> At least some are trying to counter all this privacy invasion (EU, Apple, etc.) Let's hope they will continue doing so.

Not so sure. While they may be doing more than FB obviously, both example parties you listed are more than happy to support privacy invasion when it furthers their ends. You don't need to lower your standards to find counter examples nor do you need praise those that are only a little less bad. In my view the word "all" in your statement is verifiably false. We should be more nuanced and call out bad when we see it no matter the org instead of giving out org-level labels.

> proprietary hardware, intentional slowdowns, and insane app fees

Android phones are also effectively proprietary (especially phones from manufacturers such as Samsung and Xiaomi) and seemingly get slower over time. But yes, the apps are cheaper/free thanks to sideloading and a good community.

(RMS-Mode On) What I'm referring to as Android, is in fact, Google/Android, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, Google plus Android. Android is not (really) a usable operating system unto itself (for most people), but rather another component of a fully functioning Google system made useful by the Google Apps, Google Play Services and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by the end user. (RMS-Mode Off)

If either way you're going to have a proprietary phone, you might as well pick the one that has less of an interest in data mining you.

Nobody’s saying that Apple is not self interested. The claim is that it is Apple’s self interest not to violate its users’ privacy. In contrast to Google and Facebook, Apple’s business model does not require Apple to know as much as possible about their users. It does however require Apple to offer something that its competitors does not or cannot, in order to justify its higher prices. Privacy is one such thing.

In fairness it was a pretty old phone, without a secure enclave iirc.

> 'didnt help'

Why the scare quotes?