Slashdot Mirror


XML Co-Founder Joins Google, Blasts iPhone

XML co-founder Tim Bray has taken the job of 'Developer Advocate' at Google. Don't other companies call that position 'Evangelist?' Because he sure doesn't mince words against the iPhone in his first sermon: 'It's a sterile Disney-fied walled garden surrounded by sharp-toothed lawyers. The people who create the apps serve at the landlord's pleasure and fear his anger.

72 of 628 comments (clear)

  1. XML vs iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    XML vs. iPhone. I can't think of a better metaphor for "open but convoluted" vs. "closed but useable."

    1. Re:XML vs iPhone by JamesP · · Score: 5, Funny

      Comparing XML to the iPhone is like comparing a fighter jet with a celebrity cooking show on television.

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    2. Re:XML vs iPhone by .tekrox · · Score: 5, Funny

      They both have the power to kill thousands, I don't see the big difference.

    3. Re:XML vs iPhone by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Funny

      Comparing XML to the iPhone is like comparing a fighter jet with a celebrity cooking show on television.

      I see no mention of cars in that comparison, so I have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

    4. Re:XML vs iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Steve, is that you?

    5. Re:XML vs iPhone by Requiem18th · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Comparing XML to the iPhone is like comparing a fighter jet with a celebrity cooking show on television.

      No, comparing XML to the iPhone is like comparing fiberglass insulation to a Toyota car. One is a technique the other is a brand of hardware products.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    6. Re:XML vs iPhone by neoform · · Score: 4, Funny

      He invented XML, how isn't he an expert on cellphone platforms....???

      --
      MABASPLOOM!
    7. Re:XML vs iPhone by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 3, Funny

      Try asbestos insulation. The poisonous effects aren't obvious at first, but it eventually infests and clogs the flow of important things, like oxygen or the data you actually care about.

    8. Re:XML vs iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      lol I ws thinking the same thing. Like a guy like this would have ever thought of a UI like the Iphone. Instead we'd be noodling through tons of awkard menu's but hey it would all be configurable with xml and xls. Can I pull my hair out now or later.

    9. Re:XML vs iPhone by JackieBrown · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well that explains why proprietary alternatives to XML like JSON or YAML are so much better!

      JSON is not propietary.
      http://www.json.org/license.html

      Nor is YAML
      http://www.yaml.de/en/license/license-conditions.html

      Or is there a woosh here that I am missing?

    10. Re:XML vs iPhone by Tycho · · Score: 3, Informative

      Try asbestos insulation.

      Head, desk. Desk, head. HEADDESK!

      95% (literally) of the asbestos ever used is of a type known as crysotile. Crysotile fibers are hollow and fibers shorter than 1.5 inches are quickly physically broken up in the lungs by the immune system and excreted. Fibers longer than 1.5 inches can get stuck in the bronchii and are carcinogenic. However, no processed crysotile with fibers that long are sold anymore. Only smaller fiber sizes are sold currently. On the other hand, the other types of asbestos are amphiboles and have a totally different fiber structure that is solid and that has ends that will flake off into microscopic pieces are are carcinogenic. It may be good to mention at this point that natural asbestos deposits are common and asbestos fibers of both types are probably something you inhale on a regular basis. On the other hand, if you live in the US and have vermiculite insulation in your home, and depending on the age tremolite asbestos, an amphibole, may be present. Surprisingly, asbestos is not like a toxic or radioactive substance and is safer if left alone, assuming it is in an enclosed space, like an attic, that is left undisturbed. Note, this changes is vermiculite insulation end up in your living room. When and if asbestos needs to be removed, hire trained professionals with the proper equipment.

      Also, fiberglass insulation isn't necessarily any better for your lungs than asbestos.

      --
      Impersonating Tycho from Penny Arcade since before there was a PA.
  2. To be fair by JanneM · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is not a work-related "convenient opinion" of his. He's been critical of Apple's walled-garden approach to development for years, and an Android advocate since he got an Android phone in 2008 (see http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2008/12/18/Android-Diary for his chronicles using and programming it).

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    1. Re:To be fair by Hadlock · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not only is it a walled garden, but everybody seems to forget that Apple is doing exactly what the slashdot community rallied against Microsoft for doing, i.e. the digital wallet, multiple music stores, music players (at least they opened it up to other vendors besides themselves), etc, all crying out that this would be bad for the consumer. Well, Apple has done exactly what Microsoft was doing 10 years ago, it's just that since it was Apple, it was ok (don't mod me down, I'm not trying to troll here). There's some traction in the tech media about Apple doing to developers what slashdotites claimed MS would do, but since Apple isn't the (or wasn't) 800 lb gorilla most people let it slide. Well now Apple owns the market segment (or at least a good portion of it) and ceding Poland to Apple is showing it's downside. Google's approach is definitely better, but right now the fact of the matter is that Apple's DRM system is just as bad as Mircosoft's has been in the past.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    2. Re:To be fair by GaryPatterson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      everybody seems to forget that Apple is doing exactly what the slashdot community rallied against Microsoft for doing

      Yup, very few posts on /. critical of Apple lately. It's not at all the dominant meme when talking about smartphones.

