Software similarity and market positioning don't really come into consideration once the role of gatekeeper has been established.
They had valid reasons for it.
They just realized that Apple was full of shit and trying to circumvent the law by differenciating iPadOS and iOS in the same arbitrary way you think the EU is working.
It is rarely a good strategy to play the smart ass in front of authority.
>The Commission's investigation found that Apple presents the features of a gatekeeper in relation to iPadOS, as among others:
>Apple's business user numbers exceeded the quantitative threshold elevenfold, while its end user numbers were close to the threshold and are predicted to rise in the near future.
>End users are locked-in to iPadOS. Apple leverages its large ecosystem to disincentivise end users from switching to other operating systems for tablets.
>Business users are locked-in to iPadOS because of its large and commercially attractive user base, and its importance for certain use cases, such as gaming apps.
>On the basis of the findings of the investigation, the Commission concluded that iPadOS constitutes an important gateway for business users to reach end users, and that Apple enjoys an entrenched and durable position with respect to iPadOS. Apple has now six months to ensure full compliance with the DMA obligations as applied to iPadOS.
Edit: looks like the EU didn't even bother challenging the arbitrary distinction between both OS, since the iPad crosses the threshold for business users by itself, it's submitted to DMA on its own.
The only complaints tend to come from gamers - DRM, "console exclusive" titles and lootboxes, mostly, but of these three the only realistic field where the EU can/will/should intervene is the lootbox crap.
Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft's markets 2 orders of magnitude smaller and effect 3-4 orders of magnitude less companies.
I mean, regulators aren't stupid; just because Apple rebranded iOS on iPads to 'iPadOS' a few years ago, presumably seeing the writing on the wall, you shouldn't expect the EC to go "oh, well, the company we're regulating _says_ it's a different thing, so it must be a different thing".
For me personally, all of the above is the cost and what I get is something I wasn't using and didn't miss (if I want to install things outside the walled garden, I use a my Mac not a mobile device).
Also, it costs the vendor to implement support for installing other software - resources the vendor could have spent on features I value, rather than features I don’t want. If only a government didn’t dictate to the vendor what it should do, stripping the vendor and the user of the power to decide for themselves.
- Size criteria:
Have an annual turnover in the European Economic Area (EEA) of at least €7.5 billion in each of the last three financial years, or
Have a market capitalization of at least €75 billion, and
Provide the same core platform service in at least three EU countries.
Provide a core platform service which is an important gateway for business users to reach end users.
Enjoy an entrenched and durable position on the market, operationalized by having had at least 45 million monthly active end users and 10,000 yearly business users of the same core platform service in the EEA in the last three years.
Don't get me wrong, I'm _very_ happy about this, but you asked ;)
It's more complicated than this: the EC has the initiative for legislation in the EU but the text they submit is later amended and voted by both the European Parliament and the Council (representing member states) so it's not true that the EC defines the rules. And both the member states and the European Parliament are pretty jealous of their prerogatives in the decision process so you can be sure that the EC cannot have arbitrary power that bypasses the Council and the Parliament.
And the resources needed to make an app installer are not nearly as high as you make it out to be because iOS already has the mechanism to install signed .ipas. All that's needed in theory is a check to disable signing (which they already have implemented in MacOS) and to add a few pages to the Settings app, which surely shouldn't be an issue for a tech company of Apple's size. And if you argue that it might break some spaghetti code then maybe that should be fixed anyways and it's doing them a favour.
I'm just using the CJEU as an illustration that Apple themselves doesn't believe in the “arbitrary rules” narrative as they aren't even fighting in court.
Also, you're trying to use the “bureaucrates” card here, but Apple executives are bureaucrates too, and Apple's management of sanctions and their habits of shutting down user accounts without recourse shows that their own bureaucracy is closer to the one from authoritarian regimes than anything else.
As an anecdote myself, the main reason I haven't switched to a Galaxy S24 is because my Airpods work amazingly with my iPhone and Macbook, and my Apple Watch only works with iPhones. But very often I sorely miss having Termux, NewPipe, Tachiyomi, a non-gimped version of GBoard, Syncthing, a sensible launcher, and probably other things that I can't remember off the top of my head. I've decided that I value the Apple system more than the value I get from those apps but this regulation means I get to have my cake and eat it too.
Following this decision EU Commissioner Thierry Breton said: “We continue monitoring market developments and will not hesitate to open new investigations should other services below the thresholds present characteristics to be considered important gateways for business users,”.
per the commission iPad passes the threshold for business users elevenfold.
While it does pass the threshold for business user the threshold, I think, is end users and business users. But that doesn't matter at all since the EU commission can declare a service as a gatekeeper, after an investigation, even if it had both business and end users bellow the threshold.
--- start quote ---
Yes, it does that. And then some.
iPad is so versatile, it’s more than up to any task. Whether you’re working on a project, expressing your creativity, or playing an immersive game, iPad is a fun and powerful way to get it done. Here are just a few of the countless things you can do with iPad.
--- end quote ---
And it has historically been "it's like a computer, but in tablet form".
Here's how Apple introduced iPad Pro just a year after it introduced iPad as a product: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2015/09/09Apple-Introduces-iP...
--- start quote ---
The new iPad Pro will enable a new generation of advanced apps for everything from productivity, design, illustration, engineering and medical, to education, gaming and entertainment.
The innovative Apple Pencil and new Smart Keyboard enable users ... making iPad Pro ideal for everything from professional productivity to advanced 3D design.
--- end quote ---
Or in 2016 here's Apple announcing how it will transform businesses with Deloitte: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2016/09/apple-and-deloitte-te...
--- start quote ---
Deloitte is creating a first-of-its-kind Apple practice with over 5,000 strategic advisors who are solely focused on helping businesses change the way they work across their entire enterprise, from customer-facing functions such as retail, field services and recruiting, to R&D, inventory management and back-office systems.
The new offering will help customers discover the highest impact possibilities within their industries and quickly develop custom solutions through rapid prototyping.
--- end quote ---
etc. etc.
Great! (Imagine having wallgardened Windows computer where you could not install whatever you want).
> This will mean a race to the bottom for iPad apps. Which, of course, means even more ads
iOS store is already at the bottom. Everything is with ads or subscription based. More ads won’t scare me because I won’t use app with any ads. If app offers one time purchase - I’ll buy it if I like it. Examples of apps I bought: Structured, Bobby, ArtStudio, MusicStudio.
> if I want to install things outside the walled garden, I use a my Mac not a mobile device
What if Apple decided you cannot install apps outdide off their App Store on a Mac neither? What would your “Apple-defending” argument be then? It’s NOT a far fetched idea. Microsoft tries it with Windows S Mode and they currently constantly threaten people when they download software from internet about how dangerous it may be, trying to scare people into using their store.
Again, you are presenting this as if it has only one side to it. I need a computer that has no walled garden for certain kinds of work. For other kinds of work I'm happy to know I can't break it. Even more important, I'm happy when my parents can't break the one I buy them.
>More ads won’t scare me because I won’t use app with any ads. If app offers one time purchase - I’ll buy it if I like it.
As long as such an option exists. But in a true race to the bottom situation, there may not be anyone willing to invest in developing an app and then selling for a one time purchase. One time purchase is a model that's nearly dead anyway.
>What if Apple decided you cannot install apps outdide off their App Store on a Mac neither?
This I wouldn't accept because I can't. It's a development machine for me. But an iPad is a consumption device, I need the thing to just always work.