I want to be sympathetic but the fundamental premise here seems to be flawed:

    In recent years, the number of apps that users
    have been installing on their handsets has
    declined. This is the case despite the increasing
    number of applications of all kinds that make a
    handset more useful.

But I’d propose a counter-narrative: Users have slowed down installing apps because they’ve learned the lessons of the past 15 years that most dedicated apps are intrusive and counterproductive trash that track you, spam you, burn through your battery, and don’t actually provide any useful functionality.

It goes on to suggest that allowing other app stores may increase “innovation in discovery and distribution”. But the only innovation that would be happening is new levels of confusion as not all apps are available in all app stores, and different stores will have conflicting policies and procedures that will make them impossible to coexist, and many app stores will inevitably be taken over by scam lookalikes.

I find no reason to believe that alternative app stores would ever provide a beneficial experience to users. If we’re unhappy with Apple’s monopolistic practices and conflicts of interest, then we need to be improving regulation of things like app store fees and user tracking; forcing divestment of problematic integrated business lines like streaming content, ad sales, and cloud services; requiring device makers to provide open specs for ports like lightning and access and tools not only for repair but for installing alternative OSes or buying hardware without anything pre-installed.

But fiddly little things like forcing alternative “app stores” just to satisfy financially abusive wannabe monopolists like the video game companies is not a solution that will help anyone.