> I don’t see why the makers of an app aren’t entitled to seeing how the app is used for the people who opt to use it. If I’m using windows terminal, I want them to know how often I use the hot keys, how often I split a terminal vertically then horizontally (alt-shift-d), etc. lest it be removed, since I know they don’t have infinite resources to dedicate to this single project to maintain every feature forever and ever.
The makers of an app are entitled to no more information about me and my use of it than I allow them to have. I think that it's reasonable to argue whether my allowance of sharing should be opt-in or opt-out, but I don't think that there is much scope for argument about whether I should be able to block the sharing of information if I choose explicitly to do so.
(One could argue that, as long as everything is disclosed up front, then the makers of an app have the right to demand whatever they want, and I have the right to accept their demands or else not to use their software. This is surely true in one sense; but, in another sense, it's exactly what the notion of "contract of adhesion" is meant to describe, and in many other contexts it's recognised as not a good thing.)
To the argument that the makers of app can use telemetry information to make their app better, I would say that that is doubtless true; but I would argue that is also true that I, and not they, have the right to decide where the boundary lies between my desire for privacy and their desire to improve their app. For example, perhaps—even likely—browser makers could make their browsers better if they knew exactly what sites I visited, but, if I found my browser reporting my history information back to Mozilla, then I would not say "ah well, as long as it makes for a better browser."