Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th May 2012 18:28 UTC
Apple "I think that Apple could be just as strong and good and be open, but how can you challenge it when a company is making that much money?", Wozniak told a crowd in Sydney, according to ITNews. They'd score so many brownie points the internet would explode.
Thread beginning with comment 518167
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

Via it's financial success, Apple has proven that you can keep your hardware and software proprietary if the marketing and quality meets the needs of end users. This doesn't mean that there are no crashes, that there are no security issues, or even that it's the best operating system and hardware combination.

The reasons people make purchases are a lot more complicated than simple facts and right now, Apple has tapped into the right combination of efforts. There is simply no justification to gamble on the effect of an "open" company right now.


Facts have also proven that open works too:
* Redhat
* Virtualbox / Xen / KVM
* Firefox
* Apache
* MySQL
..and i could go on.

However I agree that there's no point in Apple open sourcing their products. They'd gain nothing but nerd points.

I'd rather see Apple open up their compatibility:
* Don't litigate against the jailbreak community (they don't have to support either, but don't criminalising users for wanting more out of their hardware)
* Allow Hackintoshes (again, they don't have to support them, just allow users the choice of an unsupported home build or a fully supported official Mac)
* And most importantly, cut all the petty bullshit App Store restrictions! Allow users to install outside of the store (even if it's an option that needs to be manually enabled), allow software to link to purchase pages etc, allow adult content.

Apple are just software manufacturers - period. So I don't want to be policed by the developers of the software I used any more than I want car manufacturers to tell me where I can or cannot drive to and what music I'm authorised to listen to on route.

Edited 2012-05-15 08:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

As far as I am aware they haven't sued anyone from the iOS jail breaking community. In fact, some have landed a job at Apple.

But I don't see why they should allow the ability to freely install whatever you want. Apple will miss their cut on any sales, malware/crapware can infect iOS devices and damage the brand image, app developers might not like it being too easy for people to install cracked apps.

Reply Parent Score: 0

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

As far as I am aware they haven't sued anyone from the iOS jail breaking community. In fact, some have landed a job at Apple.

They've sent plenty of cease and desist letters to web sites that offer advice as well as campaigned for it to be criminalised.

As no websites nor individuals have the resources nor income to take on Apple, cases never make it to court.

So my point stands.


But I don't see why they should allow the ability to freely install whatever you want.

Because when I buy an iPhone, I own said phone. It's now my hardware and I can do anything I want with it so long as that doesn't break any laws (eg I cannot bludgeon kids to death with it). Installing your own software does not break any laws, it only contradicts an EULA which is nether law nor been upheld in a court of law.

Hence my car comparison. I own the hardware and thus I can drive it / install whatever (legal) software I want. Apple cannot -edit: should not- dictate this to their users.


Apple will miss their cut on any sales,

Boohoo, so Apple will miss a cut on sales of products they contributed nothing towards the development of. How unfair that would be to Apple. *rolleyes*

Worse yet, they charge twice for the distribution (both the devs for adding to the app store and a percentage for each sale).

Given they pride themselves on appealing to the creative industry, the least they could do to give back to their key demographic would be to stop robbing them blind.


malware/crapware can infect iOS devices and damage the brand image, app developers might not like it being too easy for people to install cracked apps.

That's all FUD.
People who want cracked apps can already jailbreak and don't care about the ramifications of doing so. So that market wouldn't change.

And as for the malware issue, Apple could still pull apps plus if it's an opt out feature (as I suggested), then the really stupid (or paranoid) wouldn't be exposed anyway.

So your points are moot.

Edited 2012-05-15 09:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

damage the brand image


Really. So if i buy a Ford, customize it to my liking and then it doesn't work properly that hurts Ford brand image? That's the idea here? Only in the IT industry could such amazingly stupid reasoning exist.
What I do with something after it is purchased is *my goddamn business*, no-one else's, and if I f--k up that's my problem. This works in every other industry, there's no rational reason for it not to work in IT.

Edited 2012-05-16 00:34 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4