this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
183 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

59428 readers
3120 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 113 points 1 year ago (1 children)

“Companies to come under regulation argue they shouldn’t be regulated”

[–] nosurprises@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I already created the summary. You can find it at https://lemm.ee/comment/3217890.

[–] lossykittens@reddthat.com 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But what if I want lossless kittens?

[–] lossykittens@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

Sorry, that’s a whole other level;)

[–] Phoenix3875@lemmy.world 107 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We are, in fact, the gate.

[–] starman@programming.dev 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] lando55@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Boops@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago
[–] shotgun_crab@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

It was all foreshadowing

[–] Marsupial@quokk.au 5 points 1 year ago

Ah the gategate conspiracy.

[–] zerkrazus@lemmy.world 83 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We don't have a monopoly. - Company with a monopoly

[–] ares35@kbin.social 20 points 1 year ago

what they mean by that is they haven't got the hotels on all the spaces yet.

[–] Skoobie@lemmy.film 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Obviously Apples claim is complete bullshit but damn ya gotta feel a little for Microsoft tho, right? Like they've been trying to capture the search engine market with Bing for so long and only after being crushed by Google, they're being accused of succeeding 😂.

[–] tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's more about bing being built into windows I think.. but I suspect they may get away with it just because it has little market share despite being built into windows..

[–] ares35@kbin.social 27 points 1 year ago

bing may not be succeeding in the browser or mobile search space, but microsoft is doing everything they can think of (and get away with) to leverage windows' dominance in the OS space to trick, con or force users into bing searches directly from the OS (that display in the OS or forced into edge), as well as shoving bing-delivered, ad-infested clickbait content in front of users eyeballs whether they want it or not.

[–] LethalSmack@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Not just built in to windows but forced on you in windows.

[–] tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So apple is saying they don't have 45 million active monthly users in a market of 750 million people and a 34% market share?

I'm sure 'most of our customers don't use our product' isn't what they were going for..

TBH though I suspect the EU will see through it - the purpose of the gatekeeper legislation isn't really about numbers, it's about market power - no one company should be able to dominate with a proprietary system. Which is precisely what apple is trying to do with imessage.

[–] derpgon@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

Either implement the current standard, or release your standard. If it's so good, then it should be available to anyone, and everyone would want to use it, right?

If I want my app to support iMessage, I should be able to do that. If not, the fuck right off. These things are never meant "for the people".

"But if anyone can use it, then we don't make money off it!" - then you won't get a cent from me, period.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 9 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Brussels’ battle with the two US companies over Apple’s iMessage chat app and Microsoft’s Bing search engine comes ahead of Wednesday’s publication of the first list of services to be regulated by the Digital Markets Act.

The legislation imposes new responsibilities on tech companies, including sharing data, linking to competitors, and making their services interoperable with rival apps.

Microsoft had rejected the idea that Bing should be subject to the same obligations placed on its much larger rival, Google Search, said two people with direct knowledge of the matter.

Separately, Apple argued that iMessage did not meet the threshold of user numbers at which the rules applied and therefore should not comply with obligations that include opening the service to rival apps such as Meta’s WhatsApp, said the two people.

Meta’s Instagram and Facebook and Google’s search engine are all expected to be covered by the new rules, which are aimed at opening up markets and enabling competition from European start-ups.

“The DMA will bring new competition to digital markets in Europe, and now it is up to the commission to make it work,” said Andreas Schwab, the MEP who led negotiation of the rules.


The original article contains 649 words, the summary contains 195 words. Saved 70%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] sheinar@feddit.uk 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I have some sympathy with Microsoft, minimal though it is, given how few people use Bing compared to Google. I have zero for Apple though.

[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

They're arguing their bing devision and some others should be excluded.

Windows is still a huge market share of OSs. So, the law is capable of saying this part of Microsoft is a gatekeeper, and this part not, is what I'm saying.