I made this comment in the previous thread that dealt with the issue, but it's worth repeating to stress why opening up some of these systems is important despite some drawbacks:
The EU is probably already missing out on some innovation because companies cannot or will not make their products work in accordance with local regulation. There's nothing wrong with that per se, that's a decision for individual companies to make.
It
does become a problem if you sell a, for the lack of a better word, global product such as iOS (or Android) but you only allow yourself to use the full potential of the platform. If Apple Pay is not available in your region, then there's really no comparably convenient way to use your iPhone for touchless payment services in shops or public transportation. In some ways that may be insignificant, but it multiplies across several areas.
The obvious rebuttal to forcing platforms to be more open is that they have created the platform and it should therefore be up to them what you can do with them. Don't like it, create your own platform. Fair enough, but pragmatically also not very feasible. Companies such as Apple know that, which is why they are making this argument in the first place.
Ideally, therefore, our smartphones should be open and modular platforms that allow competition not just between platforms but also (to the extent possible) on core services. If Apple does not want to offer touchless payments in your region, use this local solution instead to tap and pay. If Siri doesn't work with your language, swap out out for something that does while still being able to use an iPhone.
No I'm not saying that the DMA/DSA will deliver this, I don't believe they go that far. We shall see what impact they will have in a couple of years. What I do believe, very strongly, is that it would open up room for innovation in places that are not at the forefront of product road maps in Cupertino or Mountain View. As most non-US users of these devices will know, there's always a long list of things that just doesn't work outside of the US and, where local alternatives do exist, it's always a second rate experience because some things just cannot be easily integrated into the "seamless experience." Until the platform provider realises, of course, that it would be profitable, in which case the competitor is immediately at a disadvantage.
Big tech will likely kick and scream, not everything will work as intended and mistakes will be made, but I very strongly believe that more open systems would benefit everyone in the long run.
The EU is probably already missing out on some innovation because companies cannot or will not make their products work in accordance with local regulation. There's nothing wrong with that per se, that's a decision for individual companies to make. It does become a problem if you sell a, for...
forums.macrumors.com
