It's dangerous to haphazardly disregard that as meaningless, by extension it's such movements that fight for very valid consumer rights, like actually owning the hardware that people pay money for.
When I buy a piece of hardware I expect to own it, to run on it whatever I want, to be able to repair it, not to be a "tolerated guest" with only limited access and everything thrown my way to make self-repair as difficult as possible by design.
Others, in the meanwhile, should be able to install whatever application they want if they want to do that. Just because the current situation aligns with what you want to do doesn't mean that it is the perfect situation for everyone - but as long as your situation isn't affected (assuming what you want is about you and not about forcing everyone else to be like you) then you should be fine.
1. Users have perfect choice in which apps they install.
2. Developers will release their apps on all available app stores.
But many users are compelled to install apps that they would prefer not to and it's not at all obvious that developers would support two app stores instead of one given the choice. The net result of that combination is that some (many?) people would be compelled to use both app stores against their inclination.
The only wrong part is users not being in control over what they can install on their devices and from where they will install them.
Yes, it is possible that people will be forced to install applications they do not want, but this isn't something that is or even should be up to the OS vendor to try and protect against - the person being forced to do that is the one who should and if they cannot, then legal action should be seeked. The entire issue is outside the scope of the OS.
You can argue (as I think you are) that those losses are outweighed by the gains of a more open ecosystem, but to many users they are meaningful losses.
The biggest irony of all this is that consumers don't seem to realize the harm Apple is doing, because Apple is busy pulling the wool over their eyes by telling them they are protecting their security and privacy. iOS is a nanny state. Apple maintains a culture of fear among consumers to achieve its business goal, which is to maintain its monopoly position.
Console hardware doesn't have much value by itself: Computers are plentiful, so if you just want something to run software pick up a Raspberry Pi or Nvidia Jetson. Their value derives from the games that companies make, so ceding power to the game companies(via Nintendo) makes your console more valuable.
Look at Macs vs. PCs. There are entire industries dedicated to fixing the problems presented by the amount of options available on a PC. I don't want that. I want a device that I know works to do the things I need it to do. If the day comes where I need to do something I can't, I'll need to find another device.
Also, it's nice that you mention Macs. On Macs, you can install any app bypassing the AppStore. As it should be on a proper computer, and iPhone IS a computer.
The lack of UX-degrading software on the iPad is also the primary reason why I’ve been pushing my friends and family away from the Mac and onto the iPad. With the limited software ecosystem of the iPad, there’s far less things for them to screw up on the Mac.
And yes,I've seen Macs of average users. Never saw anything really wrong there. You are exaggerating the issue.
Why don't you address it then? There is a world of more open software and hardware out there if you want that freedom. Why should everyone be subject to exactly the product you want?
You see, you too want the product I am describing, but you are too myopic to understand it. Maybe it is because you come from a better place than I, where the government does not actively censor app stores. Imagine, that some day Apple will remove the app you use, would you still say 'ok, I knew what product I bought'?
With iOS devices, you don't buy a product that can run a set of apps. You buy a product where the app you use may stop working any day, because some random moderator or executive at Apple will decide this way.
This has happened to me with more products than I can count on both the Mac and PC side and with nearly every mobile device I've ever used. Tons of apps on SymbianOS and Windows Mobile that worked on one device didn't work on the next device I bought. The current environment is a vast improvement on everything that came before it.
Maybe that's why you're being so condescending. We've lived through the evolution that got us here while you, quite clearly, think that open, by default, equals better simply because it's better for you as an individual. There are many, many people that view the iPhone environment and Apple's ecosystem as the better option. They're obviously all wrong.
In a market where both options exist why should one change to be like the one you prefer?
You claim that users 'agree' to this when they buy Apple devices. But to what exactly that agree? That apple can take away any app they use, any time? Even the one that was perfectly available when buying the device?
The 'deal' you get with apple by buying their hardware can be altered at any time, so the only thing you can do is pray that they don't alter it any further.
> You claim that users 'agree' to this when they buy Apple devices.
I claimed no such thing. Read my words directly and please don't put your own spin on them.
In a market where both options exist why should one change to be like the one you prefer?
"Google is apparently taking down all/most fediverse apps from google play on the grounds that that some servers in the fediverse engage in hate speech"
THIS is what you are so tirelessly advocating for
Also, what happens on a Mac has no bearing on what happens on the iPhone even if I made an analogy using the Mac. I need that type of access on my Mac. If they ever remove that, I'll need to find another option. That's not the case with the iPhone so your point is moot.
With Android, at least you can sideload the apps, and firewalls can be circumvented fairly easily. As for laws, well, not all laws are to be obeyed.
Tell that to the people living in China.
That's incorrect. Just don't use it.
What's the argument here, why not just don't use an iPhone then? Why turn an iPhone into more of an Android? I have an iPhone because I don't want to be like an Android. It's a feature to me that this (and other possibilities, bad and good) is not possible, hence why I bought it.
You have to understand that to many of us it is very much a feature that it's not possible to sideload or allow more control of your device. It's not lack of a feature, it is a feature. Just as much as a feature to you is the ability to sideload or take more control. This is why I should buy an iPhone and you should not. My preferences are different than yours. I do not want you, myself, or others to have some of these abilities; not merely the option not to use them.
I very much like the iPhone because of design architecture differences over Android. It's not perfect but (imo) closer to perfect than Android. We live in a world with many options and not all must subscribe to the same paradigm.
But you don't have to have it be like Android.... All you have to do is not install other app sores.
If I wanted choice in App Stores I would buy an Android phone. I don't care about choice of App Stores and I prefer the consistency of a single, consistent, secure source of Apps. Therefore, I bought an iOS device.
And you can have that. By not installing other app stores.
> reduces fragmentation
You don't have to fragment anything. Just only use the Apple App store.
> If I wanted choice in App Stores
You are not forced into choosing anything. All you have to do is not install other app stores, and you don't have to worry about choice.
> improves the overall user experience of the product.
You can have this improvement! If the Apple app store provides this value, then just only use the Apple app store.
> ...prefer the consistency of a single, consistent, secure source of Apps.
What is consistent when every app player is part of a different app store? Suddenly Microsoft has their own, Google has their own, Epic Games as their own, etc.
No thank you.
What is consistent would be your experience if you choose to only use the Apple App store. That experience would remain consistent.
> No thank you.
Then don't use those app stores?
If the conversation is about your rights, as an Apple user, then other people doing what they want with their own phones does not matter.
Someone can, right now, remove their app from the Apple app store, and nobody would claim that if they did they, then they are infringing on your rights as a user. So I am not sure why you would bring that up.
Nobody would claim that you are forced to do anything, if an app just removed themselves completely from an app store, so that is not relevant.
Why don't you just not use it then if you don't like it the way it is?
But yes, the options are too few and things can go like apples - one bad Apple can spoil the bunch.
>Nobody is forcing you to buy an Apple product, and there are plenty of stellar alternative products from numerous other brands.
We want to fix things (even in companies that we otherwise might like) that we think are morally unacceptable. That's how progress is made.
You can advocate your own position too, nothing wrong with both of us doing so.