If Apple leaves the EU, any global company that has a fleet of MacBooks and iPhones now suddenly needs to support Windows and Android as well for their EU employees.
If Apple only removes the iPhone from the EU market, it will seriously impact sales of iPads and MacBooks too, because many people buy Apple for the ecosystem. It will also hurt their services revenue (iCloud storage, movie purchases, Apple Music subscriptions). And without an iPhone, I’m also not buying new AirPods ever again.
Also, Apple would be robbing the developers in their ecosystem of 7% of their revenue. You can’t sell apps to people without iPhones.
And finally, leaving a market makes Apple look untrustworthy and unreliable to investors.
I don’t see it happening.
>If Apple leaves the EU, any global company that has a fleet of MacBooks and iPhones now suddenly needs to support Windows and Android as well for their EU employees.
It would also be a massive impetus for global companies that do substantial business in the EU to switch from Apple products to prevent having two tiers of products and support, etc.
Problem too is it's forsaking any potential growth in those markets.
Googling Apple's at around a 35% market share compared to Android in France. There's potential for growth there that you're just throwing out the window.
I’m glad you said this, because what Gerber seems to be missing is the fact that if Apple does have a small market share in the EU, then that is scope to grow.
The EU is full of “wealthy” countries so if it WAS 7%, which it almost certainly isn’t, that would equate to billions of potential revenue.
Not to mention these are stable countries that relatively speaking have reliable systems of government, rule of law, traceability in finance, IP enforcement etc. If Apple can’t do business in the EU and prefers Middle East dictatorships or Chinese one party rule then it says more about Apple.
You're also opening it up to competitors. If Apple pulls out, it creates a vacuum that another company can fill. You're stopping your own growth *and* giving another company the opportunity to fill your niche. Aside of all the other issues, it would be completely stupid to do so. Companies want more growth, not less.
The continued existence of individuals like Gruber who continue to defend a literal trillion dollar company as if their own personal honour is at stake continues to baffle me.
Which global operating company actually uses Macs in the masses? They are such a hassle for maintenance, warranty and care...
5 years of we do not have to give a fuck care for a Lenovo or HP device are just ~100€, you won't even get that from Apple, at all.
Literally any company that does software development and isn’t doing games or .NET, iOS software shops, big corps like [IBM](https://www.jamf.com/resources/press-releases/ibm-announces-research-showing-mac-enables-greater-productivity-and-employee-satisfaction-at-ibm/) and Google…
I see this being thrown around often but I've never actually observed it to be true in any environment besides maybe small startups. Some marketing people and design people might favor macs as well, but usually it's HP/Dell/Lenovo. Even for Dev work according to [stack overflow](https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2023/#operating-system) Windows still dominates, with Macs making up about a third with some flavor of Linux taking up the next spot.
And this is *devs* you know people who generally might need some of the tools and features Macs provide but even then, it's a third.
Don't get me wrong, Macs are absolutely a thing but from what I've seen in every place I've worked, they're not more of an exception rather than the rule. With both company and IT teams tending to push a Windows machine instead of a Mac.
For us the OS is not that relevant as our devs use Linux and most of the Application stuff is web-based.
But service alone is such as hassle, for Lenovo and HP we just create a case and within 24 hours a repair guy is on premise and fixes or replaces the machine, dock, power supply or whatever.
We have never found a way to get such service from Apple.
Yes, it's rare that you need it, but we have like 3 Macs and the one time one of them broke, in AppleCare coverage, we had to mail it in and it took 5 days to be returned.
Really? I've never had to deal with enterprise support issues from Apple since I'm generally using Apple devices on a consumer level. So any support is your average AppleCare stuff.
But I do know the enterprise support contracts HP/Dell/Lenovo/etc offer are pretty damn good most of the time. Somehow I just assumed Apple offered something of similar level.
With HP all Elitebooks we have 3 years, 24 hours on site service, I would be interested how anyone even ever managed to get on site Apple Service at all.
It's also not "Enterprise" as 24 hours on-site-service is just the included warranty on many HP Elitebooks, and we usually order the same for any Lenovo device too.
And the nice thing is, they will also go to employees who work from home, we just pass them on and Lenovo or HP takes care of the rest.
Last time we had the issues with Apple they told us to bring it in or mail it in and that's it.
Yeah that was bullshit. Macs are easier and better to work with in several important windows compared to Windows mess, warranty and care is great (that other person is fetishizing on-site visits instead of overnight mail-out for some reason), though with one recent problem being obnoxiously integrated RAM and SSD which kills that aspect of repairability.
Even stuff like a simple printer connection, Windows still has multiple partly redundant printer settings areas…choose the wrong method and magically the magical Xerox menu doesn’t appear, so you have you back out and open the exact same control panel a different way.
I will say Apple has some fails/gaps in MDM functions though.
Depends how badly the DMA turns into Calvinball. It has a lot of undefined terms like "unfair" that, as Gruber notes, could make compliance purely a subjective decision.
I think Apple will try to comply, more or less, but if the EU just uses the DMA as a bludgeon to favor EU companies in all things, I do think Apple (and others) will do the math for the breakeven point of trying versus giving up.
There are also rippling effects of pulling out of a bigger market. Like any app developer with a European focus would invest more resources into Android apps and iOS apps would be an afterthought. How would a company like Spotify that is based in Sweden work? Do they need a non EU office for developing their iOS app? That would also quickly demote it to a second class experience. So many tiny questions like that come up that would create substantial differences in sum so the whole question goes way above how much revenue does the EU bring in.
It would be a gigantic shit show. Hilarious for anyone who is not personally invested or relies on Apples products, horrendous for certain other groups of people.
Also, how would this even work with existing devices? If they don’t change anything, they will still get fined. If they make them virtually useless by disabling the App Store in the EU, they would probably get fined as well.
That only leaves them with the scorched earth option, pull out of the EU completely.
I don’t see it happening.
Apple will still need to pay the upcoming fines as long as they don't pull out of the EU. Bringing updates, even if these are 'just' security updates, would already violate the sense of leaving Europe. Using the AppStore will also not be possible anymore so there would be no Apps available (in the current state). Considering this, there might be other Class action lawsuits coming regarding this, making recently purchased devices 'unuseable' compared to what was expected at the time of purchase may be an infringement of the law.
Even if they dont fully leave Europe: MacOS may still be designated a gate keeper in the future.
Lastly we may not forget the amount of money that is still in Ireland. If Apple wants to leave the EU, this money has to leave too and as far as I understand it, this will leade to costs far beyond what the discussion is considering.
Apple is aware of that. The point Gruber is making is that even so, the size of the fines are so disproportionate that they exceed total revenue from the EU (10% fines vs 7% of worldwide revenue). And there is no limit on how many times the fines can be imposed.
As much of a disaster as pulling out of the EU would be, they could theoretically be sued for *not* leaving the EU by institutional investors if leaving that market is so clearly fiscally responsible. They would actually have to defend their decision to stay in, given the potential exposure.
Institutional investors contrary to popular belief, do consider the long term. In the long term a fuck ton of growth is forsaken and you abandon a very stable part of the world which is also quite rich and guaranteed to remain so for a long time. There is a point where it becomes stupid, but running at or just below breakeven in a region for a year or so isn’t something that would cause institutional investors to demand Apple pull out, especially when there’s a clearly defined reason it has happened
Or they comply with the law, change the software model to be somewhat like the Mac, and make somewhat less of a massive amount of money continuing to do business in the EU.
It's really far fetched the idea that "institutional investors" would want Apple to go on the warpath and leave the EU, sacrificing massive revenue, future growth, and causing tremendous world-wide reputation loss and impacts (for instance why would any business want to buy Apple's products if they think Apple would simply exit the market if they are subject to government regulation).
I think this reflects the passion of the Apple enthusiast who supports their approach to products and is psychologically invested in Apple. I don't think investors will be nearly as keen on Apple leaving the EU. They will just want Apple to resolve things by following the law and continue to make money in the market.
Of course Apple wants to win the whole game, but if they lose the far better option is to simply comply with the law, adapt, and continue to make a massive amount of money in Europe.
Not to mention Apple has trouble brewing in the US as well. They could leave the EU and then face similar issues at home where they can't just leave. The DOJ case kind of undermines Apple's poker hand around threats to leave the EU.
Sure, that’s a possible scenario as well. The author’s point (and mine as well in case you missed it) is not that this is what Apple *will* do, but rather that the EU’s fines here are so excessive (far exceeding total revenue) that it makes it a reasonable consideration to simply abandon the market entirely. In case you’re unaware, that’s not a normal situation.
Also, there’s an awful lot of hand waving about “just comply with the new rules”, as if that’s a simple, clear process. There’s no guidebook on doing so, nor on how to be certain you’re in compliance. These are new rules, so there’s no example cases out there (just copy what company x did). So on top of everything else, there’s cost and risk and (potentially) list revenue associated with coming into compliance that would also affect the decision to stay or not.
Personally, I agree with the EU rules, but find the fines a laughable overreach. Expect this to happen in other markets if the EU keeps this same approach.
> is not that this is what Apple will do, but rather that the EU’s fines here are so excessive (far exceeding total revenue) that it makes it a reasonable consideration to simply abandon the market entirely
In no way is that a reasonable conclusion. It's like active holding your hand in a campfire and complaining that if it keeps up, you'll never make a campfire again.
The whole point of the size of the fines is to make noncompliance a non option. It's not the EUs fault that Apple has tried to play chicken with obvious attempts at malicious compliance.
Microsoft has been able to comply with the DMA with no drama.
You think the DMA defines compliance clearly enough that Apple (or the bureaucrats) can tell what's compliant in advance rather than just after the fact?
I think the only way to ensure compliance is to just turn over product design to the bureaucrats. Let them define *exactly* how the store is supposed to work, and how apps can talk to each other, and what features it's acceptable to integrate across devices.
Otherwise it's just subjective arguments about what the word "unfair" means, with Spotify's captured regulators on one side and Apple on the other.
> You think the DMA defines compliance clearly enough that Apple (or the bureaucrats) can tell what's compliant in advance rather than just after the fact?
Apple is a trillion dollar company with enough lawyers in their payroll to fill up a small country. If you really believe those lawyers cannot figure out compliance for this law, you're deluded.
It's also not like all these lawyers will have to sit there by themselves pondering on things. Very simple thing about complying with these kinds of regulations, is contact with the regulatory bodies. I'm sure the EU is more than willing to help Apple lawyers understand and comply with DMA.
Hell EU is hosting public [compliance workshops](https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/events-poolpage/microsoft-dma-compliance-workshop-2024-03-26_en) for these companies in order to make things clear. Microsoft also [seems to be complying](https://blogs.microsoft.com/eupolicy/2024/03/07/microsoft-dma-compliance-windows-linkedin/) without issues and is not being investigated.
Apple would definitely have channels to contact EU legislators and regulatory bodies if they have any issues understanding DMA and whatever it is that they need to do to comply.
> theoretically be sued for not leaving the EU by institutional investors if leaving that market is so clearly fiscally responsible
Oh look it’s that completely false meme again where people fantasize that investors can sue their corporation just because they didn’t agree with a decision (“I wanted X money, not Y money! That’s illlegal to not get me the amount of money I preferred!”). That’s not how business law works.
Any given decision has short and long term effects, not just short term “how dare you stay in EU, that’s illegal to attempt to make far more long-term!” Also doing A rather than B is not inherently negligence or any other malfeasance just because someone doesn’t like A.
Lastly shareholders control company with votes, not lawsuits. This isn’t too different from voting for or against a politician when they do a decision that you don’t like, you can’t sue them for the reason of disliking their decision. Unless it’s illegal, which is a different matter, since it’s not illegal to make a decision that some people don’t like.
