>
I see Apple pursuing a long term vision where product integration and privacy are pillars in a seamless, trusted ecosystem.
Privacy is clearly not what Apple is doing: simply read the 90s texts from the cypherpunk scene to get an idea what privacy really means. Also consider that a lot of features that make life a lot more comfortable ("seamless") are very privacy-invading. Thus going for privacy would make the (in this case Apple) product quite uncomfortable to use.
Not how Apple and others are doing. Internet access and cloud accounts are not a requirement to integration. You need standards and conventions. Now, eveyone is doing its own thing and company wants to control your devices to the point they can brick them within a few years.
Explaining this in sufficient detail would make a really long text, so I'll just give one very isolated point:
Bascially, the internet is a dark forest. A lot of things "ordinary" people do all the time is insanely privacy-violating (just to give one example: if you send a message to a person who is not insanely privacy-conscious and capable (meaning very knowledable about technology) of preserving your privacy, malicious entities can spy on you).
So, for the product/OS to be capable of keeping your privacy, it will have to prevent you from doing an insane amount of things against your reflexes, comfort and what you learned about politeness.
Privacy is clearly not what Apple is doing: simply read the 90s texts from the cypherpunk scene to get an idea what privacy really means. Also consider that a lot of features that make life a lot more comfortable ("seamless") are very privacy-invading. Thus going for privacy would make the (in this case Apple) product quite uncomfortable to use.