Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 23:25 UTC, submitted by Chicken Blood
Apple The beauty of the internet is such that every opinion has become worthless; this goes doubly so for those with publish buttons on (relatively, we're humble) major websites. For every opinion, there's a matching counter-opinion, and that's great. Yesterday, we linked to an article by Mark Pilgrim about tinkerers and the iPad, and of course, someone was bound to disagree with that one.
Thread beginning with comment 407514
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Richie97
by lemur2 on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 03:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Richie97"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

"Because you don't want to do those things is not a valid reason for a company to provide no means for anyone who wants to to do them.
Sure it is if the company is targeting "me" and not "them". "

This is a possible argument if the company left it at that ... but they don't.

They have already used the argument along the lines "but popular devices (read their devices, e.g. iPod) support only such-and-such a format, and not that other open one, so we can't use that open format on the public access web".

They aren't targetting their control-freak restrictions at just you, they are targetting these anti-freedom restrictions at everybody on the planet.

They are even targetting web content providers, via the ploy: "if you use Flash or HTML5/Theora, you won't get iPad users, so use HTML5/h264 instead (and BTW pay us a royalty, but not Adobe)".

Strangely enough, not everybody on the planet is willing to be restricted by what Apple wants them limited to be able to do.

Edited 2010-02-03 03:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Richie97
by nt_jerkface on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 06:24 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Richie97"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

They are even targetting web content providers, via the ploy: "if you use Flash or HTML5/Theora, you won't get iPad users, so use HTML5/h264 instead (and BTW pay us a royalty, but not Adobe)".


Well this is at least a much more valid concern than a perceived war against curiosity.

If your goal is Theora adoption then you certainly don't want to see the iPad become popular. However I think the blame here really lies with Google since portable video devices will be built to decode whatever YouTube uses.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Richie97
by boldingd on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 17:50 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Richie97"
boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

That's a very good point. If the iPhone and iPad become popular ways to access the web, then the restrictions on what those devices can do with the sites they access will start to affect the design of websites. If the iPhone helps kill Flash, that may be a good thing. ;) But if it lets Apple start controlling what's possible with the Web, and start controlling what web technologies can and cannot be used, then that's a problem that affects more than just iPhone and iPad users.

And note, Apple could solve that problem by allowing the installation of third-party apps -- like less-restricted web-browsers. Or even allowing alternative web browsers into the App store (the alternative browsers that are there now are really just wrappers around Safari). But they won't - or, at least, haven't, even tho it'd be a simple step to take.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Richie97
by lemur2 on Wed 3rd Feb 2010 22:43 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Richie97"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

That's a very good point. If the iPhone and iPad become popular ways to access the web, then the restrictions on what those devices can do with the sites they access will start to affect the design of websites. If the iPhone helps kill Flash, that may be a good thing. ;) But if it lets Apple start controlling what's possible with the Web, and start controlling what web technologies can and cannot be used, then that's a problem that affects more than just iPhone and iPad users.


Fortunately, it is possible right now to get a smartphone that doesn't constrain you to Apple's restricted web.

http://arstechnica.com/open-source/reviews/2010/02/hands-on-mozilla...

We just need a decent ARM-based tablet to arrive with 10+ hours battery life, Pixel Qi touchscreen display, USB ports, an ethernet port, and HDMI and/or DisplayPort video output(s), with a good full-featured and well-integrated version of Linux (possibly Android, possibly Qt/Maemo, maybe KDE4/Plasma-netbook, maybe even Moblin) and the iPad would look utterly silly in comparison.

A silly device (compared to the competition) would capture only an insignificant portion of the market, despite even Apple's marketing spin, and hence the web content providers would then be able to safely ignore the limitations of the iPad, and provide content for everyone that firefox mobile could render but which the iPad couldn't.

Edited 2010-02-03 22:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2