      Seriously - do you actually read /. ? Half the posts in a thread about Apple are criticising it for exactly the things you mention, and the other half are defending it.

    3. Re:To be fair by Hadlock · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oops sorry. But you got my lightly veiled reference that Apple = Hitler, so I'm still ahead :)
       
      Here's the wikipedia link for those interested.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    4. Re:To be fair by GaryPatterson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The iPad seems a nice device. It's not for everyone, but there's nothing inherently wrong with it. It may not be for you, but again, there's nothing wrong with that.

      I find the backlash you mention exactly as bad as the breathless fans you berate and to be honest I'm just as tired of either side of the pundits on this one. Extremes on both sides are misrepresenting the truth, either intentionally or not, and I see some of that in the little squad of straw-men lurking in your post.

      The only people that matter in this are the people who will buy the device. If there aren't enough of them, it'll fail. If there are, it'll succeed. All this back-and-forth garbage is a waste of electrons.

      Nothing you or I say will make a jot of difference on that, and judging by the posts on /. this is a good thing.

    5. Re:To be fair by troll+-1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      everybody seems to forget that Apple is doing exactly what the slashdot community rallied against Microsoft for doing

      Microsoft was sued by 20 State Attorneys General for violating antitrust laws. http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-238758.html

      I don't think there's much of a comparison between Apple and Microsoft.

    6. Re:To be fair by daveime · · Score: 5, Funny

      So this raises the question, who are the Yanks?

      Johnny-come-latelys who will hang around for 10 years after the actual fighting is over, and claim THEY won the battle ?

    7. Re:To be fair by fermion · · Score: 3, Insightful
      So what you are saying is that every car with an automatic transmission is crippled so that grandmas can drive it. Any claims of superiority over a manual transmission are excuses proposed by advertisers and fanboys. I pretty much agree. The only reason the automatic transmission is so heavily advertised is because it provides an extreme up front profit and requires prohibitively expensive repairs, many of which are done by the dealer as the transmission is so unreliable.

      We also see in real estate that walled gardens are valued. People seem perfectly willing to pay huge amounts of money to live in controlled gated community. I do not believe that they provide any additional security, I have never needed to live in one and an perfectly safe, but I do not see AGs going after them for fraudulent PR.

      I am not going to say any Apple product is superior to any non apple product. I like the laptops because I transfer video through firewire, and I can do so with no additional drivers. Same thing for cameras. Same this for mass storage. I expect people to buy the machine they need, not the machine they are told to buy to look good.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    8. Re:To be fair by istartedi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Microsoft was never and is not a monopoly.

      I don't care what the courts say. I'm not usually a defender of the "let the market sort everything out" mentality; but by the time the court ruled, Linux already had some pretty useable desktops, and OS X was not far behind. Defining "PC" as "IBM clone" was a travesty. Whoever prosecuited MS was smart, and got away with that. I remember joking at the time, "so an iMac's not a Personal Computer, eh?".

      Also, the MS "monopoly" is far less problematic than what would happen if Apple's way of doing biz took hold. It was MS that forced hardware vendors to be open. No PC clones, no open BIOS, and arguably NO LINUX. I don't think that's an exaggeration.

      If a proprietary hardware business model dominates, it's much harder to break than a "monopoly" in software. After all, a rather small core of hackers demonstrated that very fact. Developing an open competing *hardware* platform would be an order of magnitude more difficult, I think.

      Hopefully we don't end up with a choice of iPhone-like lockin, or homebrew Arduino-based machines 10 years from now.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    9. Re:To be fair by Capsaicin · · Score: 3, Funny

      Linux

      But linux can't be the yanks!!! It's communist, remember?

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    10. Re:To be fair by caitsith01 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apple's control issues can be a pain, but they've simply never done anything like that. The fact that music players and associated file formats are frequently cited as one of the most high profile issues shows how weak the comparison is: even at their absolute worst in terms of lock-down, iTMS and the iPod have been quite usable with non-Apple products and systems, and most of the time, Apple's competed on their product merits and marketing skills rather than market pressure.

      It's funny, you know. I can't remember one single occasion where Microsoft actually used its control of Windows to specifically prevent a competitor's product from functioning on a PC. Yes, they pushed their own stuff. But I could always install Opera or Mozilla or Lotus or whatever I wanted, and nothing built into the OS could or would prevent that. Likewise MS never attempted to 'protect' me from 'objectionable' material or otherwise impose its value judgments on me.

