They’ve just lost significant part of Chinese market. So … you’re definitely right.
They want our money? They have to obey the EU rules. Easy.
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.
iPadOS Identified as Digital 'Gatekeeper' Under New EU Tech Rules
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They want our money? They have to obey the EU rules. Easy.
Nope, that’s it! This whole thing initially started as a “monopoly” argument but those that understood what the word means convinced regulators that Apple’s tiny marketshare in the region could not not be a monopoly by any stretch of the imagination. That’s where the whole “gatekeeper” thing came from, to avoid having to try to build a regulation that indicates that company’s shouldn’t have control over a company’s products. That would have overturned what every other company in the region was doing.
So you don't know what the word means.
There will be regulations about the artist shares as well, Spotify and Daniel Ek will get his part of this whip as well.
That is not the same!
Spotify hasn't got a unique product, nor that tells the people what and how to sing.
Apple indeed does have a unique product and tells people how to code their products and doesn't allow competition.
You can see this in the browser category, where you only get one single browser and others can only put another UI above it.
And Spotify is a good example too. Apple does take an extra fee when another company wants to sell the exact same product. That is not a free market where the better product makes more profit. Even if nobody uses Apple Music, they would still make millions when people use Spotify and pay it through the Spotify app instead of the webpage.
Ads. Why is meta required to allow users to opt out of ad tracking but Spotify doesn’t have to offer a similar plan on their free tier?
gate·keep·ing: Gatekeeping is the activity of controlling, and usually limiting, general access to something.
Isn't that hypocritical irony? Isn't that exactly what the EU is doing? Aren't they trying to control and limit what Apple does? They unilaterally decide what's appropriate and even people outside the EU are having to put up with it. For example, having to consent to cookies each and every bloody time you go to a new website is just plain annoying and really doesn't safeguard our privacy that much.
I sort of understand limiting a company if they have too much control/ power and abuse it, but if you put forwards millions, maybe billions of dollars to curate a product that people love, why should other companies or the EU get to dictate how you do it? Mac products are much more stable and reliable because they are a closed system, and I'm thankful for that. I don't want that compromised because I have to side-load a necessary app because that company doesn't want to give apple the 30% cut.
A part of me wishes Apple would just pull out of the EU and let them suffer with PC/ Android devices. That would never happen though.
Isn't that hypocritical irony? Isn't that exactly what the EU is doing? Aren't they trying to control and limit what Apple does? They unilaterally decide what's appropriate and even people outside the EU are having to put up with it. For example, having to consent to cookies each and every bloody time you go to a new website is just plain annoying and really doesn't safeguard our privacy that much.
I sort of understand limiting a company if they have too much control/ power and abuse it, but if you put forwards millions, maybe billions of dollars to curate a product that people love, why should other companies or the EU get to dictate how you do it? Mac products are much more stable and reliable because they are a closed system, and I'm thankful for that. I don't want that compromised because I have to side-load a necessary app because that company doesn't want to give apple the 30% cut.
A part of me wishes Apple would just pull out of the EU and let them suffer with PC/ Android devices. That would never happen though.
Why is it a joke? If the devices are so efficient, Apple does not need to prop them up using lock-ins, walled garden, anticompetitive moves, and such shenanigans. So, why is Apple terrified about the DMA? Why is their compliance so malicious? Nothing shows this more than the CTF.
I am not going to argue about the analogies because they're not comparable or they are legitimate in your imagination, I am sorry to say.
Any link that says DMA is doing this?
If it meets the criteria, then yes.
Do they meet the metrics to be considered an advertising gatekeeper? If so, then they should be forced to do so, just like Meta.
This is the only right decision. I would even argue, that iPhone and iPad (and increasingly macOS, though certainly not yet), are the same platform.
Which is because of how Apple implemented DMA compliance and the CTF.
Because of the CTF Riley would have to implement IAP in Delta itself, which he doesn't want to do (I think for license reasons). By distributing it exclusively in Alt Store he can use the Alt Store subscription to pay for the CTF for both Delta and the Alt Store. Since there is no way to tie Delta purchases in the mainline App Store to the Alt Store IAP he can't put it in the App Store.
This is Apple's fault for saddling everyone with the CTF (they still gotta earn that cheddar)
When will EU deal with the problem of exorbitant upgrade cost for RAM and SSD? Come on, you need to hit right on the point!
Because Meta is a dominant platform?
Don't get me wrong, I think all ad platforms should be require to let users opt out of tracking but the EU only requires dominant/large platforms to do so.