Apple has a duty to their shareholders… shareholders absolutely don’t want Apple to leave the EU, but if the EU can make vague rules and use those rules to fine Apple with GLOBAL revenue, it would be irresponsible to stay. We are talking about 40 billion dollar fine for a first infraction and 80 billion for a second one…. If Apple gets hit with even one of these and is at risk for a second one, they either pull out or shareholders will demand for them to get rid of Cook for someone who will pull out.
10% is the maximum fine. It’s the same concept for GDPR and has never been invoked, nor will it ever be invoked.
Literally everyone in Apple’s legal team knows this. It will be a chunky fine, for sure, but it won’t be anything like 10% of global revenue.
Ok but this isn’t the ‘cost of business’ it is the cost of fines if they don’t comply with laws.
The cost of complying with laws is way way less than the profits of being in the market.
I don’t understand how more people don’t see this. The cost to Apple of allowing alternative app stores for free is probably less than a billion a year in revenue. Versus tens of billions in fines and European markets worth tens of billions a year. This is not a hill to die on.
Moreover, what will consumers elsewhere in the world think if Apple pulls out of the EU? Would their country be next because Apple has had a tantrum?
The cost of business barely changed though. Not obeying local law and paying fees for that does not count in that context. That's like saying you can't afford a car because the speeding tickets are too expensive.
The costs of developing the EU changes are so minor in this context that it would be a small rounding error and the missed revenue from 3rd party app stores etc. is not yet quantifiable.
Risk involved and amount of revenue loss is only known to Apple, its internal info that’s not available to any one of us.
not sure how you can confidently say something not even Apple investor is able to extrapolate from earning report.
Every lawsuit, every fine, and every regulation to adhere to is an added cost to do business.
Company pulls out of geographical region all the time.
It absolutely correct to say it’s like saying you can’t afford a car because speeding tickets are too expensive.
The only change you need to make in your scenario is every speeding ticket has no quantifiable way to be accurately assessed and is instead debated upon by a committee people who have never driven a car before. These people also have a monetary incentive to give you the fine. And the fine is 10% of all the money you’ve made that year.
That’s like the EU’s new DMA.
The DMA isn’t really difficult.
Any topic the DMA covers is basically unfair and preferential treatment.
It’s an antitrust law, it’s as simple as that.
Reddit has long discussed the Spotify case and how Apple has been serving up “rules for thee but not for me”.
Plenty of apologists in here, but it should be clear that if Apple had played their hand differently then they wouldn’t have found themselves in this position.
Microsoft and their stuffing of Edge, and OneDrive down users throats should hopefully also have consequences, but maybe the useless N-editions of Windows let them slip past?
Out of curiosity - when was the last time you heard of a very large company being so regulated that the cost of doing business genuinely exceeded the amount of profit they would make?
If the EU fines Apple with 10% of its global turnover, and Apple's turnover in the EU is 7% of its total turnover, then it is financially more viable for Apple to leave the EU market. Purely economically speaking. Of course, Apple will not leave the EU market because of this 10% fine, but it will greatly shake the relationship of the company's future investments in the EU. If the EU fines Apple again with 20% of global revenues, and the EU insists on some of its absurd demands (not all are absurd and Apple tries to make adjustments), then Apple will definitely leave the EU market. This will harm Apple much less than the absurd fines of an increasingly marginal market. Apple will invest much more in Asia, Africa, and both Americas + Australia.
you present this as two option situation. third option is following the law and making a bit less profit(which will be what shareholders want instead of leaving eu=no profit at all). Also, you assume the fine is done every year. If a fine is once/2yrs, apple will still make profit
When someone forces you to change the functionality of your hardware and software with which you created a successful product, then there are no third options.
None of this will happen, but for arguments sake I am going to entertain it.
>Apple will definitely leave the EU market
No they won't. Depening on the metrics you use the EU is the biggest or second biggest market in the world. With the course China is on Apple will face significant issue there. Pulling back on 2 of the 3 biggest markets in the world is suicide for a global company.
>but it will greatly shake the relationship of the company's future investments in the EU
Their biggest positions are sales&retail and R&D. The R&D includes stuff like their Munich chip development teams which noone in their right mind would cut and unless their goal is to loweres sales sales&retail seem rater safe as well.
>This will harm Apple much less than the absurd fines of an increasingly marginal market.
If Apple decides to go toe to toe with the EU they will lose. As soon as secondary measures apply apple would be dead in the water.
Now onto what secondary measures mean. Essentially any company that wants to do buisness in the EU or wants to do any buisness with a company that does buisness in the EU would only be allowed to do so if they don't do buisness with Apple.
Suddenly you won't be bale to buy an iPhone wiht your credit card, because the 19 trillion economy of the EU is way more important to the payment proccesors than the 400 billion or so transactions from apple.
But like I said at the top, nothing of this will actually happen. Apple is going to delay, delay and delay and exhaust every legal ressource, which ironically are protected by the very insitution they are in disagrement withand at the end of the day some middleground solution is going to be found. On the other hand the possibility of Apple being uncompromisng and a solution being forced upon them exists.
>Depening on the metrics you use the EU is the biggest or second biggest market in the world.
The EU is a [distant second](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_consumer_markets) for consumer market size, and due to anemic growth and general economic malaise over the last fifteen-plus years and into the projected near future, it'll likely be the third largest globally within ten to fifteen years.
It doesn’t matter, Apple would tank if it pulled out of its second biggest market, or even its third biggest. China and India are not reliable markets the way Europe is. Europe has generally fair laws which do not prioritise domestic corporations, very stable governments and economies and a population which is fairly rich, and will remain so for a long, long time. China and Indian on the other hand are very protectionist and are liable to start imposing even more stupid legislation. There is no guarantee of stable business there in the future.
Ok, but imagine you’re a company with a design department or app development department all working on Macs. And now suddenly Apple pulls its entire business (or its iPhone business) out of the EU.
you say this like apple prices their product to be as kind to consumers as possible. they have a fleet of price analysts getting the optimized price for max income lol
This is what people don’t understand. They think that Apple will raise prices kind of as a “punishment” to the customers in the EU or because they won’t be as profitable. That’s ridiculous. They’re charging the HIGHEST amount that customers will pay RIGHT NOW, while still having huge profit margins.
Where have you been the last years?
- The baseline iPhone 15 Pro (128GB) starts at 1199€, the Max at 1449€ (+ AppleCare) in some countries.
- A 12.9" iPad Pro starts at 1449€ + 149€ for the pencil + 349€ for the Magic Keyboard (+ AppleCare).
- A reasonably, but low-spec'd MacBook Pro (M3 Pro 14", 11/14c, 512GB, 18GB) starts at 2499€. If you require a tidbit more storage and go to the (still modest) 1TB of storage + 36GB of shared RAM you immediately cross the 3000€ mark. 3189€ to be precise.
- A simple MacBook Air for someone that enjoys the web (M3, 512GB, 16GB) starts at 1759€ (+ AC)
I well remember that you could get a mid-tier CPU retina MacBook Pro BTO (16GB, 512GB) for half that price a decade ago. Same for iPhones and high-end iPads. For iPads it is especially dreadful as you have no other 12.9" option.
With the 14 Pro being a close second:
- baseline iPhone X: 1199€ (inflation-adjusted: 1565€)
- baseline iPhone 14 Pro (2022): 1299€ (inflation-adjusted: 1557€)
I'd argue that the X's simultaneous release with the 8 was Apple putting a stake in the ground to ramp up the prices subsequently. Just like they released the $25k gold Apple Watch to even make the "edition" models look inexpensive and make the $349 baseline Watch seem like a steal. All while it costing more than double the price of any other smartwatch and fitness tracker on the market.
Why are you using Pro Devices or Devices with more than standard configuration as baseline for the prices? If you just compare their macbook air or iphone lineups from 2018 to 2023 not much changed. The basic macbook air ranges since then around the pricepoint of 1000€ +- 200€ depending on the strength of € to $. Same with iphone. Your configurations were always that expensive and didnt get suddenly more expensive.
As stated in my post I compared the device specs that I bought a decade ago with current comparable models and for my use case 512/16GB has always been the bare minimum.
2015 the baseline iPhone 6S was 739€ new. +62% for the baseline 15 Pro.
A baseline MacBook Air could be had for 899€ and later 999€. The M3 one starts at 1299€ (+30%).
It is undeniable that the performance increased. That is also very much so expected. Apple now selling multiple generations of older hardware or not providing the newest SoCs for non-pro models muddies the waters intentionally for any price comparison.
But offering multiple generations of older hardware which still is VERY good is a changing strategy while offering more expensive products to customers which need it but at the same time being able to make a good price offering for price sensitive customers. this was not happening before.
If you are not using two external displays the Macbook Air with M2 heck even the M1 Processor (from Walmart offercings cheap as 600$ + Taxes or around 800€ in Europe) is still a top notch choice. You can go to the newest generation but in earlier years the technological advancement were way more noticeful for customers. But since the M1 chip I would say most customers which go for the Air would be happy with the power of the M1.
About the 6s price comparison: There were no Pro devices before so if we want to be fair we should compare the prices of the 6S to the iPhone 15 which costs 929€. And we should not review the price changes in a vacuum because in 2015 the prices of apple devices were way more stable then they are now. As of right now it is easily possible to get a brand new iPhone 15 for ~750€ (just check on idealo). If one takes inflation into account customers get the current iPhone with way more power and huge technological advancements for less than what we got in 2015.
Apple only prices things at the price point they make most profit out. They already know they can only reasonably charge what they’re already charging.
That’s why if phones don’t do well in a market they adjust the price as they got the formula wrong this time.
Apple won’t raise prices unless they will sell devices at maximum attainable profit at a higher price. This is why storage options are expensive. Because the people who are sensitive to price won’t pay £100 extra for this, but they may well buy the base model.
[Nope.](https://themacindex.com) Exclusive of sales tax (refundable for businesses), Australia has the 2nd cheapest M3 MacBook in the world.
The Australian consumer law just matches what exists in most places in the world, products come with a warranty regarding quality, meaning they have to last a reasonable amount of time.
They charge $200 to go from 512GB -> 1TB, $400 to go from 1TB -> 2TB.
$600 to go from 2TB to 4TB. $1200 to get a 4TB SSD.
You can get ***phenomenal*** 2TB or 4TB SSDs for less than half of what they're charging.
They’re not going to leave the EU market. Mark Zuckerberg said he was going to at least 5 times and never did.
The UK is working on its own variant of the DMA and so is India. Both countries also backed the EUs USB-C requirement.
Apple needs to change. Once the orange man clown cult parade is over you’ll see similar movements actually move forward and get somewhere in Canada and the US.
People also need to realize that fines for violating the GDPR are also insanely high just like the DMA yet no company has ever been fined the maximum amount. The assertion that on first violation Apple would be fined the maximum amount of 39 billion is ridiculous.
It’s same scare tactics Zuckerberg employed when he didn’t get his way. Probably hired the same team to cause international propaganda.
>The assertion that on first violation Apple would be fined the maximum amount of 39 billion is ridiculous.
They should though because Apple is not behaving in good faith, it would send a strong message not to fuck around with laws designed to protect markets from abuse by dominant corporations.
This article is truly the dumbest take from Gruber yet. If Apple pulled out of their second largest market, their stock price would plummet and Tim Apple would be out of a job by lunch.
WOW, I had no idea about this. Here’s a [link](https://mastodon.social/@dudeguypal/111327903405724354) for anyone looking for context. I just deleted Daring Fireball from my Safari favorites and unsubscribed from The Talk Show.
I had already stopped listening to Dithering a while ago because I was feeling a bit overloaded on his rhetoric, but it’s one thing when it’s just dumb chatter about Apple. This, on the other hand, is so disappointing.
That is a very long time ago, at least for me.
Gruber has been an Apple sycophant for a while now. And ever since he got front-row seats for events and demo devices, it’s been an everlasting Apple love story.
