I'm getting really tired of seeing snarky comments like this show up in EVERY single post about Apple doing anything regardless of wether it was "good" or "bad". I'm also getting tired of "own" being used to mean "control", but that's a different argument.
There is nothing here to indicate that Apple has demonstrated any level of complete control over the devices they sell.
The only thing Apple demonstrated here is that once they determine an app is a bad actor that they are willing to terminate the services they provide utilized by those apps. There's no Big Brother style weight being thrown around here like it's some school yard fight, just a simple termination of contract and it's a benefit to users as well as Apple. It is also a mechanism that is severely limited in scope. Apple isn't capable of exerting full control over a person's phone only certain aspects which they have demonstrated a significant amount of restraint and have only been willing to execute any action when they have determined that there is either a security risk or a breach of terms. We can debate whether their determination of what constitutes a breach is appropriate, but I have seen nothing from Apple to demonstrate that they aren't acting in their customers' best interests in these cases. I can't say that of any other company I've owned products from with similar capabilities so I'm inclined to give them a little slack.
It's also important to remember that Apps do not define the functionality of Apple's devices, merely extend them, and weren't even available until consumers demanded it. Users have never "owned", in the sense of control, everything about the applications they install on any platform and I don't think we can rationally say they ever will, unless they build it themselves. You want examples of devices that can be considered "owned" by the company that produced them? How about Playstation or Kinect (before MS' shift)? There are plenty of examples of companies that publicly used the big hammer approach to dealing with things before they went with warnings, notices, policy change deadlines, service termination, or any other remediable approach, but so far I haven't seen Apple go that route and they don't deserve to be vilified for doing what we all wish everyone else would do when faced similar kinds of things. As far as I know Apple can't arbitrarily disable your phone from working as a phone.
I wouldn't want my business model challenged by the company that created the product I had based my business on either, but it is the height of folly to assume it wouldn't be when the model depends on "bending" a few rules that are otherwise considered to protect customers from foul play.
As a user: I want the platform to take care of notifications.
I care not to install dozens of different notification systems because some app decides to use Yet Another Notification System.
As a developer: I want the platform to take care of notifications.
I don't want to worry about some third-party server works as expected nor do I want to have to care about the user having the right software install either.
You own your damn phone. Apple didn't lock you up and force your money out of you. Stop whining about getting what you paid for. I love my iPhone, and the iPhone market, but I understand what I paid for. You have plenty of alternatives.
