Slashdot Mirror

Price isn't the issue for me. The issue is that with Linux, you can always dig deeper when debugging and hacking. With Windows, OSX, or any other system without full source, the debugging will hit a brick wall at system calls.

Actually, with OS X, you can go below the system call layer (but not down to the device driver layer, as most of those are part of the non-open-source part of the kernel-mode code, and not down to some file systems such as AFP, as the AFP client isn't open-source either). The big problem would be with debugging stuff sufficiently far above the system call layer, such as problems in the Cocoa Framework and AppKit layers.

Also, if Apple is deprecating all GPL3 software that they have, be it GCC, Samba, then why are they offering bash?

mavericks.local$ sw_vers
ProductName: Mac OS X
ProductVersion: 10.9
BuildVersion: 13A603
mavericks.local$ bash --version
GNU bash, version 3.2.51(1)-release (x86_64-apple-darwin13)
Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

And that version is GPLv2.

Er what? The hardware requirements of Mavericks says that an iMac from 2007 is compatible. As far as MacBooks, late 2008 is the oldest. So six year old desktops and five year old laptops are compatible. It's not six or seven years but it's close. If you haven't noticed, hardware from 5 or 6 years ago has been good enough for most consumers on the PC side. That's one reason people have stopped buying new PCs.

Second, how much does a 5 or 6 year old PC laptop go for? I can tell you it's often less than $200 considering new ones are not much more than that.

Let me share those tips I've found:

No credit card required to create an Apple ID if you don't have one: tip 1

No Snow Leopard upgrade from Leopard (however you should have a Snow L. licence for this Mac): tip 2

One still needs a Snow Leopard at least to use the new App Store and download the Maverick files.
Maybe you can go to a friend's and use your new ID to download your Maverick copy... or wait for a tip 3 someone may post here !

Apple changed gamma to 2.2 in OS X 10.6 "Snow Leopard" in 2009, from 1.8 of past Macs.

That would've been what you saw in 2003; lower gamma by default.

Apple wants control. I found out that Apple uses your ID account to inject your data into each downloaded app as DRM. Read https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-5261 ... I was wondering why my downloaded 10.9 copy did not match others' with file sizes, CRC checksums, etc. :(

It certainly won't work when there are usable default or better alternatives already available on PCs that allow it.

So... they should disable all plugins like Java and Flash and not let the user authorize anything? That would never work.

It's only a problem with Apple devices. Both Android and Windows devices are generic bluetooth. My Windows Phone (HTX 8X) works wonderfully with my VW, which connects via bluetooth for the phone part, and bluetooth audio for the music part. Works seamlessly. iPhones... not so much. As long as people use devices that conform to generic bluetooth standards, it's not a problem.

Yeah, it sucks how Apple devices don't support generic Bluetooth profiles

All I can find is this in the Apple Dev Forums (login required). It seems that certain people in a workflow without a monitor color profile see differences without embedded profiles look differently. This does not appear to be a problem in a workflow where you regularly profile your monitor (and in fact, I don't see a problem).

So, if you depend on OS X for color accurate work, and if you are working exclusively with untagged images that are to be assumed to be sRGB, and if you have a monitor which does its own sRGB calibration and you're depending on the bits from the image being sent directly to the monitor without adjustment, then you might see problems. I don't know how big of a community that is.

I'm in the middle of something, so I can't try this, but did you try downloading the control panel at apple. Of course, you have to have an iCloud membership so I'm not sure if that'd work for you.

Apple laptops are not magic

but they are unix, and unlike linux, everything just works out of the box. for some of us, it's worth paying more to not have to dink around for hours on the weekend to hopefully get things running smoothly.

macs are overpriced, but not as much as some folks say. consider this MBP,
http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro

it's $1800 with no upgrades.

the most comparable thing i can find at dell.com is this,
http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-12-9q33/pd?oc=dncwi16b&model_id=xps-12-9q33

it's $600 less, but it has 1/2 the memory, worse graphics, a slightly smaller display and lesser res, and a 128GB SSD vs. a next-gen 512GB SSD. also, it runs windows, not a unix-based OS.

how about toshiba?
http://www.toshiba.com/us/computers/laptops/kira/kirabook13/KIRAbook13-i5-touch

$300 less, but has last-gen graphics, last-gen core processor, and a last-gen SSD that's 1/2 the size. it does have a touchscreen where the MPB does not.

