A surprising >article<.
If you use apple products are you finding your "freedoms" being limited by the man?
"Mr. Jobs ushered in the personal computer era and now he is trying to usher it out. We should focus on preserving our freedoms, even as the devices we acquire become more attractive and easier to use."
If you use apple products are you finding your "freedoms" being limited by the man?
No. My freedoms extend beyond the gadgets I own.
Greg
An intriguing article. Reminded me of the truly old school AOL days when progs got big.
|
The article misses one important part of the iDevice problem - hardware-software lock-in. You can only get devices with iPhone OS from Apple, and they can charge however much they want for it, which would be called a monopoly if it applied to a whole market. The same is true of Mac computers. I can find a Windows PC with the same specs as a Mac for half the price or less, because MS will sell the software to any hardware vendor buying, making for healthy competition, judging by the number of PC manufacturers out there...and if the hardware is bad, as opponents of the iphone claim, there's nothing you can do about it.
IMHO, there's a reason Apple products are stereotyped as a conceit of the upper-middle class - I think a lot of people see the upper-middle and upper classes as being the only ones who can afford an Apple product. While this most applies to Macs nowadays, with the sheer number of iPods produced driving the secondary market into the reasonable price range (I sure wouldn't have bought my iPod touch at all if buying used on ebay didn't save me almost a hundred dollars), the iPhone is pretty expensive, either in up-front price or having to agree to 2 years of a $100/month cell phone contract just to drag the iPhone into the realm of affordable, and then there's the iPad, which is several hundred dollars more expensive than the competing device, a netbook.
Of course, as long as Apple continues to charge the prices they do for their stuff, I don't fear for my freedoms, because somebody will want to sell me a cheaper system with Windows or Linux (or Linux-derivative Android in the case of phones and upcoming iPad clones) on it.
A surprising >article<.
It is only surprising that people take it as seriously as they do.
Mr. McAfee talks about hyperbole aimed at the iPad from geeks, and then slings some of his own against said geeks. And wraps it in a nice faux civility by claiming to not caricaturise the "geek ethos."
And yet in the "summary" he writes that these geeks "don't have any interest in playing nice with big sleepy incumbents," and are a source of "creative destruction."
Not to mention that the desire to be able to transfer content purchased through Amazon, and Marvel, to any device that is owned by the purchaser is "participation in the theft of intellectual property."
I find it amazing what people will allow from those they agree with, while condemning the same from those they don't.
The answer is simple, if you are that upset. DONT BUY IT.
I own an Ipad and an Ipod, but would never buy a Mac or an Iphone.
The reasoning is simple the first two are very handy and inherently superior at what I need them for. The other two are tooexpensive for my needs and frequently aren't as good as their competetion at doing what I would use them for.
I really dont see this as a monopoly as much as a lack of proper competition for my dollar. If a device comes along that does what my Ipad does for the price I want and doesnt feature a boatload of software to limit my " freedoms " I can very easily sell said Ipad and put the money towards a new gadget.
|
You might want to read the article Cory Doctorow wrote.
If you want to live in the creative universe where anyone with a cool idea can make it and give it to you to run on your hardware, the iPad isn't for you.
If you want to live in the fair world where you get to keep (or give away) the stuff you buy, the iPad isn't for you.
If you want to write code for a platform where the only thing that determines whether you're going to succeed with it is whether your audience loves it, the iPad isn't for you.
It's important to think about what kind of infrastructures we're building in the world today.
I don't have interest in it for myself because I don't have interest in tablet PCs or the like. They don't do anything special, certainly nothing worth $900.
I read it, and my argument doesn't change...it's not a social construct it's a gadget. I don't b*~@+ because my tv lack user generated content nor that best buy doesn't Carry underground bands that I favor...I go someplace that has those things when I crave them.
Writing a manifesto as to why no one else should buy what are essentially toys based on your moral compass is self indulgent wankery.
Or because I can't use my iPad to endlessly copy and forward books I buy from Amazon and comics I buy from Marvel (in other words, I can't participate in the theft of intellectual property)?
Wow. Disingenuous.
It's like two nutbars flailing at each other.
A surprising >article<.If you use apple products are you finding your "freedoms" being limited by the man?
"Mr. Jobs ushered in the personal computer era and now he is trying to usher it out. We should focus on preserving our freedoms, even as the devices we acquire become more attractive and easier to use."
These devices are far, far more closed than the PC platform, which I acknowledge is part of Apple's game plan, and not a part of the Android plan. You are buying a specific experience when you buy an Apple product, and that doesn't always measure exactly to what you get from the "computer market".