The minute Safari was no longer the default browser, there was a marked improvement in the downloads of alternate browsers. Some of them were not even mainstream/well-known browsers. As days pass, the safari market share on iOS in the EU will reach Mac levels. The reason I am giving this example is that unless the users have seen the alternative, we cannot say whether users will like it or not. Let MacOS or some other OS run on the iPad. We will see how good the sales will be. If people are paying for a gimped-up OS, I am sure they will gladly pay for a more productive OS easily.
If Apple have a universal switch for sideloading, even the CCP won’t be able to do anything about it. They will just continue to force Apple to censor the App Store. And pretend their great firewall will do the rest. After all they don’t force Chrome to censor websites for them
Interestingly Article 17, section 4 of the DMA legislation covers what the EU has done with iPadOS:
4. When the Commission, pursuant to Article 3(8), designates as a gatekeeper an undertaking providing core platform services that does not yet enjoy an entrenched and durable position in its operations, but which will foreseeably enjoy such a position in the near future, it may declare applicable to that gatekeeper only one or more of the obligations laid down in Article 5(3) to (6) and Article 6(4), (7), (9), (10) and (13), as specified in the designation decision. The Commission shall only declare applicable those obligations that are appropriate and necessary to prevent the gatekeeper concerned from achieving, by unfair means, an entrenched and durable position in its operations. The Commission shall review such a designation in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4.
4. When the Commission, pursuant to Article 3(8), designates as a gatekeeper an undertaking providing core platform services that does not yet enjoy an entrenched and durable position in its operations, but which will foreseeably enjoy such a position in the near future, it may declare applicable to that gatekeeper only one or more of the obligations laid down in Article 5(3) to (6) and Article 6(4), (7), (9), (10) and (13), as specified in the designation decision. The Commission shall only declare applicable those obligations that are appropriate and necessary to prevent the gatekeeper concerned from achieving, by unfair means, an entrenched and durable position in its operations. The Commission shall review such a designation in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4.
Or he could have kept the status quo and released the app in the App Store as he did in the rest of the world, but he is trying to make a point that I believe has failed.
I don’t disagree. Thats why the fight should be about side loading. And any alternate App Store would just be built on top of sideloading without much effort needed from Apple’s part. This is also the lowest lift on Apple’s part.
Apple is basically investing a ton expressly to continue their lock-in, it provides zero user or developer benefits
Except he was ready to release the app before Apple changed the rules at the last minute.
EU Commissioner Thierry Breton said the iPadOS investigation marks the first time the bloc has determined whether a platform can be considered a gatekeeper based on qualitative factors, rather than a for simply breaching a numerical threshold for users.No, the criteria requires more than 45 million active monthly users. iPadOS has 23 million according to Apple.
Apple discloses number of monthly active users for the App Store in Europe - 9to5Mac
In order to comply with the European Digital Services Act, Apple has been forced to reveal the number of monthly...9to5mac.com
Apple’s iPads Must Follow Tough EU Tech Rules After Being Branded A Digital ‘Gatekeeper’ — Joining Safari, App Store And iPhone’s iOS
The EU has already designated three Apple platforms — Safari, iOS and the App Store — as gatekeepers under its strict tech rules, which can impose fines as much as 10% of a company’s annual turnover for noncompliance.
www.forbes.com
To be classified as a gatekeeper under the DMA, a company must have annual EU revenues above €7.5 billion or a market capitalisation exceeding €75 billion, along with more than 45 million monthly active users and over 10,000 yearly business users in the EU.
EU classifies iPadOS as a ‘gatekeeper' subject to DMA rules
The European Commission has classified Apple's iPadOS as a “gatekeeper" under the EU's new tech competition rules, subjecting it to strict requirements aimed at promoting fairness and expanding consumer choice.
www.developer-tech.com
The Commission said Apple's business user numbers exceeded the quantitative threshold by eleven times, while its end user numbers were close to the threshold and were predicted to rise in the near future. It said both business users and end users are locked into iPadOS because of its large ecosystem.
So many complaining about how iPadOS is crippled and not what they want it to be and people seriously think Apple is going to be better about iOS and iPadOS if the OS is less profitable.
The EU hurts Apple's bottom line and we will definitely as end users will be affected. It will be behind the scenes so everything thinking this is great will deny it's the cause, but this will lead to a weaker product with the option to switch to Android and just throw privacy out the window.
Its not the platform. It’s the device and OS. App Store can do any pricing or censorship they want. As long as iOS devices are not forced to use the App Store to get apps. Ideally not forced to use any App Stores or weird licensing that requires KYC more stringent than getting a banking relationship just to develop iOS apps
That’s a different argument. What does bringing up Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft have to do with Apple can do whatever it wants with it’s IP?
Game consoles are not advertised as general purpose computing devices. And there is significant engineer gap to become general devices.
Phones literally are advertised as computer in a pocket. But in reality its more like an Apple branded AOL device in a pocket