It's borderline 'conclusive' because there is literally no material difference between 'security' on either system, ergo, it cannot be a material choice for 'se

It's borderline 'conclusive' because there is literally no material difference between 'security' on either system, ergo, it cannot be a material choice for 'selection'. Only the 'appearance' thereof. Moreover, I really don't think Apple users in any conscious way are into this - I have never in my life heard a single user hint at this. If you were to ask Apple users 'If you could have a bunch more apps right now, that you do not have because of Apple's closed model, and that having those apps would in no way affect the security or integrity of your device' - would they say yes? Of course they would. This is getting absurd - the 'restrictions' on Apple, while based on some degree of legitimacy, are also, unambiguously a vector for them to pursue leveraging the control they have on their platform to make money. This isn't conspiratorial, my gosh, this is exactly the kind of position every business wants to be in, it's like the 'whole point'. They can milk their dominance and suck profits out of adjacent sectors and cover it with some other related policy? It's 'business gold'.