Considering the fact that you prefer Apple to block you from other options: it doesn't follow that they should do this to everyone, just that you would still pick that option if you had the choice.
I respectfully disagree with this statement. I think an analogous situation would be the launch of Disney+: it used to be possible to watch Disney series on Netflix, but after Disney decided to launch Disney+, these series were pulled from Netflix to push the adoption of Disney+. For a Netflix user, their situation would very much be affected by Disney+ existing.
Where the pedal really hits the metal is with the cost of buying zero day exploits. iOS exploits can be had for much cheaper than Android ones.
But who's to say that Apple has your interests in mind, and not their own, and makes a choice for you that is actually detrimental to you and beneficial to them? Let's say, by locking you in, and preventing any competition.
How would you feel if every other company you buy from did the same?
Vote with your wallets doesn't really work since people will put up with plenty of abuses for software that's useful enough to them. Vote with politics doesn't really work either because regulators are very hesitant to regulate tech and kill the cash cow.
People, like me, are so fiercely loyal to Apple because seemingly no other company has been able to strongarm developers into not being shitty to their users.
If they didn't have my interests in mind I wouldn't buy their products (which is why I don't buy any more Google products, their customers are the ad companies, not the people who buy/use their products). Companies make products for their customers with the customer's interest in mind in order to make a product that sells the best.
Mac apps do just fine with other install options while most still choose the App Store for ease and security.
For example, iPhone/iPad users being unable to install Adobe Flash accelerated its demise hugely, by motivating websites to remove Flash, not just add 'please install' links.