Your position is based on an (implicit) false dilemma. It's perfectly possible to "trust" Apple in the sense that you use their operating system and hardware a

Your position is based on an (implicit) false dilemma. It's perfectly possible to "trust" Apple in the sense that you use their operating system and hardware after you've bought it. This kind of "trust" is similar to "agreeing with an EULA or TOS". There is not much of an alternative to it. This does not imply that you therefore must also trust Apple as the one and only broker and manager of certificates for software running on your machine. You could, for example, suspect that Apple might revoke a certificate for some developer that creates a controversial product (e.g. a p2p client) or some product that competes with Apple products or some future plans of features. For example, Apple has in the past essentially copied innovative apps and revoked licences for the app store of the original developers. In theory, Apple could just erase such applications, since they "have root". In practice, they wouldn't do so. But they would and will revoke certificates and app store licences. The new rules also make alternative app stores impossible, of course, although I'm not sure they were possible before. In a nutshell, trust != trust. You can trust a hardware or software maker in some respects but not in others. The primary goal of Gatekeeper is monopolization of secure access, not security.