Exactly. Ubuntu is the worst offender of nix based "Easy" systems. By trying to make an uncomplicated system, they have instead done exactly what all these other cr*py systems have done. Made things more complicated.
Linux distributions are not the worst offenders of over-complicated software. Instead, that would be Windows. Linux is there for the people who need/want to understand and manipulate their system. To a greater degree than any other system around.
No one is recommending Linux software to people who don't need or what this level of manipulations.
What I feel is the greatest abusers of these types of over-complications is Windows. I used to volunteer at a library helping elderly people (plus anyone else that needed help). No one came in with a Linux computer.
What the majority of these people came in with were Windows laptops. Laptops that were just too complicated for them to get a hand on.
Apple does not block people from installing better browsers (I know a couple). They did, back in the day, when they couldn't find a way to make Nitro (their web engine) secure.
Aha, but of course, these services and time wasters will just adapt to have no ads. Essentially, I fear that all apps will take the approach of being excellent time wasters or services (because that's what they're being paid for), and killing all the truly great apps that that have around 20 people using them, yet cost around $7. And are not as addictive as these time wasters. Some apps try to minimize the time spent in their apps (a losing strategy in this new economy) because people pay them for a fast, frictionless service (think Drafts), but put less time into them than a browser or addictive game.
Da basics.... You know, separate content from presentation. Content being the HTML page, and presentation being the styling. Semantically right HTML should be the primary goal when writing HTML. You can than style it 40 different ways using CSS.
I disagree. The truth is, some of my most used apps are the least important and/or cheapest. This is why, if we went with a pay by usage app store plan, the true winners would be the addictive, least useful apps.
I use the Spotify app 24/7, yet I use Editorial and Pythonista (both costing around $7), an app I value to a much greater degree, sometimes just -8h daily. And the truth is, while OmniOutliner is so much usefuler than say Pinterest, people spend a lot more time on Pinterest.
Don't get me wrong, I do see why the losers are probably the 99¢ apps, after all, you probably do not use those on a concurrent basis. Yet, if we go by the hourly usage, people use social networks like Pinterest and Facebook, games like Temple Run, and music services, to a much greater degree overall.