I'm conflicted on the signified, maybe because I'm conflicted on the signifier. I would be less conflicted, I think, if Apple products really did "just work" as

I'm conflicted on the signified, maybe because I'm conflicted on the signifier. I would be less conflicted, I think, if Apple products really did "just work" as so many Apple adherents purport. But from my experience, it's just a matter of degree, i.e. Apple products "just work" more often than MS products do, but not that much more often anymore, and when Apple products don't work, they don't work harder (or maybe it just feels that way because people have so little experience trying to get non-working things to work?). On a more abstract level, it just feels weird and maybe subversive to characterize the restriction of choice as freedom. I mean, it does make a sort of sense, esp. after taking human psychology into account in that restricting choice to a manageable level might make it easier for people to make decisions. But it still feels weird. Maybe it just exposes "freedom" as a flawed concept, and a tense balance between orders of magnitude-larger forces is all there is. That's a weird Lovecraftian world to live in, though.