[amelius]

> That the product is locked down by design is a feature, not a limitation.

And why should the entity locking down the design be the same entity as the one selling it? Is that a feature too?

You can't imagine a world where people can install different services by different providers to protect their devices? And have some actual competition? And therefore choice?

[fragmede]

We almost had that with the browser wars, when Microsoft was forced to have customers choose which browser they wanted when they got a computer. Operating system choice was already lost to Windows, but at least browser, they were forced by EU directive to let the customer choose which one they wanted. Then the game changed, and now it's basically Google or Apple for your smartphone, with a tiny bit of competition that doesn't really count. If the EU really had guts, they'd say that computing devices must let the user install a OS of their choice, at their risk, and businesses would be able to just sell phones, with the option of GrapheneOS alongside Android and iOS or Windows Mobile or FirefoxOS or WebOS. We didn't get that future, unfortunately.

[amelius]

We really need to have a "no-tether law" that says that the consumer should be able to break all ties with the vendor and still be able to use the device as advertised.

Otherwise, you bought a service, not a product.