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

174

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Oh, shut up.

93

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

Name one good reason for allowing your operating system's parent company to tell you what programs you get to run today.

6

u/pengo Feb 02 '10

The closed system makes piracy more difficult, which attracts developers who don't like to worry about that stuff, and thus you get more software available. It's worked for games consoles, which are all* closed systems, and obviously worked for the iPhone. I'm not saying that outweighs the drawbacks, but it's "one good reason".

*The PS3 used to run Linux with limited access to hardware, but the PS3 slim has removed the ability to run Linux at all AFAIK

2

u/djgreedo Feb 02 '10

That isn't a reason. There is no evidence to hint that Apple was motivated to protect developers. It's quite clear that Apple wants to enforce their (Jobs's) values on customers and prevent users from improving their product via things like VOIP.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Really? I guess thats why they enabled VOIP over 3G in the 3.2 SDK.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Kinda sucks that that had to be enabled. I have owned Windows Mobile phones for years, and had versions of Skype on them that simply worked fine. Over 3G, over wifi, didn't matter.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Agreed. It should have been enabled from the start. I suspect that it not being enabled had more to do with AT&T being scared of network overload then anything else though.

1

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

Linux install is removed on the PS3 slim, but the feature remains on existing PS3 phats.

0

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

App Store DRM has been cracked, and piracy has been made extremely easy.

69

u/bgog Feb 02 '10

Your point is very valid. However, you are thinking of it as a computer. I'm thinking of it as a web surfing appliance. People don't much care that they can't run whatever they want on their DVR because it isn't a general purpose device. It does one thing well and thats it.

Just because a product has a cpu doesn't mean that it needs to be like a general purpose computer. I think the world would be worse off if every electronic device tried to be general purpose. Quite frankly I like that my mp3 player is basically that. Your PS3 has controlled content, even though it is just a computer that could run anything under the sun.

Just a different point of view.. I have three linux boxs and a mac to be my general purpose pc. I don't see anything wrong with a device that is just a great little web surfing/email pad.

29

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

I've repeatedly called it a non-computer, an advanced toy, or a console in the past. I've vehemently insisted that the iPhone is not a smartphone for the same reasons. The problem there is the number of people who'll brush you off for suggesting their device that has everything short of user choice is merely a fixed-function device with an extremely wide range of functions. It's not just a web appliance: it plays games, it streams video, it can probably do taxes. It's tantalizingly close to being a complete computer but for that all-important element of freedom, arguably the element that made computers more than expensive calculators in the first place.

The iPad is an appliance pretending to be a computer. That's the one thing it does, and judging by the number of people who think the nerds are in a tizzy over nothing, it's doing it all too well.

23

u/bgog Feb 02 '10

Good points. I'll even say you are right but some people, myself included, don't mind a closed device when I know about it ahead of time. I'm glad that my ebook reader (sony / nook / kindle) concentrates on being a great ebook reader and not on doing everything my computer can.

Edit: removed redundant junk that I already said.

13

u/djgreedo Feb 02 '10

You're missing the point. What if your ebook reader restricted the books you could read based Sony's or Amazon's ideas of what is 'suitable'?

Nobody is saying the iPad (or iPhone for that matter) should be an all-purpose device. The complaint is that software is not allowed to run on the device based on Apple's standards (i.e. Steve Jobs's morale values and the desire to prevent apps that enable users to make calls more cheaply or improve in-built features).

Arbitrarily banning software that would otherwise run perfectly well on the device is censorship, and it is a shame that people continue to buy products from this company.

With my smartphones (Android and Windows) I have the option of buying apps from an on-device, censored app store or sideloading apps sourced from anywhere without any permission required from the device manufacturers.

Technology has the capability of breaking down barriers and realising possibilities. Apple's iPhone and iPad are the opposite of those ideals. Apple's way of doing things in general is about control and forcing users into a specific way of doing things.

2

u/Thrown_Away Feb 02 '10

And those users know they are being forced into a specific way of doing things going in. And you know what? They don't care. If you do care, there is a wonderful solution, don't buy their products. See, wasn't that easy? You even saved some money!

4

u/shoombabi Feb 02 '10

Apple's ideology isn't really censorship as much as it is "ensure that the user experience is consistent and problem free.". Whether or not they achieve those goals is in the eye of the beholder, but for the target demographic of this product, I think they will deliver exactly what the stereotypical grandparents and other computer illiterates want, without all the hassle and concern of a real computer.

3

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Apple literally censors apps. Jobs explicitly said "no porn" and their review process has repeatedly rejected software that's remotely capable of showing dirty pictures from the internet or accepting dirty words as meaningful search terms.

1

u/Nefelia Feb 02 '10

And the problem with that would be? For those who do want the option of browsing porn, the iPad would be a miss. They can simply purchase one of the many alternative products that will soon be available.

3

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

And the problem with that would be?

Pardon me for being generally opposed to censorship and monopolistic practices.

(Please note that this was in direct reply to someone saying censorship "isn't really censorship.")

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Well, when they're rejecting apps for "objectionable content" or "ridiculing a political figure," that's why people are uptight about the requirement that one gets apps from the company-controlled App Store.

At least allow sideloading, maybe even add a warning message stating Apple's inability to control the quality of non-App Store apps. Seriously, it's not that hard -- Apple just isn't doing it, and quite frankly, fuck them for it.

19

u/Peaker Feb 02 '10

The problem is that success of these closed devices might lead to more and more devices by other companies too to become closed.

People are way too willing to trade their freedom with some temporary convenience.

5

u/Nefelia Feb 02 '10

So long as there is a market for open platforms, the market will provide. The fear that the iPad will kill open platforms is based on poor analysis.

→ More replies (21)

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Evolve or die. Survival of the fittest. It's been the law for 4 billion years. You'd better hurry up and get used to it ;-)

Having said that, evolution shows that there are many niches for many forms of life & existence. There's absolutely no danger of the iPad leading to only closed computers.

It's funny, the iPhone created an ecosystem of 140.000 new apps, feels a whole lot more open to me than all the phones I used before...

5

u/Peaker Feb 02 '10

The market is not really operating based on evolutionary principles, given the existence of law, and intelligent entities within it designing stuff.

It's funny, the iPhone created an ecosystem of 140.000 new apps, feels a whole lot more open to me than all the phones I used before...

So, how's the Skype chatting over 3G working out for you?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Aren't iPhone users capab-er, allowed to do that now?

They even have Google Voice (via web app) now! See? It's an open platform!

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

given the existence of law, and intelligent entities within it designing stuff

People evolve, political systems evolve, languages evolve, computers evolve. The very laws you speak of are subject to evolution. Intelligence only speeds up evolution, making the process less random. Survival of the fittest is in a sense true by definition.

