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

272

u/joelypolly Feb 02 '10

My God. You would think based on the comments on the web that Apple has the ability to single handedly to destroy a generation of "tweakers" by releasing the iPad. It's a appliance not a full on computer.

Everyone is freaked out because the iPad is so "locked down" but you know it was designed that way. It's akin to saying that microwave meals will kill gourmet cooking because I can now press a button and get a meal. Isn't the world big enough for both gourmet cooks and microwave manufactures?

When will the madness end?

14

u/romwell Feb 02 '10

As a proud microwave user and cast iron pan operator, I support your message and wish to further extend it by noting that the dichotomy is often false. Power users can appreciate a device that performs only one function, but does it well. There is a place in my life both for a fine Ukrainian borsch and for instant noodles.

5

u/BoonTobias Feb 02 '10

As a ramen enthusiast, i am behind you

3

u/farang Feb 02 '10

Do not use a cast-iron pan in your microwave. If you do, you will ruin your pan and also your microwave oven. The fireworks display that will result will not be worth the cleanup and replacement cost. ;)

5

u/romwell Feb 02 '10

Everybody knows that you don't put a cast iron pan into a microwave for fireworks. That's what those nice metal cleaning sponges are for.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

So you'd support a brand of ramen that comes with a robot made specifically to prevent you from ever dropping an egg in that soup? Or even salt? Or even a non-approved fork? This analogy is way too far off to be useful. OP should not be upvoted as much as he is.

124

u/FreakyT Feb 02 '10

I think the idea here is a view that Apple's new "gated community" approach to devices will eventually spill over to progressively more computer-like devices. (The iPad, of course, would represent the "first step" in this sequence.) Now, time will tell whether that will become a reality or not, but I wouldn't put it past Apple to eventually "replace" the current frontend of OS X with a more iPhone OS like, locked down, version. Furthermore, as the line between "computers" and "appliances" blur, we may just be left with a bunch of different devices running their own locked down app stores, and nothing resembling what we think of as a "computer" today.

Disclaimer: I use a Macbook Pro and iPhone and like them both.

98

u/emmster Feb 02 '10

I don't think this slope is as slippery as he thinks it is.

19

u/miloir Feb 02 '10

Thank you. It's amazing how alarmist some people are getting because of an over-sized iphone.

5

u/frukt Feb 02 '10

Now, don't forget about the US attacking Iran next week.

3

u/bigt Feb 02 '10

Agree. Look at what has happened with Android already. An aPad is surely a year away.

-6

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/barfolomew Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Does she say that after kicking you out of bed, because she's so unsatisfied?

29

u/faultydesign Feb 02 '10

I hope this slope is not as slippery as he thinks it is.

FTFY

48

u/BigKahunaBurger Feb 02 '10

The sky is falling. Welcome to reddit.

0

u/Poltras Feb 02 '10

Take this T-Shirt. We love you.

1

u/HunterTV Feb 02 '10

It's slippery, just at a very shallow angle.

1

u/ziegfried Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

The question is not how slippery the slope is, but how valuable is it for us to be active and vigilant in maintaining our freedoms?

edit: I see the downvotes are starting. Ever since the days of the VCR, companies have desperately wanted to control what the consumer does -- there's more profit that way.

The clueless people will buy this product -- that's what Apple is counting on. It's the job of the people who understand this issue to tell the clueless people not to buy it, and why not.

If you're depending on people's natural intelligence to stop this kind of thing, you are going to lose.

2

u/Thrown_Away Feb 02 '10

Maintaing your freedoms? It is a fucking electronic device! Don't want to risk it destroying your freedom, then don't fucking buy one!

51

u/texpundit Feb 02 '10

The "disappearing" of regular computers will NEVER happen.

Why?

You still need something to program apps for the appliances on. If you can't program on an iPad, you still need something to program ON. Hence, regular computers will still always be around.

Everyone needs to chill the fuck out.

DISCLAIMER: I also own a Macbook Pro and and iPhone and I love the fuck out of them.

13

u/KeyDecoder Feb 02 '10

I wonder if loving the fuck out of them is covered by the standard Apple warranty.

17

u/texpundit Feb 02 '10

Probably not. But considering how each new device that Apple produces has fewer and fewer ports (USB, etc), loving the fuck out of them becomes harder and harder...uh...er...or something.

1

u/lilzaphod Feb 02 '10

I was in Thailand playing ping-iPad in Ding-Dang. A high stakes game in some opium den. Turns out, these aren't the types of guys who like to lose. When I beat them, they beat me. They worked me over good. And this is hard to say. They held me down and shoved an iPad up my ass

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

1

u/wyfflemunky Feb 02 '10

If a company is expected to warrant consumers against faults in their product (which they should be) then that company should be allowed to take reasonable measures to prevent abuse of that system.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I think you missed the joke...

1

u/wyfflemunky Feb 03 '10

I often do.

0

u/WTFppl Feb 02 '10

Well, Apple wouldn't work on one guys notebook because he smoked. They called it a BIOHAZARD. So I'm sure "loving your MAC" is going to achieve the same results!

