Here are the actual numbers.
Apple sales revenue by country/region 2025| Statista
The Americas are Apple’s largest regional market, bringing in net sales of ***** billion U.S.
www.statista.com
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.
Germany Urges EU to Require 7 Years of Updates and Repairs for iOS Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
www.statista.com
I really dislike american companies trying to impose their awful anticonsumer practices to EU citizens. They could just stop selling in the EU and we would be fine.
You are right. I took the wrong number. $68.6bn in NET sales!!!! 🤣Here are the actual numbers.
Apple sales revenue by country/region 2025| Statista
The Americas are Apple’s largest regional market, bringing in net sales of ***** billion U.S.
Apple: net sales in Europe 2011-2024| Statista
Apple recorded sales of over *** billion U.S.
www.statista.com
Wow, one thing I actually agree with the EU overlords.
Yes, software updates, or at least security updates, should be provided at a minimum of 5 years, on a regular basis (not bi-annual, that's useless). This should hit the Chinese OEMs hard as they are the worst (releasing dozens of models a year with 2 years of updates at best, and many are not getting any other than some security updates during the first year).
Yes, software updates, or at least security updates, should be provided at a minimum of 5 years, on a regular basis (not bi-annual, that's useless). This should hit the Chinese OEMs hard as they are the worst (releasing dozens of models a year with 2 years of updates at best, and many are not getting any other than some security updates during the first year).
Leave it to the EU’s managerial elites to stifle market competition - they will be creating unnecessary friction for smaller market players that compete with big tech companies who can afford to meet these onerous regulatory standards. It’s no wonder there are so few global consumer tech companies blossoming in the EU.
Good point. It also means resellers may be less likely to stock cheap phones, since they are likely to be stuck when the manufacturer fails to comply with the update laws and have to deal with consumers demanding repairs or updates.
My guess is the OEMs will simply sell through shell companies that fold when a new device is released, leaving resellers and consumers no recourse.
So what happens when a part in one of these phones is now (in the future) on some toxic cancer causing list? Or we can't mine the cobalt or other rare earths cause they are in harder to reach area's and labor is too expensive to keep prices down? Or a government gets overthrown, and you can't source it anymore? How can one support new OS's for 7 years when the hardware it runs on simply can not do what that new OS does so well? Like I don't know, save on battery life or run faster by using new features in the new processors?
These people have absolutely no freaking idea what they are talking about. It's a bunch of people saying "they can do it, they can do anything so long as we tell them to. So lets just say $#!T and make them do it, without having any idea why you can't and not caring much at all!"
5 years is pretty darn long to support hardware with "Current" software updates. Security updates could go further, but at some point you can't support the old OS anymore. It's not economical to do so. Batteries don't last forever, and in order to get devices as small as they are. A sacrifice of space on the inside of the device is made to better fit the battery and parts. Making it more user serviceable is not easy. That would require a full on design change and most people may not want it. Which would do wonders for keeping that device going for 5+ years. You would not get USB-C connectors the first or second or 3rd go round. Who knows what we will have in 5 years? You may not even have a connector, could all be full wireless by then. Zero ports.
I find that there are areas I agree with when it comes to making things last longer and providing for some type of self repair on devices. However, if you want that you should look for another device in many cases. And when you do take that hard look for one. You will tend to find those devices are simply not popular enough to make the cut. Apple from the start didn't make this phone very self repairable. And even if you said well I want to take it to someone that can repair it at a reasonable cost. I would say the same thing I said above. It's not easy to do and also have people want it enough to justify making it in the first place. Apple and other companies would need to certify that shop as having the full ability to repair your device. If not, then you will get substandard parts and work. If your device is not fully functional for as long as expected to be. You would have the right to be very upset and expect Apple to correct it. Good luck with that if they are not certified and you wasted your money AND Apple still has to deal with your complaint. Because people do things like that all the time.
It took machines to build these devices as the tolerances of space are so darn low, you can do very little by hand. Screen and battery maybe easy enough by hand to replace. But, anything past that and you start going down a rabbit hole to the point of it costing MORE to just replace it then it is to keep trying to fix it. Why support a 5 year OS when 90% of the customer base is on the current OS and hardware? Why make parts for a phone that 10% of the customer base is still on? What manufacturing line is still producing that part? And if they are, can they do it at the same price? Most likely not, it's economies of scale not economies of storage. You're going to pay more for old parts because it will be more scarce. My recommendations would be:
1) Make parts out of the most abundant and SAFE materials of the time for the need of the time.
2) Support the OS for security updates for 7 years unless the hardware can't support it.
3) Source materials from the SAFEST and most economically viable places with proper labor laws (enforced).