Not true:

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2534

I am particularly impressed by the Mac Pro. They've totally overhauled a PC design and come out w/ a new tower that is optimally designed w/ the best of components. Finally a Mac worth the price!

Apparently, Firefox isn't the greatest, or most supported, browser anymore.

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5436

The new iPad mini retina will have the same 2048x1536 pixels in a 7.9" display.

Forget the workstation, I'm thinking of getting a couple of the mac pros and putting them in a rack.

Not true... http://www.apple.com/ipad-mini/specs/ specifically lists the chip as: "A7 chip with 64-bit architecture and M7 motion coprocessor"

Thank you. I am thrilled to be wrong. I only noticed the M7 being mentioned with respect to the iPad Air during the presentation, I read too much into that.

So a developer only needs to get a mini to test 64-bit code and A7/M7 functionality.

I'm sorry, but part of your comment is just plain wrong. Firstly, Apple is not collecting your fingerprint, only something similar to a hash of the fingerprint's characteristics. Secondly, it isn't shared with anyone. Thirdly, the explicitly state in this article that your actual fingerprint can not be reverse engineered from the data the store on the phone.

In addition to this, the NYPD's stated reason for pushing the iPhone 5s is that it makes iPhone theft a thing of the past, which it clearly, demonstrably does. The link you posted saying NYPD is after the fingerprints is clearly, demonstrably false. Now, I'm sure you can find folks that say something different, but I can also show you pictures of Obama shaking hands with space aliens - you can find anything you like, but it doesn't make it true.

Finally, Apple (and Google) outright deny sharing data with the NSA.

You can continue to believe that they are sharing if you like, but stating that they have admitted they are sharing is incorrect.

I tried android for a couple of weeks to see what I was missing. I asked all my android owning friends "OK, what should I check out that I can not do on my iPhone". About the only useful response I got was wifi scanning tools. That was it. Which i don't use my phone for anyway.

Then your friends either aren't very smart, or are simply happy with their stock Android and have never wanted to change it.

Homescreen widgets, a decently-sized screen, NFC file sharing, third party keyboards (or a physical one if you prefer), custom launchers, completely customizable app icon placement (including whitespace where you want whitespace), ability to add a huge micro sd card to double your storage size (or swap it if you're bored with the media on this card and want something different for a road trip), ability to add and remove arbitrary files directly to/from the phone over cable without having to use iTunez spyware to do so, ability to go to pretty much any store and pick up a replacement charger/data cable for $5, support for a pointy stylus (on some models) instead of trying to use a marshmallow-on-the-end-of-a-stick capacitive stylus, etc., etc., etc.

Not to mention being able to take a video in any orientation and have it display correctly (i.e., not rotated 90 degrees) on any system...but from your comments, I'm guessing you partake of the entire apple pie, so you may not have seen this particular defect before if you only view your vids in your phone or on your Mac or via your Apple TV box. Oh, I didn't even know this one: apparently you can't email anything but a photo or video using the stock iPhone email app...huh. Guess you'll have to use the GMail account for business stuff, then...other Android advantages such as haptic feedback are pretty 'meh' for me, as I just turn them off anyway.

Looks like Apple is finally allowing homescreen widgets (?er, maybe? looks like you still need to buy an app?), so that's *one* thing off the list...once developers catch up and start providing more widget types, that is.

All that without having to root or 'jailbreak' the phone. If you root it, sky's the limit. True, most of the things you can do if you root the phone are things that your average Joe won't care much about (custom ROM's, complete bit-wise phone backups, ability to software-switch more system settings, ability to remove the stock apps instead of just disabling them, etc.), but to the tinkerer, they are delightful :)

My problem with the summary, other news sources (including NYT) and many comments is that Apple themselves state:

"Apple does not move its intellectual property into offshore tax havens and use it to sell products back into the US in order to avoid US tax; it does not use revolving loans from foreign subsidiaries to fund its domestic operations; it does not hold money on a Caribbean island; and it does not have a bank account in the Cayman Islands."

(From testimony of Apple Inc. before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations US Senate)
http://www.apple.com/pr/pdf/Apple_Testimony_to_PSI.pdf

Sorry. Forgot the link to the tech specs for the 4th generation iPad.

