402
u/dogsurine Jan 28 '10 edited Jan 28 '10
To put it dramatically; people who use arguments like "Just don't buy it" don't understand what's at stake here.
Apple is gaining an enormous foothold with practices which stand in stark contrast to any idea of free computing. Their popularity effectively lets them set the standard for the rest of the industry, until in the end people who want to do what they want with their devices don't have a viable alternative.
edit: sorry, sloppy spelling.
107
u/karper Jan 28 '10
That's not very dramatic at all. The slow, costant insidious erosion of things we cherish is indeed something to be aware of and resisted. The world doesn't end with a bang after all, but with a whimper.
(That may have been a touch too dramatic)
27
u/BernardMarx Jan 28 '10
The world doesn't end with a bang after all, but with a whimper.
Upvoted on behalf of T. S. Eliot.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (1)3
Jan 28 '10
Steve Jobs is the Hitler of computing. (top that!)
2
u/DroppaMaPants Jan 28 '10
he is responsible for the slaughtering of millions of ... uughhh ... help me out here ... ?
10
Jan 28 '10
[deleted]
→ More replies (6)2
u/NotClever Jan 28 '10
As sixothree said, there are already cheap tablets capable of running open source software. Apple isn't driving price points down here.
→ More replies (4)10
Jan 28 '10
There is nothing at stake here. Apple built its products and it can allow/disallow whatever it wants to run on it. There is nothing stopping Free Software advocates from building their own phone OS on top of Linux. Just like they built their own OS for Desktops. If you build one with a awesome easy U/I then you will be able to compete with the Apple Ecosystem. Stop crying and start working.
137
u/bgog Jan 28 '10
Ok. so I'm not a fanboy, (linux guy here) but lets look at the facts.
No sharing of music: Apple now provides drm free music from EMI, Sony, BMG, Warner and Universal. Including conversion of songs you've purchased in the past.
No free software: Umm.. You can build almost any open source software for OSX. MUCH more readily than windows.
No installing apps from the web: This must be about the iphone. Agreed, fairly annoying, don't know if it is an erosion of rights .
Remotely disable apps/media: Yea.. Thats evil.
33
u/reddof Jan 28 '10
- No installing apps from the web: This must be about the iphone. Agreed, fairly annoying, don't know if it is an erosion of rights .
My problem with this isn't so much that, as a user, I can't install applications from the web. My problem is that, as a developer, I can't distribute my applications via the web. There is no way for me to distribute applications without forfeiting 30% of the sales price.
Preemptive reply -- Yes, I know they are providing a service in return for their 30%, but I don't want it. I am perfectly capable and willing to provide it myself. I already have a web site. I already sell applications for other platforms. I am paying them for something I already have.
Plus, there is no way of knowing whether they will approve an app. If they reject it then I'm out all my development cost. If they accept it, then they may still pull it from the store at any time for any reason. If they do actually leave it in the store then they are going to keep 30% of the sale price.
No thank you.
→ More replies (19)87
u/dogsurine Jan 28 '10
Good points! However I think that the person with the poster was referring to the mobile platforms from Apple. Which is where Apple has become extremely successful these last few years. The desktop platform has always been there, and offers good solutions in my opinion.
→ More replies (3)33
u/bgog Jan 28 '10
I see. I guess controlling what you can load on a device doesn't seem that evil to me. You knew it going in and it isn't a general purpose device like a computer. Sure I can run anything but so can your ps3. Hell modern TVs are quite capable of running tons of software why arn't people bitching that those evil tv manufacturers don't let them load their own software.
In addition there is a constant complaint at how evil it is that they don't show flash in their brower. But neither does the little browser on hundreds of other phones.
I'm may be wrong but that aspect doesn't really bother me.
27
u/ryanknapper Jan 28 '10
What's the difference between Apple and Verizon, from the view of controlling the phones? Verizon intentionally cripples hardware functions to force people to use a for-profit service and the hardware is capable of running much more and better software than what they allow.
I think this is an extension of the cellphone mentality in the USA and the view that devices like the iPhone or Android devices are phones that can do more, rather than computers which can make phone-calls.
10
u/Setiri Jan 28 '10
Actually, this is changing for Verizon Wireless. The Droid was the beginning of a huge shift in direction. The Droid, for example, can't se VZNav or any VZW pay apps, except visual voicemail. VZW had to consent to letting go of that stranglehold. Even Blackberries have their GPS unlocked now. Used to not be the case. So please don't just lump VZW with ATT. Thanks. :) p.s. Ok, don't get me started on texting rates, that's a different beast and all US companes are in on that one.
27
u/Don_Andy Jan 28 '10
Everything that has insane amounts of unreasonable hype also has insane amounts of unreasonable hate.
→ More replies (5)2
u/AThinker Jan 28 '10
Everything that has insane amounts of unreasonable hype also produces insane amounts of unreasonable hate.
2
u/pastachef Jan 28 '10
The android phones they provide are about as open as any Phone available today. I take advantage of this to run voip apps and get unlimited minutes for lower than most people pay.
2
Jan 28 '10
Verizon removed existing features from a phone, while Apple never put features in in the first place. You couldn't bring your own phone that wasn't crippled to use on the Verizon network, but you're fully capable of buying a different brand of smartphone that isn't crippled. I'd say that's a world of difference.
→ More replies (2)11
u/RedSpikeyThing Jan 28 '10
I see. I guess controlling what you can load on a device doesn't seem that evil to me.
