Needing a Mac is an extra expense in itself. I fail to see much difference.

Sure. A company doesn't choose to spend hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars per year to port their development tools to a third-party platform.

I'm sure if they believed they would get more & higher quality developers to build apps by doing so, they already would have.

Makes since, especially since Windows historically hasn't done the same for Visual Studio / C# (I know they're supposedly trying now or planning to but I confess I haven't followed along closely enough to determine if it's cancelled, delayed, or the scope was actually smaller than full dot net + c# support).

Super simple to do as an end user, for sure.

Your average end user who requires things to be simple is never going to install their own apps outside the approved, simple channels.

There are multiple thriving app stores in the global android market

I’ll take one App Store over many anyday if it severely lessons the chance of getting malware.

Would you also take one news source over many if it lessens the chance of seeing "fake news"?

Would you take one false equivalency over another if it lessens the chance of an "ironic reply"?

Choosing your app store and choosing your news source aren't equivalent, but they're both desirable (for related reasons).

> Would you also take one news source over many if it lessens the chance of seeing "fake news"?

Yes. This is why, every morning, I first get my news from trusted sources.

Who picks those sources - you or your phone's operating system vendor?

You are not replying to my meaning or intention. The context of the discussion was clear. You’ve taken it in a wholly different direction.