I personally would rather have my device charge in 60 minutes instead of 40 minutes and be able to use anyone's charger anywhere I go

That's your prerogative. But if you're trying to argue why Apple should switch, you have to address the priorities of other people, not just your own. Some people value faster charge, lack of orientation (makes it easy to plugin in the dark) and sturdiness. Your priorities are irrelevant to them.

Hell, they could have even made an 'extended' charging port that was capable of using their proprietary 'faster' cable but still allowed a micro USB to be connected for charging only.

You mean like selling an adapter? What a crazy idea...I wonder why they never thought of it? It's almost like for $19 added to the cost of a ~$700 phone, they could have completely obviated your entire argument.

It doesn't appear owners are very happy with them... http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD818ZM/A/lightning-to-usb-cable?fnode=3a
Also, Apple discussion forums are pretty scathing but happy people don't post there.

You'll find similar ratings on a majority of their other adaptors and cables, stuff made for a pittance and sold for $25+. Check out the fail that is Mini-Display Port (-> VGA or HDMI) for example.

On the upside, they do try new things and bring ideas to market. I've thanked Apple numerous times for the Mag-Safe power connector which they definitely popularized. (Whoever said the iMac popularized USB is wrong.)
Also, I thought I blew a MacBook Pro a year or 2 back when I plugged in a Chinese knock-off adaptor. The PSU brick popped right away and the notebook instantly powered down. It turned out to be OK but that's an experiment you don't retry so after that I always buy the less crappy, safe and warrantied chargers from Apple. A chip in the cable may have come in handy there, otherwise it does seem like a money grab.

except with the record companies.

The true history is that the labels forced DRM on Apple and over time, Apple's DRM along with the popularity of iPods and iTunes gave Apple negotiating leverage over the record companies since it sold 70% + of the digital music and no one else could sell DRM protected music for the iPod.

When they asked Apple to license their DRM, Steve Jobs said no and told them if they wanted interoperability with iTunes and iPods with other vendors let everyone sell DRM free music,

http://www.apple.com/ca/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/

Most people back then didn't care about DRM as long as they could play their music on iPods and burn their music to CDs,

Perhaps you should consider a new computer.

If you had an Apple II, you had everything you needed to develop new software for it.

Looks like they used a Multics box at MIT. http://www.frankston.com/public/?name=ImplementingVisiCalc

Mobile phones and tablets have no such tools.

Really?
http://developer.android.com/tools/sdk/eclipse-adt.html
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/IDEs/Conceptual/iOS_Simulator_Guide/GettingStartedwithiOSStimulator/GettingStartedwithiOSStimulator.html

Their operating systems are shit packed on top of shit

Rather subjective. They do quite a bit more than Apple DOS or MS-DOS ever did.

fiddly little distraction machines that function as brightly colored noisy little pets

Same as it ever was:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King's_Quest

a way to drain their parents' wallets by sending nonsense to each other 24 hours a day

Ever use a BBS back in the day?

the world-changing technology the PC made possible

The PC made computing accessible to commonfolk where it was previously the province of large institutions. Mobile continues this trend.

With the exception of FOSS, there hasn't been shit developed for any platform since.

We invented a new platform. Web Applications and APIs facilitated by cheap, commodity hardware have changed the nature of human communications and learning in the last 15 years.

distracted by Unity and HTML5 and Haskell and all the other flavors of proprietary dumbfuckery

Huh? None of those are proprietary. If a young person chose to learn about and use Haskell, I think they'd be well-equipped to learn quite a lot about how computers work.

Well, that's what Apple tries to imply (page 2):

Apple is likely the largest corporate income tax payer in the US, having paid nearly $6 billion in taxes to the US Treasury in FY2012. These payments account for $1 in every $40 in corporate income tax the US Treasury collected last year.

Note that that is an official testimony of Apple to the US Senate, so if it's a lie it's not likely to be very blatant. The fact that they payed $6 billion in 2012 has really not been contested, as you can check through a Google search. Whether it really makes Apple the largest tax payer, I can't confirm.

Samsung America has more employees in the USA than Apple does. However, as long as people think of Samsung as a Korean company...

Bullshit. At the end of 2011, Samsung had 21,531 employees in the Americas (mostly in the USA, see page 58). Around the same time (February 2012), Apple had 50,250 direct employees in the U.S.

