Apple's iMessage Avoids EU's Digital Markets Act Regulation (macrumors.com) 39
An anonymous reader quotes a report from MacRumors: Apple's iMessage will avoid regulation requiring interoperability with other messaging platforms under the EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA), following the conclusion of an investigation by the regulator (via Bloomberg). The probe concluded that the iMessage platform and Microsoft's Bing do not hold a dominant enough position to be brought under the DMA's strict rules for services provided by big tech's so-called digital "gatekeepers," which include Apple, Meta, Google, Amazon, and TikTok, according to the EU.
The EU has been working on legislation under the DMA that would have required Apple to make changes to iMessage to make it available on other platforms. The interoperability rules would have meant that Meta apps like WhatsApp or Messenger could request to interoperate with Apple's iMessage framework, and Apple would have been forced to comply within the EU. However, the EU probe found that iMessage falls outside the legislation because it is not widely used by businesses. The reprieve for Apple is part of a five-month market investigation by the European Commission. It's not all good news for Apple, though. The DMA is still forcing the company to implement updates that will allow iPhone and iPad users to download and install apps outside the App Store through alternative app marketplaces. The changes will arrive with iOS 17.4 in March.
The EU has been working on legislation under the DMA that would have required Apple to make changes to iMessage to make it available on other platforms. The interoperability rules would have meant that Meta apps like WhatsApp or Messenger could request to interoperate with Apple's iMessage framework, and Apple would have been forced to comply within the EU. However, the EU probe found that iMessage falls outside the legislation because it is not widely used by businesses. The reprieve for Apple is part of a five-month market investigation by the European Commission. It's not all good news for Apple, though. The DMA is still forcing the company to implement updates that will allow iPhone and iPad users to download and install apps outside the App Store through alternative app marketplaces. The changes will arrive with iOS 17.4 in March.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, everyone uses WhatsApp, so the blue/green bubble thing just isn’t a problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Android is the most popular smartphone worldwide and in the EU. In the EU, it is about 65% Android, 30% iOS, and 5% everything else. I am not sure any bribery is involved to conclude that iOS does not have a dominant position in the EU. And that does not take into account that Europeans may use other messaging services like WhatsApp instead of what comes with their phone.
So, with those numbers, how did Apple get forced into opening the App Store (and iOS) to alternatives?
The EU obviously doesn't treat any of this logically or dispassionately.
Re: (Score:2)
So, with those numbers, how did Apple get forced into opening the App Store (and iOS) to alternatives?
It depends if you can recognize the difference between messaging service apps and an exclusive App Store as different things. It also relies on the fact that on an iPhone, there has been only one App Store, the Apple Store. A consumer can get messaging apps with some from Apple competitors: WhatsApp, SnapChat, Signal, Skype, Facebook Messenger, Discord, Telegram, etc. The App Store is a different situation than messaging services.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, with those numbers, how did Apple get forced into opening the App Store (and iOS) to alternatives?
It depends if you can recognize the difference between messaging service apps and an exclusive App Store as different things. It also relies on the fact that on an iPhone, there has been only one App Store, the Apple Store. A consumer can get messaging apps with some from Apple competitors: WhatsApp, SnapChat, Signal, Skype, Facebook Messenger, Discord, Telegram, etc. The App Store is a different situation than messaging services.
WTF does that have to do with the question I asked?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It may be because Apple has already agreed to add RCS support to the iMessage app, but also because iMessage just doesn't have the market share that it does in the US. In fact I don't know anyone who uses it personally. WhatsApp seems to be the dominant chat app here.
Anyway, if there is a compelling argument to be made that the decision was wrong, it can be challenged.
Re: Bribery (Score:1)
That would be the GSMA and European spy agencies. Apple is forced to support a sub-par protocol which has demonstrable security flaws. At least it avoided having to hand over the encryption keys (a requirement of the DMA).
Re: (Score:3)
While correct about open source, nothing about iMessage encryption is 'roll your own'.
When a user turns on iMessage on a device, the device generates encryption and signing pairs of keys for use with the service. For encryption, there is an encryption RSA 1280-bit key as well as an encryption EC 256-bit key on the NIST P-256 curve. For signatures, Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) 256-bit signing keys are used. The private keys are saved in the device’s keychain and only available aft
Re: (Score:1)
While correct about open source, nothing about iMessage encryption is 'roll your own'.
