Slashdot Mirror
Jimmy Wales Declares App Store Models a Threat
An anonymous reader writes "Wikipedia's chief says models such as the App Store on the iPad are not only a dangerous chokepoint to internet freedom, but that this is a real and immediate problem that's of more concern than the overblown what if's of the net neutrality debate."
I’m personally not a fan of the whole “app” thing. Feels like we are going backwards.
You had specialized viewers and clients for various data, then gradually the web became more mature and more and more data was simply put on a website. Now we are gradually going back to the specialized viewer mentality.
OS integration and a few features like GPS and multi-touch are one justification, and there are certainly cases where it does make sense to have a specialized client vice a web app to view content from the web, however I think a lot of it has to do with money.
You can’t sell a subscription to a website (unless you’ve got some really damn good content), but you can sell a little app that pulls data off your website and displays it in a different manner.
We had a shitty but effective standard going here.. and I fear this whole “app” craze is going to put us back in the “dark ages”.
But not like the one on Android, since you can still install apks from other sources, or use third party app stores.
The only problem with app stores is when it is inordinately difficult to install software from another source. People have been buying stuff from non-recommended sources since time immemorial to upgrade anything and everything.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Article format: "Jimbo says app stores are bad. By the way, Wikipedia."
It talks about app stores for the first two paragraphs, and then the rest of the article is about Wikipedia, PhDs, and markup code. It's an interesting point, but I wish they'd talk more about it. Then again, /. commenters will take care of that.
Not worried about it. The walled garden is only superficially popular while it's the only game in town.
Apple is a publicly traded company and as such here's what's important to them.....
Making money for their stockholders.
That means sucking you into a proprietary app system. That means sweatshops for iPods and doing things like heading down the dangerous path of closing off the Darwin source for development so that OSS geeks can't find a way to make OS X work on commodity boxes.
Apple is going to do what is best in their corporate interest.
Surprised? Don't be. It's business
As we move toward tablets with full functioning web browsers that will display anything you throw at it, then you will see the end of the app store era. But what do I know?
vender lock-in and lock down is bad also people who make free apps should not have to pay $99 year just to have you app in the store.
There needs to be more then just 1 app store and there needs to be a way to load apps with out the any store as well being able to code apps with out paying big fees and or having to buy a high cost dev kit.
App stores aren't the problem, exclusive app stores are. Remember the song line "I sold my soul to the company store"? That's what these things are.
All those hours spent gazing fondly at your picture at the top of every Wikipedia page. Installing the Jimmy Wales extension for Chromium, so I could see you everywhere. Knowing that you were looking just at me...
You have betrayed me, Jimmy, with your false generalization of software distribution systems. Words cannot express the anger and shame I feel.
I want my $2.50 back.
Just another proletarian malcontent.
Don't download just any app, don't change the OS, don't share your books or music with anyone, and NEVER develop unauthorized software or be ready to be remotely disabled!
If you don't like it, buy something else!!!
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Granted maybe not in Apple's case since you can't install anything on your own, and I think that's the way they are going to go on the desktop as well -- totally closed off and everything 100% through the App store for desktop and mobile.
Windows won't go that route on the desktop, though they will on the mobile device.
Android is going to take a bit of a hit with the iPhone coming to Verizon, so we'll see how they change their tune to stay competitive.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
There exists PPAs and Overlays, but you can't open a private "App Store" for OS X
I think we need a law establishing the clear difference between own vs. rent. Own = single payment (or limited set of payments) ahead of time, no need to return property, free right to mod, upgrade, download anything to it. No cancellation fees allowed. They can charge to ship out (and charge shipping to return if broken and being replaced). No signature required Rent = a set of equal payments (no set up/start up/initiation fee) each good for a specified amount of time, property must be returned WITH ZERO SHIPPING COST (it is their property, they have to pay to ship it both ways - build it into the rent), zero rights to mod/upgrade/download anything. Cancellation fees allowed, but not to exceed remaining months. hand written signature expressely required for a rental agreement - and also for any extensions of the agreement. Services can be begun without the signature on a monthly usage, but no cancellation fee or contract is considered active without the signature. Electronic signatures not allowed unless an independent third party tracks said signature. (Sort of like In addition, they need to clearly state what is being sold vs what is being rented. You would be allowed to sell a product and then rent a service to it, but which is what needs to be clearly shown.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
"people who make free apps should not have to pay"
Just because the app is free, doesn't mean that Apple has no costs associated with hosting the app on the download server, verifying the app doesn't have viruses/etc, and bandwidth to allow customers to download the app.
