iPadOS Identified as Digital 'Gatekeeper' Under New EU Tech Rules

[Rogifan]

Game consoles can run consumer/business software. The companies that make them just don't allow it to be sold on the platform.

Again, when has Apple ever referred to iPhone or iPad as a game console? People like John Gruber classify those devices that way to justify Apple’s commission structure.

 

[laptech]

Look at the gray line. That is the European iPhone market share for the past year. If you think that any firm with a 32% market share is a monopoly, you don't know what that word means. View attachment 2372957

Let's go back ten years. Surely a monopoly would have market power to dominate their competition. Well, not so much. The iPhone market share in 2014 ended up at...32%.
View attachment 2372962
Maybe Europeans were/are smart enough to avoid iOS due to its 'stifling, anti-competitive practices', without needing the EU bureaucracy to step in?

You've lost the plot of what this is all about. It has absolutely nothing to do with market share of mobile phones but everything to do with the services that are provided on the mobile phones and this is where Apple is found to be at fault. Apple restricts who can use NFC, it's Apple pay and interoperability with imessage. Numerous banks want to use the NFC function of the iphone, they cannot, many companies and businesses want to use the functionality of Apple pay, they cannot, numerous chat/message businesses want to be able to interreact with imessage, they cannot. This is what the EU is tackling.

 

[ericthered926]

Really? Then why have I been able to use Chrome and Edge on my iPad for several years?

You quoted someone saying browser engine. Chrome, Edge, and any non-Safari browser on your iPad are literally just versions of Safari/WebKit (not running Blink or Gecko, Chrome and Firefox’s respective engines) with some ui changes. Apple doesn’t allow any other browser engine on any non-EU iPhone (this is recent thanks to the DMA) nor on any iPad whatsoever.

 

[gnipgnop]

This quote is taken completely out of context. Business use alone is 11x the threshold for gatekeeper status. That’s already an existing rule; the goalpost didn’t move. This quote was simply adding context to the additional info that on the consumer side, the threshold hasn’t been met *yet*. Consumer usage is close enough that, had the business use not already passed the threshold, iPadOS would still pass the pass it in the coming months/years anyway due to the consumer user base expanding.

That's not how the EU determines gatekeeper status.

"The European Commission presumes a platform is a gatekeeper if it meets two conditions. First, it must have an annual EU revenue of at least €7.5 billion in each of the last three fiscal years or an average market cap of €75 billion in the last fiscal year, while providing its core platform to at least three EU member states. Second, it must operate a core platform with at least 45 million monthly active users in the EU and more than 10,000 yearly active EU business users in each of the last three fiscal years."

It's not multiple choice. Gatekeeper status requires all of those thresholds to be met. Vestager/EU have admitted that iPadOS doesn't actually meet them.

 

[cfountain72]

The same logic can be extended to any length and the fallacy will become apparent once it is done.
1. If Apple wants to sell devices as it chooses, then it should sell in only those countries that do not force it to make changes. In effect, do not sell in the EU if you do not want to adhere to the laws the EU makes
2. If you want to use only devices that have a closed garden type ecosystem, make your own device.

See, this is a game anyone can play.

1. That is absolutely true, although the App Store has been around since 2008, and these new rules just went into effect in 2022. And that certainly doesn't preclude someone from criticizing them, and their possible self-defeating nature.
2. I don't need to. Apple already did.

 

[gnipgnop]

Again, when has Apple ever referred to iPhone or iPad as a game console? People like John Gruber classify those devices that way to justify Apple’s commission structure.

Again, business/consumer software can be run on game consoles. The only reason it isn't is because the game console manufacturers don't allow it.

 

[Beautyspin]

No because that didn't work well for M$. https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/25/...s-revenue-profits-windows-xbox-gaming-surface

Tim Cook was right all along.

