This is such a bad article, I half suspect it's astroturfing and food intended for Apple apologists. It's focused on a single small part of the problem and unnecessarily misrepresented it.
As a reminder of the broader picture: Apple has a strong anti-repair stance, they have lobbied for this [1], have engaged in broad, deceptive strategies to remove 3rd party repair options, by confiscating legally refurbished hardware under the guise of "counterfeits" [2], attempting to confiscate grey market parts under the guise of "trademark violation" and threatening the 3rd party repair shops [3]. They profit from this continued attack by deceiving customers into expensive unnecessary part replacements, suggesting repair is not possible and generally coercing customers into buying new products instead [4].
Personally, I've replaced many components on iPhones through the ages. Often the replacement parts I've ordered have been sub-standard and that was the risk I've accepted as I was purchasing from unknown sellers. Sometimes the parts have been on par with the original components and I've been very pleased with my purchase.
The right to repair should be protected. When I am no longer able to fix my own purchases then I no longer feel I own the device.
This is especially true given Apple present themselves as an environmentally conscious brand. Often people don't have the opportunity to get parts replaced by Apple directly, or they don't have the means. Ensuring there are options for everyone promotes reuse and recycling. Additionally it limits the extent that a given company can build in planned obsolescence.
However. My opinion is that in purchasing a second hand device I want to know which components are from the OEM. This is especially important for components that are not easily validated, i.e. the battery. I can then take the risk of price vs quality at face value.
I get the impression here that people are very vocal about one side or the other, but I feel there is a balance to be made.
You stopped "owning" your device the monent you accepted locked bootloader and no root. It is weird that it is the battery replacement that triggered that feeling.
It’s not about owning. It’s having trust in the device that it will do what it says it will. Buying from Apple there is generally a trust that the device meet’s Apple’s bar and hasn’t been tempered with.
A lot of Apple defenders have the perspective that Apple isn't selling you a thing (i.e. an object), it's selling you an experience (a fashion object, a lifestyle brand). From this perspective, if Apple doesn't aggressively attack people who don't align with the brand values, they damage the brand.
People who want to economize on parts and labour damage the brand. They're poor people, or at least people not wealthy enough not to care about these things; they shouldn't be associated with the Apple brand. Apple does not aim at the bottom of the market.
People who want open hardware that they can poke at damage the brand. Apple sells an integrated, hassle-free experience. An open market is chaotic and uncontrolled, and antithetical to the brand promise.
As a reminder of the broader picture: Apple has a strong anti-repair stance, they have lobbied for this [1], have engaged in broad, deceptive strategies to remove 3rd party repair options, by confiscating legally refurbished hardware under the guise of "counterfeits" [2], attempting to confiscate grey market parts under the guise of "trademark violation" and threatening the 3rd party repair shops [3]. They profit from this continued attack by deceiving customers into expensive unnecessary part replacements, suggesting repair is not possible and generally coercing customers into buying new products instead [4].
[1] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180126/07355539089/apple...
[2] https://boingboing.net/2018/10/20/louis-rossman.html
[3] https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a3yadk/apple-sued-an-inde...
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2_SZ4tfLns