Slashdot Mirror


iPad Is a "Huge Step Backward"

An anonymous reader writes "FSF's John Sullivan launches the Defective by Design campaign and petition to rain on Steve's parade, barely minutes out of the starting gate. 'This is a huge step backward in the history of computing,' said FSF's Holmes Wilson, 'If the first personal computers required permission from the manufacturer for each new program or new feature, the history of computing would be as dismally totalitarian as the milieu in Apple's famous Super Bowl ad.' The iPad has DRM writ large: you can only install what Apple says you may, and 'computing' goes consumer mainstream — no more twiddling, just sit back, spend your money, and watch the show — while we allow you to." What is clear is that the rise of the App Store removes control of the computer from the user. It makes me wonder what the next generation of OS X will look like.

186 of 1,634 comments (clear)

  1. I've said it before and I'll say it again by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And I honestly don't mean this as a troll, but anyone who buys an Apple product *NOT* expecting it to be locked down tighter than Ann Coulter's vagina deserves to be disappointed. Buying an Apple and expecting freedom is like buying something from Sony and being shocked when it only supports some bullshit propriety storage or media format than only Sony makes. Apple is about doing what Steve tells you to do, or at least says is okay for you to do. If Apple could get away with locking down their Macbooks and other PC's so that you could only download their approved software, they probably would.

    Apple keeps it simple: Here's what this does. It's elegant and does what it does very well. We don't want you screwing that up by messing around with it without our approval. If you want open and free, go somewhere else and take your chances.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Thank you for this. The only thing I love more than a new Apple product is Ann Coulter's VJJ. I think I'm in heaven.

    2. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep yep. People (especially here) missing the point of Apple is pretty common. Skimmed the iPad article yesterday and had nothing but iPhone flashbacks.

      "It's derivative."

      "It's the same as (crappy, unpolished, user-hostile device that didn't sell) so no one is going to buy one."

      "The hardware has been out for (absurd number of years) so Apple has utterly stopped innovating and will be going out of business next year."

      "No one wants (feature that everyone wants)."

      "It doesn't have (feature that only ubergeeks care about) so no one is going to buy one."

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    3. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by hamburgler007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I thought she was a dude.

    4. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by LaminatorX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was disappointed to see the iPad following the App Store model rather than full-on Mac OS X. On my MacBook Pro, or my wife's iMac, I feel like I get the best of both worlds: a nice consistant "just-works" gui with all the power/control I might need just a terminal window away.

      FSF is very much on target with the locked-down AppStore model being the biggest threat to user freedom that we've ever seen, bigger than software patents. It's "Tivo-ization" writ large.

    5. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually, you're both right.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by pydev · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Buying an Apple and expecting freedom is like

      OS X is not locked down. This is something that started with the iPhone.

      If you want open and free, go somewhere else and take your chances.

      I will. iPad may not be useful in itself, and it is certainly not the first, but all of Apple's marketing dollars may finally get this market segment to take off.

    7. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by inviolet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apple keeps it simple: Here's what this does. It's elegant and does what it does very well. We don't want you screwing that up by messing around with it without our approval. If you want open and free, go somewhere else and take your chances.

      Yep yep. I've hated on Apple from the beginning, because I'm a hacker (in the take-it-apart/tinker/design/build sense) from way back and I very very much like to control all of the assets in my world. And I too was offended at the iPhone's integrated battery.

      BUT...

      I bought an iPhone this year. This is one asset that is so important that I just want it to WORK. I don't want to worry about viruses, or ongoing maintenance. This is my ONLY TELEPHONE LINE, and so I finally do approve of somebody keeping it locked down and pristine.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    8. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by _LORAX_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All three of you presume she is human to begin with.

    9. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by Bemopolis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wait a second, wait a second, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
      Wait.



      Ann Coulter's a WOMAN?!?!?

      --
      "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
    10. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by ByOhTek · · Score: 2, Funny

      So you agree with my hypothesis that she is actually a horse dressed as a human?

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    11. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 4, Informative

      MacOS is not locked down. I can install any software I want, and most open-source Unix programs compile and run without any modifications or hacking. The developer tools are available at no cost, and there are no restrictions on who can write and distribute apps to users. Also, you can run almost any modern OS on Apple hardware (I've installed XP, Solaris and several flavors of Linux on Macs).

      None of the above is true of the Apple mobile line, which is why I stay away from it.

    12. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 2, Informative

      My horse is really pissed at you now. And, she bites.

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    13. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
    14. Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again by metamatic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So basically, you're part of the problem. You've somehow swallowed the line that BlackBerry, Android and Symbian phones are a danger to the network because they can run software that hasn't been approved by a single vendor.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  2. Re:Dear FSF by Tobor+the+Eighth+Man · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Frankly, it doesn't matter if it happens to OS X. What matters is that it could become the standard going forward, and if we've learned anything from the iPhone and iPod it's that Apple has tremendous influence in driving the standards of consumer electronics. The reason for the app store has nothing to do with security and everything about Apple wringing every last penny out of developers by taking an arbitrary cut of their sales and providing only limited QC and indexing that could easily be provided by any other site or service. If people want a choice, they should GET a choice - use the app store, or don't. Instead, Apple's making the choice for you. And that's no choice at all.

  3. Steve Jobs has gazed too long into the abyss by axl917 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Apple of today is more 1984-ish than Microsoft ever was at the time of the aforementioned Superbowl ad.

    1. Re:Steve Jobs has gazed too long into the abyss by CrazyBusError · · Score: 5, Informative

      I hate to break this to you, but the 1984 ad was aimed at IBM, not Microsoft. Microsoft were small-fry at the time, in comparison.

      --
      -Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience-
    2. Re:Steve Jobs has gazed too long into the abyss by CrazyBusError · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know, it was an easy shot, but there's an important difference.

      The lockdown here is on *two* devices. You want a laptop or desktop you can do whatever you want with? There's the macbook, imac and mac pro for that. Want an expandable handheld appliance with a limited (albeit ever-expanding) functionality that'll have no hidden surprises? There's your iPad and iPhone.

      You may as well criticise arcade machine makers for vetting all the roms you can put in their hardware. Or any of the console makers for vetting what's available for theirs. Or that kindle can't do anything but display books. Experience has shown them all, time and time again that as soon as you open up a platform to anyone and everyone, quality and reliability take a hit, not to mention susceptibility to attack. It's a specific product for a specific market and like the iPhone, will be hated by geeks everywhere, but loved by everyone else who want something that just works. Apple will likely do little to stop people jailbreaking these things, they'll just make it difficult enough that only determined people do it.

      --
      -Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience-
    3. Re:Steve Jobs has gazed too long into the abyss by Daetrin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The Apple of today is more 1984-ish than Microsoft ever was at the time of the aforementioned Superbowl ad."

      Aside from the IBM/Microsoft thing which others have mentioned, has anyone else noticed the interesting correlation between the Superbowl ad and Apple's logos?

      In the 80's Apple was an upstart, fighting against the big "totalitarian establishment," and the commercial showed a dark and grey world before the brightly colored Apple person ran in and smashed it. It then ended with the bright, cheery rainbow apple logo.

      Then in the late 90s, Apple switched from the bright colorful logo to a series of monochrome logos.

      Some other company (Google?) could remake the 1984 Superbowl ad with the current Apple logo plastered all over everything (trademark issues aside) and it would still be thematically appropriate color-wise. Obviously the FSF would argue that it would still be thematically appropriate in other senses as well.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  4. The Don't Buy It by whisper_jeff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    iPod Touch.

    iPhone.

    They're both spectacular devices. The iPad will work within a similar ecology and thus has a good chance of being a pretty sweet device (time will tell, of course).

    But.

    If you don't like it, don't buy it.

    Simple.

    1. Re:The Don't Buy It by gad_zuki! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I dont think the problem is as simplistic as you make it out to be. I have an iphone and I grudgingly accept its limitations because its a portable device that needs to be rock-solid and not randomly drain the battery on me, or whatever issues Apple has with multitasking.

      Ive been thinking of buying a tablet for some time and have remained somewhat open-minded about this tablet, but you cant sell me the exact same iphone model with simply a larger device. You cant tell me I cant have flash for something that will primarily be a web tablet. You cant expect people to buy flash apps turned into iphone apps for every site. You cant say "Well, its really an iphone, but its not, so when you complain just remember its an iphone sans phone." Its supposed to be a tablet computer not a super ipod touch. Perhaps they should have marketed it as an ipod for your grandpa like those giant remote controls.

  5. Should we give (l)users control? by Azureflare · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First, the FSF needs to convince us average users need to have control. Why should average users have control over their computer? Isn't this what got us the virus nightmare in Windows?

    Doesn't migrating to the iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch model mean that social engineering has much less of an impact to the security of a system? I would think this would be a good thing.

    I don't think Mac OS X will ever go away from giving you the control it does (and it is quite nice), but Mac OS X is not appropriate on a device like the iPad.

    In fact, I would compare the iPad to the upcoming yet-to-be-made Chromium netbook. The vision Google laid out for their device is pretty much exactly the same as Apple's vision of the iPad. Except that Apple is actually _less_ connected in to your device than Google would be.

    Sure, this is bad for the FSF, but what alternative vision of computing do they offer?

    Attacking Apple's products is one thing. Why not create your own open source tablet to compete, and let the marketplace decide?

    1. Re:Should we give (l)users control? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bullshit. How many iPhone clones have hit the market in the last 2 years? The hardware is virtually identical.

      It's not about the hardware, it's about the software. And if you want the software, you've got to drink the Kool-aid, because as soon as you start screwing with the software, it just doesn't work as well.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    2. Re:Should we give (l)users control? by jareth-0205 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Attacking Apple's products is one thing. Why not create your own open source tablet to compete, and let the marketplace decide?

      Because that's not the purpose of the FSF. If the only way to warn the public about a Potential Harmful Thing is to create your own multinational corporation with the engineering power to create open competition, that's somewhat going to limit the informed debate...

      Watchdog organisation: "Look, this make of washing machine regularly blows up and kills anyone nearby"
      Company's apologist: "People are buying it, so obviously the market is deciding! Create your own non-explosive type and sell it"

      Sometimes people don't know all the consequences of the purchase they make, that's what the FSF are trying to do. Guess what, sometimes the market gets it wrong...

      Separately from the locked-down issue, do you *honestly* think that people are not going to be a bit surprised at some of the limitations of the device? No Flash therefore no Vimeo, Hulu and lots of websites will be hamstrung? It looks like a laptop without the physical keyboard, people are going to expect similar functionality.

  6. Re:Dear FSF by kieran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The FSF isn't saying the iPad should be banned, it's just raising awareness about the need for freedom in software.

    Frankly with the amount of bullshit publicity this (somewhat underwhelming) device has had so far, I'm happy for a worthwhile organisation like the FSF to hijack a little for it's cause.

  7. Re:Dear FSF by shoemilk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And there's no chance whatsoever that this will ever happen to Mac OS X, so don't lose sleep over it.

    Really? I can totally see Apple releasing a new mac mini with this OS because *it just works*. Then putting a premium on future machines with the OSX variant. I think the saddest part is that for a large portion of the population, that's probably best. Would we have such large bot nets if every Joe could only get their stuff from one place? Doesn't even Ubuntu try to mimic this in some respects with its downloader?

  8. At least nobody is complaining about by notaspy · · Score: 4, Funny

    it having only one mouse button.

    --
    hi!
  9. A Huge Step Sideways by decipher_saint · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The iPad is a huge step sideways, it's neither good nor bad. Unfortunately it tries to fill a position already inhabited by existing devices (some of which are Apple products).

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
  10. Re:Dear FSF by Yvanhoe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not sure how Apple's DRMs are more of a choice than any DRMs are.
    If users like the idea of being locked into the store, fine. RMS, the EFF, Slashdot, "whine" by showing people the bars they are getting into. I must say that I never heard Apple bragging that they locked in users or that it was hard to get the kind of apps you like for their devices. For that I thank those "whiners".

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  11. Re:Dear FSF by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If people want a choice, they should GET a choice - use the app store, or don't. Instead, Apple's making the choice for you.

    But that's exactly the choice any iPhone or iPod Touch user has right now! They both perform their primary functions perfectly well without the owner ever using the App Store.

    For that matter, owning either device is also a choice. Don't like the fact that you can only (officially) purchase and install apps that have been approved by Apple? Use a different phone/media player.

  12. Re:Dear FSF by rotide · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think he's saying it's a step backwards because they are taking, what is essentially a tablet computer, and 100% locking it down to only do what Apple explicitly allows.

    This thing isn't a phone and it's not an mp3 player, it is a tablet computer that is directly trying to compete with netbooks and even laptops. But again, they are entirely locking down the platform and the software to such a degree that any freedom is entirely lost. You can fully understand a phone being locked down to phone applications delivered by the manufacturer and the same with mp3 players. The software is written for the device and that's all there really is to say about it.

    The iPad on the other hand, again, is a computer meant to be used like a laptop with its own internet connection. Locking it down so harshly is a step backwards in the usability of the device.

    That's my impression, anyways.

  13. Re:Dear FSF by Anonymusing · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Furthermore, none of this is required of any consumer. The government is not handing these out to schoolchildren. They don't come free in the mail. You won't be required to own one in order to buy groceries or flush the toilet. It's a fricking LUXURY ITEM, folks. You buy all its locked-in glory BY CHOICE.

    Also, as someone who owned a number of various personal computers in the 70s and 80s, I'd say there was tacit lock-in simply because of incompatibility between all the nascent hardware and OSes. But worse, some home computers (example) actually had hardware that locked out unlicensed cartridges from running.

    If the sky is falling right now, then it has been raining sky for a long time. I mean, if you're going to complain about lock-in, how about the current state of American health insurance?

    --
    Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
  14. A step nowhere is more like it. by Shivetya · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Its small enough to sprout legs of its own and too big too be convenient to carry about, well it would fit in some purses. I certainly cannot pop it out over the dinner table while out and not feel obtrusive, even at the local coffee shop it would be to overt. I guess that is where it will excel, people who want to be seen with one.

      Throw in that it cannot multitask and its just a large Touch. Now if the screen were larger, one the order of 12 inches, I would be all over it. It would be large enough to display more than one item and let me interact with it. Even it were it states it runs whatever is in the foreground only.

    I need the capabilities of a PC as well as the audio/visual abilities this device offers. The iPhone is nice because its sized right. It cannot do what my laptop can and as such is sized appropriately. It does not do enough to justify its size. Throw in the what the article is about, its so damn locked down in content and capability it isn't so much a step backward as a step nowhere

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:A step nowhere is more like it. by PhilHibbs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If the iPad fails, it will still drive the rest of the industry to up their game in the tablet space. The original iPhone wasn't all that great, but look at what we have now. You might still not like the iPhone, but would Android and WebOS be where they are now without it?

    2. Re:A step nowhere is more like it. by lwsimon · · Score: 3, Informative

      I also noted that the 3G version is visually different from the WiFi version --- there is a dark accent on the top of the tablet, on the back.

      That couldn't *possibly* be so everyone around you will instantly know if you cheaped out and got the wifi-only version, now would it?

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
  15. Re:Dear FSF by xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can accept that many consumers don't care, or even like, being locked into the Apple store. I'm somewhat more sceptical that many consumers like that that "lock" is enforced by criminal law and that they'll be jailed if they ever try to leave the Apple store. I think John Sullivan brings up a valid concern. Also, you shouldn't conflate the issue with choice: the FSF and RMS, to my knowledge, have never advocated choice. Having the freedom to use your device the way you want is a separate concern from choosing which device to use.

