Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple vs the Law

formularsumo.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 450 posts

Re: Apple vs the Law

#61

Post by OkPin »

This is fascinating and troubling. Apple’s presentation felt more like a marketing defense than a compliance discussion. Their claim that meeting the DMA “current interpretation” is “impossible” really stood out, it’s almost like they’re banking on legal ambiguity to stall real change.

I’m curious: if Apple and Google are using workshops as delay tactics, what’s the EC’s real enforcement power here? Are small fines enough leverage or do we need tougher mechanisms, like mandatory timelines or public transparency on third-party integrations?

Re: Apple vs the Law

#62

Post by shuckles »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #16
interpol_p wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s extremely complex. I’m not debating whether they should comply - they should. But it’s gonna cost them years of engineering effort, and maintenance far into the future. See, for example, BrowserEngineKit https://developer.apple.com/documentation/browserenginekit They needed to engineer, maintain, document and support a whole class of APIs so that third parties can create their own competitive browser engines (th…

Somehow, Android manages to do it. Not only for browsers; all apps have JIT access without any entitlement/review needed. It doesn't seem like the average Android user is worse-off because of that, security-wise.

The average Android user is far worse off security-wise than the average iOS user, and it isn't even close.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#63

Post by ashdksnndck »

jb1991 wrote: post #23
EMIRELADERO wrote: post #19

The greatest gem is found in the footnote, IMO > "They managed to convince the courts that iPadOS is a separate operating system to iOS (it's not), which delayed iPadOS being designated as a gatekeeper for almost a year. They are currently challenging all of the rest: the iOS, Safari, and App Store designations, and successfully managed to avoid iMessage being designated at all. They have taken the DMA law to court f…

I am certainly not surprised that Apple is employing a lot of legal tricky to work around judgments. But what does surprise me is that there’s a very common attitude in forums that somehow Apple is the only company doing this, or they’re doing it worse than any other company.

I wouldn’t argue that Apple is worse than any other company. They’re just the tip of the spear in the fight against EU competition regulation. Other companies would fight just as hard if they had as much to lose by following the rules.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#64

Post by pyman »

scotty79 wrote: post #42
charlesrobertd wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are billionaires doing this instead of governments? It doesn't make sense. Governments are supposed to protect workers, regulate industries, and make sure technology benefits everyone. Looks like billionaires and VCs who love monopolies are building the future on their terms.

They don't want to get eaten. We already had symbolic real assassinations of CEOs. It's only a matter of time. You can call it savagery, but you also can call it economics.

Politics is funded by the rich. It's the only way to win an election. Just like a VC investment is the only way to build AI.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#65

Post by jjcob »

The saddest part of this whole fiasco is that Apple itself is suffering from the lack of competition.

Apple Watch for example gets a huge boost from being the only wearable that integrates with iOS. But it has a lot of quality issues, and is by far the worst Apple product in my opinion. Apple would have a lot more incentive to improve it if they had to compete with other smart watches on a level playing field.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#66

Post by KoolKat23 »

culturestate wrote: post #60
LoganDark wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But what does surprise me is that there’s a very common attitude in forums that somehow Apple is the only company doing this, or they’re doing it worse than any other company. Apple creates vertically integrated devices. For many people, Apple dictates their entire digital life - far more so than any megacorporation on the mere level of, say Google, could ever hope to, considering Apple owns the hardware, software,…

> You cannot buy a device with entirely Google-designed hardware and software - Pixels with Android come close I don’t really understand this distinction. How is eg a Pixel 9 Pro running Android with GMS on a Tensor any less entirely Google-designed than an iPhone 16 is entirely Apple-designed?

You can still install Huawei market place or Fdroid marketplace and sideload all the apps you want. And it's easy to do.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#67

Post by celeryventure »

christina97 wrote: post #26
Fizzadar wrote: post #4

I really hope the EU keeps up the pressure. The level of control the gatekeepers have is beyond ridiculous. Sure there’s the “take your money elsewhere” option but we’re at a point where that’s just not realistic to be a normal person. (My sons nursery for example requires an app that only exists on iOS/Android). EU looks set to be the only big enough institution with any spine or willingness to take this on. Will pr…

The whole point of the gatekeeper designation is that they gatekeep access to things in such a way that you can’t simply take your money elsewhere. If you want to use a popular banking app, it’ll be available on exactly two platforms: iOS and Android.

We effectively have a duopoly. It's impossible for a third operating system to gain any traction and until that changes we're stuck with these two options.

A lot of things nowadays rely on apps so not having a phone with either Android or iOS means it's increasingly hard to do stuff. For example, with 2FA regulation in the EU for banks, they effectively made their mobile apps indispensable for being able to make some payments. I shouldn't have to use either iOS or Android to bank but here we are. It's even worse when you can't even use a custom ROM because the apps refuse to work on one.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#68

Post by FinnLobsien »

simonask wrote: post #46

As a European, I have to say I am generally impressed with the EU in these cases. I'm from a country that's rich and capable, but with a GDP a fraction of Apple's market cap. There is no chance that national laws and entities would be sufficient to protect my consumer rights from corporations this size. The EU is fundamentally a centre-right, liberalist, pro-business coalition, but what that means is that it is pro-c…

I would argue the opposite: It actually makes European businesses worth off by continuing to make its regulatory environment so complex only massive companies like big tech or Europe's legacy players have the resources to comply.

Add to that feel-good green initiatives like a packaging initiative that might lower packaging waste from European companies, but more likely will just make European goods more expensive and cause Europeans to buy from Temu instead.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#69

Post by amelius »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #40
EMIRELADERO wrote: post #19

The greatest gem is found in the footnote, IMO > "They managed to convince the courts that iPadOS is a separate operating system to iOS (it's not), which delayed iPadOS being designated as a gatekeeper for almost a year. They are currently challenging all of the rest: the iOS, Safari, and App Store designations, and successfully managed to avoid iMessage being designated at all. They have taken the DMA law to court f…

Big companies like that have a vested interest in paying their legal team A Lot Of Money to find stupid details like this and to argue the toss over them because a ruling can cost them billions. If arguing over a comma means they don't have to, or that it pushes the point where they have to pay forwards, it's worth the expense to them.

It also costs them my trust, though.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#70

Post by qweiopqweiop »

rickdeckard wrote: post #38
nolok wrote: post #2

Ah, the title point at something I said in an earlier thread that was misunderstood or I probably explained it wrong : the way apple played it, it was not about the actual regulation anymore, and anyone who kept arguing "but it's a bad regulation bla bla" where missing the point. By playing it the way they did, with their public statement against the regulator, and half implementation clearly done to be non cooperati…

> I'm not sure why Apple leadership played it that way, maybe they have a stronger belief in the US administration ability to strongarm the EU into accepting a loss there Apple is playing it that way because they are rallying their USERS against the EU. They want to create pressure from EU citizens against these EU regulations, and amplify their narrative also to US Apple users in political positions. Unfortunately t…

Not just their users, the US government too. They've successfully turned it into a geopolitical issue. Apple not being viewed in the same light as Microsoft in the 90s is one of the best marketing ploys ever seen.
Post reply on HN