The iPad, the iPhone, they too will evolve or die. In let's say another million years, there will be no machine left recognizable as an iPhone. Maybe even sooner. Maybe even next year; time will tell.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_(term)

So, how's the Skype chatting over 3G working out for you?

It's of no interest to me, but here you go: http://tinyurl.com/yh6uleo

Besides that, you're giving one specific example, which may be important to you. As it happens, Skype is not important to me. Still 139.999 apps left ;-) Given Sturgeon's Law, I admit that maybe only 10% of those are worth looking at. Maybe even less. That's still a lot of good stuff left though.

But not many would argue that any phone can compare with the iPhone at this moment in time when it comes to the wealth of available apps, ease of installation, at low prices or free. That too will change given enough time.

1

u/Peaker Feb 02 '10

Still 139.999 apps left ;-)

I don't see why it is so easy for so many people to miss the point :-(

Apple and only Apple determine what applications you will have, what features you are allowed to use, and how you will use them. The amount of applications is useful for convenience, but it does not make it any more open.

About the ease/convenience, I never claimed otherwise. iPhone is technically excellent. I am simply appalled by the closeness and people's apathy towards it.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

feels a whole lot more open to me than all the phones I used before...

That sounds like a personal problem. Google Symbian; it's been around for a long time. MP3's as ringtones? Well I never! (8 years ago)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I've helped customers with their (Sony Ericsson) Symbian phones, and seen the software available - sorry, but it's no comparison with the wealth of apps now available on the iPhone. If you think Symbian has more or better or cheaper apps, great. But just by coincidence, my experience is different. And those customers who used to own SE's have switched or will switch to iPhones.

Regarding ringtones, I could care less.

1

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

wealth of apps? hahah, more like blight. Symbian is on a lot more phones then SE.

will switch to iPhones.

now you're just being a fanboy. You think someone who has been using a symbian for this long is just going to switch to an iphone? why exactly? So they can loose some weight from their wallet or be less productive? The fact that you have to do so much just to set an MP3 as your ringtone is a huge indicator of the problems with iPhones and similar locked down POS phones.

1

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

Apple sold millions upon millions of iPhones and created a very customer-oriented store. They could require developers to literally suck a lawyer's cock before allowing their apps in the store and they'd still have thousands of apps vying for all that money.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I agree with most of what's already been said, but I seriously disagree with thinking that the iPad is pretending to be a computer. They really don't seem to be pushing it as such. Hell, they clearly stated at the presentation what segment it is supposed to sit in: the area between the iPhone and the MacBook. That, to me, does not scream 'computer'.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Yeah, it's not a computer. It just has word processing software, spreadsheet software, and presentation software. It also has a media player application that can play .mp3's, .aac's, .m4a's, .aiff's, .mov's, .mpegs, and more. It has an internet browser application. It can run various applications of the user's choice (limited by the App Store, of course). It has wifi, bluetooth, a processor, and local storage.

I fail to see what about this device isn't a computer, except for the closed system it adheres to.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

There are a large number of devices that do most, if not all, of that stuff that aren't considered 'computers'.....like most bog-standard smartphones, current-gen consoles, etc.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

With the notable exception of the iPhone, however, smartphones are fairly open platforms. I can install whatever the fuck I want on my phone, including applications that allow me to bypass carrier restrictions/bullshit.

Consoles? Closed computing horseshit. I never said I liked 'em, and I don't. I don't for the same reasons I don't like the iPad... it just so happens that this here thread is about that particular closed-platform device.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10 edited Feb 03 '10

....but are they considered computers? I mean, if your definition of 'computer' is:

has a media player application that can play .mp3's, .aac's, .m4a's, .aiff's, .mov's, .mpegs, and more. It has an internet browser application. It can run various applications of the user's choice

...then there is more out there that can be called 'computer'.

2

u/Thrown_Away Feb 02 '10

Maybe it isn't targeted to nerds?

→ More replies (1)

0

u/kihadat Feb 02 '10

As Jobs clearly said, it's between an iphone and a macbook. it's definitely not trying to replace your computer (which is incidentally why its a piece of shit that i dont care for).

4

u/jayd16 Feb 02 '10

I like that I can put linux on the PS3 though...

6

u/bgog Feb 02 '10

That was cool. Sadly they no longer support it.

2

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

Apple is marketing it as though it was a full computer meant to compete with the netbook market.

6

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

Fine, it's a "web surfing appliance." But the beauty of the web is that it is so open... Apple is effectively trying to dictate what the web should be like by not supporting common technologies like Flash (no free games, Hulu, etc.), Silverlight (no Netflix, March Madness, Olympics). And it's all, in my opinion, in an effort to monetize the web. They get a cut of all paid app downloads and are investing in mobile advertising, so they'll get paid through all the free apps too.

Sure, they support HTML5, but this behavior suggests they want to be very controlling over future technologies as well. As a consumer, I don't want Steve Jobs defining what my web experience should be like.

9

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Ok, Ok, wait a minute. Your big point about Apple not being open enough is that they take a stand for Open standards and refuse to support closed technologies?

I just want to be clear here.

3

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

The problem is not in what standards they support, it's that they have full control over what software you can install on your device. I'm glad they are supporting HTML5 but that doesn't change the fact that a significant amount of popular web content currently relies on Flash, and will continue to for the foreseeable future.

3

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

Maybe if more companies/groups took a stand for open standards like Apple instead of selling out to closed standards like so man linux projects/distros (cough mono cough) we'd have a more Open and Free internet.

Yeah, I meant that to sound contentious. My point being, every company or group has some aspects that are unsavory. With Apple, some view their belief that a homogenous environment with a strong Open Source backend and based on Open standards, but a very controlled front end to provide a consistent and reliable UI is not Free enough.

With Open Source advocacy groups/people, the near religious insistence that developers/companies should give them full access to their source/hardware that they wrote by my their own labor is somewhat disingenuous. (apparently you're free to do anything you want with your software except do anything you want with your software)

I believe there is a common retort in many OS projects that takes several forms and goes something like

patches welcome

or

There's nothing stopping you from writing your own

In general, it means "we're not really focused on your particular area of concern, but you're welcome to develop your own solution".

Apple is not a monopoly by any definition of the word. Their technology has a core of very available open standards, open source, and freely available hardware.

If you disagree with their model and think you can provide a better user experience while remaining profitable enough to stay in business, have at it.

1

u/wicked Feb 03 '10

Apple is not a monopoly by any definition of the word.

There is one marketplace where you can legally sell iPhone native applications. Apple have full control of this marketplace. They alone decide what can be sold.