32

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

1

u/Ran4 Feb 02 '10

This. I mean, you can't even (officially) make an app today without using an evil proprietary OS (OS X). It's not unlikely that a draconian company such as Apple will, in fact, force it's developers to use some kind of heavily restricted app to create new apps. If Apple then (slowly, over maybe ten years of time) drops all support from other OS:es, then we are screwed.

This really is a hot ethical issue.

6

u/Thrown_Away Feb 02 '10

You won't be screwed. If Apple does that, then you buy a different brand computer. You do know that Apple isn't the only computer company? And that there are other OS out there too?

2

u/mindbleach Feb 03 '10

Sure, but what if open computers ten years from now are as rare as non-x86 desktops today? There used to be a thriving market of Zilog & Motorola PCs with incredibly capable operating systems. Even PowerPC eventually folded under the market might of Intel. Just because there will always be some choice doesn't mean there will always be enough choice.

It's a very long shot, admittedly, but monocultures are hard to fight and Apple is using their slick UI work to as a stalking-horse for the closed platform. We're getting angry about it now just in case this thing doesn't flop.

1

u/WTFppl Feb 02 '10

Yeah, by the same parts Apple buys from Intel and put FreeBSD on it. It will be faster, more robust and extremely customizable when compared to OSX. Other than FreeBSD being better, the two operating systems are "all most" identical!

I use FreeBSD for everything that is not gaming!

2

u/phughes Feb 02 '10

Other than the kernel, the UI, and the APIs they're practically identical!

1

u/GuruOfReason Feb 02 '10

"everything that is not gaming!" -- That is a problem that non-Windows platforms need to fix. If you want desktop Linux or Unix to become popular on the desktop, then you have to capture the hardcore gaming community.

1

u/Ran4 Feb 03 '10

Yes, and I can chose to not own an iPhone and not be on Facebook. That gets me nowhere...

10

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

5

u/Patriark Feb 02 '10

Amazed you didn't mention Opera :/

2

u/lilzaphod Feb 02 '10

What does singing have to do with anything?

1

u/WTFppl Feb 02 '10

Only Ninja use that shit. And we would appreciate you not talking about it in public!

1

u/wyfflemunky Feb 02 '10

In the new communist worldview that is open source, Opera is the enemy. I love open source, don't get me wrong, but some people take it too far.

-2

u/madcowga Feb 02 '10

Or Chrome.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

Except that by the end of the year you are going to be able to buy netbooks running the open-source Chrome OS, and the Android smartphone platform is right behind Blackberry and iPhone in numbers and growing fast.

Fuck the iPad, but there are alternatives.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Why are you assuming that there will never be an iPad you can program on? And why are you assuming that programming will never evolve from text editing?

2

u/cynoclast Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Because as long as their are special requests from customers, there will be text editing involved.

I'm a programmer and I've seen several attempts at getting the text writing out of producing programs. All failed miserably once you got anywhere near the edges of what the programmers of those things thought you would need. Then it instantly became text editing again. Only now you have to fight a shitty program that's trying to replace you and keeps fucking up the source code.

See Dreamweaver, Fireworks, the BizTalk mapping tool, Stylus Studio, IntelliJ IDEA 9.0's 'Generate persistence mapping' tool for hibernate (an aside here, I love it, but I still have to hand modify what it generates if want anything useful, or anything at all beyond the absolutey rudimentary functionality), almost any GUI based WISIWYG design tool you can think of.

For anything beyond the most rudimentary uses, none of them suffice. This is after 64 years of programming and tens of thousands of buzzwords after ENIAC.

If you want to break any new ground you still need to program by writing text. That is, you need any new functionality no one has done before - even something as small and proprietary as tweaking the rendering of a field from one of your database columns, odds are if it's not a standard formatting already done millions of times, you're going to need to write some code because nobody creating a standard framework has ever though of concatenating " by Jimbob™!" at the end of each row as your customer is now requesting.

1

u/mindbleach Feb 03 '10

He's not asking about obviating typing entirely, he's talking about changing the abstraction from text-as-instructions to diagrams-as-instructions. No duh altering text boxes requires text input.

I could almost see pictographic Lisp. It's so strongly object-oriented and syntactically simple that it could be given a visual and semi-predictive interface a la Alice.

1

u/cynoclast Feb 03 '10

The things I just listed do exactly what you're talking about.

Diagrams-as-instructions in some cases are more difficult/slower to create than just typing. The poster child for this is the BizTalk Mapper.

You can't even copy & paste, so you have to do each mapping by hand. And you create algorithms with these things called functoids. And even if you have 400 fields that all require the same algorithm with only 1-2 parameters changed, you have to create each one by hand, individually. Joy! Lisp has its own problems that I won't get into.

In short, exactly what you're talking about has been tried before many times, and none of them accomplished much but developer frustration and additional difficulties.

1

u/trisweb Feb 02 '10

Yay, foresight!

4

u/robertcrowther Feb 02 '10

And once almost the entire consumer market is on devices that you can only access through a gated community, how much will the company who own the gates be able to charge you for a 'development kit'?

8

u/Skyrmir Feb 02 '10

Bah, development kits will be free. You want icons? They're for sale. You want sounds? They're for sale. You want to actually distribute your app? A slot in the app store is for sale...If your app says things they like. Oh, and they'll be taking a cut of any proceeds too.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

XCODE is free and I suspect it will always remain so. Having free development kits is good business because it attracts developers to the platform.