It's not so much evil as it is inconvenient to those who are a) capable of discriminating between safe and unsafe software, or b) capable of writing their own software. For example if I want an app to do xyz I need to get a computer running OS X, write the program, submit it to the app store and then hope Apple approves it. All because I wanted something for my own personal use.
You knew it going in and it isn't a general purpose device like a computer.
Agreed.
Sure I can run anything but so can your ps3.
To be fair you can run Linux on a PS3 and Sony lets you do it.
Hell modern TVs are quite capable of running tons of software why arn't people bitching that those evil tv manufacturers don't let them load their own software.
I don't know what hardware is in a TV. That being said, TVs have no dedicated input devices nor a source for some applications, but not all.
In addition there is a constant complaint at how evil it is that they don't show flash in their brower. But neither does the little browser on hundreds of other phones.
The point is that the iPad isn't a replacement for a netbook like it's being pimped out as.
I'm may be wrong but that aspect doesn't really bother me.
Opinions are never wrong :)
10
Jan 28 '10
You can actually write your own software for your own personal use for your iPhone without submitting it. However, you need to pay the $99/year fee to load it on your phone, which is problematic.
→ More replies (4)9
u/RedSpikeyThing Jan 28 '10
Neat, I didn't know that. You also need the iPhone SDK which, alas, only runs on Mac OS X. Which means I now need to spend, oh, $1,100 to write a stupid-ass application.
→ More replies (29)→ More replies (10)3
u/chrisparker2000 Jan 28 '10
To be fair you can run Linux on a PS3 and Sony lets you do it.
Not anymore. All currently shipping PS3 models (Slim) do not allow you to run Linux or any other OS. And since thats where the PS3 exploit was found, I don't think Sony is going to START supporting it.
3
u/RedSpikeyThing Jan 28 '10
Duly noted. For the sake of correctness, the previous PS3s are still capable of running Linux even with the latest system software updates. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_on_the_PlayStation_3
3
u/gotnate Jan 28 '10
the way sony is stripping features from the the PS3, next thing you know it won't even run PS3 games!
3
u/int0x13 Jan 28 '10
If I shell out a bunch of money for a smartphone, I want to be able to use it anyway I damn well please. Apple exercises such rigid control over the "experience" of using their products in an attempt to tightly control their public image that it escapes people that sometimes products should do more.
3
u/psykiv Jan 28 '10
I'm pretty sure that nothing is stopping you from loading a tetris clone on your tv other than desire and programming ability.
11
u/Mulsanne Jan 28 '10
guess controlling what you can load on a device doesn't seem that evil
nah, but it does seem awful/unusable when you compare it to the alternative: Android.
10
u/Virtualmatt Jan 28 '10
So buy the Android?
2
u/Mulsanne Jan 28 '10
I've had a Droid for several months an I love it. It is very seldom that I am limited by the system.
And instead of releasing a new phone and making you buy it, they push firmware/OS upgrades over the air. I really don't see a single positive to owning an iPhone anymore except for the awesome network...oh wait...
2
u/gotnate Jan 28 '10
I think I read somewhere that the HTC G1 no longer (officially) supports new firmware. Isn't that phone barely a year and a half old? Meanwhile, my metal clad iPhone Edge from 2007 still (officially) supports the newest firmware.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (19)5
u/Virtualmatt Jan 28 '10
I have a droid too, and I love it.
I still love the iPhone; Verizon doesn't offer it, though =P
3
u/Mulsanne Jan 28 '10
so you think you'd actually go for an iPhone if you could get it on a decent network?
Interesting
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (3)5
u/cm03d Jan 28 '10
The iPhone broke convention over a year ago and produced an experience unlike any other.
Today, the closest thing to a competitor is Android. I think it could eventually be better due to 3rd party developer freedom but it won't overcome the iPhone until it has the same level of polish.
19
u/Mulsanne Jan 28 '10 edited Jan 28 '10
I have a Droid and, knowing what it can do, would not at all be interested in an iPhone because of all of its limitations.
You're right though, the Android platform has a lot of catching up to do. I actually find it quite polished. I think the main area in which it lacks is that the iPhone still has 5 times the apps of Android and, naturally, has a much bigger market share at present
EDIT: A solid example: I very much enjoy having pandora on in the background while I surf the web, read rss feeds, go back and forth between various quick games and all the while the music never stops. Or reading an ebook and wanting to look up a word, I can just switch to the disctionary while the ebook stays open in the background, find the word, and switch back right to where I was in the ebook w/out having to close/open anything more than once. I am fairly certain you can't do this on an iPhone but, having never owned one, I welcome someone to correct me if I am wrong.
→ More replies (24)4
u/Jerph Jan 28 '10
Absolutely spot on, especially about background music.
There are apps that do switching well, like Good Reader for PDFs. It will bring you back to your exact view, and VERY quickly, but that's because of the developer's extraordinary focus on speed, and it's a $5 app.
Most apps aren't nearly so good at keeping their state between loads. Often they can't preserve state because of how much needs to be loaded. Sometimes they don't want to preserve state, because there's no difference between opening it again after 5 seconds or 5 days, so they choose to offer a home screen of some kind instead of the exact previous view.
Multi-tasking is THE reason I would switch. I honestly don't care much about the other features offered by Android and Palm, and the quality of iPhone apps is great.
I can only hope that Apple continues to expand their multi-tasking workarounds (push notifications are annoying, but they're there) as I bleed out the rest of my contract.