Tim Cook: Here's Why Microsoft's Plan For Windows 8 To Work On PCs And Tablets Is Insane

Tim Cook critiques Windows 8, comparing it to a toaster-refrigerator hybrid. What does this reveal about Apple's competitive stance?

www.businessinsider.com

Tim Cook does not know everything. I had a Dell touchscreen laptop. I used it for 4 years but I never used the touch screen. I bought an M1 MBP and gave away the touchscreen laptop to a friend of mine who makes music for temporary use. That guy was ecstatic about the touch screen as he could play with the timeline better using the touchscreen. So, it depends on the use case. I was not into video editing then, but now I do video editing for a hobby. I have an M2 iPad Pro, but cannot use it for video editing because the file system is rudimentary and using davinci resolve in it is more difficult than using it on my M1 MBP. If my MBP had a touch screen or the iPad had MacOS, I would chuck the other. That is the only reason Tim Cook does not want MacOS on iPad. People use Apps on iPads. If they are made well, then having MacOS will be beneficial.

 

[iOS Geek]

"Today, we have brought Apple's iPadOS within the scope of the DMA obligations. Our market investigation showed that despite not meeting the thresholds, iPadOS constitutes an important gateway on which many companies rely to reach their customers."

This is Vestager/EU admitting that they're not following their own rules. "Gatekeeper" was supposed to be defined by the thresholds. Now they're saying that they can just deem anything a "gatekeeper" regardless of whether the thresholds are met or not.

Vestager/EU are literally saying OUT LOUD that they are regulating iPadOS even though it doesn't meet THEIR OWN DEFINED THRESHOLDS and people here are defending that. The EU isn't even sticking to its own defined rules here. Honestly, if anyone out there actually believes the EU is on a witch-hunt against Apple...this would be a perfect bit of "evidence" to that claim.

 

[Rogifan]

Actually Apple executives do agree with that:

"Today, we have a level of malware on the Mac that we don't find acceptable," Federighi told the court in testimony. “If you took Mac security techniques and applied them to the iOS ecosystem, with all those devices, all that value, it would get run over to a degree dramatically worse than is already happening on the Mac. Put that same situation in place for iOS and it would be a very bad situation for our customers".

Haha, of course they’re going to say that in a court setting to justify the way iOS and iPadOS works.

 

[picpicmac]

The end game here is not clear to me, but I doubt that the EU policy wonks really care about fostering future business. That is, the public face of these policies is not what is really motivating these policies.

There is no secret plan here, no conspiracy by hidden organizations deep in the halls of some Swiss bank.

Rather we are seeing a grasp to appreciate the vulnerability of information and survivability in the current age of computerized society.

I suspect that any large corporation will try to comply to whatever regulations are continually thrown at them, but I also do not think that I as an individual will benefit from these regulations. Instead, I suspect that there will end up being fewer, not more, choices for the average person.

 

[gnipgnop]

Yes, they have different sets of criteria.

• Apple's business user numbers exceeded the quantitative threshold elevenfold, while its end user numbers were close to the threshold and are predicted to rise in the near future.
• End users are locked-in to iPadOS. Apple leverages its large ecosystem to disincentivise end users from switching to other operating systems for tablets.
• Business users are locked-in to iPadOS because of its large and commercially attractive user base, and its importance for certain use cases, such as gaming apps.

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

 

[Beautyspin]

1. That is absolutely true, although the App Store has been around since 2008, and these new rules just went into effect in 2022. And that certainly doesn't preclude someone from criticizing them, and their possible self-defeating nature.
2. I don't need to. Apple already did.

Now they are changing the way the devices operate. If you do not like it, make your device.
I am not actually advising you to do so. I am just responding to some user's responses like "Make your device if you do not like what Apple does" "Let the EU make its own device" blah blah. Why should they make their own devices? Why can't the users who want closed systems make their devices instead of expecting Apple to not follow laws. If they make their own devices, they do not have to worry about any laws. It will not satisfy any criteria of any country/region because it will be for one user only. You can do whatever you want with it.

 

[one more]

It makes sense and is a step in the right direction, however so far none of the iOS 17.4 DMA-related “changes” resulted in any real benefits for EU users.

