Exploring Apple’s Concerns Regarding Alternative App Stores
Apple finds itself under public scrutiny and facing a barrage of criticism from its closest competitors and rivals. On one front, Microsoft and Meta have repeatedly stated that Apple is not properly complying with the EU and the new Digital Markets Act. Claims and counterclaims abound, with even Epic Games expressing discontent over the new terms and conditions of alternative stores. Now, Apple itself is defending its position by releasing a new document explaining how it is working to comply with EU user protection regulations and the risks associated with opening the iPhone to other app stores.
In their technical document, Apple explains that they have been able to “achieve the goal of protecting their users more effectively” than any other platform. They subtly convey the message that their efforts for such protection, including considerations for developers, are “never complete.”
They boast of never having allowed a malware attack in the 17 years since they started as a computing platform. However, due to the Digital Markets Act, they have been compelled to adopt a new approach to their work, emphasizing that they were forced to change their successful approach to protecting user security and privacy.
The new options they are introducing to comply mean that they will not be able to protect users in the same way. They are highly confident that the EU’s actions will create a gap between today’s protections and those of the future, making it clear that Apple will not be to blame for any serious consequences that may occur in their alternative stores in the coming years. On the other hand, they justify the tireless work they have done to keep the iPhone one of the safest mobile devices, reducing risks but unable to eliminate them entirely.
A document as extensive as Apple’s own history, now altered by third parties, spans 32 pages and around 14,000 words. In it, Cupertino explains the certification process for stores and the apps included in them. However, it does not address the object of criticism they have faced regarding the fees charged for app sales and downloads.
Undoubtedly, the Digital Markets Act highlights potential monopolistic actions by tech giants that could harm users. In Apple’s case, as a guardian company with over 45 million active monthly users and a market capitalization of 75 billion euros, the App Store must allow alternatives not only for competition but also for the benefit of users who should have the freedom to decide what they install on their mobile devices.