Now, I'm no Apple fanboy - I own an Android phone, because I don't like the level of control that Apple exercises over their products after sale, but I also recognize that having a small annual fee for hosting the app is not unreasonable. On the other hand, what is unreasonable is that you can't host the app yourself, or with some other service.
Wikipedia is "free" but they just raised something like $10 Million to fund their operations this year. If you are offering a 'free' app that other people find useful, you should have no problem getting $99 in donations to pay the annual hosting fee. That is an absolutely paltry sum, in the big picture. But, you should also have other hosting options, which Apple does not allow.
As long as the browser works, I don't see how the app store model has any impact on "internet freedom".
Seems like it's always the App Store which gets all the credit for being bad for society. Why don't we ever hear about the PlayStation Store, or the Xbox Marketplace, or the Wii's Shop Channel? These also sell screened, platform-specific software, some of which you cannot get any other way. Oh, but they're just games, right?
Sure you can. You just can't integrate it into Software Update.
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
i agree that app stores do bring a new level of control and threaten the openness of devices however it does provide a larger distribution center for smaller developers. the ability to use another app store or source is a huge plus which is what android seems to have going for them. Cydia brought this to the iPhone but it will be nice to see the ability to turn on other app store abilities like you can on android.
Bryan
This is typical "bight - and - switch". Start with controversial statement to get eye-balls and then switch to self-promotion. Statement about App Store (which he completely fail to explain/justify) occupy barely 15% of the article, rest is promotional stuff about Wikipedia. On top of this, any article which claims that most of "net-neutrality" debate focused on "hypothetical" issues makes me highly suspicious in regards to author real intent.
"App Stores" are quite arguably a good thing. I know that I say a few words of thanks every time I type 'sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade' and everything automagically pulls from the repositories and does its thing. It absolutely curb-stomps the experience of a zillion separate updaters, obsolete library versions, and so forth.
On the other hand, an implementation where my apt-sources are cryptographically signed, and the BIOS refuses to boot if the list has been modified, would be a dark day indeed. That, to my mind, is the actual threat.
Although they haven't been called "app stores" in the past, package management systems kick ass, and are generally far superior in user experience to just grabbing random stuff off the internet and installing it. However, any entity who would restrict you exclusively to their own package management system fancies themselves your master and will soon be your rent-collecting landlord.
Sorry Jimmy, sorry. We won't do it again.
i still use wikipedia to great extent. the fact that one of your edits have been shunned does not make it a less valid source. take your whining elsewhere. the complaint wales puts forth is valid and important. you may choose not to use wikipedia. but if a few corporations close the internet as we know it, as their fenced gardens, all of your freedom goes away.
learn to sort your priorities.
Read radical news here
>>According to Wales — who was quick to stress he was speaking in a purely personal capacity — set-ups such as the iTunes App Store can act as a “chokepoint that is very dangerous.” He said such it was time to ask if the model was “a threat to a diverse and open ecosystem” and made the argument that “we own [a] device, and we should control it."
In other words, he has a problem with the iTunes stores and Apple lockdown, versus the idea of monetizing and controlling content like this in general as his business is making money on the for-profit Wikia content sites. As someone said above, what exactly is an app store but a GUI front end for a site like like Sourceforge or a Linux repository, where people can install programs without having to jump through technological hoops?
