Apple

I, too, have read the article and it doesn’t say that. The closest thing is this paragraph here:

Vestager’s comments come within the context of EU’s Digital Markets Act or DMA, a flagship law that imposes rules and obligations on digital gatekeepers, including Apple. Among the DMA’s obligations is a requirement that Apple permit app developers to direct users to alternative sources, outside of Apple’s App Store, to download apps and make transactions. Vestager asserts that Apple’s security based claims are a diversion and improperly support Apple’s purported desire to keep a 30% commission for doing business in the App Store.

This primarily argument here targets the inability to download from external sources and leaps to the conclusion that it is to guard their commission. It also uses the top line 30% figure which is incorrect as vast majority of businesses fall into the lower tier and is much lower.

Despite the claims, the security implications remains true. By limiting installation mechanisms and requiring everything to be centrally notarized, this enabled Apple to rapidly block malicious applications across all devices. They’ve gone out of their way to implement a secure mechanism for DMA which allows them to continue to have the ability to rapidly stop malwares dead in their tracks.

Apple devices are much harder to compromise. Security researchers have noted this time and again. Even the recent malware that’s allegedly “cross platform” turns out to be greatly nerfed on iOS due to the security frameworks.

Law makers want to claim monopoly, they should call it for what it is, but not try to conflate things they clearly do not understand sufficiently and have not spoken with enough industry experts in.

Edit: you can see my comment from the GoldPick discussion a couple months back demonstrating the vast level of differences between the two platforms on the alleged cross platform trojan here: https://lemmy.chiisana.net/comment/498511