A large number of people happen to select the iPhone over alternatives. That does not mean Apple loses the right to design the iPhone.

Shopping malls get to reject tenants. Store owners get to reject products. Store owners also get to make loud religious and political statements (Forever 21 anyone?). Nobody owes you disinterested businesses or general purpose computing.

I agree that its erosion is dangerous, which is why my last smartphone was a Motorola Droid 3. It had superior specs and more freedom, but after a couple of months, revealed itself to be absolute crap. At the end of the day I took the tightly integrated and polished walled garden over what was at that point bloated, buggy abandonware, and it's one of the best electronics purchasing decisions I've ever made. I consider it wrong that people believe this option shouldn't even be available to consumers.

Same goes for software freedom. I would move from OSX to Ubuntu, from Creative Suite to GIMP, and from Office to Libre/Neo/OpenOffice in a heartbeat if either of those products served my needs effectively. I have tried them all, and they don't.

It's great that the anti-Apple crowd continues to make noise. Consumers should know what they're getting into, and I hope the Android ecosystem develops a high-quality, mature, stable, non-gimmicky product. But handset manufacturers are not last-mile infrastructure. Consumers have a choice. Popularity != absolute control.

"absolute control on a market"

I don't think this means what you think it means.

"exerts its influence on political grounds"

You're assuming Apple is exerting it's influence on political grounds as opposed to simply thinking the app has failed their taste guidelines. I've seen a number of comments suggesting the same thing or that they are buckling to government pressure but without evidence all of that amounts to little more then conspiracy theory mongering.

"Whether it gets one complaint of a million is not relevant to the question"

It's certainly relevant, the force of numbers is how pressure is exerted both in the market and in democracy. I'm sure there's a few people outraged that white power apps aren't in the app store. The key word is "few" as in generally, no one gives a fuck. Nearly every argument slamming Apple over Drones+ seems just as effective when restated for white power political party apps. IMHO that's a sign something's wrong with those arguments.

"if this was the case of ISPs blocking access to a website"

I've already talked about this above. I don't see these as remotely equivalent.

I get the argument about the principle. But I guess Steko is nearer on reality that it practically does not matter. Because it really does not "effectively" stifle freedom of press. Especially if the developer himself regards Drone+ as a one trick pony with no downloads. And there are dozens of full featured news apps available who are reporting all kinds of bad news. You can surf the big wide web. An email newsletter would provide the same feature of a notification alert.

A few years ago I read a disgruntled guy complaining that he made a very basic clock App, but Apple rejected it with the explanation there are already hundreds basic clock Apps in the clock category. The other commenters were riled up, how dare you Apple! But in the end there are really enough ways to check the date and time.

> Whether it gets one complaint or a million is not relevant to the question.

I disagree. A million complains have enough weight to lead to a public discussion and the forming of public opinion and pressure. In the hn thread about this drone-topic, which was only 2 days ago, this link was posted:

http://mashable.com/2011/03/23/apple-removes-gay-cure/

Quote: "After more than 146,000 people signed a petition against a “gay cure” app, Apple has removed it from the App Store."

I am glad this junk was removed! But from your viewpoint of principle it should be allowed?

-------

That said, I think Apple could some day adopt Mountain Lions new Gatekeeper feature in iOS, if it proofs itself on OSX.