My problem with it is that it tends to put things in the wrong perspective. Should we judge things by comparing them to other crappy products, or by a reasonable expectation of what things should be like independent of that? If it's the latter, then what's the point of comparing it with the former? It just gives a false sense of "it's not so bad after all."
I see both approaches as merely tools to achieve what you want. I don't see any of those approaches as good or bad. If one wants to make only Apple's decision and practice look bad, then yes they could do absolute comparison. Alternatively, you could do a relative comparison to see that this is a standard practice followed by all major platforms providers, that compete with their customers.
Neither is good nor bad except one is supposedly singling out Apple to make it look bad? Besides, I was talking about holding ALL involved to the absolute standard, compared to a purely relative comparison.
Companies don't operate inside a vacuum. They are part of an ecosystem that they share with their competitors. If a competitor does X, the company in question must respond with Y. It's just how things work.