  16. FSF-approved version: +$99 by nweaver · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you want what the FSF purports to want in the iPad and iPhone, its only $99/year more to be a certified developer, and that allows you to upload your own code onto up to a hundred selected devices. The process to become a developer is pretty painless (I did it for my own iPod touch, simply to have the potential to do some hacking down the road).

    Similar abilities exist for companies to upload their own selection of apps to corporate devices, for $250/year.

    Apple really isn't limiting the freedom to tinker for those who actually WANT to tinker, instead they realize that for most users , having an approved-code-only model is something the users actually wants: it means they have confidence in the system.

    How many people will happily grab tons of random free apps off the app-store? Would they have the same attitude if they didn't have apple saying "we've at least done a cursory check of this to make sure these free random apps won't *BLEEP* you up the rear"

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
    1. Re:FSF-approved version: +$99 by happyfrogcow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So I have to buy the hardware, then I have to buy the right to use the hardware in a way that I want to? I call BS.

      So many people are playing the "FSF is Looney" card. I fully support them in this effort to raise awareness.

    2. Re:FSF-approved version: +$99 by daid303 · · Score: 2, Informative

      [quote]The process to become a developer is pretty painless (I did it for my own iPod touch, simply to have the potential to do some hacking down the road).[/quote]After 3 weeks of mailing with support I gave up. They never got my account working. Painless is not requiring any registration/payment, and supplying the documentation and development software for nothing.

      And I only wanted to look at the iPhone api, just to see if the platform would be worth developing for. But this experience told me enough.

  17. Re:Dear FSF by Idiomatick · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is the computer illiterates that get fucked by these thing not the informed. Apple doesn't come with a 'this is a trap' label on it. So many unsuspecting users buy an apple product and then shortly after start getting pulled into the costly trap. One apple product supports another sometimes they require another (not a real requirement but an enforcement), other times they outright install more apple products on their own. Eventually if you decide that you don't want everything you own to be apple products it becomes a COSTLY extraction process as you have to replace most of the electronics you own.

    BTW Jobs originally didn't want any apps for the iphone, the app store was a middle ground, allowing 3rd parties to have an effect on the product whilst retaining total control.

  18. Re:Dear FSF by Anonymusing · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If people want a choice, they should GET a choice - use the app store, or don't. Instead, Apple's making the choice for you.

    Are you serious? Is Steve Jobs now running the government??? You do not need to buy an Apple product. I hear Google has some stuff going on in this area....

    --
    Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
  19. Re:Dear FSF by StingRay02 · · Score: 4, Funny

    You're absolutely right. It's such a shame that no one has yet determined a way to break the locks that bind the iPhone and the iPod Touch to the App Store. You could even say these devices are imprisoned, jailed. If only some intrepid group of hackers could find a way to break these devices out of jail, allowing those that wish it a way to modify their devices or install "unauthorized" applications onto them. If only there were some way to get the word out, and allow those that wish to make use of this mythical hack to find it. Perhaps some day such technology will exist.

  20. Oh, come on. by mea37 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The iPad is not a general-purpose computing device. It cannot be compared to, nor can it show the direction of, the market for general-purpose computers. This is like saying that the segway is a major step backward in international travel because it can't fly.

    If the next version of OSX were to have similar limitations, that would be worthy of this line of criticism. Of course, the criticism would then be unnecessary, as the Mac would drop out of the PC market promptly of its own accord.

    1. Re:Oh, come on. by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The iPad is not a general-purpose computing device.

      Only because its locked down. Remember that. Only because its locked down.

      It cannot be compared to, nor can it show the direction of, the market for general-purpose computers.

      Yes, because general-purpose computers aren't arbitrarily locked down.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
  21. Re:The Don't Buy It - iPass by osoroco · · Score: 2, Interesting

    yeah, I agree, I won't buy it because I don't like it.
    In fact, I publicly announce here and now, that I WILL NOT buy anything that I DON'T LIKE.
    Thanks Jeff, you've opened my eyes!

    All sarcasm aside, pretty much everyone was expecting something to compete with the kindle -and- netbook/tablet pc's, ie. running a full OS X, not a supersized iphone, hence the disappointment on the iPad

  22. Re:Dear FSF by TrippTDF · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's why I prefer Android's approach- they have an app store, anyone can get into it, OR, you can just install packages directly from websites... they give the choice of the nice, clean easy way, OR the DIY for those that want. The Android interface might not be quite as clean as the iPhone, but it gives a world more chioce.

    Not unlike Ubuntu- you have the option of the super clean Apps installer, but there's nothing stopping the power user from doing more.

  23. Misses the point by Philotomy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the complaint misses the point of the device. It's not supposed to be a full-blown personal computer. It's supposed to be an iPod for documents (including web pages and especially books -- note that bookstore), doing for them what the iPod did for music: let me carry it around and interact with it in my easy chair or my bed or on a park bench.

    1. Re:Misses the point by u38cg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What I don't get about this is why you can't do any of these things with a laptop and why it's better to carry around a device with an unprotected screen instead. I just cannot imagine using one of these tablets and I can't imagine it having the mass market appeal that makes, say, the iPod or the iPhone the success that they are.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    2. Re:Misses the point by rotide · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is exactly what I don't get.

      The iPod was a personal music and later a video and limited "game/app" device. The latter obviously more of a "can do" versus "is made for".

      The iPhone was primarily a phone with PDA functionality and an iPod built in. Feels like either an iPod with phone functionality or an iPhone with iPod functionality. Not sure which, but it was replacing something you already carried in your pocket. Ok, I get the need.

      The iPad.

      Ok, it can't make calls.
      It's an unportable iPod.
      It's an eReader with a bright ass screen that will strain your eyes.
      It can do limited word/spreadsheet processing.
      It surfs the internet the way Apple says you should (no flash, IE: no Hulu, etc).
      It plays limited games so it's not going to dominate the handheld market.
      It only plays video from the apple store but the iPod et al already do that albeit on smaller screens.

      I just don't get what niche this thing is supposed to fill. Is it a crippled laptop or a huge iPod?

      And starting at $500 for the version without 3G surfing capability, which arguably is it's strongest trait, I don't see the "Well, I already had one of these in my pocket (cell phone) and this one does it better plus it does tons more (iPhone), so I must get one." argument.

      It seems to be a solution to a problem, or a replacement for a product no one needed to invent.

    3. Re:Misses the point by ciderVisor · · Score: 2, Informative

      It only plays video from the apple store

      Not true. You can upload any video file through the iTunes app, so long as it's in the right format for the iPod. It doesn't have to be purchased through the iTunes Music Store.

      --
      Squirrel!
    4. Re:Misses the point by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's an eReader with a bright ass screen that will strain your eyes.

      You do realize they have brightness controls ... right? You can turn the backlight off if you'd like, though you'd have to be in some pretty bright outdoor light to read it afterwords.

      Interestingly enough, the iPod touch and iphone are capable of auto adjusting to ambient light although it doesn't work that great by my standards.

      It surfs the internet the way Apple says you should (no flash, IE: no Hulu, etc).

      Okay, no flash would bother some people, personally this really is a feature to me, but to each his own. As for hulu, it works fine for me without installing flash on my Mac, far better than in a browser actually, though its still a flash app under the hood I'm sure, it certainly chews through the CPU like flash.

      Its an iPod touch with a bigger/higher resolution screen. Some people will like that, I've often wanted that, but I wouldn't buy one. Other people will like it more, some like you and I will have little to no use for it.

      Its a solution to a problem you don't have, but that doesn't mean it can't solve someone elses.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    5. Re:Misses the point by cowscows · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It fits a perfect spot for me. But I think my priorities are a little bit different than yours. The 3G is irrelevant to me, because I see this as something that I'd just use around the house, where I've got WiFi. I wouldn't be carrying this around with me everywhere like I do my iPhone. I hardly ever even take my laptop out of the house.

      I like to fart around on the internet while I sit on the couch in my living room and watch TV with my wife. I can currently do that on my 17" MacBook, which I love, but which often a pain in the ass to deal with while chilling on the couch. It's a little heavier than I like, every time I move or get up I need to carefully set it down, I generally need to find a big hardcover book or something to slip under it because the heat it produces is uncomfortable, and the battery has a couple years on it and can't make it through a full football game on a single charge (I'd rather not have to deal with moving the power cord).

      I can also sit on the couch and browse the web on my iphone, which mostly solves the above problems, but with the downside of a tiny screen that requires lots and lots of constant zooming in and out and panning around and that gets aggravating. The other primary home use of my iphone is us lying in bed and watching stupid youtube videos before we fall asleep. Oh, and also I use while I'm camping out on the toilet taking care of business.

      Anyways, my point is that I can come up with a bunch of things that I use my iphone for that I think the ipad could do better. And at least one use for my laptop that the ipad would do better. Now I'm not sure that it does those things so much better that it's worth $500, but if prices come down a little I could see it becoming more appealing to me.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    6. Re:Misses the point by Inda · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Firstly, I hate it and I hate everything it does and doesn't do. It is pointless.

      But it's not meant for you or I, nor anyone else who reads Slashdot.

      It's meant for my wife. My wife who runs Firefox, types "facebook" into Firefox's default Google homepage, clicks the first result and then spends the next three hours talking bollocks to her friends.

      If the iPad runs Facebook, it's a winning.

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    7. Re:Misses the point by c4t3y3 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's an eReader with a bright ass screen that will strain your eyes.

      Did you know that some programmers spend at least 8 hours daily reading on a LCD? What strains your eyes is an inadequate contrast between ambient light and your device. LCD is usable, e-ink is better because not having light of its own, it's always adjusted to the environment.

      It surfs the internet the way Apple says you should (no flash, IE: no Hulu, etc).

      Adobe can shove... well, let's just say that Flash on OS X is slow, insecure, and Adobe won't fix it.

      It plays limited games so it's not going to dominate the handheld market.

      They want you to buy in the AppStore. So far it's doing great.

      I just don't get what niche this thing is supposed to fill. Is it a crippled laptop or a huge iPod?

      iPad: Browsing, email, photos, video, music, games, ebooks.
      Watch the Keynote.

  24. Re:Dear FSF by StripedCow · · Score: 2

    If the first personal computers required permission from the manufacturer for each new program or new feature

    ...then, for sure, Linux would not have existed.

    Hell, if this continues, I wonder if there's a future for open-source projects.

    I say big shame on Apple for abusing an open-source operating system (BSD) in this way.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
  25. Re:Dear FSF by Zordak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doesn't even Ubuntu try to mimic this in some respects with its downloader?

    Do you honestly believe that having a repository where people can easily get most of the stuff they want is the same thing as having a single app store that is the only place your computer will let you get stuff from? I don't think anybody would be complaining if Apple had a nice, tidy app store, but still let people run arbitrary code on their stuff.

    --

    Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
  26. Central repository is good by Enderandrew · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One of the things I love about Linux is a central repository for software, being able to find all software updates in one place, and having one simple way to install and remove apps.

    The App Store is great in this regard. The issue isn't that the App Store restricts the user, but rather the App Store restricts the developer. Not anyone can simply get an app in the store. You have to pass Apple's magic gates.

    Apple would never let any old app in the store, nor would they allow users to simply add other "repositories" to the App Store, because it would breed piracy. But the basic concept of the App Store is still solid.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    1. Re:Central repository is good by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One of the things I love about Linux is a central repository for software, being able to find all software updates in one place, and having one simple way to install and remove apps.

      The App Store is great in this regard. The issue isn't that the App Store restricts the user, but rather the App Store restricts the developer.

      Actually, yes, it does restrict the user as well. While Linux distros have a "central repository", you're still free, as a user, to 1) use third-party repositories, and 2) install software without going through a repository. If at least one of those was supported by iPad (and iPhone, etc), it wouldn't have been an issue. Indeed, it's precisely what Android does - one "official" marketplace, but you can skip it altogether if you know how to get what you want otherwise.

  27. Re:Dear FSF by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Frankly with the amount of bullshit publicity this (somewhat underwhelming) device has had so far, I'm happy for a worthwhile organisation like the FSF to hijack a little for it's cause.

    But this 'worthwhile organisation (sic)' comes across as a bunch of wingnuts. The principles behind the FSF are well and good, but no one (except perhaps RMS) would consider them applicable to every computing device under the sun. The iPad is a consumer device, designed around the needs and (lack of) abilities of the general public. It's really a toy. It is a reflection of what's loopy in this country that it received so much publicity, but what the hell. In a world of 'reality' shows, American Idol, Glen Beck, Sarah Palin and a host of other barometers of popular culture, it's just one more weird little thing.

    The iPad has little to do with the computing world at large, despite the hype and the rhetoric and not really a target for Free and Open Software. Yeah, the FSF saw some potential free publicity but I rather don't think anyone was listening.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  28. Average users don't WANT control by aussersterne · · Score: 3, Insightful

    over their computers. Go ahead. Give it to them. Explain that they need to right-click on the icon and choose "Run as Administrator," or that they need to run spyware scans, or virus scans, or allow the machine to install updates, or use Browser X instead of Browser Y, or manage a filesystem in a clean and organized way. What do they say? Come on, we've all heard it.

    "Can't you fix it so that I don't have to worry about that?"
    "Why doesn't the computer just do that for me?"
    "Why do I have to do that? I never had to do that before."
    "Do I really have to worry about this stuff?"
    "Just make it work, I don't care how, and I don't want to know."
    "I'll just buy a new computer."

    They DO NOT WANT to perform maintenance, worry about security, track down tools, learn to use said tools, administer storage or filesystems, etc. Given the choice between technology that slides into malfunction when not administered properly (i.e. "it's broken" as far as they can tell) and no technology at all, most regular people will simply opt for "none," as in "I tried it for a while, but it was always broken or crashing or getting a virus, it sucked. I sold it and just went back to my old XYZ."

    Say what you will, but the masses are sheep and they're happy as sheep. You cannot teach them to think, vote, raise children, or use computers responsibly because they DO NOT WANT TO BE THE SHEPHERD, only the sheep. And there will always be a market to sell them sheep-friendly devices.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    1. Re:Average users don't WANT control by roju · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But they want that option to be there for their expert to fix it. Same thing with cars - I have no interest whatsoever in the internal state of my car, but I would be unhappy if I had to take it to the dealership instead of my personal mechanic to keep it running smoothly.

    2. Re:Average users don't WANT control by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      over their computers. Go ahead. Give it to them. Explain that they need to right-click on the icon and choose "Run as Administrator," or that they need to run spyware scans, or virus scans, or allow the machine to install updates, or use Browser X instead of Browser Y, or manage a filesystem in a clean and organized way. What do they say? Come on, we've all heard it.

      "Can't you fix it so that I don't have to worry about that?" "Why doesn't the computer just do that for me?" "Why do I have to do that? I never had to do that before." "Do I really have to worry about this stuff?" "Just make it work, I don't care how, and I don't want to know." "I'll just buy a new computer."

      They DO NOT WANT to perform maintenance, worry about security, track down tools, learn to use said tools, administer storage or filesystems, etc. Given the choice between technology that slides into malfunction when not administered properly (i.e. "it's broken" as far as they can tell) and no technology at all, most regular people will simply opt for "none," as in "I tried it for a while, but it was always broken or crashing or getting a virus, it sucked. I sold it and just went back to my old XYZ."

      Say what you will, but the masses are sheep and they're happy as sheep. You cannot teach them to think, vote, raise children, or use computers responsibly because they DO NOT WANT TO BE THE SHEPHERD, only the sheep. And there will always be a market to sell them sheep-friendly devices.

