> With all Android devices that aren't managed (read: business device), you can sideload a third party app store without the need to use system exploits to 'jailbreak.'

Is an average Android user actually going to do any of that?

Sideloading apps is very easy (albeit you have to press “okay” on a very scary looking warming page). Plenty of people do, to play Fortnight or install the Amazon App Store, for instance.

> Is an average Android user actually going to do any of that?

It really doesn't matter if the average Android user will do it.

What matters is that you have the option to do so.

I think it only matters if that was the expectation when you purchased it. Nobody buys an iPhone with the expectation that they’ll be able to install apps anywhere outside of the App Store. In fact, a single place to buy and install apps is a selling point to many people.

Nobody? Not one single person?

That must be why there isn't a large jailbreaking community behind iOS.

Or why there hasn't been a lawsuit over...

> If you already have an iDevice and can't replace it, you basically don't have any choice.

An educated consumer would know that before they bought the phone. It’s never been possible to legally side load apps on iOS (well outside of your own) so it’s not unreasonable that anyone who’s bought an iPhone would expect to have that functionality. It was never taken away from them. They bought into that walled garden, whether they knew it or not.

An educated customer would also know that their food was made in a factory that also works with nuts and thus avoid said product if they have an allergy. An educated customer would also know that their car airbags have a defect and will thus fight to get them replaced. An educated customer would know that the Phoebus Cartel was driving down the lifetime of lightbulbs to increase sales.

It's entirely unreasonable to expect the average person to read up and become an expert on everything that they purchase. This is the whole reason consumer protection laws exist.

None of your examples are relevant.

I’d argue it is the responsibility of the consumer to know if their food has allergens. It’s convenient for consumers to have the declarations on packaged products, but that doesn’t stop an allergic person from being responsible for grabbing a street bite that ends up having nuts in it.

The airbag example is a contractual obligation with a a warranted product.

The light bulb cartel example is totally unrelated and throwing it in the mix only adds a sinister tone to the original topic. If you were talking about their salary collusion it’d be relevant. But it has no relation to iOS not allowing side loading.

I’m not saying a consumer need be an expert in everything. But expecting that a product has functionality that’s never been advertised or suggested is unreasonable.