As i wrote in another comment, those comparisons 99.9% of the time lose a ton of details so they are not helpful at all.

The choice for others to have no choice is not really much of a choice - not only i want to have a choice in what i install on iOS devices but i also want the ability to have a choice available in all of the devices i paid for, especially in an environment where other companies see Apple's success and become too thirsty for it and try to copy them (see Microsoft as an example).

You’re framing your preference for openness as a choice and another’s preference for regulation as “having no choice” which is exactly the problem I was trying to highlight. You see your option as the only option so all others are a mistake, and so are dictating what options are available (is only yours). Do you not see this is removing people’s choice? Especially if already today there are other ecosystems that cater to your desire?

I do not make such a framing, the choice i describe is about what to install in your device - this assumes the ability is already there. I do not refer to having the ability itself as a choice.

All analogies will have that problem, it's unconstructive to dismiss them like this. Understanding this is part of how arguing and exchanging ideas takes place.

I don't think it's Apple's fault if other companies try to copy them poorly. I'm very familiar with what you mean and it bothers me too, but I don't think that means Apple needs to change.