They don’t need to pull out of the EU, just turn off NFC payments completely on EU phones.
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
Yes it's an opinion that people can either think about or not. You choose not to and that's fine. I'm merely extrapolating what I believe to be the inevitable outcome based on past and present form with legislatory overreach. Each time you give up a piece on the chess board they move another into position and turn the screws tighter. The EU are like the Terminator. They absolutely will not stop. Ever.
You're free to disagree. I guess we'll see soon enough.
Exactly and that is the difference. Game consoles are sold as single purpose devices, phones are used as multi purpose devices to run everything. If Apple would have stuck to the old app model they had in the very beginning, none of this would be discussed. Back then apps were released via web apps, only Apple could provide "real" apps for the iPhone. Apple chose to open it up so anyone could run anything on it. Consoles don't do that.
Unfortunately, some of the people here are exactly that mindset and it’s clear daily.
Translation: if its a good idea that works, we will step in and steal it from you.
This is the incentive to make good things today? That it will eventually be stolen from you by whiny clueless regulators?
"Some of their things genuinely do succeed on merit, but not all of them do. That's the point. They protect their weaker products by locking their successful products to them."
^^ That's the quote that I was responding to. If you're not talking about supposed iPhone "lock in" protecting weaker products, what are you talking about?
Lol, and there's no way that wouldn't result in a massive series of fines.
NFC payments and communication wasn’t Apple’s „idea“.
They have been and are technological standards invented/created by others.
There’s ample evidence to the contrary in other areas of EU regulation.
No, it's funny how you label something designed in this instance to de-monopolise a service as a form of market regulation.
I know what you're quoting, but it just seems like you didn't actually read it. I didn't mention lock-in once.
Neither was wifi. Should Apple have to allow third party wifi software and drivers To access the chip?
I‘m not sure about that - especially if they’re shutting down theie own NFC payment tech (Apple Pay) as well.
The irony with such proposals („leave the market“, „shut it down“) is that it would remove a steady stream of revenue and hurt Apple’s bottom line and market share.
So if Apple had to focus its efforts on maintaining security while allowing third-party NFC access, a lot of you think they just couldn’t do that?
Seems pretty pessimistic to me. Obviously the least costly and most profitable way to maintain NFC security is to only allow yourself to use it.
Seems pretty pessimistic to me. Obviously the least costly and most profitable way to maintain NFC security is to only allow yourself to use it.
I'm pretty sure you can't just disable things people have paid for without a good reason and get away without a fine or two.
Console makers are allowed to limit functionality on their own hardware. Shouldn't that also mean that Apple would be allowed to limit functionality on their own hardware? Think about it from the OS side. What if a 3rd party complained to the EU that they wanted iOS to have a feature that Apple hadn't added support for yet? Is that a scenario where Apple would be forced to include the feature?
Pretty staggering so many Americans think that a choice between just two operating system vendors is a healthy market situation and is impossible to abuse (ignoring the many examples of yore where duopolies became collusion buddies to cement their hegemony).
You’d think that would be taught in business 101, no?
You’d think that would be taught in business 101, no?
"They protect their weaker products by locking their successful products to them."
You were claiming that the above scenario is where Apple doesn't succeed by merit. That's what "lock in" means.
They‘re not leveraging Wi-Fi functionality for market share and revenue (in an anticompetitive manner) as they’re doing with NFC and Apple Pay.
But yes, if Apple - conceivably - leveraged their installed user/device base to charge internet access providers a 15% or 30% share of internet access fees (by the minute/megabyte or month) through that Wi-Fi chip, then such regulation should be put in place.
In other words: Once Apple demands a cut of internet access provider’s fees for internet access over Wi-Fi, then I‘m all for such regulation. And so will be the EU, I guess.
Giving access to NFC via an open API isn't the same as providing drivers or giving direct access to a chip. There are still layers between that and the chip and those layers remain only accessible and known by Apple (unless you do reverse engineering, then it's accessible right now!).
Ok but take off the costs of developing features and services we pay for that only work in North America. Guarantee you we come out on top on this pathetic game.
Probably true, but you could stop supporting it now. Existing devices would retain current functionality. New ones wouldn’t have it.
Obviously, it’s not going to happen. Apple is, eventually, rightly or wrongly, going to conform to what the EU tells them to do just like they conform with what China tells them to do.
From the EU: Apple is a gatekeeper and has to be interoperable with ****** 3rd party apps.
Use Android. People who choose to use Apple and then whine about it always strike me as either trolls or immature adults (or EU regulators, I suppose). I know what I'm choosing. If I wanted sideloading etc etc I'd use Android.
No, it isn’t, but one of the arguments here is that third parties might implement functionality better than Apple, and that rationale applies just as much to the APIs themselves as it does to accessing them.