wait, why do I need an account for WhatsApp if I don't want their app? seems kinda retarded to be honest....oooh I really want this chat feature from xyzzy, but I don't actually WANT an account for xyz and download their app, etc., etc
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
No, you have a misunderstanding there!
In actual reality what this does is giving the operator of that fictitious OS2 / Warp messaging service the opportunity to ask Apple for gateway access, but that other service will still have to implement such a gateway to Apple's specifications at their own cost to ultimately provide that choice to users of both services!
Sure, Apple refuses everything. 3rd party AppStores and Apps won't happen like USB-C will only happen with the EU. The EU waited 10 years for the industry to implement a common charging standard. But Apple, and only Apple refused.
So if you want to blame anyone, go and write Tim a mail.
WhatsApp literally originated on the iPhone?
That being said, Apple should‘ve just jumped on the RCS bandwagon already which probably would‘ve dampened the blow they‘re about to receive once this goes live. Been saying this for years already, bury SMS already.
What bugs me the most is a certain subset of iPhone users who think they represent all iPhone users and try to keep towing the Apple company line as if it was handed down from the Gods without any ability to think for themselves.
Maybe just maybe outside your personal bubble, some of these things are wanted by other users. Some people want better interop with their family and friends in countries that are less dominated by iPhones. Or are you suggesting people should disown their family and friends and never speak to them again when they can't include them in a group chat?
Others want the ability to install harmless game streaming applications without running through a browser app.
I don't think too many would be upset with the AppStore if they didn't use it to squash ideas they didn't like, or actually did their job in properly reviewing that an app was legit (they do not). But no, the way Apple represents the App Store ends up being a lie and it hurts consumers and innovators.
As others have said, if Apple was responsive to complains of consumers, developers, and regulators.... this wouldn't be happening. Some compromise and they could have gone years longer without this. But no, they only bow to Wallstreet pressure to continue the "Services" revenue growth, which is mostly made from the App Store. They aren't in it to actually help you, unless it in-turn makes them more money than not helping you.
From Apple's point of view part of not allowing third party app stores will be because they feel security, performance and stability will suffer. That's one of the reasons behind their app review process. They also police the use of hidden api's that could cause further instability and security issues. They also dont want to be spending their support money fixing issues that could have occurred because a third party App Store allowed software that used a hidden api that changed the underlying system incorrectly.
All of the above may require that third party stores will get a sandboxed lower spec experience. In the same way that Safari/webkit applications dont get full access to all the underlying system for security reasons.
Also, the sdk, all the buttons, UI Kit stuff etc.. comes from Apple. They spent money building it so that 3rd parties can can use it to build software. Do they have to let 3rd parties use it? Maybe you need to role your own UI stuff etc.. As your not paying for it's use.
The EU are basically hobbling one company that isn't even any where near a monopoly to benefit the rest of the companies who cant create stuff off their own backs so need the govt to cut down the winner and distribute the spoils. Thats how I'm reading it. When was the last time a mass of general users in the EU complained that they couldn't message anyone on another OS? When was the last time a group of normal citizens were up in arms that they couldn't side load some app on the App Store.
This is all lobbyist money coming from rival software companies. I dont think it has much to do with what the general public really want or need.
I wish they'd also push for upgradable and repairable computers but then again, the EU get their cut from the VAT of Apple's ripoff hardware upgrades. Conflict of interests
I can group SMS chat with my family, they have androids, and I have iPhone. we can also send pictures, and videos. what exactly are people NOT able to do when using iMessage with android users?
much the same way the US helped Harley Davidson by imposing tariffs on imported motorcycles back in the 80's
For those who say that 'Apple can just get out of the EU' - do you realise the EU is the world's second largest trading bloc that has a market of hundreds of millions of people? Apple could leave, but it is unlikely.
Anyway, although I am generally pro-EU and bemoan the day the UK left the organisation, this seems like crass government over-reach to me. The same is true of the proposed requirement for a USB-C connector on all phones. These measures are just plain silly and reduce consumer choice and product/service diversity. Next the EU will require volume knobs on guitar amplifiers to go up to 11*...
*See This is Spinal Tap if you do not understand the reference.
Anyway, although I am generally pro-EU and bemoan the day the UK left the organisation, this seems like crass government over-reach to me. The same is true of the proposed requirement for a USB-C connector on all phones. These measures are just plain silly and reduce consumer choice and product/service diversity. Next the EU will require volume knobs on guitar amplifiers to go up to 11*...