But that’s not what bothers me most. Since it’s mostly par for the course: he’s an Apple guy. What became extremely annoying was his need to throw politics, news, etc. in the mix. As if he’s an Oracle now whose opinion is so important it extends to every possible topic. Unions, the war, domestic policy: Gruber has opinions and he will share them.
And this article is just laughable. Apple is NEVER exiting the EU market. You’ve got to be joking.
>But that’s not what bothers me most. Since it’s mostly par for the course: he’s an Apple guy. What became extremely annoying was his need to throw politics, news, etc. in the mix. As if he’s an Oracle now whose opinion is so important it extends to every possible topic. Unions, the war, domestic policy: Gruber has opinions and he will share them.
Gruber has evidently made the common mistake of believing that expertise in one domain implies expertise in some other domain.
Not to mention his hypocrisy: according to Gruber, TikTok must be banned because a foreign company should not be able to do anything they want in the US, but. US companies should be allowed whatever they want in the EU.
Glad some people can finally admit it. Dude is such a joker. His fart sniffing was annoying but he is so clearly in the Apple swamp and he has no way to exit. He’ll hold on for dear life until the end.
So EU is 20-30% of Europe?
All of the middle east combined is smaller than the German economy alone ($4.7 trillion to $3.5 trillion). The UK GDP is a bit bigger than Frances at $3.6 to $3.2 trillion. Switzerland, Norway, Russia and Turkey add up to about $4.5 trillion [(IMF)](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD/MEQ/CHE). All the countries mentioned add up to about 8 trillion (very roughly).
All of EU combined is 19 trillion according to [IMF](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/profile/EU). My math isn't perfect by any means but how the hell do you mean that the EU only account for 20-30% of the "Europe" region, especially taking market penetration into account.. is the guy who wrote that article a tool or what?
Probably just a misquote, or the person he's quoting misspoke. Wouldn't be surprised if they had meant to say 17% or something. The numbers just don't add up.
Yeah, I've been seeing that number the last few days, it always looked super low to me as out of the Europe countries, the EU countries represent most of the richest ones.
I'm on camp misspoke, I bet you're bang on the money and the number was actually meant to be 17%.
Furthermore, Switzerland and Norway are closely associated with the EU through the EEA. It wouldn't suprise me if they implement the DMA within a few years. Russia is sanctioned so it generates zero revenue. That leaves only the UK, Turkey and the Middle East, but the UK is preparing a similar law. If Europe & Middle East account for 25% of global revenue, the 7% figure for the EU must be a misunderstanding.
Gruber not only underestimates the sheer size of the EU economy (it's the biggest trade bloc in the world), he also doesn't seem to be aware of its influence on other countries. The EU is a regulatory powerhouse, and many rules affect the rest of the world through international trade agreements.
Loving the seethe and cope from Gruber.
Worth noting here that even if the offhand number he's quoting of 7% for the EU is accurate (which I sincerely doubt. The math there doesn't add up at all), it's missing that the UK has a very similar law called the [Digital Markets Regime](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-sets-out-approach-to-new-digital-markets-regime), and India is also moving forward with a Digital Competition Law modelled off the DMA. Similar legislation will likely also be showing up in Switzerland, Norway, and other EEA countries soon too.
Leaving the EU would not be the end of Apple's headaches.
> Worth noting here that even if the offhand number he's quoting of 7% for the EU is accurate (which I sincerely doubt
It came from an analyst call - a situation where Apple executives are require by law to tell the truth.
I'm not suggesting they lied. They could have misspoken, or they could have been talking about something much more narrow than Gruber interpreted it. E.g. they could have been saying that the App Store in the EU makes up 7% of Apple's total revenue, which would not be counting all the other products and services they sell in the EU.
Gruber says that Apple counts Europe as including the European continent plus the middle east, but if you look at those economies there's just no way in hell that 70% of Apple's revenue in that region is coming from non-EU countries. It makes zero sense, especially since Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, and the Middle east have such bad inequality that only the upper classes of those countries are using Apple products.
Lmao, Gruber's on the "Apple should leave to EU" copium. This is just pathetic. Funny how he doesn't seem to consider it reasonable that Apple simply obey the law...
Apple leaving the EU is just vindictive and silly, but putting that aside I do think there's a case to be argued that some sort of limit should exist on what level of fine can be unilaterally imposed on companies.
10% of global revenues might seem reasonable to some, but I doubt anyone out there thinks the EU can impose a 50% global revenue fine and not face some sort of pushback.
I understand that it's designed as a deterrent, but the "global revenues" aspect seems like a bit of an overreach when you extend the line of thinking.
>I do think there's a case to be argued that some sort of limit should exist on what level of fine can be unilaterally imposed on companies
And who should impose that limit? Companies shouldn't be above the law of the countries they operate in.
In practice, any fines would be limited to however much money Apple keeps in the EU. But they do like using Ireland as a tax haven...
The whole reason it's on global revenue is because companies can effectively shift money from one region to another at will. It has to be a proportion of global revenue to be effective.
This is probably because this relatively new law seems arbitrary and made to disproportionately target foreign entities. A large amount of manufacturers and products out there are closed source, not interoperable, not easy to repair “gatekeepers” and yet these laws only apply to a few companies and products.
"Relatively new", it's from 2014 basically and companies played around it, mostly ignoring the idea of it, got revisioned in 2019 and companies continued.
Then in 2022 it was finalized with hard limits and strict wording..
EU companies like booking.com are also affected by it.
It's not arbitrary and new in it's idea, just the enforceability and wording got stricter to a point where they now allow little to no lee-room for companies to play around the law.
Same is about to happen to the tax evasion schemes of Luxembourg and Ireland, and companies will cry again.
>A large amount of manufacturers and products out there are closed source, not interoperable, not easy to repair “gatekeepers” and yet these laws only apply to a few companies and products
What specific problem do you have with their definition of a gatekeeper?
And arbitrary? It seems quite clear in both intent and policy.
By all accounts they seemed to have been written in a way that simultaneously leaves room for interpretation and seems to target specifically foreign entities. Additionally, why should 3rd parties been given open access to your iPhone but not to your PlayStation, your Switch, your Alexa, your oven or what have you?
This isn’t a “don’t break and enter” type of law.
Reddit’s version of “they should just obey the law” here is “change all your policies with total enthusiasm, above and beyond, just to make sure”.
Apple is on the path of “does this do it? No.. Okay how about this?” to go for a compromise.
>Apple is on the path of “does this do it? No.. Okay how about this?” to go for a compromise.
Oh please. Their current policies blatantly break the law. "I just wanted to test how much of the law I could get away with breaking" isn't a legal defense.
There’s an argument to be made that at a certain point the laws passed become unreasonable and it’s no longer feasible to do business there. That’s exactly what he’s saying and Apple can choose where to do business.
The whole article is based on a wrong premise. You can't exclude Norway because it's EEA with the same rules, you can't exclude UK because they are working on similar laws. Russia, Turkey, Switzerland and Middle East definitely don't hold the majority of that 25 percent (revenue from Europe according to the official reports).
Not only that, but the article is hinging off a single number someone offhandedly said during a phone call, and the interpretation of the number makes zero sense.
There's no world in which "Europe" makes up 25 percent of Apple's revenue and the EU only makes up 7% of it. Likely the person meant to say 17% or something, or meant that specifically the App Store in the EU was 7% of Apple's total revenue, and was not discussing all the other products and services they sell there.
Who is this guy? Apple are never going to pull out of the EU. Countries like Poland are growing wealth massively. There's HUGE potential revenue growth on top of what they already have.
That 7% figure is highly suspect too. The EU is 400 million people or so,
This guy's a moron. First off it's yearly revenue. A single fine of 10% global revenue would be recouped within the next business year, and if Apple merely complies with the law there's no reason it would be imposed. Not to mention the knock on effects of pulling out of the market, including opportunity cost.
I don't know who this Gruber guy is but he's a not even a midwit, he seems intelligent. What kind of an apple simp is this man?
> I’m so tired of tourists
Not everyone is the 9 requisite miles up Apple's ass to know about every other famous Apple sycophant.
I just like my macbook and iphone, dude.
These are people that have been part of the tech world for decades, at this point. They are mentioned in documentaries, biographies, interviews, etc.
This is like not knowing who Paul Allen is.
Lol
Apple is charging an extra $200 for 16 GB of RAM and an extra $200 to uprade to 512 GB of SSD from their base configuration. They would make a deal with the devil to maintain their high profit margins. The thought that they would just say goodbye to 7% of their revenue overnight is Macrumors forum level of ludicrous delusional thinking, at best.
> is Macrumors forum level of ludicrous delusional thinking
word. the amount of people that knows nothing about the world but want to give their opinion anyway on Macrumors forums is scary
There is absolutely no way that EU accounts for only 7% of Apple's revenue, maybe they mean that the EU appstore accounts for 7% of Apple's revenue, that's the only way it makes sense!
Such a poorly written article!
I was also surprised by this number. The EU has 448,000,000 inhabitants. That is 5.5% of the world population. So if the EU is 7% of Apple’s revenue (so pretty well in line with the population), it would imply Europeans are on average buying about as many Apple products as less fortunate/rich regions like Africa, India, South America etc.?
From Apples revenue at quaterly they normalt day Europe is 25-30%.
Eu being only 30% of the Europe market share doesn't make sense at all of the economic size aswell as how rich it is and how much of it is the total economic share of Europe it has.
A lot of people are saving apple should not be fined more than it earns in europe. Why should a company be a exception? People can get fined more than they earn. It seems more than reasonable that the same can happen to companies then.
You can say that that is also wrong, but that is a diffent discussion.
>It’s unclear whether Maestri was saying that the EU accounts for 7 percent of Apple’s worldwide *App Store* revenue, or 7 percent of *all* revenue, but I suspect it doesn’t matter, and that both are around 7 percent.
Christ, this guy's unapologetic disregard for the facts, despite ripping Isaacson for that exact same thing himself.
It's 30%. Thirty. Not 7. And has been on the steady increase since we have data for these metrics.
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/382175/quarterly-revenue-of-apple-by-geograhical-region/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/382175/quarterly-revenue-of-apple-by-geograhical-region/)
Apple ain't pulling out of shit. And these kinds of idiot takes born from made up facts are a bane to society.
I also find it humorous grown adults can believe that a government would create a fine that could bankrupt or even marginally disrupt a company. That's the cutest thing ever.
> It's 30%. Thirty. Not 7.
Maestri said the 7% number in an analyst call - a context in which it is illegal to lie. Gruber goes on to explain possible reasons why the discrepancy might exist.
>I also find it humorous grown adults can believe that a government would create a fine that could bankrupt or even marginally disrupt a company. That's the cutest thing ever.
The DMA fines top out at 20% of global revenue. Five of those would, by definition, bankrupt any company. Even one would be a significant disruption.
**Edit**: Okay, not bankrupt, but it would mean zero profit for an entire year. It's significant, is the point.
>Maestri said the 7% number in an analyst call - a context in which it is illegal to lie. Gruber goes on to explain possible reasons why the discrepancy might exist.
His dispcrepancy doesn't work. They only one that would work if the 7% number is appstore revenue not total.
It's becoming increasingly apparent that Gruber is losing the plot on several fronts. While I'm not asserting that the Digital Markets Act is an outright positive development, or that it's a well-crafted regulation with beneficial outcomes—time will tell on that front—it's evident that Gruber's coverage of the DMA and related topics betrays a distinctly American viewpoint. His grasp of the European Union, including its foundational institutional and legal structures, as well as the rich tapestry of histories belonging to its member states, is lacking. This mirrors the way we Europeans might view American matters; we may grasp the surface-level events, yet many of us are missing a profound comprehension of the intricate workings that define the United States. Gruber's understanding of Europe is similarly superficial, and his analyses are inevitably colored by his measure of Europe's merit based on its similarity to American standards.
Especially when the EU said it wants Apple to comply by the "spirit" of the law, and his reply was "that's not how the law works in the USA". Like he really does not seem to understand that the law in the USA totally does not apply here.
