They will rapidly lose market share to Android and become irrelevant in the EU, which is as good as pulling out from the EU. Good outcome.
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.
Impending EU Regulation to Force Apple to Allow Third-Party App Stores and Open Up iMessage
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
With Android, those operating system updates are only half the story. For well over a decade now, Google's been pulling what were once core operating system elements out of the operating system proper and treating them as standalone apps instead. That means those elements — all of which are still considered part of the single-bundle operating system in the land of iOS — get updated numerous times a month, all throughout the year. And those updates reach every single Android device within a matter of days, regardless of which company made it or how long ago it was released.
A perfect example of that principle in action came up just the other day, when Google announced it was bringing the formerly Android-11-exclusive feature of auto-resetting app permissions to all Android devices running 2015's Android 6.0 software or higher. That feature provides a huge privacy and security boost, as it makes sure apps you're no longer actively using can't keep accessing sensitive forms of data on your phone.
Android’s underappreciated upgrade advantage
Yup, you read that right. And it's as true as can be, even if Apple does everything in its power to make you forget.
www.computerworld.com
I am sure Google, Amazon, and MS will be glad to open and run their own App Stores on iOS without any worry about folding. What happens when Google products are exclusively available on Google Play store, and MS products are exclusively available on MS store and so on? I guess Apple's App Store will be the one to die. One can always hope.
There are many laws regulating McDonalds and other fast food outlets.
Fast-food lobbies U.S. states on "Happy Meal" laws
Fast-food companies are asking U.S. state legislators to remove restaurant marketing from local governments' regulatory menu, in the latest industry bid to stay a step ahead of anti-obesity laws.
07-1658 (CFMS)
cityclerk.lacity.org
More Salt In School Lunch, Less Nutrition Info On Menus: Trump Rolls Back Food Rules
The Trump administration says it wants to remove burdensome regulation. On Monday it served up a taste of what that looks like when it comes to aspects of Obama-era food policy.
www.npr.org
Just give me sideloading lmao
I don’t want a third party App Store and I couldn’t care less about iMessage on Android since I already use multi platform messaging apps
I just want to install apps from developers I trust that run sandboxed but apple will never approve like emulators and other cool stuff that can take advantage of the kickass hardware I paid top dollar for
Is that so hard to understand?
I don’t want a third party App Store and I couldn’t care less about iMessage on Android since I already use multi platform messaging apps
I just want to install apps from developers I trust that run sandboxed but apple will never approve like emulators and other cool stuff that can take advantage of the kickass hardware I paid top dollar for
Is that so hard to understand?
Agreed.
Also, what business does Apple have to be getting in the middle of what a user wants to put on their device?
If a user wants to run emulators with roms that were sourced from "wherever", that's up to them.
Apple has zero right to be getting involved and "policing behavior" in this way.
Same if someone wants to run some KodiTV IPTV type stuff on their device.
Apple needs to get out of this gatekeeping business.
It's incredible this has been tolerated for this long honestly.
You have every right to crack the device you purchased and run whatever. The issue is does apple have to help you do it?
Yes, it does. Since having competing service like Apple Arcade while blocking the Xbox service is anti competitive. It is identical to the Google regulation, but Google did only put their own services on top of the search results. It didn't even block 3rd party services, like Apple does.
And once again, it doesn't matter so much what you or any other user wants. DMA is more about equal conditions for the industry. Users will profit in turn, cause they have better options and cheaper products.
DMA regulates Apple when it comes to competition. Remember Tile? Those guys build a great key finder service, but Apple copied them with AirTags. AirTags where deeply integrated into the system, while Apple didn't want to allow Tile to private system Api call, the AirTag system is using.
https://9to5mac.com/2020/01/17/tile-apple-antitrust-opening-statement/
This is just one example why DMA is necessary and is one example of Apples anticompetitive behaviour. Every government will release similar laws.
They should allow a one-way-only BootCamp on these phones, but to a blank “install any OS”. And, for security reasons it might not be reversible back to iOS.
Pick and choose any thirdparty OS from any established source (i.e arm compatible Linux releases) or what any random dev might decide to make. Pick and choose your GPU drivers, install any random app stores, Bluetooth/WiFi/mic/camera controllers, etc times 200.
This is the true “my phone my freedom to do whatever I want with it”.
And I’ll get behind this idea, even if I’ll never use it, but only as long as it’s 100% far detached and out of reach from messing with current iOS as we know it.
Pretty sure that the Cydia and Jailbreak people would have something in months if not weeks if it were supported.
That would be too restrictive and sabotage-like levels of implementation.
