For once, Apple and Google are standing on the same side of a major tech fight. The two rivals, who usually compete aggressively across smartphones, AI, and software ecosystems, are now pushing back against new proposals from the European Commission that could dramatically change how AI assistants work on Android devices inside Europe.
At the center of the dispute is the European Union’s ongoing enforcement of the Digital Markets Act, commonly known as the DMA. European regulators want Google to open Android much further to rival AI services, arguing that competing assistants should receive the same level of system access currently enjoyed by Google’s own AI platform, Gemini. Regulators believe this would create a more competitive AI market and prevent large tech companies from locking users into their own ecosystems.
Back in January, the European Commission reportedly informed Google that external AI providers should receive equal access to Android features and user interaction layers. Regulators also demanded that Google share anonymized search-related information such as rankings, clicks, and query data with rival search engines. According to the commission, the goal is to ensure fair competition and encourage innovation as AI assistants become deeply integrated into smartphones and everyday digital life.
But Google strongly opposed the proposal almost immediately. The company argued that giving third-party AI systems broad operating-level access could weaken user privacy protections, increase security vulnerabilities, and make Android devices less safe overall. Google’s legal representatives also claimed the measures could increase costs and create technical risks that European regulators may be underestimating.
Now Apple has surprisingly echoed many of those same concerns. According to reports, Apple submitted feedback supporting Google’s position after the commission released draft compliance rules in April. The iPhone maker reportedly warned that allowing outside AI systems unrestricted or near-unrestricted access to smartphone functions could expose deeply sensitive user activity. That includes interactions involving email apps, messaging services, food delivery platforms, photo libraries, and other private user behavior handled daily through smartphones.
Apple reportedly argued that the proposed rules create “urgent and serious concerns” involving privacy, safety, device integrity, and performance. The company also emphasized that AI systems are still evolving rapidly and can behave unpredictably, making it dangerous to grant them extremely deep operating system access before the technology fully matures. In simple terms, Apple’s argument is that regulators may be moving faster than the technology itself is ready for.
One particularly sharp criticism reportedly came when Apple questioned how quickly the European Commission developed its draft measures. The company allegedly stated that regulators were effectively overriding engineering decisions made by Google after years of development work while relying on only a few months of regulatory review. Apple also suggested that the EU’s proposals appear too focused on “open access” without fully accounting for the security consequences that might follow.
The irony here is hard to miss. Apple has spent years positioning itself publicly as the tech company most focused on privacy and controlled ecosystems. At the same time, critics argue that the company often uses privacy arguments to defend its tightly locked software environment and maintain dominance over its platforms. The DMA directly challenges that control by forcing companies like Apple and Google to become more interoperable with competitors.
Apple itself is already under heavy scrutiny from European regulators because of the same law. The company has repeatedly clashed with the EU over App Store policies, third-party marketplaces, and restrictions placed on outside developers. Under DMA requirements, Apple was forced to allow alternative app marketplaces on iOS in Europe — something the company resisted strongly for years.
Earlier this year, Apple even accused the European Commission of using political delay tactics while investigating the company following issues surrounding alternative app stores. So while Apple’s support for Google may look unusual on the surface, both companies currently share a common interest: limiting how much control regulators gain over their software ecosystems and AI infrastructure.
What makes this fight especially important is timing. AI assistants are quickly becoming the next major battleground for big tech companies. Services like Gemini, ChatGPT, Claude, and others are evolving beyond simple chatbots and slowly turning into operating-system-level assistants capable of managing apps, messages, schedules, purchases, and personal information. Whoever controls that layer of interaction could dominate the next phase of consumer technology.
European regulators, meanwhile, appear determined to stop a future where only a few giant companies control that ecosystem entirely. Their position is that opening platforms early could prevent monopolistic AI dominance before it becomes impossible for smaller competitors to catch up.
Honestly, this entire dispute shows how complicated the AI era is becoming for governments and tech companies alike. Regulators want openness and competition, while companies warn that too much openness could create privacy and security disasters. Somewhere in the middle sits the average user, who wants both innovation and protection at the same time. And right now, Europe is trying to decide how much of each side it is willing to sacrifice.
