If Apple gets away with this, everyone else will follow.
Actually, it seems that only Apple has ever been able to get away with this.
"Slowdown". I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Depends whether they are referring to the first derivative (rate of phone shipments), which is still positive, or the second derivative (change in rate of phone shipments), which is sharply negative.
What is reasonable expectation?
That's really the crux of the issue, isn't it? I don't think that people are stupid or uncaring just because they want to enjoy, or are seduced by, the benefits of Facebook's front door, and don't fully appreciate what they are giving up on the back door. This is a "feature" that no doubt was snuck in and pushed out via automatic update without user any the wiser, and the documentation is online but not in a place where a casual user would find it.
Jaded veterans like you and me are not surprised by this - Facebook has a long track record of playing fast and loose with what most people consider private data (Remember when they started posting Visa purchases on Friend's News Feed? "Archangel Michael just bought tickets to Star Wars movie.")
In the end, laziness and short-term memory will prevail, and Facebook will succeed in boiling live frogs.
Displaying an ad based on a word I say is the biggest waste of advertising money I can think of.
Actually, displaying an ad based on a word you say is the holy grail for advertisers.
There are reasonable expectations and there are unreasonable expectations. Users may be guilty of being naive and giving an inch, but Facebook has taken that inch and run 10 miles down Big Brother Blvd. all the way out to Creepytown. So yes, users have some role, but it's no more than 10%, and a whole lot less in my opinion.
I suspect that in your haste you forgot to mention that you have deleted your Facebook account, and furthermore don't even own a TV.
Perhaps if taxes weren't so high...
I don't think I buy this argument. Companies are ultimately driven by people, people are people, and human nature is human nature. A tiger who is plays shenanigans at a 35% or 28% tax rate does not magically change his stripes if the tax rate drops to 20% or 15%. It's still more than zero, so he will play jurisdictional arbitrage to try and make it so.
In Apple's case, it's probably a demand to never compromise the bonuses your product has (e.g. insane battery life, etc) just to make room for a new-shiny. That's why it hadn't shown up in the iPhone yet (Mind, I say this as a guy who owns an Android phone.)
I pretty much agree with you, with the exception of battery life. IPhone is known for insanely bad batter life. In the day, it was Blackberry which could run for days on a single charge -- and they could never fathom why people were flocking to the iPhone, even with its well-known bandwidth and battery performance problems.
It's a separate topic, but what Blackberry never got was how Apple turned a functional item to a fashion/fetish item, and the tech specs became largely irrelevant.
Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing. -- Roy L. Ash, ex-president, Litton Industries