My wife has an Ubuntu netbook that she uses for writing and browsing and mail only, but if I suggested that she apt-get or sudo or any other nonsense she'd whack me upside the head, point at the screen, and ask me to do whatever it is I thought needed doing. That's probably 95% of everyone in the world, right there. There is no chokepoint unless the hardware vendors do dumb things like the news that Microsoft locked out app installs yesterday on Windows Mobile 7 unless you subscribe to their tools.
App stores are no more evil than the business decisions of the vendors controlling the hardware that connect to them. Sort of like computers, cars, guns, and so on.
Dude, where's my packet?
Seriously tired of all the rambling about freedom here. Have any of those who incessantly babble on about how some capitalist is "taking away their freedom" ever actually thought through the lack of logic in their statement? As if you have some god-given right to set policy within a sphere or activity that grew out of someone else's creative efforts. If you don't like Apple's walled garden, then stick your shovel in some different dirt! Nobody is forcing you to buy anything from Apple. Enough of this silly "I want something exactly like what that guy invented, but I want complete control over it!" Grow up. Apple's only relevance is that they put together a system of 'stuff' that a good many people like. You can buy in, or you can stay out. You can't come in and tell Steve how to run it. Invent your own. In the unlikely event that a few people like it and decide to buy into yours...I probably will abstain. Ain't freedom grand?
Except I don't think Woz would say anything negative about Apple...
What does he think about the Xbox360 and the Wii bussiness model? Does he think the same ?
Get my e-mail after a captcha test in: http://tinymailt
I can't speak for him, but I certainly think it is bad. These sorts of restricted and locked down computers (yes, we are talking about computers, even if they are dressed differently) are a bad thing for society. Now, as for the impact on the open web, I suppose one could argue that video game systems are not drawing efforts away from websites (nobody is talking publishing newspapers exclusively on video game consoles, last I checked), but the broader effect on society (e.g. dividing people, keeping free software out) is largely the same.
Palm trees and 8
Let me guess. You tried to "correct" something and people who knew better than you thankfully reversed it?
Jimmy Wales is using his stature to trumpet the evils of Apple's closedness, a message shared by Eric Schmidt, of course.
As Wales is constantly reminding us, Wikipedia needs money.
Perhaps this is nothing more than a quid pro quo. Look for an infusion of Google money into Wikimedia Foundation in the near future.
one can choose to use or not use apple products.
one usually has little choice over their cell service or internet provider.
net neutrality is a far more important issue and imminent threat than apple's control over their little corner of media sales.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Jimmy Wales and RMS register as a domestic partnership...
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Hmmm... I'm getting an image forming in my mind...
Stale oranges? Nope...
Bad apples? Nope...
Rotting blueberries? Nope...
Ah... yes, it's clear now...
Sour grapes.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
... provided that I also have the freedom to poke people in the eye over the Internet every time they download malware from $random_server_found_with_google and turn their PC into a DDoS client, spam MTA, pr0n/warez server ...
So considering the amount of dumb people on the Internet, app stores for *them*, with at least some rudimentary control over the quality of provided apps, are a good thing. While a lot of malware/junk can be found on app stores as well, at least there is usually only 1 version of it and not 50 different manipulated copies floating around on the web.
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
I'm all for net neutrality and keeping things open and as free as possible..
But when it comes to users like my parents, jesus, is something like the new OS X App Store a sanity saver.
I think having App stores on the desktop is a great thing. But it only makes more newbs be able to use their computers. Of course the classic models will continue. Though this whole Cloud thing, particularly as Google's been working on, could really change things up.
Look, at the end of the day, we can all always fall back to Linux and that will never be a fail.
.
And why exactly should I care what Jimmy Wales thinks?
I get what Jim is saying. I do not want, and therefore to not have, any sort of walled garden type device. The actual idea that we need to have something like that is somewhat repugnant to me.
