"They should add a simple new heuristic to determine an abusive monopoly. If a company is imposing a volume surcharge instead of a volume discount to its biggest customers, it means there exists an abusive monopoly and regulatory intervention is needed.
There is absolutely no reason in a well functioning market for this to occur."
It also clarifies why I dislike so much the concept of a Gaming Console (vs a computer)
Compare this to iPhone activations of new phones which is at 33% and declining [1]. Which means Android's market share of 70%+ is going to get larger over time.
https://9to5mac.com/2024/04/24/iphone-market-share-new-low-a...
I quote from the EU document
> connected devices of all brands will work better on iPhones. Device manufacturers will have new opportunities to bring innovative products to the market, improving the user experience for consumers based in Europe.
About developers:
> The measures will accelerate their ability to offer a wider choice to European consumers of innovative services and hardware that interoperate with iPhones and iPads.
The DMA defines gatekeepers as "large digital platforms providing so called core platform services, such as for example online search engines, app stores, messenger services" and lists their obligations prohibitions. Apple is one of them because it's sufficiently large.
Smaller companies are not gatekeepers and are out of the scope of the DMA.
As a user, I must be able to switch platforms at the end of the lifespan of a phone or Mac. So, buy a non-mac computer and then later a non-iPhone phone. So things need to interoperate.
That position from the EU is genius because it’s capitalism at its highest form. (Next is, all Windows apps must work on Macs, sounds like a joke but you’ll notice we already live in a world where they’re all webapp/electron, so it’s literally not a problem).