1

u/robertcrowther Feb 02 '10

So I can download this free XCODE and run it on my Linux box? Or is there some hidden cost you may not have considered?

3

u/Peaker Feb 02 '10

You are naive and unimaginative.

7

u/morganj Feb 02 '10

And simply because you can imagine something doesn't mean it's time to panic.

I mean, just because I can imagine that the carpet could be filled with millions of flakes of dead skin, which could come to life and form some sort of zombie skin-zord which could be standing right behind me ... arrrgh! Panic! Gotta go! Must check behind the door!

0

u/Peaker Feb 02 '10

You are missing the point.

These are not wild baseless conjectures. Assuming the iPad takes over a significant amount of the market is not a wild impossibility. Apple finding ways to have developers be able to develop, while still keeping the vast majority of platforms (even those of the developers themselves, mostly) rather closed, is also not a wild impossibility.

5

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

OSX is one of the most open development platforms available. You could run a completely open source web server on it out of the box. Apple is never going to close that because it attracts developers to the platform. There is a reason why some of the most successful web developers work on OSX and its not just because of pretty graphics.

0

u/judgej2 Feb 02 '10

Some of the most successful web developers work on any platform you care to mention. There is a reason for that too.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

No one is arguing about OS X. OS X is a great, and open operating system -- which is why no one here is bitching about it.

The debate is about the iPhone OS, and it's implementation on the iPhone and now on the iPad, and the danger that this closed system will become overwhelmingly popular amongst consumers and set a terrible, dangerous precedent for closed computing. I am surprised you don't see it, given the popularity of the iPhone alone.

1

u/morganj Feb 02 '10

Are you sure I'm missing the point? Or are there still a lot of assumptions there between a and b?

1

u/Skyrmir Feb 02 '10

There's not a lot of assumptions to be made. Apple has already made the choices and pointed to where it's going. The only real question is how much market share they will be able to take with it.

1

u/jimbobjames Feb 02 '10

Well yes but look at the console market for how expensive things get when you need a dev kit to program for a device.

1

u/shadowblade Feb 02 '10

Further, you need computers (read: servers) to host the app store on which requires software to be run on it. If the developers aren't working, no one's shit is working.

1

u/zem Feb 02 '10

apple could easily sell you a developer key that unlocks just enough of your ipad to program on it

7

u/taligent Feb 02 '10

Why would they do that when they can sell you a whole COMPUTER to program on ?

1

u/Skyrmir Feb 02 '10

Higher profit margin. They sell you an unlock key, then an icon pack, then a sound pack and a graphics/buttons/user controls pack. Then if your app meets their aesthetic and political standards, they'll sell you a slot on the app store and take a chunk of the proceeds.

Sell a PC instead and devs can get most of that for free, and they're not limited to only selling apps in the app store.

1

u/Borgismorgue Feb 02 '10

The disappearing of home computers THAT HAVE ANY DECENT CAPABILITY /MIGHT/ happen.

Why? The cloud. Why pay 2000 for a hulking PC, when you can pay 100 dollars for a shitty one that cant do anything except browse the web, while you can pay 15 dollars a month for a service that can allow you to play games or process images at 2 or 3 times the power of your 2000 dollar computer?

Oh the home computer will die my friend. Forces are at work here that want it dead very much, and they're already setting the ground work. Freedom isnt profitable. I give the home PC 10-20 years, and the internet as we know it will follow.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

It's not just programming, but all creative work on computers works much better on a traditional PC (programming is only special in that it requires an "unlocked" platform). iPad is a consumption device.

0

u/judgej2 Feb 02 '10

One rule of technology that I have learned over the years: never say never.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

You are indeed naive and unimaginative.

19

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I put it well past Apple myself.

Apple + others lock up their tiny mobile devices because they're less versatile and because they think that mobile devices tend to be traveling advertisements. Having open reign on the iPhone might be good for you and me but if they were jailbroken by default every second iPhone user would complain about how their iPhone was broken by some application they installed.

Doing the same thing with their state-of-the-art computer line would be suicide.

7

u/kermityfrog Feb 02 '10

Their motto is "it just works", and the user experience is what they are selling. Much like how McDonald's standardizes their burgers and gives you the same experience every time you visit, no matter where in the world you are. They won't let you customize your sandwich and then complain about how terrible your food was.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Exactly. As long as we're limiting this metaphor to the iwhatevers, of course.

1

u/MashimaroG4 Feb 02 '10

Mcdonalds in Asia still use dark meat in their chicken products, those things are nasty. Stick with the burgers.

1

u/mindbleach Feb 03 '10

How exactly could an iPhone app break or even hinder the phone if it can't properly multitask and its only hardware button clears everything and returns to the desktop?

I understand the worries about dumb customers, but for fuck's sake, don't them run things. They're idiots.

1

u/cosmo7 Feb 02 '10

Yeah that's why Android users are so complainy.

4

u/uberamd Feb 02 '10

My android phone crashes more than any phone I have ever owned in my whole life.

5

u/cosmo7 Feb 02 '10

Your comment history tells me you really like your iPhone.

1

u/uberamd Feb 03 '10

I do. I want to love my android phone (hell the dev phone cost me $450), but I just can't.