      My memory loss must be pretty bad, because I also can't remember this fabled golden age when ipods and itunes were "quite usable with non-Apple products". What I can remember, though, is Apple changing the way files are written to an ipod over and over again to deliberately break compatibility with non-Apple software. I can remember my frustration that my ipod wouldn't let me simply drag music files on and off in via a file browser. I can remember Apple selling DRMed music through itunes which wouldn't work with my Creative Zen MP3 player. Funnily enough, I also remember Apple forcing me to install the bloated monstrosity that is quicktime on my system, and both itunes and quicktime then breaking my perfectly functional GUI standards almost as though they never existed.

      As for your underlying thesis, it is immensely naive. "ipod" and "mp3 player" are more or less synonymous for most non-tech people I know. Apple is moving aggressively into video and text. And to me, control over our society's collective cultural record is far more significant than which web browser I use when I install a pre-2000 version of Windows.

      --
      Read Pynchon.
    11. Re:To be fair by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can't be ignorant of the fact that it's pretty much impossible to do client-side web development and not test with (3 versions of) IE.

      You also have to do testing with several versions of Firefox. Damn that Mozilla! We should all hate them!!! (More seriously: what's your point? If you don't suck at your job, you have to test with all currently-supported somewhat-popular browsers.)

      And in many corporate environments, you're still essentially forced to use Windows.

      That's because your corporation chose Microsoft products, because Microsoft products generally are much better than the competition in corporate environments. Apple's always ignored corporations, and Linux solutions are disjointed and disorganized.

      Did your company have a choice? Of course, they could have gone with some other solution. They chose not to... that's not Microsoft's fault.

      But they don't ever really try to bend the whole industry that direction, and the only reason they have as much influence as they do is the same reason anybody who comes up with a good idea or a successful model does.

      Sure they have. Look what they did with the record companies... remember when Amazon was fighting to price music at less than $0.99, they were fighting against Apple and the record companies Apple had brainwashed into selling all tracks for at least $0.99.

      I suppose you could argue (using the loophole you helpfully included) that Amazon's music store wasn't "a good idea or successful model."

      But let's back up a step... Windows (Windows Mobile if you like) ecosystem vs. iPhone ecosystem:

      Has your Windows computer ever stopped you from downloading and installing a program because that program contained a feature the OS already had?

      Has your Windows box ever prevented you from paying for software that contained pictures of titties?

      Has Microsoft done anything, ever, on purpose to break compatibility with older or competitive software? (Apple does this about every week, BTW.)

      No, no, and no.

      Oh, and here's something else to think about: why do I have to install a gigantic application that sells music and movies so I can update the *firmward* of a cellphone? Why does that gigantic application also install a media library I don't want or need? Why does it try to stealthily install a web browser I didn't fucking ask for? Why do I now have some strange zero-config service running beyond my firewall? Apple's software situation sucks-- it's the worst "software taking over your computer" experience since RealPlayer circa 2004.

    12. Re:To be fair by GlassHeart · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm not usually a defender of the "let the market sort everything out" mentality; but by the time the court ruled, Linux already had some pretty useable desktops, and OS X was not far behind.

      Microsoft was enough of a power to be able to dictate to OEMs that they may not pre-install Netscape, simply by threatening to charge different prices for Windows licenses. If that's not a monopoly, it's pretty damn close, because these OEMs did not tell Microsoft to fuck off. The fact is, they played ball and squished Netscape as instructed.

      MacOS X is irrelevant to the discussion, because it ran on PowerPC chips, because Apple wasn't willing to license it anyway, and also because the antitrust trial started in 1998 - some two years before the MacOS X Public Beta. As for Linux, GNOME's first major release was March 1999, entirely irrelevant to this discussion. KDE was first released in July of 1998, also irrelevant. So exactly which "pretty usable desktops" were you referring to?

      I remember joking at the time, "so an iMac's not a Personal Computer, eh?".

      The trial started in May 1998, while the iMac G3 that did not ship until August 1998. The iMac is also irrelevant to the Microsoft antitrust case.

    13. Re:To be fair by bennomatic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think this is one of my favorite comments on this topic. iPhone detractors describe what they see as a problem. iPhone users say it's not a problem because they don't care. The detractors describe the situation accurately, but their judgement of it as a problem is contextual. If you don't care, it's not a problem.

      This isn't like global warming, where a relatively small group can fuck it up for everyone; if people didn't like the iPhone, they just wouldn't buy it. And it's great that there are other options out there.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    14. Re:To be fair by weston · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's funny, you know. I can't remember one single occasion where Microsoft actually used its control of Windows to specifically prevent a competitor's product from functioning on a PC.

      You apparently weren't involved in the industry in the late 1980's and early 1990's. Lotus 1-2-3 and DR-DOS are among the (then) highly discussed cases. Proving intention is a difficult thing, but with all the fuss over time that Microsoft's come to make over backward compatibility, it's a pretty big stretch to claim that they didn't test against what was at the time fairly popular software.

      I also can't remember this fabled golden age when ipods and itunes were "quite usable with non-Apple products".

