See your doing it again by mentioning the 30% market share
The device being "standalone" has nothing to do with whether or not the regulation applies. It is determined by whether the platform is a "gatekeeper". Which is why Apple can continue to ship MacOS without a browser choice screen because MacOS isn't considered a gatekeeper under the DMA. I think we can all agree that a Mac is a standalone device.
Yes and no. I'm in the process of obtaining citizenship in an EU country. But you're correct that it mostly doesn't impact me, as I'm not planning to move to the EU.
Why did the US courts prevent Google from paying apple to be the default search engine? No EU involvement
Yes but the EU are looking at the iPhone as a standalone device
It’s not about existing customers
They're losers with nothing better to do.
Yes that’s true but over time because it’s been the default option on both platforms it’s allowed to get consistently better because most consumers haven’t bothered to change it & went with the default option anyway
Right but every western country is relying on Asia for most of the hardware including America
I don’t think that’s accurate. As currently written, the DMA would still apply to Apple if Android was 3 companies each with 25% market share (in fact, it would apply to all 4 mobile OSes if there the case). DMA’s gatekeeper status is based on number of users, (unless you’re iPadOS - then it applies just because the EU says so) and revenue, not number of market participants.
It wasn't the EU that stopped Google from paying apple to be the default iOS search engine. It was the US courts.
The third company doesn’t use android anymore & has about 1 billion active users in Asia
Yes, and under the DMA, they’d get regulated just the same as Android and iOS, have to make their phones work with Apple’s watches (assuming they make watches of their own), not be able to set their browser as the default, etc.
That’s a bit like here. iPadOS is exactly like iOS, unless it’s a discussion about the EU, then suddenly it’s different.
I mean, the EU admitted it was a different platform, and that it didn’t have the required number of users for the law to apply, but they were having it apply anyway. I understand “the letter of the law” doesn’t apply in the EU - but that seems particularly egregious to me.
Oo, oo, I know, tariffs the EU will impose a tariff on users who select an American app. Oh no what have I done!
So you don’t know who the company is?
I’m assuming you’re referring to Huawei, but I’m honestly not familiar with their product offerings because they’re not an option in the US and I wouldn’t use them even if they were.
Let’s just say I disagree with the idea that the EU would not want to regulate this space if there were three main players instead of two (unless one of those players was European, perhaps).
As I have said previously
So which is it? Completely fair, or favoring EU citizens - because it cannot be both. They keep claiming all these required changes are to make things fair. If it's favoring EU citizens, it is, by definition, not fair.
It's sad, because Safari came from KDE's html engine, and then Google cloned it, and for a while Safari and Chrome were very compatible, but ever since, Google has been looking for ways to crap up Chrome.
