Does anyone really think giving 20-30% of ecosystem revenue to some gatekeeper makes better ecosystems?
We need new open computing laws.
If you don't want that feature, don't buy the device! Or jailbreak it. Or compile your own code and load it.
It is not the 20%-30% of revenue that makes a better ecosystem, it's the vetting process for the software that makes it better. Every vetting process has errors, just as all software has bugs. The end goals of the process and the error rate of the process, and correction procedures of the process, are what makes a better software ecosystem.
Your average user won't know or even bother to change since as you mentioned they don't want to run unwanted code. Rest of us can run anything on our devices.
For example, I'm not going to buy Sonos speakers ever. It doesn't mean they should be outlawed for their practices.
Because then your grandmother will turn on that toggle as instructed by the fraud-center in South Asia, install a keylogger watching her banking activity when she sends you that $5 for your birthday, so they can drain that inheritance you were counting on.
See the article right here on HN about Python devs applying for jobs and being prompted to self-pown.
TL;DR:
There are more people susceptible to fraudulent instructions by bad actors than there are people qualified to evaluate consequences of running unvetted code.
Examples of both 1) and 2) are plenty, so I guess I just disagree that this vetting process helps anyone but the incumbent gatekeeper-taxers.