The DMA is only vague if you're trying to game it. The rules amount to “don't be a dick”.
Apple's out here asking “well how will I know if I'm being a dick?? I can’t operate under this environment!”
Whereas most people don't have to ask themselves that question
@stroughtonsmith yes and no,
There are areas were the DMA is unclear on how much access the platform vendor must provide day one to third parties.
Eg does the DMA require apple expose apis so that MS and Linux devs can implement iPhone mirroring?
Is this an iPhone platform feature or a Mac feature, so does it fall under the DMA or not?
These are legit questions that are unclear and would likely require a good bit of dev work to comply with securely.
DMA is not just about apps it also covers system features and services. There is clearly un-certainty within the teams with respect to the iPhone Mirroring feature and if that would be required to be exposed otherwise they would be shipping it.
As for remote controle, yes they should have an api to let other screens sharing apps (that already exists). But that will require more work.
@malauch Yes but that is extra work, for any feature that might possibly fall under the DMA they are required to go put in extra work to ensure that they provide this parties access to it. (thus committing them to an API they then must support)
The DMA does not have the ability within it for apple to seek pre-aproaval they cant check with the commission in advance, all they can do is delay features or risk a legal battle.
@malauch One of the differences with automative regulation is the clarity on what is and is not permitted.
The DMA is intentionally very vague in a way that you don't see with seatbelt or crumple zone regulation.
It would take a LOT more work to make iPhone mirroring and remote controle be exposed to third parties in such a way that it matinees the same level of security and is an API that apples teams want to commit to long term. Not to mention the system ML access for DMA.
@stroughtonsmith @hishnash i am not sure i agree with the concept that anyone should be able to ship any app that can do anything the platform can do
there are just way too many power imbalances. how long until an employer or government requires people install apps on their phones that tracked them and let them remotely access, keylog and record everything they do?
it's been sickening to read how features that to me seem common sense, like family controls and screen time, have been used by abusers to monitor and control their partner. scaling that cruely to corporations or nation-states is unconscionable.
apple's pro-user anti-developer stance has been quite irritating for some employers and clients I've had over the years, but the idea that the person holding the phone can make an informed free choice about what apps that phone is running just isn’t based in reality.
seems to me the only way this could work is if eu married these laws with ones just as savage and policed for anyone coercing installation.
Steve Troughton-Smith
Matthaus Woolard
Michał Jurewicz
Leon
phi1997
Jorge Salvador Caffarena