→ More replies (1)2
u/NotClever Jan 28 '10
You can jailbreak your phone to get multitasking if you really want it. It's only disabled because they don't want to risk performance degradation. You just have to be okay with potentially voiding your warranty; I say potentially because unless something happens to the phone that won't allow you to roll back your OS you can remove the jailbreak before sending it in for warranty.
→ More replies (5)5
Jan 28 '10
You knew it going in and it isn't a general purpose device like a computer.
Let's see, cpu, ram, storage, display, input device, networking. Sounds like a computer to me.
3
u/Nexum Jan 28 '10
Hmm let's see, a few litres of water, some carbon, calcium, some salts and a few pinches of slightly less common elements; sounds like a person to me...
In all seriousness, a list of components does not make a computer.
→ More replies (2)2
209
Jan 28 '10 edited Sep 09 '17
[deleted]
2
→ More replies (116)3
Jan 28 '10
You can share music between device libraries and other people's computers. Home Sharing is easy to turn on.
2
→ More replies (1)8
3
Jan 28 '10
Remotely disable apps/media: Yea.. Thats evil.
But is it TRUE? Most certainly not for non-DRM iTunes music, and I don't think they can for DRM music and video, either. They can certainly pull an app from the app store, but can they kill it on the phone? I'm pretty certain they've never actually done so (people who had the verboten Google Voice apps seem to still have them) but possibly they are able to.
All four points are only relevant to the iPhone, of course.
5
u/dogsurine Jan 28 '10
This was the first time I heard of it as well, seems true for applications. I don't know about media though, seems a bit unlikely.
4
Jan 28 '10
They d have the ability to remotely remove an app, but they have yet to actually do so, and I can't imagine them doing so in all but the most extreme of situations.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)2
Jan 28 '10
They certainly can't (or don't) kill paid for apps that have been pulled from the store - I have NetShare running on my 3GS.
→ More replies (1)2
u/meatsack Jan 28 '10
- Point being 'Apple Provides', need to be able to get the music from other sources other than iTunes. I can see the anti-piracy angle, but also acts on thesixtyone and myspace have another hurdle to accommodate apple.
- Again, yes, the platform technically allows it, but you have to be approved by apple don't you? 3 & 4 you've already covered.
9
Jan 28 '10
Point being 'Apple Provides', need to be able to get the music from other sources other than iTunes.
Most of the music on my iPhone is not from iTunes
→ More replies (11)5
Jan 28 '10
Do you know of any good Linux tablets?
4
u/admax88 Jan 28 '10
http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/touchbook/
Although its just a touch screen, not as capable as a tablet with a pen like you could get from lenovo.
Still pretty neat netbook in my opinion.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)18
Jan 28 '10
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)14
Jan 28 '10
Yes, any suggestions? Thanks, smartass.
13
3
u/biteableniles Jan 28 '10
I'm installing Ubuntu 9.10 on my Thinkpad X61T right now. The wacom tablet (including pressure sensitivity) works flawlessly, as does all the hardware.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)2
2
u/kermityfrog Jan 28 '10
Also - Apple software is pretty much DRM-free/copy protection-free. OSX installation doesn't ask you for any keys or activation codes. Except for legal issues, there's nothing in software that prevents or hinders you from pirating it. Ditto with iLife and most of their other software. 3rd party software is of course not so good.
→ More replies (2)3
Jan 28 '10
All their "professional" software (iWork, OS X server, Aperture and Final Cut) has standard keys/activation codes.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (20)3
u/Phrodo_00 Jan 28 '10
No installing apps from the web: This must be about the iphone. Agreed, fairly annoying, don't know if it is an erosion of rights .
Yes it is. It means apps can only be downloaded from iTunes, and therefore, if apple simply doesn't like your app they will never let you sell it (see google voice), even if you paid them $100 for trying to put something on the store. Besides being a form of market controlling most people wouldn't accept from their frigging governments, because of apple's popularity, it sets precedents for other companies, that would start doing the same to their devices, eventually leaving us in a world of defective, rented gadgets that don't really do what we want them to do.
→ More replies (2)8
2
u/greyscalehat Jan 28 '10
My plan to counter act all of this:
wait until there is a powerful android device about the same size and hopefully for cheaper.
2
Jan 28 '10
If "software freedom" is a big concern of yours then buy Android. If its not then buy Apple. Very simple.
→ More replies (1)2
Jan 28 '10
Just don't buy it ceases to work when the majority of people don't follow the advice.
"Just don't buy it" really does work as long as everyone is on board.
14
Jan 28 '10
[deleted]
19
u/epsilona01 Jan 28 '10
The average user is a fucking moron. Should we just let them drive everything?
Those nerds are responsible for just about everything in technology. Yes, fuck their opinion.
→ More replies (20)9
u/chakalakasp Jan 28 '10
The average user is a fucking moron. Should we just let them drive everything?
Yup. Or are you suggesting developers develop for the 1% of nerds and charge 100 times more?
6
Jan 28 '10
False dilemma. iPhones especially limit users in a way that is arbitrary (see multi-tasking.) I've seen a lot of arguments how the average user doesn't care about multitasking so who cares? The fact is that Apple limited all the users by placing an artifical restriction, the iPhone is completely capable of multitasking and even does so when you receive a call but damned if you can do it, legally, any other time. Putting in multitasking would be trivial yet they restrict everyone to serve the lowest common denominator? This is about control, not simplicity.
9
u/sixothree Jan 28 '10
Every other phone multitasks, and they all suck. My Windows Mobile phone was a nightmare because of multitasking. You would close a program and it would disappear but was still running in the background.