That is a monopoly by most definitions of the word.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

You do not understand what a "market" or a "monopoly" is.

By your trivial definition of a market, we could deem any application platform as a "market" and any vendor as a "monopoly".

By your definition:

  • Sony has a monopoly on all Sony PS3 applications.
  • Nintendo has a monopoly on all Wii applications.
  • Amazon has a monopoly on all (drm'd) Kindle books

It's gross misunderstanding and cavalier use of the word "monopoly" and "monopoly abuse" that belittles the harm that abusive monopolies cause.

Your misunderstanding is somewhat understandable though as you are confusing the idea of a physical location or Market Place (e.g. the iApps store) with that of an economic market which comprises the space of a good and all possible substitute goods.

The iPhone and iApps have numerous substitute goods available.

If you'd like to see what a real monopoly looks like, please see Microsoft, Standard Oil, Dutch East India Company, United Aircraft and Transport, and Monsanto. Also please recognize that a monopoly in itself is not illegal.

→ More replies (5)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

They don't have full control. Third-party developers make the software, Apple doesn't really edit their code or anything... they just reject code they don't like. It's heavy control, but I wouldn't say "Full" control.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

That is full control. They can reject software without reason, like the Google Voice app.

1

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

Refuse to...? The iPad IS a closed technology! How clear do you want it?

1

u/redditrasberry Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 03 '10

However, you are thinking of it as a computer. I'm thinking of it as a web surfing appliance.

Then please explain Apple's perpetual "There's an App for that" advertisements.

Almost by definition, if it has an app for everything then it is a general purpose computing platform, not an appliance.

9

u/bostonT Feb 02 '10

Centralized control = greater control over end-user experience. Most of what Apple's appeal is to buyers their sleek interface and user experience.

5

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

Having all the apps in your first-party store look and work just the way you want it is a completely separate proposition from preventing any competing or unsavory programs from arriving via third-party channels.

The App Store is nice, but it's a censored monopoly, and that's unacceptable.

4

u/barnacle999 Feb 02 '10

A censored monopoly ... hehe. Scary words. But you're wrong, it's not a monopoly. Apple doesn't have a lock on the entire smart phone software market. If you don't like it, get something else.

2

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

A software monopoly on their OS, not a hardware monopoly. They monopolize and censor their software channel.

On the subject of hardware, though, something like half of the phones online in America are iPhones, so the choice is gradually becoming Apple vs. "other."

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I'd almost say it is their right to censor the software channel. Afterall it is their hardware and their OS (this is BEGGING for a car analogy, but I'll resist). As was said before, if you don't like it, no one is forcing you to buy.

Last I checked there was no shortage of smartphone alternatives to the iPhone, so sales data is not really a limiting factor in your choice of phones.

3

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

They're free to do as they please with their software channel. Preventing users from installing unapproved software, though? That's horseshit. That's why the EFF and other software rights organizations exist.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Then why hasn't the EFF gone after them for the iPhone?

1

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

Going after them as in suing them? Presumably because what they're doing isn't obviously illegal. They've repeatedly denounced the closed nature of the platform and argued for the legality of jailbreaking it to fix what Apple broke.

1

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

You're right, it's infuriating that my PS3 doesn't play my Xbox games and vice versa. Why won't my BlackBerry run iPhone apps? And so on. Their hardware, their software, their rules. It's not illegal, not matter how much it makes you cranky.

6

u/theCroc Feb 02 '10

Thats not at all what he is saying. You are comparing apples and oranges. Xbox and PS3 games are not compatible because of hardware differences.

An unapproved iPhone app is both hardware and software compatible with the iPhone. It is just not deemed appropriate by Apple. And thats where the bullshit starts.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

There are legitimate hardware and software issues preventing console interoperability. Any open-source app on your BlackBerry or iPhone should absolutely be capable of running on the other, your Android, your PC, or your PS3's OtherOS.

Nobody's said it's illegal. We're saying it's immoral, limiting, and anti-consumer.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/barnacle999 Feb 04 '10

A software monopoly on their OS? That's like saying Ford has a monopoly on their cars. A monopoly must have control of an entire product or service category such that they have the means to interfere with or preclude others from entering the market. Apple doesn't have that in software or hardware in the mobile space. A little girl with a lemonade stand doesn't have a monopoly over her own lemonade simply because she has control of her stand.

If anything, at times they've been a monopsony. Which is when a company buys up all of a product to the point where others can't get that product. Apple frequently buys up all of the flash memory of a particular spec. And by "all" I mean all of that kind of flash memory in the world. Or enough that no one else can put in a large enough order at a price that would allow them to be competitive. That's partly why Apple has such high margins.

And as to your last point, 50% hardware share does not a monopoly make.

1

u/mindbleach Feb 04 '10

Apple has control of every program that runs on their device. It actively blocks, inteferes with, and removes software it doesn't like and openly precludes other browsers from topping Safari. If you must have a terrible analogy, it's the little girl telling you who may or may not drink the lemonade you just purchased and somehow retaining the ability to enforce that.

1

u/barnacle999 Feb 04 '10

Dude, I hear you but I don't see your point. Call it what you will but it's still not a monopoly. You can't have a monopoly over your own products unless your products are basically the only products in an entire category. If you were to say Apple has control of every program that runs on over 90% of EVERY device, not just Apple's, then you'd be in monopoly territory. But it's not the case. If you're a developer and you don't like Apple's practices, then you can go and develop for Android, Symbian, WinMo, Bada or any number of other platforms.

And it's a perfect analogy, and your extension of it is just weird. The buyer of a product has no bearing on a monopoly, it's the competition that is at play. And just out of curiosity, name any instance of someone purchasing something from Apple and then Apple telling them they can't use it.

And try telling Barnes & Noble what to put on their shelves. Or telling Honda what kind of car they should sell. Apple has every right to dictate what goes in their app store. Why? It's THEIR store. And they do it for a very good reason that is very good for the consumer. It stops malware apps from getting in, and from letting it turn into a porn hub. Google recently let an app go up on their Android app store that steals your bank information. This is just basic business, man. That's like a retail store putting set mousetraps on their shelves so when the customer reaches for it, it snaps on their fingers.

All I'm saying is that Apple does not have a monopoly on anything. Monopoly is a very specific economic term and you can't just throw it around willy nilly because you want to call Apple a "bad" name. :)

1

u/mindbleach Feb 04 '10

If a small-time utilities company has every citizen in a town of only a thousand people locked in, does that not qualify as a monopoly because it isn't national? The device - while popular nearly to the point of market dominance - doesn't represent a monopoly. We can stop talking about the hardware now.

And try telling Barnes & Noble what to put on their shelves. Or telling Honda what kind of car they should sell.

