Having a curated store \neq Having only one store.
Also, that misses all the other areas pointed out: "Be it the electronic wallet, browsers or app stores, consumers using an Apple iPhone should be able to benefit from competitive services by a range of providers."
> But that policy should then also apply to PlayStation, X-box, Tesla infotainment, etc.
Why? That only applies to "gatekeepers". So you would have to argue that apple is very unsuccessful and hence these are at the same level as apple... seems like quite a stretch.
No it's not. Currently all the apps that want to be available on Apple's platform have to submit to Apple's rules. If alternative app stores are allowed, they won't have to do that. As a consumer I like the current state of matters more.
>Also, that misses all the other areas
I'm reacting only to the App Store part. I'm all for opening electronic wallet or allowing browser engines into App Store. Those are off topic in this subthread.
>Why? That only applies to "gatekeepers".
I don't see how PS/Xbox/Tesla are any less of a gatekeeper than Apple.
The point is choice. As a consumer, you can choose to only get your apps via the official Apple store, which comes with all the "Apple rules" you want. As another consumer, I prefer freedom and hate monopolists so would choose another store. Everyone is happy!
Having a curated store \neq Having only one store.
Also, that misses all the other areas pointed out: "Be it the electronic wallet, browsers or app stores, consumers using an Apple iPhone should be able to benefit from competitive services by a range of providers."
> But that policy should then also apply to PlayStation, X-box, Tesla infotainment, etc.
Why? That only applies to "gatekeepers". So you would have to argue that apple is very unsuccessful and hence these are at the same level as apple... seems like quite a stretch.