Straight from the horses' mouths.

They seem to allow them under certain circumstances:
Spectrum ZX emulator.
TurboGrafx-16 emulator.
HP48GX emulator.

They seem to allow them under certain circumstances:
Spectrum ZX emulator.
TurboGrafx-16 emulator.
HP48GX emulator.

They seem to allow them under certain circumstances:
Spectrum ZX emulator.
TurboGrafx-16 emulator.
HP48GX emulator.

Sorry to break it to you, but there's a Mach kernel working inside your system, not a FreeBSD kernel as many idiots like to believe.

More precisely, there's a kernel composed of Mach-derived code (providing the low-level process and thread management, Mach messaging, VM system, and some low-level platform support), BSD-derived code (providing the high-level process management atop the Mach low-level code, VFS layer and some file systems that plug into it, and networking layer and networking stacks), and Apple-developed code in various places including I/O Kit. The Unix system call interface is provided by the BSD-derived code.

Sorry to break it to you, but there's a Mach kernel working inside your system, not a FreeBSD kernel as many idiots like to believe.

More precisely, there's a kernel composed of Mach-derived code (providing the low-level process and thread management, Mach messaging, VM system, and some low-level platform support), BSD-derived code (providing the high-level process management atop the Mach low-level code, VFS layer and some file systems that plug into it, and networking layer and networking stacks), and Apple-developed code in various places including I/O Kit. The Unix system call interface is provided by the BSD-derived code.

Sorry to break it to you, but there's a Mach kernel working inside your system, not a FreeBSD kernel as many idiots like to believe.

More precisely, there's a kernel composed of Mach-derived code (providing the low-level process and thread management, Mach messaging, VM system, and some low-level platform support), BSD-derived code (providing the high-level process management atop the Mach low-level code, VFS layer and some file systems that plug into it, and networking layer and networking stacks), and Apple-developed code in various places including I/O Kit. The Unix system call interface is provided by the BSD-derived code.

Sorry to break it to you, but there's a Mach kernel working inside your system, not a FreeBSD kernel as many idiots like to believe.

More precisely, there's a kernel composed of Mach-derived code (providing the low-level process and thread management, Mach messaging, VM system, and some low-level platform support), BSD-derived code (providing the high-level process management atop the Mach low-level code, VFS layer and some file systems that plug into it, and networking layer and networking stacks), and Apple-developed code in various places including I/O Kit. The Unix system call interface is provided by the BSD-derived code.

Sorry to break it to you, but there's a Mach kernel working inside your system, not a FreeBSD kernel as many idiots like to believe.

More precisely, there's a kernel composed of Mach-derived code (providing the low-level process and thread management, Mach messaging, VM system, and some low-level platform support), BSD-derived code (providing the high-level process management atop the Mach low-level code, VFS layer and some file systems that plug into it, and networking layer and networking stacks), and Apple-developed code in various places including I/O Kit. The Unix system call interface is provided by the BSD-derived code.

Sorry to break it to you, but there's a Mach kernel working inside your system, not a FreeBSD kernel as many idiots like to believe.

More precisely, there's a kernel composed of Mach-derived code (providing the low-level process and thread management, Mach messaging, VM system, and some low-level platform support), BSD-derived code (providing the high-level process management atop the Mach low-level code, VFS layer and some file systems that plug into it, and networking layer and networking stacks), and Apple-developed code in various places including I/O Kit. The Unix system call interface is provided by the BSD-derived code.

Then that makes two open specs that must be implemented: POSIX and X11. But you have a point that right now the only notable environments that focus on implementing these specs are desktop Linux and the free *BSDs. OS X, while based in part on FreeBSD, is not a free *BSD and no longer includes XQuartz as a standard feature.

So it looks like mostly FreeBSD and a little of the old Mach

Well, if you call the osfmk directory of the XNU source a little, I guess it's "a little of the old Mach", although a fair bit of that code comes from NeXT and Apple as well.

I think NetBSD was used as a means for porting between architectures more than a literal inheritance.

