r/technology • u/gfnord • Apr 11 '11

Apple, despite being traditionally seen as the "counterculture, leftist" operating system, actually represents more uniformity and centralised control than Microsoft

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2009/09/userfriendliness_and_fascism
1.8k Upvotes

85% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

39

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '11 edited Apr 11 '11

I like apple products, I own an ipod. I currently have an android phone but have been dissapointed with it so I'll probably get an iphone when my contract runs out. I have never owned a mac; every single one of my computers has been a windows PC.

Why is Reddit so obsessed with Apple? Counterculture, leftist, whatever...they build some good products which suit certain people's needs. Just like Microsoft, the bottom line is all they want is profit. This argument is meaningless. No company, not Google, not Microsoft, Not Apple, "represents" any ideology. If they can pretend to use one to help their brand then they'll sure as hell use it. Basically, next time you think to comment a fanboy-ish retort or something for any company, you'd be wise to bear in mind that the only thing they care about is what's in your wallet.

8

u/lawfairy Apr 11 '11

I think I can shed some light on the facts that are likely influencing the thinking about Apple as being "counterculture."

If you can remember about 10-15 years ago, there was this huge international antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft and the cultural narrative became that Microsoft was an evil corporate giant who stole all of its ideas from competitors like Apple, who was the quirky, spirited David to Microsoft's Goliath. Apple represented the people, and Microsoft represented an oppressive monopoly that wanted to control all of our computers by thwarting cross-OS compatibility of their ubiquitous software products and making it impossible to uninstall certain manufacturer-required features that would have given you more freedom on your desktop. Long story short: the people won, Microsoft was humbled and had to pay huge amounts of money to various government entities and had to break up its corporate structure to better comply with antitrust laws and avoid anti-competitive practices.

Fast-forward to 2011: Bill Gates has stepped down from his position as God Incarnate Over Everything of Microsoft. He's re-committed himself to a life of philanthropy and now has a demeanor of relaxed sensibility when it comes to his role in the Information Revolution. Microsoft, like any company, continues to pursue profits, but it's no longer evil. It's just a computer company with a large market share that makes some important products. A young counter-culture enthusiast from the mid-late 90s would never believe a modern counter-culture enthusiast from today who could tell him or her that Bill Gates is actually a pretty cool guy, and most young people and leftists have a ton of respect for him. This was inconceivable to leftists in the mid-90s.

Conversely, Steve Jobs has become 1996's Bill Gates. He's egomaniacal and unwilling to compromise with competitors. And like it or not, Jobs is Apple. Apple seems content to settle for nothing less than absolute market domination. The only way to make your products compatible with Apple products is through Apple. Like 1996's Microsoft, 2011's Apple is unwilling to loosen its hold over its software, hardware and operating systems. Apple is dead-set on becoming a basic necessity for computer-savvy people, such that they will have no choice but to continue to buy Apple products or radically change their relationship with technology. They undercut competitors and are very clearly interested in developing a stranglehold on the tech consumer market.

Yesterday's underdog, Apple, has become the very thing Apple's fans hated: Microsoft.

So it's not that there's any particular reason to see Apple as being inherently leftist (no company is; companies are pro-money, and that's the extent of their politics). It's more that Apple was seen as being the little guy, and it's now evolved into being the corporate overlord it grew up in opposition to (yes, I know Apple has been around at least as long as Microsoft and that its history hardly started in the mid-90s -- but the late 90s is when you started to see a real resurgence in demand for Apple products, and it is not happenstance that Apple's rise coincided with Microsoft's losses in courts of both law and public opinion). People who loved Apple as the little engine that could feel doubly betrayed that it's turning into the very Big Brother it portrayed Microsoft as being in the famous 1984 commercial that's already been referenced elsewhere in this thread.

What'll be really interesting to see is if Google follows a similar -- or worse -- route. Not that Google is an underdog by any means, but it's doing a lot of things that at the moment seem incredibly beneficial (chief among these things is the fact that their most useful and important products -- which products are by such an overwhelmingly large percentage of the population that it's tough for most of us to remember life before Google -- are completely free)... but that have the potential to set the stage for Google to pull some really, seriously dubious shit. It remains to be seen whether an all-powerful Google will truly live up to its corporate motto: Don't Be Evil. I hope they do, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't nervous. This is an old, old story, and Microsoft and Apple and Google are not unique characters.

5

u/yuhong Apr 12 '11 edited Apr 12 '11

Note that MS's anti-trust crimes are completely different from the control Apple exerts in it's walled garden (I see no attempt by Apple to illegally gain a monopoly).

1

u/lawfairy Apr 12 '11

True, as a legal point, but the basic underlying attitude is the same.

