Software Devolution in the Hands of Apple

I was momentarily confused by the mismatch between the title and the article. The author means "de-evolution" (going backwards with respect to progress) not "devolution" (more power to the people).

Apple can get away with this because it doesn't (directly) affect their users, only the developers.

Even with all the racketeering, the developers don't really have a choice; choosing to leave the Apple platform and their racketeering ring means losing out on a huge user base and (potential) profits.

At this stage it would take a "union" of sorts, a bunch of developers of big/popular apps and services to collectively boycott Apple in order for them to loosen their iron grip, but that will never happen because of the aforementioned reasons.

> This was the standard way to compute in the 60s. But we have evolved. Nowadays, you buy a computer and nothing keeps you from doing anything with it.

Depends on the specifics of "you," "nothing," and "anything."

> Wake me up when Linux is ready for everyday phone use, because Google is a poor alternative.

I have UBports (i.e. Ubuntu Touch) installed on an old Pixel for use as a remotely controlled camera, but I don't use it as a daily driver. It's a thick wrapper around Android, though. There's no getting around proprietary hardware, firmware, and drivers.

Apple "gets away with it" because it is what users prefer.

These users are the same folks who prefer and pay a premium for Apple technology.

If the market had a better product Apple's users would flock to it.

But the market doesn't. And we're left well meaning backseat drivers who insist on "fixing things".

If its not a big deal why doesn't apple just remove that requirement?