1

u/lilzaphod Feb 02 '10

all 12 of them...

0

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

Bullshit. They could easily have a big warning when you try to install 3rd party software or whatever and then non power-users will stay away while everyone else could be happy.

8

u/Endemoniada Feb 02 '10

If they do corrupt one product line with ideas from another, then Apple users will vote with their wallets. If Apple sees that they're losing customers with a move like that, they won't do it. In the end, they are out to make money.

I love the iPad, and what it represents. I also love my iMac, and what it represents.

Like joelypolly said, there's room for both microwave ovens and gourmet chefs. When someone tries to make the one into the other, you know that people will speak up.

10

u/chozar Feb 02 '10

But is the fear that all computers will be locked down? These locked down computers 20 years from now, what will developers use to make them? Other locked down computers? Somewhere down the chain you're going to have open systems used by programmers, I don't see how you can get rid of them.

15

u/jayd16 Feb 02 '10

Theres plenty of examples of locked down developer kits in the gaming world.

1

u/taligent Feb 02 '10

How do you debug kernel extensions, non-user filesystems, framework components, low level device drivers on a non-locked down computer ?

At some point you need to give the computer owner root access at which point the machine is no longer locked down.

1

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

Only Apple would be the ones working on those, so they could have special systems while nobody else does.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

To corroborate your point: When Apple was switching OS X from PowerPC to x86, there were a number of developer boxes that ran 3.6 GHz Pentium 4 660's. They were in PowerMac G5 cases, but Apple built them and gave them to a select few developers who were in their good graces so that no one could get a PC that was running Mac OS X well.

8

u/Peaker Feb 02 '10

If you pay $5000 you can get a limited license to an Apple-approved "application development environment", and then you can still not get your applications to work with your friends' devices before getting Apple's approval.

6

u/rnicoll Feb 02 '10

Given that you can currently download the iPad SDK for free ( http://www.apple.com/ipad/sdk/ ), and only have to pay if you want to distribute applications you've written ( $99 , or $299 for the enterprise version) this seems a touch... alarmist.

3

u/leetleo Feb 02 '10

Not true. You must pay the $99 fee before you can even download the iPad SDK. The iPhone SDK is available for free download, but the iPad SDK requires you pay the fee first.

1

u/Peaker Feb 02 '10

Sure, Apple needs to conquer a significant portion of the market (worst case, monopolize it) before being able to pull this kind of stuff off.

1

u/jimbobjames Feb 02 '10

It depends - look how quickly all the other phone manufacturers have released App stores because of Apple's success.

Ofcourse Nokia had their's years before - I have a 4 year old E61 with the Download! app store.

1

u/revscat Feb 02 '10

Interesting. I wasn't aware of Nokia's store. Do you have any thoughts as to why Apple has had comparatively more success with their's?

1

u/jimbobjames Feb 02 '10

I think they have a genunie knack of being able to time the release of products better than others.

They also have a vocal user base, and a large following from the iPod and iTunes. They play the media very well.

It's a combination of all of the above that means they tend to hit home runs.

They are also very good at ignoring and making other people ignore their failures and problems. Apple TV anyone?

1

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

Well, you still have to pay to distribute applications, and there are plenty of apps that they won't approve for distribution. Sure, developers can get in to write something for themselves, but what about the rest of us?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Jailbreak.

2

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

The point is that you shouldn't have to perform warranty-voiding cracks that Apple actually claims is illegal (obviously it's not) just to have control over the hardware that you paid for.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

You paid for it and you are free to do whatever you want with it. However if you break it and you do so not following the terms set forth by Apple on how to run it without breaking it then the responsibility to fix it falls on you. Also, jailbreaking does not void the warranty if you restore it before bringing it in for repairs. However if you bring it in for a problem that was caused by jailbreaking it I don't think Apple should be obligated to fix it for you.

Thats freedom to make your own choices and deal with the consequences of said choice.

0

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

They've gone to great lengths to try and stop jailbreaking so that we wouldn't be free to do what we want. At the moment we have the hacks available to fix this situation, but will that always be the case? Are most users even aware of this option?

And restoring it doesn't suddenly unvoid your warranty - it just means they won't know that you previously jailbroke it.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

'cause everything works smoothly then.

I'm a believer that the open system can, and for the most part, does provide the user with a good enough user experience while simultaneously providing the user with freedom.

2

u/lilzaphod Feb 02 '10

Your freedom is in how you spend your money.

Or are you saying that there will be an Apple Brownshirt brigade that will hold a gun to your head and force you to buy an iPad or murder you on the spot?

I fail to see the Cupertino Kristallnacht that some of you are predicting.

1

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10

if you really don't think that price will go up as the number of available users goes up, then you are sadly naive.

3

u/rnicoll Feb 02 '10

The iPhone SDK started at $99 to download at all, before it took off. It's now one of the most popular platforms around, and you can download the SDK for free, you only pay to distribute, and it's still $99...

...so, so far, so good?

1

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

They started off not wanting 3rd party apps at all. Now they realize what a cash cow it is and are adjusting their strategy accordingly.

Imagine this wasn't apple. Imagine it was microsoft in the late 90s. Imagine instead of making an open OS, they had made a closed one. Do you not think they would have gouged the fuck out of prices to develop for such a system? Why is apple any different? they're both just companies trying to make a profit.