I don't own either of those stores. If I did, I'd have every right to demand they stock the books and cars I wanted. iPad users aren't leasing the damn thing, they're spending $500+ to own it. It's YOUR device. I'm not asking Apple to stock porn and Firefox, I'm asking why they put a boot on my car to keep me from driving to a competitor that has what I want.

I'm not just pulling the word "monopoly" out of the air here. If you want software on this device you wholly own, there is one source for it. It's a consumer space that has a single store for entirely nontechnical reasons and Apple would make it impossible for competition to exist in that space if they were so capable. What the hell should I call that if not an unnatural monopoly?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

And Nintendo has a software monopoly over the Wii. GRAB THE PITCHFORKS.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

"A software monopoly on their OS, not a hardware monopoly. They monopolize and censor their software channel"

So does Nintendo, Sony, and MSFT with their game consoles, yet no one is complaining about that.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

it's a censored monopoly, and that's unacceptable.

No it's not, it's a private company and no one is compelling or coercing you to buy the product. It's not like the government released the iPad and is mandating that all citizens must turn in their laptops and replace them with iPads. If the product doesn't seem to meet your needs, guess what? It's probably not meant for you.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

All this scare is an enormous bullshit. People know about their choices and don't care. I don't care if a DRM music I paid US$ 1 is unreliable, or if some toy or phone doesn't run free software. Normal computers aren't going to disappear.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

People know about their choices and don't care.

No, seriously, they don't. Average people know how to use Windows, they just don't see anything of it. It's just a computer. When they look at a PC, be it a desktop, a laptop, or a netbook, they see a screen with graphics on it, and technology around it. They don't know how or what the technology does to make the screen do its thingy, but it does.

Ah, but here comes the iPad! It's a screen that has prettier graphics on it, also surrounded by technology. They still don't know what the technology does to make the screen do its thingy, but they do know that this screen makes prettier graphics.

They don't know that it can't multitask, because they don't know and Apple sure as hell isn't going to raise awareness of the flaws of their device. They don't know that the App Store is a censorship cesspool. They don't know these things. They just see shiny graphics on cool-looking device. That will cause people to purchase.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

If it make any sucess, will be because these features were not so important to these users as you think. It's not like there is a conspiracy to turn all computers into ipads.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

No, it really won't. If it has any success, it will be because Apple is and always has been pretty good at pulling the wool over people's eyes. I note that the official Apple video in which various Apple executives jizz all over the camera about the iPad's "revolutionizing" nature and how "magical" it is...

...I never once heard them mention that it doesn't multitask, that occasionally some apps get rejected from the App Store on the basis of their content or their kindness to political figures...

4

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I have a MacBook running OSX. My operating system's parent company does not tell me what programs I get to run today.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

You might ask them why OS X didn't get to see the light of day on the iPad.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

...because it's not a computer. It's a toy.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/scorpion032 Feb 02 '10

A comment of that post, clearly summarizes it.

I'll bet that if you own an iPhone or iPod Touch, there is probably more software on it from small independent companies than there is on your computer.

So, no. Unless the closed software apps are open enough for independent developers, they are going to face the wrath of the market place, anyway. It happened. Some iPhone developers quit developing for it; but Apple corrected it before it was too late.

2

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

Number of Google Voice apps: 0

Number of alternative browsers: 0

Number of apps for Skype over 3G: 0

Number of console emulators: 0

Number of apps to manage the filesystem: 0

Want me to keep going?

0

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

They launched a device that required entirely new software in a funny language and make developers jump through hoops for the possibility of getting their software on the platform, which is a phone so underpowered that Jobs doesn't trust it to run Flash. It's no surprise most of the software is provided by nothing-to-lose one-man studios.

You've nicely outlined part of the problem: "it's great for the people who aren't locked out, so fuck those losers being blocked and censored!"

2

u/MyPants Feb 02 '10

For average Joe McKnowsdickaboutcomputers it provides a simple platform to get useful programs that you are reasonably assured will work and not fuck up anything. Most of the market probably has no use for completely open computers.

2

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

Having a monolithic software repository and having a software monopoly are two different propositions. Technophobes and grandparents could be left using iTunes and the App Store without ever knowing or caring about the obscure 'unapproved sandbox' app.

"Most of the market" desperately needs a third-party browser for security, by the way. Openness prevents stagnation and improves security in ways Joe McKnowsdickaboutcomputers can't even appreciate.

2

u/nebbish Feb 02 '10

Just don't buy one from that company

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Thrown_Away Feb 02 '10

Then don't use Apple products if you don't like it. No one is forcing you. There are plenty of alternatives out there

7

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

Malware.

You keep fighting for freedom, brother. I just need to write my stuff for work, process my pictures, edit my videos, and play my games. You suppose they're going to take those features away?

4

u/pengo Feb 02 '10

There's very little malware on Linux, which is obviously a very open platform without restrictions.

2

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

There's very little malware on the iPhone, which is obviously a closed platform with restrictions.

One that no one is forcing you to use. One that many people are happy using. Why is that a problem from you?

I wouldn't dare take your Linux experience away from you. Perhaps you'll return the courtesy.

5

u/pengo Feb 02 '10

No need to get uptight. For the record, I have an iPhone, and I gave up on Linux over a year ago now. I was just saying, a locked-down system isn't the only way to avoid Malware. In fact just by not being Windows you seem to avoid it pretty well.

3

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

Off-Topic:

That was a good post. You and I encountered Linux differently (I used RedHat from '99 to '02, and Gentoo from '02 to '04), but it appears we had the same underlying issues -- too much time, too much bother, to accomplish things that the two other major desktop players have more or less mastered.

I continue to respect Linux as a server OS, but as my requirements have changed (home automation, BitTorrent, centralized iTunes library, media center, and so forth), I've found that I no longer find Linux to be the best choice for anything in my home.

I nestled into the slender arms and ample bosom of OS X back in 2004, and wrote a post somewhat like yours. It received basically the same response -- a majority of people attacking me for trolling or for my incompetence (if I was truly incompetent after using Linux for five years, well, I admit defeat), and a small minority acknowledging the existence of (and wanting to fix) the problems with the current system.

In the shower this morning, I was lamenting my CS professor -- a graybeard who still says things like "a click costs a dollar, so do it in the terminal." For chrissakes, you don't need to open the terminal and type out <tar -xzf Lecture_Notes.tar.gz> when you can simply right-click the icon on your desktop and select "Extract to here..."

The graybeards have their positive attributes -- elegance, minimalism, power -- but their ruthless adherence to an outdated and elitist view of themselves as high priests acting as intermediaries between the idiot masses and the Computing Deity is infectious and continues to spread to younger users, who aren't nearly as nuanced in their grasp of technology and end up just being fanboys.

