It's a double edged sword. The problem is that there's a lot of bad actors out there. You know why Apple doesn't let companies get access to the raw camera data on the Vision? Because Meta is salivating at getting inside people's homes and being able to get even more data.

Some of us are able to navigate the minefield through a lot of hard won experience acquired over years if not decades. I lived through the J2ME era with compromised JARs, premium rate scams, carriers monopolizing things, and all the bullshit that came along with it. The App Store, for all its MANY faults basically solved all that for normal people in one fell swoop.

A lot of people aren't going to realize what they might be giving up until it's too late. Apple is at least trying to mitigate this by keeping as much processing as possible on device and trying to secure those devices as best they can. For a lot of people who aren't technically inclined this is a godsend. DMA somewhat counteracts that because it forces Apple to give up some of the control that is keeping these bad actors at bay.

The problem is also that Apple uses security (which I agree is a good feature of Apple platforms) to give itself an exceptional position, making it hard to compete. For instance, it is nearly impossible to make a smartwatch with deep integration with iOS. This hugely benefits Apple’s own Apple Watch.

With Google also quickly restricting Android, we have to ask if this is the future we want, where only Apple, Google and Samsung products work well with their devices.

It's not a double edged sword. That is pure nonsense. Apple only needs to let OTHERS provide the protection service and we're done. Also, it is not the essence of the DMA.

Apple is a bad actor too. They advocate for privacy but it's placing themselves as the trusted party. It doesn't mean they are and even if they are it doesn't mean they won't stop at some point when it suits investor interests.

How would Meta gain access to my home if i don’t install Meta’s apps on my Vision?