Well, let's look at the libc source (the libc part of libSystem):

$ fs . | xargs egrep -h '\$NetBSD:' | wc -l
49
$ fs . | xargs egrep -h '\$FreeBSD:' | wc -l
482

("fs" is a script that finds source files and prints their names to the standard output). The files it found with "NetBSD" in them were ./gen/FreeBSD/fmtcheck.c, ./gen/FreeBSD/lockf.c, ./gen/FreeBSD/stringlist.c, ./gen/NetBSD/utmpx.c, ./include/arpa/tftp.h, ./include/FreeBSD/nl_types.h, ./include/getopt.h, ./include/limits.h, ./include/NetBSD/utmpx.h, ./include/paths.h, ./include/search.h, ./include/stddef.h, ./include/stringlist.h, ./include/util.h, ./include/wchar.h, ./include/wctype.h, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/getopt.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/getopt_long.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/hcreate.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/tdelete.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/tfind.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/tsearch.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/twalk.c, ./stdlib/NetBSD/strfmon.c, ./string/FreeBSD/strndup.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcscat.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcscmp.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcscpy.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcscspn.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcslcat.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcslcpy.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcslen.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcsncat.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcsncmp.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcspbrk.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcsspn.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemchr.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemcmp.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemcpy.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemmove.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemset.c, and ./util/fparseln.c.

The "NetBSD" and "FreeBSD" directory names are somewhat historical - for example, the 10.8.4 version of getopt_long() comes from NetBSD.

of course there are probably newer bits of FreeBSD used that are only known internally to Apple.

And other bits only known to people who download the open source bits and look at them. :-)

Then the timeline proceeds with Mac OS X as what appears to be where all of the development is taking place (including inheriting from FreeBSD), with Darwin and OS X Server only ever taking from OS X like mirrors. Then suddenly in 2006 this model changes and the OS X 10.5 beta inherits from Darwin 9.0 beta, when OS X 10.5 and Darwin 9 mature the model goes Darwin -> Mac OS X -> Mac OS X Server...

That's the timeline, not reality. Darwin was always produced by taking parts of OS X and making them available in source form; the model didn't change with Leopard.

Then in 2007 during the OS X 10.7 beta the model changes again when the server branch is eradicated all together and gets integrated into OS X and OS X gets integrated into Darwin so the model goes OS X -> Darwin again but without the server

So it looks like mostly FreeBSD and a little of the old Mach

Well, if you call the osfmk directory of the XNU source a little, I guess it's "a little of the old Mach", although a fair bit of that code comes from NeXT and Apple as well.

I think NetBSD was used as a means for porting between architectures more than a literal inheritance.

Well, let's look at the libc source (the libc part of libSystem):

$ fs . | xargs egrep -h '\$NetBSD:' | wc -l
49
$ fs . | xargs egrep -h '\$FreeBSD:' | wc -l
482

("fs" is a script that finds source files and prints their names to the standard output). The files it found with "NetBSD" in them were ./gen/FreeBSD/fmtcheck.c, ./gen/FreeBSD/lockf.c, ./gen/FreeBSD/stringlist.c, ./gen/NetBSD/utmpx.c, ./include/arpa/tftp.h, ./include/FreeBSD/nl_types.h, ./include/getopt.h, ./include/limits.h, ./include/NetBSD/utmpx.h, ./include/paths.h, ./include/search.h, ./include/stddef.h, ./include/stringlist.h, ./include/util.h, ./include/wchar.h, ./include/wctype.h, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/getopt.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/getopt_long.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/hcreate.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/tdelete.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/tfind.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/tsearch.c, ./stdlib/FreeBSD/twalk.c, ./stdlib/NetBSD/strfmon.c, ./string/FreeBSD/strndup.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcscat.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcscmp.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcscpy.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcscspn.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcslcat.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcslcpy.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcslen.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcsncat.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcsncmp.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcspbrk.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wcsspn.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemchr.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemcmp.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemcpy.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemmove.c, ./string/FreeBSD/wmemset.c, and ./util/fparseln.c.

The "NetBSD" and "FreeBSD" directory names are somewhat historical - for example, the 10.8.4 version of getopt_long() comes from NetBSD.

of course there are probably newer bits of FreeBSD used that are only known internally to Apple.

And other bits only known to people who download the open source bits and look at them. :-)

Then the timeline proceeds with Mac OS X as what appears to be where all of the development is taking place (including inheriting from FreeBSD), with Darwin and OS X Server only ever taking from OS X like mirrors. Then suddenly in 2006 this model changes and the OS X 10.5 beta inherits from Darwin 9.0 beta, when OS X 10.5 and Darwin 9 mature the model goes Darwin -> Mac OS X -> Mac OS X Server...