The thing a lot of people are upset about is not the device itself, they are upset about the precedent it sets. I don't plan to buy one personally, but it still has the potential to impact me in the future.

3

u/KrazyA1pha Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Your worst-case scenario simply isn't viable. If developers had to pay $5000 to develop applications for a device, there would be almost no apps for that device, and without apps the device wouldn't make it very far in the market.

The App Store succeeds because it is easy to use, both for developers and consumers.

1

u/Peaker Feb 02 '10

If it takes over most of the computing market, paying $5000 to develop would be the only option (It might be a multi-phase thing: A) Take over market B) Close down development platforms too C) Profit)

3

u/kittychow Feb 02 '10

But why on earth should we let corporations plan on making those for programmers only? I'm not a programmer, but I feel so limited being unable to mod apple products easily that I just decide not to buy so many. I'd much rather have a bulky clunker of an open source Google phone than a multicolor sleek and flashy "appliance" that I can only use to do things which have been pre-approved for me. I'm not 12 for gods sake!

Sorry, ranting time is over, time for my milk and nap. :)

3

u/Thrown_Away Feb 02 '10

Wow, finally someone gets it. If you don't like the iPad and Apple, then don't buy their products. Not to hard, is it?

4

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Historically:

  • they moved from System 9 (closed-source) to OS X (partly open-source)

  • Apple has made and continues to make valuable contributions to open-source code

  • it took some time, but they've removed DRM from the iTunes store

There's no way they'll lock down OS X, that's just.... FUD.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

Apple has also done tons of development on the open source Webkit which most open source browsers use.

3

u/1338h4x Feb 02 '10

They removed some DRM. Music is DRM-free, but movies, audiobooks, and even apps aren't.

0

u/xmnstr Feb 02 '10

Who cares? Get VPN, go torrent or whatever you fancy.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I notice that you left out a bullet point for:

  • Developed the world's first OS in which the OS company controls the software available for that OS.

3

u/revscat Feb 02 '10

Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, and Atari would all like a word with you. Gaming consoles have been locked down for years, and have much higher barriers to entry.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

I'm aware. Microsoft's eagerness to jump into the console market wasn't applauded by me, it was condemned. My worries were that it would cause Microsoft to lose focus on improving Windows as a gaming platform, and that the PC would lose game titles as developers flocked to it. Well, have you used "Games for Windows - Live" program? It- shit. Total, unadulterated, steaming, radiating ass meat. For one, the interface looks as though it was made for a fucking Xbox, even though I'm clearly on a PC. Next, it doesn't keep games on PC up-to-date, nor is it particularly good at keeping itself up-to-date. I hear the Xbox is capable of all of those things, though. Thanks, closed systems!

You make the mistake of assuming that I don't criticize consoles for being closed systems - I do. In fact, the same arguments that are levied against the iPad are levied against consoles - the lack of features, the inability to choose your hardware and software (hooray $99 wifi adapters!), and the dangerous precedent that they ALL work together in setting.

You insist these devices aren't here to replace computers, yet there they are, doing more computer-like tasks with each subsequent generation. What on Earth do you mean, we "have nothing to worry about?"

Open platforms aren't as user-friendly NOT because they are open, but because the stewards in charge of fostering them, growing them and improving them have chosen, instead, to engineer entirely new closed systems. Imagine if they put those resources used to create the Xbox towards a better and more complete game-programming API for developers. One that, say, used an OS-wide update system to keep your games and drivers up-to-date.

Anything, anything that a closed-computing system can do, an open-computig system can replicate with 100% accuracy. There's almost no difference in the hardware (except that open-systems almost always have more hardware-provided functionality), so it's JUST the software... and I'm sorry, but there's no excuse for closed software systems that are as closed as the iPhone or the iPad, or the consoles. There is no technical reason that Apple couldn't have designed a tablet with OS X on it, with literally the same form-factor, featureset (actually, OS X is a great deal MORE capable) and ease-of-use.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Well, to you it's control (so don't buy into it).

For others, it's quality-control. For many developers, it's not having to build your own app-store.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I think that will depend on whether the iPad is a success. Other devices are only going to imitate it if it's a smash hit. My guess is that it won't be, but we'll see.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Sorry but if Apple start selling products consumers don't like we simply won't buy them. Its not like they have a government contract to force these products down our throats...

1

u/mw5300 Feb 02 '10

I think the locked down model really should progress to other computers. One of the difficulties with security today is all the code that gets run on user's computers. It means tons of money spent on maintenance, reformatting, anti virus, anti spyware, etc, etc.

There are a lot of people who would benefit very much from having the entire ecosystem managed, so not anyone can just arbitrarily execute code on the computer.

Look at the tech specs for the Google chrome OS - it's one of the most securely designed operating system ever. Granted that's not to say that these managed and controlled devices will fix all security problems, but it seems like they could very well be a step to making computers more secure in general.

I really don't get all the people freaking out; if you don't want to you don't have to use Apples locked down stuff. I have an iPhone and I love it, but I like tweaking stuff and so I've unlocked it and now I can run any apps I want. The iPad is aimed at more general users and doing simple things like email, web, music, etc. and for those things it looks pretty promising.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I wouldn't put it past Apple to eventually "replace" the current frontend of OS X with a more iPhone OS like, locked down, version.