      This comment is just baa a ad

    3. Re:Average users don't WANT control by thesandtiger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Oh, for the love of christ, get over yourself. People are sheep because they don't want to spend time and energy maintaining their gadgets, they just want to use them?

      YOU are the sheep because you think that defective gadgets - ones where you need to spend time and energy on maintenance that a PROPERLY designed gadget wouldn't require - somehow makes you a better person. Rather than holding the people who design and sell those faulty gadgets responsible for releasing a shitty product, you instead seem to think it is a *virtue* that you're willing to put up with a crappy device that requires you to spend tons of time on tasks unrelated to what you want to do just so you can use their devices. You actually think it's a *good* thing that you have to do this!

      Talk about being a brainwashed sheep!

      I want tools that DO WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO with a minimal amount of hassle and that don't require me to spend tons of time making sure they're in good shape before I use them. When I want to use a web enabled device, I want to just surf the goddamn web. I don't want to spend 30 minutes checking for the latest viruses and exploits, scanning my system, and dealing with all that bullshit - I just want to surf the web and do whatever it is I'm going to do there. When I want to install an application on my computer I don't want to have to dick around with making sure permissions are right or that all dependencies are met or any of that - I just want to click as few buttons as possible and then use the application.

      Please, though, feel free to continue to imagine that you're somehow better than everyone else because your time is worth so little to you that you're more than happy to spend your time making up for the failures of the people who provide you with gadgets and software to do their jobs better. Meanwhile, the rest of us will be getting actual work done or having fun with our gadgets. If not wasting my time doing bunches of routine maintenance tasks with my electronics makes me a sheep, then baa baa baa, guilty as charged.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    4. Re:Average users don't WANT control by slim · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Can't you fix it so that I don't have to worry about that?"

      "Sorry, I can't fix anything. It's locked down to just do what it does."

      "Why doesn't the computer just do that for me?"

      "It does what the manufacturer made it do, we can't do a damn thing about it"

      "Just make it work, I don't care how, and I don't want to know."

      "It's a closed system. It just does what it does"

      See how those answers could be different for a reasonably open system? (not necessarily Open Source -- even Windows and OSX are open enough to improve those answers).

    5. Re:Average users don't WANT control by Nicolay77 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm sorry to point this out, but reality seems to contradict you.

      I have an Android Phone. I can develop whatever the hell I want to develop for it, and install what I want without jailbreaking it or something.

      And it does what it is supposed to do, and it does it well. If I don't want to thinker with the device, but just use it, then I can, with no hassle.

      Now, any feature you can imagine that could make my device easier to use, doesn't imply closing the device and make it so full of DRM that it no longer interests me.

      The fact that older Linux distros or other open source software were both the epitome of openness and also very hard to use is just an stupid cultural thing, not a hard rule.

      If some software is hard to use, it only depends on the quality of the developer, not on the censoring policy of the platform. Good developers can make usable and powerful software for any platform.

      If you think that a platform should be very closed to be easy of use, then you have been brainwashed.

      --
      We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
    6. Re:Average users don't WANT control by thesandtiger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're missing my point, but that's cool.

      The person I was responding to was essentially saying that people are sheep because they don't want to fuck around with doing maintenance on their gadgets, and because most people generally want something that just does whatever it is that it does, without them needing to be arsed with learning more.

      My point is that no, this doesn't make people sheep, it just makes them people who don't really care about all of that stuff, and who just want to use their gadgets, and could really not care less if the device is "open" or "closed" as long as it works.

      I think closed platforms can have much greater quality control over user experiences and ensure a consistent experience than open platforms, certainly, if done well: not allowing shitty design, shitty interfaces and buggy apps to be put on the App Store will, on a closed platform, keep those shitty designs, shitty interfaces and buggy apps off of the devices that use that store.

      I think open platforms are fantastic - I use a jailbroken iPhone and have all kinds of good stuff on it that Apple doesn't want me to have - but I certainly don't think that somehow makes people who use a locked iPhone because they have no need or interest in the kinds of things they could get on a jailbroken one into sheep. It just makes them people who want different things from their gadgets than I have.

      Is someone who uses a modern car replete with computerized control systems that they can't easily modify a sheep? Is someone who buys clothing off the rack and doesn't modify it a sheep? Are people who buy frozen dinners, cook and consume them as the directions say sheep? No, they're just people who don't care about modding their car, clothing or frozen dinner cooking times because they have other priorities. So why is it OK to call people sheep because they see a device that does what they want, does it well enough for their purposes, and happens to be locked down sheep?

      They aren't sheep. They're people. Devaluing their humanity because they like a different gadget is demented.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    7. Re:Average users don't WANT control by thesandtiger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My, that's an awfully nice strawman you've constructed - too bad you had to go and kick it over like that.

      I never said that closed platforms were the only way to go, or that people shouldn't be able to use their tools in any way they see fit. I simply said that if one thinks someone who doesn't want to fuck around with maintenance, doesn't want to have to learn how to do anything with their computer other than use it, one is wrong to do so.

      So, it takes you 10-15 seconds to check for anti-virus at boot? Awesome! I'm assuming, since you didn't mention it, that your computer also must know what software to download and install in the first place, and how to set itself up to do the whole background automation process? It must have done that right out of the box - which is pretty cool, since I've never known Windows to do that! I guess it also only took you 10-15 seconds to learn enough about anti-virus software to know you need it and how to work with it on your system, how to disable it when you install some software, and so on?

      With installation, sometimes, yes, it can be as easy as that, but often times - I know this will shock you - people make craptacular installers that don't make it easy to install. "What do they mean 'custom' installation?" "Why is it telling me that folder doesn't exist?" "It wants to know if I want to install this toolbar thing, well duh of course I do because isn't that what I'm trying to do?" Don't make the mistake of thinking that because these things are obvious to you or many people who deal with tech regularly that they aren't still somewhat confusing to people who just want these things to work.

      With driver updates, yeah, that's *brilliant* - I'm sure the average person knows how to do that and isn't remotely confused by what a driver is, where to get it, or any of that. I, for one, was born with that knowledge in my racial memory. I'm being sarcastic, in case you couldn't tell. My point is even that having to do that kind of thing is often actually outside the scope of what people want to do with their computers. A well designed device would make it easy - "Hey, there's a bunch of new stuff that might make your computer work a little better and be a little more secure. It could mess it up, too, so you have a choice if you want to install it or not. And if you do install it, if you don't like the way it works you can go back to how it works now by clicking a button. Ok?"

      Bottom line is this:

      Most people would prefer it if the manufacturers of the stuff they use took care of all that maintenance shit for them. Especially if they're looking for a device that's billed as easy to use and just works. When it isn't easy to use (even if it is something as trivial as just knowing how to install or uninstall an application can be), or it doesn't "just work" people who wanted those things are bothered. But the fact that they want such a device - even one that is closed - does not make them sheep. It just makes them "people who don't care about a device being open or closed and just want to use it."

      Calling them sheep devalues their humanity. It's demented and disgusting.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    8. Re:Average users don't WANT control by thesandtiger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Absolutely not - I think there are plenty of devices that are not locked down that can be truly great devices. I use quite a few of them, in fact. I never said otherwise. My iPhone is jailbroken, my MacBook Pro runs OS X/Windows 7/Ubuntu (the latter 2 in virtualization, usually) as well as emulators for some older platforms. There is very unlikely a piece of software I want to use that I couldn't get running on my machine (other than stuff that would require beefier hardware than I have).

      That aside, if a user wants a specific kind of user experience, and they want to be absolutely sure that whatever they get for their device will meet minimum quality standards or usability guidelines at are set by a company they feel they can trust, and they want to have to learn the least amount about the workings of the device, then a closed platform is going to make that easier for them to do because they know that no matter what they download, it's pretty much guaranteed to work in a way they're familiar with. To a lot of people that's worth quite a bit. It's easier to design because there's basically only one way it'll need to work (one configuration of hardware/OS and they can make assumptions about how the thing will work for every user) etc. It obviously isn't impossible to make an open device that can offer the same things, but it isn't as easy to do, and most companies seem to think "reasonably good" is "good enough" so they don't try very hard.

      Look at Windows as an example - because Windows must accommodate pretty much any piece of hardware out there (which is a good thing, IMO), the overall user experience of Windows can suffer quite a bit because some manufacturers don't write good drivers. Some applications just completely blow up because they were poorly programmed and don't play well with others, or make assumptions about a "default" Windows configuration that might or might not be true. To someone who knows nothing about this stuff, all they see is "shit don't work" and it's a frustrating experience.

      Look at the OS X as a counter example - because it doesn't need to support every piece of hardware ever, drivers are mostly a non-issue. There can still be applications that don't play well with others, but generally the usability guidelines Apple sets out help reduce quite a bit of crazy shit like you see quite a bit with Windows apps and ALL THE TIME with stuff for Linux. Locking things down even further - going to an unjailbroken iPod Touch - you wind up with a situation where other than maybe having a shitty network connection sometimes, the user experience will be generally predictable and users will know that if they try to do something it will generally work the same way across apps, and work when they want it to.

      The iPad isn't for me - it doesn't have cameras/video/microphone (and it's closed, which isn't a deal-breaker at all, as the thing will be jailbroken almost instantly) - but I can see a lot of people who would want to have it and find it met (and exceeded their needs). These people aren't sheep, they're just people who have different needs than I do, and don't care if the device is open or closed, just that it works.

      The device doesn't even *have* to be closed to give them that primary provider - obviously - but calling human being sheep, devaluing their humanity because they don't really care about open vs. closed and just see a device that'll meet their needs is just twisted and serves absolutely no purpose.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
  29. Re:Dear FSF by EvilNTUser · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The "just don't buy it retort" doesn't hold any water in my eyes. It's not even only misinformed consumers' benefit that's at stake. 10 years from now, do you want your Free OS being an island of its own that no one tries to be compatible with, because closed platforms represent 99% of the market?

    The other side has their advertising, and we have the FSF. Now all we need is proper awareness of real alternatives.

    --
    My Sig: SEGV
  30. Re:Dear FSF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "[The iPad is] really a toy"

    A toy being hailed by the press as the future of computing. Sorry, dude, but the FSF hit the nail on the head here. If this toy is the future of computing, then computing is in for a bleak future.

  31. Re:Dear FSF by blueZ3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It partly depends on what the iPad is. I don't really think that it's a general purpose computer--though I understand why some people might think that. It's more of a Web/Entertainment appliance--like a Tivo with a browser. You don't expect to run arbitrary code on your DVR (or at least most people don't) and I don't think most people expect to do that with their phone (again, at least most people). As long as people are expecting to get an "appliance" rather than a PC, this could be successful.

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
  32. They can't possibly believe this... by argent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We organized actions and protests targeting iTunes music DRM outside Apple stores, and under the pressure Steve Jobs dropped DRM on music.

    Jobs was on record as opposing DRM on music long before the campaign started. It was the labels that had to be convinced to change, they were the ones responsible, not Apple. Taking credit for something you had no part in does nothing for your credibility and weakens your ability to work effectively in the future.

    1. Re:They can't possibly believe this... by rliden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would think Amazon dropping DRM first and selling MP3s at a very competitive price had a lot more to do with dropping that than EFF and FSFs publicity campaigns. I don't mean to discredit their work against DRM and I'm sure it was an influence. I just credit Amazon and business competition a bit more. That perspective could be my bias though. My initial experience with iTuens was horrible. It wasn't until I tried Amazon's MP3 store that I started buying digital music again.

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame, more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage.
    2. Re:They can't possibly believe this... by nine-times · · Score: 2, Informative

      What's more, it was pretty well known that Steve Jobs tried to argue against putting DRM in iTunes in the first place. It was only after it became clear that record labels wouldn't allow online sales without DRM that he caved. IIRC the iPod used to allow more free copying from the iPod to the computer, too (you could just browse the directory structure and pull the mp3s out) until the record companies started threatening to sue under the claim that the iPod was a device constructed to aid in piracy, or something along those lines.

  33. Re:Dear FSF by John+Betonschaar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Exactly. The fact that this tablet is intended to be used as an end-user consumer device that does not allow or require tinkering, or using it as if it were a PC, isn't necessarily a bad thin. Who cares if you're locked down to the apps in the app store, if the app store has exactly the apps you need, and if said apps are a whole lot better than some random you can download from the internet and install yourself.

    Two things I don't get about all the whining about the iPad (I understand much of the other whining but not these two things)

    1 - Why is it so hard to see that the iPad is NOT a computer in tablet format? Not everything with a CPU, RAM, some storage and a screen should have to be like a 'real' computer that uses a 'real' os that you can slap 'real' apps on, in fact, people don't even WANT a PC in tablet format, since it sucks using a PC in tablet format. There's a reason all the PC-like tablets failed: no-one wants to have one.
    2 - Why don't the FSF people go as crazy over mobile phones, satnavs, media players, e-readers, handheld consoles, or whatever computerized device that runs proprietary stuff to accomplish some task that people find a need for, as they go crazy over this iPad. How is a device like the iPad a 'step back in computing' if you view it as a device that allows all these specialized devices to be merged into 1? The thing is simply applying existing technology to create a kind of device that people may or may not find useful, and not the next step in the evolution of computing.

    The FSF need to have their heads checked if they really can't look beyond the fact that in theory you might be able to run all-free, all-open software on something like an iPad, and if they really believe the world would be better of if no-one would create devices like the iPad.

    In the end people will buy and use products they like, and this is what drives development of new products. People don't buy what the FSF decides to be good or bad for the development of computing.

  34. Re:Dear FSF by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Microsoft would KILL to do this. Honestly, they would literally go out and kill puppies, kittens and baby seals all day long if it would allow them to control everything you install.

    If apple get's away with it, you know they will follow in their footsteps.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  35. Amen by mewsenews · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "We think basically you watch television to turn your brain off, and you work on your computer when you want to turn your brain on." - Steve Jobs, Interview in Macworld magazine, February 2004

    Steve used to preach that you could tell simply by looking at someones posture whether they were consuming or creating. The hacker bent over his keyboard is a boon to society while the couch potato leaning waayy back is a drain.

    Meanwhile, he introduces the iPad while leaning back in an easy chair and telling us how easy it is to buy and consume web pages, music, movies, books from the iTunes store. And it's all DRM infested, right down to the software you may or may not be allowed to run on it.

    Consume, consume, consume.

    1. Re:Amen by theTechnophile · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are you joking? Who do you think wants to run Photoshop on a slow ARM processor with a low-res uncalibrated screen and no useful input devices? How are you going to do audio work on a device whose primary audio input is the iTunes Store? You're going to do video production on something that has no way of getting video into it? Don't even think about writing your own webpages on the onscreen keyboard. It's obvious that the iPad is meant for consumption because it has no input devices meant for creation.

    2. Re:Amen by Tim+C · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The hacker bent over his keyboard is a boon to society while the couch potato leaning waayy back is a drain.

      With no-one to consume the hacker's output, there is no reason for it to exist, and thus there is no boon.

      Never forget that supply and demand are linked; without one, the other is worthless.

    3. Re:Amen by cowscows · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Consuming media is an important part of furthering ones own creative endeavors. Not to mention that there's nothing wrong with relaxing and watching movies from time to time even if I never have any intention of creating my own film.

      Nobody in their right mind is ever going to seriously hack code on a tablet. It's not the right tool for the job. Excuse me if I can't get upset at Apple for recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of a particular form factor and designing around them.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  36. Actually, it's a huge step forwards for many. by motorcyclemaintain · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "What is clear, is that the rise of the App Store revokes control of the computer from the user."

    Wrong. It may "revoke control" from the power user. But, the general public will view the iPad, like the iPod, as a simpler, more friendly way to get things done. It gives them control.