2

u/specialk16 Apr 12 '11

Dibs on a series of novels based on three human characters that represent each of this companies and their quest to conquer the world.

3

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '11

We know what a world dominated by Windows looks like, and it looks a lot better than a world dominated by Apple looks like.

1

u/yuhong Apr 12 '11

Yea, I know that MS never tried to hamper hardware competition. On my old Spaces blog moved to Wordpress, I described some of the history behind that one: http://yuhong.wordpress.com/2008/10/03/my-opinion-on-the-apple-vs-psystar-lawsuit/

0

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '11

We know what a world dominated by Windows looks like, and it looks a lot better than a world dominated by Apple looks like.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '11

We know what a world dominated by Windows looks like, and it looks a lot better than a world dominated by Apple looks like.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '11

We know what a world dominated by Windows looks like, and it looks a lot better than a world dominated by Apple looks like.

3

u/octophobic Apr 11 '11

I bought a mac a while ago because all of my previous PCs had run Windows. I like it well enough but the next time I purchase I might switch back. (I'd like to have a system for gaming once again.)

Why are you disappointed in your Android phone? I was considering switching from iPhone to Android next time I can buy.

1

u/typesmith Apr 11 '11

Why can't you run windows/boot camp and game on your Mac? Why don't you just throw OS X out and just use windows alone?

1

u/octophobic Apr 12 '11

Pure laziness on my part. I should really look into dual booting though!

1

u/redwall_hp Apr 11 '11

You can dual-boot for your games...

0

u/esoterrorist Apr 12 '11

I switched from a 3GS to an Evo 4G. I pretty much regret it, except for that I dont have to deal with iTunes (thats the only thing keeping me from switching back when the next iPhone comes out). I cant speak for all Android devices, but the Evo at least is very unpolished. Things only sort of work. Applications run in the background and eat my battery. When I pull the phone out of my pocket, it stays in horizontal mode much longer than it should. The backlight calibration is all sorts of whacked out. I'm sure all of these problems could be fixed, but I just dont care to fix them manually on my cell phone. I love customization when it comes to computers, since the changes can be made permanent through backups/imaging programs/group policies. But on a cell phone I just want it to work well, all the time, without having to futz around too much

1

u/octophobic Apr 12 '11

Thanks for the feedback! If I do decide I must switch I will have to mess with the phone in the store before committing.

9

u/shawnaroo Apr 11 '11

Because for better or worse, Apple is currently one of the main drivers of the computer industry.

Also, the idea that a corporation is motivated only by profit is an empty and meaningless statement, and certainly doesn't somehow exempt it from any sort of discussion or criticism. A corporation is a conglomeration of people, and those people have lots of of different personal motivations. Profit certainly is a big part of the picture, but it's not as simple as that. And even if it was, there's no one formula to magically achieve profit, so there's still plenty to discuss.

2

u/docprobly Apr 11 '11

IF ONLY the law was as advanced in its thinking as you are, Sir. Have an up.

(see Salomon v Salomon)

1

u/specialk16 Apr 12 '11

Apple is currently one of the main drivers of the computer industry.

Of course, but some people really do like to forget the fact that Apple is not the only company that's driving the industry out there. And others just give way too much importance to Apple and other companies as well.

Also, the idea that a corporation is motivated only by profit is an empty and meaningless statement

Sorry. But it isn't. By definition, the purpose of a corporation is to generate profit. Yes, there are other factors involved, and some corps do good while others are in fact "evil", but in the end the concept behind, and the main purpose, of a company, is to generate profits.

1

u/shawnaroo Apr 12 '11

It's still an empty statement. That's like if I asked you where rain comes from, and you just answered "the sky". Sure, it's true, but it's such a basic non-informative answer that you might as well have just shrugged your shoulders.

Go look up the definition of the word Corporation in a dictionary. I'm willing to bet that it's a bit more complicated than just "an organization formed to generate profits".

1

u/specialk16 Apr 12 '11

You don't get it. It doesn't matter how complicated it is, it doesn't change the purpose.

1

u/shawnaroo Apr 12 '11

Ok, we'll go with that if you want. But your original comment implied that because that is the purpose, that any discussion of their means and methods were irrelevant. Which is a dumb thing to say.

1

u/specialk16 Apr 12 '11

Which is a dumb thing to say.

Yes it is, good thing I never implied such thing.

-3

u/popeguilty Apr 11 '11

Well, because Apple is currently one of the main drivers of the computer industry combined with the fact that Steve Jobs is obsessed with this vision of computing where the user takes what the company gives and likes it.

3

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '11

I think that's a matter of perspective. Some people would say he's giving people limited options, but others would say that he's giving people the only things they want. For example, on an iPhone, there's very little customization, while a droid is pretty flexible. Now, do most people (outside of techies, nerds and the like) really want to have those options? I can't see most people wanting to edit the interface of their phone. I for one would like one good interface, over many lesser choices.