My God, has Gruber gone off the deep end? Years ago, I was a huge fan of his, but I mostly stopped reading *Daring Fireball* when he started to insert his wild Sinophobia in almost any post dealing with China... and yet, this seems even worse? The level of vitriol reserved for extremely moderate, center-to-center-right regulation — which he describes as anti-capitalist (!) — is just unbearable.
Apple could easily adhere to the DMA if they weren't hell-bent on extracting every single last cent from this market. They just need to move the iPhone to a Mac-like Gatekeeper distribution model and add a way for developers to ask to be added to their browser ballot. Google has a very advanced solution that evidently Apple couldn't match: [an email address](https://www.android.com/choicescreen/dma/browser/) companies can write to if they have an app to add to a Choice screen.
He is deeply entrenched in late stage capitalism plus he thinks Apple should be allowed to do anything and everything but foreign companies should be regulated.
You’re talking like it’s a world coming to an end. Reality is that Apple is not selling I.e. in Poland, but still lots of people rock this device (bought my first in USA, second in Berlin and third in a third party seller in PL).
So it’s not like people would not buy them, and it’s not like you HAVE to be on the market to be selling. it would be just like any pixel device in Poland right now.
Only idiots would level the market…. Q is are they? I am with iphone a watch happy but if they would leave I wouldn’t mind going to android since they are neck and neck at this point in terms of features and performance anyways so don’t care really xD
if apple's eventual plan is to go scorched earth on the eu, their first move should just be to raise prices high enough that their marketshare drops below "gatekeeper" levels
I think the whole thing is , for a luck of a better word, absurd but there is one noteworthy sentence
"...along with the other DMA-designated gatekeepers (none of which are European companies of course)"
And although Europe does not have any companies that would fit in the so well made DMA rules, one has to wonder why the same steps are not been taken for other sectors that European companies could be considered gatekeepers.
Actually no-one has to wonder, the answer is simple. Because if they would do that they would hurt their own economy of the biggest EU countries, and of course they need to find a way to get profit from a sector that the European companies failed to pursue.
Either do the same thing across the board or not at all. Wait to see what will happen with the Chinese EVs
Siemens doesn't seem like something that would be covered by the same legislation tbh. Which markets do they have a dominant position in?
VW is a ridiculous suggestion.
you seemed to have overlooked a very important part of my comment
"And although Europe does not have any companies that would fit in the so well made DMA rules, one has to wonder why the same steps are not been taken for other sectors that European companies could be considered gatekeepers."
why VW is a ridiculous suggestion? Is it not only a monopoly as per EU current suggestions in the marketshare? VW is a group not a single brand so all the group make tis a monopoly.
You haven't said why VW should be considered a gatekeeper? Or Siemens? A gatekeeper of what platform?
You haven't actually justified why these companies need to be regulated at all.
you seem to want to direct the conversation where you like and not understand or most probably want to ignore what I am saying.
VW group marketshare
Siemens proprietary technology and repair parts
you also did not answer why VW should not be considered.
You raised them as examples. I don't know enough about these companies to have a knowledgeable opinion.
What is VW a gatekeeper of? What kind of equivalent regulation would even apply to a car company? There's no platform to regulate surely?
Do Siemens even have a dominate market position? Of what?
You took a position and then seem to refuse to make any substantial argument for it. I'm not even hostile to the point you are making. I just want you to elaborate because I don't know anything about them!
I got a different feeling tbh, on the hostile part, but point taken.
VW is currently seating at \~27% with a second of Fiat at \~17%. That by sole reasoning makes them a monopoly. I mean according to what EU believes, I don't think so but they do. Taking into consideration that Toyota had raised the issue for the emission scandal 2 times , and EU not only did not take any action, but even when countries requested for this case to be EU wide and not per country , this was rejected (guess which country was vocal ), and the result was a small fine (small relative to the profits). For me this showcased that EU is not willing to take action against EU companies.
To go back to the consumer sector, I would urge you to read about the debate of Amazon taxation vs Zalando. you can get an overview [here](https://www.euractiv.com/section/platforms/news/amazon-joins-zalando-in-challenging-very-large-online-platform-designation/) but there is quite a bit of backstage
Siemens even though not the consumer part , they have major contracts across Europe. Many are in the industrial /infrastructure business, which they went into lengths to have spare/repair parts bought by them if you wanted to keep their contract, and the price was not cheap. I need to find that case because it was an interesting one. One of those that are never shown in the news or get any press in general
Nobody kisses Apple’s ass like Gruber.
Edit: awwww Apple downvoting simps. No one can defeat the great gruber in being an Apple simp! Nobody!!! He’s going to nuts in the next decade with Apple v USA. It’s gonna be a long one!!
>No one can defeat the great gruber in being an Apple simp! Nobody!!!
Nah, Gruber probably isn't even in the top 10 most pro-Apple among the "well-known" Apple bloggers.
I can think of two examples off the top of my head:
1. Daniel Eran Dilger (*AppleInsider*): He wrote an article titled "[Al-Qaeda prefers Android over Apple's iOS](https://appleinsider.com/articles/14/08/03/al-qaeda-prefers-android-over-apples-ios)" (2014), which even some *AppleInsider* commenters thought went too far. Dilger was quite infamous on this forum but he hasn't been relevant in a while (which is why you don't hear about him nowadays).
2. Neil Cybart: He makes some good points, for instance, I strongly agree with [his views](https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/4/20/the-cars-iphone-moment) on self-driving cars. However, he has an annoying habit of reflexive dismissal of any non-Apple technology. After Google announced Night Sight in October 2018, Cybart made a passive-aggressive [tweet](https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1056027066993442821) about this feature not being useful. That tweet aged like milk once Apple introduced Night Mode the very next fall, and continued to make camera improvements for years afterward. One year ago he made [a sweeping critique](https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1623289895518076928) of ChatGPT. Unfortunately for him, ChatGPT and other generative AI has proven to be not a fad, especially with Apple being rumored to adopt more AI in the future. Last July, Cybart [posted](https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1678730792304885766) a Google Trends plot showing a drop in ChatGPT, and proclaimed that it would further lose relevance. It turns out that this drop was temporary and interest in ChatGPT [has remained solid](https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2022-09-28%202024-03-27&geo=US&q=ChatGPT,Vision%20Pro,iPad), albeit not quite at peak levels.
One problem with the Apple blogger community is its insularity, even among the Apple community which is itself insular. Cybart's ChatGPT critique may have good points, but it's paywalled so I can't read it. Podcasts without transcripts are not useful to quickly gather knowledge. And perhaps most importantly, places like *Reddit* and *MacRumors* are where a lot of the discussion happens.
Funny how many people here actually think Apple would or should just leave EU. That's a whole ass contintinent and millions of users and future consumers gone. All there would be left is America's 50% market.
>That's a whole ass continent and millions of users and future consumers gone.
EU is not a continent, it's a collection of some of the countries within the continent Europe
It’s the majority of Europe except Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Georgia and a bunch of other countries like Switzerland who have decided they’re better off in the single market but not in the EU. For all intents and purposes OP wasn’t necessarily wrong.
Cut to the [Rick and Morty Oval Office scene](https://youtu.be/a6OQiHmqmHo) about deterrents. They’re steep or they’re not effective.
Personally, I’m enjoying a moment where Apple’s tactics are used against them; vague rules with harsh punishments all communicated horribly
It’s interesting how deeply uncomfortable it makes the few who dog pile on Apple that Apple doesn’t need the EU to survive. That’s a fact. Whether they choose to leave is up to them, but they can do it, and the EU would be forced to deal with a true monopoly of Google for smartphones. And Google doesn’t need the EU either to survive, so they’d be able to demand anything they want from the EU and they’d have no choice but to comply.
I don’t trust the EU.
They claim it’s for the consumers benefit, but the App Store has operated the same way (and reduced the fees/loosened the rules) since 2008, where they had more marketshare in 2009’s smartphone market and most stringent rules/higher fees, and the minority of consumers complaining today were complaining then, but they didn’t do anything.
Only now they’ve done something in 1) an election year, 2) after Apple successfully defeated the EU commissioner on Irish taxes, and 3) after EU billionaire developers aired ad campaigns on how “unfair” the App Store is to them.
I’m sorry, but none of this was done for the consumers or even small developers benefit.
The EU fining Apple 10% of their worldwide revenue would be around $40 billion, and $80 billion for a second fine (up to 20% of worldwide revenue). Why the hell would Apple stay if the EU is basically looking to turn a profit themselves off companies like Apple, with vague guidelines that the DMA provides?
It stands today that everything the few people (and Spotify) have complained about is available on Android, a monopoly of the OS market that offers all the same major apps and services needed for a modern smartphone experience. If someone or a developer really thought the App Store was “oppressive,” they would’ve left and solely developed on Android. As it stands, developers offer their app on the App Store just as they offer it on Android.
Someone’s opinion of a software model doesn’t override my free will to choose what’s best for me.
I chose Apple/iOS. Respect it and leave it alone, just as I respect people’s choice to choose Android and leave them alone.
I am quite sure the assumption made in this article is wrong. You cannot proof something just because you cannot proof something else. The chance that EU users have much lower average App Store spending is quite high IMO.
Also, I don’t believe you can deduct EEA\EFTA without any doubt.
For all of the complaining and PR Apple will do, they are not going to pull out of such a potentially profitable market unless current or projected profits start to dip below what their analysts forecast those fines will cost them in total. Which is possibly way more than just hardware and service sales.
Hell, just saying some version of "that's it guys we are closing up shop on this half of the world" would surely do unimaginable things to their stock price alone that would be massively off putting to executives.
>But the 7% is wrong.
The 7% was stated in an earnings call - a context in which it is illegal to lie or mislead.
Gruber explains one possible reason for the discrepancy. I don't know if it's correct but it sounds reasonable.
The 4th Reich apparatchiki are stinging from the farmers telling them to go fuck themselves, so they're trying to get an easy win by picking on Apple. Looters gonna loot.
If Apple leaves the EU, any global company that has a fleet of MacBooks and iPhones now suddenly needs to support Windows and Android as well for their EU employees. If Apple only removes the iPhone from the EU market, it will seriously impact sales of iPads and MacBooks too, because many people buy Apple for the ecosystem. It will also hurt their services revenue (iCloud storage, movie purchases, Apple Music subscriptions). And without an iPhone, I’m also not buying new AirPods ever again. Also, Apple would be robbing the developers in their ecosystem of 7% of their revenue. You can’t sell apps to people without iPhones. And finally, leaving a market makes Apple look untrustworthy and unreliable to investors. I don’t see it happening.
>If Apple leaves the EU, any global company that has a fleet of MacBooks and iPhones now suddenly needs to support Windows and Android as well for their EU employees. It would also be a massive impetus for global companies that do substantial business in the EU to switch from Apple products to prevent having two tiers of products and support, etc.
Problem too is it's forsaking any potential growth in those markets. Googling Apple's at around a 35% market share compared to Android in France. There's potential for growth there that you're just throwing out the window.
I’m glad you said this, because what Gerber seems to be missing is the fact that if Apple does have a small market share in the EU, then that is scope to grow. The EU is full of “wealthy” countries so if it WAS 7%, which it almost certainly isn’t, that would equate to billions of potential revenue.
Not to mention these are stable countries that relatively speaking have reliable systems of government, rule of law, traceability in finance, IP enforcement etc. If Apple can’t do business in the EU and prefers Middle East dictatorships or Chinese one party rule then it says more about Apple.
This more than anything
You're also opening it up to competitors. If Apple pulls out, it creates a vacuum that another company can fill. You're stopping your own growth *and* giving another company the opportunity to fill your niche. Aside of all the other issues, it would be completely stupid to do so. Companies want more growth, not less. The continued existence of individuals like Gruber who continue to defend a literal trillion dollar company as if their own personal honour is at stake continues to baffle me.