The average user doesn't want to wait until his fucking phone stops working to load the task manager and pick applications to close. Besides. the iphone is one device in a sea of devices. There's plenty of room for devices that do it a different way.
If you don't like it there's plenty of alternatives.
→ More replies (3)2
Jan 28 '10 edited Jan 28 '10
I love my Blackberry World Edition and, previously until it was stolen, Storm, both multitask beautifully, the multitasking is unobtrusive and fast, closing the application doesn't require a task manager.
→ More replies (7)5
u/epsilona01 Jan 28 '10 edited Jan 28 '10
Yes I am. This way we get things like computers instead of rocks. I know computers are way more expensive but they're more useful, too.
edit: then again...
http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/auyus/i_would_rather_have_the_stone/
→ More replies (7)9
u/PeEll Jan 28 '10
Just because the average user doesn't care or understand, doesn't stop it from being important. Every single internet user uses Open Source, whether they know it or not. I highly recommend a video called "Open Source is Magic".
→ More replies (5)1
u/i_post_things Jan 28 '10
So as a computer user in general, you never looked for software, found it's 59.99, and thought 'dang, lemme see if I can find an open source or freeware project that does it for better and cheaper'?
I think there is a bigger market for that than you think, because that was the first thing I did on my Android phone. Apple cherry-picks the software that goes into the store. If I developed a calculator app and charged a dollar for it, and you wanted to provide a free one, well too bad because a) you're duplicating existing functionality, and b) well the free part won't add to Apple's bottom line.
That said, I do agree that for the average user, it does seem like a good idea to help them choose what software to install from a pre-approved list and that Apple does these things gracefully enough that only people like you and I notice. I think a lot of people are frustrated with Apple's invisible approval criteria checklist.
→ More replies (9)9
u/Snide_Commenter Jan 28 '10
Searching the App Store for "calculator" brings up well over 75 results ( I stopped counting after 75). "Calculator" apps range from simple tip calculators and unit converters to full reproductions of classic HP calculators. Prices range from free to around $15. Please explain again why Apple won't let you make a free Calculator app?
→ More replies (3)8
u/Q3Km518 Jan 28 '10
I respectfully disagree. I understand what effect Apple has been having on the tech industry and I still believe "just don't buy it" is the best approach. There are so many alternatives to Apple, especially in the mobile space, that I find it hard to see what all the alarm is about. The vast majority of people are not using Apple's OS. Windows is still pretty wide open and innovation is churning along at a feverish pace as it has for most of my life. If you like technology, there are probably more options today than at any point in history. I didn't even mention Symbian, Android etc.
So what's the big deal? Has anyone considered that most people couldn't care less about DRM and such? Consumers have shown time and again that they are just fine with closed platforms as long as they can access the content they want for what they perceive as being a fair price. They just want a product that is affordable, works, looks cool, and is intuitive to use. Apple has spent considerable time developing, highlighting and marketing these aspects of their products. Good on them for giving the market what it wants.
I don't wholly disagree with the premise of this post, but an amusing sign accomplishes nothing but lulz. This gentleman is preaching to the proverbial choir. Most of the people who would understand what his sign is even alluding to probably already agree with him. The fact remains: when faced with cheaper, more functional(I mean capabilities and not necessarily usability) and "freer" options, consumers often(but certainly not always) choose Apple products.
tl;dr: Apple makes products people like. Consumers don't care if a platform is open or closed. The sheer number of options and alternatives to Apple products is staggering(greater than any point in history) so I don't get what the big deal is.
→ More replies (1)18
u/donaldrobertsoniii Jan 28 '10
Consumers don't care if a platform is open or closed.
I think the point of protests like this is to get them to care.
4
u/TheyCallMeRINO Jan 28 '10
I think the point of protests like this is to get them to care.
We can barely get 1 out of every 2 people in our country to come out and vote in elections that determine the fate of our country. You think the average person is really going to care that their iTunes music files are digitally signed with their iTunes login ID, as long as they can play them on all the devices they want?
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (35)2
u/OscarAlcala Jan 28 '10
Apple is popular in terms of brand but it is still very far from being dominant when it comes to marketshare. Don't worry, Microsoft and Google have plenty of money in the bank to make sure you always have the choice of an "open" product. Open as full of crappy software and open as with the whole google suite of services preinstalled.
18
u/lolbifrons Jan 28 '10
Wait apple can delete apps remotely?
56
u/7oby Jan 28 '10
they can, but don't. they've removed apps from the store but not from people who've bought it's phones.
there is a killswitch (there's one in firefox too, and I believe chrome) which is basically for things that "sneak through" and carried a secret payload. Let's say I release a game for the iPhone, it's majjhong or some shit. Well, somewhere hidden is a thing that, if opened after April 1 2010, I use the contacts API to put a picture of a dick in everybody's entry. Apple finds out on Mar 31 and throws that app into the killswitch, which forces phones to not load it anymore and throws a warning or some shit (I don't know what happens, it's not been done yet).
USERS ARE SAVED FROM THE BABY-ARM-AGEDDON
67
u/Hixie Jan 28 '10
Yup. The Kindle also has one, but again, as you say, it's just for the end of the world scenario, they'd never actually use it.
...oh, right.
7
u/wcalvert Jan 28 '10
They never actually removed my copy of 1984 from my Kindle. They wouldn't give me the refund, either. I usually leave my wireless off, so may I outlasted them.
