I just read this:
First, it's a bit heartbreaking that someone could do so much research and understand so much -- then throw it away or rationalize it into not being important. I'm glad Mossberg realizes there are people who enjoy tinkering with the guts of a device, but it was just plain strange that he tries to equate having a wide selection of apps to meaning the same thing. It's easy to say a closed platform is closed, even if it has a lot of apps -- you could even argue that it's better! (I'd disagree, but you can certainly argue it. It's the whole debate Mossberg missed the point of.)
I'd also wish he had put a bit more thought into where BSD, Webkit's KHTML origins, and the other open source tech inside came from -- without the people willing to dive into the guts of the operating system and programs and how they work, none of this would existed to be built on.
I think a better goal for the article might have been, "How the Open vs Closed debate doesn't line up with Apple vs Android fandom." It doesn't line up, and I've frequently seen people in comments get confused why someone who supports open source has consistent opinions on it -- supporting Apple/Google when they support open source and opposing them when they don't; that's why the debate Mossberg thought was "false" and "phony" is, in fact, anything but.