Different people have different annoyance levels with security restrictions. Personally, I'm all right if Apple's security model makes things I rarely do -- e.g., install privileged system extensions like Rogue Amoeba's Audio Capture Engine -- difficult but still possible. I understand why other people might make different choices.
Having said that, I do roll my eyes whenever I come across the phrase "walled garden" when applied to the Mac in particular, especially when people stridently insist that the Mac is just a year or two away from being locked down like iOS. (I've been hearing that prediction for over a decade, and find it less likely than ever in the era of Apple Silicon Macs.)
If apple wants to ban me, specifically, from running software on my M1 computer now, they can do so. If China or the US government says so, apple will probably comply. You are completely dependent on a network connection to apple to be able to run an M1 now.
If I want to make an app on my iPhone that I don't want to publish, I have to reinstall it every week, and can only install apps with network connections to apple, as apple gives my phone another 1 week permission slip to run code that I have written.
There are no more offline updates, no more offline app installs.
Also apple cares about privacy, except for privacy from apple. They transmit a shit ton of info all the time from their devices to the mothership and know effectively when and where you have been running apps on their computers constantly. They also do so unencrypted in some cases so anyone spying on the network can know too.
You are not the owner of an apple computer anymore, it's apple.
Ultimately in the end, if they really cared about giving their users ultimate ownership of their devices, they would. It would show up in the form of corporate MDM servers which make the ultimate certificate authority the corporate MDM server owner, and in personal cases you could launch and run your own or use Apple's.
Apple hasn't. They are game console computers and macOS is effectively legacy at this point compared to iOS.
Still, it kinda is. You really have to go out of your way now to have full access to modify system files and even then you're not able to do just anything you want. Think of installing another OS on the SSD on Intel Macs with T2 chip, or choosing which iOS apps you want to run on M1.
That logic is a bit circular, though, and not very convincing. Apple is known for being opinionated and stubborn about their long-term goals. If they really wanted to lock down MacOS, they’d just have done it, developers be damned.
Or, that's just part of their sales pitch. You know, like how politicians dont like to be seen as wishy washy, its very likely Apple responds to public opinion just as much as anyone else.
Apple made no further moves to “lock down” iOS to force people to use the App Store after 2006. If Apple listened to public opinion, the iOS App Store wouldn’t be the shit show it is today.
Having said that, I do roll my eyes whenever I come across the phrase "walled garden" when applied to the Mac in particular, especially when people stridently insist that the Mac is just a year or two away from being locked down like iOS. (I've been hearing that prediction for over a decade, and find it less likely than ever in the era of Apple Silicon Macs.)
reply