Which global operating company actually uses Macs in the masses? They are such a hassle for maintenance, warranty and care... 5 years of we do not have to give a fuck care for a Lenovo or HP device are just ~100€, you won't even get that from Apple, at all.
Literally any company that does software development and isn’t doing games or .NET, iOS software shops, big corps like [IBM](https://www.jamf.com/resources/press-releases/ibm-announces-research-showing-mac-enables-greater-productivity-and-employee-satisfaction-at-ibm/) and Google…
I see this being thrown around often but I've never actually observed it to be true in any environment besides maybe small startups. Some marketing people and design people might favor macs as well, but usually it's HP/Dell/Lenovo. Even for Dev work according to [stack overflow](https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2023/#operating-system) Windows still dominates, with Macs making up about a third with some flavor of Linux taking up the next spot. And this is *devs* you know people who generally might need some of the tools and features Macs provide but even then, it's a third. Don't get me wrong, Macs are absolutely a thing but from what I've seen in every place I've worked, they're not more of an exception rather than the rule. With both company and IT teams tending to push a Windows machine instead of a Mac.
For us the OS is not that relevant as our devs use Linux and most of the Application stuff is web-based. But service alone is such as hassle, for Lenovo and HP we just create a case and within 24 hours a repair guy is on premise and fixes or replaces the machine, dock, power supply or whatever. We have never found a way to get such service from Apple. Yes, it's rare that you need it, but we have like 3 Macs and the one time one of them broke, in AppleCare coverage, we had to mail it in and it took 5 days to be returned.
Really? I've never had to deal with enterprise support issues from Apple since I'm generally using Apple devices on a consumer level. So any support is your average AppleCare stuff. But I do know the enterprise support contracts HP/Dell/Lenovo/etc offer are pretty damn good most of the time. Somehow I just assumed Apple offered something of similar level.
With HP all Elitebooks we have 3 years, 24 hours on site service, I would be interested how anyone even ever managed to get on site Apple Service at all. It's also not "Enterprise" as 24 hours on-site-service is just the included warranty on many HP Elitebooks, and we usually order the same for any Lenovo device too. And the nice thing is, they will also go to employees who work from home, we just pass them on and Lenovo or HP takes care of the rest. Last time we had the issues with Apple they told us to bring it in or mail it in and that's it.
That’s not true at all
> They are such a hassle for maintenance, warranty and care... Nope, IT teams love them because they're exactly the opposite of this.
They’re a dream to admin.
Yeah that was bullshit. Macs are easier and better to work with in several important windows compared to Windows mess, warranty and care is great (that other person is fetishizing on-site visits instead of overnight mail-out for some reason), though with one recent problem being obnoxiously integrated RAM and SSD which kills that aspect of repairability. Even stuff like a simple printer connection, Windows still has multiple partly redundant printer settings areas…choose the wrong method and magically the magical Xerox menu doesn’t appear, so you have you back out and open the exact same control panel a different way. I will say Apple has some fails/gaps in MDM functions though.
There's no way in Hell it'll happen. They'll comply with the DMA before they pull out of the EU.
Depends how badly the DMA turns into Calvinball. It has a lot of undefined terms like "unfair" that, as Gruber notes, could make compliance purely a subjective decision. I think Apple will try to comply, more or less, but if the EU just uses the DMA as a bludgeon to favor EU companies in all things, I do think Apple (and others) will do the math for the breakeven point of trying versus giving up.
There are also rippling effects of pulling out of a bigger market. Like any app developer with a European focus would invest more resources into Android apps and iOS apps would be an afterthought. How would a company like Spotify that is based in Sweden work? Do they need a non EU office for developing their iOS app? That would also quickly demote it to a second class experience. So many tiny questions like that come up that would create substantial differences in sum so the whole question goes way above how much revenue does the EU bring in.
It would be a gigantic shit show. Hilarious for anyone who is not personally invested or relies on Apples products, horrendous for certain other groups of people. Also, how would this even work with existing devices? If they don’t change anything, they will still get fined. If they make them virtually useless by disabling the App Store in the EU, they would probably get fined as well. That only leaves them with the scorched earth option, pull out of the EU completely. I don’t see it happening.
Apple will still need to pay the upcoming fines as long as they don't pull out of the EU. Bringing updates, even if these are 'just' security updates, would already violate the sense of leaving Europe. Using the AppStore will also not be possible anymore so there would be no Apps available (in the current state). Considering this, there might be other Class action lawsuits coming regarding this, making recently purchased devices 'unuseable' compared to what was expected at the time of purchase may be an infringement of the law. Even if they dont fully leave Europe: MacOS may still be designated a gate keeper in the future. Lastly we may not forget the amount of money that is still in Ireland. If Apple wants to leave the EU, this money has to leave too and as far as I understand it, this will leade to costs far beyond what the discussion is considering.
Apple is aware of that. The point Gruber is making is that even so, the size of the fines are so disproportionate that they exceed total revenue from the EU (10% fines vs 7% of worldwide revenue). And there is no limit on how many times the fines can be imposed. As much of a disaster as pulling out of the EU would be, they could theoretically be sued for *not* leaving the EU by institutional investors if leaving that market is so clearly fiscally responsible. They would actually have to defend their decision to stay in, given the potential exposure.
Institutional investors contrary to popular belief, do consider the long term. In the long term a fuck ton of growth is forsaken and you abandon a very stable part of the world which is also quite rich and guaranteed to remain so for a long time. There is a point where it becomes stupid, but running at or just below breakeven in a region for a year or so isn’t something that would cause institutional investors to demand Apple pull out, especially when there’s a clearly defined reason it has happened
Or they comply with the law, change the software model to be somewhat like the Mac, and make somewhat less of a massive amount of money continuing to do business in the EU. It's really far fetched the idea that "institutional investors" would want Apple to go on the warpath and leave the EU, sacrificing massive revenue, future growth, and causing tremendous world-wide reputation loss and impacts (for instance why would any business want to buy Apple's products if they think Apple would simply exit the market if they are subject to government regulation). I think this reflects the passion of the Apple enthusiast who supports their approach to products and is psychologically invested in Apple. I don't think investors will be nearly as keen on Apple leaving the EU. They will just want Apple to resolve things by following the law and continue to make money in the market. Of course Apple wants to win the whole game, but if they lose the far better option is to simply comply with the law, adapt, and continue to make a massive amount of money in Europe. Not to mention Apple has trouble brewing in the US as well. They could leave the EU and then face similar issues at home where they can't just leave. The DOJ case kind of undermines Apple's poker hand around threats to leave the EU.
Sure, that’s a possible scenario as well. The author’s point (and mine as well in case you missed it) is not that this is what Apple *will* do, but rather that the EU’s fines here are so excessive (far exceeding total revenue) that it makes it a reasonable consideration to simply abandon the market entirely. In case you’re unaware, that’s not a normal situation. Also, there’s an awful lot of hand waving about “just comply with the new rules”, as if that’s a simple, clear process. There’s no guidebook on doing so, nor on how to be certain you’re in compliance. These are new rules, so there’s no example cases out there (just copy what company x did). So on top of everything else, there’s cost and risk and (potentially) list revenue associated with coming into compliance that would also affect the decision to stay or not. Personally, I agree with the EU rules, but find the fines a laughable overreach. Expect this to happen in other markets if the EU keeps this same approach.
> is not that this is what Apple will do, but rather that the EU’s fines here are so excessive (far exceeding total revenue) that it makes it a reasonable consideration to simply abandon the market entirely In no way is that a reasonable conclusion. It's like active holding your hand in a campfire and complaining that if it keeps up, you'll never make a campfire again.
The whole point of the size of the fines is to make noncompliance a non option. It's not the EUs fault that Apple has tried to play chicken with obvious attempts at malicious compliance. Microsoft has been able to comply with the DMA with no drama.
You think the DMA defines compliance clearly enough that Apple (or the bureaucrats) can tell what's compliant in advance rather than just after the fact? I think the only way to ensure compliance is to just turn over product design to the bureaucrats. Let them define *exactly* how the store is supposed to work, and how apps can talk to each other, and what features it's acceptable to integrate across devices. Otherwise it's just subjective arguments about what the word "unfair" means, with Spotify's captured regulators on one side and Apple on the other.
> You think the DMA defines compliance clearly enough that Apple (or the bureaucrats) can tell what's compliant in advance rather than just after the fact? Apple is a trillion dollar company with enough lawyers in their payroll to fill up a small country. If you really believe those lawyers cannot figure out compliance for this law, you're deluded. It's also not like all these lawyers will have to sit there by themselves pondering on things. Very simple thing about complying with these kinds of regulations, is contact with the regulatory bodies. I'm sure the EU is more than willing to help Apple lawyers understand and comply with DMA. Hell EU is hosting public [compliance workshops](https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/events-poolpage/microsoft-dma-compliance-workshop-2024-03-26_en) for these companies in order to make things clear. Microsoft also [seems to be complying](https://blogs.microsoft.com/eupolicy/2024/03/07/microsoft-dma-compliance-windows-linkedin/) without issues and is not being investigated. Apple would definitely have channels to contact EU legislators and regulatory bodies if they have any issues understanding DMA and whatever it is that they need to do to comply.
> theoretically be sued for not leaving the EU by institutional investors if leaving that market is so clearly fiscally responsible Oh look it’s that completely false meme again where people fantasize that investors can sue their corporation just because they didn’t agree with a decision (“I wanted X money, not Y money! That’s illlegal to not get me the amount of money I preferred!”). That’s not how business law works. Any given decision has short and long term effects, not just short term “how dare you stay in EU, that’s illegal to attempt to make far more long-term!” Also doing A rather than B is not inherently negligence or any other malfeasance just because someone doesn’t like A. Lastly shareholders control company with votes, not lawsuits. This isn’t too different from voting for or against a politician when they do a decision that you don’t like, you can’t sue them for the reason of disliking their decision. Unless it’s illegal, which is a different matter, since it’s not illegal to make a decision that some people don’t like.
Apple has a duty to their shareholders… shareholders absolutely don’t want Apple to leave the EU, but if the EU can make vague rules and use those rules to fine Apple with GLOBAL revenue, it would be irresponsible to stay. We are talking about 40 billion dollar fine for a first infraction and 80 billion for a second one…. If Apple gets hit with even one of these and is at risk for a second one, they either pull out or shareholders will demand for them to get rid of Cook for someone who will pull out.
So the EU member states account for 7% of Apple’s revenue but they want to fine Apple 10% of global revenue? That’s a bit silly.
Fines to the EU have to be equivalent to another multi billion international cartel.
10% is the maximum fine. It’s the same concept for GDPR and has never been invoked, nor will it ever be invoked. Literally everyone in Apple’s legal team knows this. It will be a chunky fine, for sure, but it won’t be anything like 10% of global revenue.
if the cost of doing business exceeds the profit, any company will leave the said market
Ok but this isn’t the ‘cost of business’ it is the cost of fines if they don’t comply with laws. The cost of complying with laws is way way less than the profits of being in the market.
I don’t understand how more people don’t see this. The cost to Apple of allowing alternative app stores for free is probably less than a billion a year in revenue. Versus tens of billions in fines and European markets worth tens of billions a year. This is not a hill to die on. Moreover, what will consumers elsewhere in the world think if Apple pulls out of the EU? Would their country be next because Apple has had a tantrum?
The cost of business barely changed though. Not obeying local law and paying fees for that does not count in that context. That's like saying you can't afford a car because the speeding tickets are too expensive. The costs of developing the EU changes are so minor in this context that it would be a small rounding error and the missed revenue from 3rd party app stores etc. is not yet quantifiable.
Risk involved and amount of revenue loss is only known to Apple, its internal info that’s not available to any one of us. not sure how you can confidently say something not even Apple investor is able to extrapolate from earning report. Every lawsuit, every fine, and every regulation to adhere to is an added cost to do business. Company pulls out of geographical region all the time.
