Regulating the requirement that Apple support Linux on Macs makes no sense.

What does make sense - to me anyway - is for Apple to embrace Linux because they'd sell a lot more Macs. I assume there are many thousands of developers like me that detest macOS and won't even consider a Mac. But like you said, Apple is making some amazing hardware these days. I would buy a Mac if Linux was well supported.

Apple did just fine in the early days when their hardware and software was open source. But while it got them up and running, it's not a viable business model to get to be a multi trillion dollar company. It became understood in tech that the way to be profitable was to make your competitors stack a commodity.

> I assume there are many thousands of developers like me that detest macOS

Out of millions of buyers. Developers are almost an irrelevant demography to consider for such a fundamental change.

"Regulating the requirement that Apple support Linux on Macs makes no sense."

Not Linux, but any Operating System. They just have to publish the documentation of how the hardware works.

> for Apple to embrace Linux because they'd sell a lot more Macs.

If that was the case, I think they'd have done it a long time ago. It is more likely that keeping users on Apple-controlled operating systems brings them more profit

But I can't think of any scenario where that would be true.

Selling more hardware would be profitable, and a user being able to dual boot into Linux wouldn't reduce any revenue.

My understanding is that the sale of hardware alone doesn't make anyone a trillion-dollar company. Selling subscriptions and processing payments does.

Apple's hardware is good because of the software on it. Hardware is controlled by software. Lots of stuff that once happened in hardware is now done in drivers. For example, Apple's speakers melt if you run them at maximum volume. Regulating that is what software is for.

I say that as someone that prefers to use Linux.

It is not the scope of DMA to identify and regulate an OS, or demand a hardware-vendor to open and document his OS at his own expense.

They identified something more abstract and much less arguable:

They identified that Apple has created a closed market of significant size, made themselves the gatekeeper and invited companies to compete there.

But ON TOP Apple decided to enter the market also as a player, and skew the playing field in their favor.

So it's an unjust market where forces are unable to flow freely, and the EU is attempting to rectify that.