iOS 19 and iOS 20 Must Include a Long List of Major Changes, EU Says

[9081094]

And they didn't need the EU to open up Apple to do it, and apparently you think it's significantly better than Apple's ecosystem, so why is the EU getting involved at all? If Apple wants to shoot itself in the foot then it should be allowed to do so.

What you and lots of people don't understand is most people like Apple because of the "lock-in" and "App Store" rules, not in spite of them. People want to know the App they're downloading is well designed, follows security and privacy protocols, and they can reach out to Apple for a refund if something isn't right. They don't want to have to figure out if the reason something is working is Apple's fault or the watch manufacturers fault - they want to walk into the Apple Store and say "it's not working right, fix it." Not everyone are nerds like us on MacRumors who run home servers and want to fiddle around in settings - we're the minority.

This is where all the fuzz is about. It’s not unfair:

The Digital Markets Act: ensuring fair and open digital markets

Discover how the Digital Markets Act ensures large online platforms in the EU behave fairly, and allows new players to enter the market, thus developing a fast evolving digital sector.

commission.europa.eu

 

[surferfb]

This is where all the fuzz is about. It’s not unfair:

The Digital Markets Act: ensuring fair and open digital markets

Discover how the Digital Markets Act ensures large online platforms in the EU behave fairly, and allows new players to enter the market, thus developing a fast evolving digital sector.

commission.europa.eu

It's incredibly unfair to give away Apple's hard work and innovations to its competitors for free. It's wrong, and the EU should be embarrassed and ashamed.

 

[robvalentine]

Not the poster you are responding to, but I own zero Apple shares and don't work for them, and think this law is socialist garbage, and I am someone who is on the left side of the political spectrum.

Why should Apple be forced to make it easier for its competitors to make products that compete with its own? Do you understand that telling a company "any feature you develop must be given to your competitors for free" does not mean everyone will get all the new features, but that new features will stop being developed?

I don't know what kind of work you do, but I manage a team that comes up with proprietary tools and techniques that my company spend significant amounts of money developing so we can do the same amount of work as other firms in our market faster with fewer people. If we had to give the outputs of those tools and techniques away to our competitors, who didn't have to spend the money to develop them, they'd be able to massively undercut us on price. We wouldn't keep doing it out of the goodness of our hearts, because it would actually be a competitive DISADVANTAGE to spend the money to do that and let others profit off of our work for free.

HJM.NL said it a lot better than I can, but an Ecosystem doesn't have to be exclusive, and My Garmin watch works well with Samsung and Google, but the basic smartwatch features are crippled by Apple. On Android it shows pictures sent via whatsapp for example, where as I get a camera emoji on my iPhone. That's not developing stuff on behalf of third party companies, that's making the user experience better. Apple has deliberately chosen not to support it. When I used an apple watch it displayed images, so it can be done, but they don't so that you have to buy an apple watch if you want full notification access.

I agree that the h2/h1 access is pushing it.

 

[9081094]

It's incredibly unfair to give away Apple's hard work and innovations to its competitors for free. It's wrong, and the EU should be embarrassed and ashamed.

This tells me you haven’t read and still not knowing what it is about.

 

[9081094]

HJM.NL said it a lot better than I can, but an Ecosystem doesn't have to be exclusive, and My Garmin watch works well with Samsung and Google, but the basic smartwatch features are crippled by Apple. On Android it shows pictures sent via whatsapp for example, where as I get a camera emoji on my iPhone. That's not developing stuff on behalf of third party companies, that's making the user experience better. Apple has deliberately chosen not to support it. When I used an apple watch it displayed images, so it can be done, but they don't so that you have to buy an apple watch if you want full notification access.

I agree that the h2/h1 access is pushing it.

Thanks for explaining. English isn’t my native language and you do it a lot better.

 

[txscott]

My beats fit pro's have H1 chips.

 

[surferfb]

This tells me you haven’t read and still not knowing what it is about.

No, it means I have a different interpretation of the law, its goals, and the likely results of the law than you do. For what it's worth, I've actually read the entire DMA (parts of it in two languages even).

HJM.NL said it a lot better than I can, but an Ecosystem doesn't have to be exclusive, and My Garmin watch works well with Samsung and Google, but the basic smartwatch features are crippled by Apple. On Android it shows pictures sent via whatsapp for example, where as I get a camera emoji on my iPhone. That's not developing stuff on behalf of third party companies, that's making the user experience better. Apple has deliberately chosen not to support it. When I used an apple watch it displayed images, so it can be done, but they don't so that you have to buy an apple watch if you want full notification access.

