• SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I like the article, but red tape means pointless or needlessly complicated bureaucracy. Doesn’t apply to just any regulation.

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I mean, it’s a smart argument, because they want to keep control of their closed platform and not follow regulations. It’s just also nonsense and rather unethical.

        • sir_reginald@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          RISC != RISC-V

          for the long explanation, look it up in Wikipedia, but briefly, RISC is a “family” of CPU architectures that includes ARM, MIPS and RISC-V. The other one is called CISC, which x86 belongs to.

    • hansl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you read the article, it’s one for iOS, one for iPadOS and one for macOS. Which makes sense to see them as three different software (they probably only share the WebKit engine), but not as different product for core market.

      It also might explain why Apple is so adamant on renaming the OS on different devices, and not using the iOS brand for iPad and Apple TV for example.

      It’s flailing at best for technically being correct in legal cases. Which works in the US, but the EU is seeing right through it.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Apple tried to avoid regulation in the European Union by making a surprising claim – that it offers not one but three distinct web browsers, all coincidentally named Safari.

    As a result, it’s expected that Apple will allow third-party app stores that work with iOS and browser engines other than Safari’s WebKit by March 2024 – in Europe, if not elsewhere.

    In its response, “Apple reiterated its position that each of its Safari web browsers constitutes a distinct [core platform service],” the European Commission said in its newly published decision document [PDF].

    He also argued that Apple’s approach explicitly violates the DMA’s Anti-Circumvention provision that forbids subdividing a platform’s market share to avoid regulation.

    Citing six different issues with Apple’s claims, the commission concluded: “Safari qualifies as a single web browser, irrespective of the device through which that service is accessed.”

    Jon von Tetzchner, CEO of browser biz Vivaldi, told The Register in a phone interview that Apple, Google, and Microsoft all are trying to find ways to avoid onerous DMA requirements.


    The original article contains 837 words, the summary contains 172 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • onlinepersona@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Somewhere, somehow, apple fans are nodding along and agreeing with this disingenuous take while ordering another overpriced device.