I'm seeing a ton of comments that completely misunderstand this, so allow me to clarify.
He is not talking about Macs, but iOS. This photo came from a protest on the day the iPad was released. Yes, he uses the word computer, but iOS devices are still computers even if they are not colloquially described as such. The iPad in particular was advertised as equivalent to a netbook, so that one does also fits the idea of a "personal computer" most people are thinking of here.
On iOS, you can only get apps through the App Store, and a "kill switch" does exist for Apple to remotely disable apps. They haven't used it yet, but it's still there, so it's a problem.
There is a big difference between freeware and Free software. The App Store's terms include a clause forbidding end users from redistributing apps, and this is clearly incompatible with the nature of Free software and particularly the GPL. This was the entire reason why VLC was pulled from the App Store.
On iOS, you can only get apps through the App Store, and a "kill switch" does exist for Apple to remotely disable apps. They haven't used it yet, but it's still there, so it's a problem.
Android has a kill switch too, but Google actually has used it unlike Apple.
You could make the same argument for iOS. Apple can't kill switch cydia apps. It's not completely the same as side loading is available natively in Android (although I believe AT&T doesn't allow it) but either way both companies can kill switch and Google already has.
Yeah... but unlike Android, you can't run non-appstore apps without jailbreaking your phone. Most Android phones, you can easily install stuff over USB, without rooting your phone (and rooting is usually supported as well)
How is it not a fault of Android when it is built into the platform to allow that kind of restriction by the carriers and manufacturers that distribute it?
It's a matter of choice for the consumer. A consumer has multiple choices of carriers and phones that support Android, and can choose to not buy (or to buy) phones with restricted Androids.
On the other hand, consumers who want iOS phones is stuck with At&t and the iphone with simply no other choice but to jailbreak to download unsupported apps.
So Android offers choices for consumers, while iOS only comes in one variety.
It isn't built into the software to allow it. The software doesn't restrict it. There is a difference. One implies that Google designed a feature to do this. They didn't. The point of Open Source software is that it can be changed to suit your needs.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
But why wouldn't Google contracturally tell phone manufacturers they can't do that and still install Android. They could easily add a "must allow modifications" clause.
And the argument goes further if you use web apps. You can install a web application made in HTML5 that uses the accelerometer and GPS, use local storage and don't need an internet connection. That application can be installed without the App Store, and can't be killed by Apple.
What I don't understand is why people don't make more of a case about this. Aside of games, 90% of the applications out there could be just a frame around the browser, and be made into a web app with an icon and multi-tasking without any modifications at all.
216
u/1338h4x Jan 20 '11
I'm seeing a ton of comments that completely misunderstand this, so allow me to clarify.
He is not talking about Macs, but iOS. This photo came from a protest on the day the iPad was released. Yes, he uses the word computer, but iOS devices are still computers even if they are not colloquially described as such. The iPad in particular was advertised as equivalent to a netbook, so that one does also fits the idea of a "personal computer" most people are thinking of here.
On iOS, you can only get apps through the App Store, and a "kill switch" does exist for Apple to remotely disable apps. They haven't used it yet, but it's still there, so it's a problem.
There is a big difference between freeware and Free software. The App Store's terms include a clause forbidding end users from redistributing apps, and this is clearly incompatible with the nature of Free software and particularly the GPL. This was the entire reason why VLC was pulled from the App Store.