luxuriant

Nailed it. I think the only things you left out were dropping, bending and blending.

The OpenID Foundation has pointed out that Apple's technology bears a lot of similarities with OpenID Connect, but has serious gaps affecting security and development.
Given its membership (https://openid.net/foundation/sponsoring-members/) I regret that I have to take any pronouncement from this source with a large grain of salt.

Right with you on Gruber, Daniel. The posting you reference seemed to me so small-minded (and potty-mouthed) that I've unsubscribed from DF, which I've followed for not a few years. 

But wait! there's more:

• Access to over 100,000 new music stations from iHeartRadio, radio.com and TuneIn.

• Sleep timer.

The lack of those meant there was no way I would buy a HomePod. Mind, I probably won't even now, unless I get even more annoyed at Sonos' incessant content-free updates than I am now. 

One more thing …

if you study Apple, you'll come to realize that it is very wary of getting into a position where an accusation that it is a monopolist (as defined by the current interpretation of US anti-trust law) would stick. Sure, it gets accused of being a monopolist — the recent SCOTUS decision allowing users to sue it over App Store prices is the latest example — but has always been able to point to alternatives in the marketplace, which means that the accusations fail. (Yes, I know: eBooks. Let's say no more than that it strengthened their resolve.)  Monopolizing the profits without monopolizing the market, on the other hand, is quite another issue. But the law can't get you for that. Buying Netflix could, notwithstanding all the emergent competitors, put Apple in future danger of monopoly charges that would stick. It doesn't want to go there.