For instance, everybody thinks Apple hates advertising, esp user-tracking. The interesting thing is Apple themselves run a $6B+ ads businsess, which does first-party user tracking - which is the nuance.
Similarly, if Apple truely wanted user privacy, they'll outright ban Facebook from their platform.
Or most egregious is Apple "stands up to government" (famously with FBI) but is more than happy to bend the knee to Chinese government, or most recently with the gold plaque with Trump.
This would mean many apps like the Facebook App, Messenger, Google Maps, GMail, Line, WeChat, Slack, Discord, etc would effectively not be allowed to open links to the entire internet but only domains directly related to the app and would be a privacy win.
They'd have to have some wording that would have to distinguish between a browser app and a non-browser app but i'd argue that's probably not that hard to do.
That's why a regulator can be effective. You can have a regulation that A has to be as easy to do as B and enforce it. Think of browser choice in on PCs in Europe or (briefly) the rule that it should be as easy to unsubscribe in the US as it is to subscribe. People have different feelings about regulations, but I think in places where everyone converges on a single platform pregulation that is protective of the individual makes sense.
[0] https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/12/market-failure/
[1] https://www.phonearena.com/news/apple-facebook-almost-worked...
kg•5mo ago