When a user turns on iMessage on a device, the device generates encryption and signing pairs of keys for use with the service. For encryption, there is an encryption RSA 1280-bit key as well as an encryption EC 256-bit key on the NIST P-256 curve. For signatures, Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) 256-bit signing keys are used. The private keys are saved in the device’s keychain and only available after first unlock. The public keys are sent to Apple Identity Service (IDS), where they are associated with the user’s phone number or email address, along with the device’s APNs address.
You'll have to trust Apple on this, and that they didn't screw anything in the process.
If you don't trust this, do you shop online or bank online?
You can bank and shop online using an open source web browser where the encryption can be audited. That's not possible for iMessage.
But sure, you can't control what the bank/merchant does with your credit card number once they have it. Which is why you have to check for unauthorized transactions from time to time, or accept the risks.
Re: (Score:3)
I wonder who in the EU regulatory boards got rich off this decision. We need a full investigation.
Not every decision you don't like is the result of bribery. The reality is, no one cares about iMessage here. No one. I've literally not seen an Apple user use it in Europe ever. That said we don't use RCS, or SMS either. WhatsApp is the national default communication tool in many European countries and it does everything iMessage does, only better, and without cross platform issues.
The DMA has a market share requirements, and iMessage has virtually none in Europe. Heck Apple themselves don't even have much
Rings true, (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's still a little sad that imessage is not included. Interoperability could have boosted its popularity a bit.
How is it sad? Why do we even need iMessage to begin with, given the dozens of alternatives which are cross-platform?
Re: (Score:2)
Interoperability could have boosted its popularity a bit.
You are already juggling 4 other messaging systems, all of which are cross platform, several of which are widely used on national levels. Why do you need a 5th?
Re: (Score:2)
Who in his right mind wants interoperability between message platforms? That would be utterly stupid.
I want messages sent by a WhatsApp user end up in WhatsApp, and not in IMessage. Same for Signal, Telegram etc.
If I see a red 3 at my Signal app, I know it is important.
If I see a red 10 at WhatsApp, I know I can ignore it for a day or two.
If both would go to iMessage, I had a red 13 there and every time I get a new message: I have to check it!
Re: (Score:1)
Who in his right mind wants interoperability between message platforms? That would be utterly stupid.
Ideally everybody could pick his favorite messaging app and be able to communicate with everyone yes.
Just like email. It would suck if gmail could only communicate with gmail, don't you think?
I want messages sent by a WhatsApp user end up in WhatsApp, and not in IMessage. Same for Signal, Telegram etc.
If I see a red 3 at my Signal app, I know it is important.
If I see a red 10 at WhatsApp, I know I can ignore it for a day or two.
If both would go to iMessage, I had a red 13 there and every time I get a new message: I have to check it!
Not sure what your red 3 and 10 means. But, obviously, you would be free to register for 3 different accounts if you prefer, and use three different application if that's how you like it to be organized. So your point is moot.
Re: (Score:1)
The red number close to the icon of the app, indicating the amount of unread messages.
That is exactly what I have, an account for each app. Why would I want to mege them into one?
Your email example makes no sense. Or how exactly do you sent an email to my signal or telegram or imessage account?
Re: (Score:2)
That is exactly what I have, an account for each app. Why would I want to mege them into one?
As I said, even if the messaing protocols were interopable, you wouldn't be forced to do it.
I would merge a couple of them, and use a single messaging application that work on my phone and computer.
Your email example makes no sense. Or how exactly do you sent an email to my signal or telegram or imessage account?
It makes perfect sense.
You can send an email from Gmail to Hotmail. By your logic, they should be made not interoperable so that you need to install both applications on your phone.
What is great of email is that it is not controlled by a single entity and can be used to join anyone. That's not true for Telegram o
Re: (Score:1)
I would merge a couple of them, and use a single messaging application that work on my phone and computer.
ARE YOU DAFT?
No! That is exactly what no one except rare cases like you want.
I want them separated on app level.
What is next? All Excel sheets need to be opened in Word? All Word documents in PowerPoint?
Is it really so damn difficult to grasp that normal people want message apps separated? Does not mean they should be interoperable by intention. But I want a message sent by skype to end up in my skype a
Re: (Score:2)
I would merge a couple of them, and use a single messaging application that work on my phone and computer.
ARE YOU DAFT?
No! That is exactly what no one except rare cases like you want.
I think you underestimate the number of people who would like the ability to merge at least some of them. And again, it wouldn't FORCE you to do it if you don't want to.
I want them separated on app level.
What is next? All Excel sheets need to be opened in Word? All Word documents in PowerPoint?
