All that already exists on Android and the negatives didn't happen (with modern android versions), on the contrary. My phone supports multiple payment vendors using nfc. I can have Tasker do magic with my phone etc.
Why not just have EU draw up specs on a phone that apple and android phone companies have to adhere to. Why allow any variance at all? Surely a one size fits everything approach would be best for the consumer, and designed by the EU government brain trust it would surely be the best?
It will not be a benefit to consumers. If I have a choice of an Android phone or an Android-like phone with an Apple logo on it, I don’t have a real choice.
> Simply only use the Apple app store and you will have the same phone you had before.
That's not really true. Apps you need and currently use may well be moved from the Apple app store.
For example WhatsApp. Some people have to use it, not because they want to. Some have to use it for work. One day they may have to install the Meta app store to get WhatsApp, and agree to permissions and access to their personal data that they don't like at all, because there will be no gatekeeping pressure from Apple on WhatsApp to not do that.
Maybe Chrome, the world's only browser by then that most sites are tested on, will require the Google app store with special advertisement and behaviour influencing hooks enabled. Don't like them? No Chrome for you and your banking website doesn't work on your phone.
Maybe the banking apps will move to SecurTrust Special Banking App Store With Device Verify(tm) too.
> Apps you need and currently use may well be moved from the Apple app store
This is isn't the case on Android.
> For example WhatsApp. Some people have to use it, not because they want to.
That's already a separate problem and hopefully also one that the EU will address. Imagine if to call someone you'd have to sign up with the same provider as them. That we allow this kind of mess in the the software world is pure insanity.
Legislation is simply lagging behind technology but that is an argument for updating legislation to deal with the modern world, not for letting a private company play judge, jury and executioner.
> Some have to use it for work. One day they may have to install the Meta app store to get WhatsApp, and agree to permissions and access to their personal data that they don't like at all, because there will be no gatekeeping pressure from Apple on WhatsApp to not do that.
If your work requires you to install something on your private phone that is not completely isolated than that should also be regulated. If its on a work phone then your work should be interested in restricting what the app can do.
No, because apps will be moved to other stores with less strict guidelines on permissions. Meta will for sure do it. They mentioned Apple as a major reason for their poor financial performance, after Apple introduced further restrictions on what they can and can't do. They've also been caught red handed before, and had their enterprise developer account disabled for abusing it to do things they weren't allowed to on end user phones.
And why Apple should be the arbiter of truth in the question? They are free to make the UX for enabling side-loading as inconvenient as they want (I haven’t heard anyone accidentally unlocking dev mode on Android for example), and presumably Facebook is not big enough to overcome that burden, effectively still forcing them to play by Apple’s rules. But why should everyone do so?
No, a device I bought from them is very much not their hardware, but mine, I should do as I please with it.
And can we just stop this “you can buy android” bullshit? 2 is not a choice, and there are fundamental reasons why a 3rd competitor can’t exist right now, so competition can’t produce a better product, hence we are left with market regulation by governments to not let this oligopoly get away with everything.
> No, a device I bought from them is very much not their hardware, but mine, I should do as I please with it.
This argument falls apart when the “device” in question is a car or PlayStation though? You most certainly cannot do whatever you please with a car for obvious reasons. You most certainly cannot install any game on a PlayStation unless Sony approves it.
More importantly, the pov you hold is a ableist attitude. A device that controls your communications (either to your bosses at work or loved ones at home) or that deals with your financial or health data can become a treasure trove to exploit among less tech savvy users.
A device a “less tech savvy user can do what they please” with is exactly the device that a mobile repair person in a store can convince the user to install BigEvil’s browser because BigEvil pays a commission to that repair person. Or that’s exactly the device the police or immigration customs agents can install spyware as a part of a “security check”.
Tech savvy users can do whatever they please with their devices. Feel free to jailbreak it and forgo any right to future software updates. After all, once you buy it — the device is yours. But you have no right to expect to receive continued support and features in the form of future software updates.
If apple has to drill holes in their hardware/software API for sideloaders, it is not the same. Known CCP agents like tiktok would love to sneak around any "securty/sandbox" and have more opportunities for attack.