    The general public doesn't care about our App Store hang ups, or cries of "DRM". Previously, the general public has struggled to install and play movies / apps / music at all, now they can tap a finger and it's there. Did these users prefer the pre-App Store world, where you had to have specialist knowledge to access this media? I doubt it. They couldn't access that world at all.

    Here on Slashdot, we see the iPad bringing "DRM", and view it as a "huge step backwards". However, the general public sees the iPad as easy access to movies and apps, simple, straightforward accessible computing. The general public see it as a huge step forwards.

    Our loss of control, as geeks, is most people's gain. Don't you think that complex media should be accessible to the general public, quickly and easily? We cry DRM at Apple, but do we really mean that we just don't want the general public in our clubhouse? What's wrong with the iPad and the "consumer mainstream" derided in the story? Not everyone wants to pop the bonnet and fiddle with the engine. In fact, hardly anyone does.

    The story is seriously blinkered.

    1. Re:Actually, it's a huge step forwards for many. by clone53421 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Our loss of control, as geeks, is most people's gain. Don't you think that complex media should be accessible to the general public, quickly and easily?

      We cry foul because it’s not an either-or decision.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  37. Re:Dear FSF by SolitaryMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And there's no chance whatsoever that this will ever happen to Mac OS X, so don't lose sleep over it.

    Just as the "we can pull your app whenever we wont for no reason" in the App Store TOS was there just to be there and never meant to be used by white and cuddly Apple, right?

    --
    May Peace Prevail On Earth
  38. Re:Dear FSF by blueZ3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    if freedom can only be preserved by removing choice

    George Orwell just called and he wants NewSpeak back. Did you honestly think about that as you were typing it?

    This is why I just can't take free software advocates seriously. Yes I use (and support) some free software, but apparently RMS and the FSF have bought into the whole "we had to destroy the village to save it" mentality.

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
  39. Re:Dear FSF by drummerboybac · · Score: 4, Informative

    they have, jailbreak your phone install what apps you want from wher you want.

    whoosh

  40. Re:Any Mac Fan to explain why being slaved is good by hamburger+lady · · Score: 2, Funny

    what? you mean most people who buy ipods really just want a solid MP3 player with an elegant interface, and maybe some extra applications? pfft.

    come on, man. you know most consumers secretly want an open platform device they can code for. just the other day my grandmother was decrying that she can't run linux on her nano.

    --

    ---
    Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
  41. Nah, it is just a replay by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It is exactly the same thing as it happened in PC. Apple makes an innovative product and makes it an expensive niche product. In 1980s, Microsoft brought a copycat product, it controlled the software, and let the hardware manufacturers duke it out for shrinking profit margins. In 2010s, Google will being Android, the MS-DOS of ultra portables, it controls the OS, the hardware manufacturers will duke it out again for ever shrinking profit margins. Once an installed base is large enough, Google brings out its own applications, and supplants all other competing apps, and it will consolidate its grip like Microsoft did back then.

    Microsoft wanted money for its products. Google just wants to know a lot about you. Most people don't care about privacy. So Google is shaping up to be Microsoft+{Nielsen+Gallup}+{Madison Avenue} all rolled into one.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  42. Re:Dear FSF by AndrewNeo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I take it that you believe that the Ipad is just a large Ipod with additional functionality?

    It is. Same OS, same type of processor (ARM), same application development environment, same application set, same store restrictions. How is this not a bigger iPod Touch?

  43. And if every car was speed limited by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You would have far less problems with speeding if all cars just work and had a speed limiter installed that just worked.

    There would be less theft if every car was bio-keyed to the person and every person tracked...

    Do I need to go on?

    Why are the privacy nutcases always so ready to imagine the most terrible wrongs about potential abuse of power by the government, but think it is super okay to give all control to a corporation?

    Apple has severe intrest in controlling how people consume their media and their hardware is reflecting this, making it harder and harder to install alternative methods. You can of course believe they won't abuse this, you can but you would be a silly person.

    I really don't know if your kind can ever learn, there have been enough example shown that when companies get to comfortable with themselves, it is bad for their customers. Car companies that only produce the cars they want to make, not the ones they want, tell me, how is detroit doing? MS stopping development on IE because it had won, so why continue to invest? Apple buying up competing software and then stopping development.

    Google is doing it as well, support h264, so that no competing video service can be started easily since they can't afford the millions in licensing costs.

    It is all very subtle and long term, but you only got to be old enough to remember the old unixes to know how right the FSF is.

    And the fact that you claim Ubuntu does the same... sudo -i [your own password] is all you need to do to have total control. One command and you can change everything and access everything...

    If you want to see why the FSF is right, install IE6 as your main and only browser. If you last for less then a day, donate some money to the FSF.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:And if every car was speed limited by TheGreek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why are the privacy nutcases always so ready to imagine the most terrible wrongs about potential abuse of power by the government, but think it is super okay to give all control to a corporation?

      Because you still retain the option of not buying the corporation's product.

    2. Re:And if every car was speed limited by ciaohound · · Score: 2, Funny

      if all cars just work and had a speed limiter installed

      Until then, we'll keep driving our Toyotas...

      --
      Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
    3. Re:And if every car was speed limited by dzfoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >> Why are the privacy nutcases always so ready to imagine the most terrible wrongs about potential abuse of power by the government, but think it is super okay to give all control to a corporation?

      Because an abusive or tyrannical government will force you to abide by its rules; and often times will require you to take action against your will. On the other hand a corporation offering consumer electronic devices hardly has such power. They can merely control the devices you buy from them.

      Let's face it, owning an iPhone, iPod, or an iPad is a luxury, not a requirement; they are hardly items of first necessity. Have some perspective.

      If the goverment starts mandating everyone to purchase and use an iPad for normal civic activity, then the lock-in becomes a threat--but that wouldn't be because of Apple per se.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
  44. Re:Dear FSF by slim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here's a similar opinion from a source that's less Free Software oriented.

    The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around them.

    Every time Apple decides to close something off - by insisting on approving apps, by not giving you a [general purpose] USB port, etc., and people go for it anyway, because it's slick and nice to use, we get used to a little bit less openness.

    People don't miss openness until it's too late. Then it's suddenly "What do you *mean* I can only use printers that are Apple certified?". "I've bought all these e-books, and now the only place I can read them is on Apple hardware?" etc.

    I know, I know: slippery slope fallacy. But it's a slope we *will* slide down, without a critical mass of openness-aware customers insisting on some openness in their tools.
     

  45. Re:"Customers Can't Be Trusted With Freedom" by ewenix · · Score: 2, Funny

    Put him in a bubble. Sure he's locked in there, but he can't catch a virus!

  46. Unpopular position on Slashdot...I LIKE the iPad by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't see what the iPad has to do with OS X. The iPhone OS is built for a completely different purpose than OS X is. iPads are meant to do a relatively few things (read books, consume media, browse web, play games, etc.) very well and intuitively. OS X does a lot of things very well and is incredibly powerful. In our neuroimaging lab we used to run Linux as our main processing OS (we still use it a lot) but we are transitioning over to OS X because we can do everything we need to do that Linux can do plus much more.

    As someone in academia, the iPad would be perfect for much of what I do. I can take notes on it (including notes when I do therapy or psychological assessments), check my email, write papers and reports, read articles and books, listen to music, run all sorts of other apps (including terminal ones with ssh support), transfer and display brain images, and more. With the right adapter I could use the iPad to run Keynote presentations from.

    I do some of these things on my iPod Touch - I use it all the time for my work - but the screen size limits some of what I can do. Could a netbook meet my needs? To some degree but the tablet form factor of the iPad is key for me. I could purchase a different tablet computer but again, their form factors are larger than the iPad. Plus, they usually cost more.

    Besides, the iPad is competing with the Kindle to some degree and a Kindle with a 9.7" screen is only $10 cheaper than the iPad. I know the smaller Kindle is slightly more than 1/2 the price of the iPad but it does far less than 1/2 of what the iPad does (but the Kindle is very good at what it is designed to do, so I hear).

    I'll probably purchase an iPad - maybe not this 1st rev. but possibly when it is updated in a year or two. I think Apple is going to sell a lot of them.

  47. Re:Dear FSF by neutralstone · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not defective, RMS et al: it's a CHOICE. You purport to like choice, but no one believes you anymore. Many consumers don't care, and even LIKE, the idea of being locked in to the App Store, because it introduces a significant amount of safety.

    So, apparently you think the choice is between (1) being able to download software from Apple's app store and (2) having software distributed directly by 3rd parties to users (as with desktop PCs). Why not give each user the power to decide whether they will choose only (1) or only (2) or both (1) and (2)? Part of the FSF's point is that Apple has taken away some of the user's power of choice.

  48. Wrong by Old97 · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can install any application you want on an iPod Touch, iPhone and presumably the iPad as well. If you own or manage the device you have 2 options. You can either get the development environment and install applications directly to each device or you can set up a server (intended for but not restricted to enterprises) that manages all the devices in your control. You can install and remove any application, backup and restore data and setting, etc. What you cannot do without jail breaking the device is violate certain restrictions on using some OS APIs or distribute applications to devices you do not directly manage. You can distribute applications to others without jail broken phones who either have a developer set up or enterprise server. You can distribute pretty much anything to people with jail broken devices.

    As far as I know, Apple doesn’t arrest, prosecute or sue people who jailbreak their devices. They just don’t support them. Fair enough. If you use unsupported APIs on any OS or application you’ll generally find that you won’t get vendor support or cooperation doing that. No one can stand behind a product that is not being used as it was intended. As a customer, your reasonable expectations about a product and its support are those expressed by the vendor. They don’t include anything that the vendor expressly does not support. They don’t include whatever you can dream up.

    --
    Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
  49. Re:Dear FSF by at_slashdot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Doesn't even Ubuntu try to mimic this in some respects with its downloader?"

    Don't even try to bring Ubuntu into discussion, there's a clear difference between making things easy to install and locking the OS, Ubuntu can run probably any piece of software that works in any other Linux distribution, even more, you can write your own software, compile it and run it, can you do that with iPad?

    --
    "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
  50. Re:You can actually programs without permission... by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Exactly, that is why nobody writes apps for Nokia, Windows Mobile, and Android.

    all three of those failed platforms have no apps at all.

    How is it there at the BSA? is fred still working in accounting?

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  51. Re:Dear FSF by tyrione · · Score: 2, Informative

    Microsoft would KILL to do this. Honestly, they would literally go out and kill puppies, kittens and baby seals all day long if it would allow them to control everything you install.

    If apple get's away with it, you know they will follow in their footsteps.

    We'd love to kill this fallacious analogy. Microsoft owns the content on the XBox. Microsoft's OS owns 3rd party PC OEMs. Apple doesn't. Get it?

  52. They're artificial limitations. That's the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These artificial limitations that Apple puts in place are completely unnecessary, and unjustifiable.

    Maybe if I use a car analogy, you'd understand it better. These days, virtually every consumer-grade vehicle has a gas tank that can be filled at virtually any gas station. If you want to buy from one station instead of another, you're perfectly free to do so. After all, there's no justifiable reason to put any limitations in place. It's your car, you should be able to fill it up however and wherever you want.

    Now suppose Ford comes out with a new, trendy car that appeals to yuppies, hipsters and homosexuals. It comes in flamboyant colors, has no controls but a steering wheel and an accelerator, and costs a fuckload more money than any other comparable car on the market.

    Ford wants to exploit these fools even more. So they create their own line of gas stations, that sell the same fuel as everywhere else, but at five times the cost. Then they change the hole in the gas tank to a star shape, so that you can't fill the car up anywhere but at their gas stations.

    Ford doesn't have a legitimate reason to do that. It's outright exploitation, facilitated by artificially-introduced limitations.

    Now, some of the smarter fools realize that they can create an adapter that lets them fill their cars up at any normal station. This is a perfectly legitimate thing to do, given that the constraints they're facing are completely artificial. But thanks to lobbying certain politicians, some car manufacturers have gotten legislation passed to make the use of such adapters illegal!

    That is exactly what we see with Apple today. The limitations they put in place are artificial, and completely unnecessary.

  53. Many people *like* appliances by profplump · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can certainly understand and support the idea that users should be allowed to do whatever they want with their general purpose computer. But it's absurd to suggest that Apple has to make that machine. At best the argument is "they shouldn't do this because it's a slippery slope", but even that seems a bit of a stretch given the current state of the market.

    Now if you wanted to make this argument in a market where locked-down was the only option -- like cell phones or DVD players -- I might have more sympathy. But this particular instance just makes the whole movement look whiny.

    Your microwave oven doesn't allow any third-party software to be run, has no data interface ports, and in general is quite difficult to modify even though it's controlled by generic, programmable digital electronics. But that's exactly how most people want it. There are certainly some users who would like to be able to reprogram their microwave, but the vast majority of users prefer the completely locked-down version they currently have.

    Why should computers be any different? Yes, it is physically capable of running other programs. And I count myself among those who would actually run other programs on such a device, if given the opportunity. But we aren't (or at least shouldn't be) in the market for an iPad, or any similarly-restricted device. Just as the electronics market supports the sale of both general-purpose magnetrons on purpose-built microwave oven the computer market can support both general-purpose and purpose-built workstations.

  54. Re:Dear FSF by tyrione · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Doesn't even Ubuntu try to mimic this in some respects with its downloader?

    I'd rather say that Apple is "mimicking" what Linux distributions have been doing for a decade.

    However, Apple doesn't have to restrict the ability to install software from other sources; that is a typical Apple-restriction.

    Wrong. The dpkg/apt-get comparison or Redhat's package manager are not like Apple's. Apple's package manager comes from NeXTStep, which PREDATES them both.

  55. Re:Dear FSF by farble1670 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    if we've learned anything from the iPhone and iPod it's that Apple has tremendous influence in driving the standards of consumer electronics

    have they driven standards? they produce a bunch of proprietary devices that lock you into using another one of apple's proprietary devices whenever they can. itunes is a completely closed ecosystem. the app store is locked down. their media devices don't use open formats.

    firewire?

    what did i miss?

  56. Re:Dear FSF by Kelbear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's another way to look at it:

    If Apple gets away with it, what can their competitors offer to get you to buy their version instead of Apple's?

    Apple can offer a heavily DRMed and locked down experience because they serve it up with a reputation for a highly polished overall user experience right out of the box.

    Can the competitor provide higher quality? Maybe...but they still need to get the consumer to believe that. More innovation? We wouldn't be having this conversation about Apple if it was their competitor leading the way. Lower prices? Yes, definitely, Apple's products tend to be overpriced and are quickly undercut by the competition, but the competition's price cuts hacks directly at their profit margin.

    How about a more open experience? It's a cheap way to one-up Apple, and it saves money on the overhead of running everything through an approval process. Certainly less damage to their bottom-line than engaging in a price war.

    Obviously not all companies will see it the same way, but there is incentive for at least some of them to give it a shot. Particularly if all of them drive at the locked-down approach of Apple, then there will be an underserved niche market of geeks who want to install their own stuff on it. Then some company will try to sell to that market.

  57. Re:Dear FSF by purpledinoz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is why free markets are so great. While there's great debate whether the iPad is good or bad, the destiny of the iPad is solely in the consumer's hands. If they don't like it, they buy something else and the iPad dies. If they love it, the iPad thrives. Just wait a year, and we will see if Apple made a good decision. All this huff about the system being locked down is irrelevant.

  58. Re:Dear FSF by lwsimon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Exactly. Depending on perspective, the iPad is either a great internet appliance, or a piss-poor portable PC. Apple's challenge will be to control that perspective - seeing how good they've been at that in the past, I'm going to say this product will be a success.

