They replied to me they did not see any legal problem with notarization.
replyWe need a DMA 2.0 which address the oligopoly of dominant Operating Systems, including the freedom to install alternative OSes (no more signed bootloaders, proper hardware documentation, etc...).
It's not because you can still install apps outside the Play Store. The EU commission buys these "safety" arguments (also worked for Apple, they don't care that you still can't install IPAs) and the DMA is made for businesses, not for end-users. I once wrote them about the Chrome Web Store monopoly but they insist that everything is fine because businesses aren't impacted. They are of course also interested in centralized censorship because they can order Google to block apps they don't like.
replyIt feels like you can draw a pretty clear comparison to the Google Shopping case: https://www.stibbe.com/publications-and-insights/google-shop...
replyIt's not enough to provide some crappier way for competition. Just using your dominance to influence the market at all is already monopoly abuse.
And of course, businesses are affected. App developers are frequently businesses.
Wouldn't they have fined Apple long ago, if what Google is doing here (a small step less bad than what Apple does) were illegal?
reply