[walrus01]

An API and an operating system that runs on bare metal are in no way similar. One has a bootloader, a kernel, a filesystem, etc. The other is just a set of apis. The freedom to run your own choice of software on the OS that you boot on the hardware you own is important. It's a very different philosophical choice from being able to, or not being able to make use of one company's social media publishing API via https.

If my operating system has a rootkit or APT I am boned. If twitter is hacked I couldn't give a fuck, it doesn't affect my equipment or how I use my computers.

[jenga22]

Sure, one is an operating system and one is an API. In the literal sense you are correct.

However, You're completely arguing a point that is different from what the entire discussion is about. We're talking about proprietary control points. The iOS operating system is proprietary and the App store dictates who and who can't publish on it.

The same is the case with Twitter. It has APIs and they control who and who can't use them to make apps.

Both companies have invited developers to make apps. Both companies have benefited from having those apps make their services/devices useful.

[walrus01]

I guess what I am trying to say is that having a walled garden operating system is a magnitude worse than a walled garden social media API. Mostly because the OS is the gatekeeper to literally everything else. Twitter is a gatekeeper to hearing the latest ramblings of a Kardashian.