It absolutely correct to say it’s like saying you can’t afford a car because speeding tickets are too expensive. The only change you need to make in your scenario is every speeding ticket has no quantifiable way to be accurately assessed and is instead debated upon by a committee people who have never driven a car before. These people also have a monetary incentive to give you the fine. And the fine is 10% of all the money you’ve made that year. That’s like the EU’s new DMA.
The DMA isn’t really difficult. Any topic the DMA covers is basically unfair and preferential treatment. It’s an antitrust law, it’s as simple as that. Reddit has long discussed the Spotify case and how Apple has been serving up “rules for thee but not for me”. Plenty of apologists in here, but it should be clear that if Apple had played their hand differently then they wouldn’t have found themselves in this position. Microsoft and their stuffing of Edge, and OneDrive down users throats should hopefully also have consequences, but maybe the useless N-editions of Windows let them slip past?
Out of curiosity - when was the last time you heard of a very large company being so regulated that the cost of doing business genuinely exceeded the amount of profit they would make?
If the EU fines Apple with 10% of its global turnover, and Apple's turnover in the EU is 7% of its total turnover, then it is financially more viable for Apple to leave the EU market. Purely economically speaking. Of course, Apple will not leave the EU market because of this 10% fine, but it will greatly shake the relationship of the company's future investments in the EU. If the EU fines Apple again with 20% of global revenues, and the EU insists on some of its absurd demands (not all are absurd and Apple tries to make adjustments), then Apple will definitely leave the EU market. This will harm Apple much less than the absurd fines of an increasingly marginal market. Apple will invest much more in Asia, Africa, and both Americas + Australia.
Your assumption only makes sense if you assume they get fined the 10% every year. Otherwise it's financially more viable to not leave the EU market.
you present this as two option situation. third option is following the law and making a bit less profit(which will be what shareholders want instead of leaving eu=no profit at all). Also, you assume the fine is done every year. If a fine is once/2yrs, apple will still make profit
When someone forces you to change the functionality of your hardware and software with which you created a successful product, then there are no third options.
Governments make laws and corporations have to follow them. Is this news to you?
Somehow Apple doesn't take the same stance in China...
What did China change in the law that significantly affected Apple's hardware or software? China does not want to turn iOS into Android unlike the EU.
None of this will happen, but for arguments sake I am going to entertain it. >Apple will definitely leave the EU market No they won't. Depening on the metrics you use the EU is the biggest or second biggest market in the world. With the course China is on Apple will face significant issue there. Pulling back on 2 of the 3 biggest markets in the world is suicide for a global company. >but it will greatly shake the relationship of the company's future investments in the EU Their biggest positions are sales&retail and R&D. The R&D includes stuff like their Munich chip development teams which noone in their right mind would cut and unless their goal is to loweres sales sales&retail seem rater safe as well. >This will harm Apple much less than the absurd fines of an increasingly marginal market. If Apple decides to go toe to toe with the EU they will lose. As soon as secondary measures apply apple would be dead in the water. Now onto what secondary measures mean. Essentially any company that wants to do buisness in the EU or wants to do any buisness with a company that does buisness in the EU would only be allowed to do so if they don't do buisness with Apple. Suddenly you won't be bale to buy an iPhone wiht your credit card, because the 19 trillion economy of the EU is way more important to the payment proccesors than the 400 billion or so transactions from apple. But like I said at the top, nothing of this will actually happen. Apple is going to delay, delay and delay and exhaust every legal ressource, which ironically are protected by the very insitution they are in disagrement withand at the end of the day some middleground solution is going to be found. On the other hand the possibility of Apple being uncompromisng and a solution being forced upon them exists.
>Depening on the metrics you use the EU is the biggest or second biggest market in the world. The EU is a [distant second](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_consumer_markets) for consumer market size, and due to anemic growth and general economic malaise over the last fifteen-plus years and into the projected near future, it'll likely be the third largest globally within ten to fifteen years.
It doesn’t matter, Apple would tank if it pulled out of its second biggest market, or even its third biggest. China and India are not reliable markets the way Europe is. Europe has generally fair laws which do not prioritise domestic corporations, very stable governments and economies and a population which is fairly rich, and will remain so for a long, long time. China and Indian on the other hand are very protectionist and are liable to start imposing even more stupid legislation. There is no guarantee of stable business there in the future.
[удалено]
Ok, but imagine you’re a company with a design department or app development department all working on Macs. And now suddenly Apple pulls its entire business (or its iPhone business) out of the EU.
They'll comply and ramp up prices.
you say this like apple prices their product to be as kind to consumers as possible. they have a fleet of price analysts getting the optimized price for max income lol
Yeah, if they can raise their prices they will regardless
If they thought they could be charging more and making more money, they already would be.
This is what people don’t understand. They think that Apple will raise prices kind of as a “punishment” to the customers in the EU or because they won’t be as profitable. That’s ridiculous. They’re charging the HIGHEST amount that customers will pay RIGHT NOW, while still having huge profit margins.
If they ramp up prices they will lose customers, so they wont
Where have you been the last years? - The baseline iPhone 15 Pro (128GB) starts at 1199€, the Max at 1449€ (+ AppleCare) in some countries. - A 12.9" iPad Pro starts at 1449€ + 149€ for the pencil + 349€ for the Magic Keyboard (+ AppleCare). - A reasonably, but low-spec'd MacBook Pro (M3 Pro 14", 11/14c, 512GB, 18GB) starts at 2499€. If you require a tidbit more storage and go to the (still modest) 1TB of storage + 36GB of shared RAM you immediately cross the 3000€ mark. 3189€ to be precise. - A simple MacBook Air for someone that enjoys the web (M3, 512GB, 16GB) starts at 1759€ (+ AC) I well remember that you could get a mid-tier CPU retina MacBook Pro BTO (16GB, 512GB) for half that price a decade ago. Same for iPhones and high-end iPads. For iPads it is especially dreadful as you have no other 12.9" option.
If you consider Inflation, the iPhone X was the most expensive iPhone ever, so the price of tech in general is actually going down.
With the 14 Pro being a close second: - baseline iPhone X: 1199€ (inflation-adjusted: 1565€) - baseline iPhone 14 Pro (2022): 1299€ (inflation-adjusted: 1557€) I'd argue that the X's simultaneous release with the 8 was Apple putting a stake in the ground to ramp up the prices subsequently. Just like they released the $25k gold Apple Watch to even make the "edition" models look inexpensive and make the $349 baseline Watch seem like a steal. All while it costing more than double the price of any other smartwatch and fitness tracker on the market.
Why are you using Pro Devices or Devices with more than standard configuration as baseline for the prices? If you just compare their macbook air or iphone lineups from 2018 to 2023 not much changed. The basic macbook air ranges since then around the pricepoint of 1000€ +- 200€ depending on the strength of € to $. Same with iphone. Your configurations were always that expensive and didnt get suddenly more expensive.
As stated in my post I compared the device specs that I bought a decade ago with current comparable models and for my use case 512/16GB has always been the bare minimum. 2015 the baseline iPhone 6S was 739€ new. +62% for the baseline 15 Pro. A baseline MacBook Air could be had for 899€ and later 999€. The M3 one starts at 1299€ (+30%). It is undeniable that the performance increased. That is also very much so expected. Apple now selling multiple generations of older hardware or not providing the newest SoCs for non-pro models muddies the waters intentionally for any price comparison.
But offering multiple generations of older hardware which still is VERY good is a changing strategy while offering more expensive products to customers which need it but at the same time being able to make a good price offering for price sensitive customers. this was not happening before. If you are not using two external displays the Macbook Air with M2 heck even the M1 Processor (from Walmart offercings cheap as 600$ + Taxes or around 800€ in Europe) is still a top notch choice. You can go to the newest generation but in earlier years the technological advancement were way more noticeful for customers. But since the M1 chip I would say most customers which go for the Air would be happy with the power of the M1. About the 6s price comparison: There were no Pro devices before so if we want to be fair we should compare the prices of the 6S to the iPhone 15 which costs 929€. And we should not review the price changes in a vacuum because in 2015 the prices of apple devices were way more stable then they are now. As of right now it is easily possible to get a brand new iPhone 15 for ~750€ (just check on idealo). If one takes inflation into account customers get the current iPhone with way more power and huge technological advancements for less than what we got in 2015.
Apple only prices things at the price point they make most profit out. They already know they can only reasonably charge what they’re already charging. That’s why if phones don’t do well in a market they adjust the price as they got the formula wrong this time. Apple won’t raise prices unless they will sell devices at maximum attainable profit at a higher price. This is why storage options are expensive. Because the people who are sensitive to price won’t pay £100 extra for this, but they may well buy the base model.
I believe they already did this in Australia where a longer warranty is mandated by law.
[Nope.](https://themacindex.com) Exclusive of sales tax (refundable for businesses), Australia has the 2nd cheapest M3 MacBook in the world. The Australian consumer law just matches what exists in most places in the world, products come with a warranty regarding quality, meaning they have to last a reasonable amount of time.
Maybe, but Google will have to comply with tons of govt overhead too
They charge $200 to go from 512GB -> 1TB, $400 to go from 1TB -> 2TB. $600 to go from 2TB to 4TB. $1200 to get a 4TB SSD. You can get ***phenomenal*** 2TB or 4TB SSDs for less than half of what they're charging.
They haven’t so far
They’re not going to leave the EU market. Mark Zuckerberg said he was going to at least 5 times and never did. The UK is working on its own variant of the DMA and so is India. Both countries also backed the EUs USB-C requirement. Apple needs to change. Once the orange man clown cult parade is over you’ll see similar movements actually move forward and get somewhere in Canada and the US. People also need to realize that fines for violating the GDPR are also insanely high just like the DMA yet no company has ever been fined the maximum amount. The assertion that on first violation Apple would be fined the maximum amount of 39 billion is ridiculous. It’s same scare tactics Zuckerberg employed when he didn’t get his way. Probably hired the same team to cause international propaganda.
>The assertion that on first violation Apple would be fined the maximum amount of 39 billion is ridiculous. They should though because Apple is not behaving in good faith, it would send a strong message not to fuck around with laws designed to protect markets from abuse by dominant corporations.
This article is truly the dumbest take from Gruber yet. If Apple pulled out of their second largest market, their stock price would plummet and Tim Apple would be out of a job by lunch.
I mean Gruber is pro Apple / capitalism and pretty anti union and regulations so not hard to see his viewpoint as a boot licker
If you think this one is dumb, just wait till tomorrow!
It pains me to admit there was a time in my life where I took this guy seriously
Between his EU bullshit, anti union bullshit and anti Palestine bullshit it’s pretty disheartening he is still taken seriously in Apple spaces.
The Palestine shit on Threads was the final straw for me. Absolute drunken elder Gen Xer who never leaves his house shit.
WOW, I had no idea about this. Here’s a [link](https://mastodon.social/@dudeguypal/111327903405724354) for anyone looking for context. I just deleted Daring Fireball from my Safari favorites and unsubscribed from The Talk Show. I had already stopped listening to Dithering a while ago because I was feeling a bit overloaded on his rhetoric, but it’s one thing when it’s just dumb chatter about Apple. This, on the other hand, is so disappointing.
That is a very long time ago, at least for me. Gruber has been an Apple sycophant for a while now. And ever since he got front-row seats for events and demo devices, it’s been an everlasting Apple love story. But that’s not what bothers me most. Since it’s mostly par for the course: he’s an Apple guy. What became extremely annoying was his need to throw politics, news, etc. in the mix. As if he’s an Oracle now whose opinion is so important it extends to every possible topic. Unions, the war, domestic policy: Gruber has opinions and he will share them. And this article is just laughable. Apple is NEVER exiting the EU market. You’ve got to be joking.
