When a final straw eventually breaks the camel's back, that tipping point happens at the end of a long sequences of disappointments.
The grievances you mentioned -- soldered RAM, non-user-replaceable batteries -- are the beginnings of a load of disappointments that are currently outweighed by OSX's other benefits.
At some point, the load becomes too great, and the floodgates crack, and people shift to another platform.
e.g. people shifting away from previous market leaders, e.g. Blackberry, Palm etc.
These are some grievances which - although not fatal in themselves - are building up a weight of grudges that, eventually, will combine into a toll that breaks the camel's back:
-- removal of DVD burners/players, just to have a slim profile.
-- total removal of matte, antiglare screens from all iMac and Cinema Displays, i.e. no matte screens for any Apple desktop gear, need by professionals and many people suffering from eye-strain.
-- soldered-RAM not upgradeable.
-- no user-replaceable batteries.
-- GLUED-IN batteries. This is a separate grievance to "no user-replaceable batteries". At least, with previous batteries, you could actually replace them by opening up the case, with a bit of hard work. But, no, Apple now glues the darn batteries in, so that even if you can open up the case, the glue prevents you from removing the battery. Apple is so SPITEFUL that it purposely glues the batteries in, not only making it harder for YOU to replace the battery, but also making it harder for their own Apple technicians to remove the glued-in battery. There is no other reason for glueing in the battery other than Apple's spiteful attempt at foiling any attempt by the user to replace the battery.
-- dumbed down iOS with no Finder-like filing system.
-- refusal to offer user-option to bring back colored icons in the Finder. Sure, mono-chrome looks more artsy and modern. No doubt. Monochrome looks nicer. But some of us, whilst acknowledging that it looks nicer, still need color icons so we can work FASTER. Why this refusal to offer options?
-- dumbing down of OSX, e.g. removal of option, in Calendar, of stipulating the length of snooze e.g. 5 min, 10 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 1 day etc. -- now restricted to just one option of snooze for 10 minutes. Apple thinks such dumbing down makes life easier, but it makes life harder for us when we need options to snooze a reminder for the time we need.
-- refusing to add an SD slot to iPads -- why? So you are forced to upgrade when the memory becomes to small for your needs.
-- refusal to allow iOS apps to save files to a common area, rather than partitioning save-areas to each app. Sure, mom and pops find that simplistic, but some of us need a regular Finder for more complex activities and projects. Why not allow iOS to have a Preference to turn on more complex features, rather than totally dumbing down the iOS for the lowest common denominator?
-- rapid annual upgrades of OSX, each year causing havoc with incompatibility with OSX applications, often having to purchase upgrades of many apps. Remember, a version of OSX is not like a rapid upgrade cycle of Google Chrome or Firefox. Here, when OSX changes, often it means some Mac apps no longer work in the new OS. Developers must upgrade their apps, often charging big bucks for it. Older Macs go out of date, making their Macs obsolete, often when the new features in OSX are so darn trivial. Instead of obsoleting older Macs, why can't older Macs use the new OSX without activating those features that require the newer hardware. In Mountain Lion, I don't care for the fancy animations when you close a reminder, etc. Why should my Mac be obsoleted by such nonsense? Oh, yes, Apple needs to force us to buy new hardware so it can add to its cash pile. Yes, the money pile is growing, but the aura of Apple as a company that cares for its users is being replaced by a snide Wall Street cash cow that finds every strategy to milk its users of money. Think, people, think. If Apple sells less smartphones than Samsung, but is making more money, does that not equate to Apple milking more money per item than is reasonable compared to the industry standard? It does so because users are locked into buying Apple because of the aura of Apple products - but once that bubble bursts, you're left with a greedy company that will try to screw its users for greater and greater profits as the ship sinks.
At some point, once the market no longer feels that Apple is cool, these grievances, and no doubt a list of future misteps, will start to stink bad. That's when the tipping point happens, when people start calling Apple the next Blackberry or Nokia.
If I can sum it up, I think it points to Apple being a company that is more beholden to its koolaid of producing computers that are works of art, rather than caring what its customers want.