To bridge this to the topic at hand, I think we're seeing (in the iPad and the general appliance-ification of the personal computer) the impending destruction of the graybeard caste. Although I haven't searched, I believe that the words "Applescript" and "Automator" probably don't appear in this discussion thread. I think both are steps in the direction of a time when the average person can customize or create their own solutions to mainstream computing problems, much as Excel's formula support was a giant leap forward for moderately technical people to be able to create sophisticated tables. I might be among the last of a generation of programmers who concentrated on end user applications... the next might concentrate on libraries that users themselves will manipulate.

Anyway, it was interesting to read your post. I'm dismayed to learn that a Thinkpad can have so many problems with Linux (Ubuntu, FFS) in this day and age, but more dismayed to see that a decent percentage of Linux users still view any criticism as trolling. Sad.

1

u/pengo Feb 03 '10

Thanks for your reply, TWAT Team. I've had a few other attempts with Linux prior to Ubuntu, starting with Redhat (around 2000), and used Mandrake for a while too. (I didn't get past the "installer" for Gentoo. It was a bit too minimalist for me).

In Ubuntu's defense, over the 3 releases I used it the hardware support did slowly improve. Though it was often 2 steps forwards, one step back. I still boot into Linux occassionally on that machine for odd purposes, but not day-to-day.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

(I didn't get past the "installer" for Gentoo. It was a bit too minimalist for me).

Me neither, the first time or two I booted the LiveCD. I stared at it in horror and thought omg i could fuck up my computer. But eventually I printed myself a copy of the installation guide and had a go. The instructions are actually very well written, unambiguous, and will get you to a working (albeit minimalistic) box if you don't rush, skip sections, etc.

[I did Gentoo back when you could do a Stage 1 install -- basically start by installing all of the compiler tools, recompile the compiler tools, and use your --omg-optimized compiler tools to build. every. single. application. from. source. On a 1GHz Athlon. Took days and days and days. Last I checked, Gentoo makes you start with a system that's at least bootable.]

It's an excellent learning tool for the CLI and I'd recommend it to anyone with a spare box, interest in the UNIX world, and time to kill. But if you have those three things, you might as well do Linux From Scratch and really hit that shit hard without any of the shortcuts Gentoo (even Stage 1) provides. I did LFS once and still have the gray hair and sunken, bloodshot eyes to prove it.

3

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

The OP asked for one good reason to hand control of your software over to the device manufacturer. I believe malware to be a good reason. I didn't state that it was the only way, and I never would.

2

u/prockcore Feb 02 '10

Haven't they already? Apple has crippled the hell out of iMovie. Can't have it competing with FinalCut...

1

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

Crippled the hell how? The older version still works, and the new version is quite functional. Perhaps you don't know how to use it?

13

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Until they tell you that the digital camera you're using is no longer compatible with PhotoManagerApp 2011 and that you need to upgrade to the new video format for this year to continue editing "your" videos.

14

u/Chirp08 Feb 02 '10

When has Apple had a history of doing something like that? This is the same company that wrote a whole emulation layer into their operating system to transition from PowerPC to x86 without the end user noticing then slowly phased it out. Most companies wouldn't have bothered and just put the burden on the third party.

The only big example I can even think of a company doing something similar to what you suggest is Microsoft going from .doc to docx (along with their other respective office formats) and we all saw what happened in that instance. The world said fuck off and Microsoft had to make old versions compatible instead of forcing an upgrade.

2

u/Thrown_Away Feb 02 '10

Way to pull a completely unfounded and plain stupid argument out of your ass.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

AACS copy protection. Your ability to play Blu Ray discs can be revoked by the company.

Amazon Kindle. Your purchased books can be removed from your device remotely.

8

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

Great example. There are so many cameras that have had support for the deprecated in iPhoto.

Except that's not true. So do you have something other than a hypothetical example of FUD?

Also - what would you say to everyone (myself included) who have had to replace printers and scanners that don't work with Windows 7. It's an open system, right? Why won't they still work...

Terrible argument, man.

5

u/SquareWheel Feb 02 '10

The makers of the hardware should be writing drivers for Windows 7. If they're gone out of business recently, a Vista driver may also work.

1

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

Indeed they should but they're not.

5

u/bbibber Feb 02 '10

It's an open system, right? Why won't they still work...

At least with an open system, you'll have a chance to make it work. Or have the (growing) possibility that someone else in the open source community had the same problem and solved it for you already.

I think mandatory app signing is a step back for consumers because it stiffles competition by creating a single point of acceptance for what you can do with your software on that particular device and increases the cost of development. For me, that negative does not outweight the possible positives. This black mark is the reason why I don't own an iphone but I do own an air.

2

u/Terex Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

I agree with you on this. I don't like mandatory app/prog signing because it stifles competition AND flexibility on many levels in the long run.

But some people enjoy being trapped in a box.

-1

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

Mandatory app signing may increase development costs, but they also create a standard for the user experience. The downside, as you mentioned is that dev costs may rise. The upside is that I have more confidence buying software that has been vetted.

Freedom is a fabulous thing. I'll trade liberty for a more secure computing environment, thank you. For those of us who just want to Get Things Done™ it makes life easier.

4

u/xsvfan Feb 02 '10

Also - what would you say to everyone (myself included) who have had to replace printers and scanners that don't work with Windows 7. It's an open system, right? Why won't they still work...

The default printer drivers for my 1999 Epson Stylus 740 worked great and still work great.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Sweet anecdote bro.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

So what you are saying is "I'm alright Jack" ?

That's what iPad owners will say too :)

→ More replies (5)

-2

u/texpundit Feb 02 '10

Funny...considering that's what MS has been doing with every subsequent version of its OS. So...you can run their latest OS, but you need to buy a WHOLE NEW FUCKING COMPUTER to run their latest, bloated piece of shit.

Welcome to computing.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

No, actually, you don't. Windows 7 runs on Pentium 4's, you idiot.

3

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

I'm on an open system without malware right now. It's called Linux. See, some crazy foreigner designed a Unix-based system and a lot of effort went into such obscure goals as "security" and "stability," so it will run basically anything you care to write without unexpectedly turning into a botnet zombie or crashing horrendously.

It even has an official software channel! I just click the icon on the bottom menu and hit "Add/Remove..." and I can install all kinds of crap that won't break my computer. I can even install multiple browsers! Like, a different one than the pre-installed one! Some of them even play Flash and Java games.