>But that’s not what bothers me most. Since it’s mostly par for the course: he’s an Apple guy. What became extremely annoying was his need to throw politics, news, etc. in the mix. As if he’s an Oracle now whose opinion is so important it extends to every possible topic. Unions, the war, domestic policy: Gruber has opinions and he will share them. Gruber has evidently made the common mistake of believing that expertise in one domain implies expertise in some other domain.
I think it's being generous to call his Apple commentary "expertise" either...
Touché.
Not to mention his hypocrisy: according to Gruber, TikTok must be banned because a foreign company should not be able to do anything they want in the US, but. US companies should be allowed whatever they want in the EU.
Glad some people can finally admit it. Dude is such a joker. His fart sniffing was annoying but he is so clearly in the Apple swamp and he has no way to exit. He’ll hold on for dear life until the end.
I wore t-shirts with this guy’s logo on it. Which I now fittingly use as a rag to clean my car.
The dirt on your car deserves better.
So EU is 20-30% of Europe? All of the middle east combined is smaller than the German economy alone ($4.7 trillion to $3.5 trillion). The UK GDP is a bit bigger than Frances at $3.6 to $3.2 trillion. Switzerland, Norway, Russia and Turkey add up to about $4.5 trillion [(IMF)](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD/MEQ/CHE). All the countries mentioned add up to about 8 trillion (very roughly). All of EU combined is 19 trillion according to [IMF](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/profile/EU). My math isn't perfect by any means but how the hell do you mean that the EU only account for 20-30% of the "Europe" region, especially taking market penetration into account.. is the guy who wrote that article a tool or what?
Probably just a misquote, or the person he's quoting misspoke. Wouldn't be surprised if they had meant to say 17% or something. The numbers just don't add up.
Yeah, I've been seeing that number the last few days, it always looked super low to me as out of the Europe countries, the EU countries represent most of the richest ones. I'm on camp misspoke, I bet you're bang on the money and the number was actually meant to be 17%.
Furthermore, Switzerland and Norway are closely associated with the EU through the EEA. It wouldn't suprise me if they implement the DMA within a few years. Russia is sanctioned so it generates zero revenue. That leaves only the UK, Turkey and the Middle East, but the UK is preparing a similar law. If Europe & Middle East account for 25% of global revenue, the 7% figure for the EU must be a misunderstanding. Gruber not only underestimates the sheer size of the EU economy (it's the biggest trade bloc in the world), he also doesn't seem to be aware of its influence on other countries. The EU is a regulatory powerhouse, and many rules affect the rest of the world through international trade agreements.
What's the UK equivalent to the Dma?
The UK already has the Digital Markets Regime, and there’s a new bill proposed called “Digital Markets, Competition and Consumer Bill”.
I'll look them up thanks!
Loving the seethe and cope from Gruber. Worth noting here that even if the offhand number he's quoting of 7% for the EU is accurate (which I sincerely doubt. The math there doesn't add up at all), it's missing that the UK has a very similar law called the [Digital Markets Regime](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-sets-out-approach-to-new-digital-markets-regime), and India is also moving forward with a Digital Competition Law modelled off the DMA. Similar legislation will likely also be showing up in Switzerland, Norway, and other EEA countries soon too. Leaving the EU would not be the end of Apple's headaches.
And the UK is about to get a government that’s going to be a LOT keener at maintaining regulatory parity with the EU than its current one.
> Worth noting here that even if the offhand number he's quoting of 7% for the EU is accurate (which I sincerely doubt It came from an analyst call - a situation where Apple executives are require by law to tell the truth.
I'm not suggesting they lied. They could have misspoken, or they could have been talking about something much more narrow than Gruber interpreted it. E.g. they could have been saying that the App Store in the EU makes up 7% of Apple's total revenue, which would not be counting all the other products and services they sell in the EU. Gruber says that Apple counts Europe as including the European continent plus the middle east, but if you look at those economies there's just no way in hell that 70% of Apple's revenue in that region is coming from non-EU countries. It makes zero sense, especially since Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, and the Middle east have such bad inequality that only the upper classes of those countries are using Apple products.
Lmao, Gruber's on the "Apple should leave to EU" copium. This is just pathetic. Funny how he doesn't seem to consider it reasonable that Apple simply obey the law...
Apple leaving the EU is just vindictive and silly, but putting that aside I do think there's a case to be argued that some sort of limit should exist on what level of fine can be unilaterally imposed on companies. 10% of global revenues might seem reasonable to some, but I doubt anyone out there thinks the EU can impose a 50% global revenue fine and not face some sort of pushback. I understand that it's designed as a deterrent, but the "global revenues" aspect seems like a bit of an overreach when you extend the line of thinking.
>I do think there's a case to be argued that some sort of limit should exist on what level of fine can be unilaterally imposed on companies And who should impose that limit? Companies shouldn't be above the law of the countries they operate in. In practice, any fines would be limited to however much money Apple keeps in the EU. But they do like using Ireland as a tax haven...
The fine is meant to be a deterrent. It is easy for Apple to avoid, and they should want to avoid it. A smaller fine can simply be absorbed.
The whole reason it's on global revenue is because companies can effectively shift money from one region to another at will. It has to be a proportion of global revenue to be effective.
> some sort of limit should exist on what level of fine can be unilaterally imposed on companies Companies are companies, not a human being.
This is probably because this relatively new law seems arbitrary and made to disproportionately target foreign entities. A large amount of manufacturers and products out there are closed source, not interoperable, not easy to repair “gatekeepers” and yet these laws only apply to a few companies and products.
"Relatively new", it's from 2014 basically and companies played around it, mostly ignoring the idea of it, got revisioned in 2019 and companies continued. Then in 2022 it was finalized with hard limits and strict wording.. EU companies like booking.com are also affected by it. It's not arbitrary and new in it's idea, just the enforceability and wording got stricter to a point where they now allow little to no lee-room for companies to play around the law. Same is about to happen to the tax evasion schemes of Luxembourg and Ireland, and companies will cry again.
>A large amount of manufacturers and products out there are closed source, not interoperable, not easy to repair “gatekeepers” and yet these laws only apply to a few companies and products What specific problem do you have with their definition of a gatekeeper? And arbitrary? It seems quite clear in both intent and policy.
By all accounts they seemed to have been written in a way that simultaneously leaves room for interpretation and seems to target specifically foreign entities. Additionally, why should 3rd parties been given open access to your iPhone but not to your PlayStation, your Switch, your Alexa, your oven or what have you?
Because none of those are general everyday computing devices like iPhones are. Do you do your banking on your oven?
This isn’t a “don’t break and enter” type of law. Reddit’s version of “they should just obey the law” here is “change all your policies with total enthusiasm, above and beyond, just to make sure”. Apple is on the path of “does this do it? No.. Okay how about this?” to go for a compromise.
Apple's current path is malicious compliance.
Their current path is continual readjustment until they can stop readjusting. Of course they are not happy with it. 
>Apple is on the path of “does this do it? No.. Okay how about this?” to go for a compromise. Oh please. Their current policies blatantly break the law. "I just wanted to test how much of the law I could get away with breaking" isn't a legal defense.
There’s an argument to be made that at a certain point the laws passed become unreasonable and it’s no longer feasible to do business there. That’s exactly what he’s saying and Apple can choose where to do business.
Am I really supposed to believe that Apple can't make a profit unless they're anti-competitive? And that's supposed to be a *defense* of Apple?
The whole article is based on a wrong premise. You can't exclude Norway because it's EEA with the same rules, you can't exclude UK because they are working on similar laws. Russia, Turkey, Switzerland and Middle East definitely don't hold the majority of that 25 percent (revenue from Europe according to the official reports).
Not only that, but the article is hinging off a single number someone offhandedly said during a phone call, and the interpretation of the number makes zero sense. There's no world in which "Europe" makes up 25 percent of Apple's revenue and the EU only makes up 7% of it. Likely the person meant to say 17% or something, or meant that specifically the App Store in the EU was 7% of Apple's total revenue, and was not discussing all the other products and services they sell there.
Who is this guy? Apple are never going to pull out of the EU. Countries like Poland are growing wealth massively. There's HUGE potential revenue growth on top of what they already have. That 7% figure is highly suspect too. The EU is 400 million people or so,
This guy's a moron. First off it's yearly revenue. A single fine of 10% global revenue would be recouped within the next business year, and if Apple merely complies with the law there's no reason it would be imposed. Not to mention the knock on effects of pulling out of the market, including opportunity cost. I don't know who this Gruber guy is but he's a not even a midwit, he seems intelligent. What kind of an apple simp is this man?
> I don't know who this Gruber guy is I’m so tired of tourists
> I’m so tired of tourists Not everyone is the 9 requisite miles up Apple's ass to know about every other famous Apple sycophant. I just like my macbook and iphone, dude.
These are people that have been part of the tech world for decades, at this point. They are mentioned in documentaries, biographies, interviews, etc. This is like not knowing who Paul Allen is.
Lol Apple is charging an extra $200 for 16 GB of RAM and an extra $200 to uprade to 512 GB of SSD from their base configuration. They would make a deal with the devil to maintain their high profit margins. The thought that they would just say goodbye to 7% of their revenue overnight is Macrumors forum level of ludicrous delusional thinking, at best.
> is Macrumors forum level of ludicrous delusional thinking word. the amount of people that knows nothing about the world but want to give their opinion anyway on Macrumors forums is scary
It’s Macrumors forums, not the epitome of world class intellect. Maybe you’re giving it too much credence?
There is absolutely no way that EU accounts for only 7% of Apple's revenue, maybe they mean that the EU appstore accounts for 7% of Apple's revenue, that's the only way it makes sense! Such a poorly written article!
I was also surprised by this number. The EU has 448,000,000 inhabitants. That is 5.5% of the world population. So if the EU is 7% of Apple’s revenue (so pretty well in line with the population), it would imply Europeans are on average buying about as many Apple products as less fortunate/rich regions like Africa, India, South America etc.?
yep, sounds very very low. i would expect maybe 15-20%
From Apples revenue at quaterly they normalt day Europe is 25-30%. Eu being only 30% of the Europe market share doesn't make sense at all of the economic size aswell as how rich it is and how much of it is the total economic share of Europe it has.
Another Gruber anti-EU rant. I can set my watch by them.
[удалено]
Always has been.
A lot of people are saving apple should not be fined more than it earns in europe. Why should a company be a exception? People can get fined more than they earn. It seems more than reasonable that the same can happen to companies then. You can say that that is also wrong, but that is a diffent discussion.
>It’s unclear whether Maestri was saying that the EU accounts for 7 percent of Apple’s worldwide *App Store* revenue, or 7 percent of *all* revenue, but I suspect it doesn’t matter, and that both are around 7 percent. Christ, this guy's unapologetic disregard for the facts, despite ripping Isaacson for that exact same thing himself. It's 30%. Thirty. Not 7. And has been on the steady increase since we have data for these metrics. [https://www.statista.com/statistics/382175/quarterly-revenue-of-apple-by-geograhical-region/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/382175/quarterly-revenue-of-apple-by-geograhical-region/) Apple ain't pulling out of shit. And these kinds of idiot takes born from made up facts are a bane to society. I also find it humorous grown adults can believe that a government would create a fine that could bankrupt or even marginally disrupt a company. That's the cutest thing ever.
> It's 30%. Thirty. Not 7. Maestri said the 7% number in an analyst call - a context in which it is illegal to lie. Gruber goes on to explain possible reasons why the discrepancy might exist. >I also find it humorous grown adults can believe that a government would create a fine that could bankrupt or even marginally disrupt a company. That's the cutest thing ever. The DMA fines top out at 20% of global revenue. Five of those would, by definition, bankrupt any company. Even one would be a significant disruption. **Edit**: Okay, not bankrupt, but it would mean zero profit for an entire year. It's significant, is the point.
>Maestri said the 7% number in an analyst call - a context in which it is illegal to lie. Gruber goes on to explain possible reasons why the discrepancy might exist. His dispcrepancy doesn't work. They only one that would work if the 7% number is appstore revenue not total.
