I also think there is a mismatch. I mean he was a free software advocate and an AppStore is a curated repository in the end. Whether that is free software or not is a different discussion. The sandbox and the walled garden is a different story. And there is the conflict.
However, I share the opinion that he generally buys into the Apple philosophy of things. And, he is a family father with a different perspective (they call that diversity).
To be fair, he's been very heavy-handed with his support for Apple through any and all criticism. I follow him on Twitter and, from the tweets of his that I have read, he's defended Apple every single time they have appeared in the news, irrespective of circumstance or evidence. He is definitely not an objective and unbiased source when it comes to Apple.
Just because he is a well-known individual, and is incredibly intelligent, does not mean that every single opinion that he holds is necessarily superior (which is why an appeal to authority is a logical fallacy).
All of that being said, I really don't understand the point of the root comment.
You are comparing tomatoes with potatoes. 1) Kids use the iPad/iPhone as gaming console, and 2) parents don't give their young kids a Dell laptop to play Talking Tom Cat. So your interpretation of the problem is not realistic and therefore incorrect.
Kids always played online browser games, flash games, downloadable games and similar stuff, and some of them still do. The only difference is that there is a higher probability now that technologically illiterate parents accidentally give their kid an access to their credit card.
