[yinyang_in]

Apple did lot of efforts building the ecosystem. No government system helped them in it. Now fruits have come up & they want to tweak it to their own taste.

If monopoly is causing trouble to small businesses & you’re able to prove it then impose fines & whatever is under the law. But just being jealous & imposition of laws just to target businesses(here almost Apple is being singled out).

But this is unpopular opinion.

With 30% fees you get access to big ecosystem of Apple imo is cheap. They’ve put lot of efforts in building it. If don’t want to participate, then don’t. Use android it has what you all what EU wants.

Ps. Not a US citizen neither stakeholder in Apple

[techdragon]

You may not be an Apple shareholder and I’m not sure how being a US Citizen has any potential to be a conflict of interest in this case but you still sound like you “drank the cool aid”… the question I have for you is where (if anywhere at all) do you draw the line between what Apple should be allowed to do and and what it should do voluntarily … and what rights you think individual nations have to regulate their internal commerce including regulations on what manufacturers and sellers of devices must make it possible for the purchasing public to do…

while this regulation is targeting Apple’s software control the same principles are underlying the regulations that allow bilingual countries to require products be labeled in both languages, allow countries to mandate hygiene in health care facilities, higher food safety or ingredient quality control to minimise food contamination risks…

Does Unilever have the right to decide what’s good enough for consumers in a country? Or does the country and its citizens have the right to demand Unilever products meet their standards if Unilever wants to sell in that country?

[filoleg]

> what rights you think individual nations have to regulate their internal commerce including regulations on what manufacturers and sellers of devices must make it possible for the purchasing public to do

> while this regulation is targeting Apple’s software control the same principles are underlying the regulations that allow bilingual countries to require products be labeled in both languages, allow countries to mandate hygiene in health care facilities, higher food safety or ingredient quality control to minimise food contamination risks

I mean, while this regulation is targeting Apple’s software control, the same principles are underlying the regulations that allow countries like PRC to demand Apple to host data of their users in China in datacenters that are run by, essentially, the PRC government, as well as give them the keys to decrypt data of those users.

I don’t see how that’s a point in favor of anything at all here. Just because the countries have the right to do those things and sometimes utilize those rights for things like food safety management or bilingual product labeling enforcement, it doesn’t automatically make their usage of those same rights for other things (like compromising user data and, with full legal support, spying on political dissidents) any more justified.

No one is arguing that the EU doesn’t have the right to do what they are doing (the EU, indeed, has the right to do it). People are arguing whether it is a smart and beneficial thing to do.

[duanem]

Apple did not build the ecosystem alone. The ecosystem is made up of the platform, the developers and the users. Lose one of these and you don't have an ecosystem. If all the developers leave, users will leave. If all users leave, developers will leave.

I would argue developers put in just as much, if not more effort.

Apple did not build the ecosystem alone, nor does it own the ecosystem. It is merely acting as a uncool gatekeeper.

[addicted]

If it wasn’t for government regulation Microsoft would have wiped out Apple before the 2000s.

Apple owes its existence to Microsoft’s fear of regulators.

So yeah, every penny of its trillion dollar market share is thanks to government regulation.