I've said it several times on this forum that I wish Apple would open up a bit on its own. It clearly shot itself in the foot by not doing so earlier; the DMA is dramatically worse than it would have been had Apple done so. That doesn't change the fact that I think the DMA is a terrible overreach of a law, is playing Robin Hood with Apple's innovations, and the government shouldn't be forcing private companies with 30% market share to behave like their competitors with 70% market share. The bar for the government dictating hardware, software, and business models ought to be incredibly high. Health and safety, security and privacy, that sort of thing. "I want my smartwatch to work better with my phone, and there's a phone that does that, but Android is icky" is not one of the things that clears the bar.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

When they caved to the USBC and “BackDoor” I knew that was going to be a floodgate breaking open. Why would it stop there?….

Let’s see what Apple does.

Compare this with …

Radio stations being shut down, universities are threaten to be cut off not taken out, people are being arrested for political views, Musk has data of every citizen on his finger tips, Supreme Court decisions are being overruled by your President.

Honestely don’t get distracted.

 

[Belisama]

I love when Americans realize that the EU market actually exists...
About 450 million consumers, i.e. USA + 30%.
And they can decide whatever they want.
And, thanks to the current US administration, they will become more defensive and protective (normal reaction when you are assaulted and insulted on a daily basis).

Good night, and good luck.

 

[Timpetus]

There are only two mobile phone OSs on the planet. They are both acting as a monopoly. The market is virtually impossible to break into, Microsoft failed even with all of their wealth.

As such the gloves are off. Governments and the people have a right to make sure they are not being exploited. Monopolies are not new, neither are the laws that all governments have created in all countries to control them.

Apple have huge power with iOS, as it is a monopoly they are not allowed to abuse that power in order to break into other markets. The monopoly is not being regulated against, only the abuse of it to give them power in the App Store market or the Mobile Browser Market, or the bluetooth headphone market.

MacOS isn't a monopoly, they are many other operating systems available, including linux. The computer market also acts well to provide a real choice to consumers.

True monopoly power only exists in the form of the state. Their regulations and laws actually make it easier to hold on to a monopoly, because compliance costs $x instead of x% of your business's size/revenue/profits. If the market were truly free, larger companies would have to keep up with their smaller competitors in terms of serving customer desires, or they'd have their lunch eaten.

Also, trying to break up a duopoly by forcing one side to turn into the other makes no sense. It's like trying to break up the Coke/Pepsi duopoly by forcing Pepsi to use the Coke formula.

 

[9081094]

No, it means I have a different interpretation of the law, its goals, and the likely results of the law than you do. For what it's worth, I've actually read the entire DMA (parts of it in two languages even).


I've said it several times on this forum that I wish Apple would open up a bit on its own. It clearly shot itself in the foot by not doing so earlier; the DMA is dramatically worse than it would have been had Apple done so. That doesn't change the fact that I think the DMA is a terrible overreach of a law, is playing Robin Hood with Apple's innovations, and the government shouldn't be forcing private companies with 30% market share to behave like their competitors with 70% market share. The bar for the government dictating hardware, software, and business models ought to be incredibly high. Health and safety, security and privacy, that sort of thing. "I want my smartwatch to work better with my phone, and there's a phone that does that, but Android is icky" is not one of the things that clears the bar.

It’s not only targeting Apple. It’s making a fair playing field for all tech companies. In the past small start ups didn’t have a chance because bigger companies pushed them out. This rule is to give the smaller start ups a chance of survival.

Thanks for reading and I appreciate you took the time. I also respect your opinion and that might differ (it’s a democracy 😊).

Apple knew these rules were coming years in front but is constantly seeking ways to prevent them or doesn’t want to comply to them.

Like any other European business doing business with the USA we have to apply to the rules in the USA. If we don’t, we get fined too. There is always the option to stop doing business that’s everyone’s free choice.

Samsungs ecosystem has always been open without the EU forcing them. I showed them to you to let you see that it is possible to thrive with an open system if your products are good.

 

[jarman92]

As for EU manufacturers, maybe if they weren't locked out their products which work better with another US company (google) would stand a chance. And Apple would then be forced to actually innovate.

Like 75% of the EU market runs Android, so unclear how such companies (which largely don't exist) would suddenly find success with access to the remaining 25%.

And Apple will have no reason to "actually innovate" if it's forced to immediately give away any innovation it does make, for free, to its competitors. Companies only innovate when they have a profit motive.

Serious question, do you work for Apple, or hold a large amount stock/shares? If you want to stick to Apple, then you can, but let other people have the option. No one is forcing you to leave Apple, or use non-Apple products, but why should people be forced to use only Apple products.