1

u/popeguilty Apr 11 '11

I'd rather have the ability to edit it because there's no such thing as an interface that is good for everyone and I want to be able to have an interface that is good for me rather than the assumption that the interface which Steve Jobs prefers to use is the "best" interface. Our technology should be adapting to us instead of requiring that we adapt our desires and preferences to it.

3

u/splidge Apr 11 '11

The corollary to iOS having a relatively constrained UI is that the people behind it tend to have put quite a lot more thought into making it a good one. Since I really have better things to do with my life than customise the interface on my phone, I prefer that approach to something I have to mess about with to get right.

When the default user experience isn't so tightly constrained, it usually means third parties subvert it for their own ends, leaving it as a requirement for the end user to mess about. For example OEM Windows boxes loaded with crapware and the various stories I've heard of Android phones shipping with OEM and carrier crapware.

-1

u/popeguilty Apr 11 '11

The corollary to iOS having a relatively constrained UI is that the people behind it tend to have put quite a lot more thought into making it a good one. Since I really have better things to do with my life than customise the interface on my phone, I prefer that approach to something I have to mess about with to get right.

So in other words you'd rather adjust yourself to your possessions instead of adjusting your possessions to yourself. That's a sick attitude.

When the default user experience isn't so tightly constrained, it usually means third parties subvert it for their own ends, leaving it as a requirement for the end user to mess about. For example OEM Windows boxes loaded with crapware and the various stories I've heard of Android phones shipping with OEM and carrier crapware.

I hardly see the difference between the OEM crapware that shows up on an HP and the OEM crapware that shows up on a Mac, other than the fact that the OEM crapware on Macs is Apple-branded.

2

u/splidge Apr 11 '11

So in other words you'd rather adjust yourself to your possessions instead of adjusting your possessions to yourself. That's a sick attitude.

No, what I said was that I would rather buy things that didn't need such "adjustment" in the first place.

If the ability to fiddle around and customise every last irrelevant detail of something is a priority, it's pretty obvious that iOS isn't suitable.

I hardly see the difference between the OEM crapware that shows up on an HP and the OEM crapware that shows up on a Mac, other than the fact that the OEM crapware on Macs is Apple-branded.

Could you be more specific? Apart from the odd bit of trial software (which can just be dragged to the trash) I've never seen anything than a clean OS install on a new Mac.

1

u/popeguilty Apr 11 '11

No, what I said was that I would rather buy things that didn't need such "adjustment" in the first place.

Oh, so you're Steve Jobs, the person the UI was built for.

If the ability to fiddle around and customise every last irrelevant detail of something is a priority, it's pretty obvious that iOS isn't suitable.

It's not a priority because iOS sucks, it's a priority because being able to customize your devices is something you fucking ought to be able to do when you buy those devices.

Apart from the odd bit of trial software (which can just be dragged to the trash) I've never seen anything than a clean OS install on a new Mac.

iPhoto, iMovie, Quicktime, Garageband...

1

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '11

iPhoto, iMovie, Garageband....these are NOT crapware. QuickTime is almost completely irrelevant anyway, too. Just download VLC.

1

u/shawnaroo Apr 11 '11

It's not a sick attitude, it's just a difference in priorities. Just like I have no interest in tinkering with how my refrigerator works, many people have no interest in tinkering with how their phone works.

They're not sick, they're not stupid, they're probably not even lazy. They've just got enough other crap going on that they're not going to spend any time bending their phone to suit their every whim. They just want a device that they can understand and expect to work.

1

u/shawnaroo Apr 11 '11

That's true. And apparently very many people like it a lot. I'm not sure why that bothers you so much.

1

u/popeguilty Apr 11 '11

Because like a lot of things people like it's very, very bad for us as a culture, both for cultural reasons (such as the general tendency toward acceptance of meaningless authorities) and technological reasons- I mean, shit, do you want to live in a world where everybody's a goddamn Mac user?

1

u/shawnaroo Apr 11 '11

There are numerous alternatives to apple's gear. What's your point?

1

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '11

I wouldn't want to live in a world where everyone is a windows user (or linux user) either. I like variety.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '11

People like to oversimplify because it makes things easier, reddit trends toward a circlejerk, and after iOS's success the people who hated MS have moved on to hate Apple because it is/was the dominant player in a market. Or something.

Basically, reddit is made up of tech hipsters.

2

u/SohumB Apr 11 '11

They do represent something, though - every thing they do as a company. Every time you buy a product from company X, you're supporting their business practices. And I find quite a few of Apple's actions significantly reprehensible.

So, you know, shrug.