> You are not forced by the evil companies, you are forced by market pressure from the majority of consumers. It can be both. If Apple decided to do something

> You are not forced by the evil companies, you are forced by market pressure from the majority of consumers. It can be both. If Apple decided to do something moderately annoying to their phones without considering any user/customer feedback, it wouldn't drastically affect sales. There's a limit, of course. If they're too hostile, too quickly, then people will buy Android phones instead. But, if it's just a little bit worse for the end user, customers will keep buying iPhones. Why? Because of vendor lock-in. Why do you think companies have been trying to lock us in to their product ecosystems since the dawn of market economics? It's certainly not to make it EASIER for their customers to "vote with their wallets." For example, I'd be willing to bet good money that Microsoft didn't start putting ads and shit into Windows 10 or whatever because it really thought that Windows users would just LOVE that. I also bet they didn't decide to re-enable settings during updates that users disabled because the majority of Windows users wanted to have to periodically reapply settings changes that they made... > Not even Apple was able to resist consumer pressure, they famously yielded and made a big screen phone. I don't know the internals of what goes on at Apple, but both the small size and the "no-stylus" convictions seemed to be due to Steve Jobs. And I'll note that both, the bigger size phones and the iPad stylus came out at least a couple years after he died. So, it's not obvious to me that Apple would have yielded on those with Jobs at the helm.