Yes, let's break the power of big tech and cheerlead building the power of big EU. Makes perfect sense.
I'm actually all for curbing 'big tech's' power, but these don't strike me as the biggest problems.
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
I'm actually all for curbing 'big tech's' power, but these don't strike me as the biggest problems.
Proper leadership in Washington would be threatening retaliation against European enterprises if this even comes close to being law.
Yeah pull out of a market of + 400 Mio people. Very smart move.
What apple needs to do is open talks with the EU and come to some compromise. There are things that apple definitely should change. Their level of control is only in their interest, not in yours
It was stopped by lawsuits from patent troll VirnetX claiming they invented common messaging protocols. Apple could no longer validate the user and then let them communicate between themselves. Apple had to change it so they have to continuously play an intermediate roll and incur significant computational cost. Opening it up to everyone would mean Apple incurs costs for devices they never generate any revenue from.
Apple opened up iMessage to China simply because it was the law. What makes this different?
Exactly right. Who's going to break the power of the Big EU...they seem like the biggest bullies on the block right now.
This is the end of Apple's end to end encryption in iMessages....which is what the 5 eyes, 9eyes, 14 eyes really wants. Who gets to say which third party apps get to request interoperability?? What if blackhat hackers are posing as a legit messaging app? or what about if the Saudis are building a messaging app? Do they get to request interoperability thus gaining all the secrets of how to break the end-to-end encryption and spy on people?? This is so wrong.
Apple hurt themselves by simply not releasing a iMessages app for Android.
This is the end of Apple's end to end encryption in iMessages....which is what the 5 eyes, 9eyes, 14 eyes really wants. Who gets to say which third party apps get to request interoperability?? What if blackhat hackers are posing as a legit messaging app? or what about if the Saudis are building a messaging app? Do they get to request interoperability thus gaining all the secrets of how to break the end-to-end encryption and spy on people?? This is so wrong.
Apple hurt themselves by simply not releasing a iMessages app for Android.
There are EU companies operating in the US. Which ones are facing this kind of nonsense?
Forcing 3rd party stores and side loading isn't going to accomplish anything and I think the EU already knows that. They're just using "competition" as an excuse to scuttle privacy/security on mobile.
The EU has always favoured its own, which is fine.
In this context, has the EU ever required the likes of Audi or BMW to make their car head units interoperable with each other? Or have standardised engine mounts so that you can switch comparable engines or gearboxes between platforms? All of this is technically possible through standardisation.
Alternatively, have they ever required Siemens to open up their traffic management platforms to third parties? Or required Bosch to allow end-user accessible APIs into CAN bus systems so I could extend or modify my car software?
Answers to all of above: no.
Last edited:
In the same market and of a similar size as Apple or Google? Not to my knowledg…
Yes, because as you know every single European citizen had a say in that matter.
Not just 400 million people but 400 million people with pretty high income. Apple could not replace them with 400 million people from Africa, for example.
Its Apples platform, Apple's rules........ Changes will come but probably not what the EU is asking for.
There's always Android for the ones that don't get it the way they want it.
With the DSA, the EU again proves that global tech companies can and should be regulated if they have the position of a gatekeeper. When I read some comments here, I again notice how necessary this is. Not just the actual changes that will benefit us, the customers and citizens, in the long run but also the symbolic act of showing that global tech companies can’t just behave as if they are above the law. In a democracy, elected representatives and the governmental institutions have the power, not private companies like Apple and others.
They're behaving above the law when it comes to taxes. There aren't laws about how you can build your chat apps, and there don't need to be.
That's the problem though, right? Sure they can switch to Android but then lose out on iMessage. Locking users behind that choice is exactly the kind of vendor lock in that EU wants to get rid of.
As an example, I recently switched to Android and my family is all using iMessage group chats. They don't work over SMS. All other chat apps are supported on both platforms but not iMessage. It's high time for a regulation. Having to choose your phone based on if iMessage is supported is crazy.
There are a few things Apple can do to help out consumers, satisfy regulators, and keep their business strong (ultimately, this is about them trying to keep control so they can make more money).
Keep iOS walled, but figure out how to do the third party store thing. Been doing it forever on computers, and it's time the phone/tablet world of Apple followed suit.
