I don't think I can be considered an open source advocate. But the basic premise of open source ideology (the way I understand it) is no limitation in any form or shape. When you buy a hardware (or software), you should not be subject to artificial limitations imposed by the manufacturer.

PS3 is a very good example IMO. It comes with very powerful hardware, which you paid for, but you are only limited to rules placed by sony. As a matter of fact Sony goes through a lot of trouble to make it almost imposible to do anything else with the hardware.

Similarly, I should be able to install any app on my iphone/ipad that is not approved by Apple without have to go through hoops of cracking the device.

Or at the very least Apple shouldn't spend so much time making it impossible to crack the device. If I've already proven that I'm willing to jump through the pain to get a cracked device, maybe that's a sign that I don't necessarily want "exactly" what Apple wants for me. It's already a barrier to entry, so why not just leave it so. It's not like the majority of users will just 'stumble' into a cracked device.

YES.

Have you been following the kerfuffle behind Other OS yankage?

Game consoles are less dangerous than iPads because consoles are not replacements for a computer. If someone has a console and a PC they still have some freedom, but if someone only has an iPad, an iPhone, and a console they're totally walled in.

It's not an open source argument, it's open platform argument. I should have the right to do what I want to what I buy.