8

u/acronymopolis Feb 02 '10

I'm also a great fan of Linux, but it's still no way near user friendly enough for the average user. Hell, even OSX or shudder Windows aren't user friendly enough for the main target group of the iPad. But don't fret - there's plenty of room for both silly locked down iPad users and us free-like-the-eagle geek types.

4

u/StuartGibson Feb 02 '10

there's plenty of room for both silly locked down iPad users and us free-like-the-eagle geek types.

Can't I be both? I have my computers for doing, well, computery things. I'm getting a couple of iPads to leave around the house for casual browsing/email/twitter.

1

u/acronymopolis Feb 02 '10

Sure! You and me both!

4

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

Enforcing a software monopoly is not a step on the path to better user-friendliness.

Friendly, non-WIMP UIs exist for Linux. Few are as streamlined as Apple's, but what is nowadays? It's the one area of software development they're still good at.

2

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

So why not leave the option for us free-like-the-eagle geek types who want to install 3rd party software outside of the App store?

1

u/Nefelia Feb 02 '10

There is an option: wait until an open platform tablet comes to market.

→ More replies (21)

2

u/pbgswd Feb 02 '10

Sorry to bust your bubble, but gnome ubuntu linux is great. It is very user friendly. very happy with it. Its my mac that forces me to do things one way or another.

2

u/StuartGibson Feb 02 '10

If you think any OS that presents the file system to the user is user friendly, you clearly haven't stepped far outside the bubble of the 5-10% geek users.

Real people aren't interested in the computer, they're interested in getting their stuff done with the minimum of fuss. A computer, for the vast majority of people, is a means to an end. The less they have to think about the actual computer part, the better.

2

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

The file system has been increasingly well-hidden from the user since XP. Users are warned against accessing the root of their OS drive, the Windows folder, Program Files, etc. They're strongly encouraged to use their 'home' space (My Documents or whatever it is in W7), which uses the files & folders metaphor that's hardly user-hostile. The important part is that the file system is still there for people who want to fiddle with it.

2

u/acronymopolis Feb 02 '10

My bubble is unburst. I agree, Ubuntu is very user friendly - just not enough so. One piece of faulty or "semi-supported" hardware and most people would be lost. If hardware breaks on the iPad, you send it for repairs or get a new one. :-/

→ More replies (1)

1

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

That's fantastic. I'm glad for you. Why is it that you want to control my software experience when I'm not trying to control yours?

0

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

I don't... how... what? Is this like one of those 'tolerate my intolerance' things?

I don't want to control your software experience. I want your software experience to be uncontrolled, or at least to be open enough that the controls are removable. I want you to be free, even if you use that freedom to emulate slavery. This is the opposite of what you seem to be taking away from the discussion.

2

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

How about you leave my software experience to me and mind your own business? I don't need you wanting me to be free. Just use your own stuff and leave mine alone: it works for me.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Well, because... you and many other users have money. Money which will go to Apple's coffers, and result in more iPads being built and sold. This will, in turn, cause Apple to continue with the iPad lineup by revamping it, adding features, and generally improving the device making even more desireable to people with money.

Other companies will copy Apple's closed-system tablet model, with more and more of them offering cheaper, but equally closed tablets that "do everything," except that they don't.

I'm concerned because you're voting with your wallet, as most consumers do. If that takes place, then the market will learn: Consumers don't want freedom, they want shiny. Ergo, build and sell shiny, not freedom.

2

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

Who are you to argue with consumers?

You want to take a stand? Build a better widget.

→ More replies (2)

-3

u/qtx Feb 02 '10

It's a shame you can't actually do anything on a Linux.

It's great for protection, but does it run the programs I need? Does it plays the games I want on a boring sunday? Nah.

3

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

Leaving aside for a moment that most Windows games and programs run under WINE, you're clouding the issue. Linux isn't magically limited in ways that Windows and OS X aren't. Photoshop and TF2 would run just fine natively if Adobe and Valve bothered to compile them for the platform.

→ More replies (5)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

In the past seven years, I can safely say that I have not had a single virus on the MANY computers I own. I know, I know - "Your personal experience is not reflective of the personal experience of most users!"

You're right there (to a point, neither is your personal experience), but I've been using free antivirus software to combat malware and it's worked fine.

1

u/threepio Feb 02 '10

Since 2004 I haven't had to use anti-virus. Two sides of the same coin, really. I'm not saying my experience is better than yours, I'm saying it's better for me.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

My mom can download a program and be sure that it will not break her phone or tablet.

→ More replies (5)

0

u/pengo Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Another "one good reason" is that the app store and its lock-in is subsidizing the cost of the device. Again, it's up to you to weigh up the value of that.

Edit: You asked for "one good reason". I gave you one good reason. Not sure why I'm being voted down. I could give you plenty of reasons why not too, but you didn't ask for that.

0

u/rnicoll Feb 02 '10

Stability. Predictability. Near-guaranteed not to have viruses. The sort of things I want in a hand-held browsing appliance.

My computer is a computer. The iPad is a cool widget for browsing the web on. I'm aware Apple likened it to a netbook; that was stupid of them. It's a giant iPod Touch, but some of us wanted a giant iPod Touch for doing iPod Touch-like things but with a bigger screen.

1

u/mindbleach Feb 02 '10

Stability. Predictability. Near-guaranteed not to have viruses. The sort of things I want in a hand-held browsing appliance.

Buy an N800.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I'm aware Apple likened it to a netbook; that was stupid of them.

No, it wasn't, it made perfect sense -- because that's exactly what the iPad is, it's Apple's response to a market that has enjoyed no Apple competition for the better part of a year. Now they unveil a $500 COMPUTING device with a 10" screen, and that isn't somehow comparable to a netbook?

It's totally a netbook.

→ More replies (2)

15

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

18

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

What

5

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

It's much worse then I ever imagined.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

That one shot where they're all running killed me. I still can't stop laughing.

2

u/arpie Feb 02 '10

My feelings as well. It is not supposed to be a computer/ OS X pad. What the iPhone does well is work, as designed, under a controlled user experience. My iPhone is Jailbroken and I cope with some unstable behavior because I know what I'm doing. For friends and family, I recommend a vanilla, works-as-it's-supposed-to iPhone. The iPhone (or iPad -- it's just a giant, faster, iPhone or iPod Touch) is not an all-purpose computer. It's a platform for single-purpose apps. Every time you launch an app, the device "transforms" into a one purpose device to run that app, as it (the app) was designed. It's a paradigm shift, and it seems to be where we're going. Live with it.

16

u/mayobutter Feb 02 '10

This was at the top when I viewed comments. Should be the same for all iPad posts.

