Humour? Yes, please!
@Steven Knox: "Now, if what you claim is entirely correct: that Apple has marketed solely to those who wish to run Apple-approved apps obtained through Apple-approved means..."
What I said is that it is good business practice to "know your market and work to fill the needs of that market". Aiming for a target market of "people who want to buy things from us" is like trying to pull yourself up by your shoelaces - no matter how hard you try, you won't get anywhere. But Apple's customer-base has grown dramatically. Many iPhone users would never have previously considered buying anything from Apple - but Apple have thought hard about what their target market might want from a phone and delivered a product that has met that goal.
End-users - including myself - couldn't care less who the device or software comes from. It just needs to be easy to understand, consistently provide useful services, and require a minimum of know-how and effort to maintain. Many of the excluded apps would undermine that environment, particularly those that support hacking (witness how jailbroken phones have been the target of malware). The rules Apple have imposed are not designed to control users, but to protect the environment their customers bought into.
I appreciate The Register's humour - that's partly why I read it. I thought the jokes about Apple's control-freakery were funny too, but 50 articles later it started to get stale. It's degenerating into cliche now, e.g.:
"once they've stepped outside of Apple's control"
"Apple's rules clearly don't allow emulators, which  threaten the  iTunes monopoly"
If it was a good argument, I'd say stick with it. But for humour...? Can we find something new to laugh at Apple about? Please?