Due to the regulatory uncertainties brought about by the Digital Markets Act, we do not believe that we will be able to roll out three of these [new] features – iPhone Mirroring, SharePlay Screen Sharing enhancements, and Apple Intelligence – to our EU users this year.
deleted by creator
DMA is focused on preventing “gatekeepers” from unfairly favoring their own services and promoting interoperability.
- If Apple Intelligence were to prioritize Apple services like Apple Music or Apple Maps in searches or recommendations, the DMA would apply.
- iPhone Mirroring is only native to Apple devices which violates DMA’s interoperability requirements.
- Similarly, Shareplay ScreenSharing will require an Apple device on both ends, meaning it also violates the DMA’s interoperability
deleted by creator
Well I was planning to get a new iPhone that fully supports Apple Intelligence, but if Apple can’t swallow their pride by properly opening up their platform but would rather leave out headlining features, I guess I won’t.
Reason #6724 to move to the EU
Lol. No.
I think more and more companies are going to make the EU a tech backwater because nobody will want to innovate in such an unfriendly area where woke lawmakers will try and mess up your business model.
Lmao, no, the companies will learn they can’t just do whatever they want anymore, or they will fail. It might take years. But it will happen. Take your woke nonsense back to reddit.
I feel like that’s only partly true. Most of the AI features were limited to US English, and wouldn’t be released in other languages (yet) anyway. I don’t quite get how iPhone Mirroring or SharePlay are affected by the DMA either. They are right though, we don’t know yet how different countries will implement legislation based on this. That’s how the EU works though, so as long as there are no laws prohibiting a feature, I assume they could release it but would need to make changes if laws are created. That’s what they did with 3rd party app stores. So, I guess weird flex by Apple PR.
It is unreasonable to expect platforms to open up everything to be ripped out and swapped for their competitors.
I expect platforms get more and more cautious as to what they release into unfavorable regulatory environments that offer only marginal economical benefits.
Expecting platforms to try and get chosen by consumers for being a good option rather than being the only option is unreasonable?
If Apple’s offering is better or as good as the competition, consumers won’t try to rip it out and swap it for the competitor’s product.
This is what never made sense to me about this argument.
Who exactly is forcing people to buy iPhones? How is the platform anti-competition when there’s loads of competition all around it, in equally as large numbers?
The walled garden has always been a feature, a selling point. And people choose to adopt it or not.
Can you explain better how the logic in your argument above goes, with that in mind?
The iPhone platform has competition against other platforms. The platform as a whole is competing with android for instance.
Within the android platform, google play competes with fdroid, Samsung galaxy store, etc.
Within the iPhone platform, the app store has no competition.
But what does that matter when the platform has plenty of competition? This is what doesn’t make sense to me. Google chose to allow other app stores. That’s a feature of the platform. Apple chose to not allow sideloading or other app stores, again, as a feature.
Who is forcing people to use Apple devices?
Why doesn’t this extend to other platforms like Nintendo or PlayStation whose stores are explicit features of the platforms?
No one is forcing people to use Apple devices. That’s not what this is about.
It’s about other services trying to reach potential customers that happen to be using an iPhone. Spotify has to go through the App Store if they want to reach any customers on the second largest mobile platform. And Apple themselves have a lot of advantages concerning integrating their own music streaming service into the OS while Spotify is limited by the rules Apple sets, including taking 30% of any subscription made through the App Store.
The anti-competitive behaviour implied in a walled-garden starts once that flagship product is bought.
Apple chose to not allow sideloading or other app stores, again, as a feature.
Ok, so maybe some cars decide not to offer seatbelts as a feature. Oh wait, they can’t, because that’s dumb.
Not having a feature that helps consumers is not a feature. When Apple prevents people from repairing their phones, that’s not a feature. When they prevent consumers from loading their own apps on their own device that they bought, that’s not a feature! It’s comically anti-competitive and bad for everyone.
The DMA doesn’t seem to have ever been about consumer choice, it’s about the choice of other competitors to have access to Apple’s customers without having to play by Apple’s rules. Just look at who was pushing for sideloading on iOS, I mostly saw Meta and Epic Games at the forefront. Why should Apple compromise my device’s integrity so that Meta can spy on me? I have no good answer to that.
Bitter that you’re not able to use new features much? Reap what you sow.
I’m in the US. When did I say I was European?
Glad to see you respond to the argument with logic instead of making assumptions about my identity and deciding that’s an attack.
Even more aggregious is the EU’s audacity to declare that tech companies must be horizontally integrated. What’s next, are they going to go after Nintendo?
