Google has opened enrollment for its Registered App Stores programme, which will allow approved third-party app marketplaces to install applications with a single tap and deliver updates in the background on supported Android devices from December 1. The programme gives alternative app stores a more direct route to reach Android users, but access to these features will depend on meeting Google's verification, security and operational requirements.

The move does not introduce third-party app stores to Android. Users have been able to download alternative marketplaces such as Epic Games Store and F-Droid, or install applications directly through APK files, outside Google Play. However, these installations typically involve additional system prompts, manual permissions and separate confirmation for app updates.

Google's new programme changes this installation process for marketplaces that qualify. Registered stores will be able to install apps without secondary system confirmation screens, while updates can be downloaded and installed in the background, subject to user settings. Users will also receive notifications about download progress and installation status.

The programme is optional. Marketplaces that do not register can continue distributing applications through Android, although their installation experience will remain unchanged.

What changes under Google's Registered App Stores programme?

Under Android's existing sideloading process, users installing an alternative app store must allow it to install unknown applications through system settings. Each subsequent app installation also requires a separate confirmation. Updates distributed through these stores require user approval.

Registered App Stores will receive permission to install applications directly through the Android system once the marketplace has been verified. This removes the additional confirmation screens for individual installations. The programme also allows registered marketplaces to manage app updates in the background, with users retaining control over automatic updates.

However, registration is not an automatic approval for unrestricted app distribution. Google requires marketplaces to operate as legitimate, open platforms that allow eligible developers to distribute applications under clear and non-discriminatory policies. They must provide users with information about applications, including developer details, version information, download size and relevant safety disclosures.

Marketplaces must also allow users to uninstall applications through the same listing or management page used to install them, support app restoration and archiving, and provide a mechanism to update the marketplace itself.

There are financial and technical requirements as well. Ars Technica reported that the fee is $10,000 a year, with additional review charges possible if a store's catalogue exceeds Google's malware threshold.

Applicants must register as organisations through the Android Developer Console, complete developer verification and establish ownership of their marketplace's package name. They must also submit their store's APK for malware scanning and provide Google with their complete app catalogue and subsequent updates for security review.

Google can remove a marketplace from the programme if it fails to meet these requirements. However, the company states that registered stores remain responsible for their catalogues and that Google will not moderate the content distributed through them.

The programme will be available from December 1, 2026, on devices running Android 17 QPR2 or later in supported regions, including India. It is not currently available in the US. The rollout will therefore depend on both regional availability and whether device manufacturers deliver the required Android update. Android Developers Ars Technica

Why is Google formalising third-party app stores?

The programme is part of Google's broader changes to Android's app distribution and billing policies following its legal dispute with Epic Games, the developer of Fortnite.

Epic sued Google in 2020, arguing that the company used its control over Android and Google Play to restrict competition in app distribution and in-app payments. In 2023, a US jury found Google had maintained an illegal monopoly in the Android app distribution and billing markets. A subsequent court injunction required Google to make changes that would allow competing app stores to reach Android users and compete with Google Play.

Google challenged the ruling, but the legal dispute continued through subsequent proceedings. In November 2025, the companies announced a proposed settlement, followed by a revised agreement in March 2026. The changes included alternative billing options, lower service fees and a programme for registered third-party app stores.

Google's March announcement presented the registration framework as a way to make alternative app stores easier to install while retaining security checks. Epic welcomed the changes, saying they would allow competing marketplaces to operate on Android and give developers more distribution options.

However, the US rollout has a separate legal complication. Google and Epic's revised settlement requires court approval. Google has indicated that the Registered App Stores programme will initially operate outside the US, with its US availability dependent on the legal process. Google has also introduced separate arrangements for third-party stores to access Google Play's app catalogue in the US.

The distinction is important because the registration programme is not a court-mandated requirement for every third-party store. It is a voluntary framework through which marketplaces can obtain additional Android system capabilities.

Does Google become a gatekeeper for alternative app distribution?

The registration framework raises questions about how much control Google should have over competing marketplaces on an operating system that has traditionally allowed users to install software from outside its official app store.

Google's security requirements have a clear purpose. Requiring developer verification, malware scanning and regular catalogue checks can make it harder for malicious applications to circulate through third-party stores. Users also benefit from having fewer installation prompts and a more consistent update process.

However, the programme creates a distinction between marketplaces that receive Google's approval and those that continue to operate outside the framework. While the latter can still distribute applications, they do not get the same installation and update capabilities.

The requirement to share an entire app catalogue and subsequent updates with Google also gives the company visibility into applications distributed through competing stores. Google says this information is needed for malware review, while marketplaces remain responsible for their own content. The annual fee and organisational verification requirements could also prove difficult for smaller independent marketplaces.

There is a further question about how Google will assess applications and enforce its requirements. The programme allows Google to suspend a store's registered status if it fails to meet the prescribed standards. Although this does not prevent the marketplace from continuing to operate through conventional sideloading, losing registration would mean losing the simplified installation experience.

This makes the registration process an important point of control over how easily rival marketplaces can reach users, even if Google does not have exclusive authority over app distribution on Android.

How does Google's approach compare with Apple's alternative app stores?

Apple's approach to alternative app distribution offers a useful comparison, although the circumstances behind the changes are different.

Unlike Android, Apple's iOS ecosystem traditionally did not allow users to install third-party app marketplaces. Developers had to distribute applications through the App Store, subject to Apple's review and commercial terms.

Regulatory intervention forced Apple to change this model in the European Union under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). Starting with iOS 17.4 in March 2024, Apple allowed authorised alternative app marketplaces to distribute applications in the region. Developers can also distribute applications through their websites under certain conditions.

Apple retains a verification process for marketplace operators and requires applications distributed outside the App Store to undergo notarisation. This is a baseline security review intended to identify malware, security threats and certain forms of fraud. Marketplace operators must also obtain Apple's authorisation and meet ongoing requirements.

Japan has followed a similar route under its Mobile Software Competition Act. With iOS 26.2, Apple introduced alternative app marketplaces and other distribution options in the country, alongside requirements for marketplace authorisation and app notarisation. These changes came in response to the new Japanese law, rather than a voluntary decision by Apple to open its ecosystem.

Google's framework differs in one important respect: Android already permits third-party app distribution. Its new programme does not create that right or make registration compulsory. It offers approved marketplaces additional operating system privileges that reduce the friction involved in installing and updating applications.

Apple, meanwhile, has introduced alternative distribution in markets where regulation required it to do so, while retaining control over marketplace authorisation and baseline security checks.

Both companies therefore retain a role in determining which marketplaces qualify for additional system-level capabilities. The difference lies in the starting point. Apple is opening distribution options in response to regulatory requirements, while Google is formalising an approval system for capabilities on an operating system that already supports sideloading.

For Android users, the immediate change will be fewer steps when installing applications from registered marketplaces. Whether this leads to more competition will depend on how many alternative stores enrol, how accessible Google's requirements are to smaller operators and whether developers choose to distribute their applications outside Google Play.