Coming out with "Apple is doing a poor job" just once isn't going to move the needle. People have to hear it over and over in a relatable way.
Maybe it hits different for other people, but I don't appreciate being given a conclusion without any good discussion
I imagine, however, that there are readers for whom this information is novel, and for whom the first-person journalistic style is insightful. In this case, the value here is obvious.
You can, or, alternatively, you can simply acknowledge you’re not the intended audience for the article, and that you may have over-stepped rhetorically in declaring a complete absence of value with respect to insight or novelty in the article; which is there, and obviously so.
For example, I found this comment section much more enlightening than the article, because commenters here made better discussion than I found in the article.
Not to be crude, but that seems like a personal deficiency, not a demerit of the article. The "commenters here" who "made better discussion than I found in the article," are discussing the implications of the article's information and presenting interesting perspectives. If you didn't find anything of value, perhaps you could try thinking a bit harder or for a bit longer. Others have done so successfully.
For example, this is actually a story about a mother worried about her child. I really appreciate that! What I don't appreciate is someone using that to present unsupported positions.
I am attacking the piece that she wrote and it's because I don't think it was a good piece.