Just so we are all on the same page. This has nothing to do with how Apple, Google, Facebook, et all have conducted themselves except in one way: The EU countries used to make millions in tax revenue from telecom. They don't make a penny from this new tech and they don't like it one bit. They don't give a c*** about sideloading, IAP, or any of it. They care about money.
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 Planning to Force Apple to Give Developers Access to All Hardware and Software Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Alright... so how does forcing WhatsApp to be interoperable with Telegram or Signal make the UE money?
Or sideloading and alternative app stores or whatever?
Will the EU start charging a "messaging tax" to all major players?
?
An Xbox series s customer is still with Microsoft they can buy Xbox games from other online stores to register to your account.
It’s the equivalent of buying a Wi-Fi only iPad ,you don’t tell them to buy an android tablet but the 4g version of the iPad
Well in one fair instance. This happens in EU all the time, but it always gets thrown out of court as explicitly the customers fault. This is likely why many Europeans use this as stab at the us Court system.
Then again we get those cost covered anyway by private insurance or free healthcare.
Are nether illegal nor breaking any food safety standards. As long as it’s served in a safe container. The moment you put it in your lap it’s no longer McDonald’s responsibility legally speaking. And Eu courts do not allow emotional or moral arguments as evidence.
Wait, are people supporting the EU, the same EU who wants to end encryption as we know it, just so they can side load apps?
www.eff.org
For real?
The EU Commission’s New Proposal Would Undermine Encryption And Scan Our Messages
The executive body of the European Union published today a legislative proposal (text) that, if it became law, would be a disaster for online privacy in the EU and throughout the world. In the name of fighting crimes against children, the EU Commission has suggested new rules that would compel a...
For real?
Well it’s apple who prevents signal from sending sms, isn’t it? If signal launched an app that can send and receive sms on iOS apple would block them as they do.
There isn’t a need for a new communication standard to fulfill the requirement.
Two easy solutions:
1: one existing communication standard becomes the baseline. It could be the signal protocol.
WhatsApp can use “signal protocol” to communicate with iMessage users as iMessage contains the signal protocol as the fallback to anyone who doesn’t use iMessage or sms.
2: you allow companies to use each other’s communications protocol to communicate.
WhatsApp is allowed to use iMessage protocol to communicate with iMessage users
Well this is bad. But apple already wants to do that.Wait, are people supporting the EU, the same EU who wants to end encryption as we know it, just so they can side load apps?
The EU Commission’s New Proposal Would Undermine Encryption And Scan Our Messages
The executive body of the European Union published today a legislative proposal (text) that, if it became law, would be a disaster for online privacy in the EU and throughout the world. In the name of fighting crimes against children, the EU Commission has suggested new rules that would compel a...
For real?
Apple’s Plan to Scan Photos in Messages Turns Young People Into Privacy Pawns
This month, Apple announced several new features under the auspices of expanding its protections for young people, at least two of which seriously walk back the company’s longstanding commitment to protecting user privacy. One of the plans—scanning photos sent to and from child accounts in...
I hope you realize the difference between Apple doing it (1 company, and they decided not to due to public backlash), vs a governing body like the EU (which will apply to every company, and you will have no choice).Well this is bad. But apple already wants to do that.
Apple’s Plan to Scan Photos in Messages Turns Young People Into Privacy Pawns
This month, Apple announced several new features under the auspices of expanding its protections for young people, at least two of which seriously walk back the company’s longstanding commitment to protecting user privacy. One of the plans—scanning photos sent to and from child accounts in...
Here its the opposite. The phone is financed (or subsidised) by the carrier at 0%APR but unlocked from day 1. If you accidentally break or lose your phone you could take out a second contract to get a new handset and then use a sim from the other line.
I think its more a case of developers being able to offer F2P games directly to players without needing a base subscription first. Devs have a choice and consequently so do players. Xbox Live is worth the money but Sony's service isn't really any better than the PS3 days and back then it was free.
With regards to the Activision purchase, whilst this seems like a way to fatten out Gamepass I also believe it was a protectionist move designed to keep valuable gaming franchises out of the hands of non-gaming companies. If a chinese company like Tencent came along and brought Activision they might have had them churning out mobile ports of all their titles evermore and ignored the console market which would be bad for Microsoft and Sony.
