We are free to defend whom we wish. Unless the EU wants to regulate that too? It's this type of EU behavior as to why they don't have a Google or Apple of their own.
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 to Accuse Apple of Unfairly Blocking Third-Party Access to NFC Payment Technology on iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You could tell Apple why.
The all-or-nothing view applies to almost anything, though. There’s no feasible way to vote with a buying decision alone that mini-spare tires are an abomination. Or whatever.
Would I prefer that Apple allow iOS browsers that aren’t largely skins on their web functionality? Sure. Or allow sideloading? Or NFC access? Or whatever functionality. Yeah.
I don’t pretend that these decisions by Apple are altruistic or solely for the safety and benefit of the customer. As imperfect as Apple‘s policies or implementations are, I prefer that to third parties with no skin in the game telling Apple how they have to do it.
Not every progress happens naturally. The fallacy therein is in believing that „natural“ progress, free from government regulation or interference is always the best progress.
The EU‘s regulation on payment services, for instance have created a much more competitive market with great benefits for consumers, while making payments much more secure and cross-border payments faster and less expensive for consumers - due to interoperability requirements put in place by regulation.
…yet it would likely not satisfy - or circumvent - the criteria of them being gatekeepers.
They can sell Android-branded iPhones all they want - as long as their iOS offerings are popular enough and Apple make as much money (as they are today), they can still be covered by this regulation.
What data? They still have access to the transactions even with Apple Pay, no?
So what you are saying is once a product is successful and enjoyed by consumers, that product automatically becomes to property of the government who then gets to dictate how that product is manufactured? Sounds pretty anti-capitalist to me. Apple is not a monopoly there are many brands of smartphones, there are at least two operating systems, and different app stores to choose from.
All the EU regulations do is drive up the cost of the product and make it harder to introduce new products and make those products even more difficult to secure.
Visa has access to the iPhone NFC chip. Mastercard has access to the iPhone NFC chip. American Express has access to the iPhone NFC chip. Soon NYC’s MetroCard will have access to the iPhone NFC chip, I think Tokyo’s rail system already does. So there’s an established path for the payment systems causing the EU concern.
So the accusation seems ill informed.
So the accusation seems ill informed.
This seems highly unfair, especially given the fact PayPal and Venmo are already able to make ample use of iOS devices for their own purposes. This is forcing Apple to let other companies profit off of its hardware and software development, beyond the ample opportunities they already have to do so.
There's already plenty of ways for those companies to utilize both the hardware and software of the iPhone through different methods.
There's already plenty of ways for those companies to utilize both the hardware and software of the iPhone through different methods.
Quoting this in hopes of more people reading it. I spit out my drink 😆😆
That would be for a court to decide. In order for your scenario to work, a singular product would have to be considered a monopoly which as we know only a company can be a monopoly.
Even with the best intentions (which lets be honest what government has ever had good intentions), I don’t trust the government to regulate things they don’t understand. I feel like there’s bigger things big tech is doing that’s not good for their consumers. But they’re worried what these big financial companies don’t have access to. Also PayPal and Venmo are one company. There’s not 2 companies outraged at unfair practices. That makes me question this even more.
So now Apple can't even add a feature to iPhone without also enabling third parties to use it?!?!? What?!?!
The E.U. is absolutely batshít.
The E.U. is absolutely batshít.
People: Can you make your point without insulting the ones with opposing POV?
That's all.
That's all.
This is the solution if the kleptocrats in the EU continue this: an EU version of iPhone and iOS.
Charge more for the extra engineering, specific manufacturing and software development so that the people who are advocating for this are paying for it. Everything has a cost and the EU should be the ones to cover it.
Mastercard and Visa got heavily regulated in the EU by specifically prohibiting quite a few of their anticompetitive business practices and putting a cap on interchange fees set in the EU (for consumer cards).
As a result of regulation, card acceptance has increased considerably and costs of acceptance for merchants has gone down.
You can download apps from the AppStore only. Problem solved.
The problem is that the argument people are "locked" into an iPhone is flimsy at best. Apple's flagship phones are in the $800-$1,000 range. Is that significantly more expensive than desktop/laptop systems? No. And then when you consider that desktop/laptop systems have MUCH more expensive software than mobile...how can you really say the "lock" for a phone is worse than Windows/Mac? Most people that actually want to change systems and are hesitant to do so are going to be thinking primarily about the software cost it involves, not the hardware.
That's not really true. You can have various stages of network security down to the level of having only a specific app or system talk to other devices in your network and even then, there are modern IDS' that allow to block compromised systems.
That is true and even the US is not safe for Apple. Many people seem to forget quickly. When the US government / NSA forced Cisco to build not so random number generators into network equipment, so the NSA would have an advantage of find a backdoor, no one said a thing. Cisco devices are also sold in the US... lucky the two security researchers at Microsoft found it.
Huh? The iPhone is a larger market than Macs or iPads. What about the Watch? They'd have to pull it out as well. Not that pulling out is going to happen, Apple will comply, not just in the EU, but also Asia and the rest of the world.
Not sure what you're saying. If this goes through they still would not allow access to any piece of a device. That's not how APIs and libraries/frameworks/toolkits work. That being said, anyone can already get full access to functionality by reverse engineering right now. George Hotz got access to the low level Neural Engine framework on M1 series, which is closed and only accessible to Apple.
An you explain why Apple is a monopoly? Do they make the only smart phone? Do they have the only App Store?
But all of those things I mentioned provide even more choice? iOS will still be a choice with all of those things implemented. Quite honestly, I have been considering an iPhone the last couple of years but the deal breaker for is the USB C port. And I can't be the only one. I'll give you another example, when the UK left the EU, in order for existing EU residents to get the right to remain, they had to scan the NFC chip in their passport. I had to scan the passports of three friends as they had iPhones. It's plain bonkers to me that this is a thing. We all know why it happens, Apple's bottom line but I am just so surprised how many people here agree with it
It makes a lot of sense that Apple has wanted to keep their walled-off platform intact. Of course it's for both security and economic reasons. Personally, I don't mind if they are forced to open up iOS to 3rd party app stores. I'm not likely to use them because I do appreciate the simplicity and security of Apple's App Store.
Ironically, this is the same EU whose members don’t control their energy supplies or even spend enough on their collective defense to ward off Russia. Perhaps they should concentrate more on those issues rather than blackmailing American corporations…
I think you may have missed the part in the proposal about the definition of gatekeepers.
There‘s literally not one mention of „monopoly“, „monopolist“ or similar in the text.
They can.
But if it’s relevant to the greater economy (as NFC payments are, which are, by the way, interoperable and follow a standard), it may be regulated.
Leveraging a technological standard (NFC) to gain market power (for Apple Pay) but prohibiting/preventing others/competitors from using it on a gatekeeping platform is targeted by regulation here.