As per my recent posts (and something that I might be saying often, thing is I don’t get neither ideas nor serious backslash), I would give the option to flush out iOS to a BootCamp-style install any OS.
I would maybe even call it, “anyOS” forever mode and then let them have at it… from coprocessors, GPU, etc low level handling to mic/cam/WiFi/Bluetooth etc drivers to all sorts of app stores. 100% full freedom.
Requirements: can’t be reverted back to iOS, can’t touch anything iOS.
You've got to look at it from the outside in: Apple adding in sideloading and the ability for other vendors to offer storefronts for application purchases does nothing to harm you, the customer not interested in this position. You don't have to use them.
Android already locks sideloading behind an app-by-app permission so you can use a file browser to manually install things yourself but completely block Chrome from doing so, locking yourself out of things potentially doing it in the background.
Desktop computers have, since they were first conceived offered an open platform where the user can install and buy software from whoever they like. Apple themselves sell a popular line of computers all named after a long raincoat that does this very thing.
Apple won't ever bow to customer demands because they make a ton of money from their app store cut and the more they can control, dictate and infantilise their customers the more loyal they become. People jokingly refer to the hardcore Apple fans as a cult but this isn't far from the truth but they are seemingly blind to the capitalistic intentions behind every business decision they make. Getting rid of chargers? Entirely about reducing Apple's shipping costs by fitting more handsets on cargo ships span as an environmental choice. Apple's privacy push is really just another way to dictate what its customers can and cannot do.
I've been using Android and iOS for as long as the OG iPhone and the T-Mobile G1. In that time I have sideloaded umpteen apps, files and other things on dozens of Android phones and never had any issues.
Just because Grandfather Apple tells you that its all bad doesn't mean it is.
I kind of like this idea. People keep saying they’ve bought apple hardware and should be able to do what they want with it.
Well fine!
Just don’t run iOS and we’re all good!
Perfect solution.. run android on iOS or something. Whatever makes them happy.
If side loading is enabled, most if not all companies will pull out of the App Store to save on costs... this leaves the users with no choice but to get the app from a website... is that website real? did I click in the right thing? was that app scrutinised?.... see where this will go?
If this were true, 95% of Android customers wouldn't be using the Play Store for Android apps.
I have spent a good bit of time reading the DMA and DSA as well as the reviews and opinions of these, and I think there are much farther reaching implications than what we are discussing:
This does not just affect Apple. Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, Twitter (especially now under Musk) and all other major players have major impacts, some much larger than Apple.
Since it is so current, how will Elon Musks vision of Twitter operate under the DSA? He wants to pull back suppression of free speech, the DSA makes this illegal. The platform must suppress and censor what is considered harmful or disinformation. "Very large online platforms will have to comply with stricter obligations under the DSA, proportionate to the significant societal risks they pose when disseminating illegal and harmful content, including disinformation."
How about Meta, who has already admitted that Apples efforts to limit user tracking has caused much more damage to their advertising income than they originally thought. Now, this same tracking, outside of their core apps (FB, WA and IG) will be illegal on all platforms, not just if the user elects but must be built in?
Staying with Meta, how will giving 3rd party devs access to their core platform affect their advertising income when you can carry on your Facebook interactions through a 3rd party app, without being exposed to the advertising and data collection that is their reason for existing?
What about Apple, Amazon and Google, who now may have to open their Siri, Alexa and Google Assistant services to 3rd party developers who want to take advantage of the AI? Or forcing them to allow, say, Google Assistant to be installed on an iPhone.
There has to be a major pushback by all of the digital providers. Going to be very interesting how this plays out.
This does not just affect Apple. Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, Twitter (especially now under Musk) and all other major players have major impacts, some much larger than Apple.
Since it is so current, how will Elon Musks vision of Twitter operate under the DSA? He wants to pull back suppression of free speech, the DSA makes this illegal. The platform must suppress and censor what is considered harmful or disinformation. "Very large online platforms will have to comply with stricter obligations under the DSA, proportionate to the significant societal risks they pose when disseminating illegal and harmful content, including disinformation."
How about Meta, who has already admitted that Apples efforts to limit user tracking has caused much more damage to their advertising income than they originally thought. Now, this same tracking, outside of their core apps (FB, WA and IG) will be illegal on all platforms, not just if the user elects but must be built in?
Staying with Meta, how will giving 3rd party devs access to their core platform affect their advertising income when you can carry on your Facebook interactions through a 3rd party app, without being exposed to the advertising and data collection that is their reason for existing?
