> There is value in the marketplace they've created.
I'd argue said "value" is artificial or inflated (inclusively), but whatever.
> It's somewhat like complaining about the right of console manufacturers to limit and profit from the software that runs on their platform.
Something which I do actually object to in a lot of circumstances, since it presents a significant barrier to entry for "indie" developers. Thankfully, though, at least game consoles' arbitrary restrictions are typically easier to permanently circumvent (though perhaps this is starting to change).
> If you want different rules, use a different platform.
And I do; I've been an Android user exclusively for the last few years after I got sick and tired of continually jailbreaking my iPhone just to install apps that Apple didn't approve of.
> Is it ridiculous to limit your potential userbase to android users, or users savvy enough to jailbreak devices?
I have no problem at all with the former. It's the latter that's absurd. At least in the former, one doesn't have to jump through seemingly-endless hoops to maintain a semblance of user choice.
> One might wish for iOS policies to be different, but there is no intrinsic right for them to be different.
You're right. There's also no intrinsic requirement for me to, say, let houseguests bring their own food for a party at my house. That doesn't make me any less of a dick for painstakingly inspecting and rejecting each individual platter and charging each food-bringer a $100 "food preparer fee" in order to serve said food at my party.
The walled garden is pretty and all, but all walls eventually crumble, and forests are way more fun anyway.