@dmitriid @stevestreza If Apple cuts off services in compliance with the law, is it Apple holding EU citizens hostage, EU citizens holding themselves hostage (i.e. "They saw this law coming; why didn't they distance themselves from Apple's ecosystem and find alternatives?"), or EU's regulators holding citizens hostage?

I think Apple is betting there's more than one answer to the question.

(To be clear: it's a huge, weird bet and I respect the opinion that the starting-gate position should have been "Don't do that." But I've been watching governments regulate the Internet long enough to also not accept the premise that regulators are always right in what citizens want or need. It'll be interesting to see how this sifts out).

FTA:

The EU absolutely is for protecting and strengthening the European single market.

No disagreement there. But I also observe that Apple is under no obligation to be aligned with that goal (over, say, strengthening and regularizing a global marketplace that simplifies the creation of Apple's products by requiring fewer special cases).

The EC has identified six gatekeepers, zero of which are European companies. This specific move is pretty naked protectionism (which, to be clear, is well within the EU's purview). Apple is making an... Interesting decision by saying "Okay, we play ball. You're protected. Someone else, we're sure, will backfill the products and services we provide."

(ETA: What I find most interesting in all of this is that Alphabet is also a gatekeeper company and, AFAIK, they are playing ball. So Apple is really betting that their offering is so good that people won't jump ship to Android, which is more-or-less "right over there" from a consumer perspective.

Will that bet work? I'll be interested to see).