4) Produce locally for local markets wherever possible with local labor.
5) RECYCLE as much as possible.
6) Provide cash or trade up incentives for the life of the product.
Things they shouldn't do
1) Force a common connector for charging and data transfer.
2) Force design changes for the sake of repairability. Let the market decide the devices people want.
3) Force Apple and or Google to open up their platform to any competition. You can compete by building your own!
4) Force these companies to support a device that simply can't be predicted 7 years out to be supportable.
5) Force these companies to make a device "few" want vs the "Many".
6) Force any specific commission pricing on the App Stores. It's called WebApps on iOS and Side-loading on Android if you don't want to pay anything to Apple or Google.
I'm very much not in favor of anyone forcing either Apple or Google to work with any third party store. While also vetting/securing them and making their hardware/software stack fully accessible to those third parties. I trust Apple/Google more than those third-parties. And while both are not perfect, I know whom to go to if I have any issues. And i paid for that ability when I purchased there devices. I/we own the device we paid for yes. We can do all kinds of experiments, hack, twist turn, break etc to our liking once we paid for it. We don't own the software Apple/Google provides. We can lobby and ask them to do things to the OS we want. But, we can't make them. We do so by not purchasing their stuff and supporting products that do. We had that chance, and both Apple and Google won out. Blackberry is still around, but Palm and others all died out.
Last edited:
If you want to regulate consumer electronics the same as durable good, then don't complain when features stagnate for years too.
The only regulations necessary here might be for Apple and other hardware makers not to block or hinder third-party repair businesses from performing board-level repairs. This means allowing third-party repair businesses to a) manufacture their own replacement parts and/or procure replacement parts from official first-party component vendors and b) access official schematics and diagnostic tools used by first-party repair and refurbishing.
With Apple’s decision to keep iOS 14 around, I think they are anticipating supporting their own devices for much longer than ever before. If the iPhone 6s runs iOS 14 now, it will continue to do so with security updates for an indefinite period of time. I think apple is already way ahead of Germany on this one. Pretty awesome!
So you have recently bought a German car too?How about they do similar laws for car manufacturers? You buy $50k car only to find out that OS is already 5 years old and slow and laggy and there are no updates etc. Good cars are handicapped by crappy UIs
Why? The law tells car manufacturers they must install seat belts too.
Why?
Think about it... 7-Elevens. 7 Dwarves. 7, man, that's the number.
"7 chipmunks twirlin' on a branch, eatin' lots of sunflowers on my uncle's ranch." You know that old children's tale from the sea. It's like you're dreamin' about Gorgonzola cheese when it's clearly Brie time, baby.
But you believe in country sovereignty right? Your “American company” products are made in China, so they don't seemed worried about dealing with it.
IMO, these types of articles call out Apple because they know it will draw the most eyes. As for how this proposal will affect Apple, I think it wouldn't affect Apple that much at all from the software end. Apple is already the industry leader when it comes to the duration of supporting their hardware.
Where Apple may feel some pain is with being forced to sell repair parts. Apple doesn't want users to open up their devices. I would think that most users would also not want to open their own devices. Apple would prefer you take it into the Apple Store, or an authorized shop for repairs.
I think having a documented price list of all components would be a good thing for folks that are capable of doing their own repairs. It would help independent repair shops that can then get a hold of OEM parts and offer it to their customers that insist on quality components.
In the end, I think a law like this would actually help Apple more than hurt them. If users have assurances that their devices can be updated/repaired 3, 4, 7 years from time of purchase, they'll be more likely to spend more on the device in the first place. Let me spend the extra $200 to go from 128GB to 512GB. Let me jump up from the iPhone 12 to the iPhone 12 Pro. Things like this could drive the ASP and the margins up.
This would hurt the smaller Android makers, I would suspect. Manufacturers without the scale of Apple or Samsung will be severely hampered by these requirements. Software is easy, just let the user install it regardless of how well it'll run. Having to maintain stock of components like batteries will drive smaller OEMs to standardize on these types of parts across their devices. It's easy for Apple and Samsung to have different batteries for every device because even the lowest selling iPhone is going to sell in the tens of millions.
While they’re at it, please regulate the sloppy programming that makes these devices slow and buggy. Who wants to replace the battery on a 5 year old device that’s now a snail?!
I had to upgrade a 1st gen iPad Pro (4 year old) because the lagginess became unbearable. The memory management/usage was so bad that almost every app was reloading itself from scratch every time. iOS was constantly dumping every app from memory just to run another.
I had to upgrade a 1st gen iPad Pro (4 year old) because the lagginess became unbearable. The memory management/usage was so bad that almost every app was reloading itself from scratch every time. iOS was constantly dumping every app from memory just to run another.