My post doesn't quote anything Apple said. I am reasoning solely from their actions.
I don't use a Mac - I think they're overpriced and the latest OS versions haven't introduced anything of interest to me. I admit, their hardware is beautiful, but I am frustrated by the lack of high-resolution screens anywhere else in the industry and I intend to vote with my wallet.
In the meantime, feel free to review my comment history. I have tried to contribute links to http://coreboot.org as often as possible. I'm never going to give up the ability to compile my OS from source, which means I won't need an apple laptop. You can pry the kernel source code from my hands when I'm dead.
The only "slack" I propose we give apple is to not claim they are backing Microsoft's Trusted Computing initiative without evidence. Essentially, my argument is exactly the same as yours: why should we claim something about apple that is not backed by evidence?
Make "open" into an expensive niche for professionals.
The low-end and mid-range of the market will be running iOS or WinRT, on ARM hardware. The professionals and, in the case of MS, corperate users will run OSX and Win8PRo, on X86 based chipsets. The ability to side-load will cost you at least 999 dollars for Apple ( price of cheapest OSX device ), and something around 800 dollars for a win8pro/x86 device.
The result will be, that those configurations wont be targetted for consumer stuff. This effectively kills of alternative marketplaces for consumer oriented products. Like, say, Steam!
Yes, and Apple has publicly said that iOS is for the general public, while full-featured PCs will become "trucks" only for specialized usages.
When Apple introduced locked software on the iPod Nano, it was ostensibly to prevent clone makers.
What does forbidding users from running software of their choice have to do with preventing clone makers?
But I don't think Apple has that in mind. iOS devices are jailed. OS X devices are relatively open.
When Microsoft announced UEFI Secure Boot, the first articles were about desktops. A "surprise" announcement later about ARM devices being locked and not unlockable should be the proof of what Microsoft wants.
When Apple introduced locked software on the iPod Nano, it was ostensibly to prevent clone makers. Apple can of course always betray their user base, but they haven't done it yet. Cut them some slack.