"The limited walled garden approach to computing ensures that she doesn't accidentally install malware, etc" OK, but why not have a sanctioned, free, voids-you

"The limited walled garden approach to computing ensures that she doesn't accidentally install malware, etc" OK, but why not have a sanctioned, free, voids-your-warranty way to disable these restrictions, so that users who want to install software without using the app store can do so? This would not be hard. It could be buried somewhere deep where users cannot find it, it could be loaded with warnings, but all that would be fine. Apple wants control, because control is profitable. Control lets them spot the next cool application early, so they will not be blindsided like they were by the Web. Control lets them promise developers and media partners that copyright infringement will not be such an issue. Control lets them maintain their image on a level that was not previously possible -- they can make sure that iPads are not associated with pornography, that iPhones are not associated with political cartoons, that nobody will point at Apple devices as a symbol of some national rebellion, and so forth. Control lets them slow down their competitors until Apple has a chance to market their solution (even if that solution is a total boondoggle). It is hard to believe that Apple's policies on the app store were created with users as the top priority. "the inherent danger is unfair competition - the gatekeeper can decide to reject software whenever it wants and impose fees and crazy rules" Which is already what happens. "I think it is best that the European union would regulate such walled gardens, e.g. by limiting the percentage that the gatekeeper can charge," Did they regulate video game consoles?