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 519903
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by MOS6510 on Tue 29th May 2012 16:45 UTC 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[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by MOS6510 on Tue 29th May 2012 18:34 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12


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?


I am well aware of the situation and the implications, I just don't believe the EFF or any other armchair rebels really care, which makes them perhaps even more dangerous than the people who don't want to be saved by them.

In context of your Jews quote, don't forget a number of people and countries have been "liberated" during the course of history.

There are closed AND open systems. Their advantages and disadvantages should be clear now. People can make their own choice and they should be allowed to make wrong choices, that's part of being human and free. One should be able to opt to give away some of that freedom if it reaps another benefit.

Forcing people to make certain choices and taking away options is more wrong that allowing people to make choices you consider wrong.

A lot of harm has been done the last few thousand years by people who knew what was best for others.

If you are convinced your choice is the best one: convince others, but don't force them.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by phoehne on Tue 29th May 2012 21:43 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
phoehne Member since:
2006-08-26

The EFF takes a lot of positions on various issues. I generally support the EFF and have sent them money. I don't agree with every position.

Part of living in a free market economy is that the maker of a good or provider of a service can deliver that good or service as they see fit. Unless there is an actual harm (for example, poisoning people or abusing their market position) the law generally doesn't intervene. Even though the EFF may make a point I agree with, that over time some of these companies may be better off with more open platforms, fundamentally it's the responsibility of their management and board as to whether or not they sink or swim. Sometimes being open is the best thing you can do and sometimes it isn't. Either way, it's that organization's choice.

I think lot of people would like something like the iPad hardware was an open platform for other types of development. A number of tablets have good specs and would be fantastic platforms for Linux (in terms of memory and CPU) but for various reasons are closed. We don't have to buy them. There's one maker of Linux based tablets (although the specs aren't outstanding). If you want to vote in a way that Apple, Samsung or Microsoft will understand, vote with your pocketbook.

If you want to get other people to vote with their pocketbooks you have to provide a compelling alternative. Either it has to be better (which is hard because Apple makes a very polished product) or it has to be cheaper (with Amazon selling theirs at break even, that's tough) or it has to do something that's important to consumers. Given the use of these devices to watch video, and the requirements by content producers to lock up the delivery of content, and the fact that it's impossible to have a pure open source product that protects that content, it makes a compelling use case hard.

Right now the sweet spot for open source platforms is on developer desktops and servers. I'm cool with that.

Reply Parent Score: 3