We can use them today as general purpose computers, if we make a large effort to do so.

In my Linux and Mac, I dont think twice to quickly write a script to automate some pain-in-the-butt issues. But with my phone, it is pain-in-the-butt to write anything. It becomes not worth the effort.

Moreover, we can argue if technically it is a general purpose computer for whole day long. But that's not the point.

The point is that we are allowing gradually the big organizations to restrict general purpose computing, the internet and other previously free systems. It is happening slowly, where we can still give them the benefit of doubt. We are the frogs in the kettle where we are arguing that the temperature is just one degree more than earlier, so it is not actually boiling. We can keep on arguing about the temperature or step back and see the big picture where it is going.

No it's not. I need permission by a third-party to be able to program a device I supposedly own. I need to give them money, I need to give them my identity, and I need to tie my identity to any distribution of the software I make if other people are to be able to install it.

This is not a rhetorical sleight of hand, this is just saying that I am not truly in control of the device that I have bought.

The rhetorical sleight of hand is yours, by claiming that a device requiring pre-authorization (by virtue of needing a developer account) is an open computing platform.