Laws like the DMA were specifically made to fight the influence of mega corporations like Apple. For them to use language like "it should be repealed" instead of "it should be changed" shows their intent.
I support the EU's right to shape their digital environment. But if you're being threatened with fines on the order of $38 billion which are levied based on vague, ever-changing rules, then of course you will want that situation to go away while the law gets fixed.
On the other hand, cynically speaking, maybe "fighting Apple's influence" through arbitrary fines is actually the point.
My understanding is that Apple's proposed approach to CSAM prevention (which was subsequently abandoned) made significantly greater attempts to protect user privacy compared with the current EU chat control proposal.
Why lie about stuff that's so easy to check?
https://www.wired.com/story/apple-csam-scanning-heat-initiat...
I expect there are many other falsehoods of yours in this thread, but I'm not going to try to identify all of them. I just want to know: What motivates you to make claims which can be refuted with a 30-second Google search?
For example, at the gym I go to they do have a card reader as an alternative to checking in with the app, but at one point it was not working, which meant a smartphone was mandatory to go to the gym. And it was left that way for months; fixing it was clearly not a priority because the expectation of society is that everyone has a smartphone (you'll be met with surprise if you tell people you don't have their app installed, and incredulity at the idea that someone might not have a smartphone). And outside my workplace they put up car charging stations that have no way to pay for charging without an app.
And then (at least here in Sweden) there are increasingly places that accept no payment methods other than mobile payments (Swish here in Sweden), and online services like healthcare services requiring you to authenticate with BankID on a smartphone (or sometimes Freja e-ID, which also requires a smartphone), for things like ordering from pharmacies, doing your taxes online (and getting your tax return sooner), accessing healthcare services etc, and meanwhile physical alternatives like physical pharmacies are increasingly getting outcompeted and shutdown. So you may be able to get by without one, but at the cost of getting cut off from parts of society, and that's likely to increase.
And of course there was recently the news that the UK may require a digital ID (probably on and Android or iOS phone) in order to get employment or residence: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-digit...