More anticompetitive moves from Apple. Surprise!
Considering that even if it’s moving slow the EU won’t give its approval to that “fee despite not using anything from them”-charge.
Yeah, I’m baffled at Apple’s response to this. Like I get WHY they’re doing it, I just don’t understand why they’d think they’ll get away with it. How would this not get slammed with more anti-competitive lawsuits in the EU? The whole reason they’re even being forced to allow 3rd party downloads was due to the anti-competitive nature of forcing everything into their app store, right?
It’s all about testing how far they can go and what they can get away with and tying things up in legal recourse for as long as possible. They know they’ll have to comply eventually but they will drag their feet a good while more. Dumb compliance, malicious compliance, expect them to try everything. They don’t really want to do this but can’t come outright and say it.
See also how Meta was told to stop collecting people’s data and what did they do — they offered people a choice between paying a monthly fee and giving up their data willingly. It’s this kind of devious compliance you can expect from Apple too.
I just don’t understand why they’d think they’ll get away with it.
They don’t. Looking at Wikipedia’s summary of the DMA, it appears there’s a lot of room for interpretation and detailed rulings from regulators with respect to each gatekeeper company’s obligations. Apple is choosing an interpretation that’s extremely favorable to Apple as an opening position in what’s sure to be a negotiation if not a court battle.
Regulators could take the position that Apple must allow users to install applications from any source with no interference by or payments to Apple, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the final outcome is close to that.
There really doesn’t appear to be any room for misinterpretation or negotiation on this one. From the DMA:
(57) If dual roles are used in a manner that prevents alternative service and hardware providers from having access under equal conditions to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used by the gatekeeper in the provision of its own complementary or supporting services or hardware, this could significantly undermine innovation by such alternative providers, as well as choice for end users. The gatekeepers should, therefore, be required to ensure, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision of its own complementary and supporting services and hardware. Such access can equally be required by software applications related to the relevant services provided together with, or in support of, the core platform service in order to effectively develop and provide functionalities interoperable with those provided by gatekeepers. The aim of the obligations is to allow competing third parties to interconnect through interfaces or similar solutions to the respective features as effectively as the gatekeeper’s own services or hardware.
(7) The gatekeeper shall allow providers of services and providers of hardware, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same hardware and software features accessed or controlled via the operating system or virtual assistant listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9) as are available to services or hardware provided by the gatekeeper. Furthermore, the gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services.
This is black and white. Access must be free of charge. There are provisions for necessary limitations to access based on security risks, but there are no provisions for charging a fee for access.
I’m charging you $1 for that comment. I’ll have my lawyers tally your overview and they’ll provide the total sum you owe me.
I’m all about customer care so I’m happy to extend the usual 30 day due period out to 90, but you’ll need to subscribe to the Protection Plan for that benefit, which is only $4.99 a month. But your first 100 comments are free. So, really it’s a way better option for you financially over the 24 month period the contract runs for. If you comment a lot, you might be interested in the Premium Plan.
For an extra $2.99, the Premium plan also means I’ll manage your password and post for you.
But don’t take my word for it, here’s Doja Cat…
The EU said they will be no exceptions. It’s open or open.
developers can offer other payment options outside the App Store, but they still need to pay Apple a 27% fee. In addition, they have to follow some guidelines to promote an external link while also reporting to Apple about every purchase made through this external link so the company can charge a fee.
I think the meeting at Apple when they were discussing this must have gone something like Well how hard can we fuck them before their arsehole ruptures? A bit more? Sure let’s go for it. Lube? Nah we don’t need that.
Tim Cook is not British, and would say “asshole.” Kindly get your facts straight before posting on the interwebs, sir/madam/other. /s
Why does anyone actually like this company? Or thinks they are pro-consumer?
Serious response: the average consumer doesn’t give a fuck.
Most people don’t know this is going on.
Most people couldn’t care less about side-loading apps. They’ll only ever get stuff from the app store.
And then there is the contingent that buy apples products because of their walled garden ecosystem. They want to trust the apps they download are vetted by apple. They don’t care if the air pods don’t have all the features if you use them on Android because they’ll always have an iPhone. They don’t care if they can’t customize xyz on their phone because they like the design choices or will always adapt to the choices apple made.
If all of this sounds really shitty to you, you probably aren’t their target demographic.
Continue not buying their stuff. It crazy how worked up non-customers get over this stuff. It’s not like rabid apple fans are grabbing their pitchforks. It’s always Android weenies(self included in that group) that do the bitching.
I have seriously considered switching the last few years because, at the very least, they pay lip service to privacy. They also have different incentives in terms of data harvesting since they don’t also run a giant ad business at their core (Google). This type of lawsuit isn’t the reason I haven’t. It’s dumb shit like not having a back button or knowing where basic things are.
It crazy how worked up non-customers get over this stuff. It’s not like rabid apple fans are grabbing their pitchforks.
See, here is where we disagree. The amount of revenue Apple generates, makes them an example for other companies, and you see them start making the same dumb choices.
I want this trend of tech enshittification to stop and the brain-dead Apple fans are to blame. Because they allow themselves to get milked for revenue, the whole consumer space has to deal with companies trying hard to nudge the boundaries with every new product. All aimed at extracting just a little more money than they did before.
So no, in addition to not buying their shit devices and services, it actually helps to make others stop buying their shit as well. I am done allowing people to take the easy way out and to stay ignorant about the consequences of their choices. If you praise Apple to me, you’re going to get an earful.
It’s pity because they definitely know how to do hardware but I will never spend or buy their products.
Right, like how they design connectors that when shorted will instantly fry your CPU.
Or the part where they design flex cables that are too short for you to bend your screen back all the way.
There is a long list of hardware fuck ups that are outright stupid choices that competent engineers would never make. The only reason these defects exist is because they cause people to buy new devices more frequently.
They know how to do fancy hardware, not how to do reliable and durable hardware.
It’s always Android weenies(self included in that group) that do the bitching.
Oh, I’ve seen my fair share of Apple users being all high and mighty.
I have seriously considered switching the last few years because, at the very least, they pay lip service to privacy
Their privacy is a joke. They harvest your data as much as anyone. Sure, Google harvests a little more, but given that Apple with their premium prices on everything could manage without harvesting data at all, yeah, they’re as shitty as Google.
