Yes ans Eula's are widely regarded as beacons of fair and reasonable conditions for consumers.
Eula's, don't make me laugh.
It's blatantly obvious you've never been involved in software development.
Put yourself in the developers shoes. You've put a lot of time, effort and money into developing code which you now need to sell in order to recoup your costs, pay for the cost of maintaining said code, and hopefully make a little bit of money.
It is only fair and reasonable to expect that you will want to protect your interests when it comes to IP rights and other matters. The use of third-party libraries in your code may also lead to contractual requirements for downflow of specific EULA clauses. If you are exclusively a software-house, then there is an even greater incentive to protect your interests as you've got no other source of revenue. If you're a software-house that's had a round or two of external funding then your business plan and exit-strategy probably involves further monetisation of your hard work.
Putting Apple to one side for a minute, let's take a market leader.... Adobe and their Photoshop product. Name me a viable competitor that comes anywhere near them (I'm talking about the full version here, not the cut-down version(s)). The fact is their client base is computer-literate and readily prepared to switch platforms (e.g. as happened in DTP with QuarkXPress vs InDesign). Adobe continue to innvoate to introduce new features (which in a program like Photoshop involves lots of fancy algorithms written by well paid maths gurus) and work hard to maintain a stable and efficient code base. For them to go to market without a EULA in place to protect their unique and incredibly valuable IP would be unthinkable.
Even open-source code still has EULAs (BSD, GPL etc. etc.), so even those who are fighting hard against what they perceive to be the big evil money making corporate behemoths still want to ensure that some rules are still put in place.