But the reality is that all of us geeks have done enough tech support to know that the walled garden idea has it's roots in practicality. It begins with the idea that most end users should not have total control over everything because when they do they only will require more support.
However with control means ideology. Someone has to setup the rules. And now I'll quickly digress and say that FOSS is not without it's own ideology. But there is a huge delta between a walled garden and a FOSS repository.
So for those who are a bit upset with Jimmy and what he is saying I'd ask you to really think before you get too upset. And if that is too much then just either stick with Jobs or Stallman since the shades of gray that line the real road of human travel might be too much for you.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
Exactly. The talking heads on local news give me chills when they keep spouting off about iPads being "the future of computing!". It's a console to replace your computer!!! Would it be too tin-foil hat like of me to forsee sometime in the future the regular PC becoming illegal on a public network?
SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
Yes it is a barrier to entry and that's part of its purpose I'm sure. A sort of cover charge to make sure the developer is really serious about putting his app out there and maintaining it. Can you imagine the sheer number of fart apps Apple would have been sent if there was no $99 developer fee ?
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
The only problem with Apple's App Store is that Apple makes it impossible to have other app stores on your iPhone or iPad. In the physical world, we don't allow that kind of monopolistic behavior (at least in the USA). Want to have a brush guard with a killer winch on the front of your Jeep? You can buy them from lots of places, even though the manufacturer won't sell you one and (most) dealers won't install one. You can even pay someone else to install it for you, without Jeep's permission or approval.
Lord Acton was right about absolute power.
...you can't open a private "App Store" for OS X
Sure you can. In fact, I think it might even be a viable business model. Clone the app store right down to using the same formats to make things easy. Roll your own payment and update system (preferably identical to Apple's but independent). Make a huge, public promise to never, ever, ever reject any app for any reason other than it being malware. Do actual due diligence on the apps, target both apps in the app store and apps that can't get into the app store. Make a deal with Adobe and Microsoft both of whom want Apple to have less power. Charge less than 30%, say 25%, what have developers got to lose by putting their apps in your store too? Build in features Apple is lacking, like demo/trail versions of software.
What's stopping you?
Aw, did somebody have his stupid trivia about anime characters deleted?
If you write code as a hobby, you should also realize that there are costs associated with the pursuit of just about any hobby.
I play hockey strictly for fun: this means sticks, pucks, protective gear, all purchased out of my own pocket. My teammates don't pick up the tab for my gear, but I bet if my name were Cam Neely, I could get Easton or some other manufacturer of gear to hook me up with all kinds of free stuff.
I play the guitar, strictly for fun (and poorly): this means picks, strings, a capo, an instrument, neckstraps, and any amplification equipment I wish to buy must be purchased out of my own pocket. Guitar Center doesn't sponsor me with a bunch of freebies, but I bet if my name were Slash, I could go in and get a pack of guitar strings for free.
I attend concerts, strictly for fun: this means tickets, drinks, transportation and parking all must be purchased out of my own pocket. The bands I'm going to see don't send me free tickets, but I bet if I worked A&R for a record label, they'd be willing to send me a free ticket.
I'll agree it would be *nice* for Apple to allow you to load apps from a location that isn't hosted by them - but they don't. Android does, however. Though incidentally, if you wanted to "host your own" android app, you'd also have to pay for hosting & server space for yourself anyway, unless you have no intention of ever distributing your code to anyone else. Think a yearly hosting package is going to cost you some money? I bet it will.
Damn fun! Curse them for making me suffer through multiple hundreds of hours of social interactions and fun with friends growing up on the NES, Genesis, and later other gaming platforms! Down with fun and childhood, up with FREEDOM!!!!
Dude, where's my packet?
I don't know what all the fuss is about. The Mac app store participation is completle optional, as it should be. This is no different that any of the other hundreds of websites that collect shareware/freeware etc...
not to mention Steam .
The iPhone/iPad/Touch is a closed platform. Get over it. Write in HTML5 if you want to avoid the app store, or don't write for iPhone at all.
