My point is that this is ridiculous in the first place. There is no reason
to disallow people from running their own code on their own devices.
It's even worse like this. What they are doing is essentially making an undesirable
situtation, then capitializing on that by offering you a slightly less shitty
solution (which is still far from reasonable):
"Hey, you could buy a $100/y dev account, but we're so incredibly generous
that we'll allow you to run a few programs at a premium of $10!"
They are charging for something that should be one of the most essential
freedoms of a computing device. This is insane, no matter how you try
to sugar-coat and excuse it.
The basic argument is, it's a cell phone. It's an embedded device. It's not a computer (as proved by the "post-PC-world" phrase). A traditional cell phone could run apps (Tetris, Snake, etc). A game console is built to run "apps" (video games). Yet no one is loudly complaining that they cannot run their own software there for free. A smartphone is more closely related to a game console than a traditional personal computer.
Will we reach the point where smartphone (or smartphone like devices in the future) are considered computers and we can use them freely? I hope so. It might happen. It might not. What we can count on is there will always be the choice on the market for those who require that choice. Not everyone does. I have a Windows Phone. I've never been bothered by not being able to install my own software. I also have an HP Touchpad with Android and WebOS, the two freest OSes on the market right now. Never sideloaded. I don't need to.
My point? Your outrage is misplaced, for several reasons listed above. People often talk about consumer choice, but the rubber meets the road when consumers willingly make an informed decision (in my case) that the crowd doesn't understand. I bought a Palm Pre not because of the freedom, but because of the UX. I bought a Windows Phone for the same reason. Sometimes a smartphone is just a smartphone. You might not understand my choice, but I do and that's what counts in the end.
Neither of your point disproves the fact that it's ridiculous. It's not
about whether you want to run your own applications or not, it's about
having that choice whenever you want to. On every computing device. This
is - or should be - a fundamental Freedom, one which you should not be able
to sign away, not even by an "informed choice".
Citing examples like feature phones and gaming consoles isn't helpful, either.
Just because nobody complained in the past doesn't make it okay. Also,
as the quite active homebrew scene around most consoles proves, there
is value in being able to run your own stuff on gaming consoles. You might
remember the deep shit that Sony got themselves into when they decided to
turn off OtherOS on the PS3 for no reason whatsoever.
Anyways, I think consoles - while owning quite a few myself - are a thing
of the past. They're eventually going to die. The coming next generation might be
the last we see.
It's even worse like this. What they are doing is essentially making an undesirable situtation, then capitializing on that by offering you a slightly less shitty solution (which is still far from reasonable):
"Hey, you could buy a $100/y dev account, but we're so incredibly generous that we'll allow you to run a few programs at a premium of $10!"
They are charging for something that should be one of the most essential freedoms of a computing device. This is insane, no matter how you try to sugar-coat and excuse it.