      I've never had a problem putting music I didn't buy from Apple on an iPod. I've never had a problem getting music I bought from Apple out of their ecosystem, as they included a "burn to CD option." That's before you consider some of the various hacks out there that will let you move whatever you like on and off an iPod w/o having to use iTMS (or even replace the iPod software entirely) and/or crack their DRM.

      But again, that's beside the point. Apple's never used whatever market power they've had to ensure that you didn't have an alternative to their music player, or their music format, or their music store.

      As for your underlying thesis, it is immensely naive. "ipod" and "mp3 player" are more or less synonymous for most non-tech people I know.

      But not because they threatened anyone or made deals to eliminate competitors. Largely because they're good at marketing campaigns and producing products most non-tech people like to use.

    15. Re:To be fair by c.r.o.c.o · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Has Microsoft done anything, ever, on purpose to break compatibility with older or competitive software? (Apple does this about every week, BTW.)

      You either are too young to remember, or you have a short memory.

      Microsoft went out of their way to maintain compatibility with their own older software. But until recently they always tried to block competition intentionally. Although Windows 3.1 ran perfectly on DR-DOS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DR-DOS, it was returning an non-fatal error message, in effect convincing users there was something wrong with DR-DOS. Eventually Novell gave up on DR-DOS and sold it to Caldera (now called SCO). The ensuing lawsuit was settled out of court sometime in 2000 for $155 million, with Novell and Caldera sharing the profits. This is just one example.

      When they couldn't outright deny competitors access, Microsoft's policy was embrace, extend, extinguish. Internet Explorer 4 and 5 were NOT standards compliant. I remember running Mozilla M18 and encountering sites that would only render in IE properly, that is if Mozilla wasn't blocked outright. How is that not purposely blocking competing software? Only after FireFox started gaining traction did Microsoft release standards compliant browsers.

      The point is today Microsoft is a better company because the competition forced them to open up and listen to their clients. Remove competitive pressure and I promise you they'll revert to their old policies.

    16. Re:To be fair by MrHanky · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, there is something inherently wrong with it. Are you intentionally ignoring everything that's being said? Here's a brief refresher: Lock-in, crippleware, no multitasking, iTunes.

    17. Re:To be fair by LordVader717 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This whole "if you don't like it that's your opinion" crap is getting ridiculous.
      Yes, we realize that products are made for diverse markets, and people have different priorities. But if we can't call bullshit when we see it what's the point of having a forum of discussion.

      Back to the topic:
      The iPad is a nice device. But there are a lot of things inherently wrong with it. And I find it worrying that Apple, otherwise often a pioneer in technology is capable of ruining an otherwise good device and wants to severely restrict what I do with it. I think there's something very wrong with that. Even if I'd never contemplate buying an iPad.

  3. He Can Vote With His Wallet by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just like the rest of us he can choose to buy, or not buy, an iPhone or any other Apple or non-Apple product.

    We're all adults here and if he doesn't like Apple's rules about software of the iPod/iPhone/iPad then he can choose not to get one. It's as simple as that.

    The government isn't requiring us all to get iProducts ... yet ;-)

    1. Re:He Can Vote With His Wallet by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also, as Developer Advocate for Android, part of his job is trying to change people's viewpoint on whether they ought to develop for the iPhone or Android.

    2. Re:He Can Vote With His Wallet by hedwards · · Score: 4, Insightful

      iPhone's main advantage from the perspective is user base and that won't necessarily continue if Apple has to compete with competent Android implementations. I'll probably be getting a droid based phone in the near future. A large part of the desirability is that Google allows a number of programs into their marketplace which Apple won't. It got really ridiculous when Apple started banning things which made the iPhone easier to use or could be used in some esoteric way to find objectionable material.

      Probably the best thing he can do is crack the whip and make sure the various companies that want to create Android based products do so in a competent way and discourage carriers from behaving like the dicks they tend to be. As in not doing all that stupid adjustments and customizations that hurt usability.

    3. Re:He Can Vote With His Wallet by MBCook · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll agree that Apple makes Disney Land. It's all highly controlled and polished to look exactly how they want it to, and to keep "undesirable" elements out.

      There's still quite a lot of choice in the market. In fact, whatever you think of the iPhone it's self, we've certainly seen a bigger improvement in the cell industry in the last 3 years (post iPhone) than we did the in 3 or 4 years before. Today, there are numerous phones out with interfaces that aren't abysmal. You can get a game like Bejeweled without having to pay $3 or $4 per month (as carriers liked to charge).

      I like the Apple experience, and I love my iPhone. Daniel Jalkut put up a post on his blog today called Surfing in Antartica, which really resonated with me on why I think the iPhone is so great, and why I'm really interested in what the iPad might bring.