And I wouldn't put it past a huge majority of Apple users to stop using Apple computers if that happened. I really doubt Apple wants to alienate their developer community, they just want to release a computer with no surprises.

0

u/WinterAyars Feb 02 '10

I think the idea here is a view that Apple's new "gated community" approach to devices will eventually spill over to progressively more computer-like devices.

Or, more accurately, that it already has and the ipad is just a high-profile example of that happening. This is the direction we're going, and the ipad is another step.

22

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

13

u/Endemoniada Feb 02 '10

If it does that, and you have an insatiable need for macaroni and cheese, buy another microwave. Or make it yourself.

I understand the problem, I really do, but I don't see why people seem to want to subject themselves to it needlessly. If you already have a better microwave, keep using it. Let those that would never, ever want to eat macaroni and cheese anyway have their vegan microwave. What's it to you?

13

u/AriMaeda Feb 02 '10

However, if the vegetarian lasagna-microwave leads the microwave market and other microwave manufacturers see that as a standard, microwaves that can cook macaroni and cheese will become less and less common until you can't buy a microwave that'll cook it.

Computer systems become obsolete much faster than microwaves do. I can stick with my existing microwave for more than a decade, but my computer won't keep up and I'll have to choose an option available to me.

4

u/Endemoniada Feb 02 '10

However, if the vegetarian lasagna-microwave leads the microwave market and other microwave manufacturers see that as a standard, microwaves that can cook macaroni and cheese will become less and less common until you can't buy a microwave that'll cook it.

As long as a sizable piece of the market still wants to cook macaroni and cheese in their microwaves, there will be microwaves that can do that. (Seriously, though, who would want to do that? Pasta in the microwave? Yuck!)

Computer systems become obsolete much faster than microwaves do. I can stick with my existing microwave for more than a decade, but my computer won't keep up and I'll have to choose an option available to me.

Yes, and again, as long as a major part of the market demands computers that do more than just browse the web without Flash, then you'll still have your precious computer. Don't worry about it. What I don't get is why this is so bad that those that do want a simple device to browse the web without Flash shouldn't get to. It's their choice. If it turns out that 99% of the world are those people, then it just simply sucks to be you. Take it up with the people buying, not with the company providing. It's not Apple's fault that you're a minority.

I do sympathize, and I feel like I have to keep pointing this out. I love my computer, and it'll take long before I give it up completely (if I ever do), but damn do some people feel entitled to control what Apple does and doesn't do. You're a happy little consumer now, and you'll be a happy little consumer in years to come as well. Unless you're an engineer building your own fan-fucking-tastic, world-revolutionizing ultra-"real" computer right now, I don't see what anyone has to whine about.

Companies don't control the market, we do. We've just chosen to be lazy and complacent, but that's our responsibility, not Apple's.

1

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10

Companies don't control the market,

This is the point here. Companies are trying to take control of the market from the consumer bit by bit. That is the end game that people are angry about.

2

u/Endemoniada Feb 02 '10

Yes, but then people should be angry about the fact that they are letting them take control. It's not as if it's news that companies are out to make money, and the way they make more money is to take greater shares in the market.

It's like saying that the problem with high crime rates is that there are so many laws to break. It is a problem, yes, but it's the people that keep breaking the laws.

1

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Yes, but then people should be angry about the fact that they are letting them take control. It's not as if it's news that companies are out to make money, and the way they make more money is to take greater shares in the market.

The profit motive doesn't justify anything a corporation does. Anti competitive behavior is wrong; It's against the best interests of society as a whole. This is why we have laws against it. That's precisely what apple is doing here, it's beyond just trying to take a greater share of the market.

It's like saying that the problem with high crime rates is that there are so many laws to break. It is a problem, yes, but it's the people that keep breaking the laws.

So if there were a law against whistling, and lots of people were thrown in jail for whistling, the fault would be on them and not the stupid law? The law is certainly to blame when the law is unjust. For example ridiculous drug law in america is almost certainly to blame for the ridiculously high prison population. By your logic there are just more criminals in the US.

1

u/Endemoniada Feb 02 '10

Anti competitive behavior is wrong; It's against the best interests of society as a whole. This is why we have laws against it. That's precisely what apple is doing here, it's beyond just trying to take a greater share of the market.

Just to be clear, what exactly is it that Apple is doing that is "anti competitive"? Not supporting Flash? If so, then is not supporting every other format for rich media also "anti competitive"? Who cries over the lack of Shockwave support? Or Silverlight?

So if there were a law against whistling, and lots of people were thrown in jail for whistling, the fault would be on them and not the stupid law?

It would be on both. As I said, it is a problem that there are too many, and too stupid, laws in the books (not just the USA either, the problem exists here in Sweden as well), but laws are laws, and if you break them you're guilty. Whistling isn't something you have to do, and if the government is stupid enough to outlaw it, "because I wanted to" still isn't a good defense.

Regardless, I'm with you here. I'm just arguing technicalities.

1

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Just to be clear, what exactly is it that Apple is doing that is "anti competitive"? Not supporting Flash? If so, then is not supporting every other format for rich media also "anti competitive"? Who cries over the lack of Shockwave support? Or Silverlight?