 

[Rogifan]

Again, business/consumer software can be run on game consoles. The only reason it isn't is because the game console manufacturers don't allow it.

Then I guess Apple should only be getting a commission on games…that is if you’re going to treat it like a game console.

 

[SAIRUS]

It's like iPadOS isn't really just a copy of iOS....is it? 🤣🤣🤣

 

[iOS Geek]

It makes sense and is a step in the right direction, however so far none of the iOS 17.4 DMA-related “changes” resulted in any real benefits for EU users.

Big surprise there. Saw that coming a mile away.

 

[realtired]

It’s laughable how many people are getting upset over this move. There is zero downside to what the EU is doing here, only more freedom for the end user. People complain on these forums every day that iPadOS is too locked down or useless but the moment something is done about it it’s all white-knighting for a multi trillion dollar company.

 

[Beautyspin]

I agree. Without the App Store, the iPad would have probably failed. However, I also think the iPad would have failed with a Mac-like approach. Turns out, the “locked-in” model was very successful and customers like the iPad a lot. And Apple was (and is) responsible for the decisions they take. If they’re right, they will benefits from high customer satisfaction; if they’re wrong, they won’t sell products.

Any statistics that show that iPads are successful because they are locked in? Let us see how successful iPad is once the lock-in is removed. It might do even better. No wonder Apple is making a calculator App for iPad. Looks like Apple had advance information that iPadOS will be designated as a gatekeeper.

 

[gnipgnop]

What’s your point?

I'm pointing out that game consoles can run business/consumer software if allowed to do so. That shows the argument that game consoles are different than a "general computing device" is false. They are general computing devices. They could run MS Office and email applications. They could run photo editing software and video editing software.

 

[cfountain72]

You've lost the plot of what this is all about. It has absolutely nothing to do with market share of mobile phones but everything to do with the services that are provided on the mobile phones and this is where Apple is found to be at fault. Apple restricts who can use NFC, it's Apple pay and interoperability with imessage. Numerous banks want to use the NFC function of the iphone, they cannot, many companies and businesses want to use the functionality of Apple pay, they cannot, numerous chat/message businesses want to be able to interreact with imessage, they cannot. This is what the EU is tackling.

Thanks for the clarification. That's even more ridiculous. They have no monopoly market power, but are being required to open up their software so banks can free-ride on services they spent years and billions of dollars to develop? Got it.

Apple is such a failure. I sure hope they appreciate the benighted geniuses in Brussels rushing in to save them from how poorly they've been running their company lo these many years.

 

[darngooddesign]

EU should do something useful like going after notches in laptops.

The EU knows you can easily hide the notch so there is no reason to go after them.

 

[iOS Geek]

There is zero downside to what the EU is doing here

This is untrue. There is NEVER a situation that comes with "zero" downsides.

 

[gnipgnop]

It’s laughable how many people are getting upset over this move. There is zero downside to what the EU is doing here, only more freedom for the end user.

The EU claimed that 45 million active monthly users was part of the threshold for "gatekeeper" status. iPadOS has half that number in the EU. The obvious downside is that the EU is just randomly changing the rules.

 

[darngooddesign]

And how the openness of the macOS hurt the Mac platform? Why don't we have that on a so called "computer" like the iPad? It uses the same services, accessing to the very same privacy levels of your information, and you can install whatever you want. Despite all of this the Macs aren't advertised as less secure devices.

I'm very happy that finally someone crushes some balls in Cupertino and bring down this walled garden for our goods. It's my device, I paid for it, now let me install whatever stuff i want.

Wait… so you bought something despite it not liking how it works… LOL

 

[gnipgnop]

Any statistics that show that iPads are successful because they are locked in? Let us see how successful iPad is once the lock-in is removed. It might do even better. No wonder Apple is making a calculator App for iPad. Looks like Apple had advance information that iPadOS will be designated as a gatekeeper.

How do you explain the iOS lock-in creating 101 million active monthly users and iPadOS lock-in only creating 1/4 of that number? How do you explain the EU ignoring iPadOS only having 50% of the threshold required for DMA?