I honestly believe Phil Spencer sees himself as some sort of guardian of the industry and if somebody from outside the industry ever made a play for someone like Nintendo he would probably outbid them just to put them off because he is not stupid and knows where most of the industry gets its long-term ideas from.
We are, for better or worse now entering a gaming cold war where Sony and Microsoft make a deal to keep publishing on each others' machines. CoD pulls in billions from PlayStation gamers and Microsoft isn't likely to want to see that money disappear.
I for one hope we do see games consoles opened up to alternate storefronts! Heck, you can sandbox dev unlock an Xbox console and build your own games for it if you want.
Y
Explicitly spelled out in 2011 lock-in is the strategy.
Well according to apple it’s a lock in feature.
Here you have the source directly from apple
And here you have it in greater detail
Explicitly spelled out in 2011 lock-in is the strategy.
I do. I completely disagree with this, but it doesn’t even have a draft. The commission proposing something doesn’t mean anything unless it’s supported by the EU parliament(elected representatives of everyone in eu) and council( elected heads of state of every member)
Apple haven’t dropped it. They have said it’s still coming, I’m just waiting for apple to drop the ax and officially kill the idea tho.
That last one is a doozy. I would have loved to see that iPhone Nano prototype, especially as it was the smaller product compared to the iPhone 5! Maybe this eventually evolved into the 7th gen iPod Nano after they realised stuffing a cellular radio into such a small device would have been counter-productive.
Apple did eventually suffer from innovators block. They listed (in 2011) how the cloud would surpass the computer as the center of customers' digital universes. They were 100% right on this and yet outside of the i-ecosystem Apple's cloud business is a complete joke.
Some of us have Windows machines at work or at home and still want access to our iCloud accounts, ideally through a quality web portal. Google get this. Microsoft get this. Apple's insistance on using a terrible native 'sync' app together with a useless iCloud web portal (that doesn't even let you create reminders let alone edit photographs) is designed exclusively to make you buy Apple products so you are no longer tearing out your own teeth.
But I have a Windows work PC in the workplace and Apple isn't an option so I switch to Android because Google works with everything and Apple doesn't.
One big think is that EU regulations still must be approved by the member states.
Does the us government need the approval of the congress( equivalent to eu parliament) and majority of state governors? To pass a federal legislation?
Eu work like this if I use the USA government bodies as an example:
The executive(EU commission) branch consists of the President, his or her advisors and various departments and agencies would propose a legislation.
The senate?(council of EU) would also have the head of agriculture, economics etc etc from every state form the goals of the of the executive (eu commission)
The us House of Representatives(eu parliament) would be the legislative body would negotiate the proposed law/regulation etc and vote on it. They can’t initiate legislative action.
The Us senate(eu council) would contain one senate governer from every state. They would negotiate with the House of Representatives and vote on the proposed legislation.
If both the senate(EU council) and House of Representatives(EU parliament) agree of the structure and goal of the bill, the executive will provide it for a vote. This means the house and the senate always votes on the same bill.
Do you have any source for any of that or is it just a feeling you have?
I would immediately use Signal instead of WhatsApp or iMessage as it’s both private and exist on iPhone, iPad and windows that I use. Because it sounds like the core economic model they have is trap as many users as possible and make money of them instead of making the best product.
So make it better for users and companies will have to innovate or make it worse for users so companies don’t need to innovate. Just as how IE died for failing to innovate but tried to trap as many users as possible to stay relevant.
Weill it’s al based on their impact on the market. If Amazon isn’t profitable and is harming the market, then they will just be limited in the actions they can continue to use. Same with Facebook who will be seen as a digital public square and face new obligations.
That’s is why every criterias must be met. Telegram probably can’t ever fulfill four of the six criterias even if they tried
The thing is telegram can’t become a gatekeeper. But if another company buys them, they could depending on the company. And remember EU do not want a company to be bought up as it’s negative for the internal market, consumers and for healthy competition. Buying your competition isn’t desirable for anyone but the investors.
