Re: cry wolf
IOS app distribution. IOS browser engines.
I'm sure you have your counterarguments lined right up, for example how smartphone apps as a whole aren't an Apple monopoly. It doesn't work, and has never worked, that way because the phone you have only runs one operating system and is limited to the facilities of that. The argument didn't work for Microsoft, either in the IE case or the Windows Media Player case, even though the restrictions in Windows were much weaker than those in IOS and you could install another operating system on the same computer, either instead of or alongside Windows. Unsurprisingly, it's not working for Apple either.
In this case, I'm much more on Apple's side. I disagree with the EU that interoperability is necessary in most of these cases*, and I am much more confident in Apple's privacy practices than Meta's. Apple does abuse privacy at times**, but Meta abuses privacy every second of every day. I think a GDPR-based argument is likely to go Apple's way if they have it adjudicated by someone knowledgeable.
* For example, I assume the request to have full access to iMessage is because of the theory that all messaging apps should be interoperable and thus that WhatsApp needs to be able to send to and receive from iMessage, and to avoid confusing everyone it probably needs to sync all the messages in one place. This may be correct from a technical perspective, but I don't trust Meta to have that access. Since I see no reason why WhatsApp and iMessage need to be interoperable when I can use both if I wish, I disagree with the EU and agree with Apple here.
** I am not likely to forget Apple's on-device scanning attempt. That significantly harmed their privacy record in my mind. I don't give them credit for not actually doing it because it took a lot of screaming to get them to back down, they tried hard not to tell people important information about it, and it feels too much like giving someone credit for not actually following through on a plan to punch me.