As an engineer; I want homogeneity, interoperability and lower cost/effort to ship features. We can see that the market also wants this and that's probably why

As an engineer; I want homogeneity, interoperability and lower cost/effort to ship features. We can see that the market also wants this and that's probably why everything is now an Electron app. As a consumer; I want an affordable, high quality product that supports all of the software/games I like to use. The task of getting my MacBook to run Linux and play video games is massive on the part of Apple. I understand that interplay is intricate, complex and expensive to implement so it's not fair to force Apple to implement anything they don't want to - for instance have the government declare Vulcan a mandatory standard for all OSes. As someone who values the freedom we have to innovate, I don't know what the right way to convince everyone to play nicely together is but ultimately it's about stimulating competition to drive innovation. The current environment stifles innovation, either through ring fencing developers/users or adding a storefront/marketplace tax to distributing a product, killing new products before they get off the ground. The Apple Silicon hardware is remarkable, but outside of web browsing, basic web development and video editing - it's artificially limited in it's capabilities. Windows is a dumpster fire, holding onto market share due to its mammoth support for software and Microsoft won't improve Windows unless there is competition. Perhaps the solution is not to force "platform" companies to build anything, but instead think of software like we did old school repairable hardware and implement regulations that require vendors to offer the equivalent of schematics. Perhaps regulations that require platform developers to distribute their software/drivers under permissive open source licenses such that people can implement competing platforms. That way no one is compelled to do anything but if a disruptor (like say, SteamOS or Asahi) wants to compete, they can freely build a better product without needing to reverse engineer APIs and worry about getting sued. Perhaps OS vendors be regulated such that they must offer a means for third party software to be run. That way developers could distribute for platforms through their own marketing efforts and the value proposition for OS marketplaces/app stores is a better ROI - rather than being "the only option" Perhaps hardware should be regulated such that it's "jail-breakable". That way disruptors could offer competing platforms that are compatible with the original (like the ROMs available on some Android devices, or Ubuntu OS or something). ...Or maybe that would disincentivize the giants from building anything because there's nothing other than investing in innovation that would protect them from losing market share I'm not advocating to open source all the things under GPL or something - feel free to keep Photoshop, Word and The Witcher 3 closed source - we just need some kind of balance that lets me, as a consumer, have choices so that the giants can fight it out and build the best products.