You might be able to blame Apple for starting this and continuing it on their phones, but I don't think Google is pushing Android handset makers to do this at all, just like I don't think Google is pushing Samsung (and maybe some others) to eliminate 3.5mm headphone jacks on their phones. Unfortunately, I think this is one of those things where the whole industry is just copying each other. Non-removable batteries are better for manufacturers for various reasons, but bad for consumers, and they've conned consumers into accepting it.
>Unfriendly to repairs
Same here. Nothing is keeping Android phone makers from being repair-friendly.
>Updates obsolete old hardware
This is Apple-only. The Android counterpoint is "Updates simply cease after 2-3 years, leaving you with security vulnerabilities that won't be fixed", but here again it's the fault of the handset makers, not Google: they're just too lazy, and Google is too stupid and short-sighted to force them to support their phones longer-term to improve the Android brand image.
It's so sad that a company that resorts to those kinds of tactics to increase their market share, as opposed to, just selling more of their product because it's a superior product.
Also, the OS developer acting as a gatekeeper is necessary to prevent malware from getting onto devices. Without that, you have Windows where black hats trick the average user into installing malware constantly.
Almost everything you list is actually a positive thing, although I would be wasting my time to explain it to people who should take the time they put into complaining into developing their own competing platforms that align with their ideals. Please do put your energy into making a competing platform. We need more choices at the operating system level, and nothing people hope these lawsuits would accomplish would give us that.
If Windows and MacOS imposed the same limitations, entire classes of software would stop getting distributed. Games would no longer be profitable enough to ship or diverse enough to compete in terms of profits. Professional software/plugin developers like Pro Tools, Panic! and U-He would lose the software margins they enjoy today and potentially stop supporting new OS releases. It happened already on MacOS after the depreciation of 32-bit apps and OpenGL.
> the OS developer acting as a gatekeeper is necessary to prevent malware from getting onto devices
You say that, but then viruses like Pegasus show up using nothing more than first-party Apple services. It's a bogus fearmongering tactic that cannot be used to justify not giving people a choice. User exploitation will exist as long as the user has enough power to act against their own interests. You'd have to remove the phone functionality to make a safe phone.
> Almost everything you list is actually a positive thing
> nothing people hope these lawsuits would accomplish would give us that.
Interesting, you sound incredibly desperate to dismiss the idea that legislation could fix this problem despite a lack of evidence. Wanna expand on that?
Google and Apple are a duopoly that controls one of the most essential devices of our time. Their racket extends more broadly than Standard Oil. The smartphone is a critical piece of modern life, and these two companies control every aspect of them.
There are no other companies in the world with this level of control over such an important, cross-cutting, cross-functional essential item.If we compared the situation to auto manufacturers, there would be only two providers, you could only fuel at their gas stations, they'd charge businesses every time you visit, they'd display ads constantly, and you'd be unable to repair them without going to the provider.
There need to be more than two providers. And if we can't get more than two providers, then most of these unfair advantages need to be rolled back by regulators.
This is horrific.