Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Alternatives exists" sounds a lot like this fallacy The fact that an argument is superficially similar to an informal fallacy doesn't make the argument inherently fallacious. You can easily construct a variation of the same conversation which is structurally identical but is obviously not fallacious— Critic: "I want a banana, but I don't like the texture." Respondent: "If you don't like them, don't eat them." What…
I would like to access my bank, or my investment account, pay my tax. However in many cases I can only do that via an app, and apps are only available on iOS or Android. Your argument a based upon me being able to buy something from an alternative manufacturer, yet here we are. And I have to purchase Apple or Android to be able to function in society. If Apple isn't going to follow open standards yet be the largest p…
If you did, what has any of that got to do with anything I wrote? How does your complaint relate to what I’m talking about? Which open standard, specifically relevant to your ability to access your bank account and do your taxes, is Apple not following? And how is that relevant to concerns over privacy?
(Seriously, I’d like to engage with your argument but it seems like you’re confusing a discussion about the choice to buy a zero-tracking device with a unspecific complaint about standards.)