Capitalism isn't trying to do me any favours. Its practitioners simply want my money. It's how they go about it that counts.
When I bought my first smartphone last year I looked at Android devices as an option. I could, of course, have chosen to buy whatever product I wanted – and I did. The Android devices used the 'latest tech' and the prices were very competitive. Much easier on the bank balance than Apple's 'equivalent' products. I nevertheless eventually decided to stick with Apple, though, because I am familiar with their way of doing things and I like the standards that the company usually manages to attain. More importantly, I rely on Apple's devices to be robust and secure enough for me to use as the efficient tools they are intended to be. There are far too many scumbags 'out there' ready to scam me one way or another, for example, and lots of inferior products, too. Thus I rely on a company – Apple – that has robust control, as much as it feasibly can have at any rate, over what can be done on and to its devices by users like me, and by others unlike me who actually do not understand their devices sufficiently well enough to use them safely and efficiently.
Apple would be insane to allow an 'opening up' of such a successful, hugely popular and highly reputable way of operating (its company policy, which translates across into its products' behaviour) when it is tried and tested and has been refined over a consistent, extended period of years, and which is an excellent proven alternative to the far less robust and loosely curated open market of Android, for example. The consequence of doing so would be to see Apple devices' perceived reliability and usability profoundly diminished in countless ways by the loss of some of that robust oversight. This might indeed be a success for those like Telegram wanting to sell more apps and gain more market share (in their guise as defenders of free choice) but they certainly don't have the Apple device users' best interests at heart; of anyone, it is of course Apple that tops that particular list.
I am reminded of Blu-ray, – that proverbial 'bag of hurt' Steve Jobs referred to when he declared that it wouldn't be coming to Apple computers any time soon, or at all. Was there a mass exodus to some non-Mac alternative? Nope. It was generally understood by many or most Apple users (those that even knew that it was in fact an 'issue') to be the way Apple chose to operate, and we were free to vote with our wallets or not. Apple's user-base increased steadily as the company's way of doing things continued to evolve and mature.
Do I want the option of Telegram on my iPhone. No thanks – not interested. Do others? Probably. Maybe they should take it up with Telegram and not Apple, because Telegram knows what Apple requires of it to join the Apple-administered party (rather than the all-welcome 'free-for-all' that goes on elsewhere). I'm with Apple. The company's not perfect. I know that. But I've been using the company's products for thirty years and I continue to rely on them to make it a civilised, value-for-money experience in comparison with the other options available. I certainly don't want a bunch of opportunist Apple competitors convincing the 'lawmakers' in the EU that it's for my own good that they tear down that (reasonably) secure Apple walled garden I have chosen and subsequently paid to spend time in. I'm happy for Apple to remain a vigilant gatekeeper. It's partly why they get my money.
