[cgranade]

There's a vast, vast difference between being first to market, and using that advantage to unethically create a monopoly by cryptographically locking users out of their own devices. If we fail to take a stand against such blatant violations of user rights, then that is what will undo the wonders of computing. Under the Apple model, innovation must follow asking your competitor for permission. Truly disruptive innovation cannot be sustained as long as Apple has unilateral control over the devices that they make, even after they are long past sold.

[relic17]

Apple has the right to do whatever it wants with its first-to-market product, as long as it does not break the law. There is nothing unethical about that.

Also, there is no such thing as user rights. The only right a user has is to sue Apple if he/she thinks Apple is in violation of its explicit written contract with any individual user. Before purchasing an Apple device, a customer knows that he/she may be "locked" out of the device, but he/she buys it anyways. A user knows all the conditions before the purchase. Apple does not guarantee that after you buy a device they will always provide a great variety of apps at a price you find acceptable. Apple does not guarantee a wonderful service, it does not guarantee great partnerships with developers, it does not even guarantee that it will be in business in a few months. All of that is perfectly clear to anyone who buys a device in almost any market.

Apple also has no obligation whatsoever to help any of its competitors innovate. If they cannot "innovate" without Apple, it is their problem to solve, they have to be smarter and more resourceful, create something on their own or convince Apple to work with them by demonstrating a compelling product. This is how a free economy operates.

What a user can do is vote with his/her wallet.