What if Apple abuses that power in ways that not everyone sees as "abuse", yet they are affected by it?
The reason you are not already seeing this act as abuse is because you happen to agree with it. What if you didn't agree? What if you were in the minority? What if the reason you where in the minority was that the majority simply didn't had the necessary understanding, experience and/or knowledge to see the issue you see?
If something can be abused, it will be abused, there isn't a matter of if, it is a matter of when. And with that in mind it is better to try and avoid being abused than wait for the abuse to happen and see what you can do after the fact.
Is it appropriate for Microsoft and Apple to push updates that disable and remove those from infected computers? If so, what is the significant difference?
I remember many years ago when the first widespread worms for Windows started circulating. All MS did was publish news and a removal tool. It was publicised greatly, but the ultimate choice was left to the owners of the computers, and that's how it should be.
All the big tech companies (and even a lot of the smaller ones) are becoming increasingly authoritarian, and that's the most concerning thing about this.
> You may agree with its decision this time, but will you always agree?
Yes, I will. At least I am not going to lose sleep over it until Apple does abuse that power.
I am actually even more happy to be an Apple user knowing that the mothership said hell naw to the naw naw naw naw to this horseshit Zoom has been pulling.
If I were Apple, I'd be taking this as a personal slight against my entire user base.