    --
    Learn about Photography Basics.
  59. Re:Dear FSF by pudge · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And there's no chance whatsoever that this will ever happen to Mac OS X, so don't lose sleep over it.

    Really?

    Yes.

    I can totally see Apple releasing a new mac mini with this OS because *it just works*.

    Then it won't be branded as "Mac OS X," and surely won't become the primary OS sold by Apple.

    Then putting a premium on future machines with the OSX variant.

    Only if it wants to alienate almost all of its users and developers.

    It won't happen.

  60. Re:Dear FSF by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And there's no chance whatsoever that this will ever happen to Mac OS X, so don't lose sleep over it.

    I hope it does happen, but that it's a choice. I got to thinking yesterday, and a 22" version of the iPad would be perfect for my mother. I don't want to deal with her accidentally screwing things up. I don't want to deal with a 'file system' with 'folders'. Put it in a dock and forget it. She can even take it to the couch to watch movies. Some thing even simpler than 'Simple Finder'.

    With the AppStore I don't have to worry about a package breaking, having to uninstall. All I do is say "OK mom, there's this great program. Just do this." She can't for the life of her figure out how to do anything on my laptop (She freaked out and set it down when she hit Expose) but her sister's iPhone had 0 learning curve.

    I really don't see how this is any different than AtEase from back in the Macintosh OS 7 days. I had my entire family on that. My brother and sister eventually got full Finder access, but my parents stayed on AtEase.

    While she does know how to use a mouse, I remember that was the most difficult concept for my grandma to grasp. She just wanted to touch the screen. She just wanted to point at what she was going to use... sound familiar?

    Yes a 'touch interface' is much slower than us that can use a mouse and may get tiring after a long time, but for some it may be a ton easier. Want to go to the next photo? Just 'grab' the current one and move it over.

    I use OS X because of the built in bash shell and all the other *nix toys. AND because I don't want to fight my system. But there is huge dichotomy in OS X users. The technical users that want the technical, but don't want to fight their computer and non-technical users who wants something that just works. The iPad panders to the lowest of the low non-technical users and I really hope I can get the OS on a 22" iMac some day.

    If it wasn't for OS X, I wouldn't have a SheevaPlug running Sid or a ZFS FreeBSD server. That little black window opened my entire world to command line stuff. First a 'mv' or a 'cp'. Then I was sshing into my desktop from other places. Before you know it I'm doing a cross-compiled kernel for an ARM on an AMD64 and trying to figure out why uBoot refuses to read my SD card. (Damn latest version of uBoot not being able to boot off of SD cards.)

    I'd say a good 50% of what I do on my computer is in Terminal.app. This includes all my photo processing (ImageMagick, ExifTool), movie watching (mplayer -ontop -fs), mp3s (mplayer), screen, etc. All because Apple packaged it up with a nice bow and made it accessible. And this was back in a time when I couldn't make it through the Linux installer without something breaking and me having a broken computer and going back to Windows.

  61. Re:Dear FSF by srmalloy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think he's saying it's a step backwards because they are taking, what is essentially a tablet computer, and 100% locking it down to only do what Apple explicitly allows.

    Don't forget that Apple is also locking down the carrier by introducing a SIM card with a new form factor -- GSM SIM cards are 15x25mm, but the SIM inside the iPad is 12x15mm -- which means that you can't just download a software hack and jailbreak your iPad to use another carrier; because the GSMA isn't pushing conversion to the new form-factor, you're hardware-locked into getting service from AT&T. "Here's this wonderful tool; you can use any application you want from the ones we've approved for you to use, and you can get your 3G service from any one of the single provider who offers SIM cards small enough to fit in its socket. But we're not trying to control how you use your iPad... honest."

  62. Re:You can actually programs without permission... by mdmkolbe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So Apple ensures that no one can pirate my app by ensuring that no one can install my app? Brilliant!

  63. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by tholomyes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, like electric vehicles and charging stations, then?

    --
    When did the future switch from being a promise to a threat? -C. Palahniuk
  64. Re:Dear FSF by jhoegl · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is it windy in here or did something just fly over my head?

  65. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by rufty_tufty · · Score: 5, Funny

    Worse than that, since all the media talks about is the latest trendy new Ford, it soon becomes like you're the oddball if you don't have their latest model. Everyone crowds around Ford's latest models and everyone else is all but ignored.
    Children growing up only see Ford's car and think that is synonymous with a car and soon all there is is Ford and their overpriced overhyped standard.

    Right time for another dried frog pill before the slashdot car analogy gets out of had

    --
    "The weirdest thing about a mind, is that every answer that you find, is the basis of a brand new cliche" -
  66. Re:Dear FSF by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reason for the app store has nothing to do with security and everything about Apple wringing every last penny out of developers by taking an arbitrary cut of their sales and providing only limited QC and indexing that could easily be provided by any other site or service.

    And the reason that it's working is because it's fucking easy. While you GNU, FSF, & Linux Luddites are arguing over the technicalities between GPL v2 and v3 and why BSD license sucks. Or KDE vs GNOME or how you can configure every damn single thing on either, Apple has released an OS that has 0 configuration, you literally get 0 options other than what page your apps appear on, and it has become more popular than both.

    "Year of the Linux Desktop" will happen when Grandma can get a computer that 'just works'. My grandmother figured out my aunts iPhone no problem. She did never figure out OS X or Linux or Windows. Hell I can't even stand the amount of configuration options in the X window managers. Do I want this font or this font, this size or that. O, I can drag the 'start' menu over here, or over there. I'll spend 5 days figuring it out and never be convinced that it's "right".

    Nothing prevented Linux developers from releasing a phone, other than internal bickering and unresolved issues (How's that openmoko coming?).

    As soon as you introduce choice, all hell breaks loose. So say I can add any repository for apps I want. When I get my mom the 22" iPad so she can just run programs and not have to deal with an "OS" how do I tell her which repository to use? Or maybe she should install the FSF one too, that way she can use GNU/FSF/HURD/Gnome on her new device.... at which point she tries it and it completely fucks up the install. Then what? I get called.

    Jailbreaking is easy enough for a 'technical' user. If I want the iPad and I want to install what ever I want, I'll just jail break it (6 months max) and do that. I don't even want the option available to my mom or 90% of users. Because then they'll find it and use it. Then we'll have Bonzai Buddy for the iPad because some friend sent them a great link to this great repository of smiley faces.

  67. OS X is ok by lymond01 · · Score: 2, Informative

    OS X, based on Darwin, isn't what I would call locked down. At least not any more than Windows. We've converted random homemade apps to work on Mac (by a professor's request, not because is was cost effective in any way). The iPhone without jailbreak is pretty much how you said: very good at doing what Apple wants it to do. But Apple hasn't clamped down on Jailbreak either.

    The iPad is very niche. It'll probably also be jailbroken (likely with the same hack that jb's iPhones) but before that I wouldn't think of it as a computer. It's pretty much meant as a distribution device, not as a production device (you read from it, you don't write). If you accept that it's not a gaming/Cray/design machine, only something you use for leisure on the couch, then it'll be easier for you to ignore.

  68. Re:Dear FSF by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2, Funny

    But this 'worthwhile organisation (sic)' comes across as a bunch of wingnuts.

    FSF is the Sea Shepherds, PETA, and MADD of the Software World.

  69. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by joebok · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If the "artificial limitations" are "completely unnecessary, and unjustifiable", then consumers won't buy it. In your car analogy, people can still buy Chevys and Hondas.

    I happen to agree about completely unnecessary - I suspect that Apple has a justification (they think they'll make more money), but their choice of what to make doesn't control my choice of what to buy.

    I am very disappointed in what I've read about the iPad - but on the bright side, I'm going to save a lot of money!

  70. Re:Dear FSF by thittesd0375 · · Score: 2, Informative

    How did USB for input devices work out for you? If the iMac hadn't adopted usb as the primary connection for peripherals we'd still be stuck with the PC's multitude of incompatible interfaces. And Firewire... At the time that USB 1.1 was popular, it was inadequate for doing serious data transfer. I still use my Firewire 800 connection for any data I need to have quick access to and my USB 2.0 ports for data that is archived or not speed sensitive.

  71. Re:Dear FSF by theJML · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Exactly. This IS an iPod Touch on growth hormones. That makes it also good for reading publications and maybe watching video easier or surfing the net easier. It's still basically the same.

    Personally I was REALLY hoping that it'd be more of a general use Tablet PC with OSX, some usb ports and the ability to do whatever. And maybe (hopefully) someone can hack linux onto the thing and make it that way, but the way it's intended it's NOT. If it was, Apple would charge more for it. It'd be closer to the price of a 13" MBP.

    In the mean time, the iPod Touch is only made for consuming DRM'd applications, news papers, magazines, videos, etc. Sure iWork is on there too, but that's basically to widen it's a appeal a little, no different from one of the old casio PDA's that let you type your essays on it along with being a calculator/calendar/messaging thing.

    I actually think the iPad is a decent leap forward in certian respects. It'll raise tablet awareness (maybe laptop manufacturers will catch on and release some not-expensive-as-hell tablets now) for one thing. It also is another way to move the music/movie/print media into the 21st century by going digital in a controlled environment. And most importantly, when you lock things down, you can actually perform QA on them and make things operate more smoothly. (Other than the Facebook app being slow as crap, I've NEVER had an issue with my iPhone where it locked up, blue screened, core dumped, etc. Things just seem to work on there, in most cases for more than I originally intended.) That is a HUGE help to getting Joe Sixpack and Jane Wineaux into computers.

    It also, for the most part, does everything that 90% of people getting netbooks now-a-days are doing. If this had OSX on it, it'd BE a much better netbook than anyone else has on the market at this time (esp if it had a bluetooth keyboard/mouse and a few USB ports)

    Am I going to get one? Probably never (unless someone hacks Linux on there, hint, hint...). Would I consider one for my wife who isn't a Linux Admin, perhaps.

    --
    -=JML=-
  72. What's not open about it? by dazedNconfuzed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now wait a minute. Before all the FOSS types get into a slathering fury (oops, too late), consider:
    - The SDK is free. Free! Download it and start developing apps already.
    - Distribution is free. Free! There's nothing stopping you from signing up and giving away your self-righteous apps for no cost; include the source code or a link thereto if you like. And if you do want to make a buck (er, $0.99) off each copy of your app, that costs you a measly $99/year (surely your app is good enough to get a hundred people to buy it, right?).
    - The much-defamed App Store censors mostly just take a cursory glance at each submission to make sure the app is well-behaved (not malicious or destructively stupid) and socially acceptable to all audiences (how much FOSS pr*n are you planning to develop, eh?). Is it really too much to ask that someone double-check your work for brokenness before spreading it to the unwashed masses? Have you _seen_ what got thru that process unabated?

    OK, so it isn't totally completely unquestionably end-to-end FOSS. I'll understand if RMS doesn't approve, but that's his shtick, not ours.
    - App Store is the only distribution process. Well, except that you could publish your source code and let anyone with the SDK compile & run it sans censors.
    - DRM everywhere. Well, not really - seems you can put whatever content you want on it via iTunes (music is not DRMed anymore, remember? and I shouldn't have to say anything about videos, right?) and the SDK. I expect the iBook stuff will prove the same: minimal-if-any DRM, easily circumvented.

    And what does the RMS-approved FOSS get you?
    - Android is showing diminishing quality of apps with increasing conflict. Windows has been there forever.
    - "Oh, you just need to ..." isn't preferable to "it just works" for most users, including most of us geeks who don't want to have to screw around with your app which wasn't even given a cursory independent stamp of "not blatantly broken".

    You want choice, you have choice: get a Droid. A lot of us appreciate a little formalized cooperation, at trivial cost, to ensure stupid code doesn't run rampant.

    --
    Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
    1. Re:What's not open about it? by sl149q · · Score: 3, Informative

      You need to pay $99/year before you can load and run programs into your own iPod Touch, iPhone or iPad for a testing using a provisioning profile... or distribute free applications via iTunes.

      You can download the SDK and run it on your Mac (Snow Leopard only). And do a lot of testing with the virtual iPhone/iPad simulator for free.

      I personally don't see $99/year as a serious impediment. Some people do.

  73. It's not a Tablet Computer -- it's an Appliance by samalex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The iPad is as much of a computer as the AppleTV is... it's just an appliance that lets you get or view content through the small window controlled by Apple. I like it and would get one for a few tasks, but it wouldn't replace my laptop, cell phone, or anything else. It could replace a GPS with Google Maps and I like being able to play videos for the kiddos in the car. It may also be nice to have in the kitchen to look-up recipes or to view weather or our daily calendar. And I think it would make an awesome eBook reader, but that's it... I wouldn't use it to do my budget, or pay my bills, or do anything productive. And with no Flash support or Hulu or Netflix, it's very limiting. If this thing was a full blown computer with OSX or something that would allow installing other operating systems like Linux, that'd be different, but for now it's nothing more than a simple appliance for doing simple things... no more and no less.

  74. Re:This was bound to happen... by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Personally, I don't see the benefit of such a device - - i must not be the target demographic.

    Bingo--very few of us here on Slashdot are the in the target demographic for this device. We all want something we can play with, hack, turn into a toaster or whatever we choose to do with it. The thing we tend to lose sight of is this: the vast majority of computer users out there don't give a fuck about that! They want something that they can pick up and use without worrying about the nuts and bolts behind it and that's what Apple offers. The iPad is no more a general purpose computer than an iPod is; in fact, like an iPod, it's an appliance for viewing various sorts of media in a easy-to-use way and that's all a lot of people want. In fact, if I hadn't already given my wife my old MacBook, it would be the perfect device for her since all she does with her laptop is surf the Web, send an occasional e-mail and view stuff on YouTube--all things the iPad will no doubt excel at doing.

    Apple isn't going to sell many iPads to people like us but I'll bet they'll sell a lot of them to people like my wife.

    --
    This ain't rocket surgery.
  75. Re:Dear FSF by delinear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So why have the restriction at all if all it adds is inconvenience to customers?

  76. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think many of these people are buying the "car", but you see, the way consumer feedback works, is that when people have a specific reason for not buying a product that they otherwise might want, they're going to make it very clear to the manufacturer and others just WHY they're not buying it so that hopefully their complaints, along with the complaints of others, will lead to a change.

    This whole "just don't buy it" thing is getting ridiculous. What you're basically teaching the next generation to do is to accept whatever the corporate overlords give them, or go to a corner and shutup. Don't dare try to influence any of the actions of a corporation - you are a mere peon and should just accept that the only thing that is to flow from you is cash or nothing; not ideas, creativity, or ESPECIALLY complaints.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  77. Re:Dear FSF by Remus+Shepherd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is when the consumer doesn't have full information.

    For instance, I bought an iPod touch primarily as a book reader (I wanted one that could also play music). I did a lot of research, so I thought I knew what I was getting into. To my surprise, one of the most important functions I wanted in a book reader was not there -- I could not import my own documents. So it's still useful, but it's not exactly what I want.

    That's the feature on the iPad I want to hear about, and nobody's talking about it. If it can't load and read my own documents, or docs I download from the web, then it's not useful to me. No 'official' advertising will answer that question yay or nay. I'm going to have to hope that some blogger answers it for me, or I'm going to have to get a chance to try the thing out for myself.

    Choice is great if the consumers are properly informed. Without an informed consumer, choice can be manipulated to the consumer's detriment.

    --
    Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
  78. Re:Dear FSF by ckaminski · · Score: 2, Informative

    Frankly, this idea of safety is a red herring.

    How much malware EVER existed for Windows CE and Palm OS? Almost ZERO.

