🔗 Share this article

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

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

But the UK competition watchdog has classified both the tech giants as having "strategic market status" - indicating they have a lot of power over smartphone ecosystems.

Watchdog Findings

The CMA said the two companies "may be limiting progress and competition".

But the regulator emphasized it did not "find or assume wrongdoing" from the companies.

"Mobile applications generates one and a half percent of the British economy and sustains around four hundred thousand positions, which is why it's essential these markets function properly for business," stated a senior official from the CMA.

Approximately ninety to one hundred percent of British smartphones run on the two tech companies' mobile platforms, creating what the authority calls an "virtual monopoly".

Based on recent analysis, 48.5% of UK mobile owners use an iPhone - which runs Apple's iOS - with the vast majority of the rest using the Android OS.

Apple's Response

The CMA's investigation examined how prominent the companies' own apps are versus rivals - as well as their browsers and platform software.

It is unclear what modifications the authority will look to request, but earlier it published guidelines outlining possible actions it could take.

These include requiring it to be more straightforward for people to switch between iOS and Android devices, and for both companies to rank apps "fairly and openly" in their app stores.

Apple particularly may be required to permit alternative app stores on its products, and enable people to download programs directly from developer sites.

This would mirror comparable regulations in the EU, which previously imposed measures against Apple for restrictive practices.

The technology firm cautioned the United Kingdom could lose access to receiving updates - as has happened in the European Union - which the organization blames on heavy regulation.

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

"We encounters intense rivalry in every market where we operate, and we work tirelessly to create the best products, services and customer interface," the organization said in a release.

"The UK's adoption of EU-style rules would undermine that, resulting in consumers with reduced data protection and security, slower availability to latest functions, and a fragmented, more complicated user journey."

The Search Giant's Standpoint

Android users can presently use third-party app stores - though critics say they are not as user-friendly as Google's own Play Store.

The regulator's plan said the search company may have to "modify the interface" of installing applications straight from online sources, as well as "eliminate barriers" when using alternative app stores.

"There appears to be no the rationale for today's designation decision," a Google policy executive remarked.

The representative said "the majority" of Android users use alternative app stores or install applications straight from a creator's site, and asserted there is a far greater range of applications offered for Google device owners compared to those on Apple devices.

"Currently available are 24,000 Android phone models from 1,300 device makers worldwide, facing strong rivalry from iOS in the United Kingdom," the representative added.

Google's platform is an freely available software, which means developers can use and build on top of it for free.

Google argues this means it promotes market competition.

But consumer groups said restrictions on these companies' power in different nations "are already helping enterprises to develop and giving customers more options".

"Their dominance is now causing real harm by restricting choice for consumers and competition for businesses," stated a consumer advocate.