Again, where is the monopoly that forces you to buy devices with a T2 chip (or something) analogous? That’s simply not the world we live in, and it doesn’t seem to me like we’re moving toward it. And if your political choice is to maximize market forces, why are you trying to fight the market forces that result in there being a large market for Apple’s devices and a small (but extant and healthy) market for the devices you want? Do you think that most consumers “really want” the devices you want? If so, why do they choose not to buy them even though they are available?
Right now, as a consumer (which, like you, is my only realistic lever on this situation), I’m pretty happy that I own some Apple devices and some very not-Apple devices. I’d be pretty pissed if I was forced to choose only one of these (in either direction). I think you’d find the same reaction if you became president of the world and threw everyone’s Apple devices in the trash and handed them a Librem 5 or something similar. Do you contest that this would be their reaction? If so, what is your definition of market forces and anti-competitive behavior?
Monopoly power is not a market force, it's an abuse of the market to the detriment of the consumers. If "the market forces that result in there being a large market for Apple’s devices" is Apple using its platform to, say, restrict competition and maximize app revenue, thus having more money to invest in their platform, thus forcing competitors to apply the same dubious tactics or fail, then this is not a pro-consumer model because it leads to an oligopoly at best or impenetrable monopoly at worst.
The consumers can buy any system with any chip they want. If it is employed by Apple to enhance security that's great, for example the Mac. If it's used to lockdown the device so that no competing software can be run, a la iPhone, for them to maintain the stranglehold on the app market, then I am against it on political grounds and my position is not falsifiable.
You are inworking an oligopoly situation and accuse me of wanting to turn it into a monopoly, but I want the exact opposite: all existing platforms to still exist, and additionally, all those prevented by anti-competitive behavior, which by my non-falsifiable definition includes any lockdown on the hardware that is sold in the marketplace, that can only be, and is only used to limit the options of the owner.
It is not like Apple devices would cease to be produced or be confiscated if we pass laws mandating software freedom on purchased hardware, from iPhones to tractors.
Right now, as a consumer (which, like you, is my only realistic lever on this situation), I’m pretty happy that I own some Apple devices and some very not-Apple devices. I’d be pretty pissed if I was forced to choose only one of these (in either direction). I think you’d find the same reaction if you became president of the world and threw everyone’s Apple devices in the trash and handed them a Librem 5 or something similar. Do you contest that this would be their reaction? If so, what is your definition of market forces and anti-competitive behavior?