Re: Separation of platform
"There is a fundamental issue around Apple iOS and Android device vendors locking the platforms down"
While I agree with you wholeheartedly in principle, in practice I see problems.
First, you actually DO have choice in that you can already buy devices that are bootloader unlockable/unlocked. Many manufacturers have offered and continue to sell devices that can be bootloader unlocked. They just don't advertise that fact and it's often only their premium devices or carrier independent devices (e.g. Sony has a long history of allowing bootloaders on their premium devices to be unlocked).
So, you can already do that. Just not with everything.
That said, I see room for improvement there.
In Canada regulators finally forced the hands of the local telco companies to carrier unlock phones that customers had paid for in full. It used to be that the telcos either refused to carrier unlock their phones outright or charged you 50 to 100 CAD (30-60 euro) for the privilege of doing so.
It doesn't seem like a stretch to require handset makers to do the same for devices that the customer owns outright. HOWEVER, the key difference is that over 95% of users NEVER even would take advantage of that ability. There isn't the same pressure on regulators or device manufacturers to unlock bootloaders.
Second, it's not just warranty, but, also REPUTATION. If a device is provided with an unlocked bootloader many people DO STILL expect support. People are largely UNREASONABLE. People don't take responsibility for their actions. I see it all the time in my line of work.
Heck, _I_ have caught myself having unreasonable expectations and climbed off my high horse.
What happens when you brick your device after having installed a recovery and wiped system and data? (of course, said person probably never even knew what system or data were). You're going to be annoyed with Samsung for not getting you out of the mess YOU created.
Third, the vast majority of users don't ever ACT on the ability to choose operating systems. We only have to look at the desktop to see that. Linux can be installed on pretty much every single PC whether it be Mac or Windows based. Despite that fact FEWER than 2% of the world's desktop users have EVER installed another operating system on their computer other than Windows or Mac.
People buy high powered, UPGRADEABLE hardware to promptly never upgrade it and complain about how the computer becomes slower. I've seen that story play out for over three decades now! If someone ever asks me for my opinion on whether to buy the expandable option or not I almost always counsel them to get the unupgradeable option (which is cheaper) because they'll NEVER, EVER use it. So far I've never had someone complain about that aspect of my recommendations :).
Windows isn't perfect, by a LONG shot, even Windows 10. Yet, despite that fact people don't flock to a distro like Ubuntu, which, arguably, for a substantial minority (perhaps even majority) offers an experience on par with or even better than what is offered by Windows 10.
Most people use their desktop as little more than a web browser and word processor. Ubuntu is perfect for that and actually has fewer headaches once installed (my Windows devices constantly are losing wifi connectivity... Windows 10 doesn't like switching wifi networks ;).
In conclusion, yes, you raise excellent points. In practice, they will fall on deaf ears because there's no ground swell of user support.
In the case of Google's anti-competitive behaviour, yes, the EU had a compelling reason to act because Google was abusing its dominant position. But, in the case of "open" handsets, there's much less of a legal case to be made because there ALREADY IS a lot of choice out there. Just because one hand set maker doesn't provide unlocked bootloaders doesn't prevent others from doing so.
Google also doesn't prevent handset makers from selling unlocked/unlockable bootloaders.
In fact, from Google's perspective, it's those devices with unlocked bootloaders that provide Google with the best free value in terms of R&D. Enthusiasts install AOSP distros and do things with them that handset makers don't allow their users to do. What is popular on those distros then can flow back into AOSP which can then flow back into commercial Android.