© Apple
There's something fun about comparing the impact of new rules in Europe on American businesses, depending on what they're trying to regulate ’ 8211; especially at a manufacturer like Apple, historically a supporter of a closed ecosystem strategy, of which it controls all aspects. When Europe required all smartphone manufacturers to abandon any proprietary ports in favor of USB type C ports, we of course saw the firm twist its nose on many occasions.
However, when the famous universal port arrived on the iPhone 15, Apple did not seek to continue selling iPhone 15s with Lightning port in the rest of the world: all iPhones now have the famous port universal – which Apple suddenly began to present as progress for customers. Lightning ports, which Apple continues to offer in other products, continue to exist. Better: using such a port in a third-party product or manufacturing Lightning cables involves paying a royalty to Apple… which should therefore continue to generate money with this technology.
Apple is forced to give in to Europe, but emphasizes that it ;#8217;is a setback for security
On the other hand with regard to the DMA, the law which has just forced Apple to open up its application ecosystem a little , the firm has instead decided to restrict this new dealto the European area – in which the company actually has no other choice if it wants to continue selling iPhones to the region's 450 million inhabitants. It must be said that by loosening Apple's grip on application developers, Apple risks losing, again, part of its revenue.
Even if, as you can see by carefully reading the new rules, it will actually be quite difficult to pay nothing at all to the firm. On a support page on the developers site, however, Apple justifies this troubling difference by highlighting the “new complexity and emerging risks that the DMA creates for [its] users in the European Union” ; :
“We are limiting these changes to the European Union, as we are concerned about their impacts on the privacy and security of our users' experience, which remains our number 1 priority&# 8221;, Apple defends. Understand: proposing departures from the usual iPhone security is “ok” in Europe. But the rest of the world “has the right” to continue to benefit from the firm's total monopoly on the platform's applications, because this is presented as more secure.
Let us recall in passing that, even today, iPhone security is far from being infallible. One of the latest illustrations is the famous spyware produced by NSO Group – which was until recently capable of infecting iPhones in 0-click, that is to say without the user being able to ;account for it. The change will in fact mainly imply, in our opinion, the need to install a mobile antivirus on the device, as many users already do on Android.
- Apple will not offer app sideloading in regions other than Europe.
- The firm justifies itself by relying on the security of the platform.
- An argument that is also debatable&# 8230;
📍 To not miss any news from Presse-citron, follow us on Google News and WhatsApp.
[ ]