Tag: iphone

Apple’s relationship with the European Union has always been complicated, but the latest set of demands might be the point where the company starts pushing back more aggressively. Under the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), Apple is being asked to open up even more of its famously closed ecosystem—this time targeting features that many would argue are fundamental to the Apple experience itself. And unlike with USB-C or RCS, this doesn’t feel like a consumer win. It feels like regulators are tampering with what makes Apple… Apple.

Let’s backtrack for a second. The Digital Markets Act is a set of rules meant to keep “gatekeepers”—large tech companies with dominant platforms—from using that power to squash competition. Apple, along with Meta, Google, and others, falls into that category. So far, we’ve seen the EU use that power to get Apple to adopt USB-C on iPhones and begin support for RCS messaging in iOS 18—both reasonable and arguably overdue. But now, the EU wants Apple to take things much further.

The new requirements include opening up the iPhone’s NFC chip (used for tap-to-pay services) to third-party apps beyond Apple Pay, letting non-Apple smartwatches access the same notification integrations as the Apple Watch, and even allowing non-AirPods to take advantage of features like seamless device switching. There’s also pressure to make AirDrop and AirPlay available to rival platforms.

These are no longer just tweaks to help with interoperability or convenience. These are foundational elements of the Apple ecosystem—features that have historically been exclusive and are part of the reason many people choose Apple products over Android or other alternatives. Apple didn’t mince words in its response, stating that some of the changes the EU wants “pose very real privacy and data security risks” for users.

That’s not just PR spin. Apple’s closed ecosystem has long been a double-edged sword—it offers security, consistency, and tight integration between devices, but at the cost of flexibility and openness. Plenty of people criticize Apple for that, and some of that criticism is valid. But forcing Apple to break down those walls entirely starts to feel like regulators trying to re-engineer a product, rather than just leveling the playing field.

The Digital Markets Act forced Apple to allow third party app stores on the iPhone, to which Apple complied, but only in this region. | Image credit — DMA.

And while Apple might be complying—at least on paper—it’s already found creative ways to limit how much these new rules actually affect the user experience. For example, in iOS 17.4 (the version tailored to the EU’s DMA requirements), Apple lets third-party app stores and alternative browser engines exist, but the hoops developers need to jump through are significant. And users are hit with scary warnings that could discourage them from straying too far from the Apple-approved path.

What’s becoming clearer is that Apple may choose to keep restricting or disabling certain features in the EU entirely rather than continue to change the DNA of its products. We’ve already seen this play out with things like Apple Cash and Apple Card—both of which are still unavailable in the EU due to regulatory complications. And it’s not out of the question that some of the seamless device features we’ve gotten used to might eventually be region-locked.

To be fair, Apple isn’t the only company under the DMA’s microscope. Google is also being asked to give users more choice when setting up Android devices, and Meta is facing scrutiny over how its services are bundled. But Apple is unique in how much of its brand is built around exclusivity and tight integration. Forcing them to open up feels more disruptive than it might be for a company that already plays well with others.

As someone who generally supports more openness in tech—especially when it helps consumers—I was all for the EU pushing Apple toward USB-C and RCS. Even more so as someone who uses both an iPhone and an Android device as a daily driver. Those are about standardization and making basic tech functions easier for everyone. But this latest round of demands feels like something else entirely. It’s one thing to create fairer conditions for competition; it’s another to dismantle what makes a product distinct in the name of fairness.

Apple shouldn’t be above regulation, and healthy competition is important. But regulators also need to recognize when they’re crossing from creating opportunity into reshaping products in a way that users didn’t ask for. At this rate, Apple may eventually decide it’s just not worth offering the same iPhone experience in the EU at all.