this is what you get when you elevate an operator (an operations/finance focused exective) in place of a product visionary. that's no knock on tim, who's done what he's been incentivized to do by the board and shareholders, and a good job at that (and rewarded disproportionately so). but steve wanted to win with a superior product, not just numerically as tim does. that's why steve, many years after his death, still garners more respect publicly than tim (though tim is respected too).

it's the same slow decline that happens over and over in these cases. apple is already focused primarily on services, which you can see in their financials. product has stagnated, while services continues to grow, and with it, more and more capital invested in chasing manufactured prestige awards like oscars and emmys.

I haven't left yet but it's looking bad. They are nearly out of room to grab more market share, and can't continue growing that way, so one of the few ones left to expand is ad revenue or to purchase other companies, and Apple doesn't really seem big on polluting their brand "Apple" with "lesser" companies.

It wasn’t been explicitly stated anywhere by anyone who matters

It is relevant because transitioning from premium into an ad platform is a low-brow-caveman-bottom-of-the-bucket move, only the best one to make once you're out of better options.

Truly premium products respect your privacy.

It turns out truly premium goods aren't Google, Tesla, and soon won't be Apple, if Tim&co go down this path.

If the US government (or any, really) makes that unattractive, then I am all for it, regardless of any innovation aspect. It’s like Samsung double-dipping by making its smart TVs gather data about their users. This should be illegal.