> people just want a foolproof "your product is bad" that can't be argued against, and e-waste/pollution is a great card to play, especially when it's selectively applied and you refuse to admit any of the foibles of the products you prefer.
It's not selectively applied, though. We want legislative change that legitimately forces the worst actors, Apple, Samsung and Google included, to be forced to-heel since they won't respond naturally. This was the root of all contemporary right-to-repair action proposed in the United States.
Since you seem to be locked-in on the pugilism of Apple versus Android, let's abstract things a bit. Look at John-Deere, a company hell-bent on destroying Malthusian agriculture by exploiting farmers that need tractor repairs. Their first-party exclusive repair scheme has cost people entire harvests, fields of food that could have fed hundreds of households. The reason they can't recalibrate their drivetrain? The computer that does that (over USB by the way) is in a technicians truck, and they're two states over. And John-Deere would rather blow up your tractor than give lowly old you the ability to do that. And put their licensed technicians out of work, that pay a pretty penny to be certified officially? And destroy the aftermarket repair business that they have artificially created? It's madness, unless you look at it from any perspective but the business'.
This is why Apple gets perennially dragged by right-to-repair pundits; whether you want to admit it or not, they create this problem for themselves and then scream Bloody Mary when someone suggests their status-quo is exploitative.
> Also, the actual nuclear-hot take: even lightning was not really a big deal
Then why are you still talking about it? Lightning is dead because Apple charged people a license fee to use USB, like a fucking moron. Of course they were going to be legislated into compliance once their lobbyists can't convince the EU that a serial cable is some magical proprietary technology that must be protected by their patents. They played stupid-ball and lost, the last vestiges of Lightning's influence is that I'm forced to buy new cables (that I don't need btw) to charge my Apple peripherals when they break. And why don't those use USB-C? Definitely not because Apple was trying to artificially enforce ecosystem lock-in by demanding the purchase of licensed USB cables. Definitely not... it was because, uhh... the connector is wear-resistant! People don't want it! They made a promise 10 years ago! Definitely. Wait, what was their excuse with the Mac again...?
You could explain this away with 10 more paragraphs of philosophizing on the state of electronic garbage, but the simplest conclusion is that our societal goals are not in alignment with our businesses and it is our moral imperative to democratically legislate a new standard. The alternative is letting the broken tractors pile up while sitting on our asses like we're idiots that don't understand what's happening.