🔗 Share this article

The iPhone maker may have to allow competitors to run separate app stores on Apple devices across Britain, following a ruling from the competition regulator.

This would be a major shift to Apple's infamous "closed system" where apps can only be installed from the company's App Store.

But the Competition and Markets Authority has classified both Apple and Google as having "dominant market position" - effectively saying they have a lot of power over smartphone ecosystems.

Watchdog Findings

The regulator said the two companies "could be restricting progress and competition".

But the regulator clarified it did not "find or assume wrongdoing" from the firms.

"The app economy generates 1.5% of the UK's GDP and sustains around 400,000 jobs, which is why it's crucial these markets work well for business," commented a top executive from the CMA.

Around ninety to one hundred percent of British smartphones operate using the two tech companies' mobile platforms, creating what the authority calls an "effective duopoly".

According to current data, nearly half of British smartphone users own an iPhone - which runs the iOS operating system - with the overwhelming bulk of the remaining users using the Android OS.

The Company's Response

The CMA's investigation focused on how dominant Apple and Google's own apps are compared with competitors - as well as their web applications and operating systems.

It is unclear what changes the regulator will seek to implement, but earlier it published guidelines detailing potential measures it could take.

These include requiring it to be easier for people to transition between Apple and Android devices, and for both firms to rank apps "fairly and openly" in their app stores.

Apple specifically may be required to allow alternative app stores on its devices, and enable people to install apps directly from developer sites.

This would mirror comparable regulations in the European Union, which previously imposed measures against the company for restrictive practices.

Apple warned the United Kingdom could lose access to getting new features - as has occurred in the EU - which the organization attributes to strict rules.

For instance, some Apple Intelligence features which have been rolled out in other parts of the world are not available in the European market.

"Apple encounters fierce competition in every sector where we operate, and we work tirelessly to create the best products, solutions and customer interface," the organization said in a release.

"The UK's adoption of EU-style rules would weaken that, leaving users with reduced data protection and security, slower availability to new features, and a divided, more complicated experience."

Google's Position

Google device owners can presently use third-party app stores - though critics say they are not as user-friendly as Google's own application marketplace.

The CMA's roadmap said Google may have to "modify the interface" of downloading apps directly from websites, as well as "eliminate barriers" when using alternative app stores.

"There appears to be no the justification for the current classification," a company policy executive stated.

The representative said "most" of Android users use alternative app stores or download apps directly from a developer's website, and asserted there is a much wider selection of apps offered for Google device owners compared to those on Apple devices.

"There are now 24,000 Google-compatible devices from thirteen hundred phone manufacturers worldwide, facing strong rivalry from Apple's platform in the United Kingdom," the spokesperson added.

Android is an freely available software, which means creators can utilize and develop on top of it for free.

Google argues this means it opens up competition.

But advocacy organizations said curbs on these firms' dominance in other countries "are already helping businesses to innovate and giving customers more options".

"Their dominance is now causing real harm by restricting choice for consumers and competition for businesses," commented a policy expert.