I think part of the reason why this case is so polarizing is that it ties in to unrelated issues like right-to-repair and consumer freedom. As things stand, th

I think part of the reason why this case is so polarizing is that it ties in to unrelated issues like right-to-repair and consumer freedom. As things stand, the owner of an iOS device doesn't have the final say on what software runs on their device; they can only install apps that Apple allows them to. There are some who would consider that to be wrong regardless of Apple's size or place in the overall market, even though that's not really what this case is about.