[grey-area]

> Sigh. I guess we're going to remove a product category (the relatively safe, very consistent, managed platform you can use when you just want to use a computer and not also manage a computer) and call that consumer choice, then?

Here's a better suggestion:

Stop Apple abusing their platform to force their customers to use their own book store by making others impractical.

Stop Apple abusing their monopoly to force their customers to use one browser.

Stop Apple abusing their monopoly to gouge everyone that wants to be on their platform with a 30% fee on every transaction (10% would be more reasonable, 3% a bare minimum to cover costs).

[spanhandler]

I would be entirely thrilled to see another OS & platform with similarly-pro-user rules and restrictions and its own app store compete with Apple, tweaking those parts to fix the problems you call out (and others!), and either beat Apple or force them to improve a bunch.

Except the browser thing—that's already fine IMO, and I think keeping other browser engines off is very nice because it keeps the Electron-type riff-raff out of the store, among other reasons, and besides it's just the browser engine that's restricted. Again, what I'd rather see is another iOS-like OS & platform come on the market, also only one browser engine allowed, but for that browser engine to be better than Mobile WebKit, forcing Apple to improve or at least giving me another option in the same product category as i-devices, but with a browser engine I like better.

[grey-area]

We don't need another platform, Apple just needs to be prevented from abusing their power over the platform to coerce customers and partners to give them a large cut of each transaction. It's easily done with a bit of legislation.

Apple don't keep other browsers off to keep electron out or make things safer, it is to ensure they have complete control of the web platform, which otherwise is a viable alternative to their app store, just the sort of alternative you're suggesting in fact.

Capitalism needs regulation to work well, if unregulated, it very quickly gives rise to robber barons and bullying of both consumers and smaller companies. Unfettered capitalism leads to monopolies, coercion and rent-seeking.

[spanhandler]

I still think competition with the product they offer would be a better way to make them improve their product, than removing some of the properties that define the product they’re offering.

FWIW I’m all for regulating the hell out of anything with a corporate charter. As far as I’m concerned the deal they made when they asked us to let them have the privileges of incorporation is that we can do whatever we like to them, should we decide it’s in our interest, and if they don’t like it no-one’s forcing them to keep those protections. Half the reason I’m so keen on iOS‘ particular model of software distribution to begin with is because we haven’t regulated massive-scale collection of personal data out of existence. Give me that and I’ll join you to burn the last iPhone on a bonfire, or whatever. That’d be wonderful.