In a recent opinion published yesterday, the European Union has designated Apple’s iPadOS operating system as a digital “gatekeeper” under the new Digital Markets Act (DMA) regulations. This announcement is a continuation of the European regulatory trend of restricting the operations of technology companies and demanding certain changes that, now that they are already being applied to the iPhone, have generated more questions than answers regarding the future of innovation within the European Union.
Deep changes that go from iPhone to iPad
By designating iPadOS as the gatekeeper, the European Commission imposes on Apple the obligation to open its ecosystem to changes that go beyond its control and its ability to offer a level of device integration that is unmatched in the market.
The most notable measure of these new requirements is that, if this decision is upheld, Apple will have to open the doors to alternative app stores. Some big companies, like Meta, have announced that they will not launch stores of this kind, but we have seen the arrival of one, the AltStore, which is already available on the iPhone.
The second measure is that, although we have been able to install alternative browsers on our iPad for years, now the system presents us with a list of options when configuring the device for the first time. A measure that has received criticism from the developers of these alternative browsers for preventing users from consulting information about the choice before making it, but in any case, a system to remind us that there are more browsers available.
Three reasons to justify the decision
Last September, the European Commission designated Apple as a gatekeeper under the new DMA regulations for its iPhone operating system, iOS, its web browser Safari, and its App Store. Simultaneously, the Commission initiated an investigation to determine whether they would decide that iPadOS should also be considered a gatekeeper.
The investigation has recently concluded, and according to the press release from the EU, it has been decided that iPadOS should be subject to the requirements of the DMA. The arguments put forward are that the number of business users exceeds the established threshold. While the number of users is close to the threshold without exceeding it, the EU argues that it is expected to increase in the future, which would justify its consideration as a gatekeeper.
In addition, the EU states that both individual users and business users are confined to using iPadOS due to Apple’s vast ecosystem, which discourages switching to other operating systems.
Are they good or bad news?
From an economic perspective, the imposition of these regulations raises the question of whether fair competition is truly being encouraged or if success is being penalized. Apple has built its platform through continuous innovation and a massive investment of time and resources.
Forcing the opening of its ecosystem could not only undermine its business model, but also send a worrying message to other technology companies about the risks of achieving significant success in Europe.
By imposing excessive restrictions and obligations, the EU could inadvertently discourage technology companies from operating within its borders, which in the long run could discourage investment and availability of products and services in the European market.
Finally, there is the question of whether the designation of iPadOS as a gatekeeper by the EU really achieves the goal of maintaining market competition. Although it is true that Apple enjoys its position, the imposed solution may not be proportional or suitable for fostering real competition. Rather, it could level the playing field artificially, which could ultimately harm both consumers and innovators.
Although the intentions of the European Commission to regulate digital markets and promote competition are understandable, the designation of iPadOS as a gatekeeper raises several questions about the effectiveness and repercussions of such measures. Regulatory intervention, although necessary in certain contexts, must be carefully balanced with the need to maintain an environment that fosters technological and economic innovation.
Ultimately, as the EU seeks to adjust the dynamics of the digital market, it should also consider the complexities inherent in technological development and the potential side effects of its policies. Ensuring that Europe remains a center of technological innovation requires not only regulations, but also a deep respect for the principles of market and competition that have so far allowed technology to flourish.
