There are many regulations already in place to protect consumer rights. The idea that you can influence companies by not buying is an illusion. The only real solution to anti-competitive practices is legislation.
It used to be that when you bought a computer you could run any program you wanted. No one thought this needed to be enshrined in law until Apple thought to restrict what you can do with your own devices.
We do need legislation to ban devices which don't allow running general programs.
I consider it part of Apple's competitive advantage. I bought an iPhone because I want it to just work and for my apps to behave well. I can do the tinkering on my laptop, I don't want every computing device I own to be hackable.
Heck, if I could have a phone with iOS 1 (no third party apps) and the camera and screen of the latest iPhone, I would buy that.
And people who want a hackable iPhone can jailbreak it or whip out the microscopic soldering iron. I basically don't install 3rd party apps but I want it enforced at the OS level. If even 5% of iPhone users were unable to install apps companies would think twice about ruining their website in order to force their mobile app on users.
If you’re willing to ban the NFA/legalize probate nuclear weapons we might be able to talk.
In the mean time I suspect you support at least some level of collective restriction, and that means banning companies from selling locked hardware is fair game.
Because it's anti-competitive. Society is advanced when companies have to compete and not just collect taxes from other companies who are trying to do something.
The Apple tax is not advancing anything. It's just a stranglehold on innovation promoted with FUD about how running programs is insecure despite the fact that this isn't applied to desktop/laptop computers.
Apple developing a more secure platform is an innovation and advancement. If the iPhone isn’t the right choice for you buy one of the other thousand phones on the market, and leave other people alone.
> I suspect you support at least some level of collective restriction
Locked mobile phones don’t hurt people other than the people who choose to use them. That’s different to for example a gun.
The only reason to ban iPhones is because you know other people like them as they are and you’re in a minority! You want to enforce a minority opinion on others. That’s morally wrong.
If you seriously think is a majority opinion you need to get out more. The average person wants strong device security, look at the press and angst attracted by cybercrime in recent times.
The discussion is about control. No one is saying devices should be less secure.
If you ask people "should you be able to run any program you want on your devices?" I doubt people would answer "yes, on computers, but on phones I should only be able to run what Tim Apple allows me to".
So don’t buy an iPhone. You know that’s not the offer.