Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 29th May 2012 12:43 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "Two weeks ago, Steve Wozniak made a public call for Apple to open its platforms for those who wish to tinker, tweak and innovate with their internals. EFF supports Wozniak's position: while Apple's products have many virtues, they are marred by an ugly set of restrictions on what users and programmers can do with them. This is most especially true of iOS, though other Apple products sometimes suffer in the same way. In this article we will delve into the kinds of restrictions that Apple, phone companies, and Microsoft have been imposing on mobile computers; the excuses these companies make when they impose these restrictions; the dangers this is creating for open innovation; why Apple in particular should lead the way in fixing this mess. We also propose a bill of rights that need to be secured for people who are purchasing smartphones and other pocket computers."
Thread beginning with comment 519899
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Tue 29th May 2012 16:18 UTC
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

I'm tired of hearing people, in ignorance, whine about how these companies are hindering innovation. If anything they do the opposite by compelling people to do things differently. Let's look at some facts:

- Free & open platforms already exist.
- There's nothing stopping anyone from developing new free & open platforms.
- Companies have the right to legally protect their investment and interests.

To the people who cause such a big fuss over closed-source software, instead of crying about it all the time why don't you use that time to develop an alternative that you can give to anyone who wants it? Instead of constantly pointing your finger at how these companies don't do what you want them to, just go do it yourself. If you were so innovative to begin with you would be doing that already.

Let me try to put it in terms people will better understand.. Instead of sitting on the couch crying about how nobody will change the channel for you or bring you the remote, get up off your ass and change the damn channel yourself or 'stfu'.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 29th May 2012 16:23 in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Let me try to put it in terms people will better understand.. Instead of sitting on the couch crying about how nobody will change the channel for you or bring you the remote, get up off your ass and change the damn channel yourself or 'stfu'.


I would say the EFF deserves a bit more respect from random internet commenters.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Tue 29th May 2012 16:49 in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

Let me try to put it in terms people will better understand.. Instead of sitting on the couch crying about how nobody will change the channel for you or bring you the remote, get up off your ass and change the damn channel yourself or 'stfu'.

I would say the EFF deserves a bit more respect from random internet commenters.

I respect your opinion, and I disagree with it completely. The EFF doesn't "deserve" respect from anyone. They do however have the chance to earn that respect on a case-by-case basis. I admire some of what they've done but that doesn't automagically mean I should or do respect everything.

Btw, my opinions are no more or less valid than yours or any other `random internet commenters`.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Kochise on Tue 29th May 2012 19:43 in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Hmmm, for openess there's always openmoko or the pandaboard. Needs an industrial wide accepted platform ? Just apply what Apple have done for their products : make products usable for non-geeks, eager to pay and not to hack for free.

Kochise

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by MOS6510 on Tue 29th May 2012 16:45 in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12


Let me try to put it in terms people will better understand.. Instead of sitting on the couch crying about how nobody will change the channel for you or bring you the remote, get up off your ass and change the damn channel yourself or 'stfu'.


That's not how these organizations work. They have to complain about something, because that's what they do. They save people that are in no need to be saved and don't want to be saved.

LAUNCELOT: We were in the nick of time, you were in great peril.
GALAHAD: I don't think I was.
LAUNCELOT: Yes you were, you were in terrible peril.
GALAHAD: Look, let me go back in there and face the peril.
LAUNCELOT: No, it's too perilous.
GALAHAD: Look, I'm a knight, I'm supposed to get as much peril as I can.
LAUNCELOT: No, we've got to find the Holy Grail. Come on!
GALAHAD: Well, let me have just a little bit of peril?
LAUNCELOT: No, it's unhealthy.
GALAHAD: Bet you're gay!
LAUNCELOT: No, I'm not.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by TADS on Tue 29th May 2012 18:19 in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
TADS Member since:
2010-11-01

If I didn't know any better I'd say companies hire people to troll forums. And I should know better than to take the bait and feed you guys, but since on this count your position is not only idiotic, but downright dangerous, I'll have to chime in.

That's not how these organizations work. They have to complain about something, because that's what they do.


Since you're so fond of quotes, let me give you another one:

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.


If you're somewhat narrow minded the problem of locked down devices might not seem like a big deal. The company's making money, you probably have a few shares and a piece of the action, people get to use shiny devices and all's well, right?

Well, why don't we talk again in say, 50 years time when we have an entire generation which was raised on computing devices only aimed at consuming content and engaging in social networking. When we need the next generation of engineers to do the low level grunt work that's mostly invisible to someone like you. I'm talking about an entire work force which grew in the fertile soil of tinkering and pushing the limits of what devices they had at the age when they were most curious. What certain companies are doing right now in our mobile device era, is nothing short of fostering a very dangerous culture change away from open architectures, towards totally locked down ones.

So yes, let's all ignore the crybabies that are speaking out for openness, since you don't perceive yourself as needing open systems. (hint: open architectures and access to content and polished interfaces and hardware aren't mutually exclusive)

Regarding the EFF's credentials, that you and another poster are calling into question: do you like shopping on Amazon and countless other sites? Well, you have organizations like the EFF to thank for it. You see, while several people were busy squashing every attempt to implement strong, open cryptographic systems, others were fighting tooth and nail to preserve your digital freedom to have privacy online. But hey, I'm sure Amazon and the other online retailers would eventually figure out a way of performing secure transactions without strong crypto. Highly trained carrier pigeons perhaps.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by Alfman on Tue 29th May 2012 17:45 in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

ilovebeer,

"To the people who cause such a big fuss over closed-source software, instead of crying about it all the time why don't you use that time to develop an alternative that you can give to anyone who wants it? Instead of constantly pointing your finger at how these companies don't do what you want them to, just go do it yourself. If you were so innovative to begin with you would be doing that already."

