Japan to crack down on Apple and Google app store monopolies

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Japan’s plan to force Apple and Google to allow third‑party app stores and payment systems on mobile devices is seen as a major challenge to their lucrative “walled garden” models. Commenters debate whether these gatekeepers provide useful security and quality control or primarily extract monopoly rents via 30% fees, restrictive billing rules, and bans on competing tech such as alternative browsers and emulators. Many expect the changes to ripple globally, raising questions about how platforms will adapt their business models, whether consoles and other closed ecosystems should face similar rules, and if web apps and PWAs can finally become first‑class alternatives to native apps.

Regulation of Mobile App Stores

  • Many welcome Japan’s move as another large jurisdiction poking holes in “DIY monopolies” like app stores and right‑to‑repair restrictions.
  • Others see it as protectionist realpolitik aimed at boosting domestic companies (e.g., letting Japanese game and fintech firms keep more revenue on iOS/Android).
  • Some worry about details such as how high a fee Apple/Google can still charge for “alternative payments,” citing Korea’s 26% example.

Apple vs. Google Policies

  • Several argue Google is materially less restrictive: sideloading and third‑party stores are allowed, and Play’s billing rules apply only to Play‑distributed apps.
  • Counterpoint: Google intentionally makes sideloading and alternative stores second‑class (warnings, extra clicks, no auto‑updates, payment friction, dual builds), so the “openness” is largely theoretical.
  • Debate over why Epic lost vs Apple but won vs Google: explanations include different legal theories, evidence of Google’s secret anti‑competitive deals, and the fact that Android was marketed as “open” while iOS was explicitly closed from day one.

Sideloading, Third‑Party Stores, and User Behavior

  • Many expect most users to stay in default stores; third‑party stores and sideloading may mainly serve power users and big publishers.
  • Some foresee region‑based workarounds (VPNs, foreign accounts) if features are limited to EU/Japan; others think Apple could tie access to SIM/IMSI and store region.

Console and Other Platform Comparisons

  • Strong disagreement over whether consoles (Nintendo, PlayStation, Xbox) should face similar rules:
    • One side: they are also closed general‑purpose computers with single tied stores and should be regulated like phones.
    • Other side: consoles are non‑essential, smaller markets with different economics (often subsidized hardware) and are explicitly “appliances,” so regulators focus on ubiquitous phones instead.
  • Some note EU/Japanese thresholds (device counts, title counts) effectively exempt consoles.

Web Apps, PWAs, and Development Tooling

  • Multiple commenters argue the web is a secure, interoperable alternative and that many apps are just webviews; PWAs can already be “installed,” especially on Android.
  • Others complain Apple/Google under‑support PWAs and push native apps to preserve their 30% cuts.
  • Long subthread on mobile dev friction: heavy toolchains (Xcode, Android Studio), platform‑specific quirks, and brittle build environments; suggestions include PWAs, React Native/Expo, Flutter, Cordova, and webview‑wrapped apps.

Antitrust, Business Models, and Consumer Impact

  • Some argue app‑store profits are so large that even big fee cuts won’t threaten Apple/Google; if needed they can adjust hardware pricing or services.
  • Others emphasize that smartphones are now essential infrastructure, and letting two companies tax and gatekeep all mobile software, payments, and even browsing is harmful to innovation, pricing, and user autonomy.
  • A minority defends the status quo as a justified return on R&D and a way to protect non‑technical users from malware and scams; critics reply that current stores are already full of spyware, dark‑pattern subscriptions, and low‑quality apps.

Global Access and Smaller Countries

  • One commenter highlights that entire countries (e.g., Kyrgyzstan) are blocked from publishing on Google Play, calling it discriminatory and a reminder that policy changes should also consider global developer access, not just fees in rich markets.