20.02.2026
In the modern EU, the choice of IT systems is rarely a real choice. Microsoft Windows and Android have become everyone’s OS – installed in schools, at universities, and at workplaces. iOS, iPadOS, and macOS have, in many environments, become the “smart” and socially respected choices – not least among students, creatives, and decision-makers.
It is stable. It is user-friendly. It works. And precisely because of this, very few people ask questions.
But behind the comfort lies a structural dilemma, which is not about doomsday or fear – but about sovereignty.
Most Europeans have grown up with these systems. From primary school to university, one learns Windows and Office. The mobile phone is Android or iPhone. The workplace systems are integrated with American cloud platforms.
This means that the alternative is not just “another operating system.” It is perceived as a break with the familiar. A loss of competence. A social risk.
Technology is not just a tool – it is culture.
The question is not whether Microsoft, Google, or Apple are “evil.” The question is structural.
These systems are developed for an American market, under American legislation, with American commercial interests as the starting point.
The EU has GDPR as a strong legal basis. But when the infrastructure – operating systems, app ecosystems, cloud integrations – is designed outside of Europe, an asymmetry arises.
This is not necessarily a breach of the rules. It is a balance of power.
The dependence does not show itself in everyday life. It shows itself in the absence of alternatives.
When the entire education system is built on certain platforms, competencies and expectations are shaped accordingly. When companies recruit, knowledge of these systems is expected. When public institutions procure, they choose what everyone already can.
This creates a self-reinforcing cycle.
Not because anyone wants it that way. But because it is easiest.
The idea of new, European mobile platforms or desktop environments often meets resistance. Not because they are technically bad. But because they break with habit.
For many, it feels like an existential threat:
It is less about technology and more about identity.
Europe therefore does not face a simple technological choice. It is a cultural and political choice.
The question is not whether Windows, Android, or Apple should be banned. The question is whether the EU wants strategic capacity to own and control its fundamental digital layers itself.
Digital sovereignty does not mean isolation. It means freedom of choice.
And freedom of choice requires real alternatives.
The modern EU is comfortably digital. But comfort and control are not the same.
If Europe wants long-term technological freedom, it requires investment in its own ecosystems – even if they seem less polished at first.
Because technology is not just user experience. It is infrastructure.
And infrastructure is power.