Apple's Latest App Store Changes Satisfy EU, No More Fines Coming

FINE-ally, am I right?

From the Reuters article: "All options remain on the table. We are still assessing Apple's proposed changes," the EU watchdog said.

So apps will be cheaper right? Right?

I know we're on a site for rumors. But wouldn't it be better to wait for official confirmation?
It is rather unlikely that Apple will be allowed to continue charging fees for access to the iPhone. That would be contrary to free competition and would allow Apple to continue earning money out of thin air.

And once again to all Apple fans:
Just imagine if Microsoft and Google charged Apple a fee every time a user installed "iCloud for Windows" or "Music for Android" on their OS. It wouldn't come from an app store, but simply on principle.
When you think about what Apple wants money for right now, maybe your hatred of competition, fair markets, and the EU will cease.

Imagine? So, like, if Microsoft charged a developer for games sold through Target, that would be weird to you? Because they already do that.

Once again... It's perfectly normal for platform owners to charge businesses for access to their platform. Some platforms are open. Some platforms are closed. Some are free. Some charge. That you prefer an open platform is just a preference.

You're not defending your poor sick brother from an evil dictator, you're defending a profit-driven company from having to comply with "laws“.

Ignoring the ad hominem nonsense, you're being misleading here. No one is arguing that the Apple doesn't have to comply with the law. Only that it's a bad law. Personally, I agree with the DMA''s goal of more competition. I just think it is a poor way to go about it.

Here's an article from Politico ('https://www.politico.eu/article/apple-to-appeal-e500m--digital-fine-over-eus-silence-in-compliance-talks/'). Here's the key part:

According to correspondence seen by POLITICO, Apple offered last summer to drop its rules ('https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=szrqxadx') on how app developers can communicate with users, but was told by the Commission to hold off, pending feedback from developers.

By late September and following a round of consultations with Apple critics like Spotify, Match Group and Epic Games, executives at the U.S.-based firm began worrying that a lack of feedback from the Commission meant it was teeing up a potential fine and noncompliance decision.

You call telling Apple "don't implement that yet" and then fining Apple for, in part, for not implementing what they told Apple to not implement "operating in good faith"? What part of "declare iPadOS is a gatekeeper despite the fact that iPadOS doesn't meet the quantitative metrics written into the law to be a gatekeeper" is not "changing the rules"?

I'm defending a company pushing back against wrong-headed laws that already have made, and will continue to make, everyone's products worse. Especially when those laws were written by regulators who don't understand what they're doing, have a history of screwing up regulations around tech, and have frozen innovation in their jurisdiction with their regulations.

It's not just Apple saying it either. Meta, had this to say ('https://about.fb.com/news/2025/07/why-the-commissions-decision-undermines-the-goals-of-the-dma/'):

[I]“Our constructive engagement – which pre-dated the launch of any investigation – was publicly noted by the Commission. Yet as 2024 progressed, the goalposts kept shifting and that has continued into 2025. We made proposals but feedback has often not been forthcoming. If feedback was received, it was often inconsistent and untethered from the DMA text. Meanwhile, despite the significant investment that we made to comply and address the Commission’s varying feedback, it kept repeating that it would never be in a position to bless DMA compliance proposals.[/I]

I’m becoming more and more certain that Vestager’s signature achievement is going to be whittled away, bit by bit. By the time it’s done, all it will have accomplished is to complicate the way developers deal with Apple in the EU vs the rest of the world. I’m sure part of the reason why they’re more or less going with what Apple has outlined is that they just want to avoid court challenges that may yield reversals (like when regulators went after Intel with no proof that Intel was doing what it was doing). The courts will show just how recklessly Vestager ran things when she was in power, antagonizing instead of working with companies.

Fine until new EU bureaucrats need more justification to make more edits.