Well, yes and no. Paying that fine once would just be a cost of doing business, but now that the precedent has been set if they continue to do it they’ll continue to get fined in that order. Those fines won’t need court cases, so they’ll need to be paid quickly and in full. Sure, the fine they received didn’t really hurt them but it will change their behaviour. It will also prevent others from engaging in the same behaviour.

I don’t think the EU wants to bankrupt companies like Apple - it’s not in the collective best interest. They need to guide behaviour by setting up punishments that are deterring but not destructive. I think €500m fits that pretty well - it’s akin to giving a child a timeout while their friends play or a smack on the back of the hand. It’s doing what it’s intended to do.

If they want it to have an effect it should be $500 million every 3 months until it changes.

To Ponzi schemes and selling snake oil. Only their customers won’t complain and sue them, because it’s still sometimes nice to use, and it’s a real functioning thing, and premium costs are not deceit, and nobody wants to admit they’ve been fooled, and they are often not qualified to understand it.

Weren’t Microsoft got fined similar amount (or was it higher?) for Internet Explorer browser monopoly back then?