First, there is real value in having code like this available as open source, and working using open data. The analogy to crypto would only hold if there were already good open alternatives around. It doesn't sound like that's the case. But second, crypto is basically a solved problem with clearly defined but subtle best practices. Geocoding is totally different. There's plenty of room for experimentation and totally new approaches that wouldn't fit into existing frameworks. I don't see how discouraging that experimentation can possibly be in anyone's best interest.
(Since credentials are being asked for: I used to work on the geocoder of Google Maps, as well as on geocoding data quality issues.)
As stated before, we wanted to use the data that is already there and make it available in a userfriendly way, something the current geocoders for OSM don't really do.
When you talk about the claim I make, that I wish OSM is going to be the first goto place when people want to search something on a map is still valid. It's my wish, not a general statement I'm making. And hey, it worked with Wikipedia. For many people it's the first place they go to when they are looking for information, so I think this can also work for OSM
When I need to look up stuff I usually go to Google Maps, too, but that's only because the OSM solutions out there frustrate me with irrelevant results and I have to scroll through endless amounts of data to get to the information I'm looking for. :)
Apple didn't really use OSM. The current OSM is pretty good, by the way. It's just a pity some data is still wrong (for example, many postcodes in Madrid, ES).