What gets me is that Apple's change of course on development tools long after first shipping the first SDKs indicates that Apple is willing to do this at any time, and any investment you make in the platform as a vendor (apps or content) will be subject to Apple's whims or newly discovered ways to monetize something related to their products (and take that away from third party vendors who already supply the market).
The end result will simply be that some apps and services will never get onto the iPhone/iPad, and that many corporations who run up against some limitation are more likely to say no to it.
I am glad that Android, Blackberry and the forthcoming Symbian 3 are available or soon to be available. The more they compete against Apple, the better Apple needs to compete for its customers. No downside to that.
|
A surprising >article<.If you use apple products are you finding your "freedoms" being limited by the man?
"Mr. Jobs ushered in the personal computer era and now he is trying to usher it out. We should focus on preserving our freedoms, even as the devices we acquire become more attractive and easier to use."
These devices are far, far more closed than the PC platform, which I acknowledge is part of Apple's game plan, and not a part of the Android plan. You are buying a specific experience when you buy an Apple product, and that doesn't always measure exactly to what you get from the "computer market".
What gets me is that Apple's change of course on development tools long after first shipping the first SDKs indicates that Apple is willing to do this at any time, and any investment you make in the platform as a vendor (apps or content) will be subject to Apple's whims or newly discovered ways to monetize something related to their products (and take that away from third party vendors who already supply the market).
The end result will simply be that some apps and services will never get onto the iPhone/iPad, and that many corporations who run up against some limitation are more likely to say no to it.
I am glad that Android, Blackberry and the forthcoming Symbian 3 are available or soon to be available. The more they compete against Apple, the better Apple needs to compete for its customers. No downside to that.
Hmm, rather like Alienware, then. You aren't buying the "best" system on the market for whatever it costs, because you are adding the cost of it being a name brand.
The end result will simply be that some apps and services will never get onto the iPhone/iPad, and that many corporations who run up against some limitation are more likely to say no to it.
Why is this a problem? Really? Are we so naive to think that in a capitalist system, that all people have ultimate rights to all things created? Should we not assume that, if I buy phone A) that I may not have access to all the things that are on phone B) and vice versa? Because if all cell phones are equal, then what is the incentive to buy one over the other? Should not Apple or Google (in the case of software) or Apple and HTC (in terms of hardware), each have differences to distinguish themselves from each other so as to give consumers a choice?
And, isn't it also possible that many corporations will find in the "walled guarden" a much more simple manner to restrict their corporate properties (as pretty much every single IT department in the world seems to want to do)?
So, to sum it all up:
Diff'r'nt strokes for diff'r'nt folks.
Or are we still absolutely determined to ascribe good and evil to cell phones?
Greg
If you use apple products are you finding your "freedoms" being limited by the man?
I don't use any apple products, and for that very reason. The "man" being Jobs, obviously.
Seriously: I could not disagree more with Apple's business dogma, so I will not buy anything they create, download anything they create, or install anything they create.
By the way, for someone who goes on about hyperbole and alarmism, he engages in quite a lot of counter-hyperbole and a level of criminalisation of those who disagree that you might think he works for the music industry.
I mean, seriously:
"The iCosystem puts our freedom at risk because applications have to go through Apple's ( AAPL - news - people ) review process before they can be loaded onto devices? Or because I can't use my iPad to endlessly copy and forward books I buy from Amazon and comics I buy from Marvel (in other words, I can't participate in the theft of intellectual property)?"
So because we don't want a system where everything is getting a cavity search before it is allowed in, we're all evil pirates? Grow up, man! Not everybody who owns anything that is not sold by Apple is a super villain.
"I'd prefer the iCosystem to include content that goes beyond a PG-13 rating. But I also strongly prefer it to be free of viruses, Trojan Horses and other forms of malware. It is, thanks to its stringent review policies."
This guy would feel right at home in Cheliax. "Oh yeah, the thought police can strike without warning, but at least the crime rates have gone down".
You do understand that there are more than two ways to go about this. For example, they could do an automated routine check of everything that is submitted for the store, checking it for malware. This is possible without dictating content.
And even if you control content for illegal stuff (like that locates a drug dealer for you, or whatever), you can do that in a less restrictive manner (i.e. allow stuff like nudity).
His apple apologising (apple-ogising?) sounds like propaganda for a surveillance society. I just can't take anyone like that seriously, especially if he whines about people being over the top in the same figurative breath.
Should we not assume that, if I buy phone A) that I may not have access to all the things that are on phone B) and vice versa? Because if all cell phones are equal, then what is the incentive to buy one over the other?
This gets a little gray pretty quickly.
By this same rationale, AMD should have shut down long ago since there isn't any incentive to buy their CPUs over Intel because neither provides any software differences.