What about Apple, Amazon and Google, who now may have to open their Siri, Alexa and Google Assistant services to 3rd party developers who want to take advantage of the AI? Or forcing them to allow, say, Google Assistant to be installed on an iPhone.
There has to be a major pushback by all of the digital providers. Going to be very interesting how this plays out.
Why cannot a manufacturer/developer put out a message service that is private? Why should the Zuck's message service get access to my message if I don't wish?
If that new service does not have a significant market position where it can throw its weight around, it will not be classed as a gatekeeper and thus other services cannot request gateway access to it.
And even if it reaches such a position other services can't just walk in and take over, they can at most request connectivity so users of the connected service can decide by themselves to send and receive messages with outside services. If the users themselves decide against that they will just stay within their home service as before.
The difference is that the decision whether or not users will have this option can't be unilaterally imposed by the service provider any more if it is big enough to be classed as a gatekeeper.
That’s not going to fly. One of the provisions is:
- Allow end users to install third party apps or app stores that use or interoperate with the operating system of the gatekeeper
Here in EU we are obsessed with competition. We have super strong anti-trust laws and once a company grows big enough from market share perspective, then serious restrictions start to apply. Most of this is in place already and for example Google has been scrutinised heavily by such laws. The same goes with Apple as it grows more and more stronger.
This will hurt Apple for sure. But let's put this into perspective. Apple is a company that is richer than many small countries. They are generating billions in profit and forcing to use USB-C port on iPhones or interoperability of iMessage will create additional expenses for Apple, most probably even tens of millions, but even this is just scratching the surface. It's comparable to a situation where government takes 2 beers away from you if you have more than 200 beers in your fridge.
So what will change if for example iPhone goes USB-C. For me it means that now I can have single cable on my desk and switch between iPhone and Macbook. This is great actually. I will still buy Apple brand chargers and cables, because they are good, but having less cables is good.
Another example... iMessage interoperability. If you could use iMessage on Android, would you switch to Android? I think most iPhone users use it because Apple has made a great product, not because they feel forced to do it. Also most people use App Store, because it is convenient. I will not use another app store or start sideloading and I'm pretty sure that 98% of people will not also. When I used Android I did not do it either. And on Android it is also not enabled by default and when you enable it, then Android will warn you that it's bad.
In the end I'm pretty sure that Apple will keep growing. They will comply, it will hurt a bit, but other areas will generate new and even more revenue and Apple fans will be Apple fans, because Apple makes great products, not because iMessage does work on Android.
Also keep in mind that EU-s strong decisions tell big tech companies that once they grow big enough to force users, then there is somebody who can force them into submission. Don't worry about Apple, that's normal in a big corporate world and these are business risks, which are already considered. They are making bigger fuzz about it than it actually is.
This will hurt Apple for sure. But let's put this into perspective. Apple is a company that is richer than many small countries. They are generating billions in profit and forcing to use USB-C port on iPhones or interoperability of iMessage will create additional expenses for Apple, most probably even tens of millions, but even this is just scratching the surface. It's comparable to a situation where government takes 2 beers away from you if you have more than 200 beers in your fridge.
So what will change if for example iPhone goes USB-C. For me it means that now I can have single cable on my desk and switch between iPhone and Macbook. This is great actually. I will still buy Apple brand chargers and cables, because they are good, but having less cables is good.
Another example... iMessage interoperability. If you could use iMessage on Android, would you switch to Android? I think most iPhone users use it because Apple has made a great product, not because they feel forced to do it. Also most people use App Store, because it is convenient. I will not use another app store or start sideloading and I'm pretty sure that 98% of people will not also. When I used Android I did not do it either. And on Android it is also not enabled by default and when you enable it, then Android will warn you that it's bad.
In the end I'm pretty sure that Apple will keep growing. They will comply, it will hurt a bit, but other areas will generate new and even more revenue and Apple fans will be Apple fans, because Apple makes great products, not because iMessage does work on Android.
Also keep in mind that EU-s strong decisions tell big tech companies that once they grow big enough to force users, then there is somebody who can force them into submission. Don't worry about Apple, that's normal in a big corporate world and these are business risks, which are already considered. They are making bigger fuzz about it than it actually is.
That‘s not how it works. If your privacy-focused message service is large enough to qualify as a gatekeeper, other users will be able to send messages to you from a different message service if and only if they have your contact info and you haven’t blocked unknown contacts (or even known contacts), and you will be able to reply to them the same way. Of course that particular communication will only be as secure as both message services combined (common denominator), but the rest of your use of the message service will remain unaffected. In particular, the other message service won’t gain access to your other communications.