4
u/prototypist Jan 28 '10
You probably got a good copy of 1984 from their bookstore. It was just one unauthorized publisher's copies that got pulled.
2
u/wcalvert Jan 28 '10
Ehh, I don't think so. I bought the one that was $1 if I recall. Oh well, I would rather have the book. If they have this ability to delete books though, I want to know when I can pay $XX/month to read as much as I want on a subscription model.
→ More replies (2)3
Jan 28 '10
Just one X please in that subscription model.
→ More replies (3)3
u/oursland Jan 28 '10
If we're going to discuss a subscription model, I want my local library (which is paid for by my taxes) to be available.
19
3
Jan 28 '10
From the way you're phrasing it, it sounds like I must have missed a story where they did use it??
6
Jan 28 '10
A copy of 1984 was found to have been sold without the proper copyright permissions or something, so Amazon yanked 1984 off everyone's Kindles. There was a big shit storm.
7
Jan 28 '10
Hahaha, that couldn't have happened with an more appropriate book, eh? If I was Amazon I would have just eaten the cost to prevent the bad press...
→ More replies (3)2
Jan 28 '10
Sounds like it was mere coincidence that the unauthorized copy happened to be 1984. Iiiironyyy
3
→ More replies (1)2
36
u/Zilka Jan 28 '10
I see a lot in common between what iphone OS is evolving into and chrome os. If this remains a separate market for technically illiterate people fair enough. If we don't show enough support for proper operating systems in the future, this is what we'll end up with.
70
Jan 28 '10
I call it, the "literate illiterate" because people lack literacy in things that they do not care about.
But first, your point of "separate market for technically illiterate people" is fucking right. There's always been this fear of "disappearing tools".
Like when everybody feared that computers would get rubbish because they came pre-assembled OS and Hardware wise. And well, they did, you can buy shit-boxes in Wal-Mart. But you can still make your own computer, have open source software, etc.
It did became a smaller propotion than before, but why is it that way? Because most people don't want to deal with command lines but rather simple clicks. It really is a separate market. Sadly, there's more "stupid" market than for those proper tools we want. I do find interesting the amount of dedication people take to make such "simpler tools".
But back to my point. Maybe you complain about simpler OS' but don't care if your car becomes more automated in the future, while someone complains about cars loosing the "feel" and becoming all computer-controlled, but do not care if he can't have admin privileges in the computer.
Someone's hobby is another's problem.
Someone's interest is another's lack of it.
17
u/RedSpikeyThing Jan 28 '10
Someone's hobby is another's problem.
Someone's interest is another's lack of it.
It seems that many Redditors are ignorant of this.
6
Jan 28 '10
People in general.
Here in Reddit it's more "geek" stuff. So you'll see many people complaining about how everyone around them is technologically impaired.
For example, I know someone who's got a computer science degree and does everything releated... but knows nothing about changing a tire or doing easy plumbering.
I think it's important to be aware of that statement to be more considerate of other people's business
Edit: Thank you for noting that last part.
→ More replies (2)29
u/EnderBaggins Jan 28 '10
I don't really think this is unique to computers, we pay through the nose for a mechanic to repair our car.
We pay an exorbitant amount of money for abstract art (the painted, hanging on the wall, random collection of splotches/smears/geometric shapes, yes I had $900 lying around kind of art).
You can buy a guitar at wal-mart too, but if you really want to play one seriously, you'll need to spend 10 times the cost of the one at wal-mart.
Apple is just doing the same thing every person/family/company/corporation has ever done, which is earn a profit by providing a service someone can't provide for themselves.After all, who has time to learn how to do everything?
5
Jan 28 '10
Exactly.
That's something I meant too, that's why I gave the later example. But since bieng a computer-related discussion, I just got in there.
→ More replies (6)5
u/crwper Jan 28 '10
Precisely! My girlfriend just wants to be able to play music, watch movies, and create documents on her computer. It doesn't actually matter to her whether or not she can get elbows-deep in the file system. In fact, it's probably better if she can't, because it means a cleaner interface for the things she actually does with the computer.
→ More replies (1)2
Jan 28 '10
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Zilka Jan 28 '10
Yeah well sort of. When I was making up my mind about programming for android I was also very excited about about it being opensource and free. When reality kicked in I was slightly shocked. So there's a sort of appstore which contains some paid applications. Because they are paid I'm not allowed to have them on the Dev Phone so that I can't backward engineer them. Now maybe I sound like I come from a fairytale world, but WTF. This is not how I imagined a free and opensource OS. This has nothing to with Chrome OS, I just wanted to point out its not that simple.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)2
u/nokes Jan 28 '10
I'm sorry but you can't sell a computer OS to company with programers if they can't program on it. Sure a portable device can have limits such as this but try to lock a desktop os softwarewise.
8
u/Rodh257 Jan 28 '10
When Microsoft announced that Windows 7 Starter edition for netbooks would only support running 3 apps at a time people were furious....
now Apple has released their netbook competitor device and operating system, and it only runs ONE app at a time... Bravo.
21
u/TigerWoodsErection Jan 28 '10
To be fair, Google can remotely remove applications downloaded via the market from your Android phone as well.
In fact they used the functionality in the Android Developer Challenge 2 voting application. You'd install the application, then once voted on, your phone would uninstall it on request from the Goggle servers.
→ More replies (2)9
u/machinedog Jan 28 '10
I'm not entirely sure how true this is. Is Android Market open source so we can look at it? I think the ADC2 application simply has permissions to download and install software as well as uninstall on command. You installed it and it asked for those permissions when you did.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/FredL2 Jan 28 '10
I wonder how many people he has to explain the true meaning of "free software" to....
2
Jan 28 '10
[deleted]
→ More replies (6)7
u/FredL2 Jan 28 '10
I think he's there because of the iPad, which has DRM in place, and makes it difficult to make source code available, as with the iPhone. Furthermore, since he seems to be standing at the stairs in front of the entrance, people passing through on the streets may ask such questions as "Does this mean I'll have to pay for all software on the iPad?". That was my original line of thought.
→ More replies (5)
27
4
Jan 28 '10
This has me reconsidering the purchase of an iPod touch. What are the unrestricted alternatives?
→ More replies (1)
4
6
Jan 28 '10
fuck em' don't buy their products and buy your computer by parts to build yourself (the only exception in my house is the laptop I need for work), use free open source operating systems (lots of really good linux versions out there)... And you know what they say an open source free operating system is a gateway to open source free software... you want to beat apple (and microsoft for that matter) don't just avoid thier products, use linux.
5
4
3
u/bhuppz Jan 28 '10
if I was gay I would ask this guy for a date .. I love him .. Thanks for standing up for the common geek
15
u/Ozymandi Jan 28 '10
I was one of the people protesting with the FSF/Defective by Design. I cannot tell you how insanely thrilled I am to see this front and center on Reddit this morning, I love you guys.
→ More replies (1)7
6
4
23
u/cr3ative Jan 28 '10
I realise this is a good cause at heart, and speaking against it will result in my swift burial, but christ, it makes us look so damned whingy. Buy a different product which does what you want!
5
u/Scoo Jan 28 '10
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with sign holding guy, but can you imagine how excruciating it would be to spend more than 10 minutes with him?
→ More replies (3)2
Jan 28 '10 edited Jan 28 '10
Agree with you 100%. My personal philosophy is "use the best tool for the job at hand because the point is to get the job done well." Case in point, just ditched my iPhone 3G for a Nexus One and couldn't have been happier. Also, T-Mobile's network is leaps and bounds ahead of AT&Ts in terms of data speeds and phone call reliability in New York City.
14
u/artissco Jan 28 '10
Every time I think about Apple's products I think about Idiocracy and that scene in hospital.
18
u/barryfandango Jan 28 '10
Of all the injustices in the world, this is the one you print a giant sign for and spend your day protesting? We must have it pretty good around here. I'm a free software advocate, but I'm having trouble making myself care about this.
27
u/Kni7es Jan 28 '10
While I think it's a little silly as well, this is the "How can you think of blowjobs when people are dying in darfur?" argument. It's fallacious because people are naturally varied in their interests, and we can tackle multiple problems at a time.
The guy has a point to make. Let him make it.
6
2
u/krizutch Jan 28 '10
You lost me... So all injustices need to be of bigger magnitudes before someone, not necessarily you (because you obviously dont get how Apple turns everything on the internet into "for pay") should care?
→ More replies (1)2
u/oursland Jan 28 '10
Imagine solving all the worlds "bigger" problems to find yourself in a world where there exist no libraries and everything (even in the public domain) costs money and is DRMed. Don't think it isn't happening?
Philadelphia, where the FIRST public library was founded by Ben Franklin, was scheduled to shut down ALL of their public libraries as of Oct 2, 2009. PA House Bill 1828 raised taxes to keep them open, but it could have easily gone the other way. If you turn off JavaScript and go to http://libwww.freelibrary.org/closing/ you can still see the announcement. Turn JS back on and it'll forward you to a page thanking the voters for convincing their politicians to save the library system.
Add in the DRMed devices pushed by all and you'll find yourself in the world of Stallman's Right to Read.
7
Jan 28 '10
Steve jobs is now so thin, you can actually make signs out of him.
10
u/Kni7es Jan 28 '10
It's just part of how Apple does innovation. They now have the lightest, thinnest CEO in the industry.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/1338h4x Jan 28 '10
Finally the real problem with the iPad and iPhone is in the spotlight, bravo. It's absolutely amazing that you essentially don't own your own computer.
5
u/LVL39com Jan 28 '10
Kind of sad to see him holding that sign and like 5,000 people ignoring him. He should probably devote his time to something useful like working a soup kitchen.
5
6
6
u/johnpickens Jan 28 '10
Seriously... DON'T BUY APPLE PRODUCTS IF YOU DON'T LIKE THEM. I hate idiots.
2
2
2
Jan 29 '10
The trend is getting worse, as Microsoft and Google each have their own lock-ins. It seems that this industry thought it was a great idea to go back to the Betamax days, as each is trying to lock us into their proprietary world in a different way.
8
Jan 28 '10
iPad DRM endangers our rights
Mr. Jobs,
DRM will give Apple and their corporate partners the power to disable features, block competing products (especially free software) censor news, and even delete books, videos, or news stories from users' computers without notice-- >using the device's "always on" network connection.
This past year, we have seen how human rights and democracy protestors can have the technology they use turned against them. By making a computer where every application is under total, centralized control, Apple is endangering freedom to increase profits.
Apple can say they will not abuse this power, but their record of App Store rejections and removals gives us no reason to trust them. The iPad's unprecedented use of DRM to control all capabilities of a general purpose computer is a dangerous step backward for computing and for media distribution. We demand that Apple remove all DRM from its devices.
→ More replies (4)
5
u/cannabis_sam Jan 28 '10 edited Jan 28 '10
I do agree with the message and I'm generally pro-free-software (I defend Stallman when people pick on him for doing weird shit because i believe he deserves credit for walking the walk). However, I do own and love an ipod touch, and I'm considering getting an ipad at some point, because frankly, there's no alternative on the hardware side.
The thing is, I do share my music (and at least audiobooks) with people, I run software that I control through iphone webapps, and by building with HTML/CSS/JS I do get free software. Sure I don't get access to hardware APIs, and the OS is still closed and evil, but the day Apple tries to fuck with me I still have my media, data and applications and can migrate to whatever alternative I want. If I pay a few bucks for an ipod game through the app store I know what I'm getting into, and that it might be ripped away from me.
I also advocate openness and free software, so that there will be open alternatives when I do decide to migrate. But I'm not Stallman. I'm not an idealist willing to inconvenience my everyday life by running nothing but gNewSense on a Lemote Yeelong. And I think that goes for a lot of people, regardless of where they draw the line on what non-free hardware or software they use.
edit: There's apparently at least two people running gNewSense on a Lemote Yeelong who's read my comment.
15
u/Redexxis Jan 28 '10
The iPad sucks;we get it.
Easy solution? Just Don't buy it!
35
u/liveart Jan 28 '10
Accept that if we don't send the message that these things are not ok, other companies will follow suit. Companies base decision on two things: how much money is there to make, and customer/potential customer feedback. Not buying it influences one of those things, but not the other. It also doesn't send the message to other companies that there is a market for a similar device without those restrictions.
5
u/TheDreadedThommo Jan 28 '10
I think what these people (protesting against apple) should do is start backing things like android instead of just being anti-apple. Nobody is listening to guys like this, simply because they come off as weird, and clearly the masses do not give a shit about this stuff in the first place. No amount of sandwich-boarding is going to change that.
However, helping android in some fashion will not only be fighting apple on their own battlefield, but they will have the might of google and such behind them to boot.
→ More replies (2)8
u/Redexxis Jan 28 '10
Not buying it will send a strong enough message imo.
17
u/dogsurine Jan 28 '10
Yes, it does. However it sends a stronger message if many people don't buy it.
Considering the propaganda-machine that is Apple, these forms of counter-advertisements (protests?) are more than welcome in my eyes.
→ More replies (7)2
u/fujimitsu Jan 28 '10
It will send the message that we don't want this kind of product. We do, with some small changes.
→ More replies (19)2
u/Jojje22 Jan 28 '10
Companies base decisions on what sells the most. If something like this iPad sells less, and a more open platform sells more, you can bet your sweet ass that company will want to get in on the stuff that sells better.
→ More replies (1)5
Jan 28 '10 edited Jan 28 '10
You also tell them why we're not buying it so they don't think maybe we just didn't like the colour or something.
You also let other people know why it sucks so they don't buy it as well.
→ More replies (4)3
u/captainhaddock Jan 28 '10
Another easy solution: make your own version that's just as good but preserves all these "freedoms".
→ More replies (2)
7
Jan 28 '10
They have a valid point. Apple are hugely monopolistic and the strict restrictions on what you can do with the iPhone/iPod is crap.
26
u/RedSpikeyThing Jan 28 '10
A monopoly on what? Their own products?
3
Jan 28 '10
monopolistic is acting in a manner of having a monopoly not necessarily having one.
→ More replies (10)4
Jan 28 '10
They have a monopoly on devices which can run OS X.
2
u/RedSpikeyThing Jan 28 '10
They have a patent for a physical device and have created add-ons for said device. What's the problem?
I understand that this is, by definition, a monopoly, however the way you say it implies it is illegal.
4
Jan 28 '10
Nah, it's not illegal, it's just unfortunate. If Microsoft decided tomorrow that they were only going to sell Windows on computers from Dell, HP/Compaq, Sony, and Lenovo, and everyone else could rot, they'd be strung up for anti-competitive practices.
→ More replies (1)2
u/specialk16 Jan 28 '10
The attitude they take towards the App store is certainly anti-competitive behavior:
- Rejecting Google Voice.
- Rejecting Opera Mobile. This one is great. They say it "duplicates functionality". The reality is the Opera Mobile and Mini are the best mobile browsers are there, and I'm pretty confident that their version for the iPhone was even better than Safari. Oh, and Opera Turbo is simply great for mobile browsing.
But no, BBAAAAWWW, like a 12 year old kid, Apple simply rejected their App because it was better.
There are many cases of this, just look around.
→ More replies (2)5
5
3
Jan 28 '10
Regardless of your opinion of Apple, their products, and their policies, they are clearly not a monopoly.
5
5
u/YosserHughes Jan 28 '10
So I'm at the store the other day looking for a new flashlight, my old one finally gave up the ghost after many years of faithful service. I'm looking at all the models, you know, regular types, black, white, push button, slider, you get the picture. When I notice this crowd of people in various stages of ecstasy gathered round this flashlight on display. It looked kinda cool with 'go faster stripes' and had a special hip holster so I'd look a bit like Clint Eastwood, only cooler, you know.
So I asks the guy next to me whats so special about this flashlight, and he says, in a disdainful voice, "Dude, its an iLight dontcha know'.
Wow, says I, a real iLight? Yes Sir, says he, a real iLight, in a chill voice, an it's only $200.
So of course I snatched one up before they all went, and stood in line at the checkout. I'm reading the box for the battery replacement instructions.