Not to mention ATI, and nVidia (owned by AMD coincidentally) shouldn't both exist since neither one has an available software advantage over the other.
The reality is, if we - as consumers - allow companies to continue a "walled garden" style of model, we will be burned nearly every time for it.
Should we not assume that, if I buy phone A) that I may not have access to all the things that are on phone B) and vice versa? Because if all cell phones are equal, then what is the incentive to buy one over the other?This gets a little gray pretty quickly.
By this same rationale, AMD should have shut down long ago since there isn't any incentive to buy their CPUs over Intel because neither provides any software differences.
Not to mention ATI, and nVidia (owned by AMD coincidentally) shouldn't both exist since neither one has an available software advantage over the other.
The reality is, if we - as consumers - allow companies to continue a "walled garden" style of model, we will be burned nearly every time for it.
Honestly, and I know we've been beating around this bush in a few other threads, but I honestly believe that it is not even remotely as serious as you seem to feel it is. I think many different consumer models can and will co-exist in the global economy and that there will be a place for both "open" and "closed" models.
If Android is truly the absolute best way to go (and I still am not convinced of it) then they will win. But what I think is more likely is that Apple and Google will see-saw back and forth with each new release and that each will reach a stable level. Maybe more Android phones will, on average, sell more per year than Apple. But I'm also willing to bet that Apple will sell enough to consider their phones a success for many years to come.
As an aside, for example, I have absolutely no idea what separates all the different flavours of Android phones. Now, I've not really looked into (I don't actually own a cell phone, even a dumb one, and have no plans in the new future to buy), but based on all the ads I've seen, I have absolutely no idea what differentiates a Droid from an HTC from whathaveyou. None in the slightest. So to me, its just a big mess of different names.
However, I'm really curious to see what will happen if/when a piece of malware gets through the Android store and starts bricking phones. I wonder if and how long the "open" model will last, then? Not trying to flamebait, I really am curious what Google's response to that will be. Especially if the press gets bad enough.
Greg
If Android is truly the absolute best way to go (and I still am not convinced of it) then they will win.
Not at all true. There have been several examples of the better <whatever> losing out to an inferior <whatever> due to ill-informed consumers and industry backings.
Quality never determines success on its' own.
However, I'm really curious to see what will happen if/when a piece of malware gets through the Android store and starts bricking phones.
You post that as if you think/feel Apple products are immune thanks to Apples' policies. You are very, very, wrong. There are numerous vectors for injecting devices with Malware. Web surfing is one of the worst offenders. And it is no longer an age of only "shady" websites that are culprits. In fact, some studies suggest that for every 1 "illicit" site that is infected, there are 99 legitimate ones.
Right now, all the Apple policies are doing is helping un-informed consumers ignore the vulnerabilities of their devices.
You post that as if you think/feel Apple products are immune thanks to Apples' policies. You are very, very, wrong.
I am very, very, not thinking/feeling that and never even came close to saying that. My question was what will happen if there is malware in an open system.
I'm pretty sure I know what will happen if there is malware in a closed system. It will possibly get even more closed, as they try to eliminate the problem.
So, back to my question. Will an open system for smartphones survive as a fully "open" system if it is compromised? I say there are no guarantees. Right now, everyone is riding the high of the wild west that is the Android market. I wonder how everyone will feel if sheriff comes to town?
Right now, all the Apple policies are doing is helping un-informed consumers ignore the vulnerabilities of their devices.
:) Yep, that's us. The poor, misguided, uniformed Apple consumers. Oh woe is us!
You should really stop painting with such broad strokes, y'know.
Greg
Right now, all the Apple policies are doing is helping un-informed consumers ignore the vulnerabilities of their devices.:) Yep, that's us. The poor, misguided, uniformed Apple consumers. Oh woe is us!
You should really stop painting with such broad strokes, y'know.
Greg
I don't think he was saying that all Apple users are misguided and uninformed. Just that Apple's fairly loud policy of "We don't let anything unapproved by us!" makes people who actually aren't sure on the hows and whys of computer use more susceptible to malware because they think that an iWhatever is immune because Apple and Jobs said so.
|
I don't think he was saying that all Apple users are misguided and uninformed. Just that Apple's fairly loud policy of "We don't let anything unapproved by us!" makes people who actually aren't sure on the hows and whys of computer use more susceptible to malware because they think that an iWhatever is immune because Apple and Jobs said so.Right now, all the Apple policies are doing is helping un-informed consumers ignore the vulnerabilities of their devices.:) Yep, that's us. The poor, misguided, uniformed Apple consumers. Oh woe is us!