People currently have plenty of options—Android, which runs on devices from dozens of companies and which 75% of European users already choose. I shouldn't be deprived of future Apple products and services because the EU, which I have no voice in, has decided to prioritize propping up its own failing tech sector over encouraging innovation.

Also for the record, Apple devices are based of ARM technology, which is a UK company, which sadly isn't in the EU anymore, but was when they started working with Apple.

Oh weird, I wonder why it left 🤔

 

[t0rqx]

Honestly, Apple has bought id not created standards which make their products and services premium. It's a p i t a if some regulator tells you to break and share it with competitors. I for-see that if they do this, the code will be a mess and more vulnerabilities will come to light.

Regulation? Yes.

 

[jarman92]

There are only two mobile phone OSs on the planet. They are both acting as a monopoly. The market is virtually impossible to break into, Microsoft failed even with all of their wealth.

As such the gloves are off. Governments and the people have a right to make sure they are not being exploited. Monopolies are not new, neither are the laws that all governments have created in all countries to control them.

Apple have huge power with iOS, as it is a monopoly they are not allowed to abuse that power in order to break into other markets. The monopoly is not being regulated against, only the abuse of it to give them power in the App Store market or the Mobile Browser Market, or the bluetooth headphone market.

MacOS isn't a monopoly, they are many other operating systems available, including linux. The computer market also acts well to provide a real choice to consumers.

You keep saying "monopoly" even after admitting Apple isn't a monopoly. And how exactly are people being "exploited" by Apple or Google?

 

[Tar Sniffer]

Designed by Apple in California.
Legislated in Brussels.​

 

[9081094]

Honestly, Apple has bought id not created standards which make their products and services premium. It's a p i t a if some regulator tells you to break and share it with competitors. I for-see that if they do this, the code will be a mess and more vulnerabilities will come to light.

Regulation? Yes.

They don’t have to share code of their holy grail. They only have to give access to their API’s. It won’t make their own code a mess and they don’t have to give away their broncode.

 

[9081094]

Designed by Apple in California.
Legislated in Brussels.​

And you forgot to mention “Made in China”

 

[Mr. Donahue]

That’s exactly where it’s going.

 

[raindogg]

I want to move to Europe. They seem to be the only ones looking out for the consumer.

 

[surferfb]

They don’t have to share code of their holy grail. They only have to give access to their API’s. It won’t make their own code a mess and they don’t have to give away their broncode.

Honest question. Why should Apple bother to invest significant amount of resources to develop new features if they immediately have to give access to those new features away to their competitors? Aren't you at least a little worried that we will get fewer features because the ROI isn't there to develop it?

 

[surferfb]

I want to move to Europe. They seem to be the only ones looking out for the consumer.

I want to move to Europe too, but for very different reasons 😂

(And for all you EU people who don't like Americans telling them how to run the EU, I'm actually working on it!)

 

[robvalentine]

Like 75% of the EU market runs Android, so unclear how such companies (which largely don't exist) would suddenly find success with access to the remaining 25%.

And Apple will have no reason to "actually innovate" if it's forced to immediately give away any innovation it does make, for free, to its competitors. Companies only innovate when they have a profit motive.



People currently have plenty of options—Android, which runs on devices from dozens of companies and which 75% of European users already choose. I shouldn't be deprived of future Apple products and services because the EU, which I have no voice in, has decided to prioritize propping up its own failing tech sector over encouraging innovation.



Oh weird, I wonder why it left 🤔

It left because there is a lot of bigotry in the UK, and the owners of most of the media were worried they might have to start paying taxes. It certainly wasn't to protect Apple.

maybe Apple could up their 25% by making stuff more compatible with non-apple stuff, maybe you are onto something.

 

[turbineseaplane]

The watch interoperability stuff would be good for consumers

I recognize not everyone enjoys how this is coming about, but do take a moment to at least look at it from the perspective of general consumers, and how this could benefit them (us)

 

[Ethosik]

AMAZON

Amazon has also come under the Commission's scrutiny. The online retailer is suspected of favoring its own brands on its marketplace

GOOD that Amazon is doing this, I wish Amazon did more of this. I always find it frustrating. I want something shipped and sold by Amazon, and sometimes it gets buried in the list of New and Used options because Amazon defaults to Joe Somebody's option instead.

 

[Ethosik]

If Apple can't write good enough code when everything is closed, do you all REALLY want Apple to do this? macOS and iOS are literally breaking before our eyes. There was a major level embarrassment by Apple Intelligence, macOS is a mess, iPad OS is a mess, iOS is a mess. And this is when everything is CLOSED. You expect Apple's coding and QA to get BETTER with these changes? I fully expect this to be the downfall of Apple. And it comes at the worst time with Windows 11 being just as atrocious. There is no viable alternative.