Well exactly, but they have convinced (brainwashed?) a bunch of their users that they're really on their side.

In my experience, Android users are generally not plagued by this misconception to as great an extent.

There are a whole lot more Android users.

But what's your point?

That it might not be a fair comparison.

In what sense? We're comparing proportions - I think that's fair. Unless you're also saying that a higher proportion of Apple users are more gullible (in which case you agree with me), I still don't understand your point?

  Why would a company do something in the interest 
  of the consumer if it was not in their interest

There are many reasons, but if for no other: so that emails like this don't leak and cause you bad PR! There's a whole school of thought around being 'customer focused' that boils down to the Golden Rule (but in MBA-speak). I don't know how many 'customer focused' businesses really walk the walk; probably not that many in situations where doing so requires real guts.

But doesn't that mean it's ultimately in the companies interest?

Well yes, in the long term. I was hoping nobody would notice that I avoided admitting that ;)

Unfortunately it's possible for competition to not resolve things to the benefit of the consumer, that's where regulation typically steps in. I'm not necessarily implying that that's required in this case, just that things aren't as simple as competition == consumer wins.

> Why would a company do something in the interest of the consumer if it was not in their interest ?

We call that "ethics", IIRC. It's depressingly rare.

Yes. And they sleep well at night, moral obligation to the shareholders and all that. Competition won't do anything.

At least with competition users get to choose which companies they want to do business with.