      Apple does some stuff I don't like. Disney does a lot I don't like (and I know many /.ers agree with me). But there are large segments of the market that love the way those companies do things. There are people who happily pay a large chunk of money to get to live in Disney Land for a few hours a day, a few days a year.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    4. Re:He Can Vote With His Wallet by blueg3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not only can he vote with his wallet, but he's free to express his opinion to others who might vote with their wallets in the future. He's not forcing you or anyone else to do anything.

  4. Lack of credibility by Danborg · · Score: 4, Informative

    Tim Bray bought his *first* smartphone in December 2008 and declared it the best he's ever owned:

    http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2008/12/...

    Maybe if he had tried 3 or 4 other phones and then settled on Android, his opinion would have weight.
    This guy had never owned a "fancy phone" until 15 months ago and now he's an expert? Seriously Google, is this the best you can do?

    1. Re:Lack of credibility by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Er, if it were his *first* smartphone, how could it *not* be the best he'd ever owned?

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Lack of credibility by Danborg · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Notice I said he had a lack of credibility, I didn't say he wasn't a bright guy in other fields. That's like saying, hey my Uncle Lou did some cool stuff with mainframes back in the day, and they had about the same amount of processing power as an iPhone, maybe Google should hire him! Read Tim's own words in his Android Diary.

      I've never actually had a "smart" or otherwise fancy phone before, so this is by far the nicest I've owned.

      What kind of technologist bought his first smartphone a little over a year ago? And declares his very first one, The Best! It makes me question his methodology for making decisions, at the very least.

      Do you ever read smartphone related websites like Boy Genius Report, for example? These people live and breath smartphones, and actually carry and use the devices they review and blog about. There are numerous people that are infinitely more qualified on smartphones than Tim Bray will ever be.

      I'm sure Tim is a fine fellow otherwise, and would make an excellent neighbor, who if he borrowed your rake, would return it promptly in good condition.

    3. Re:Lack of credibility by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Read his statement a bit more closely. He obviously recognizes his lack of basis for comparison, his wording says so: "I've never actually had [a smartphone], SO this is by far the nicest". He may have used other smartphones (he doesn't really say), but his wording clearly is meant to convey that he's choosing his Android phone as "best I've owned" by default.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  5. A critic, but not direct opponent of swpats by H4x0r+Jim+Duggan · · Score: 3, Informative

    Tim's critical of software patents, but his position is that there's just an implimentation problem - with good tweaking it could work. Kinda disappointing that he's not pushing for abolition. Surprising too given his experience in web dev and XML. Related info:

    swpat.org is a publicly-editable wiki - help in expanding this info would be very welcome and useful.

  6. He's right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With the iPhone and iPad, Apple has become the Big Brother it railed against in the Superbowl ad of 1984.

    As an owner of many Apple computers from the Apple ][ all the way to today, it's thoroughly depressing to have watched this happen. But I guess Apple's always been schizophrenic about opennness. One one hand you have Woz distributing schematics, the developer's signatures burnt into the Mac's first motherboard, embracing of open-sourced software & development tools, lack of copy protection on their OS, replacing drm music with watermarking, etc. But then you've got them suing Franklin & Pystar, suing HTC, their absurdly paternalistic App market, a closed-down iPad, etc. I guess there's always been a bit of hypocrisy and self-contradiction with Apple.

    But when push comes to shove, I'm growing more convinced with the iPhone/iPad they really do see the future as being closed & proprietary. Google is the athlete running in swinging the hammer. And maybe it's Jobs' face on the big screen?

    I guess Apple II isn't forever.

    1. Re:He's right. by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But when push comes to shove, I'm growing more convinced with the iPhone/iPad they really do see the future as being closed & proprietary.

      Is that why they have developed the best mobile browser to date? Pushing HTML5 instead of Flash? Contributing to webkit?

      The future is going to continue to be dominated by the web. Apple provides a really good web platform in their products.

      You can write any web application you want, and get people on iPhone and iPad to use it. HTML5 has great support in Safari.

      You can write any full application you want for the Mac platform, using one of the best development environments in Xcode.

      You can write any application you want for the iPhone and iPad, as well, using the exact same environment. The only question is whether or not you're going to be able to distribute it in the App Store. Apple has decided to tightly control that marketplace. Some of their reasoning is valid -- security issues, quality control issues, etc. Some of it has to do with branding, things they don't want to be associated with. Some of it has to do with appealing to the widest audience. And yes, some of it has to do with business.

      What I would like to see Apple do, and I think they eventually will be forced by the marketplace to do this -- is to allow apps to be installed from sources outside the App Store. Google Android will push them to do this, if for no other reason than Apple can answer all critics.

      Invariably, Apple tends to solve criticisms eventually, before they erode mindshare.

      Consider the history of iPhone:

      - Criticism #1: What, no native apps, only web apps? Solved in OS 2.0.

      - Criticism #2: What, no copy and paste? Solved in OS 3.0.

      - Criticisms #3 and #4. Now Android is picking up steam. What are the primary advantages people name for Android? Multi-tasking and an open marketplace.