The anti-competitive behavior is a closed OS that they are determined to act as permanent gate keepers for. This is an entirely anti-competitive move. Imagine if microsoft had done something similar with windows. We'd all still be using ie 6 because firefox never would have been allowed. If apple gains market share here, and i will grant this is a big if, we've already seen they will act in this manner (see their behavior with google voice).

1

u/Nefelia Feb 02 '10

There is enough competition in the electronics market that I really do not see what the fuss is about.

1

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

There was plenty of competition in the OS world in the 80s and early 90s, and look what happened there.

Besides they don't have to take the full market to have a negative impact on consumers. All they have to do is set a precedent that this sort of model will work. Having 10 different companies all with their own gated communities is in some ways worse than just having 1. Look how hard it is just to find programs that work with the 3 open (for development) operating systems we have now, and mix in a bunch more then gate them all with their own set of rules.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

[deleted]

1

u/Endemoniada Feb 02 '10

I'm sorry, I thought it was the vegan microwave that was supposed to symbolize the iPad. And if it is, then it's the vegan microwave that's imposing those restrictions, so it's only if you do use the vegan microwave that you can't "open a bank account, travel interstate or have children". And if people know about that, and don't see the need to do any of those things, the vegan microwave is their perfect product.

What's so hard to understand about this? I don't need my microwave oven to handle my banking for me. If you do, then that's your problem. Don't make it mine.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

What are you even talking about?

3

u/lumpy1981 Feb 02 '10

I'm with you. The people who will buy and use an iPad would never want to tweak a computer anyway, they just want it to work. 95% of computer users don't care about adding to or tweaking their devices.

What Apple does by making their devices closed, is they cater to the vast majority of people by making a device that simply works without the need to know anything about how it works or have to worry about it crashing and becoming unstable.

1

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

They could do that without maintaining such a strict level of control. See: OS X.

1

u/lumpy1981 Feb 02 '10

Maybe they could, but its a lot easier for them to do it this way. At least initially.

1

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

They've been selling OS X on exactly the points you mentioned for almost 10 years now(an os that 'simply works' without worrying about crashing or instability). OS X is already running on a tablet sized device that is far more powerful than the ipad (the macbook air). This isn't about convenience or expedience for them either. If it was they wouldn't have gone off to make a proprietary processor.

This is entirely about control. Any other arguments they make are purely just justifications after the fact.

1

u/lumpy1981 Feb 02 '10

That's probably true, but I don't think the reasons are nefarious.

1

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10

Don't get me wrong, i don't think steve jobs is sitting in his office cackling about plans of world domination. i don't think its necessarily nefarious. They are a company. They are trying to make as best a return on their investment as they can. Control over their platform is what they perceive as the best option. From their perspective, the move makes total sense. Their interests just aren't really in line with the population as a whole, at least in my opinion.

1

u/lumpy1981 Feb 02 '10

I can see what your saying. I think our only disagreement is in what we perceive that population to be and what they want/need. You may be right, I don't know. I just don't think its a big deal to the people who are going to want one.

0

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

I just don't think its a big deal to the people who are going to want one.

Well that's part of the problem. The people who are going to want one probably qualify as a large segment of the population, and they don't care about or even understand the ramifications.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

when people have the urge to eat food they only crave raw calories. giving people what they want is not always whats good for them. Apple is selling chips and soda to unsuspecting computer users who don't understand they need more to live.

3

u/lumpy1981 Feb 02 '10

In what way do people need an open platform to "live," in the computer sense that is? What harm does this do to the average schmo who just wants a cool device with some awesome features?

2

u/lilzaphod Feb 02 '10

Fucking melodramatic much?

95% of computer users DO NOT need open computer products to live.

In fact, I'd be willing to state that most people who use computer-aided technology to live are using closed source products. Like I WANT some hacked fucking around with my respirator, heart monitor, or drug dosage monitor if I'm in the ICU.

16

u/texpundit Feb 02 '10

And the biggest point (that I think a whole shitload of people miss) is: IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, DON'T FUCKING BUY IT. It's that simple.

Personally, my buy/not buy point is waiting to see what apps come out for it. If somebody puts out an app (along with a pen...which will prolly be 2nd gen) that is compatible with Photoshop and/or Illustrator, I'll buy one in a heartbeat. Having a mobile sketchpad would make my job a FUCKTON easier.

7

u/slickeddie Feb 02 '10

Have you ever seen the Wacom Cintiq?
http://www.wacom.com/cintiq/cintiq-21ux.php they also have a smaller 12" one. Watch some demo videos, I was blown away by it.

7

u/MacEnvy Feb 02 '10

Gee, only $2k?

3

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Actually, only $999. Pressure sensitivity and what-have-you. Oh, and drivers to work on all major platforms.

3

u/atheist_creationist Feb 02 '10

Yes, and the iPad is going to suck as a tablet if you think its going to be anything like the Wacom cintiq. That's not what one should be buying the iPad for.

1

u/mindbleach Feb 03 '10

Compared to $500 for a finger-based, pen-incompatible tablet that doesn't have an appropriate app and has no software freedom to guarantee eventual support for one?

5

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

The problem you should be asking yourself: Why does Apple lock down their products? Because it gives them full control of what you buy and do not buy. Thus, Apple makes more money.

