You do understand that you are paying for your health care from your salary right? Look how much you pay every month from your salary for it. Also they don't care about you as a customer in the EU at the moment. They voted again for Chat Control 1.0 because they failed passing Chat Control 2.0, Mandatory ID Verification already rolled out in some cases via a Palantir owned company and is coming EU wide. They just want access to our data.
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
steggerwoof
macrumors member
The stupidity is people thinking it's the 'peoples' of the EU asking for this.
Also for clarity, the word 'people' is the singular noun and the plural form. 🙂
I'd counter your statement and say please stop being so stupid as to think tech giants like Apple, Google, Microsoft etc. are doing any of this for your safety or convenience.
steggerwoof
macrumors member
Seriously though, who in their right mind would want to be the US?
Happiness - you rank 23rd
Education - maths, (note the s) you are 26th in the world, lagging behind East Asia and parts of Europe
Healthcare - you're last against wealthy peers and 69th in global indexes
Safety and Peace - you're 134th
You're first in nominal GDP with a projected output of $32 trillion, but let's be honest, that doesn't help the average American, it helps corporations.
Quick edit: I'm from the UK, and I know we're far from perfect, and we have serious problems, but I think the key difference is we, we being the general public, we know it and we don't try to suggest we're better than everyone else.
DENZIE
macrumors 6502
it’s kinda mad how competition regulators get the wrong end of the stick here. Why are folks defending a multi billion dollar corp when what the eu is intending is good for consumer 🤷🏻
steggerwoof
macrumors member
Is that so? 🙂 (take particular note to the 'transatlantic flip').
- The Scale of EU to U.S. Migration: The European Union's share of worldwide legal immigration to the U.S. has remained small. Even during peak periods, EU nationals generally accounted for only a minor fraction of the total legal permanent residents added to the U.S. population each year.
- The "Transatlantic Flip": Data from organizations like the Brookings Institution shows that recent years have experienced a reversal in transatlantic migration. For the first time in decades, the number of Americans emigrating to European countries has surpassed the number of Europeans moving to the U.S.
- Country-Specific Drops: Official figures from specific European nations—such as Germany—have confirmed that departures to the U.S. are at multi-year lows, and that in recent years, more Americans relocated to Germany than Germans relocated to the States.
- The Scale of EU to U.S. Migration: The European Union's share of worldwide legal immigration to the U.S. has remained small. Even during peak periods, EU nationals generally accounted for only a minor fraction of the total legal permanent residents added to the U.S. population each year.
tadasZ
macrumors member
i am disgusted by people opposing this rule, you are supporting monopolies, limit innovation and do HARM TO YOURSELVES. It's not your decision what i should use and what i should not, gate keeping such a innovation as AI is wrong in many ways and again - monopolies are bad, check history.
tadasZ
macrumors member
ammm, i think you understood wrong, it does not mean that EU wants "Hey Siri" to open some other AI, what it means is i could say "Hey Jesus Christ" just as i can say "Hey Siri" and do stuff with my preferred Jesus Christ AI same things as Siri does (if supported by Jesus Christ AI)
The US has no problem extracting wealth and resources from the rest of the world while disregarding international law, national sovereignty, and the rights and laws of other countries.
Typical US mentality 👻
Simply untrue.
Internet Explorer's death spiral had started way before EU mandated Microsoft to display the browser choice screen in early 2010. The choice screen also did not affect the market share trajectories in any way.
Apple would have moved to USB-C anyway, sooner or later. Just look at the nice pro stuff USB-C iPhones now make possible when it comes to camera for example.
Finally: EU originally tried to standardise on micro USB, but thanks to pushback from companies like Apple it failed.
Lightning was absolutely fantastic in its time when the alternative was micro USB.
That's innovation which is now illegal.
So you think Big Tech operates of the best interest on their users and the world as a whole. That’s pretty naive
Last edited:
No, Internet Explorer died because it was rubbish.
Regulatory intervention had nothing to do with it. Chrome was superior and Google had the most popular web page in the world which they could use to push it to users.
(Incidentally, that would now be a clear violation of the DMA!)
Look at my other comment, it includes a market share chart and the red line marks the point where regulators intervened in the EU and forced Microsoft to offer alternative browser downloads for Windows users:
maszaikasza
macrumors regular
This! 😍 But the majority of Americans won’t understand because they grew up in the society they did.
Gioser
macrumors member
The more I look at how the DMA is being enforced, the harder it is to understand the logic behind it.
Apple chose not to launch Siri AI in the European Union because it wanted to avoid releasing a product that might not fully comply with the DMA. It voluntarily stayed out of one of the world's largest markets, giving up millions of potential users in order to respect the rules before launch.
Google, on the other hand, has already launched Gemini across the EU. Even though the European Commission has now required Google to open Android to competing AI assistants, Gemini remains available while Google is given until 2027 to implement the required changes.
This is where the inconsistency becomes impossible to ignore.
The message this sends is that companies that choose to wait until they are fully compliant are effectively kept out of the market, while companies that launch first can continue expanding their user base, strengthening their ecosystem, and increasing their market share while they work toward compliance.
That doesn't create a level playing field it does the exact opposite. The company that tried to follow the rules from day one falls behind, while the company that launched first continues to gain users, collect data, build brand recognition, and reinforce its competitive advantage throughout the compliance period.
If the DMA is truly intended to promote fair competition, then it should reward companies that choose to comply before launching, not create a system where the practical advantage goes to those who enter the market first and comply later.
