It turns out that’s a big reason why Apple landed in hot water today with the US Department of Justice, which alleges that the company went too far in locking down messaging, smartwatches, and digital wallets to intentionally hobble its rivals.
What the DOJ is saying is that, altogether, this series of protective policies makes it extremely difficult for an iPhone user to leave its walled garden, limiting competition so much that it breaks the law.
But on top of that, it cites the fact that a third-party smartwatch misses out on features like quick replies to texts, accepting calendar invites, and interacting with app alerts in the same way as with an Apple Watch.
With digital wallets, the DOJ’s beef with Apple is that the company blocks financial institutions from accessing NFC hardware within the iPhone.
Again, the DOJ asserts that it’s feasible for Apple to enable tap-to-pay access but that it won’t because it would “be one way to disable [A]pple [P]ay trivially” and encourage other types of payment apps.
Apple says it disagrees with the DOJ’s lawsuit, framing all of these decisions as choices it made to protect consumers — particularly with regard to privacy and security.
The original article contains 968 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
It turns out that’s a big reason why Apple landed in hot water today with the US Department of Justice, which alleges that the company went too far in locking down messaging, smartwatches, and digital wallets to intentionally hobble its rivals.
What the DOJ is saying is that, altogether, this series of protective policies makes it extremely difficult for an iPhone user to leave its walled garden, limiting competition so much that it breaks the law.
But on top of that, it cites the fact that a third-party smartwatch misses out on features like quick replies to texts, accepting calendar invites, and interacting with app alerts in the same way as with an Apple Watch.
With digital wallets, the DOJ’s beef with Apple is that the company blocks financial institutions from accessing NFC hardware within the iPhone.
Again, the DOJ asserts that it’s feasible for Apple to enable tap-to-pay access but that it won’t because it would “be one way to disable [A]pple [P]ay trivially” and encourage other types of payment apps.
Apple says it disagrees with the DOJ’s lawsuit, framing all of these decisions as choices it made to protect consumers — particularly with regard to privacy and security.
The original article contains 968 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!