*See This is Spinal Tap if you do not understand the reference.
Until the app developers leave the App Store completely and go to another store, FORCING me to then download that third party app store to get the app I wanted originally. With who knows what else that store brings with it. The promoters of this asinine regulation never seem to realize this.
Maybe they do and realize that having options will mean Apple will be forced to compete... cleaning out scams, getting rid of artificial barriers, etc otherwise they would lose revenue to a different store. Apple just isn't doing a good job with the App Store and they don't need to because we are forced to live with it.
Didn’t this same thing happen between Apple and France over their iTunes platform a few years ago? And didn’t Apple say: fine we won’t have iTunes in France anymore then. And then didn’t France instantly fold like a cheap crêpe?
Apple will be forced to allow users to utilize third-party app stores and payment systems, as well as make iMessage interoperable with other messaging services, by the European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA), according to a newly published document from the European Commission.
In a questions and answers document on the Digital Markets Act titled "ensuring fair and open digital markets," published on Saturday, the European Commission explained and clarified what the Digital Markets Act will mean for companies that are designated as "gatekeepers." Apple is almost certain to be classified as a "gatekeeper," due to the size of its annual turnover in the EU, its ownership and operation of platforms with a large number of active users, and its "entrenched and durable position" due to how long it has met these criteria, and will therefore be subject to the rules set out in the DMA.
Last week, a leaked version of the DMA, seen by MacRumors, indicated that Apple could be forced to make major changes to the App Store, Messages, FaceTime, third-party browsers, and Siri in Europe. The latest document reiterates that gatekeepers will have to allow users to install third-party app stores, while developers will have to be able to interoperate with a gatekeeper's own services, promote their offers outside the gatekeeper's platform and use third-party payment systems, and access data gathered by a gatekeeper.
One of the new additions to the DMA is the requirement to make messaging, voice-calling, and video-calling services interoperable. The document clarifies that a third-party developer will have to request interoperability with a gatekeeper's service, and the gatekeeper will have to comply within a fixed timeframe. Immediately, gatekeepers will be required to support messaging between users on different platforms, but the DMA includes provisions to expand to group chats after two years, and video and audio calls after four years. The interoperability rules theoretically mean that Meta apps like WhatsApp or Messenger could request to interoperate with Apple's iMessage framework, and Apple will be forced to comply.
So far, Apple has heavily resisted attempts by governments to enforce changes to its operating systems and services. For example, Apple simply chose to pay a $5.5 million fine every week for ten weeks in the Netherlands instead of obey orders from the Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) to allow third-party payment systems in Dutch dating apps.
The DMA says that gatekeepers who ignore the rules will face fines of up to 10 percent of the company's total worldwide annual turnover, or 20 percent in the event of repeated infringements, as well as periodic penalties of up to 5 percent of the company's total worldwide annual turnover. Where gatekeepers perpetrate "systematic infringements," the European Commission will be able to impose additional sanctions, such as obliging a gatekeeper to sell a business or parts of it, including units, assets, intellectual property rights, or brands, or banning a gatekeeper from acquiring any company that provides services in the digital sector.
EU lawmakers provisionally approved the DMA in March. Once the final document is officially published, the European Parliament and the Council will need to approve it before it can come into effect. Digital competition chief Margrethe Vestager said last month that she expects the DMA to come into force "sometime in October."
Article Link: Impending EU Regulation to Force Apple to Allow Third-Party App Stores and Open Up iMessage
Yeah, I think Europe is losing their iPhone platform in October for a few days.
I have no objection to third party app stores or payment systems provided that there are harsh penalties for an App Store operator who allows dodgy / deceptive apps.
iMessage and Facetime interoperability sounds like a good idea too. My use of iMessage in the UK is restricted to my wife and Mum as everyone else I know uses WhatsApp. My guess is that Apple could make an SDK available and then shrug if no other software maker opts to use it.
iMessage and Facetime interoperability sounds like a good idea too. My use of iMessage in the UK is restricted to my wife and Mum as everyone else I know uses WhatsApp. My guess is that Apple could make an SDK available and then shrug if no other software maker opts to use it.
I do blame Apple. I want USB-C and perhaps some of these other 'standards' too, but I do not impose my wants on others through governmental force.
Or Apple could just buy a couple of the countries and re-vote on it.
When you download and activate WhatsApp, you have to hand over your real-life phone number to the Facebook corporation for them to data-rape you at will, build up real-life social graphs based on your contact list you'll be compelled to upload to WhatsApp (also compromising the real-life information of everybody you know in the process!) and so on.