One interesting curiosity is that venture capital investment is rare in EU, mostly it’s bank loans or investment from bank institutions. 80 billion in first quarter in USA compared to barely 20 billion in the first quarter in EU was venture capitalists investments.
then again do you want to encourage startups to have the goal to be purchased and erased from the market as fake businesses or encourage startups that plans to exist as a real business?
You’re missing the whole picture.
McDonalds was serving coffee at almost 90c. The spillage hospitalised the customer for 8 days and required skin grafts.
Spilling a hot drink shouldn’t require skin grafts to rectify. While she was awarded damages she was found to be 20% at fault still and received only 80%
of the compensation pay out.
The judge ruled that McDonalds was serving hot drinks that were unreasonably dangerous. The keyword is “unreasonably”. They then refused multiple times to settle for reasonable values that covered only loss of earnings, and medical care. No punitive damages were initially sought after.
Do I have a source that hundreds of millions of iPhone users would resist their lawmakers if Apple threatened to withdraw the iPhone from the EU rather than crapify it like Android? What source are you looking for beyond common sense - you want me to poll 800 million people? This many people bought iPhones because they weighed the pros and cons and preferred them. If they had wanted to do whatever they want with their phone, they already had the option to purchase crappy Android phones but they didn’t. Now a tiny minority of customers wants EU ignorant lawmakers to force the iPhone to be like Android to the detriment of hundreds of millions of happy customers. This is peak stupidity and the lawmakers deserve backlash from these users. Apple only needs to make this threat one time with one country or region and be willing to stand by it and other lawmakers will be more careful with suggesting idiotic laws
No, I’m well aware with the case. McDonald’s regularly serves coffee at 90c in EU and regularly gets sued every year. And court every time dismiss it on the grounds of: no law was broken and no regulation was violated, and the customer was responsible for their injuries. Eu court do not have the authority to make laws.
Reasonable and unreasonable isn’t written in the legal text for serving hot beverages.
McDonald’s and everyone else is today serving 80-90c coffee to you
Well you cou start with your claim of what iPhone users want and do not want.
iPhones have many negative features that aren’t dealbreakers.
And could it be a majority of users would find these legislation removing some of the negative parts of iPhones a good thing? How about making iOS more like Mac instead of android? Any data to supporting it will be bad?
Well let’s see if apple are willing to bet on it.
Who have more to lose? Apple earning billions or EU earning not even showing in the error margins ?
Your entire arguement falls apart when you call Android 'crap' which it quite clearly is not. I'm not going to day its better because I don't believe one platform is really any better than the next. 99% of their functionality is shared.
Value add for whom? The consumer or the company?
I would argue it isn’t enhancing when you block innovation.
Imessage/facetime is a clearly an apple ecosystem value add. One doesn't have to use it. Saying Apple is blocking innovation is no different than alleging Microsoft is blocking innovation because they don't support z/os integration. I mean yeah, anybody on the internet can say anything.
And yes, imessage is a value add for consumer. Company doesn't get anything from it, maybe a sale, for people who view that feature as a priority feature.
You missed the point.
Apple leveraged iMessage to block innovation (iMessage cross platform) and attempt to lock customers to the iPhone. (Post #562 is … wow). It is the reason I prefere Signal - cross platform. Just wish, as a consumer, I could default Signal on my iDevices. If I had iMessage cross platform I might go that route.
This is a case - iMessage - where it benefits the company, not the consumer.
Not too hard to imagine, any business that wants to work with their suppliers and customers and they are on a different platform.
I'm hoping the plan is to create an additional revenue stream by selling games to PS owners. As long as they are identical in features and play, that's fine. I just hope the plan is not to maker them platform depended hoping to sell additional Xboxes. While it would sell some additional consoles, I think in the end it would kill revenue for MS and the shareholders wouldn't be happy.
Posting someone else's opinion doesn't change the fact that a "compelling exclusive feature" isn't lock-in. Developing compelling exclusive features is competition.
Apple Never Made iMessage for Android to Lock-In iOS Users, Epic Court Docs Show
As part of the ongoing legal battle between Fortnite maker Epic and Apple, some new information has come to light confirming the most annoying thing aboutgizmodo.com
Whereby "according to Apple", you actually mean according to a random former Beats/Apple employee.