Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 16th Feb 2012 14:46 UTC
Mac OS X Well, this is a surprise. Several websites have a preview up of Apple's next Mac OS X release - it's called Mountain Lion, and continues the trend of bringing over functionality from iOS to Mac OS X. Lots of cool stuff in here we've all seen before on iPhones and iPads, including one very, very controversial feature: Gatekeeper. Starting with Mac OS X 10.8, Apple's desktop operating system will be restricted to Mac App Store and Apple-signed applications by default (with an opt-out switch), following in Windows 8's footsteps.
Thread beginning with comment 507447
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Thu 16th Feb 2012 16:14 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kaiwai"
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

Kaiwai, since I posted I can't moderate you down, and there isn't a choice for "Forgot to take his lithium".


So rather than engage in a debate you'd sooner censor someone else's opinion. Funny how you're all 'freedom' until someone pisses you off with a view point you disagree with.

You are a lost cause, in part because although you read what Thom said, you ignored it and reacted with your gut (oldthinkers unbellyfeel Ingsoc). He said essentially that Gatekeeper is a step toward more control, you want to talk about how it isn't total control RIGHT NOW IN ALL CAPS.


If you're going to see the bar to conspiracies that low then why didn't he say the very same thing when Microsoft introduced signed drivers with Windows 7 64bit? How about the 'only allowed signed applications to run' which was provided with Windows 7 and Windows 2008 R2?

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd723683(v=ws.10).aspx

I don't know about you but it seems pretty damn selective hysteria if you ask me - how about some consistency.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by kaiwai
by Excarnate on Thu 16th Feb 2012 16:48 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by kaiwai"
Excarnate Member since:
2011-08-01

Moderating down stupid comments cleans up the discussion, it isn't censorship.

Funny, you say "Funny how you're all 'freedom' until someone pisses you off with a view point you disagree with."

Where exactly did I say I was all about freedom?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You hear what you want to hear and reply to that--not to what someone actually says. Your comments need to be modded down until you can actually deal with what someone said, in this converstation by the way, not your fantasy of what someone said.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by kaiwai
by Alfman on Thu 16th Feb 2012 18:10 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by kaiwai"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

kaiwai,

Frankly, I'm baffled how anyone couldn't recognize this as another step towards take control away from users and devs. This serves to empower apple, and you know it is exactly the motivation behind why apple's doing it.

Just because "the sky hasn't fallen" doesn't mean we must naively deny the very real threats that are taking shape "right now". More and more of our household computers are becoming restricted walled garden consumption devices. The public, particularly children, will loose many of the opportunities that we had to learn if they don't have access to open devices.

I already think the DRM in tablet devices has caused irreparable harm to technology education. The corporate plans by ms and apple to begin restricting desktop operating systems in similar ways is very sad. There's no doubt about it, those growing up behind restricted walled gardens will end up technologically illiterate compared to those who grew up with full access to the OS. This will become more apparent in oncoming years.

Reply Parent Score: 7