Or Wii or Xbox or Plastation.
And fundamentlaly, how is this any different than a package manager or ports collection?
What if I don't want to use your package manager or ports method for my local install?
Oh sure, I can hunt down the original source code and complile it myself.
If you can do that, you're not in an App store's target audience.
Bodega (http://www.appbodega.com) called, and wanted a word with you, but it appears as if you've just FUD'ed them out of existence. :(
Sony doesn't own the patents to blu-ray. 17 different companies own the various patents and Sony is part of that consortium.
One thing most apps also offer that the web browser doesn't is they work when you don't have internet access.
One thing HTML5 features offer that older web technologies didn't is that properly designed web apps work when you don't have internet access.
fortunately the iphone isn't the only game in town. if a google app is yours, 1) create key, 2) sign file, 3) load to machine, 4) install through manager. if it isn't yours you do steps 3 and 4. imho an app store, even apples, is a good thing. some people that want to look for applications that do what they want to do but are not able to do it themselves. if that was the only way someone could get an app on their device, yes, it would suck royally.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Yeah, that William Connolley is such a great and knowledgeable guy.
As is generally better with all aspects of a free market, Wales, in demagogic fashion, would rather dictate that the big players are not to compete in the market. Shame on Wales!
If users want a different app model then the market will accommodate them because the market is always striving for the best growth with highest financial returns. What? What's that? Did I hear something? Was that the market and it already decided???
OH SNAP!!! I understand Wales' opinion but he sounds like he is deep in the forest but cannot see any trees.
If you think Android's success is because of growing awareness of draconian Apple policies. It is because Android phones are cheaper, some have keyboards, and they work on other carriers than AT&T.
Facebook is starting to become a 'chokepoint for internet freedom' as well. What ever happened to just putting the information about your product on the internet? Now a lot of companies are putting their stuff on facebook.com/stupidproduct, and often times you can't get to the page unless you log into facebook. I don't have a facebook account so it cuts me off from seeing it. I doubt it will happen but it would suck if in the future you'd have to first log into facebook or it's future equivalent to access the new closed off version of the internet.
-Xoltri
So this a personal appeal from Wikileaks founder Jimmy Wales to stop buying apps then?
You should have seen the shitfight when Crucifixion in Anime was finally deleted. I watched it unfold in realtime, just after being brought to attention by an SA discussion started the final assault.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Sorry. I am unconvinced. If somebody writing software isn't willing to put $99 effort into his product (costs he'd have to pay anyway for hosting and such), I really don't really want to be using their code. I remember having a Palm PDA and going to CNET and other sites and downloading programs to it. Nearly two thirds of them were too buggy to use or simply caused my PDA to freeze on launch. I do not really want to return to those days. For those that do, I'm glad they have their alternative. It's an alternative that I've looked at myself. Once I see advantage in it I'd be willing to switch but running some random guys code who can't put some minimal effort into getting it vetted isn't currently one of them.
You have a problem if you want to keep customer relation confidential (e.g. online banking for a Swiss bank) but your customers must download the app from the app store which is placed in a different jurisdiction.
I was just thinking I should have provided some more background info.
For those who don't know, Crucifixion in Anime was a section on Wikipedia's page about crucifixion. A full, main section, standing alongside Jesus and everything. To anyone serious it was a hilarious example of Wikipedia "not being ready for the desktop," to put it in Slashdot terms. But to the hardcore otaku, it was their final stronghold in the war against ANIME PERSECUTION!!1ONE
So there was some discussion on SA about Wikipedia, IIRC we were trying to find the most ridiculous Wikipedia pages, and then we would add to them, for the lulz. One person argued that Wikipedia was still mostly a good, serious source of information, and another person pointed them to Crucifixion in Anime, the last nasty stain of Otaku occupation in Serious territory.
Within minutes, somebody on the Serious side began the attack on the Otaku stronghold.