A gateway could provide much less information to the other service than that.
PSA for anyone wanting Whatsapp interoperability:
apps.apple.com
WhatsApp Messenger
With WhatsApp for Mac, you can conveniently sync all your chats to your computer. Message privately, make calls and share files with your friends, family and colleagues.
apps.apple.com
But it's not about that. The developer will chase the money. Sure, the user base is huge in the App Store but that's only because it's the sole option right now. If another app store offers say a 3% fee to use their store (vs Apple's 15% or 30%) then they could easily pull their app from the App Store and only offer it on the other one, forcing me into the other ecosystem.
That being said, I do think there's room for improvement on the filtering and screening on Apple's App Store, but if I wanted those other app store options I would be using Android right now.
The whole point of such gateways would be that you wouldn't need to have an account on the other platform any more just to message one person there.
The devil will be in the details of how the gateways actually work, of course.
How this unfolds is going to be very interesting in the long term. I think that users, developers and gatekeepers will complain and will point each other of the thing that won't work as they intended. I expect that this will increase piracy, exploits and scams, that will hurt the developers and the users. Because the gatekeepers are going to keep selling devices and data, or they will find ways to generate income.
As someone living in the US, the EU is full of people who were not elected by me, do not represent me, but somehow have a pretty heavy hand in things that could impact me. That may be where they were going with that "unelected bureaucrats" comment. If the EU wants to demand and make decisions that impact everyone, then EVERYONE should get a say in those elections. Don't want our opinions on your elections? Then butt out of our lives, stay in your own lane and worry about the EU countries that elect you. I don't get to have a say in their elections, but they seem to think they have this annoyingly large say on things that impact me.
Last edited:
Last exit. If you have a better idea, go ahead. There was lots of discussion with Apple without any result, so now there will be law. End of story. Apple could have moved.
Apple, first of all, is not a monopoly. Their latest iPhone moment, the M1, is great, but sales went from the high teens to low '20s. And frankly, they still cost too much to get monopolies in the PC or phone or watch. I think it would be a good idea to let other stores into the Apple store-- but they'd have to have the same security standards, updating, etc. That would be for the benefit of Apple customers, all of them. But, you know, I don't think too many corporations want to invest in all the servers, management, security from one end to the other-- I think this is phony populism, funded by less than serious companies that want all the benefits of the store, plus the ability to opt out of it when there is money to be made, and costs can be left in Apple's hands.
As for the Messenger bit, that is just proof that some politicians don't understand tech. Messenger is encrypted end to end. Now, you want to receive text messages from other friends, greedy politicians and just, you know, android users, but they are not encrypted end to end. There has to be some kind of flag. Nonetheless, Apple users still socialize with green bubbles. They're okay. But if I see some scam artist in my stream, I want to see it, watch his behavior, and ban him. I can block that person with a normal phone number he's already given me by writing me an SMS! Bam, blocked. (Of course, you can do that with Apple friends, but they are encrypted, so they have a higher level of trust.) If somebody brings out a way to send out an encrypted SMS, great. Apple would adapt, and everybody would be blue, at least, as long as their new system also works with a sign-in using actual, verified signatures and maybe an Apple ID, for Android people.
And the ultimate thing is, if we made a universal messaging system, it would not work the way people want. Some will stay with What's App, with one of the dozens of text message apps they have learned, or is frequented by a bunch of people you find interesting. I'm not saying regulation in this area isn't necessary. But this is surely not it.
As for the Messenger bit, that is just proof that some politicians don't understand tech. Messenger is encrypted end to end. Now, you want to receive text messages from other friends, greedy politicians and just, you know, android users, but they are not encrypted end to end. There has to be some kind of flag. Nonetheless, Apple users still socialize with green bubbles. They're okay. But if I see some scam artist in my stream, I want to see it, watch his behavior, and ban him. I can block that person with a normal phone number he's already given me by writing me an SMS! Bam, blocked. (Of course, you can do that with Apple friends, but they are encrypted, so they have a higher level of trust.) If somebody brings out a way to send out an encrypted SMS, great. Apple would adapt, and everybody would be blue, at least, as long as their new system also works with a sign-in using actual, verified signatures and maybe an Apple ID, for Android people.
And the ultimate thing is, if we made a universal messaging system, it would not work the way people want. Some will stay with What's App, with one of the dozens of text message apps they have learned, or is frequented by a bunch of people you find interesting. I'm not saying regulation in this area isn't necessary. But this is surely not it.