Glad to see you admit this talk of guns being required here is all just pointless drivel as it relates to this law.
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.
Leaked EU Document Could Spell Major Changes for App Store, Messages, FaceTime, Browsers, and Siri
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple hasn’t been hit with anything remotely compared to what AT&T went through in 1984 with their breakup and what IBM went through for decades with its 1956 consent decree.
The problem is that it is hard to do this in an encrypted way, I actually get the argument and think the theory you're arguing is correct, but I don't know how you get this implemented in practice in a way that simultaneously allows unique OS level innovation (universal app links and other niceties that exist in Messages) but also maintains long term interoperability.
If they can figure out the details of this it is more reasonable.
You’re conflating “not required” with “no involved.”
If I threaten you with a gun when asking for your wallet, the fact that I don’t have to use it didn’t mean the threat wasn’t there.
I don't understand why so many are saying that Apple is being forced to become like Android.
That is an assumption.
This "proposal" by the EU impacts Google, Samsung, etc also. If I thought Siri was bad, Bixby is far worse.
I would like to see a lot of these things in iOS... but I'm just not comfortable with government regulating them. Because if these issues were that important to me, then I would have switched to Android years ago. These companies should be allowed to operate closed systems if they want, and if devs/consumers don't like it then they should support the platform that is open.
An iPhone is not a necessity, Android does *everything* it does and *far* more. There is a huge variety of manufacturers and devices that serves every possible consumer want. Developers want to be on iOS because the apple audience is more affluent and vastly outspends the Android audience -- then maybe that justifies the 15-30%? You are benefitting from an audience Apple has cultivated over the past decade, often using its closed nature as a major selling point.
Ultimately, I don't care how it goes since I'm not an apple shareholder and, as I said, I want a lot of these changes in iOS... but I'm also sympathetic to the Apple side of it.
An iPhone is not a necessity, Android does *everything* it does and *far* more. There is a huge variety of manufacturers and devices that serves every possible consumer want. Developers want to be on iOS because the apple audience is more affluent and vastly outspends the Android audience -- then maybe that justifies the 15-30%? You are benefitting from an audience Apple has cultivated over the past decade, often using its closed nature as a major selling point.
Ultimately, I don't care how it goes since I'm not an apple shareholder and, as I said, I want a lot of these changes in iOS... but I'm also sympathetic to the Apple side of it.
Essentially, it seems what the EU wants is what we have on Mac OS X... I'm also all for the app store and its walled garden but I think the days of coming when sideloading will be an option for those who partake... We don't all need to sideload so frankly, I'm not sure what the massive fuss is over this...
It needs to be worked on for sure.
The existing way of things isn't great long term at all.
In other words, the EU knows that it would be a disaster to apply the definition of "anti-competitive" that they're using for Apple etc. to the rest of the market. That, in turn, means that the EU doesn't really expect any improvements in the market as a result of the regulations. It will just be a penalty for companies that go over the cap.
Many people here set the trap of “we need this because then each individual user can decide exactly what he wants”. And that’s completely false: you all know all design decision have consequences, and deciding that the user decides, is also another one. Of course, you’ll never get the device you want, but via imposition you won’t get it either.
The good thing about having an open and diverse market is that you’ll have a lot of products with very varied mixes of decisions. People will vote with their wallet. And even better, companies will have skin in the game with their decisions, which results in much better, consumer-oriented products than people who are not directly affected by the effects of their regulations.
I really miss when we discussed here in Macrumors about whether something Apple did was good, bad, greedy, or going to make me switch to their competitors. And they were much harsher debates. But also much more sane. There’s a huge difference between “I want Apple to change” and “I want to force Apple to change”.
The good thing about having an open and diverse market is that you’ll have a lot of products with very varied mixes of decisions. People will vote with their wallet. And even better, companies will have skin in the game with their decisions, which results in much better, consumer-oriented products than people who are not directly affected by the effects of their regulations.
I really miss when we discussed here in Macrumors about whether something Apple did was good, bad, greedy, or going to make me switch to their competitors. And they were much harsher debates. But also much more sane. There’s a huge difference between “I want Apple to change” and “I want to force Apple to change”.
That's comparing - pardon the pun - Apples to Apples.
There's choice and variety. I can get a Mac Mini for the same cost as a mid-range iPad. I can get a desktop PC for less than most iPads, even the entry-level one.
Despite all the extra features they offer, a smartphone's primary function is still as a phone.
There are many choices out there. There's also nothing stopping a phone manufacturer from making their own software that allows all the sideloading and hacking you can handle.
This seems like punishing Apple for their innovation. While I would like Apple and other companies to implement many of the things this suggested law outlines, I would rather them do it from public pressure than having their hand forced. I used this example in another thread, but its like watching a restaurant grow successful over time by having the best service, food and atmosphere, and then being forced to allow others to sell their food items in your restaurant.
Yes, some people want to steal apps. That's pretty much 100% of the reason people want sideloading.
Those people do not, of course, care in the slightest that they will make things worse for everyone else. It's all about them.
You mean this one?
I'd like to know where the goal posts were moved. They seem to be in the same position to me.
That happens currently in ALL app stores irrespective of the OS. So, not seeing your point.
They are being moved because you have two different sentences with two different meanings.
I replied to the first. You’re acting as if I replied to the second.
Do you know what the unintended means in unintended consequences? And are small companies doing what Apple, Google, Facebook, etc are doing in the first place? I would imagine to be able to do the very things these large tech companies are capable of, you'd have to be of a substantial size with the associated market power.
People complain about iOS being buggy enough the way it is. Imagine if they started allowing all these Frankenstein pieces being introduced.... No thanks!
Even the cheapest Mac (Mac Mini) is twice the cost of an iPad. Then add a keyboard, monitor, and mouse.
It’s no surprise at all that there are more iPads out there than Mac laptops. And it has little or nothing to do with the App Store being the only way to get apps.
Then don't by an iPhone. Simple.
It's the same as a Sony Playstation. I want to run Mac OS on it and run apps from Apple Store. But, Sony blocks me. I also can't buy games outside of their store. Opps. Same thing on Xbox.
Or I want to run CarPlay on my Tesla and have iTunes on it. But, Tesla blocks me for access their OS. Or install my own browser and not use Tesla's crappy one. Heck, I get zero choice on cellular data provider they chose for the car when I know I can find better one then Tesla partners with.
It goes on and on. I don't know how companies can be successful if they can't make propriety things. That is whole reason I choose different products. If they have support everything, it's not cost effective for them and they can't truly focus on their stuff.
If consumers don't buy Apple stuff, they'll get the hint and change it. But, by some miracle, they seem too e successful. Maybe many users like they walled off garden. I dunno.
No, you don’t have to be substantial size not to allow sideloading on your OS or not to have your messaging app interact with others.
At least now you’re getting close to realizing that what a law says and how it’s applied aren’t necessarily the same.
