There is no difference. Apple provides binaries (via the App Store), and the user is not allowed to install/run their own binaries, which is a requirement the GPLv3 added to prevent TiVoization.
It matters not whether the software is preinstalled or offered on the side, the effect is the same. If the user can't install their own versions of software, the environment is incompatible with the GPLv3.
Now, running GPLv3 software via Cydia/jailbroken-iPhones is probably OK, since the user has gone through the effort in order to run their own versions of software. I'm pretty sure the FSF would prefer running a free software version of Android instead, however. :-)
Whether or not there is a moral difference, there is a clear difference in terms of the license terms.
> Apple provides binaries (via the App Store), and the user is not allowed to install/run their own binaries, which is a requirement the GPLv3 added to prevent TiVoization.
No, the requirement that the GPLv3 added is that “Installation Instructions” must be provided when a licensee conveys software “in, or with, or specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized)” [emphasis added] [0]; that is, for anti-tivoization to apply, the software must be for a “User Product” (which App Store Apps are) and it must be conveyed in the same transaction as possession of the “User Product” is transferred (which clearly does not happen in the normal case with App Store Apps.)
You seem to be confusing a fuzzy picture of the goal of the GPLv3 with the actual requirements of the license terms.
> There is no difference. Apple provides binaries (via the App Store), and the user is not allowed to install/run their own binaries, which is a requirement the GPLv3 added to prevent TiVoization.
This has not been true for a few years. Nowadays anyone can freely upload apps from Xcode to iDevices (before it used to cost 99$)
You can freely upload apps from Xcode to iDevices if you own a Mac, and have an Apple developer account (not paid but you still need one), and compile the code yourself, and most crucially the code signing on apps deployed this way expires after a week. This is in no way a serious deployment method.
I suspect the "freely upload" requirement might be "free as in speech", not "free as in beer". Apple might make it free as in cost nothing. But are you required to agree to any terms of service? I suspect so.
It matters not whether the software is preinstalled or offered on the side, the effect is the same. If the user can't install their own versions of software, the environment is incompatible with the GPLv3.
Now, running GPLv3 software via Cydia/jailbroken-iPhones is probably OK, since the user has gone through the effort in order to run their own versions of software. I'm pretty sure the FSF would prefer running a free software version of Android instead, however. :-)