    And look how big those software ecostructures were. Not 4000 useful apps and 130,000 games like the iphone, but the Palm OS had 30,000+ applications over it's lifespan, it and was constrained by not having WiFi for years, and a poor CPU driving it.

    Safety was never an issue. It's about getting a piece of every $ made on their platform, that's it. Instead of big up-front licensing costs, they spread it out over every deployment.

  79. Re:It's a choice. Aren't we allowed to have choice by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who's saying you don't have a choice?

    By publicly complaining about this shit, the FSF is providing a valuable service. If no one complains, the companies will think that users are OK with it, and everyone will start doing it. Maybe they'll add even more restrictions.

  80. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by yumyum · · Score: 4, Informative

    This whole "just don't buy it" thing is getting ridiculous...Don't dare try to influence any of the actions of a corporation

    I'm pretty sure that not buying a product is a strong and clear signal to a corporation that their product sucks. If the corporation is smart, it will listen to the signal and try something else.

  81. Re:Dear FSF by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Calling the iPad "the future of computing" is impressively hyperbolic. Even if NPR and Techcrunch think so. It is pitched an 'information consuming device' and there are many, many other functions in the general field of computing that are more important than splotting out HTML and javascript.

    Yes, locked down consumer level devices WILL be the future for mass market things like the iPhone and iPad. Mass market consumers haven't the time, energy, desire or wit to maintain an general purpose Internet connected device safely and securely (see Microsoft Windows). No, Steve isn't catering to you or me or anyone that wants a 'tablet computer' he is pitching this device to people that don't care that Apple is dropping the word computer from their moniker.

    There are lots of other companies out there that will try to sell you something similar but perhaps in a different package, a more open package, one that can be twiddled with endlessly. That's the future. One that is much more complicated than the magic pixie dust and unicorn rainbow world of Apple.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  82. Consumers vs. Programmers by cdrguru · · Score: 5, Informative

    The kind of "freedom" that is the hallmark of Richard Stallman, GNU and EFF is very simple -if you have programming skills you are free. Otherwise, you are, well, unfit.

    The basic problem is that the "open" computing platform has pretty much failed the consumer. No matter what security features are implemented in software, consumers will circumvent them to obtain what they believe they want: free software, porn, money, etc. The end result is a compromised computer that is no longer completely under the control of the user. And such computers can have a very negative impact on all users everywhere.

    The average consumer has no way to utilise the sort of programming freedom that Stallman would like to see people have. They need a checked-out, validated, "App Store" where both useful and useless things can be downloaded and will never, ever compromise their computer. And if an application is found to be bad after it is released it can be "recalled". Period. If we had this today for Windows there would be no spam epidemic, no malware and little or no phishing. Instead what we have is an environment where the Internet is not safe for users with no special knowledge.

    We are certainly going to see less and less "freedom" for users in the name of keeping out the bad stuff. Users, not programmers, do not need freedom but they absolutely need safe computing. We aren't going to teach that. With great freedom comes great responsibility and the spammers, thieves and scammers don't seem to be properly exercising responsibility.

    1. Re:Consumers vs. Programmers by alvinrod · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but you completely miss the point. Open source software isn't inherently good or bad, but the concept of openness isn't something that always best suits the needs of most consumers or something that will always serve them well. I think that the GP would have been better off saying computer skills more so than programming skills as there are a lot of computer users that might not know how to download and install programs. This probably isn't as prevalent in the younger generations, but I've worked with a lot of people who use computers and don't understand how to do this things.

      The examples you mention aren't in the same ballpark as computers. They're all appliances that the user doesn't attempt to install additional software on or modify in any way. They may all as well run by magic as far as the end user is concerned because for most users they'll never need to touch that part of the device. I don't care whether my TV uses open source firmware or not. I just care that it works. I'd prefer that I never have to worry about mucking around at that level even if I have the ability to see and modify the code the drives my TV.

      Free software doesn't guarantee that it's virus free. I recall a while back that someone had slipped some form of malware into the Vietnamese language pack for Firefox without anyone noticing. I'm also free to grab an open source program and add malware of my own and redistribute a malware-laden binary and fool users into downloading it. They lack the computing skills to know how to use MD5 or even the knowledge of what MD5 actually is. I also recall that at one point there was an exploit where arbitrary code buried within a particular image format would execute due to vulnerabilities in the software used to display it.

      I think that the GP's assertion that there would be less spamming is correct. If spammers cannot use compromised computers to send out spam, they would need to use their own machines which can easily be blacklisted. Masses of phishing emails couldn't be sent out without the email providers being easily able to shut it down. People will still be subject to phishing, but on a much smaller scale.

      A gated store doesn't necessarily mean that malware will never get through. It's entirely possible that someone could release an app that sends out spam in the background, but because Apple has a kill switch they can solve that problem even if their users are incapable of solving it themselves. Of course, having this power requires a great amount of responsibility on Apple's part. If they are abusive of it, the backlash will cost them customers and bring down government scrutiny upon them. Similarly, if Microsoft could kill all of the malware on Windows PCs don't you think they wouldn't want to do so? The amount of money it would save would be enormous.

      I tend to agree with the points you have brought up, but I feel you really didn't understand what the GP was attempting to say. There is a trade off between a walled garden and an open field. Most users don't care for the advantages that the open field gives them. To use a car metaphor, driving a manual transmission gives you greater control and efficiency, but most people prefer to drive an automatic as it is much easier for them to do so. Also, the constant ad hominem attacks in your post really make you look like a jerk. It completely detracts from the good points that you made and makes your post look like the rantings of an angry person more so than a structured logical argument.

  83. Its not a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Stop thinking of it as a computer and just as another piece of consumer electronics and you'll be much happier.

    The iPad is something which does a limited set of things very well.

  84. Grab a snack...this may take a while. by Pojut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First off, it is based on iPhone OS 3.2. What the hell?!?!??! So you're telling me I'm going to spend at minimum $500 on a device that is just as locked down as an iPod Touch or iPhone? I'm going to have to hack the damn thing just so I can run an unapproved application? Great. Thanks for that, Apple.

    Secondly, it is completely devoid of ANYTHING...no external ports (except when using dongles hooked up to the 30-pin connector...huzzah for accessories :/), no flash support, no multitasking (oh great, so I can't have AIM and Safari open at the same time? Epic Fail.)...it just seems to be an extremely restricted device considering the $500 entry price.

    Third, what exactly are you getting for that price? Let's look at the fully loaded 64 gig/3G-enabled version. For roughly $800, you are buying a locked-down device with zero expansion options, zero USB ports or flash card readers, and no way to upgrade. For $800 you could put together a full-blown gaming computer or buy a REALLY nice laptop...hell, you could even buy a used tablet convertible and get the benefits of a tablet AND a laptop! But no, with Apple you get a locked down non-widescreen non-expandable device.

    Fourth (and this isn't that big of a deal, but it is still a missed opportunity) Apple should have included a stylus with the system. Think about the people that use Wacom tablets, like the Penny Arcade guys or countless other digital graphic artists/designers. If Apple had included a stylus and well-designed software, this thing could be used as a portable Wacom tablet. Digital artists would have MURDERED each other for a chance to buy this thing had they included a stylus. Nope, that's a whole 'nother market Apple shunned with this thing.

    Honestly, my biggest issue with it is the fact that it uses the iPhone operating system. By keeping it locked down like that, they have severely limited the appeal of this thing...they should have either ported over OSX (which would work GREAT on a tablet with minimal interface changes) or just built a new operating system from the ground up. But no, they decided to put on a velvet glove and slap the shit out of their customers...and they'll buy it! They are so focused on the fact that the hand has a velvet glove they are ignoring the fact that they are being slapped by it!

    Basically, this COULD have been an amazing device...but regardless of what they did right, Apple made some unbelievably stupid decisions that puts it firmly in the "what's the point" category for me.

    It is also worth mentioning that if this tablet had been announced with all the same features (both missing and included), but it had a Microsoft or Google logo instead of an Apple logo, people would be treating it like the plague. Fanboyism is a terrible disease.

    1. Re:Grab a snack...this may take a while. by couchslug · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "By keeping it locked down like that, they have severely limited the appeal of this thing"

      to an insignificant number of customers.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:Grab a snack...this may take a while. by Pojut · · Score: 2, Informative

      And bitching at me for voicing my opinion is just as silly. ;-)

      Oh, and for the record, I was VERY interested in this thing until I learned it would be locked down, maximum security prison style. Even with the hardware limitations (no expandable options, no card reader, no flash support, no multitasking) I still would have bought one in a heartbeat if it were based around a full-featured OS instead of a ported version of what the iPhone runs.

  85. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm pretty sure that not buying a product is a strong and clear signal to a corporation that their product sucks. If the corporation is smart, it will listen to the signal and try something else.

    Not buying the product means SOMETHING caused me to not lay down that money. It could have been priced too high. It might not have been fast enough. It might not have run Windows. It might not have had an integrated keyboard, webcam, or removable battery. The 3G connectivity might not have been compatible with my preferred carrier. It might have exercised too much control as to what software I can run.

    If the corporation is smart, they want some level of feedback from the people who didn't buy it so that they know just where the hell they went wrong. Otherwise the next generation could very well be "iPad - now with a floppy drive!!!!!" and they're still left scratching their heads as to why certain people aren't on board.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  86. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by jollyreaper · · Score: 3, Interesting

    These artificial limitations that Apple puts in place are completely unnecessary, and unjustifiable.

    Maybe if I use a car analogy, you'd understand it better. These days, virtually every consumer-grade vehicle has a gas tank that can be filled at virtually any gas station. If you want to buy from one station instead of another, you're perfectly free to do so. After all, there's no justifiable reason to put any limitations in place. It's your car, you should be able to fill it up however and wherever you want.

    I'll run with your car analogy.

    On one hand, you could justify Apple as making a car that your mom can drive. All the futzy-bits are taken away. Put gas in it. Go for scheduled maintenance. Make sure your oil is changed. It just works without needing to know the details. A PC would be more like the old muscle cars grease monkeys would constantly be tinkering with, adjusting the points and timing and always under the hood with a wrench and pliers. Anything that takes away control from a grease monkey would be hateful to them. All the black box stuff on cars today, grease monkeys hate that. But it makes grandma's life easier.

    The market would be fine if there was room for tweaking cars and no-tweak cars. Unfortunately the trend is to run with more computers, more specialized tools, and more barriers to entry. An independent mechanic has to spend $20k on diagnostic tools. There's no reason why a common laptop shouldn't be able to plug into the car via USB to read the codes but they charge big bucks because they can. It keeps the little guys out of the business. And there's all manner of specialized tools required to work on the cars rather than designing to do the most work with the least number of tools possible.

    I applaud moves that simplify things for one segment of consumers while leaving options open for others. What I don't like is when a move signifies an industry trend that will eventually remove options.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  87. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by slim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The issue is that if a sufficient number of people do buy the "closed" cars, "open" cars become commercially unviable.

    I think this has actually happened to an extent. Cars come with sealed engines such that only authorised mechanics can work with them. That gives the car manufacturer an effective monopoly on parts and labour -- via franchises.

    Anticipated profits from this channel allow these manufacturers to push the retail price of the car down. Now a user-servicable car is more expensive than a non-user-servicable car. Fewer people buy the more expensive car. A positive feedback loop is established.

    Now the manufacturers are free to push up the cost of parts and of service franchises, which is bad for the consumer. Due to the closed nature of the cars, you can't get any old grease monkey to fix your car for cheap.

    We're not there yet for all components of a car, but I think it's getting pretty close for some core components.

    The analogy to computers is pretty easy to make.

  88. Re:Unpopular position on Slashdot...I LIKE the iPa by MartinSchou · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm more interested in what you believe that you can do with the iPad, that you cannot do with any of the slates that were brought out at CES? From what I can tell, the only thing you get with the iPad is the app-store.

  89. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by Americano · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This whole "just don't buy it" thing is getting ridiculous. What you're basically teaching the next generation to do is to accept whatever the corporate overlords give them, or go to a corner and shutup.

    I like how you gloss over that whole middle ground where, if you see a need for a device or other product that the market hasn't filled, you go into business and make a shitload of money filling that need.

    These are the dirty little secrets that none of the "open and free" advocates want to admit to:
    1) The "freedom" you're spouting off about is only valuable to a consumer if they have the technical expertise to take advantage of it. 90+% of people do not, and of the maybe 10% who do, a vanishingly small number of them actually care to spend their days hacking devices that already work.
    2) You're lazy. If there was truly a vast demand for a "free" version of this product, you'd go into business and make a mint for yourself producing it. But you know in your hearts that what you're demanding is for - at best - a small niche / hobbyist market, so you take the safe route and bitch about Apple instead.

  90. Re:Dear FSF by slim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You wont to know why EVERY major business uses PCs?

    Because they went with the conventional choice decades ago, and now migrating would be a huge expense.

    Because whoever made the choice knows Windows and nothing else.

    (Note: This is not an argument for using Macs or iPads instead)

  91. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by quadelirus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The "just don't buy it" thing is precisely HOW you influence the actions of a corporation. If Apple can't sell these things because of the closed-ness, it will change overnight. If 90% of consumers don't care and buy it anyway, then the vocal 10% that do care will just be ignored. The "just don't buy it" thing is far from ridiculous. It is precisely how you vote in the corporate world--with your dollars. If you buy it, then you are endorsing the product and encouraging the company to keep doing what they are doing. My guess with this iPad, however, is that like the iPhone many people simply don't care about the open/closed debate and will buy it anyway. That or they are happy that unlike Android, there aren't known malicious apps being downloaded in the app store.

    And I'm not saying I like the closed system. I'm an app dev and I would much prefer to skip the annoying approval process, but the bottom line is that consumers don't care or they really wouldn't have bought it.

  92. One Users Evaluation of the SmartPhone Ecosystem by ckaminski · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm evaluating phones now - I'm the owner of a 64G Touch 3G, am wielding a Pre+ on a 30-day trial and have used a number of Android phones.

    Apple Pros:
        navigating launcher is fast, quick, easy to use. One button. Consistent behavior in metaphors (delete, back, forward).
        Bright, large screen.
        Arguably accurate/responsive touch screen.
        Incredible on-screen keyboard and editor.
        Videos, integration with iTunes.
        Most applications (productivity) seem well thought out and designed.
        Software ecosystem.

    Apple Cons:

        Harder for me to write software for (as a non-dev, I don't care, or can move to Webapps).
        Large phone.
        Tied to AT&T.
        Not expandable (sd card)

    Pre Pros:

        Small, comfortable size.
        Multitasking
        Wifi Hotspot
        Synergy

    Pre Cons:

        $10/m for access to VZ Navigator GPS
        $30/m for Wifi hotspot. For $30 more I can get a separate MiFi, and be able to browse and talk at the same time.
        Launcher is SLOOOOOW.
        Keyboard editing is more difficult - it's harder to arbitrarily edit text in a paragraph.
        Browser is nowhere near the ease of use of the Touch.
        Screen is smaller.
        Screen digitizer is not very accurate.
        Synergy: synergy is about contact and communication integration. It should allow me to email a facebook user from the contact app. As it is, it just shows me contact data that exists in each source, it doesn't utilize native communication tools. It also only supports LinkedIn and Facebook. After 6 months (since the Sprint release) I'd have expected that they'd have added Facebook or Twitter.
        Tied to Verizon.
        Software ecosystem is an unknown at this time. It's growing, but I'm not at all sure about marketshare and uptake.
        Not expandable (sd card)

    Droid Pros:

        Software ecosystem
        Powerful interfaces to communications (SMS/Email)
        Decent size for a phone
        Bright display

    Droid cons:

        midsize display
        Launcher is slow - navigating is noticably slower than the Touch.
        Digitizer is less accurate.
        Expandable with memory cards.
        Interface is not standardized (this is arguably not a con).
        My big fingers can't use the top row of the slider keyboard comfortably.

