The App Store Settlements, One Year On
A year after courts and regulators forced the mobile app stores to open their payment systems, the changes are real, modest and mostly invisible to users.
It has been roughly a year since the largest mobile app stores were compelled — by courts in some jurisdictions, by new digital-markets laws in others — to allow developers to point users to payment methods outside the store's own system. The changes were forecast to break the economics of mobile software. They have not. But they have changed it at the margins, and the margins are where the interesting things happen.
The headline finding is how little consumer behaviour has moved. Given a choice between paying inside the app with one tap and following a link to a web checkout, the overwhelming majority of users still tap. Convenience, it turns out, was always the stores' real moat — not the rule that forced developers to use it. Where alternative payments have taken hold is in categories with high prices and motivated customers: subscriptions to professional tools, dating services, and games whose most committed players will follow a link to save ten per cent on a hundred-dollar purchase.
Developers have responded with a quiet repricing. Many now maintain two price lists — one inside the app, one on the web — and market the difference directly to their best customers. The stores, for their part, have cut headline commission rates in some regions while introducing new fees with different names. The net effect on the stores' revenue has been small enough that their parent companies barely mention it in earnings calls.
The more durable change may be legal rather than economic. The principle that a platform operator cannot absolutely control commerce on its platform is now established in several major jurisdictions, and regulators are applying the same logic to the next targets: default search deals, browser engines, and the emerging question of who controls payments inside AI assistants.
The limitations of the one-year verdict are real. Enforcement is uneven across countries, some remedies are still tied up in appeals, and a year is short in platform time. But the early lesson is clear: rules can open a door, yet they cannot make users walk through it. Behaviour, not law, is the slowest layer to change.
Every claim above is sourced to a document, a named person, or a record we hold. Where we could not verify a claim, we say so. Read our standards and corrections policy →