A couple more examples:
I see no problem with an expanded standard text message format (RCS). If Apple wants to still indicate "non-iPhone user" with green, fine. But it would be nice to send large video files and such via text to Android folks (who will likely never switch) without having to jump through hoops.
Adopt USB-C until wireless-only is market-ready (I doubt this will happen). Yes, lightning is better for smaller devices, but until they resolve all the idiosyncrasies of wireless charging (or, the tech world comes up with a standard that's better than what's current), USB-C should be the port on iDevices.
Open up Shared Photos to Android users. My wife and I just had a baby, and we post like crazy to a Shared Photos Album because we don't do social media. The only problem is that in order to share with Android users, we have to make a view-only public link, which we don't want to do. They need to figure this one out.
I know. Apple wants to keep all these "special things" to keep consumers, but there are just so many other myriad reasons to be in the Apple ecosystem, these walled-garden features are becoming much more frustrating when they don't evolve with the times.
Keep iOS walled, but figure out how to do the third party store thing. Been doing it forever on computers, and it's time the phone/tablet world of Apple followed suit.
A couple more examples:
I see no problem with an expanded standard text message format (RCS). If Apple wants to still indicate "non-iPhone user" with green, fine. But it would be nice to send large video files and such via text to Android folks (who will likely never switch) without having to jump through hoops.
Adopt USB-C until wireless-only is market-ready (I doubt this will happen). Yes, lightning is better for smaller devices, but until they resolve all the idiosyncrasies of wireless charging (or, the tech world comes up with a standard that's better than what's current), USB-C should be the port on iDevices.
Open up Shared Photos to Android users. My wife and I just had a baby, and we post like crazy to a Shared Photos Album because we don't do social media. The only problem is that in order to share with Android users, we have to make a view-only public link, which we don't want to do. They need to figure this one out.
I know. Apple wants to keep all these "special things" to keep consumers, but there are just so many other myriad reasons to be in the Apple ecosystem, these walled-garden features are becoming much more frustrating when they don't evolve with the times.
How is side loading and 3rd party stores going to benefit consumers? The EU never provided any evidence that prices, quality, selection and customer satisfaction with software on the App Store were worse than other platforms that did allow side loading and 3rd party stores (Android, Windows, macOS).
The thing is, this would allow a developer to use a non-native payment gateway. I trust Apple with my payment details, I won't trust some third-party dev with my payment details.
The problem is that this legislation has been dreamt up by technologically inept corpses who have no idea how the real world works.
kind of weird that people are saying "if apple implemented iMessage on Android or if Apple opened to 3rd party app stores etc..".. It seems like an ultra targeted directive here. Its only Apple that has to change, even though they have only 25% of the EU market.
How is 25% of the market causing a problem that needs a remedy for the whole market?
I think Apple will be within their rights to bring in the USA government here. It seems more of a direct attack on one of the USA's biggest companies.
Pretty massive implications from what I consider to be a huge overreach by EU law makers.
Maybe Apple won't fight, but I can imagine Apple weaponising this overreach to serve EU customers with less quality products and services. Something that the EU will need to explain to its constituents.
How is 25% of the market causing a problem that needs a remedy for the whole market?
I think Apple will be within their rights to bring in the USA government here. It seems more of a direct attack on one of the USA's biggest companies.
Pretty massive implications from what I consider to be a huge overreach by EU law makers.
Maybe Apple won't fight, but I can imagine Apple weaponising this overreach to serve EU customers with less quality products and services. Something that the EU will need to explain to its constituents.
It was only ever going to get worse. People will always complain about something. There's always a force in the government that wants to demand that a company do X, Y and Z.
Adding such a statement will not stop consumers from doing so and in the end they will blame the product and the brand even if it was their own choice. Also you are oversimplifying how pervasive the changes throughout the OS would need to be in order to support that and maintain security. Relaxing security rules, heck even just having a path in the OS to relax security rules, opens everyone up to new bugs, hacks and exploits not just the people who opt in to it.
and at the same time they demand messages to be end to end encrypted, how would that even work if I am sending a message from WhatsApp to iMessage. What if I am a iMessage user, I never even accepted the TnC of WhatsApp for Meta to collect / process my iMessage reply.