    <rant>Why can't we have one communications standard (GMS/CDMA) in this country?</rant>

    I'm pretty sure my Pre+ is going back to the store. It's cute, it's nice, but it's not my hoped-for Treo replacement. The Touch with it's onscreen keyboard is arguably better as a PDA than the Pre+ is with it's REAL keyboard. And I never thought I'd say that - I was vehemently against getting the iPhone or the Blackberry Storm for just this reason - I thought I couldn't live without a physical keyboard (I've had Treo's since the 600, and a Kyocera 6035 before that, and an original Pilot and a Visor before that). So before I ditch Verizon and go to the iPhone, I'm going to give the Blackberry Storm 2 a try.

  93. Re:Dear FSF by jo_ham · · Score: 3, Informative

    mDNS for local networks (Apple's implementation of zeroconf, which is open source and available for all major platforms)

    USB on the iMac - it was the first, and soon became ubiquitous when it became just how useful a standard low data rate port could be.

    standardising the dock connector on the iPod and forward: even if it is proprietary, it is standard and unchanging so third party vendors can make peripherals that use the socket, and there is a published method on how to use the various features of it (Tom Tom's dock with GPS and other gubbins, for example). Yes, you have to pay royalties to build something that uses the 30 pin connector, at least at the moment. You had to for firewire too, but that cost is now gone.

    Firewire, yes, which you mentioned. The DV connection on pretty much every home camcorder onwards (at least the MiniDV revolution onwards).

    mp3 was not Apple's doing - it was already the default format due to the way computer-based personal music arose, so not supporting it would have been a deathblow for the iPod before it had even begun. The iTMS (after a shaky start with m4p at the behest of the music industry, and ditched as soon as possible) now sells standard AAC files, playable by anything that supports AAC playback.

    Incidentally I'm not sure what devices they sell that lock you into using other proprietary (Apple) products - the iPod/iPhone require iTunes, yes, but it is free and you don't need a Mac - you can use the Windows version. You are not forced to use the app store or the iTunes Music Store - the phone plays mp3 and AAC files from other sources. If you want apps, you are stuck (without jailbreak) bun in that case, the iPhone is not for you: buy a Nexus One.

    I suppose the new Cinema display (the 24" one) that uses a MiniDisplay port requires a Mac with the same port to use, but there are third party adaptors that will allow you to use it with a DVI port. The 24" CD is really an accessory to the MacBook Pro though - if you wanted a 24" display and you didn't have a MacBook you would really not be choosing wisely.

    The iMac I am using right now has a copy of XP on it for some old Windows only games, and I'm actually using a Microsoft mouse, a generic firewire external HD (with Time Machine - no need for a Time Capsule from the Apple store), two generic USB memory sticks, a generic USB hub. My 15" Powerbook dual boots Ubuntu and Leopard. I also exchanged the internal SATA hard drive in my iMac for a bigger one that I bought from an equivalent of newegg. The internal drive on the PB is big enough, but I have done several swaps of hard drives and optical drives in other Mac laptops and just use generic parts. The only properly proprietary internal part is the logic board - much the same as a PC laptop. It would be nice to upgrade the GPU in the iMac, but it is one of the compromises I made when selecting the very convenient form factor.

    I don't feel especially "locked" in to anything, but perhaps I just don't tend to clash with situations where I feel that I am being hampered rather than just going on as normal. If you find that you do, then Apple probably isn't for you. It's not different to buying a hammer to change a plug. I know to some geeks, when all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail, but right too for the job and all that.

  94. DRM: The future of computing by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The iPad is the future - computing as we know it is coming to an end. We, the geeks, the hackers, the programmers - are the minority.

    We all thought DRM was going to come-in through TPM modules in the BIOS. We thought AMD and Intel would begrudgingly add support under pressure of the RIAA. We thought Windows would add support and that Linux would be the last bastion of free computing left. But it isn't going to happen that way. It's coming from a totally different angle.

    What will happen is that various specialized devices, that are 100% DRM encumbered from the start, will slowly replace the PC until it becomes an expensive specialized device for programmers.

    First the iPhone comes out. Then the iPad. The all the iPhone and iPad clones - until these devices become ubiquitous. That covers internet, document editing, email, and limited gaming. That's maybe 50% of what the average Joe uses a computer for. Major gaming and social networking can be done on XBOX/Playstation/Wii - also 100% DRM devices. Then those devices will handle your movies, your TV watching, and your DVD/Blu-ray/DRM'd streaming video. Now we are at... 75%? Eventually, 90% of what computers do will be done more easily on some specialized DRM'd device. The idea of the infinitely configurable totally hackable PC will die away. Most consumers won't know the difference.

    So how do we break this? Maybe come-up with some super-cool thing you can do on a computer that nobody thought of yet... something that can't be done on these devices? Maybe Android is the answer? I dunno. But I see the tidal wave coming...

  95. Not a PC - More like TV + Cable by MasterOfGoingFaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The iPad is not a computer - it is an information appliance.

    Sure it has computer components, but it is not meant to be a general-purpose computer. It is a sealed-box with tightly controlled access to tools and data. It is aimed at the same crowd that buys a TV and pays for a cable connection. They can only choose what is being offered to them.

    This has been Job's dream since before the first Mac, when Jeff Raskin convinced him that computers were too hard for non-technical people to use. The smart thing about this design is (like a TV) it just works. Most people will accept the limitations, because too much freedom may not be a good thing. These are the same people who run as admin on a Windows PC, and click on any little thing that pops up. Their "freedom" turns their PC into brick in short order. So a limited device that just works is fine for them.

    I'll wait for the more open clones to appear and do what I want. Apple is rightly aimed at the crowd that is willing to cash for the comfort of not thinking. The thinkers/doers will wait for something more open. This is not a product meant for us.

    --
    Place nail here >+
  96. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by nabsltd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If the "artificial limitations" are "completely unnecessary, and unjustifiable", then consumers won't buy it. In your car analogy, people can still buy Chevys and Hondas.

    The problem becomes when Chevrolet and Honda see that Ford is making more money in a month than they make in a year and decide the same business model is good for them, too.

    Next, they'll get even more lawmakers to agree with them that just because all the big car companies are doing the same thing and have a single industry lobbying organization, it's not collusion or price fixing. As a matter of fact, it'd be just like the music recording industry, and we all know they aren't doing anything to hurt consumers.

  97. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by bkr1_2k · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Where are these sealed engines that only authorized mechanics can work with that you're talking about? I know dealers imply such bs when you buy, but there is no such warranty that can be voided that way legally. Effectively, there are many things that are more difficult to do at home, now, but they can still be done.

    Now, what you're real point is still makes good sense. If enough people buy "closed" options that it puts the "open" option in the dark then eventually there will be no "open" option because it simply won't give a good enough return on investment for the manufacturer.

    --
    "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
  98. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sure, tell the manufacture.

    Slashdot is not the manufacture of the car or the iPad, so bitching here isn't doing anything other than trolling.

    My father used to sit on the couch and whine, bitch and moan about politicians, but never once did he leave the house to tell anyone outside of it how he felt.

    His bitching was useless and annoying to those around him, just like the posts to this effect here.

    With a slight difference, if no one buys a product, it won't stick around and other ideas will be needed to stay in business.

    Considering the way iPhone/iPod sales go ... I'd say that the complaints here are from such a tiny group that no one gives a flying fuck.

    The irony is that this isn't even new to the iPhone. It wasn't the first iPod with apps you know?

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  99. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by __aaaaxm1522 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ah, but:

    I'm the family mechanic. For some reason my family is full of lazy bastards who can't figure out how to pump gas into their car. It's a simple process, but they just can't be bothered to do it themselves. I've spent *years* trying to teach them, but they always have some excuse or another as to why they can't do it themselves.

    Now they discover that the Ford gas stations are all full-serve, while every other gas station has gone self-serve. I have two options:

    1. I tell my family members to buy the non-Ford cars. I give them instructions on how to pump gas. I write it on a little post-it note and stick it to their dashboard. But invariably, several times a week, they call me from the gas station and ask how to turn on the pump, or where the gas tank is, or something similar. And I know that I'll have to drive other there in my non-Ford vehicle and pump it for them.

    or

    2. I tell my family members to pay a bit more money and get the Ford. Sure, they can only buy gas from Ford itself but they're OK with that. They like having it done for them because they just aren't into cars like I am. Sure, they like driving around and getting from A to B - but they *really don't care* how they got there, or if their Ford is missing some of the features of my non-Ford. They're just happy to get to their destination without breaking down.

    You know what else? If they go with option #2, then I get to enjoy my long non-Ford drives uninterrupted. I discover that they just don't call me for car advice as much. When they do call, it's because they actually want to talk to *me*, and not for support.

    After a few years of this, I really begin to appreciate Ford for that they offer, and for freeing up my time.

    Does that help you to understand it better?

  100. Re:Dear FSF by frogzilla · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think toy is probably better replaced with a word like appliance. There are many people who want to access content on the internet but struggle with general purpose computers. They want a TV. TVs have complex hardware inside them. They use complex communication protocols. All of this is hidden, as it should be for most people, from the users. In this sense the iPad is a toy with serious internals. I think it is likely to be successful and it probably is the future of computing. Eventually we will have single use devices like this scattered around our homes and workplaces. Each device limited in what it can do but with mutable, simple interfaces. There will always be a need for other types of computers but most people won't use them. Most people don't want them. I'm certainly not the first to believe this to be the case.

  101. Re:Dear FSF by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Interesting

    what did i miss?

    Everything.

    itunes is a completely closed ecosystem

    Funny, I've been using this nifty API to interact with iTunes for a few years now. We have different definitions of closed

    their media devices don't use open formats.

    Really? MP3 and H264 aren't open standards? You and I have different definitions of open. I don't have any music and only one video that are in the original apple formats, I've converted them all to more standard formats to use on other devices as well, they still work just fine in iTunes and on my iPhone and iPod.

    firewire?

    Not invented by apple, not licensed by apple, superior to USB in almost every way, available on all sorts of different devices, is an open standard anyone can implement, just requires licensing. Again you and I have different definitions of open. I'm okay with paying a little extra to get something better, you can stick with shitty and free, my time is worth money and waiting on slow ass USB transfers is not my cup of tea.

    The only thing I'll even partially agree with is that the AppStore is not wide open.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  102. Re:Dear FSF by __aaaaxm1522 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, you can load your own documents on the iPad. Unlike an iPod / iPhone, the iPad has a "shared folder" that is accessible to all applications, and that you can load your own files into via USB:

    http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/the_ipad_an_inside-the-park_home_run/

    (near the bottom)

    "I have begun to look over what's new in iPhone OS 3.2 SDK. It offers some positive signs. In particular, applications will be able to "share" documents they create using a new file-sharing support feature. All documents to be shared are placed in a Shared Directory, which will mount on the desktop when the device is connected to a computer. This works independently of iTunes syncing."

    I have an iPhone dev account and have confirmed this in the SDK myself. So yes, you can load your own documents onto it.

  103. Re:Dear FSF by thearkitex · · Score: 2, Funny

    And most importantly, it allows them to think differently, EXACTLY like every other Apple Zombie (Applebie?) out there...

    You'd be non-conforming too, if you looked just like me.

  104. Future of OS X by itomato · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Steve's focus has shifted. What does he have to prove? The challenge and thrill of pushing the curve of personal computing are for younger men. No longer do you hear Steve talk about how awesome, fast, and powerful something is. Now, it's about making it sleek and clean, at the expense of expansion, user access (batteries, RAM, all a thing of the past) and function (unitasking? how is that not a step backward? vendor lock-in?)

    It's now a matter of what's easiest to use, most comfortable, and what develops the relationship between Apple the device vendor, and Apple the content vendor.

    If you think the Mac OS has a future, you're looking squarely at it. What the iMac did for floppy drives, USB, and the iPod did for CDs, and Apple TV seeks to do with video and TV, the iPad aims to accomplish with the next most precariously positioned medium - print.

    People will always need tools to create content, it's true, but you can bet as online application delivery becomes the norm, and iPod-style dashboard apps take prevalence over shrinkwrapped retail media, so will the look and feel of the environment for running those apps.

  105. Re:Unpopular position on Slashdot...I LIKE the iPa by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I unfortunately missed reading anything about what came out at CES due to my schedule at the time so I cannot really comment on the other tablets. I'm sure many of them are great and maybe even better than the iPad. The main bonus with the iPad is exactly what you noted - the app store.

    I know many do not like the 'locked-down' nature of the app store and the other limitations of the iPhone/iPad OS but the App store is established and very functional. There is a lot of junk on it but there are also many great and useful apps too (I'm just thinking about what I have on my iPod Touch). Many of the iPhone apps would be even more useful if the screen was larger, which it is on the iPad.

    The overall UI of the iPad is also likely more polished than anything that was announced at CES. I'm not saying the other tablets have bad UIs (although some probably do) or that the iPad's UI is perfect, but it will be polished and useful (because the iPhone OS already is).

    The integration with the App Store (and book store) is extremely important. That is how the iPod became dominant. Other players didn't have UIs that were quite as good (many were really good, they just weren't quite as good) as the iPod's but more importantly, they did not have the tight integration with a music store that had good prices. I know many people complained about the $.99 price for songs but the ease of use of the store was big and $.99 isn't very much money (until you buy lots of songs!).

    The other slates that were announced were probably really cool and useful. However, I already have some investment in Apple's App Store because I have an iPod Touch. I use iTunes for my music (although I usually purchase from Amazon's store) and have a MacBook. I admit, I am a fan of Apple's products (most of them anyway) but much of that is because I've used other computers and OSes and MP3 players but prefer Apple's. Much of that is due to OS X, actually. I spend a lot of time in the CLI and having a bash shell with the nice but powerful UI of OS X seals the deal. I've tried many flavors of Linux but in some ways they are too flexible for me. Many times they do not 'just work' either, while OS X for the most part does (I know the reasons for that but that's a different discussion).

    One last comment. We recently got some new iMacs in our neuroimaging lab. Some of the undergrads in the lab had never used a Mac before (at least not since elementary school). Just yesterday two of them sat down at the computers, used them for a minute or two and were completely sold on them. They enjoyed using the computers instead of just used them. That's what keeps me tied to things Apple - I enjoy using OS X and my iPod. I can't say the same thing for Windows (any of the releases) or even many distros of Linux (there are many things about Linux I enjoy but I never get the same sense of enjoyment as I receive from using OS X).

    Am I affected by Steve Jobs' halo? Of course I am. Am I biased towards Apple? Yes, but that bias comes from experience. I'll consider some of the other tablet devices but they would have to have some very compelling features for me to purchase one instead of an iPad.

  106. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by twidarkling · · Score: 3, Informative

    The "sealed engine" is the computer in the system. If a manufacturer decides to encrypt that, or use specialized error codes, and only give the key to "authorized dealers," all of a sudden any non-authorized mechanic is in for a world of additional difficulty. As for doing it at home? Good luck getting the interface at all. It'll be a damned sight more expensive yet.

    --
    Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
  107. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by brianosaurus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It still works, just slower. There is always alternative product.

    I'm not quite ready to dump my iPhone over this, but I won't be buying an iPad. I can accept these limitations on my mobile phone, since I mostly just use the stock set of apps anyway. If these sorts of limits start showing up in MacOSX, then I'll "upgrade" my MacBook Pro (and my 3 other Macs) to linux instead of the next great feline. That's not a huge ding to Apple, but once I'm off their OS, I'll stop buying their hardware. I'll stop suggesting it to my family and friends.