You try to insult open technology promoters as being non-innovative, but in fact many of us are innovative and that's a fundamental reason for keeping technology open: we don't want corporations to have all the control. People who are trying to stop the proliferation of closed devices do it because of how it destroys our capacity to innovate, distribute and sell our creations without getting permission to do so first. The new platforms are being designed to tax our income and control our work. There's nothing innovative about that, it's pure and simple greed.

Now maybe you feel they're entitled to impose locks on consumer devices to control the market if they can, never mind the damage it may cause to competition and the free (as in freedom) software market. But you'd have to be an idiot to not recognise or to deny that locked platforms will harm independent developers as well as consumers who loose access to competing marketplaces.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Tue 29th May 2012 18:29 in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

ilovebeer,

"To the people who cause such a big fuss over closed-source software, instead of crying about it all the time why don't you use that time to develop an alternative that you can give to anyone who wants it? Instead of constantly pointing your finger at how these companies don't do what you want them to, just go do it yourself. If you were so innovative to begin with you would be doing that already."

You try to insult open technology promoters as being non-innovative, but in fact many of us are innovative and that's a fundamental reason for keeping technology open: we don't want corporations to have all the control.

It seems you didn't pay attention. I was clearly talking about people who whine whine whine but don't participate in being innovative. IE: People who are all talk and no walk.

People who are trying to stop the proliferation of closed devices do it because of how it destroys our capacity to innovate, distribute and sell our creations without getting permission to do so first. The new platforms are being designed to tax our income and control our work. There's nothing innovative about that, it's pure and simple greed.

Of course there's greed. There always has been and always will be greed in humanity. But that fact does not stop 'you' from developing completely open platforms and software. Instead 'your' time appears better spent complaining rather than doing. (* Please pay attention to the use of the ' ' .)

Now maybe you feel they're entitled to impose locks on consumer devices to control the market if they can, never mind the damage it may cause to competition and the free (as in freedom) software market. But you'd have to be an idiot to not recognise or to deny that locked platforms will harm independent developers as well as consumers who loose access to competing marketplaces.

It's not a matter of what I "feel", it's a matter of what the law provides them. These companies have the right to protect THEIR products and THEIR interests, within the law. If you don't like it, do your part in changing the law.

You'd have to be an idiot to not understand that the only "independent developers" who are harmed by locked platforms are the people stupid enough to depend on them.

Edited 2012-05-29 18:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by TechGeek on Tue 29th May 2012 20:42 in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

And I hate all the people out their that are too stupid to realize that they are harming themselves. There isn't much of an argument you can make that closed proprietary devices are better for the industry or anyone besides the OEM. You should also realize that knowledge is a cycle. If our children grow up in a closed off world, how will they ever know better?

Case in point: There are several lighthouses on the east coast of the US that are particularly old. They were built with a special formula of concrete. The cement is especially resistant to salt water. Today, we have no idea what that formula was. Its been lost over time.

How many generations will it take before the average citizen is incapable of thinking innovatively?

Edited 2012-05-29 20:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by ssokolow on Tue 29th May 2012 23:13 in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

I'm tired of hearing people, in ignorance, whine about how these companies are hindering innovation. If anything they do the opposite by compelling people to do things differently. Let's look at some facts:

- Free & open platforms already exist.
- There's nothing stopping anyone from developing new free & open platforms.
- Companies have the right to legally protect their investment and interests.

To the people who cause such a big fuss over closed-source software, instead of crying about it all the time why don't you use that time to develop an alternative that you can give to anyone who wants it? Instead of constantly pointing your finger at how these companies don't do what you want them to, just go do it yourself. If you were so innovative to begin with you would be doing that already.

Let me try to put it in terms people will better understand.. Instead of sitting on the couch crying about how nobody will change the channel for you or bring you the remote, get up off your ass and change the damn channel yourself or 'stfu'.


And the people who end up getting these locked-down devices second-hand or as gifts? The ones who can't afford or don't know about the existence of the open alternatives? The independent developers whose ability to complete is contingent on the capricious approval of Apple's App Store censors? What about them?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Thu 31st May 2012 02:39 in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

And the people who end up getting these locked-down devices second-hand or as gifts?

What about them?

The ones who can't afford or don't know about the existence of the open alternatives?

Is it "my" problem "you" can't afford something else? I would say that "you" are responsible for you own ability to afford what you want, not anyone else. If "you" can't afford it, make a plan so eventually "you" can. Sounds pretty reasonable to me, wouldn't you agree?

Regarding people who don't know about the existence of open alternatives, perhaps they should do something about their lack of knowledge. There's nothing stopping those people from looking into it themselves. Not every little thing needs to be spoon-fed to every single person. As far as I'm concerned, there's an expectation that "you" make at least `some` effort yourself -- at least ask questions. Don't just sit there with your thumb up your rear end.

The independent developers whose ability to complete is contingent on the capricious approval of Apple's App Store censors? What about them?

I assume you meant "compete", not "complete". If you willing choose, and it IS willingly 100% of the time, to compete on a closed-platform then you already know what you're getting yourself into. If you don't like it, pedal your software on other platforms and environments more suitable to your wants.

For the record, I'm not suggesting parts of the system aren't broken. I believe the opposite in fact. But, the system is absolutely not as closed and oppressive as propaganda wants you to believe. The real problem is motivation. People are motivated enough to complain but not enough to take action or even spearhead the change. Very few people anyways.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by phoudoin on Wed 30th May 2012 07:10 in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

I'm tired of hearing people, in ignorance, whine about how these companies are hindering innovation.


Hello, it's 2012 here : it's not whining but lobbying.
And it's as legal as protecting your investment by the best IP laws money can buy.
Get over it.

Reply Parent Score: 5