That's why it's fair to ask why Apple wasn't given the same opportunity to launch Siri AI with a comparable compliance timeline. If Google can continue distributing Gemini while implementing the Commission's requirements, why shouldn't Apple be allowed to do the same?
Otherwise, the precedent is troubling: launch first, capture the market, and worry about compliance afterward. That is exactly the kind of incentive a competition law like the DMA should be preventing.
Apple chose not to launch Siri AI in the European Union because it wanted to avoid releasing a product that might not fully comply with the DMA. It voluntarily stayed out of one of the world's largest markets, giving up millions of potential users in order to respect the rules before launch.
Google, on the other hand, has already launched Gemini across the EU. Even though the European Commission has now required Google to open Android to competing AI assistants, Gemini remains available while Google is given until 2027 to implement the required changes.
This is where the inconsistency becomes impossible to ignore.
The message this sends is that companies that choose to wait until they are fully compliant are effectively kept out of the market, while companies that launch first can continue expanding their user base, strengthening their ecosystem, and increasing their market share while they work toward compliance.
That doesn't create a level playing field it does the exact opposite. The company that tried to follow the rules from day one falls behind, while the company that launched first continues to gain users, collect data, build brand recognition, and reinforce its competitive advantage throughout the compliance period.
If the DMA is truly intended to promote fair competition, then it should reward companies that choose to comply before launching, not create a system where the practical advantage goes to those who enter the market first and comply later.
That's why it's fair to ask why Apple wasn't given the same opportunity to launch Siri AI with a comparable compliance timeline. If Google can continue distributing Gemini while implementing the Commission's requirements, why shouldn't Apple be allowed to do the same?
Otherwise, the precedent is troubling: launch first, capture the market, and worry about compliance afterward. That is exactly the kind of incentive a competition law like the DMA should be preventing.
LFO8
macrumors 6502
Yes. EU citizen here. In this case I think the EU is suffering from tunnel vision and is providing a perfect example that following ‘the exact letter of the law’ is sometimes just not a good idea due to the inability of capturing all of reality and circumstances into legislative language. That’s why judges still need a good sense of equity. Otherwise algorithms following the ‘exact letter of the law’ could be judges instead and we all know how disastrous that would be for obvious reasons.
LFO8
macrumors 6502
Basically anyone still using Meta products after all that went down (yes that includes WhatsApp)
It’s a dud because it’s a developer friendly initiative dressed up as pro-consumer.
Consumers have overwhelmingly shown they prefer to buy everything they need from one place. This is why supermarkets, Amazon and steam are so successful.
The DMA gives developers more control over where and for how much their products are sold, but this runs contrary to the consumers desire to be able to get everything they need from one place.
Last edited:
I think it’s mostly U.S. users that don’t really understand the issues due to their insularity and specific societal views, at least it’s the impression I have when I read this kind of threads. Same for the notion that the EU tech laws are to sabotage US companies and/or favor European ones because the US economic model is superior, (something that IMHO doesn’t hold true since at least 30-40 years if we look at all the financial crisis, economic bubbles, inflation, rising line of poverty, opioid/health crisis, loss of dominance in strategic sectors and so on?)
SanderEvers
macrumors 6502a
Since Chromium is made by one of those companies, you would say yes to your own question. (see the whole Manifest v3 debacle) Yes Chromium is better than IE6. But that's not the issue.
Early 2000s we had:
1. IE
2. Safari
3. FireFox
4. Netscape
5. Opera
6. Chrome
Now in 2026, we have:
1. Chrome
2. FireFox
3. Safari (on a Mac / iPhone / iPad)
This is NOT an improvement. We need MORE choice, but the EU gave us LESS.
Last edited:
Do you really believe you're smart for answering using AI?
Can't stand people who turned their brain off and use AI for everything in their life.
There are technical solutions to ensure data safety and privacy. Privacy and security are just the excuses Apple and Google are using when dealing with all these issues in order to maintain control because it gives them strategic and economic advantage. Don’t you think that is very convenient that the approach that is best for their bottom line is exactly the one that according to them is the safest for the users? Do I need to point out that Google has shown so many times it doesn’t care about user privacy? Or that Apple seems to be all about privacy when it’s about a smaller market and holding out on a feature or two while they have no problem having user data in China servers and working with Alibaba models for Apple Intelligence if the alternative is being barred from selling their products in china?
As someone living and growing up in Germany, I do not agree with your point.
Nothing innovative comes out of the EU, so of course the EU has the regulate the hell out of companies that innovate or actually make nice technology.
I hate the EU and the dictatorship it is turning into. Now we're getting chat scan, we're missing out on so many Apple device features and I do not blame Apple, I blame von der Leyen and Brussels (aka the EU).
Those old people and Europeans in general have no idea about technology and how to use it or what it is.
Well since the EU doesn't care about our privacy anymore, I really appreciate that at least Apple tries to keep our privacy.
I dont trust Google so much about that statement though.
No sane persons believe the EU is trying to help citizens. They have proven time and time again that they are an oppressive dictatorship not far away from China.
No. I want a choice.
I want a big fat pop up that says "Apple has implemented this feature without giving access to others, do you agree with this. Not agreeing with this policy disables the feature and gives you EU goodboi points [YES] [NO]."
Daddy state needs to mind their own beeswax and let its citizens choose, and I choose to live in Apples walled garden, voluntarily.
As a European, the EU is a cancer that produces nothing but misery. It innovates nothing. It's regulates everything to artificially benefit it's domestic second rate products. It's a leech that only exists to its own benefit and power.
It's so bad I have had to opt for a US based Apple account and just use a US based VPN to get features I should have just had (for example phone mirroring).
Last edited: