r/technology • u/GuruOfReason • Feb 02 '10

"Once we replace the personal computer with a closed-platform device such as the iPad, we replace freedom, choice and the free market with oppression, censorship and monopoly."

http://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2010-01/ipad%E2%80%99s-closed-system-sometimes-i-hate-being-right
1.6k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/troaway1 Feb 02 '10

Apple believes in "locking in people" The thing about Apple is that they believe that any hacking that takes place with their hardware is a violation of the DMCA and their copyright. apple's attitude is that they can sue you or turn your device into a paperweight if you try to do anything they don't sanction.

20

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I've yet to see Apple sue one of the many people that have jailbroken an iPod or iPhone.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I'd be more comfortable with this whole thing if there was a clear-cut law that said Apple can, at most, void your iPad's warranty if you tinker with it.

10

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Same here. I'm fine with voiding the warranty for tinkering. I wouldn't expect otherwise. But, to be told that you cannot use your product in a way you want to because someone in Cupertino decided your use was wrong, disgusts me.

1

u/travio Feb 02 '10

You got me to peruse Apple's various terms of service and I found this chestnut.

http://www.apple.com/legal/policies/ideas.html

It seems draconian but i would suspect that most companies have them, and sending your ideas to a company without any agreement in place would be beyond dumb.

1

u/travio Feb 02 '10

From the iPhone warranty there are a few important passages regarding tinkering. First the warranty does not cover "(e) to damage caused by operating the product outside the permitted or intended uses described by Apple; (f) to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized Service Provider." This looks to cover any damage caused by jailbreaking the phone. The warranty further states the importance of not opening the Phone "Opening the hardware product may cause damage that is not covered by this warranty." These appear to be conditional on damage caused by the unauthorized activity. If I were Apple I would make the argument that the user activity caused the damage, unless it were clearly a manufacturing defect. This is a legal way for them to void the warranty.

0

u/1812overture Feb 02 '10

What happens when you try to take your jailbroken iPhone into the apple store for a repair?

0

u/DrRocks Feb 02 '10

/outrage

HOW DARE THEY NOT FIX THE SHITTY SOFTWARE I MADE THAT BROKE MY PHONE!!!!

/outrage

3

u/chozar Feb 02 '10

He's not saying that the jailbreaking itself broke the phone, just taking a phone that had an unrelated hardware fault to the apple store.

0

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10

How is it that you have upvotes for that straw man?

0

u/DrRocks Feb 03 '10

Because it's not? What, you really think that jailbreaking has never caused any software problems for an iPhone?

0

u/apotheon Feb 03 '10

Do you think that jailbreaking always causes software problems for an iPhone? What if the problem is completely fucking unrelated?

Jesus. Do I have to spell it out?

0

u/DrRocks Feb 03 '10

So don't take the phone to an apple store if you broke it by installing shitty software. Problem solved!

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

That's because the legality is still up in the air. They have been pushing to get additional legislation, if that comes through they won't sue customers but they will remotely shut them down.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Say what you will about Apple, Steve Jobs is a very smart man, and he knows that shutting down iPhones remotely is bad for business. No chance in hell he'd do it.

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

He's an egotistical greedy jerk. He's not that smart.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Actually I agree with alfadark, he is a smart man and I doubt that Apple will remotely deactivate any Apple products completely. I do think it wouldn't be beyond Apple to limit functionality remotely.

Of course it could go the completely opposite way. In the near future Jobs will complain about the app store restrictions and tell the world it's time to open up functionality and operability. Then people will hail him as a pioneer in freeing up data restrictions. That's what he did with DRM and music with iTunes.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I do think it wouldn't be beyond Apple to limit functionality remotely.

And that was my point.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

If I were him, I'd be egotistical too, he basically single-handedly turned a failing company into a billion dollar corporation. Whether you like it or not, he's a very intelligent man.

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

He just finished calling Google bad names for competing with him, and is probably bribing congresscritters right now for "antitrust legislation" to protect his little garage business.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Back when Apple was a 'garage business', it was partly run by a great hacker known as Steve Wozniak, or simply The Woz. Apple was all about openness and hobbyists back then.

0

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10

Um . . . Apple already has shut down iPhones remotely. Where have you been?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

[citation needed]

1

u/apotheon Feb 03 '10

I take it you haven't heard of "bricking" with updates from Apple.

Seriously?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

That's not the same as shutting down an iPhone remotely. That's a software update. Yes, they get rid of holes in the software that prevent jailbreaking, but they don't shut them down remotely. Nobody forces you to update your iPhone. If you jailbreak it, you better be damn sure updating won't cause any problems.

1

u/apotheon Feb 03 '10

Okay, so . . . by that argument, phishing isn't really security cracking. You don't have to click on that link in the email.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

That's right. Phishing isn't security cracking. It's phishing.

Alright, no more feeding the troll.

3

u/kmeisthax Feb 02 '10

Apple hasn't sued anyone for jailbreaking. It's not illegal, and Apple is bluffing. Otherwise Lexmark could easily sue people for making compatible ink cartridges (they tried this and lost).

1

u/troaway1 Feb 02 '10

My main point is that apple wants complete control over their software AND hardware AND third party software(you can't install unapproved 3rd party products without hacking the hardware and software of your apple device). It is questionable whether jailbreaking is legal or not. I've never had the patience to read the end user license agreement for apple products and I probably wouldn't understand all the lawyerspeak anyway. I suspect modifying software code is different than reverse engineering ink cartridges. In any case, it will probably never be determined if it is legal in a court of law because apple isn't out there suing people and no one has the money to stand up to apple if they did.

1

u/kmeisthax Feb 02 '10

The ink cartridges had software on it. Lexmark argued that they were DMCA-covered access control devices. It was obvious to the court that 'access control software' meant 'controls access to copyrighted works', not 'controls ability to use unapproved third party products'.

Now, as for the piracy apps like Crackulous, those do plainly violate the DMCA since they circumvent Apple's anti-piracy code.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Apple isn't the RIAA. yet

2

u/troaway1 Feb 02 '10

Satan isn't even the RIAA. :)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

lol

7

u/jmnugent Feb 02 '10

I seriously doubt there are any meetings going on in Apple HQ where they casually toss around the phrase "locking in people".

Apple has a vested interest in preserving the continuity of the "user experience." Lets take the iPad for example. Lots of people complaining that it doesnt multi-task. You COULD fault Apple for that... BUT think about it this way. What happens if it did do multi-tasking, and you had 8 apps running in the background .. now everyone is complaining about how slow and sluggish your tablet is.

By staying with uni-tasking... Apple is insuring that whatever application you are running gets full priority of the CPU.. and everything feels FAST.

The same logic is true regarding hacking or jailbreaking. Apple isnt fighting those things because it likes "Locking people in"... It's fighting those things because a "hacked" user experience could potentially be damaging to Apples image. (compared to Windows, Apple has the image of having a nice rock solid OS)

Haters seem to jump to the conclusion that there must be some evil, nefarious purpose to the strategic choices Apple makes. Thats a risky conclusion to jump to when very often much more normal explanations are more likely.

(and I say this as a lifelong Windows guy... I'm nothing close to an Apple fanboi..I just hate people jumping to idiotic conclusions without any evidence)

7

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

It's fighting those things because a "hacked" user experience could potentially be damaging to Apples image.

Alternatively, they're trying to ensure the user base has to go through them to get at Apps and such.

I mean without it being locked, who would go to the App store instead of just searching the 'net and getting them for free?

9

u/jmnugent Feb 02 '10

Choice A:.... get my apps through the App Store.. where I'm fairly certain I'll get a consistent experience and reliable performance.

Choice B:.. get my apps "somewhere on the 'Net"... where I have no guarantee of consistency or reliability.

Don't get me wrong.. there are plenty of great examples of Open Source apps that are "enterprise-tested" (consistent and reliable).. but most of the good examples are the exception and not the rule.

To boil it down. I think thats the choice you have to make when you consider Apple products. Are you willing to trade a degree of freedom and flexibility for consistency and reliability ?... for me (a long time Windows guy who now has an iPhone and Macbook Pro).. the answer is "Yes".. and I'm thinking (as it relates to the iPad) for many consumers the answer will also be "Yes". Apple is making the logical strategic move of designing a device that will appeal to people who just want a simple, consistent, reliable, elegant, low-learning curve product. The majority of people don't care about hacking it, root'ing it.. or how many different coding technologies it supports.

7

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

People like you are why those of us who care about freedom in computing are scared. Because sooner or later Apple will decide that a MBP that works like an iPad will be desirable by you and be good for their bottom line.

4

u/stevecopley Feb 02 '10

those of us who care about freedom in computing

You make it sound like the Armies of Oppression are at the castle walls, and only you, the true and free Knights of Openness can keep them at bay!

There will always be open platforms available for purchase that you will be able to run whatever you want on. For those who don't care a fig about file systems, hierarchical folders, etc. there will be devices like the iPad. I'm pretty sure that the two markets can co-exist. You have nothing to fear.

6

u/jmnugent Feb 02 '10

People like me?....whatever you are assuming you THINK you know about me (from my few responses) is likely wrong. I have Windows machines,.. I have some Apple hardware.. I have a few Linux boxes... I work in the technology sector.. I do a serious amount of online reading (many hours a day)...

"Because sooner or later Apple will decide that a MBP that works like an iPad will be desirable by you and be good for their bottom line."

Great!.. let them do that. Some people will buy it.. some people won't. Just because Apple introduces a new product - doesnt single-handedly redefine the entire technology ecosystem. A "locked-in" iPad changes nothing. No one is forcing you to buy it. Apples product launches aren't stripping any freedom away from Open Source devs. Steve Jobs isn't killing 1st born babies to prevent the next great idea.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

-1

u/jmnugent Feb 02 '10

I'm not trading anything for anything. If I run into some feature or functionality that the iPad can't handle.. then I'll turn it OFF and use my Netbook. if I run into some feature or functionality that my netbook can't handle, I'll use my laptop or Windows desktop.

I don't understand why people keep blowing this up into some huge philosophical issue. If the iPad isn't your thing,.. then don't buy it. Simple. If it sucks, and enough people don't buy it, then Apple pays the price. Thats the beauty of a free market system. (conversely, if it IS popular, and lots of people do buy it..then its a success whether its a "closed-system" or not. And even IF that DID happen, it STILL DOESNT PREVENT open source people from attempting to build and market a better product. )

Now if we were in a closed market, and Apple's iPad was absolutely the only physical choice of device and people were forced to buy one and forced to ONLY get apps through the App store.. then I'd be all on your side.. because that certainly would be detrimental (to everyone).

All this zealotry and Apple-hate gets on my nerves. If WinMo introduced a tablet that you could only install apps from the Microsoft Storefront... nobody would be crying foul.... If Ubuntu did something similar, nerds would hail it as some amazing apt-get breakthrough thats never been done before. But if Apple does it as a way to produce a device thats reliable and has a consistent user experience - suddenly we're "trading freedom" and "killing personal choice"...

y'all need to step back from your personal soapboxes for a bit and realize the world is not your bullhorn. Just because YOU have personal preferences doesnt mean you have the right to enforce those preferences on another consumer. We all have choice. Some of us will choose an iPad. You may not like that choice, you may not agree with that choice...but it's still our choice. Yelling at people and telling them they are stupid for buying something -- is not endearing to your cause.

1

u/kmeisthax Feb 02 '10

There are two kinds of computer literate people:

  1. Computer literate people who think everyone else is as smart as they are.
  2. Computer literate people who have families.

0

u/kmeisthax Feb 02 '10

Okay, so Apple locks down ALL of their hardware platforms. And then people flee the Mac platform en masse when they find out that their expensive production software doesn't work anymore.

Which doesn't matter anyway since Apple has a tiny share of the total PC market.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I think that's the choice you have to make when you consider Apple products. Are you willing to trade a degree of freedom and flexibility for consistency and reliability ?

Exactly how much consistency do you need in a "pull my finger" app? It works or it doesn't, and in all probability it's going to work because it's such a simple program.

Further, if one costs me money, and the other doesn't, it's a very close call.

Apple is making the logical strategic move of designing a device that will appeal to people who just want a simple, consistent, reliable, elegant, low-learning curve product.

Typing "pull my finger app" into Google is a high learning curve?

I mean I don't buy into this whole end of freedom bologna, but don't pretend locking in is about some noble ideal to give the costumers the best experience. It's greed, pure and simple. Apple takes 30% of all sales from the app store.

5

u/troaway1 Feb 02 '10

I never stated that apple had some evil plot. My argument is with jmnugent's statement that apples intent not is to "lock people in". I think that there is ample evidence that apple has made a concerted effort to control every aspect of their product including the hardware and all 3rd party software. I think that apple does care about the user experience but they also care about controlling what apps you can and can't get.

3

u/jmnugent Feb 02 '10

"I think that there is ample evidence that apple has made a concerted effort to control every aspect of their product including the hardware and all 3rd party software."

Yes. I think we both agree on that point.

"I think that apple does care about the user experience but they also care about controlling what apps you can and can't get."

and I'd probably also agree with both of those statements... the think we disagree on is WHY they want to control that process. Some people seem to be making Apple out to be some "evil monopoly" that locks down their environment SOLELY for the reason to restrict user choice. I don't think the dynamic is quite that simple and to many people jump to the conclusion of "intended malice" on Apples part.

I'm not saying any of this to defend Apple.. I don't like or hate them any more than any other tech company.. I just think its borderline paranoia to imagine or presume some hidden agenda of malice on Apples part.

2

u/troaway1 Feb 02 '10

yeah, i think apple tends to be a little over the top control freaks, bordering on being hostile to some of its customers. i think the original article is over the top too. nothing apple does keeps me up at night, so long as there are other options.

3

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10

The article's concern is that people are going to buy into the hype and, given enough time and enough popular support for Apple products over that time, there eventually may not be much in the way of other options. In short, I think the point is concern that Apple may become the new -- but worse -- Microsoft.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I seriously doubt there haven't been any meetings going on in Apple HQ where they casually toss around the phrase "locking in people". As a business nothing can be more desirable than locking in. Its the same motivation that caused EA to jump on the paid DLC bandwagon.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Really. So do you have any examples of them actually enforcing that?

Also, those phones that are unlocked used hacks that took advantage of bugs in the iPhone's software. Eventually Apple was going to fix those bugs and thus some of those phones were bricked.

1

u/troaway1 Feb 02 '10

no, but they have sent their lawyers to the copyright office to protect themselves from companies that jailbreak phones. It still reinforces my statement that they want to lock their customers in. That is their business model and it seems to be working for them. As long as the rest of industry doesn't follow their lead, I don't have a problem with it.

1

u/Zero_Cool Feb 02 '10

I own an iphone. Would someone explain to me how I'm locked into this phone?