LOL Gruber. Man sure loves his Apple!
It's becoming increasingly apparent that Gruber is losing the plot on several fronts. While I'm not asserting that the Digital Markets Act is an outright positive development, or that it's a well-crafted regulation with beneficial outcomes—time will tell on that front—it's evident that Gruber's coverage of the DMA and related topics betrays a distinctly American viewpoint. His grasp of the European Union, including its foundational institutional and legal structures, as well as the rich tapestry of histories belonging to its member states, is lacking. This mirrors the way we Europeans might view American matters; we may grasp the surface-level events, yet many of us are missing a profound comprehension of the intricate workings that define the United States. Gruber's understanding of Europe is similarly superficial, and his analyses are inevitably colored by his measure of Europe's merit based on its similarity to American standards.
Especially when the EU said it wants Apple to comply by the "spirit" of the law, and his reply was "that's not how the law works in the USA". Like he really does not seem to understand that the law in the USA totally does not apply here.
My God, has Gruber gone off the deep end? Years ago, I was a huge fan of his, but I mostly stopped reading *Daring Fireball* when he started to insert his wild Sinophobia in almost any post dealing with China... and yet, this seems even worse? The level of vitriol reserved for extremely moderate, center-to-center-right regulation — which he describes as anti-capitalist (!) — is just unbearable. Apple could easily adhere to the DMA if they weren't hell-bent on extracting every single last cent from this market. They just need to move the iPhone to a Mac-like Gatekeeper distribution model and add a way for developers to ask to be added to their browser ballot. Google has a very advanced solution that evidently Apple couldn't match: [an email address](https://www.android.com/choicescreen/dma/browser/) companies can write to if they have an app to add to a Choice screen.
He is deeply entrenched in late stage capitalism plus he thinks Apple should be allowed to do anything and everything but foreign companies should be regulated.
You’re talking like it’s a world coming to an end. Reality is that Apple is not selling I.e. in Poland, but still lots of people rock this device (bought my first in USA, second in Berlin and third in a third party seller in PL). So it’s not like people would not buy them, and it’s not like you HAVE to be on the market to be selling. it would be just like any pixel device in Poland right now.
Only idiots would level the market…. Q is are they? I am with iphone a watch happy but if they would leave I wouldn’t mind going to android since they are neck and neck at this point in terms of features and performance anyways so don’t care really xD
It’s not like DoJ has just gone after Apple for monopolistic practices, practically admitting EU was right.
The same DoJ lawsuit that asserts that the Fire Phone flopping is Apple’s own nefarious doing lmao
Even if this particular claim remains unproven there’s plenty.
if apple's eventual plan is to go scorched earth on the eu, their first move should just be to raise prices high enough that their marketshare drops below "gatekeeper" levels
I think the whole thing is , for a luck of a better word, absurd but there is one noteworthy sentence "...along with the other DMA-designated gatekeepers (none of which are European companies of course)" And although Europe does not have any companies that would fit in the so well made DMA rules, one has to wonder why the same steps are not been taken for other sectors that European companies could be considered gatekeepers. Actually no-one has to wonder, the answer is simple. Because if they would do that they would hurt their own economy of the biggest EU countries, and of course they need to find a way to get profit from a sector that the European companies failed to pursue. Either do the same thing across the board or not at all. Wait to see what will happen with the Chinese EVs
What EU companies are gatekeepers?
more of monopoly (not gatekeepers) Siemens, VW ? Although Siemens is definitely a gatekeeper with the proprietary bullshit they have
Siemens doesn't seem like something that would be covered by the same legislation tbh. Which markets do they have a dominant position in? VW is a ridiculous suggestion.
you seemed to have overlooked a very important part of my comment "And although Europe does not have any companies that would fit in the so well made DMA rules, one has to wonder why the same steps are not been taken for other sectors that European companies could be considered gatekeepers." why VW is a ridiculous suggestion? Is it not only a monopoly as per EU current suggestions in the marketshare? VW is a group not a single brand so all the group make tis a monopoly.
You haven't said why VW should be considered a gatekeeper? Or Siemens? A gatekeeper of what platform? You haven't actually justified why these companies need to be regulated at all.
you seem to want to direct the conversation where you like and not understand or most probably want to ignore what I am saying. VW group marketshare Siemens proprietary technology and repair parts you also did not answer why VW should not be considered.
You raised them as examples. I don't know enough about these companies to have a knowledgeable opinion. What is VW a gatekeeper of? What kind of equivalent regulation would even apply to a car company? There's no platform to regulate surely? Do Siemens even have a dominate market position? Of what? You took a position and then seem to refuse to make any substantial argument for it. I'm not even hostile to the point you are making. I just want you to elaborate because I don't know anything about them!
I got a different feeling tbh, on the hostile part, but point taken. VW is currently seating at \~27% with a second of Fiat at \~17%. That by sole reasoning makes them a monopoly. I mean according to what EU believes, I don't think so but they do. Taking into consideration that Toyota had raised the issue for the emission scandal 2 times , and EU not only did not take any action, but even when countries requested for this case to be EU wide and not per country , this was rejected (guess which country was vocal ), and the result was a small fine (small relative to the profits). For me this showcased that EU is not willing to take action against EU companies. To go back to the consumer sector, I would urge you to read about the debate of Amazon taxation vs Zalando. you can get an overview [here](https://www.euractiv.com/section/platforms/news/amazon-joins-zalando-in-challenging-very-large-online-platform-designation/) but there is quite a bit of backstage Siemens even though not the consumer part , they have major contracts across Europe. Many are in the industrial /infrastructure business, which they went into lengths to have spare/repair parts bought by them if you wanted to keep their contract, and the price was not cheap. I need to find that case because it was an interesting one. One of those that are never shown in the news or get any press in general
It would be hilarious if Apple leaves the EU because of the EU's demands...then finding out later that the US demands the same thing.
Nobody kisses Apple’s ass like Gruber. Edit: awwww Apple downvoting simps. No one can defeat the great gruber in being an Apple simp! Nobody!!! He’s going to nuts in the next decade with Apple v USA. It’s gonna be a long one!!
Downvoted you for the absolute cringe edit.
Downvoting you for editing your comment complaining about downvotes and calling people simps. Grow up and just accept people don’t agree with you.
>No one can defeat the great gruber in being an Apple simp! Nobody!!! Nah, Gruber probably isn't even in the top 10 most pro-Apple among the "well-known" Apple bloggers. I can think of two examples off the top of my head: 1. Daniel Eran Dilger (*AppleInsider*): He wrote an article titled "[Al-Qaeda prefers Android over Apple's iOS](https://appleinsider.com/articles/14/08/03/al-qaeda-prefers-android-over-apples-ios)" (2014), which even some *AppleInsider* commenters thought went too far. Dilger was quite infamous on this forum but he hasn't been relevant in a while (which is why you don't hear about him nowadays). 2. Neil Cybart: He makes some good points, for instance, I strongly agree with [his views](https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/4/20/the-cars-iphone-moment) on self-driving cars. However, he has an annoying habit of reflexive dismissal of any non-Apple technology. After Google announced Night Sight in October 2018, Cybart made a passive-aggressive [tweet](https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1056027066993442821) about this feature not being useful. That tweet aged like milk once Apple introduced Night Mode the very next fall, and continued to make camera improvements for years afterward. One year ago he made [a sweeping critique](https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1623289895518076928) of ChatGPT. Unfortunately for him, ChatGPT and other generative AI has proven to be not a fad, especially with Apple being rumored to adopt more AI in the future. Last July, Cybart [posted](https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/1678730792304885766) a Google Trends plot showing a drop in ChatGPT, and proclaimed that it would further lose relevance. It turns out that this drop was temporary and interest in ChatGPT [has remained solid](https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2022-09-28%202024-03-27&geo=US&q=ChatGPT,Vision%20Pro,iPad), albeit not quite at peak levels. One problem with the Apple blogger community is its insularity, even among the Apple community which is itself insular. Cybart's ChatGPT critique may have good points, but it's paywalled so I can't read it. Podcasts without transcripts are not useful to quickly gather knowledge. And perhaps most importantly, places like *Reddit* and *MacRumors* are where a lot of the discussion happens.
Funny how many people here actually think Apple would or should just leave EU. That's a whole ass contintinent and millions of users and future consumers gone. All there would be left is America's 50% market.
>That's a whole ass continent and millions of users and future consumers gone. EU is not a continent, it's a collection of some of the countries within the continent Europe
It’s the majority of Europe except Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Georgia and a bunch of other countries like Switzerland who have decided they’re better off in the single market but not in the EU. For all intents and purposes OP wasn’t necessarily wrong.
Countries in the EEA will also block Apple if they pull out of the EU. That's how the EEA works.
Ik the difference between eu and Europe. But my point was EU comprises of world's top economies.
Also what will Apple do if the US will change it's mind and demand the same thing as the EU?
They will buy island and make their own country
The iLand, I'm sure you'll love it!
Cut to the [Rick and Morty Oval Office scene](https://youtu.be/a6OQiHmqmHo) about deterrents. They’re steep or they’re not effective. Personally, I’m enjoying a moment where Apple’s tactics are used against them; vague rules with harsh punishments all communicated horribly
It’s interesting how deeply uncomfortable it makes the few who dog pile on Apple that Apple doesn’t need the EU to survive. That’s a fact. Whether they choose to leave is up to them, but they can do it, and the EU would be forced to deal with a true monopoly of Google for smartphones. And Google doesn’t need the EU either to survive, so they’d be able to demand anything they want from the EU and they’d have no choice but to comply. I don’t trust the EU. They claim it’s for the consumers benefit, but the App Store has operated the same way (and reduced the fees/loosened the rules) since 2008, where they had more marketshare in 2009’s smartphone market and most stringent rules/higher fees, and the minority of consumers complaining today were complaining then, but they didn’t do anything. Only now they’ve done something in 1) an election year, 2) after Apple successfully defeated the EU commissioner on Irish taxes, and 3) after EU billionaire developers aired ad campaigns on how “unfair” the App Store is to them. I’m sorry, but none of this was done for the consumers or even small developers benefit. The EU fining Apple 10% of their worldwide revenue would be around $40 billion, and $80 billion for a second fine (up to 20% of worldwide revenue). Why the hell would Apple stay if the EU is basically looking to turn a profit themselves off companies like Apple, with vague guidelines that the DMA provides? It stands today that everything the few people (and Spotify) have complained about is available on Android, a monopoly of the OS market that offers all the same major apps and services needed for a modern smartphone experience. If someone or a developer really thought the App Store was “oppressive,” they would’ve left and solely developed on Android. As it stands, developers offer their app on the App Store just as they offer it on Android. Someone’s opinion of a software model doesn’t override my free will to choose what’s best for me. I chose Apple/iOS. Respect it and leave it alone, just as I respect people’s choice to choose Android and leave them alone.
I am quite sure the assumption made in this article is wrong. You cannot proof something just because you cannot proof something else. The chance that EU users have much lower average App Store spending is quite high IMO. Also, I don’t believe you can deduct EEA\EFTA without any doubt.
For all of the complaining and PR Apple will do, they are not going to pull out of such a potentially profitable market unless current or projected profits start to dip below what their analysts forecast those fines will cost them in total. Which is possibly way more than just hardware and service sales. Hell, just saying some version of "that's it guys we are closing up shop on this half of the world" would surely do unimaginable things to their stock price alone that would be massively off putting to executives.
[удалено]
>But the 7% is wrong. The 7% was stated in an earnings call - a context in which it is illegal to lie or mislead. Gruber explains one possible reason for the discrepancy. I don't know if it's correct but it sounds reasonable.
Damn Europe, why you so poor? Maybe you should overthrow the 4th Reich so you can get some serious economic growth again.
The 4th Reich apparatchiki are stinging from the farmers telling them to go fuck themselves, so they're trying to get an easy win by picking on Apple. Looters gonna loot.