      Well, Apple is rumored to be addressing multi-tasking in OS 4.0. I'm not one of those people that berates them for not having it from the beginning, I think they tackled major problems that plagued earlier "smartphones," i.e. overly complex process management, and battery use issues. As hardware evolves, battery life is less of a problem, and I am confident Apple can solve user interface challenges.

      If they did address multi-tasking and application installation, what would all of you guys bitch about? Oh, right. AT&T.

      Disclaimer: I own stock in Apple and Google.

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
  7. Re:Surprising? by VirexEye · · Score: 4, Informative

    Technically RIM still holds the biggest smart phone market share with the iPhone in 2nd place.

  8. XML... by onefriedrice · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh, so this is the guy who designed that bloated markup language. Yeah, I can't wait to not care any less what his opinion of a phone is.

    He's right, though...

    --
    This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
    1. Re:XML... by nebaz · · Score: 4, Funny

      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you aren't using it enough.

      --
      Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
    2. Re:XML... by ekhben · · Score: 4, Funny

      <?xml version="1.0"?>
      <reply xmlns="http://slashdot.org/xmlns/reply">
          <content xml:lang="enUS">True.</content>
          <content xml:lang="frFR">Vrai.</content>
          <content xml:lang="it">Vero.</content>
          <content xml:lang="hr">Istinto.</content>
      </reply>

    3. Re:XML... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hint - Tim designed it as a markup language, you know - that's why it's right there in the name. For that sort of thing, it's pretty good (and keep in mind that "sorta looks like SGML" was a requirement, just as Java had to look "sorta like C++", to get existing developers to learn it).

      The fact that it has since been used not for markup, but as a general-purpose tree and even graph description language (configs, SOAP packets, etc) isn't his fault.

  9. Exactly! by schon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Exactly - it's just like that Richard Dawkins guy - he's always talking about religion, but he's an atheist! How can he possibly know anything about religion if he doesn't believe in god!??!?!

  10. Walled garden it may be by actionbastard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But at least it's the same version of the walled garden for all purchasers/users:

    http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/03/android-version-confusion/

    --
    Sig this!
  11. Re:The bird still sings in its gilded cage by schon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Another way to look at it is that iPhone provides a solid single platform that developers can concentrate on features rather than UI and input differences.

    Yes, because if Apple allowed pictures of women in bikinis, uncensored dictionaries or mentioning the name of a competitor on the iPhone, the "solid single platform" would fragment into a dozen incompatible versions, right?

  12. correcting myself: he's turned against them by H4x0r+Jim+Duggan · · Score: 3, Informative

    While verifying my sources just now, I found that Tim is, since February 2010, against software patents. Glad to hear it.

    I've updated the wiki.

  13. Re:Opinion of Google is Changing... by einhverfr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My opinion changed when they stopped releasing text-only copies of public domain works through Google Books.

    I am rather concerned about Google and Apple, and primarily support alternatives.

    I won't buy Apple products though and only grudgingly do business with Google these days.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  14. Re:Surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm pretty sure you mean Nokia, not RIM.

    No, he said smartphones. A smartphone is defined as being a device with few enough sales that the iphone looks like a serious competitor in comparison. Nokia do not make smartphones.

  15. Re:Opinion of Google is Changing... by hedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

    Umm, Apple has been forcing people to decide for a really long time. I take it you didn't notice that the ITMS for a really long time didn't support any MP3 player that wasn't a variation of iPod. They didn't change the DRM scheme until after they had secured a strong monopoly position in that market space.

    But I'm sure that's so much better than actively locking people out of your store while signing things up as exclusive.

  16. Re:What are they doing again? by Hadlock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You've always been able to play MP3s on all digital music players. That's a key bullet point in the PPT presentation on how you even get funding to design and a digital music player. I'm not even going to argue about that.
     
    Apple has had absolute control of their standards (Quicktime, proprietary audio formats/encryption, device lockin (itunes only works with ipod, and will update itunes to break compatibility with any other device)... Apple has always been very aggressive about vendor lockin, and only uses "open" standards when it serves their purpose to break into a market, and quickly lose interest once they have a substancial market share (see also: embrace, extend, extinguish).
     
    I'm not trying to say Apple is completely evil, but they act more like Microsoft than most people realize, and only use open technologies enough to ease the paranoia of the technical community, knowing that their acceptance of products/technology is crucial to widespread consumer uptake (see also: Vista Failure).

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  17. Re:Opinion of Google is Changing... by tabdelgawad · · Score: 4, Informative

    You're missing context. See here:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/technology/14brawl.html

    Apparently, Apple considered Google's Android a stab in the back. So now Google's CEO (Eric Schmidt) is off Apple's board of directors and Apple is suing HTC for patent infringement (Google is not named, but is the indirect target).

    I'm surprised this whole fight hasn't gotten more coverage on Slashdot. In any case, I'm squarely in Google's corner on this issue. We need Android to succeed to preserve competition and openness in the smart phone and tablet/e-reader markets.