You should really stop painting with such broad strokes, y'know.
Greg
People who think that must have been really surprised about this then..
I don't think he was saying that all Apple users are misguided and uninformed. Just that Apple's fairly loud policy of "We don't let anything unapproved by us!" makes people who actually aren't sure on the hows and whys of computer use more susceptible to malware because they think that an iWhatever is immune because Apple and Jobs said so.
So what you're saying is that non-Apple users are all 100% aware of the vulnerabilities of their systems, right? And none of them are susceptible to malware?
Please. The fact is, all systems have both informed and uninformed users. Apple and non-Apple alike.
Greg
So what you're saying is that non-Apple users are all 100% aware of the vulnerabilities of their systems, right?
No one is saying that at all. So, I guess you can't continue your crusade?
Please. The fact is, all systems have both informed and uninformed users. Apple and non-Apple alike.
Greg
This is quite true.
But I have never met a Microsoft user that believes - really, really, believes, that Microsoft will protect them from all harm.
The same can not be said about Apple fans.
In fact, the "Almighty Apple" has even all but claimed this in their adds. (All YouTube videos.)
And I couldn't even find the one I was looking for with the woman waffling between them talking about wanting a computer that isn't susceptible to viruses and "PC" says "wait, no viruses? She is all yours Mac." and walks off camera. (From memory, probably off a bit.)
EDITed to add::
However, I'm really curious to see what will happen if/when a piece of malware gets through the Android store and starts bricking phones. I wonder if and how long the "open" model will last, then? Not trying to flamebait, I really am curious what Google's response to that will be. Especially if the press gets bad enough.
I'll tell you what will happen.
It is the same thing that happens when malware gets on a Unix system. Or a BSD system. Or a Linux system. Or even a Windows system.
The system will be improved. It will evolve to make that malware less of a threat. It will grow, and get better.
Aside: I'll have to look into how hard it is to clean install Android on a device. If it is easy enough, then malware really shouldn't "brick" a phone.
So what you're saying is that non-Apple users are all 100% aware of the vulnerabilities of their systems, right?No one is saying that at all. So, I guess you can't continue your crusade?
Please. The fact is, all systems have both informed and uninformed users. Apple and non-Apple alike.
Greg
This is quite true.
But I have never met a Microsoft user that believes - really, really, believes, that Microsoft will protect them from all harm.
The same can not be said about Apple fans.In fact, the "Almighty Apple" has even all but claimed this in their adds. (All YouTube videos.)
And I couldn't even find the one I was looking for with the woman waffling between them talking about wanting a computer that isn't susceptible to viruses and "PC" says "wait, no viruses? She is all yours Mac." and walks off camera. (From memory, probably off a bit.)
EDITed to add::
However, I'm really curious to see what will happen if/when a piece of malware gets through the Android store and starts bricking phones. I wonder if and how long the "open" model will last, then? Not trying to flamebait, I really am curious what Google's response to that will be. Especially if the press gets bad enough.I'll tell you what will happen.
It is the same thing that happens when malware gets on a Unix system. Or a BSD system. Or a Linux system. Or even a Windows system.
The system will be improved. It will evolve to make that malware less of a threat. It will grow, and get better.
Aside: I'll have to look into how hard it is to clean install Android on a device. If it is easy enough, then malware really shouldn't "brick" a phone.
Security apps are available on the Android market to prevent bricking and data theft from happening.
Not to mention ATI, and nVidia (owned by AMD coincidentally)
Just to clarify: ATI's the one that is owned by AMD.
In fact, the "Almighty Apple" has even all but claimed this in their adds. (All YouTube videos.)
Yeah, Apple has long elevated being childish, arrogant pricks to an art form.
They distort the facts (A hazard suit? Seriously? It's more like wearing socks so you don't get the sniffles, unless everybody else's anti-virus software is a lot more annoying than mine), they make fun of others, and when it's done to them - even as a joke, they let their legal bloodhounds loose, like with that Comedian/Talent Show Judge who made a funny quip about iphones and Apple started sulking.
No one is saying that at all. So, I guess you can't continue your crusade?
You want to make this personal? Ok. We're done.
And as far as "crusades" go? You should really go back and count the number of anti-Apple posts you've made. Then you can talk about crusades.
Pot-kettle-black.
Greg
|
|
My main point with Apple, is that they lobbied the EU commission to raise the accepted legal level of DAS waves, just so the damn Iphones could be legally sold in Europe.
I find this morally unacceptable, and potentially dangerous for the consumer.
US citizens may disagree as it basically means that Europe lowered its standards to make way for these products, and match American standards, but that's my take.