    --
    blog
  108. Not a Computer... an Appliance by illumnatLA · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Personally, I contend that it's wrong to look at the iPad as a computer. That's not the intention of the product. It is an appliance much as a washing machine, coffee maker, or toaster. It's designed to do some specific things and do it well just as the previously mentioned examples hopefully do their respective functions well.

    An appliance such as a coffee maker isn't designed to be hacked into. It's designed to be functional and simple for the average consumer to use. This is what the iPad is.

    OS X will continue for its market base, the user who needs the complexity of a full operating system and the iPad is perfect for your mom or grandmother to finally get on the internet, email, download books, etc. without needing a part-time geek to hand hold them through the process each time.

    (as an aside to that, my 90 year old grandmother bought a Kindle and really likes it, but needs help getting through the menu system anytime she wants to buy the next book.)

    Not everyone wants to fiddle with every little setting in an OS. I would say a majority just want to pick up the device and the device works. This is the primary reason the iPhone has done so well and is likely why the iPad will do really well.

    --
    Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
    1. Re:Not a Computer... an Appliance by BronsCon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Some people would prefer a device that "just works" AND allows then to fiddle with every little setting.

      Ubuntu does that quite nicely for me; every system I've installed it on in the last 2 years has just worked, but I've been able to tweak the hell out of it if I wanted to.

      Win7 seems to be a step in that direction, as well. It's been great on my little netbook.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  109. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Have you tried adjusting the timing on anything newer than 1998?

    Didn't think so. There's your answer ITG: where once anyone could preform routine maintenance on their automobile if they so chose they no longer have that choice thanks to a host of computer-controlled systems with proprietary formats and tools required to access them.

    GP is 100% correct.

  110. The future is now by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A couple of years ago everyone realized the computer was on it's way to becoming an appliance like your toaster or microwave, and were pretty optimistic about it. Well, the future is now... and people still complain about it. As others have stated, this isn't a general all-purpose computer, and it's not meant to be. Jobs was right when he said the netbook doesn't do anything better. It only does things smaller and, with every passing generation of the netbook, they're increasing the size of the device until it's indistinguishable from a laptop. The iPad is in practice what the original netbook was supposed to be - a device just for surfing the net, watching videos, reading books, playing games, and looking at photos. It's a useful appliance. All the Apple hate is pretty ridiculous, as with this they are progressing technology. Without the iPad, we'd see 10 more years of netbooks getting bigger, phones getting smaller, and Microsoft releasing Slate PCs as if they're new. If the iPad takes off, which it probably will, in 2 years time everybody will be scrambling to get a iPad like device out there, and enough of them will run existing OSes that you can install programs to and hack to your hearts content and you know what? They all won't compete with the iPad because people don't want freedom in computing... they want an appliance that they can rely on not to get viruses and have their kids come fix every 2 months.

    --
    Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
  111. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by Americano · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Up until recently, we the 10% were the ONLY market for these devices.

    Which devices? The iPod that made Apple a household name? Mac workstations which are used widely by creatives? The iPhone which from day 1 was derided as too closed / not functional enough by the geek cognoscenti here at Slashdot?

    It was our buying that put Apple in the position that made it what it is.

    Scary thing is, I think you actually believe this. But you're wrong. Apple did not become a 50Bn company by catering to a couple thousand neckbeards in their parents' basements. You did not "put" Apple where it is, and they do not "owe" you anything. If you like their products, buy them. If you don't like their products, don't buy them. If you think they've overlooked a segment of the market and you have a killer idea, go into business and compete with them.

    Now they're taking "Our" devices and retargeting them at a new market, nine times our size, and ignoring everything we say.

    "our" devices? ignoring "everything we say"? If you don't like it, GO MAKE YOUR OWN. If there's as much demand as you seem to think, you should be wildly successful.

  112. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by slim · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You think Apple doesn't have people analysing places like Slashdot?

    It's 2010. The producers of Lost study Lost fan forums, and make agile changes to the show in according to what they find.

    If the makers of a TV programme do that, surely savvy makers of gadgets study comments on prominent tech blogs.

  113. Re:Unpopular position on Slashdot...I LIKE the iPa by ldrydenb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "From what I can tell, the only thing you get with the iPad is the app-store."

    And perfect synchronisation with my iPhone and Mac: contacts, events, documents all available without having to rely on web-apps (e.g. Google Docs) when I'm in the middle of nowhere. Oh, and an interface that's been vetted by an obsessive perfectionist.

    An interface that doesn't get in the way of what I'm trying to do is a major selling point for me.

  114. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Only if our hypothetical charging station has lobbied to make it illegal to buy a gasoline-powered generator and use it to charge your vehicle.

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  115. Re:Dear FSF by s73v3r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just keep in mind that with that model, there are a slew of different problems that come along with it. Namely, malicious code being entered into the App Market. About a month ago, there was a story where Google had to kick a bunch of stuff off the Market because they were basically phishing apps.

    I'm not gonna pretend to know which side of the spectrum is more correct, and it probably isn't the same for everybody. But basically, you have Apple on one end, vetting all of the App Store submissions, and being the ones to choose what to sell in their store. On the other end, you have Google, basically allowing anyone who wants to the ability to place something in the store, and not vetting beforehand. One gives you more choice as to what to put on the phone, while the other one gives you more security and peace of mind, while still giving you access to a very large catalog.

  116. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by cowscows · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah exactly, there's a lot of evidence of this already happening. Why just the other day Google released their version of the iPhone and they've totally locked it down just like Apple...err...what's that? It's not locked down? You can install whatever you want on it? Oh...

    --

    One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  117. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Informative

    they could just as well give you a pair of booster cables and hope you don't short them across your nuts... power is power.

    Um, no, no it's not. If you'd like to test that theory, go climb the nearest electrical tower and plug your hairdryer into the wires. I take no responsibility for the result.

    Less dramatic demonstration: plug your lead-acid car battery directly into an AC wall socket. Hilarity ensues. The phrase "the goggles do nothing!" is bound to come up.

    I don't know if you noticed, but 9 volt batteries tend to be shaped differently than the AAA - type. No, this was not an aesthetic choice, or an attempt to ensure vendor lock-in - there are very real, rather good reasons for doing it that way.

  118. Circular logic with no connection to reality by Geof · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is why free markets are so great. While there's great debate whether the iPad is good or bad, the destiny of the iPad is solely in the consumer's hands. If they don't like it, they buy something else and the iPad dies. If they love it, the iPad thrives. Just wait a year, and we will see if Apple made a good decision. All this huff about the system being locked down is irrelevant.

    This is not an argument. That consumers make choices is the definition of the market, not an argument for it. You say the market will produce the best outcome - so whatever outcome the market produces is best!

    You say that no-one should concern themselves with the the actual, practical consequences in the real world. Whether the system is locked down is "irrelevant": the actual outcome - the actual impact on people's lives and freedoms - is beside the point. All that matters is that this was a result of market choices. This is a purely abstract position that explicitly claims that practical reality does not matter.

    You say, "Just wait a year, and we will see if Apple made a good decision." So we will find out whether Apple acted in its own interest. Yippee. This tells us nothing at all about whether the outcome will be good or bad, and it doesn't give a hoot about the actual empirical results. Consumers often make choices that do not lead to outcomes they would prefer. If there's a conflict between your theory and actual evidence, I'm sorry but evidence wins. Of course, real human good and bad don't boil down to a single number like price, so that involves making value judgements. Maybe you're uncomfortable with that, but there is no way around it. To make value judgments, you actually need to - you know - make value judgements. There is no magic solution that makes that go away - not even, for all its merits, the free market (which, whatever else we think of it, I think we can all agree is not "free").

    But your amoral slight-of-hand claims that value judgements are superfluous. This is no different than saying "the hurricane was the act of God, therefore it must be good." Only you are replacing God with the market. Maybe you have faith that markets do produce ideal outcomes. Fine. But that is a personal conviction, not a reason "why markets are so great." You deceive yourself if you think it is.

  119. Re:iPhone vs iTouch vs iPad? Do I have it right? by DarKnyht · · Score: 2, Funny

    Upgrade the iPad and you have a MaxiPad.

    --
    Voting them all out of office, now that's change I can believe in.
  120. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Funny


    In that case, yes. Like electric vehicles. I think the GP contradicted you because he presumed that you must be disagreeing with the person you replied to (as is normal Slashdot procedure) and because the parent post was correct, attempted to find a way to show yours was wrong. In fact, you are both correct and we have TWO bad situations of artificial constraint.

    In future, you should probably wait for someone else to post a reply when you want to agree with someone, that way you can reply to the second person's post enabling you to both support the GP that you think is right and honour the Slashdot protocol of only posting to correct someone.

    HTH,
    Harmony.

    --

    Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  121. Coffee makers and inkjet printers by drx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, even coffee makers today have coffee pad systems. Instead of being able to use any coffee powder or roasted beans i like, i have to buy the correct format from the manufacturer. The whole world is becoming a fucking ink jet printer!!!!

  122. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by neonleonb · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well, it depends. When he's not taking his dried frog pills, his world could be *anything*.

  123. No. by DrYak · · Score: 3, Informative

    Or custom GPS solutions that only work with vendor-supplied DVD's, but are convenient for the customer to obtain and use?

    No, because in these cars, you're still free to buy and use a Tomtom or a Parrot if you don't like the manufacturer's.

    With iPhone/iPod/iPad you can *only* go to the AppStore. Jail-breaking is not considered a legitimate end-user procedure. And Apple-approved applications are also technically limited (no multi-tasking). (On the ground that most users don't need it. Completely ignoring users which want to have a background web-radio music player or alerts for IM)

    Back in you GPS example, it's like if the DCMA made it illegal to own a GPS-holder to use whatever brand GPS device you want. Instead you are forced to use only the GPS device from your car manufacturer which is special purpose-built to fit your Dashboard. And for some stupid reason it can only show cities whose name doesn't start with a Z. (On the ground that most users are in the USA where this letter is rare. Completely ignoring users living in Eastern Europe, for example).

    As opposed to the Palm Pre, for example, which although has an App Market, let you also use apps ("cards") from other sources. Gaining root access is a normal operation which is enabled on all device (not only "special developer" ones) letting advanced users make weird uses of their phones if they want. And multi-tasking is not only normal, but the "Plus" generation of Palm phones even comes with extra memory to enable more simultaneous "cards".

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  124. Re:Dear FSF by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2, Informative

    To my surprise, one of the most important functions I wanted in a book reader was not there -- I could not import my own documents.

    You can't? That's news to me. Just last week I downloaded a text file ("Leiningen Versus The Ants"), used Calibre (GPL) to convert it to epub, launched Calibre's built-in webserver, opened Stanza on my iPod, pressed the "Get Books" button, looked under "Computers Sharing Books", and downloaded the file.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  125. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by forsey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    People need to be both vocal AND not buy it. Otherwise they may think that the product failed because it didn't make your penis bigger.

    This is why saying "just don't buy it then" is a silly response to "product Y sucks because of issue X". One would think if they are bitching they probably aren't going to buy it, they just want to make sure people know why.

  126. Contrast now and then by DrYak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But you can't help but notice how the things went horribly wrong :

    Apple in 1984 :
    "Hey, don't be a sheeple like everybody else ! Don't let an evil corporation decide what you should do ! Buy our Macintosches and get a product that will let you think in any innovative way you want !"

    Apple, 25 years later :
    "Hey, wan't to be as cool and as hip as all the other cool guys ? Go buy our iTrendy iProducts ! Just don't do anything silly with them. We decide what goes on an iPhone/iPod/iPad, because we know what's good for you. We select which are the best application, we select which feature another studio can use if they want to innovate. (WARNING: attempt to circumvent this limitation to do what you want the device in creative new ways may infringe the terms on your contract/make your plan cancelled/violate the DMCA/voids the Warranty/exposes you to viruses)"

    If you told 1984-era Steve Jobs how the iProducts work, he would probably never believe you that he'll be leading a company doing that.

    I agree that the iP*s are appliances. It's just weird whan a company which spent so much effort creating a public image which was all about freedom (from corporation) has turned into a corporation whose most popular product is precisely controlled in terms of what can go on it. And is actively doing everything possible to make this situation remain so.

    Meanwhile other appliances have been very successful without the need to restricting users' freedom. Both old devices (such as those based on PalmOS and Windows CE) and modern devices (like the latest running WebOs) have been made in a way where the user can get administrative right on any model out-of-the-box (not only special "developer" models) and use them to do what pleases them without arbitrary restriction by the manufacturer (old PalmOS where single-task OSes. Nonetheless, methods existed to have some background tasks anyway, and Palm never did anything to prevent this. Unlike with the iP*s). This never did prevent these devices to be successful.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  127. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by psergiu · · Score: 3, Informative

    My EU car - a Renault brand - has a plastic cover over the engine with seals. I could rip the seals and look inside, but my 4-year warranty will be gone.
    So i won't.

    --
    1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
  128. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by DJRumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    5 minutes Googling will tell you exactly how to adjust the timing. It's not some dark industry secret. Just put your car into service mode and adjust the timing. The new 'default' will be accepted once you take it out of service mode. For instance, on a typical GM, it just requires shorting two pins in an easily accessible connector usually located in the arm rest. A plain old paperclip will work just fine.

    Claims that a 'regular' mechanic can't work on a car are about as valid as saying a PC hobbyist can't work on a Dell. The work is more complicated than the 'olden days', but any cheap auto manual can be picked up at any parts dealer and you have all you need to know for your basic shade tree mechanics.

  129. No the Iphone hasn't done "so well" by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But if it's just an appliance, you might as well get one of many cheaper cut down appliances.

    Your post is just speculations on what you think various devices are like, and based on some misinformation about how popular Apple actually are in the phone market. But since it's pro-Apple, that's an instant ticket to +5 "insightful".

    the iPad is perfect for your mom or grandmother to finally get on the internet, email, download books, etc. without needing a part-time geek to hand hold them through the process each time.

    Finally? Portable devices - including those that are "appliances" - have been around already, and cheaper too in most cases.

    Of course, I see you assert that the Kindle is awful based on a single data point, and then conclude without having seen an Ipad that it must be better, than all other appliances. Let's have evidence, not speculation.

    I would say a majority just want to pick up the device and the device works. This is the primary reason the iPhone has done so well and is likely why the iPad will do really well.

    The Iphone hasn't done "so well", it's done okay. The vast majority of phones, you can pick up, and the device works (why wouldn't it? Take it back to the store if it's so defective - is that the best you can say of Apple, that it works?), and that includes the 95+% of the phone market that isn't Apple.

    Why would a device that's less useful than an Iphone, bigger, and more expensive, do better?

  130. Re:They're artificial limitations. That's the prob by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So the Ipad is less features for money money? Right.

    The iPad is a device which makes computing VERY simple

    How? Have you even used one?

    These answers aren't even consistent - the other guy alleges that the Ihype isn't a computer at all.

    Is it going to be a tinkering geeks favorite? No, of course not. Is it likely to be well received by it's intended audience (lay users), yes most likely.

    Then Apple have shot themselves in the foot. With the sole exception of the Ipod, it's only among geeks that Apple have popularity. The geeks delude themselves into thinking that Apple are the number one company (good god, what has this place become? I remember when people were concerned about Microsoft, and promoted open systems in opposition. Long have those days gone, here on Appledot). Yet the reality is that most people are buying phones from other companies.

  131. Re:Dear FSF by Little_Professor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wow! What a simple way to view a txt file! Apple - It Just Works (TM)