
I literally don't know anyone who has any interest in those alternative app stores in the eu (on iOS). It was a useless exercise.
It's really nuts that they are trying to _prevent_ a monopoly. Siri AI is banned if before it's even released here. How can it have a monopoly when it's not even here? This is like that Tom Cruise movie where they were arresting people before the crime was committed.