This is not the definition of a monopoly that courts and governments are concerned with; this style of monopoly is wholly legal. You understand that, right?
iOS is Apple's IP. So is the iPhone. Companies are supposed to be able to monopolize their IP. Japan allows Nintendo and Sony to monopolize their own console hardware and OS.
That's because the Mac was developed before digital stores were possible. It's a legacy expectation for desktop.
That is what DMA is exactly about. To adjust competition law, that has its roots in the beginnings of the 20th century, to the new realities of the distribution of digital goods.
That might be true. But many (about a third) of all apps I'm using on my Mac would not exist in a world where the only distribution method is the Mac App Store.
You're sidestepping my point. You want all governments everywhere to crush Apple's approach with the walled garden. I don't know why you don't address this directly. You want Apple to operate differently than they do, and you want Governments, globally, to enforce your desires.
I think the DMA is about protectionism for EU companies, and the EU facing the reality that their business climate hasn't fostered success on their part to compete in a digital world. So they are trying to hobble a small, select few companies, rather than pass laws that are equally applicable to all companies, despite size. It's protectionism dressed as consumer interest and choice.
As an iPhone user, you could have originally chosen Android instead.
Circumstances change, and laws are adjusted to accommodate that. IP is a concept that was invented to facilitate the industrial revolution. Some aspects of it might have to be redefined, to ensure a vibrant economy with digital services.
Oh, it’s not a monopoly? Great! Let me develop and distribute my own software for the iPhone and iPad without interacting with Apple…oh, I can’t? Huh. That’s weird. You’re telling me that I have to use Apple’s tools with an Apple dev account and distribute exclusively through Apple’s online store and there is absolutely no way around that? Huh. Wish there was a word for that kind of thing.
Comparing switching from IOS to Android to having to sell a house, pack all your goods, change schools for your kids, find a new job, buy a new house, etc. is pure hyperbole.
Can you show me a few indicators that suggest that the digital services economy isn't vibrant? Because I think it's incredibly vibrant.
You simply do not understand what monopolies mean in a legal sense. Apple is not a monopoly.
And there are a lot of apps (like games) that are never released on Mac regardless of it being open. So the "open" part is no guarantee of getting the apps you want. It's more about the customer base and what that customer base is buying consistently. That's what app developers are looking at more than the "open" part.
There is a kernel of truth to this statement, probably. But it's not something that other economic blocks are not going as well. Among them the most capitalistic country, the USA. They are inventing tariffs and laws left and right to protect their economy. If that is a good strategy in the long run, I'm not sure. But it's the reality.
They’re addressing the fact that the entire industry is dominated by a few select mega corporations. These are not mom and pop shops being cracked down on by the evil government. Hell, Apple’s yearly profits are likely larger than the GDP of some of the countries in the EU. If you add Google and Meta their combined profits are larger than many countries in the EU. There is no meaningful competition in the tech space.
No different than the game consoles that you use. Japan has no problem with Nintendo/Sony doing that.
Why do you insist so much on YOUR definition of monopoly? These are laws that change all the time. They are not some basic right in the constitution. Parliaments can and do change them when the circumstances change.
If there's no competition explain the reason for Apple constantly releasing new hardware and software for mobile.
Because there are generally agreed upon principles. Apple is not a monopoly by generally agreed upon principles. If words have no meaning, if we can't agree on basic definitions of basic words in a conversation, then there's no point to any of us talking about anything.
The EU didn't choose to make the DMA apply to video game consoles which use the same approach as Apple. Logically that means that they don't consider it to be a negative by itself. They used the market cap approach which means the main concern is really size/revenue.
So two wrongs make a right is your argument? I think games should be available on all platforms as well.
I agree. Game consoles were very likely spared deliberately. But it's easy to understand why. Game consoles are not essential for everyday life and the harm to consumers is likely limited.