Is it really so damn difficult to grasp that normal people want message apps separated?
Except that Excel and Word are not replacements. Most people see Signal, Whatsapp and Facebook Messenger as replacements, and "normal" people don't want them to be separated and would rather use 1-2 apps instead of 5-6. But who care if they don't? Maybe only 10% want interoperability. That's still enough to do it, no mater if you personally
Re: (Score:1)
There is no messaging app on the planet that supports more than one account on a single device.
If it's so important to you to have them separated, you'll take the time to configure them that way, won't you?
They most likely would not have such an option.
If you need interop, why not install pidgin?
Re: (Score:2)
There is no messaging app on the planet that supports more than one account on a single device.
Yes there are. And the others could add it as well. Just like I can have multiple accounts in my email client.
They most likely would not have such an option.
It's hypothetical here since there is no interropability... but assuming there is, as I said, I doubt the merging would be done by default.
If you need interop, why not install pidgin?
I did use it back in the days. Not sure how good it is now, especially with the closed protocols. It definitely doesn't support iMessage. I wonder if it supports all features of the protocols it claims to support. I may have a second look. But if it can't receive
Re: (Score:1)
Yes there are. And the others could add it as well. Just like I can have multiple accounts in my email client.
That is not an messaging app, but an eMail client supporting 1 or 2 or 3 standard protocols. Relying on the existence of eMail addresses and mail servers.
You seem seriously confused with your insisting that IRC, Jabber, WhatsApp and iMessage, to pick a few: need to be interoperable. They do not need, and it is not desirable at all. If you need something interoperable: get one and stick to it ... Jab
Re: (Score:2)
They do not need, and it is not desirable at all.
We get it, it is not desirable to YOU. I think most people would like it.
Re: (Score:1)
You can send an email from Gmail to Hotmail.
Because both are mail providers, idiot.
Viber provides messaging chat call service between viber clients.
Skype provides messaging chat call service between Skype clients.
Do I have to continue?
If you need for some stupid reason an universal chat: install jabber.
But then you are back on square one: The jabber clients provide services between: jabber clients.
You go something fundamentally wrong in your mind.
Why do not all messaging services automatically sent everyth
Re: (Score:2)
Oh I get it and I agree with you fully. Angel'o'ophere is the smartest person on earth.
Each pair of persons shall have its own messaging app. ... ... ...
This way on my phone I would have:
-wife messaging
-dad messaging
-mom messaging
-kid1 messaging
-kid2 messaging
-coworker1 messaging
-coworker2 messaging
-friend1 messaging
-friend 200 messaging
for a total of 3 hundred different, incompatible messaging application each with their own notification system and server.
Am I getting this right? Thank god you are there to
Thank you for less spam (Score:2, Insightful)
I already get enough sms spam. And WhatsApp spam. And Kik spam. And every other chat service spam.
I get zero iMessage spam. Opening it to other chat services would do nothing but increase the junk I have to delete and waste my time at no cost to the senders.
Re: (Score:2)
Lol, modded down by pro-spammer. Can't make this shit up. Mod this down, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
What exactly prevents spam in Europe? Are you saying you don't get email, sms, or other spam because the law says you cant?
How does the law prevent you getting WhatsApp spam? Is there a regulatory agency that tracks down and destroys spammers in a globally connected communications application?
Re: (Score:2)
"Is there a regulatory agency that tracks down and destroys spammers in a globally connected communications application?"
No. There's an agency that takes reports from users and asks service to shut down spamming accounts.
I'm in Europe. Also never have Whatsapp spam, SMS spam, or even really phone spam (maybe about one call every 18 months or so, I just ignore it because they're not on my contact list).
I've had the same phone number for nearly 25+ years now.
Re: (Score:2)
"Is there a regulatory agency that tracks down and destroys spammers in a globally connected communications application?"
No. There's an agency that takes reports from users and asks service to shut down spamming accounts.
I'm in Europe. Also never have Whatsapp spam, SMS spam, or even really phone spam (maybe about one call every 18 months or so, I just ignore it because they're not on my contact list).
I've had the same phone number for nearly 25+ years now.
This. In most countries we have laws that make the carriers responsible for abusive bulk message sending and have significant penalties for violating this. The same laws apply to things like WhatsApp as anyone sending bulk messages is doing that with their tacit (if not express) permission.
In the UK I've never had SMS or WhatsApp spam, however in Colombia I regularly get it and I've only used that number for a few services (notably Rappi, which is the prime offender), fortunately that's a secondary numb