    --
    Imposing Libertarian views on everyone online since 1992.
  18. Re:What are they doing again? by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    iTunes ain't done till the Palm won't run!

  19. iDIOT antI-fanboiIs by weston · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But then again, apple fanboi's will always try to herd a stray iSheep back to the iFlock. There's even an app for that!

    Or maybe they just get tired of anti-fanboi idiots making statements that seem to equate:

    "Um, you're not forced to buy it. You're perfectly free to buy, enjoy, and develop for something else."

    with

    "Apple fanboi's will always try to herd a stray iSheep back to the iFlock."

    For some reason, for a lot of geeks, it's never enough to just like something else that's not Apple. They have to LOUDLY TELL EVERYBODY ELSE THAT THEY SHOULD NOT LIKE APPLE TOO and this despite the fact that nobody's ever been forced to buy Apple.

  20. Re:What are they doing again? by trapnest · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not to mention that CUPS and WebKit are both open standards that apple has used and contributed to for a long time. I don't see them being thrown aside.

  21. Has anyone thought to ask by realinvalidname · · Score: 3, Interesting

    just what the point of this hire is? Apple-bashing aside, is it just to put the shiny open-source face on Google? That didn't exactly save his previous employer, who also hired him for apparent PR value and where he accomplished nothing of sufficient significance to merit inclusion on his Wikipedia bio.

    Perhaps if Apple is very, very lucky, Google will hire Jonathan Schwartz too.

  22. Re:What are they doing again? by GaryPatterson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apple has had absolute control of their standards (Quicktime, proprietary audio formats/encryption, device lockin (itunes only works with ipod, and will update itunes to break compatibility with any other device)... Apple has always been very aggressive about vendor lockin, and only uses "open" standards when it serves their purpose to break into a market, and quickly lose interest once they have a substancial market share (see also: embrace, extend, extinguish).

    Quicktime uses 'normal' formats - H264, mp4, etc. Apple don't have any proprietary audio or video formats. You're confusing format with DRM, and there's none of that in their music either.

    Palm decision to use someone else's software to manage their device is a bad move in every sense. They become reliant on the experience provided by someone else, and open themselves up to being locked out. When Apple also provide APIs for accessing the iTunes database (hell, it's just an XML file, any dev worth their salt can write a parser, and there are plenty of open-source XML parsers out there) then Palm's decision looks more like posturing and using their own customers as a weapon.

    Still, many of the /. crowd fell for Palm on this, hook line and sinker. It became an issue of 'freedom' or something, and not just a shabby development decision that was almost certainly going to bite them later.

    As for EEE, can you give an example? I can understand how Microsoft could do that with IE, as they had market dominance. I can't see how Apple can do that in any market but mp3 players, and clearly they've not done so in that market.

  23. Re:Opinion of Google is Changing... by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 5, Funny

    Unfortunately, chris.travers@GMAIL.COM, your Google boycott rings a tad hollow.

    --
    Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
  24. Re:What are they doing again? by Kitkoan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Quicktime today is h.264 video with AAC audio (Sorensen is gone).

    h.264 is a licensed technology owned by MPEG LA. While it did go free for a few more years for usage, it was set to lose that until about a month ago and is still a licensed technology that can be used to lock.

    iTMS files are AAC audio and fairplay is gone. Fairplay was easy to remove by yourself and Apple documented how to do so.

    Again, AAC audio is not an open technology, it's a licensed one. The license is quite a easy one to stream and distribute (free), but to use the actual codec itself requires a company to obtain a license. This is why FOSS FAAC and FAAD software projects are only distributed in source code form only to avoid the patent issues. As for Fairplay, it was Apples way of keeping any songs bought from iTunes to only play on iPods. No other MP3 player was able to read the files helping Apple keep a monopoly, and is still being fought under the Apple iPod iTunes Antitrust Litigation Not to mention Fairplay is still being used by Apple. Also couldn't find anything on the Apple.com site on how to remove Fairplay from anything.

    iTunes works with anything as long as anything actually knows how to interact with iTunes (the fact Palm doesn't understand how is Palm's failure). Some vendors even get sync functionality (many Motorola devices, following the ROKR partnership), not just the iPod as you say.

    iTunes works as long as Apple says it's ok, not if anything actually knows how to interact with iTunes. Palm does know how and kept programming to make it work. It was Apple that kept altering iTunes to purposely break that connection to wall out Palm since they didn't want to jump through Apple's hoops.

    What was your point again ? Oh right, outright lies.

    No, that was your point to make outright lies.

    --
    Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
  25. Re:Surprising? by daveime · · Score: 3, Informative

    So the Nokia N95 and E90 weren't smartphones ? Funny, because I could do stuff with those phones 5 years ago that I *still* can't do with an iPhone.