That's the timeline, not reality. Darwin was always produced by taking parts of OS X and making them available in source form; the model didn't change with Leopard.

Then in 2007 during the OS X 10.7 beta the model changes again when the server branch is eradicated all together and gets integrated into OS X and OS X gets integrated into Darwin so the model goes OS X -> Darwin again but without the server

No.

Cellular data is used for data communication in cellular networks. It doesn't affect your ability to make or receive phone calls

Your iPhone will still connect to the cellular network, will still show the bars of signal strength, will still allow you to make or receive phone calls, will still let you send or receive SMS messages, and will still run your battery down looking for a network if it can't find one.

The iPad 2 is still available. You can go and buy one right now if you wish: http://store.apple.com/go/ipad2

If you happen upon a used iPhone, such as a hand-me-down from someone that upgraded to the newest shiney, you likely can find a good deal on an older 3g or 4 model.

Then you can use the free enterprise/IT software iPhone configuration utility (Link is to the Windows version, but there is a Mac version as well)

This will let you create policies to push to the phone to limit resources and lock settings down.

You can give it a fixed set of contacts that can't be modified (for you and other close family),
limit facetime calls and data usage to avoid extra charges on your cellular bill,
lock the apple store to varying levels (including completely - highly recommended if you link it to your own itunes account!),
as well as enforce other app and setting limits.

The idea is normally an IT department would get in a batch of phones, link them all to the company itunes account, and push predefined settings and limitations. Then they are assigned to employees.
In this case, just think of it as crazy detailed parental control settings.
It also provides for IT department control during use, where it would be inconvenient to get your hands on the device. You can push apps to it if/when needed, to location finding and locking, etc.
You can even go all advanced and set it to keep a permanent VPN to an openvpn server you run, so you can reach the phone as long as it has some form of 3g or wifi connectivity.

Personally I couldn't really recommend purchasing a new iPhone for a 4 year old, but if your the one that ends up with the relatives old computing gear, free would be a good deal to take advantage of.

The only other functional equivalent setup for a smartphone that I'm aware of would be a Blackberry device... But unfortunately this needs way more always-on infrastructure on the back end to even make work, such as the blackberry information server, and something to link that to such as an exchange server. Not too many people have that already setup however.

I've not yet found any such equivalent software features for Android.
Assuming it does and it's something you can run without a full IT department of resources behind it, the phone itself might be a more attractive option to purchase new or used.

Lastly, if you are willing to drop the video conference call requirement - dumb phones would be a perfect fit for a child.
They have some pretty rugged models out there for very cheap, so losing $25 on the phone isn't as big of a deal if it gets lost, stolen, or broken.
Just be mindful of data connections (aka avoid that cell plan option if you can!)
Todays dumb phones seem to purposely go out of their way to rip people off in data charges.
Most phones these days have dedicated "mail" and "web" buttons that can not be disabled, will always charge the minimum 1 minute of data usage no matter how fast you exit the app by slamming the end button (something you may remember to do, but your child will not), and they seem to locate these always-on rip-off buttons right around the most common functions such as send/end/ok and the dpad.
IMHO a lot of models are also lacking in the parental control department, so do your research before buying a model.

Good luck!

http://support.apple.com/kb/PH11229

I think Apple's terms of service says it all and that all medical apps need tossed out since they would break the tos of the device. Or am I missing something. http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iOS7.pdf

7.5 YOU FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE iOS SOFTWARE AND SERVICES ARE NOT INTENDED OR SUITABLE FOR USE IN SITUATIONS OR ENVIRONMENTS WHERE THE FAILURE OR TIME DELAYS OF, OR ERRORS OR INACCURACIES IN, THE CONTENT, DATA OR INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE iOS SOFTWARE OR SERVICES COULD LEAD TO DEATH, PERSONAL INJURY, OR SEVERE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE OPERATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES, AIRCRAFT NAVIGATION OR COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, LIFE SUPPORT OR WEAPONS SYSTEMS.

if that really matters....

one note for ipad

Actually the 9 million number applies to just the 5S and 5C, according to Apple's press release.

you can't play GTA on your new iPhone.

Yes you can.

you can't play GTA on your new iPhone.

Yes you can.