The section was deleted and undeleted many times as top admins duked it out. The discussion pages were full of NERD RAGE!!! It was an epic battle. Finally, the dust settled and Crucifixion in Anime was gone, the Serious side had won! It was like a Berlin Wall separating Wikipedia from Being Taken Seriously had fallen, and there was much rejoicing.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
There are two truths about app stores. 1. They make lots of money. 2. They hobble the device by only providing console approved software. While the latter provides some protection against viruses, it also insures you'll never have the latest and greatest ability that your laptop has had for weeks.
Its a situation we accept with phones, but that will eventually kill the tablet.
I don't really think so - I am treating this as shareware 2.0. We saw 15 years of diffusion when everyone had to do their own marketing, now the App Mall just does Marketing by Aggregation. Apple caught on to the power of curating. Sure they get a bit heavy handed, but Users Like This.
I'd say the difference is in the legal framework. I never even heard of the DMCA until about 2005, and suddenly by about 2007 everyone started invoking it left and right.
If we're talking about App content vs Web Content, I think it's the battleground of Paid vs Ads. For $4, people don't have as much of the javascript / tracker silliness. (I have a couple of the privacy addons for Firefox, and some sites have 12 trackers! There's always a few stories about data leak from apps, but it can't be that bad.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
So wikipedia... there isn't an app for that?
Here's the secret to immortality:
Wikipedia Mobile
By Wikimedia Foundation
Description: Wikipedia is now officially on the iPhone! This is our official application and we are working hard on making the absolute best Wikipedia app out there.
Fandroids hate facts.
I think people are being overly reactionary when they refuse to differentiate between special-purpose gadgets and devices and full-blown computer systems.
Just like you said, the "walled garden" approach is just fine for a PHONE or even something a little larger, like the iPad. It's NOT supposed to be a computer. If it was, Apple would have immediately stopped selling Macbooks and Macbook Pros!
At the end of the day, ALL of these electronic devices have little computers in them, but the whole point is -- people didn't really WANT to carry a full-blown computer around with them everywhere or networking everything imaginable in the house or office to it, relying on it for EVERYTHING. (Imagine if your microwave oven just networked to your home PC and you controlled the cook time and settings from a piece of software on the computer? That'd get rid of a duplicate "special purpose computer" in the thing and reduce its price a little bit. But would you actually WANT it that way? Doubtful!)
Many times, I even find the functionality offered for my "smartphone" crosses into the territory of things I prefer to do with another gadget instead. GPS navigation is a great example. Sure, I *could* run any number of iPhone or Android phone apps for that in my car. But what about when I need to take a phone call while I'm using it? Plus, mounting it on my windshield glass so I can actually SEE the maps while driving means I need more special hardware to do that, and I *always* have to unclip and disconnect the thing so I can take it with me as soon as I get out of the vehicle. A cheap dedicated GPS is more convenient for the task.
Yes, Steve Jobs wants to have ultimate control over his company's devices as they ship. He spends quite a bit on internal R&D, and tries hard to keep that work a secret so it doesn't leak out before a product is ready. But that "control" evaporates as soon as the products reach consumers.
iPhones and iPads? Jailbreaks have always been available for them, often within DAYS of any software updates rendering older ones useless.
AppleTV? Made to run completely different software with hacks allowing booting them from USB memory sticks.
iPods? Heck, people have entire Linux projects that run on the platform!
And comparing Wikipedia's model of contributions to their content to what Apple sells? VERY different things and hardly even comparable in the first place! Wikipedia doesn't even sell a tangible product, for starters. The closest thing Apple has to Wikipedia might be their free user forums, where yes -- all registered users can contribute their own comments and suggestions.
So wait... why should I give two shits about what Jimmy Wales says? He's a guy who runs a popular webpage... hardly someone I'd trust to give me any kind of advice, except maybe about how to program a webpage. And I think the layout of wikipedia lately sucks, so I wouldn't ask him about that regardless.
yeah, uncyclopedia FTW!