  26. Re:Opinion of Google is Changing... by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Interesting way to spin Apple's accomplishment... that it was somehow evil to unlock iTunes. Wow, how could anyone win with this kind of logic?

    What actually happened was that Apple dominated the music business because of the popularity of their HARDWARE and the way it worked seamlessly with their SOFTWARE (iTunes). They made a music store that SELLS MUSIC, in an environment where it was almost as easy to anonymously steal the same stuff.

    Steve Jobs wrote an open letter to the music industry where he essentially said, why don't we eliminate this DRM bullshit, because it doesn't work. One by one, they eventually relented, and now most music stores sell music without DRM. You can now buy music from iTunes that plays on any modern music device.

    Yet you're convinced Apple only did this because they somehow are now "safe" with this iPod monopoly. Does this make any sense? They removed one factor that might lock someone into their iPod the most -- their music library's portability -- and decimated it. Yet, in your mind this was just a crock of shit or something?

    Wow.

    --
    Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
  27. Re:Gotta love freetards by Raffaello · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just gonna burn some karma here since you've unfortunately been modded 0 flamebait:

    As much as I enjoy tinkering w/ open source and recognise its massive contribution, why is it so hard for freetards to grasp the key issue:

    For normal users (or even geeks who don't have the time/energy to care), walled garden that "just works" beats open solution that "sorta works" (even 'mostly') 10 times out of 10

    You sir, are absolutely right, no matter how much we people who read slashdot, we denizens of the extreme right hand tail of the user bell curve, wish it weren't so.

  28. Re:Opinion of Google is Changing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    lol you have a hotmail account

  29. Re:What are they doing again? by uglyduckling · · Score: 4, Interesting

    iTunes works as long as Apple says it's ok, not if anything actually knows how to interact with iTunes. Palm does know how and kept programming to make it work. It was Apple that kept altering iTunes to purposely [slashdot.org] break [slashdot.org] that connection [slashdot.org] to wall out Palm since they didn't want to jump through Apple's hoops.

    No, that's utter rubbish. There's a well-documented method for interacting with iTunes via its database. There are many third-party apps that do so, including the Amazon mp3 downloader which competes directly with the iTunes store. Palm were trying to piggy-back onto iTunes by partially emulating an iPod, which isn't something that Apple support (and why should they, any more than HP will support your Epson scanner with their scanning software), and made a huge fuss about it. Palm should have written their own code for interacting with their media player and interacted with iTunes (and any other software) through the right APIs.

  30. Err, no. by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think the folks attacking Apple have as much of a track record of being consistently and intentionally wrong. Case in point.

    For example, both my Mother and my Aunt, in their 60's, want an iPad. They are not fangrrrls. One has a Mac and would prefer the pad, the other doesn't use PC's a lot but would like a simple, portable device for email and internet, and easily sharing photos of my family (since she lives in Europe).

    As for the walled garden, I'd say the motives are mixed. I (and many people I know) actually like walled gardens, in some circumstances, if it helps remove bullshit from my life. Not all circumstances, of course.

    I do agree the blocking of iPad -> iPhone tethering is crap, but I can't tether on AT&T as it is.

    --
    -Stu
    1. Re:Err, no. by u38cg · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, the marketing looks like it speaks to young, fashionable types. That makes it appealling to those of us who are not young and fashionable. All the actual young fashionable types I know are too busy drinking, smoking and having sex to give a toss about Apple.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
  31. That's how deep the conspiracy goes! by weston · · Score: 4, Funny

    Microsoft was sued by 20 State Attorneys General for violating antitrust laws.

    I don't think there's much of a comparison between Apple and Microsoft.

    No! You don't get it! That's how deep the conspiracy goes! Either Apple has brainwashed state governments so they don't see that Apple's also violating the same antitrust laws, or fanbois have infiltrated those governments! There's no other possible explanation!

    Wake up sheeple and see the truth before it's too late and we have iGovernment!

  32. The first law of Slashdot by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Slashdot as a group is ALWAYS against what you are for.

    Slashdot is filled with hippies/gun nuts.

    Slashdot is filled with rabid republicans/demented democrats.

    Slashdot is filled with MS apologists/BSD freaks/Apple fanboys. They are all seen as silly by the enlightened linux users who are well above this kind of shameful name calling what are after all their fellow human beings even if they are obviously less evolved.

    Slashdot is filled with Trek nerds/People that hate Trek for being nerdy/Hate trek for not being nerdy enough.

    Slashdot is filled with virgins/people who lie about having had sex.

    Oh and the best way to make a claim that slashdot is against you? Claim you are going to be modded down for saying it. Then when you are modded up, don't change your mind.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

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

  33. Walled garden construction kit by argent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One reason Android beat out Openmoko was because Google was willing to make a platform that carriers could turn into a walled garden if they wanted to, while Openmoko was designed to NOT be locked down.

    Sure, technically Google isn't doing evil here. They're just enabling AT&T to do it.