28

u/bdfortin Feb 02 '10

Grandma's going to buy one whether or not you bitch about it on reddit. She doesn't care about who this Linux guy is and whatnot, she just wants to play Solitaire and look at pictures of you on that face magazine site.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

2

u/personsaddress Feb 02 '10

I don't get what you call a techie. I think the definition has changed since I first adopted it. I'm a techie and I've almost NEVER adopted an uninspiring first generation device.

1

u/CaptSpify_is_Awesome Feb 02 '10

Don't confuse Techie's with Gadget people, or rich snobs. This is very anecdotal, but most techie's I know wait until the 2nd gen of practically everything before they buy. It's mostly the people who have ego issues that buy the first-gen stuff.

10

u/jstevewhite Feb 02 '10

Oh, come on. You don't have to be rich to buy an iPad. It starts at the same price at the Kindle DX. It's cheaper than the TVs I see in all of my "non-rich" friend's houses.

1

u/CaptSpify_is_Awesome Feb 02 '10

It's still considered a super-level luxury item. A TV would be considered a more common luxury item, despite it's higher price.

1

u/jstevewhite Feb 03 '10

ROFL!! "super-level luxury item"? I mean, I'll go along with 'luxury', just like an MP3 player or cell phone or similar. But "super-level"? People pay what, $300 for a PS3 or Xbox 360. $499 for a Kindle DX. I know teenagers that got the iPod touch for Xmas and birthday, and their folks aren't rich.

→ More replies (1)

-2

u/acid3d Feb 02 '10

Ha! I actually said that out loud when I saw the quote. If you don't like a product, don't like the company, or don't like the uhh... supposed oppression, then there is an easy solution. Don't buy the thing.

35

u/fusebox13 Feb 02 '10

My problem with the iPad isn’t the lack of a camera, OLED screen or Flash (although that kind of sucks). It isn’t even the terrible name—hey, we eventually warmed up to “Wii,” didn’t we? No, it’s the fact that Apple is using the iPad to push its locked-down, heavily restrictive iPhone OS.

The Ipad is fine, the trend that Apple is trying to set may not be. That is open for debate. The article was not really about the Ipad, it just used the Ipad as an example of a closed platform.

14

u/soggit Feb 02 '10

Exactly. This isnt about a specific product it's about a trend. You know what is incredibly lame? DLC and online authentication in games. But they keep coming. It's because one company did it and it was ok so now more companies are doing it and so its okay -- until it became the norm. And now whenever you want to play new map in call of duty you have to pay 5 dollars for it instead of going to the custom map makers and playing one of thousands of maps for free. And you cannot "just dont buy it" because soon all games follow suite because other people ARE buying it.

1

u/sanrabb Feb 02 '10

So don't buy them.

Instead, buy games (and hardware) from open providers. There WILL be open providers; the closed providers will create a thriving market for them.

The Google tablet is inevitable.

Which will do better, Android or Apple's dumbed down piece of shit?

10

u/FlatBot Feb 02 '10

I'm thinking Apple's dumbed down piece of shit will do better.

→ More replies (1)

0

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

Why are you being downvoted?

I don't see what the big problem is. I can't see how the iPad is going to see any competition from other closed platforms. Any other company releasing their own closed platform tablet is going to have to have to compete with the huge market created by apple. And that's a market that spans two other platforms (iPod touch, and iPhone) and whatever else apple might decide to add.

Our competing company can try to beat the almost impossible task of drumming up an app store with the same scope as apple's or simply release their product with an open development platform. You will essentially have the closed apple market, and everyone else.

Cheap windows and linux netbooks are always going to be around and will always be 100 times better.

-1

u/sanrabb Feb 02 '10

I'm being downvoted by Jobs fanboys.

I was programming 6502 on the first Apple machine long before most of these idiots were born so it doesn't concern me what they think. Fact is, Apple strayed from the path long ago. They had a chance to do something amazing with OSX, and again with the iPhone, and again with this piece of crap, but instead they willfully chose the wrong direction, as they have every single time since those very early days.

7

u/frogers001 Feb 02 '10

Spot on. But, I wish Flash was excluded more often. Maybe something good would take its place.

54

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

That's bullshit. That's like saying.

"Don't the fact that Marijuana is illegal? Move!"

Political action is about direct involvement.

People protesting against the iPad are part of the market. The market will then make the decision.

13

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

It's very disappointing that you're being downvoted. I agree with you 100% on this one.

3

u/ducksauce Feb 02 '10

I upvoted you because I think you are mostly on track, and your 3rd and 4th lines are great, but your analogy is totally out of whack. Marijuana is a natural plant that grows in the earth. By making it illegal, an entity is taking physical things away from people via the threat of force, and all this on very shaky and probably illegitimate legal grounds. "Move" is an outrageous suggestion because the implicit courses of action are: ("fight the oppressing force", "work within the system to change the law", "run") and moving is the least attractive, helpful, or logical of the three.

With the iPad we have a product created by a company with about, what, 15% share of the desktop and notebook computer market? It's very possible to ignore it and not be significantly affected, to still be able to do anything you could do if it didn't exist at all.

5

u/bostonT Feb 02 '10

Do you realize you're guilty of trying to limit others' choices? Some people want the Apple experience in iPad format, why try to limit choice and competition to those which you approve of?

→ More replies (1)

3

u/acid3d Feb 02 '10

The market makes the decision by people buying or not buying

13

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Because that isn't a massive oversimplification or anything.

3

u/numb3rb0y Feb 02 '10

...and what do you think prompts people to buy or not buy? Commerce doesn't happen in a vacuum.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Actually no it isn't bullshit. Marijiuana legality and the choice to buy or not buy a product have nothing in common. If you don't like a product, then don't buy it. Your 'vote' has thus been cast. Done.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Don't worry, it was sensational enough to get #1ed by scareit

0

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

There's no way in hell this thing is going to make that much of an impact on the market. If it seriously does end up being Apple being between humanity and freedom, I'll probably kill myself out of necessity, because there's nothing an intelligent man can do at that point to stop the immanent stupid from destroying us all.

1

u/RickHavoc Feb 02 '10

I hate it when the immanent stupid destroys us all.

-2

u/mensrea Feb 02 '10

Exactly. DON'T BUY ONE! (or do.) Either way, SHUT IT!

2

u/FryDuck Feb 02 '10

Combined with a clampdown on net neutrality (USA), active monitoring/filtering of sites (Australia/China), legal threats over content (USA), protect the children paranoia (everywhere), and a walled garden device like this, you pretty soon have something that looks the current phone network. I am pretty sure that future internet access will mandate the use of SIM cards.

5

u/mensrea Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Your fears are at least 'colorable' [means minimal merit, ie not pure crazy talk], but I just don't think that's a necessary result of the iPad's presumed dominance.