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
You won't be able to compete on the strength of the Reality Distortion Field.
There is no "yet". It will never be, because Javascript + HTML will never be as good as the tools available for developing on the native platform.
I don't see any reason why web apps can't be as easily to develop, as feature-rich, as fast, and as easy to use as native apps. The browser just has to use on-the-fly compilation of JavaScript, support local storage, and expose a common API for device I/O (the first two are already here). And the web app itself just has to be able to adjust its UI for the screen size.
It is madness that people think the whole world should standardize on a typeless scripting language and a klunky markup language for graphical layout, running on a VM that is always embedded in a window that allows the user to do things that will break your application.
The ubiquity of HTML+JS+CSS viewers (web browsers) greatly reduces the need to code separately for each viewing device. It's madness that we'd need to write the same software multiple times.
I'm not familiar with the details, but your list of required things sounds remarkably like the current feature list of, say, Mobile Safari.
I haven't been able to find any evidence that Mobile Safari supports WebGL (tried Google mobile safari webgl) or the camera (tried Google mobile safari camera). I checked for how big a web app could be (tried Google mobile safari offline limit), and it appears to be limited to 5 MB. The localStorage object is likewise limited to 5 MB (tried Google mobile safari localstorage limit). Nor does Mobile Safari appear to JIT compile the JavaScript due to iOS's especially strong flavor of W^X (tried Google mobile safari javascript jit). Even accelerometer support wasn't added until iOS 4.2 (came up during the camera search), which wasn't jailbroken until this week (per Wikipedia).
)
Are you trying to kill us all?
That's so entertaining. We need something like that on the math pages... Topology in Anime? Is there anything like that?
"I hope ... Average Joes will be attracted to open devices"
I admire your optimism but I'm firmly sceptical. Western civilization has had the motor car for a century now. Are we all driving "open" cars? does everyone tinker? No and No. People want to get in and drive and get out at the other end, they don't even want to have to check the oil level, never mind change it. Yes there are tinkerers and even people who get out the welding kit and make bizzare (and perfectly roadworthy) mashup vehicles but they are not the norm.
I don't believe for a second that computing and software will be any different. Yes there will be hobbyists and people who sprout multi billion industries from - fittingly - their garage but grandparent poster is right - people overwhelmingly want it to JUST WORK and don't give a shit about anything else and no amount of proclaiming "it's easy, look" and waving your arms will change that.
Personally, as I'm getting older I'm getting less inclined to tinker, I'll still happily upload custom linux firmware to my router but if someone else on the planet hasn't already cooked it then I won't bother doing it myself. And generally now I just want to be able to plug things into each other and have them talk without dicking about with drivers, imagine my horror when I finally got a PS3 this xmas and it wouldn't see my SMB LAN shares, let alone play the MP3s on there!
If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
There's no problem with an "App Store" per se. It's just another shop. You are welcome to visit it, or not, as you prefer.
Owning just the single Mac product - a laptop - and not using iTunes, I'd had no experience with their store. However, it showed up after the latest software update, so thought to give it a whirl.
Very shiny. Very unusable. Even though it professes to have free items available for download, it does not appear possible to even create an account without providing some method of payment. Sure, you can look around, but how do you get the free stuff without being logged in? Nothing - even the allegedly free items - are actually available unless you're willing to pay.
Sure, there are ways around that. I could acquire a small pre-paid Visa or AmEx, use that to establish the account then actually spend the money somewhere else. But those are extra steps I shouldn't have to go through for free stuff.
I can understand their wanting to track who downloads what, but there's no reason to provide a method of payment for something that has no cost. Surely the system can be smart enough to require payment at the time it's actually necessary.
It's as if you were at the grocery store and the lady behind the display of chips offered a sample to you, but first you had to show her a ten spot.
Guess I'm welcome to shop elsewhere.
Wow, that's the first time getting called out by a Punctuation Godwin.
Psst. How do you keep an AC in suspense?
Bye!
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine