The iPhones's closed nature also prevents security researchers from sufficiently examining third party apps for vulnerabilities.
My current, personal solution is a Jailbroken iPhone, which I'm very happy with. But, I'm getting tired of worrying about what happens if my phone breaks and I can't get a new one on an exploitable firmware. I wish Apple would stop fighting to make this impossible. Build in a switch to unlock the bootloader or what have you, and nothing will change for the rest of the user base.
> You sound like someone that just moved into the neighborhood complaining things that have been that way for the last 20 years.
Is Comcast not a monopoly because you have the option to move to a different city?
If the only neighborhood with good jobs and a good school also prevented me from buying my own furniture, I'd complain.
They do. It just won't run on iOS. That's a choice Apple made, and by extension, a choice the purchaser made when they bought the phone. For example, it is a primary feature that holds some responsibility for my continued use of iOS.
That's adding choice, not taking it away.
Yeah, who is Apple to say that I didn't want my entire contact list uploaded to a Russian server? Maybe I like a little malware mixed in with my Kandy Krusher.
In summary, if you don't want to pay a 30% surcharge for vetted software and a system that ensures that those you support technically will load only vetted software, an iPhone probably isn't for you or your loved ones.