If they do get popular (and that’s a big if), then they will become subject to DMA rules. This isn’t a one-off investigation, the EU will reconsider if they manage to gain market share.
but hat could take many years to spin up another massive lawsuit like this, and, by then, Apple could possibly have profited kajillions, and/or have modified their communications protocols just sufficiently to skirt regulations. or one of a dozen other legal maneuvers around this or a number of other possible future regulations…
It’s not about the explosive growth (or not) of iMessage. It’s a matter of fact about the legal foothold that Apple now holds. That won’t be dislodged anytime soon. Whether or not Apple can get any market growth moving forward, now the EU will have to re-file any efforts to this ruling to them in the future should they try. That is a big deal. And nothing anyone in trying in the EU will move forward anything near the weight this attempt did.

What legal foothold, exactly? The conclusion that their messaging service isn’t important enough to negatively affect the market?
Whether or not Apple can get any market growth moving forward
If they don’t grow, the EU won’t need to do anything, because the status quo remains.
And nothing anyone in trying in the EU will move forward anything near the weight this attempt did.
The commission that did the initial market research is legally obligated to continuously monitor markets. This isn’t a one-off thing, nor was it an “attempt” at anything. If the EU wanted iMessage to be opened up, they would’ve written the law better.
The DMA is a law to protect against de-facto gatekeepers, and iMessage just isn’t important enough to be called a gatekeeper.
nobody use it it Europe, therefore not worthy of consideration. doesn’t take a genius to figure out, but if it was strain for you, I understand why you feel threatened when small dogs get the concept.
they can do whatever with their service
again, not a concept that’s difficult to understand. but I understand why you’re upset why you’re mad that you neighbors cat understood it before you did.
I (or any person I know) dont plan to use it 🤷
I don’t concern myself with what the kids who eat heir own poo do.
Insulting people isn’t nice. The only rule on this understand is to be(e) nice. This is not appropriate behavior for our instance. You didn’t need to insult someone to make your point. I’m giving you a 7 day ban to think things over.
Dude, you tried to lead OP off on a weird tangent that
a) they didn’t follow you on and
b) was nonsense and lacked understanding on your part from the get go.
Stop insulting people as being stupid when clearly you didn’t (want to) understand what was said and just tried to tell people who told personal anecdotes that their anecdotes are wrong…
sorry you don’t like nuanced conversation you couldn’t follow. and if you find that insulting, perhaps you should keep to conversations suited to your… ahem intellectual level.
in any case, let others speak for themselves. the virtue signal got a bit tired in the days of old reddit. we all saw it as a way to signal boost a bad idea on the backs of oppressed people who were not, ya know, you. slimy and wrong.
;)
crawl back into your cave and come back out hen you have an argument that doesn’t require the irrelevant sweatshop of the suffering of others to make your point.
iMessages is like a footnote here. I was surprised it was even considered.
Now that you’ve let your guard down, Apple is free to do whatever they want. It’s exactly exactly what Apple wanted.
If they do get popular (and that’s a big if), then they will become subject to DMA rules. This isn’t a one-off investigation, the EU will reconsider if they manage to gain market share.
maybe…
but hat could take many years to spin up another massive lawsuit like this, and, by then, Apple could possibly have profited kajillions, and/or have modified their communications protocols just sufficiently to skirt regulations. or one of a dozen other legal maneuvers around this or a number of other possible future regulations…
deleted by creator
I try not to predict the future. it took them a long time to get here. I they’e going to loop back around, I can’t see it happening again soon.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
It’s not about the explosive growth (or not) of iMessage. It’s a matter of fact about the legal foothold that Apple now holds. That won’t be dislodged anytime soon. Whether or not Apple can get any market growth moving forward, now the EU will have to re-file any efforts to this ruling to them in the future should they try. That is a big deal. And nothing anyone in trying in the EU will move forward anything near the weight this attempt did. 
What legal foothold, exactly? The conclusion that their messaging service isn’t important enough to negatively affect the market?
If they don’t grow, the EU won’t need to do anything, because the status quo remains.
The commission that did the initial market research is legally obligated to continuously monitor markets. This isn’t a one-off thing, nor was it an “attempt” at anything. If the EU wanted iMessage to be opened up, they would’ve written the law better.
The DMA is a law to protect against de-facto gatekeepers, and iMessage just isn’t important enough to be called a gatekeeper.
they wanted to be irrelevant in the European market for chat applications?
no, merely considered irrelevant— for legal purposes. why? read the headline.
Im not sure you understands how this work. but anyway… they can do whatever with their service. I (or any person I know) dont plan to use it 🤷
nobody use it it Europe, therefore not worthy of consideration. doesn’t take a genius to figure out, but if it was strain for you, I understand why you feel threatened when small dogs get the concept.
again, not a concept that’s difficult to understand. but I understand why you’re upset why you’re mad that you neighbors cat understood it before you did.
I don’t concern myself with what the kids who eat heir own poo do.
best of luck with combating giardia!
Insulting people isn’t nice. The only rule on this understand is to be(e) nice. This is not appropriate behavior for our instance. You didn’t need to insult someone to make your point. I’m giving you a 7 day ban to think things over.
Dude, you tried to lead OP off on a weird tangent that
a) they didn’t follow you on and
b) was nonsense and lacked understanding on your part from the get go.
Stop insulting people as being stupid when clearly you didn’t (want to) understand what was said and just tried to tell people who told personal anecdotes that their anecdotes are wrong…
sorry you don’t like nuanced conversation you couldn’t follow. and if you find that insulting, perhaps you should keep to conversations suited to your… ahem intellectual level.
in any case, let others speak for themselves. the virtue signal got a bit tired in the days of old reddit. we all saw it as a way to signal boost a bad idea on the backs of oppressed people who were not, ya know, you. slimy and wrong.
;)
crawl back into your cave and come back out hen you have an argument that doesn’t require the irrelevant sweatshop of the suffering of others to make your point.