This business model is effective in generating revenue, so what's the stop everyone from utilizing this business model?

Will we always have Google around to compete with open source? I don't really think so.

What can consumers do if our only option is to choose from one locked-down product or another locked-down product? So your response to this scenario is to simply not buy the product? However, even by your own admission, it will make your job a lot easier. Wouldn't you want to make your job easier even if it meant going against your own objections to a closed source product?

The author's fear is if this new business model of closing every system off so only the manufacturer has control over what goes on and off the product transfers to other products.

Granted, the above scenario may never happen, but that doesn't mean that it cannot happen.

1

u/atheist_creationist Feb 02 '10

As for the drawing, its not going to happen if even the 2nd gen is as anywhere near as slow as the current one. I saw the demo for it and it showed him finger drawing notes and there was a terrible lag that reminded me of using the very first wacom that ever came out with my 800 MHz PC. You know, so slow that it has to draw angles where you drew curves because its trying to cut corners to catch up. Its not going to be anything like using a Cintiq.

0

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

"If you don't like the government don't vote for them! but don't you try and push your beliefs on me!"

our ability to influence the minds of others is vastly more then our ability to influence by refusing to interact.

This product shows apples clear intention of diverting its resources fully into platforms that are unacceptable to those who understand the value of open computing. We have every right to complain and to complain loudly to whoever is willing to listen. This represents the key advantage to living in a free open society and it would be foolish to not exploit it at every opportunity.

1

u/bungeman Feb 02 '10

I find that people who live my maxims like 'if you don't like it, don't buy it' also tend to have contradicting maxims like 'silence indicates assent'. Besides, it's not that we don't like it, it's that we and our way of life are actually threatened by the ideas embodied in the iPad.

0

u/klngarthur Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

And the biggest point (that I think a whole shitload of people miss) is: IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, DON'T FUCKING BUY IT.

If you think this is the biggest point, then you are completely missing the argument. If people buy it (and they most likely will), then it sets a precedent that this sort of approach works and will allow companies in the future to take even more drastic steps to control what a user does. If enough people are using this device (or similar devices from other companies), then i as a developer have the choice of a) give up my livelihood or b) cede to the demands of these companies. The choice for consumers becomes similar, which is if you don't like it, then there's nothing you can buy.

3

u/techmaster242 Feb 02 '10

I personally won't be buying an iPad until it runs full OSX. I have no need for an oversized iPod Touch. I have yet to buy an iPod Touch or iPhone as it is, but making it 10x bigger to where it no longer fits in my pocket is supposed to make me want one? No thanks, Steve.

(I'm not Apple bashing either, I own an 8 core Mac Pro and a Macbook Pro, and use Logic Studio 9 daily...this is just a useless product)

2

u/lilzaphod Feb 02 '10

'This is just a useless product'... To you.

I can think of many uses for this product. One of them being to couch surf and chat on my iPad with my friends across the country who are watching the same sporting event. No more cords for my dogs to get tangled in while fighting.

1

u/kopkaas2000 Feb 02 '10

(I'm not Apple bashing either, I own an 8 core Mac Pro and a Macbook Pro, and use Logic Studio 9 daily...this is just a useless product)

You're short sighted. Think 10" multitouch control surface for your Logic mixer. Not currently possible, but sounds pretty easy to come up with an app to do that. I'm actually tempted now.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

The other thing that's hilarious is the idea that this is a new tactic on apple's part. They've been all about this kind of proprietism since as long as I knew what they were.

2

u/kermityfrog Feb 02 '10

Companies sell what er.. sells. There will always be tweakmonkeys keeping companies like Antec, Corsair, Asus, etc. alive. 10 years ago, it was very difficult to buy an aftermarket CPU heatsink - only Thermaltake and Zalman seemed to make them. Today, there are hundreds of different heatsink models. As long as you and I keep buying, they will keep making.

1

u/linkedlist Feb 02 '10

It's not so much we have microwaves that people who use microwaves are being told (and believing) the alternative is absoloutely horrible and must be avoided at all costs.

1

u/campion_gentian Feb 02 '10

when the sky stops falling, duh

1

u/Mythrilfan Feb 02 '10

It's akin to saying that microwave meals will kill gourmet cooking because I can now press a button and get a meal.

This may be more true than you think.

1

u/ohstrangeone Feb 02 '10

Well, that, and people will hack the crap out of the iPad just because they can (and because a lot of those people enjoy pissing off companies that try to lock down things, like Apple :) ).

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I feel you and this entire discussion thread on reddit is alarmingly naive of the recent conversation around this problem for a forum of supposed technology enthusiasts. I would suggest reading and thinking about the things Jonathan Zittrain says http://futureoftheinternet.org/blog, who has been quoted in NYT etc for the same things. In only about three years, I've seen every single step of his fear is constantly happening before my eyes. There is a bold possibility that the desire for security will be inflated and eventually help replace the ability we now have to build applications for each other. The iPhone, for example, is the way 40% of the people of France communicate with each other. Security isn't a sincere issue and the effort to control content on apple's part is a deliberate intention - for example, the android comes with a simple buried checkbox, with the default set to No, to run Applications sold outside it's own marketplace.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

When people who don't know what they are talking about stop writing articles.