If Android is truly the absolute best way to go (and I still am not convinced of it) then they will win.Not at all true. There have been several examples of the better <whatever> losing out to an inferior <whatever> due to ill-informed consumers and industry backings.
Quality never determines success on its' own./QUOTE]
Beta/VHS?
Minidisc/CD?
Laserdisc/DVD?
HDDVD/Blu-ray?Any other wars I'm forgetting?
No one is saying that at all. So, I guess you can't continue your crusade?You want to make this personal? Ok. We're done.
And as far as "crusades" go? You should really go back and count the number of anti-Apple posts you've made. Then you can talk about crusades.
Pot-kettle-black.
Greg
If this is an example of how thin-skinned you are, I hope you are wearing SPF 100 whenever you are on a computer. The light being emitted from the monitor could seriously burn you.
And if this little exchange is any indication, you should first go back and count the number of post you assume are anti-apple from me, that turn out to be something else in reality.
And in conclusion: Why announce we are done? It isn't for my benefit. (More on that in a second.) I don't know you well enough to think you are so full of yourself you believe it is for every other readers' benefit. So I can only conclude it is for your benefit alone. Which fits with your follow up. So why waste your energy on it in the first place?
As for why it isn't for my benefit, the simple fact is that you don't mean anything to me. I am not saying that to be mean, snotty, or even spiteful. The truth is that your involvement - or lack thereof - in this conversation, or any conversation for that mater, doesn't affect my life... Wait. Scratch that. It isn't even my life, but a small subset of it. So your involvement, or lack thereof, in my online life doesn't affect me one way or another.
Now, back to the thread.
If Android is truly the absolute best way to go (and I still am not convinced of it) then they will win.Not at all true. There have been several examples of the better <whatever> losing out to an inferior <whatever> due to ill-informed consumers and industry backings.
Quality never determines success on its' own.
Beta/VHS?
Minidisc/CD?
Laserdisc/DVD?
HDDVD/Blu-ray?Any other wars I'm forgetting?
Any number of data storage for computers. Various floppy disks, variations on the "Zip" drive, tape formats, hard drives, etc.. We can even include data transfer protocols as well. (Firewire is arguably better than USB 2.0, and yet it is almost impossible to find support for it.)
Just to clarify: ATI's the one that is owned by AMD.
Not to mention ATI, and nVidia (owned by AMD coincidentally)
You are right. I always get those confused because of logo colors. (AMD and nVidia both use black and green, while ATI is all by itself with red and white.)
|
My main point with Apple, is that they lobbied the EU commission to raise the accepted legal level of DAS waves, just so the damn Iphones could be legally sold in Europe.
I find this morally unacceptable, and potentially dangerous for the consumer.
US citizens may disagree as it basically means that Europe lowered its standards to make way for these products, and match American standards, but that's my take.
um So? Companies lobby to have regulations changed all the time. Are you honestly worried that using the iPhone will be harmful to your health?
Stuff on the formatting wars
Seriously, how does the worse format win out so many times?!??! It's frustrating. Not like REALLY frustrating, but frustrating enough.
|
|
Stuff on the formatting warsSeriously, how does the worse format win out so many times?!??! It's frustrating. Not like REALLY frustrating, but frustrating enough.
It comes down to Price, Advertisement, and Support.
If something is cheaper better advertised and supported by more companies but is a worse format, it will win almost every time.
|
|
um So? Companies lobby to have regulations changed all the time. Are you honestly worried that using the iPhone will be harmful to your health?My main point with Apple, is that they lobbied the EU commission to raise the accepted legal level of DAS waves, just so the damn Iphones could be legally sold in Europe.
I find this morally unacceptable, and potentially dangerous for the consumer.
US citizens may disagree as it basically means that Europe lowered its standards to make way for these products, and match American standards, but that's my take.
Not just the IPhone, but potentially any cell phone whose level of waves is too high.
That and out of principle the fact that a security measure meant to protect the consumer was lifted with no solid ground.
I am a strong believer in the principle of precaution.
Now, when Apple will issue a new Iphone with a more reasonable rate of DAS waves, I'll take notice.
Stuff on the formatting warsSeriously, how does the worse format win out so many times?!??! It's frustrating. Not like REALLY frustrating, but frustrating enough.It comes down to Price, Advertisement, and Support.
If something is cheaper better advertised and supported by more companies but is a worse format, it will win almost every time.
That is about it.
Although I wouldn't include price in the first pass. If you can get the consumers to support you (advertisement), and the industry to support you (support), nothing else matters. It doesn't matter if it is 5 times more expensive, and half as good as a competitor. Now, to get this support you might have to adjust price, and often cheaper wins out... But it isn't a requirement.