I get it, of course. The problem is that "our way or the highway" only works when your way is actually good. They have a responsibility to their users to never

I get it, of course. The problem is that "our way or the highway" only works when your way is actually good. They have a responsibility to their users to never break things, if they intend to provide no means of workaround. In cases like this, the responsible thing to do is to make potentially-breaking functionality opt-in instead of opt-out. That way, until the app gets updated, the user sees no change and nothing breaks. The clean way to do this is to make the app have a version manifest that says "I am built for iOS version <x>", and then the OS can be smart enough to disable functionality that might break it. That way apps don't have to opt-in to every new feature - they just certify "not broken on iOS <x>". The wrong way to do it is to break the world, and punish the users for upgrading while expecting thousands of third parties to pick up the pieces. (I don't know why this versioning technique isn't used more in general - if all programming languages required version declarations then breaking changes needn't be a thing.)