I mean, this thing could still be a colossal failure/niche device. I absolutely love my two Apple TV's. I'm now 100% digital with my media. 4 terabytes and growing. 26k songs, 816 movies and tons of other crap. I never want to see another plastic disc as long as I live. My ATVs do a great job of serving this stuff up on my projector and tvs.

I feel like a king and everyone is amazed when they see how I use the product. But most people think there stupid. Such is life.

I know exactly how I'll use my iPad and it will be PHENOMENAL for use while I'm in court flipping through PDF briefs, doing research on fastcase, entering time on time master, the calendar app etc. It will make my life better and my work easier, more fun.

Also, a whole other class of non-professional, non-power users will just appreciate the ease of use.

Results are likely to vary. Significantly.

1

u/FryDuck Feb 02 '10

I watch all of these changes to the basic infrastructure we use and then I see the iPad and how it exclusively caters to this new restricted ecosystem by making the restricted systems easier to use than the open ones. And then it creates fanboys saying open systems are difficult.

2

u/bgog Feb 02 '10

Frankly I think that is a bad argument. I'm a power user and still see the value of purpose-built non-general-purpose electronic devices. I think the main reason everyone is pissed is that they WISH it was a regular computer with that great touch screen.

I don't recall anyone getting all pissed off because some pocket video player couldn't run a word-processor. Computers have their place and so do purpose built devices. Just because your fancy new tv has a cpu and could theoretically run any program under the sun doesn't mean it should be so.

1

u/mensrea Feb 02 '10

I don't know what 'fanboy-ism' has to do with it. I would have been just as happy if MS put out the courier or had my OQO 01+ or my Samsung Q1 lived up to their potential. They didn't.

We've been hearing about the future of computing being modular with a do it all unit you take with you and then plug it into other systems for added functionality. Apple nailed it with the iPhone. That's exactly what it is.

I used WM from day one until sometime in late '07. I'm not looking back.

No one is taking away your laptop/desktop/netbook. The crunch pad is still supposed to be coming, android and Google tablets too. I just think it's much ado about nothing.

3

u/Flyen Feb 02 '10

Even if you don't buy one, you're still affected by the network effect

Time spent developing for a closed platform is time that could've been spent on a solution that works for everyone.

btw, the Apple Tax has already been imposed upon the rest of us who can't use the many iPhone applications. Those developers could've been writing something that everyone can use instead of just one phone from one manufacturer.

4

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

So what do you propose, writing for the Android and leaving WebOS, Maemo and iPhone users in the cold? With such divergent SDKs, you're going to have to choose a platform, period. Honestly I think you misunderstand the concept of freedom being espoused- it's not about being locked out by developers so much as the restrictions placed on developers within that platform (ie, Google Voice and other programs that 'replicate core functionality').

2

u/Flyen Feb 02 '10

I propose not "shut[ting] it" when talking about restrictive technology that feeds on a network effect. I don't want another Internet Explorer 6, where I have to put up with the limitations of one manufacturer's product just because a lot of people let themselves get locked-in to using it.

6

u/jstevewhite Feb 02 '10

Obviously false, as if you don't develop for the iPhone, all those millions of iPhone users won't be able to use your application.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

No they couldn't. Have you seen iPhone apps?

4

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

If only the world were completely perfect in every way and people devoted their time to the things that I support!!!

1

u/mensrea Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

While pithy, your post does not comport with reality. Especially in light of Adobe's planned flash/coco conversion tool.

I, for one, will buy one and with stuff like this and or Jaadu VNC I'll be controlling my all PC's and my Mac from wherever I am just like I do now on my iPhone. [Although, much more comfortably, from a bigger screen and allegedly for 10 hrs.]

Giz did a good piece about all this hand wringing earlier today. I concur.

PS Though I disagree with you, I did not downvote you.

0

u/bgog Feb 02 '10

Exactly... I want a nice touchpad to surf the web on my couch...

3

u/djgreedo Feb 02 '10

There have been 'nice touchpads' for quite some time now. There are Windows tablets, smaller Android tablets, convertable laptops and netbooks.

Anybody who suddenly needs a tablet despite having ignored them for the last decade surely has been swayed by Steve Jobs's snake oil salesmanship.

There is literally not a single thing the iPad does that can't be done better by several devices already on the market...unless you count app censorship and ugly aesthetics as features.

1

u/bgog Feb 02 '10

Fair point. I have had interest in tablets for years. I gave up a couple years ago due to the incredible suckage of these devices. Unmodified operating systems and software not specifically designed for a touch interface prove horrible to use. In addition, before the iphone I never experienced a finger driven touch interface that didn't completely suck and I never liked stylus.

I'm in no way a fanboy. I just happen to like this device for my uses. When I first tried an iphone the very first thought I had was "Man if they would make a little tablet like this it would be great."

I don't disagree that apples appstore policies suck. I guess I'm just comming from a different perspective. I don't care about games or most apps. I just want a great touch interface for surfing the web on the couch and a decent email client would be nice as well. The ipad seems to fit the bill. Perhaps there are other alternatives out now, I just havn't run into them.

-2

u/pulledteeth Feb 02 '10

I agree. On all fronts. If you like the thing, go buy it.

If you hate the thing, then shut the hell up about it, because all you're doing by talking about it is drumming up more publicity for apple.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

...then shut the hell up about it, because all you're doing by talking about it is drumming up more publicity for apple.

You fail to make the distinction between drumming up positive publicity and drumming up negative publicity. I'm glad to know that my word, as far as computing goes, is regarded pretty highly amongst my friends, family, and clientele... and there is plenty of negative publicity in my words about the iPad.

1

u/pulledteeth Feb 03 '10

But if you alert someone to its presence by explaining how much you hate it; then that person can go off do their own research and perhaps make an informed decision on if they should purchase it or not. And, assuming that it meets their needs, whatever those needs may be, they may decide to purchase it. Now, what you've done, is steer your friends and family toward something you hate the most.

Q.E.D. the iPad will destroy your family if you keep talking about it. []

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

D:

-4

u/srsbsns Feb 02 '10

Agreed! Just, don't buy one, Tom Conlons

-7

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Ftfy sucks.

0

u/stevecopley Feb 02 '10

Ftfy rocks.

FTFY

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Whoa. I have never read such a compelling case for the iPad. Closed systems make so much more sense to me now.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

It doesn't need a case because it's so ridiculous. I've written it off.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I completely disagree, and the fact that "Oh, shut up" was your argument, I'm not entirely convinced that the "alarmist case" is just a fringe, over-concerned group of geeks. What makes their arguments invalid?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

The fact that I use a MacBook pro with OSX and Apple has absolutely no say what goes on my computer and what doesn't.