That’s a conclusion that does not follow from your premises. I’m sure it
was tested. A lot. But here’s the thing: when you ship
anything of sufficient complexity where the quantities involved are measured in millions, there’s no such thing as a “small problem” or “edge case”.
Apple will test and fix bugs they find, as much as humanly possible, within the constraints of execution. You don’t just decide to launch on a whim, it’s baked in 3 years previously, with tens of thousands of people working towards that one goal; with supply ramps for multiple other companies arranged and enabled; with well-known public launch dates that can realistically only give you a few days wiggle room. The fact that they do this at all is a breathtaking success and a testament to the business - this applies to any such at-scale business, not just Apple.
So they’ve covered 99.9% of all boot issues before launch. As the CEO, do you go ahead ? Or do you miss the launch date, possibly invite legal action from your supply chain or worse, a critical manufacturer folds because of cash flow, and do you risk the reputation and stock price hit of a company as large as Apple “swinging and missing” in the press ?
I think it’s pretty clear what the correct choice is, and even though 0.1% of those millions of devices still adds up to a sizable number of complaints, you’re still way ahead of the game. And you get to keep that well-oiled machine moving forwards rather than stalling.
Apple has priorities. They may not be your priorities. If they differ sufficiently, you should go elsewhere, and if sufficient people agree with you and do the same, Apple will realign its priorities. I wouldn’t hold your breath though.