I guess I assumed since we're talking public companies here that everyone knows that profits come first. Since "profits come first" for Google, MS, Nokia, Samsung, and everyone else, its not really saying much.

Not true, at least not in a useful sense (that is, without semantic games like "Putting users first is really putting profits first because it makes them money"). Google often turns down options that would squeeze out a little more money at the expense of its users. For example, Google slapped content farms for being worthless even though they seem to be pretty good money-makers.

But, while trying to avoid the semantics arguement, their profits depend on their advertising, which depends on search qualtity. By keeping search qualtity high they are passing over small, short-term profits for long-term ones. Yes the main idea is keeping users happy somthey stick around, but they aren't doing it because they love their users theyre doing it to make a better business.

The point is that Apple's best interests are served by putting the consumers' interests before the developers'. For some other companies it might be the other way around, but Apple has no lack of people willing to be developers. It can easily afford to alienate some of 'em.

But consumers? There's a lot of people with iOS devices, but are they buying apps? If the top fifty apps on the app store are crap, and people can't find the good apps, they'll buy fewer apps, and that bites into Apple's revenues, unlike alienating a few spam-inclined developers, which doesn't.

Really? Then why is it so hard to hire OSX developers that can code their way out of a paper bag?

You don't code your way out of a paper bag, you just declare a subclass of NSPaperBag and assign it an outlet.