They aren't ok with it. The EU recently passed the Digital Markets Act. But some of the provisions don't take effect until 2024.
It's only a problem for the rest of the world.
They’re not even in the same league as what MS was doing. At the time of the EU vs MS suit they had a 91% market share, and had only recently come down from a fraction over 95%
THAT is why the EU took action. Apple isn’t in a monopoly position in phones at all, they’re not even the dominant OS.
What they are, is the one that makes the most money.
Requiring Play services so much is anti-competitive by Google.
Anti-competitive behavior isn’t, by itself, an issue. At least… it’s only an issue ideologically speaking.
Based off what I found through a quick search, in Q4 2022 Apple has 29% of smartphone shipment and they have about 38% of mobile OS share. Not tiny, but not dominating the market. Back when Microsoft was being prosecuted, they had >95% of desktop OS share, approaching 99% in some places, and they were accused of leveraging that to muscle out paid-for software vendors that sold directly competing software (both operating systems through exclusivity agreements with OEMs and application software on Windows).
Apple giving away Safari for free at a time when all major web browsers are free is different. Sure, Apple might benefit from being the default but Spotify and Pandora, which compete with Apple Music, are both still in Apple's app store.
Nothing forces anyone to buy an iPhone. They don’t even have a majority of market share. In the late 90s-2000s, Microsoft actually held a monopoly on PCs. Smartphones on the other hand are a very healthy duopoly with diversity and cross pollination of ideas.
Why doesn't the EU do something about that? Why is Apple an exception?
Complaining about iPhones and game consoles being closed is like complaining that your Honda Civic isn’t good at off-roading and won’t tow your horse trailer.
There is also dev mode on Xbox One and later consoles:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/xbox-dev-mode/9nljhzjrn0f4...
I'd like an open device that supports iMessage and Facetime.
I don't understand why I should have to give up all the iOS software that I really like just because I want to run one app on my device that Apple doesn't allow.
Agreed on the other two though, both should also be forced to open up.
Exact same thing.
A phone isn't a "general computing device" like a PC any more than a gaming console is. So if Apple has to allow 3rd party stuff on their phones, it must be so for PS and Xbox too.
Though I disagree that a phone is not a 'general computing device' moreso than a gaming console is, it is hard to come up with a legally-clear definition of one.
The Xbox and PS5 are literally using an AMD Zen2 CPU and an AMD GPU, nothing weirdly custom like the PS3's "emotion engine".
There's no reason they couldn't run a standard Linux or even Windows. They have HDMI ports, USB and everything just like a normal PC. Even the PS3 with it's super weird processing system had a _native_ Linux version provided by Sony[0].
Why aren't people up in arms insisting that Microsoft and Sony allow us to install Linux on "our hardware", but are so very pressed when they can't do that with a phone? Why is a console walled garden perfectly fine, but on a phone it's anathema? Are people still thinking of the NES when they hear "console"?
[0] Yes, it was there to dodge import taxes, but still =)
However you are right, it is hard to make an unambiguous distinction, so I am with you - consoles should also be forcibly opened up. I do strongly hold the philosophical view that if you own any computing device you, as the owner should have absolute control of what that device trusts as far as any cryptographic 'locks' are concerned. The place where this seems to have both a) the largest negative impact on the market and b) the best chance of people caring and doing something about it, seems to be with mobile computing, so that is where the voice are the loudest, but personally at least, I hold the same view about any device.
Our society has long held that reverse engineering is perfectly acceptable when it comes to interoperability / competition, even if the OEM doesn't appreciate it. Now, we have progressed technologically to the point that an OEM can literally prevent any reasonable manner of that, if they want to. I just don't think our laws / society have really caught up with that fact yet, but for me it follows directly from the reasoning behind allowing reverse engineering that we shouldn't allow this.
So I don't know why you keep bringing this up as if it is a counterpoint. Yes, it's a similar situation, and yes anything we do about Apple should apply to Sony as well.
I also love how "bureaucrat" ended up meaning "any government body which does stuff I don't like"
a) : a body of nonelected government officials
or
b) : an administrative policymaking group
So really, any government is a bureaucracy.
What is funny is the way people use the word derisively, as if bureaucracy is inherently evil in some way. Bureaucracy is like math, it is netiehr good nor bad, it simply is. Like math, it can be used to do good or bad things.