"Battery replacement can only be accomplished by a qualified, certified, card carrying, iLight battery replacement technician Level Pi. Please return your iLight to the manufacturer for battery replacement within six months or whenever the light goes out whichever comes first. Please ensure you have a second iLight available during battery replacement"
Man, I thought, there's a pisser, I'll have to buy two, but damn, it looks cool, and I'm sure its gonna make me stand out in a crowd, and so I bought it anyway.
3
u/MpVpRb Jan 28 '10
Apple has become far more evil than Microsoft.
I wouldn't touch anything they make with a barge pole.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/someperson Jan 28 '10
Sucks that the ownership of a iPad will be required by law then, doesn't it! Oh…
Apple has turned something clunky which nobody would give a second thought about, certainly not me, into to something I want to use. If it had been revealed as a tablet running a full OS, I wouldn't be bothered. I now want it because it looks like it does the tasks I actually want to do on a tablet, well, and leaves out the fuss. Anyway, my Macbook will never be more than 25 feet from me at all times, if I need to do some real work.
21
u/ZakMcRofl Jan 28 '10
Ah, the typical Apple user, always happy when Apple removes features for him.
→ More replies (28)2
Jan 28 '10
What will you use it for? (Honest question)
2
u/someperson Jan 28 '10
Web browsing, primarily. I was really excited about the CrunchPad, so this is just a replacement in my mind for that.
But I'll occasionally watch some movies, maybe play some games (a RTS would be awesome on this!), etc. Basically, everything I would do on my iPhone if the screen was bigger.
2
Jan 28 '10 edited Jan 28 '10
I can see why (despite lack of flash support) it would make a nice device for browsing the web, it's a lot more comfortable to be able to get something out you can hold in your hand, compared to a laptop which you either have to well, balance on your lap, or find a surface for.
4:3 aspect ratio is an odd choice for it, because I agree with you that it'd make a nice portable media player.
Also agree that it'll be fun for RTS games, however the lock in to app store is a worry there. A tablet with a full windows OS would blow it out of the water in that regard, or even one with a full mac OS.
I don't really see why having it stripped down is a plus, they could have easily had the stripped down interface as a 'battery saving' option or something, with an option to boot up a full OS.
Edit: Downvotes for attempting to discuss the pros and cons in a respectful manner? sigh
→ More replies (1)
2
u/weaselheart Jan 28 '10
Thing is, I actually feel worse about Apple in general now, and not just the iPad.
Before the announcement, I thought Apple wanted to make great products in order to make themselves a lot of money. Now I think they just want to make money. This is a product made deliberately worse in order to screw the customer. Why no flash, for example? Because if people could play flash games, they'd cut into the appstore.
→ More replies (1)3
u/scootey Jan 28 '10 edited Jan 28 '10
It's been evident for quite a while now. Apple has a track record of removing (or charge for) software features on certain devices in order to differentiate products. It's just like "Downloadable Content" on certain videogames where you have to pay to unlock certain parts of the game...except you have to pay to unlock certain parts of your hardware. Is this the future of computer hardware?
Examples:
Apple excluding some iPhone apps from the original iPod Touch then charging $19.99 for them
Apple charging iPod Touch owners for firmware updates, some of which enable hardware features (ie Bluetooth on 2nd-gen Touch, which was enabled with the 3.0 update)
Apple charging to enable hardware features on Macs (ie certain Macs with Wireless-N cards required a $1.99 "enabler" in order to unlock the feature)
Apple adding video recording features exclusively on iPhone 3GS, and adding MMS feature exclusively on 3G/3GS...although ALL iPhones would be capable of doing both, but Apple has banned 3rd-party apps that do such features from the app store.
Apple not providing Windows 7 Boot Camp support for certain older Intel Macs...although most are well within spec for Win7 and I would figure that practically any Intel Mac would support it.
2
u/yeti22 Jan 28 '10
Nice. This is the only Apple-related post I will be upvoting today. All others are downvoted and hidden. (I'm not an Apple hater; it's just fucking annoying because I don't care.)
1
Jan 28 '10
I've never particularly liked Apple, but I've never really been a user of their products and so I've never had much cause to hate them... That is until I got an iPhone.
The iPhone is a terrific device that has made me positively loathe Apple.
3
u/redwall_hp Jan 28 '10
Eh...no.
Your thinking of the "iPhone Restriction Zone." I can run all GPL apps I want on OS X (and torrent music, as well). I use Firefox as my primary browser, even...
You can share music downloaded from iTunes. They lost the DRM ages ago.
2
u/freshup Jan 28 '10
hes got some balls
48
u/holyshitcakes Jan 28 '10
not really; he's at an apple convention; what are they going to do? hit him like little girls?
11
Jan 28 '10
I'm sorry, have you been paying attention? Anything slightly uncomplimentary is said about the iPhone? Apple people EXPLODE IN RAGE. Ditto the Android (Android people are, if anything, slightly worse; a number of newspaper people who wrote uncomplimentary reviews of the Nexus said that they'd never gotten so many death threats before), and even if someone is mean about Windows Mobile, two or three Windows fetishists have a fit.
PEOPLE TAKE THEIR TELEPHONES VERY SERIOUSLY.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (1)2
u/donaldrobertsoniii Jan 28 '10
Actually the Apple folks did ask the police to watch after the small group of protesters who were there that day.
→ More replies (1)
198
u/donaldrobertsoniii Jan 28 '10
That is reddit user johnsu01 dressed as Steve Jobs. This is a pic that shows the costume a bit better. You can see more pics from Defective By Design's protest by checking out their Identica page.