The return of Fortnite to the App Store marked more than just a comeback of a blockbuster game; it signaled a turning point in how market giants like Apple are being asked to share control over their ecosystems. 

In October 2025, a London tribunal ruled that Apple abused its dominant position by charging app developers “excessive and unfair” commissions. The ruling, hailed as a landmark win for developers and consumers, further pressures Apple to open up the tightly controlled system it has built for over a decade.

For years, Apple has advertised its “walled garden” as a sign of worthy features, tighter security, cleaner interfaces, and top-notch user experience to justify many of the restrictions placed on developers. However, the same system also gives Apple immense power over how apps are built and sold, sparking debate over whether the “walled garden” protects users or Apple’s dominance.

Gatekeeping the Garden

Under Apple’s traditional model, app developers must work within a framework defined entirely by Apple. Accessible APIs, strict guidelines, and in-app purchase commissions are only some of the restrictions that leave stakeholders with little choice. 

The infamous Epic Games v. Apple lawsuit exposed these limits, and the recent UK decision echoes the same concerns. Between 2015 to 2020, the tribunal found that Apple effectively shut out competition and overcharged both developers and consumers. 

Jacob Catayoc, a mobile developer of Benilde’s FSL Buddy app and chairperson of the College’s Information Systems Program, recalled, “We were required to change the layout of the application to conform to the iOS guidelines, which were accepted on Android. We had to delay the deployment of the iOS app because of this.”

In another case, Apple required the use of Apple Pay for payments even though the service is not available in the Philippines. “We had to provide justifications for the exemption,” he added. 

These experiences show how Apple’s globally-enforced rules may not always fit with local realities and user needs. 

Small teams, big walls

Meeting Apple’s standards for students and indie developers is a much steeper climb. “For me, Apple's ecosystem restrictions can discourage students and independent developers from experimenting with iOS development,” Catayoc expressed. 

Developing for iOS requires a Mac, since the main development tool, Xcode, only runs on macOS, seasoned mobile developer Jensen Lim explained in an exclusive interview with The Benildean.

On top of that, publishing on the app store costs $99 every year compared to Android’s one-time $25 fee, the developers explained. “[I]f you are an independent or student developer, you may not be able to deploy if you have not enrolled and paid for the Apple Developer Program, and you will not be able to recoup your investment if you don't develop regularly,” Catayoc said. 

“[O]pen platforms can further help elevate the development awareness on the iOS platform, especially schools that may not have the budget to purchase Macs just to deploy to iPhones,” he added.

This cost barrier limits who can participate in the iOS developer community and keeps many students, small startups, or hobbyists from ever getting the chance to build for iPhone users. 

Indie developers also often lack the legal compliance and financial resources that larger developers have, which results in delayed launches or censorship. At the same time, the cracks in the walled garden offer hope to indie developers that they may gain more freedom.

Sidestepping the system

In Europe, regulators are forcing Apple to open up. A recent law called the Digital Markets Act requires Apple to allow “sideloading” or the ability to install apps from outside the App Store and choose how to handle payments without surrendering 30% of every transaction.

Many developers feel that this is a step toward fairness. “Having an alternative app store is highly beneficial for developers as it can lessen the cost of putting an app and making it more accessible to users,” Lim expressed. 

Catayoc sees both sides: “[F]or private institutions or hobbyists who may find paying for the Apple Developer Program too expensive or impractical, sideloading allows them to deploy apps even without Apple approving them for publishing to the Apple App Store.”

For now, these alternatives are only available in Europe, but countries like Australia and Brazil are following suit in legally compelling Apple to extend this access, signaling that regulators are no longer buying Apple’s argument that total control is for the benefit of developers and users. 

From walled garden to open narket

The emerging direction seems promising: the App Store can no longer remain fully closed. 

For developers, this could mean more flexibility and lower costs. For users, this leads to better value and greater competition, but also more responsibility over their safety. 

But for Apple, this is an ongoing fight over one of its major sources of profit, as it appeals a €500 million fine from the EU and the right to claim revenue from payment methods outside its store.

The outcomes of these key cases around the world will change how the app economy operates, but one thing is clear: the garden remains, but the walls are beginning to come down.