Slashdot Mirror
Locked-Down Tablets Endanger FLOSS For End Users
itwbennett writes "If you buy into the idea that tablets (and ultrabooks, and smartphones) in the enterprise are nothing more than glorified thin clients, then Microsoft's Surface presentation seemed more flashback than future. And if you're a fan of free software, the announcement might also have struck fear in your heart. While Microsoft has never locked out apps based on license, it's not impossible that they might chose a more locked-down Apple-esque approach for Surface, writes blogger Brian Proffitt. 'And that could put free software for end users very much at risk.'"
A post for some anti-Microsoft tinfoil hat? Must be a slow news day.
They may also make it such that it calls you mean names...
It's not Apple locking out GPL, its the GPL locking out the App Store.
What about the x86 version where you can install whatever random .exe you want?
WHAT THE HELL IS THIS CRAP?
> 'And that could put free software for end users very much at risk.'
*if* you choose to buy the netbook (it's not really a tablet) that Microsoft has rebranded "surface". At this time I don't see any reason to do that. The people who jump in pretty much deserve whatever they get.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
"And that could put free software for end users very much at risk"... all the more reason for Apple and Microsoft to want it.
... Except for the color Nook tablets, curse them!
Let microsoft control software on their own hardware. There will be hardware vendors to fill the void, and I'm guessing that hardware will run something open source.
WebOS is already out there. Android too. And for generic computing, you have Linux, BSD, etc.
Nothing to be afraid of here. It's an opportunity. Perhaps those who want 'cheap hardware' will now be forced to finally look at the better OSs. It disgusts me that I work for a government contract, managing unix servers, where we waste so much money, time, and effort shovelling this unusable crap on our desktops.
While we mainly-Microsoft devs were scratching out head at the "guidance" from MS to drop WPF, Silverlight, .Net, etc., and instead plan on coding everything in HTML5 and Javascript, wondering why they would proceed along what seemed to be a massive self-limiting move, now there seems there may be an unmentioned rationale...
What else does HTML5 offer? It's easily sandboxed and thus compatible with an enforced channel, a la Apple's App Store and their push to eliminate uncontrolled functionality possible via Flash.
Microsoft, say it isn't so.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
I guess it's a good thing I don't buy into that stupid, stupid idea.
trugeeks don't brush or use FLOSS anyway!
tl;dr: "they are could be closed devices"
This typo is a good summary of the article.
Perfectly good vocalizing about the death of open systems.. except that it hasn't happened yet has it. Wake me up after the product launch.
Correct me if I'm wrong but only the Windows RT platform is app store locked whereas the Windows 8 Pro is not app locked. Also, aren't they making both an ARM Windows RT Surface and a x86 Windows 8 Pro Surface? If my memory is accurate then wouldn't that suggest that this entire article is stupid and a waste of time? Just buy the correct version. Problem solved.
Speculation and fear mongering... Google could be more like FB. Slashdot could be more like reddit.
In particular, M$ is touting their enormous number of programs that run on Win8 (even if not in the Metro tiles).
There are enough bad things that might happen with some actual substance, why not worry about those.
MS is in serious decline. This is just another step in the wrong direction and another nail in MS's coffin. MS is going the way IBM was 30 years ago. Since MS plans to produce its own hardware, there will be a push back by PC makers to seek alteratives to Windows. Linux now has a pretty good desktop (KDE) and Is ready to start taking some market share. Cloud Apps make the transision to the Linux Desktop easier since Cloud Apps don't run on Desktop/Laptop machines. This removes the advantage MS had with App domination over other OSs. If I can run Office and other windows business apps on the cloud, why do I need MS on the Desktop anymore?
I don't see Microsoft doing particularly well with any product directly marketed to consumers except windows. Even then, the real selling point is primarily based on the monopoly (nothing else will run my games etc...). I think this is likely to be a blip just like windows phone was.
If you look at some of the MS SDK licenses, redsitributables and similar things, you often find a clause refering to 'identified software' - here's an example, taken from the ASF/WMA/WMF specification license (http://read.pudn.com/downloads3/sourcecode/multimedia/9891/ASF%20Specification%20v.1.0/ASF%20Specification%20v.1.0.doc, abridged for clarity):
...your license rights to the Specification are conditioned upon your (a) not distributing the Implementation in conjunction with Identified Software (as defined below); (b) not using Identified Software (e.g. tools) to develop the Implementation; and (c) not distributing the Implementation under license terms which would make the Implementation Identified Software. ... Identified Software includes, without limitation, any software that requires as a condition of use, modification and/or
distribution of such software that other software distributed with such software (x) be disclosed or distributed in source code form; (y) be licensed for the purpose of making derivative works; or (z) be redistributable at no charge"
"2 (g)
The details vary between different licenses.. The most restrictive, those on things like the ASF specification that I used as an example, prohibit even using 'Identified Software' at any stage in the development process.
Translated roughly from legalese, this means that if your software is open source or even if you allow users to redistribute it, you aren't even allowed to put it on the same CD as a microsoft redistributable. If you use one of the affected SDKs or licensed specifications that takes the most restrictive variation then you are not only prohibited from releasing your source, or allowing others to redistribute your software, but you can't so much as use vim or emacs to edit your code or GCC to compile it. I also find almost the same clause in things like the Windows XP Embedded EULA, so if you make a product which depends upon XP Embedded then you are not able to open-source the application software that you wrote to run on it.
If Microsoft were to go full-on Evil Empire once again, this is exactly the clause they would probably adapt. All they'd need to do is pass a policy that no 'Identified Software' be permitted in the marketplace. A trivial legal change, and it would easily and effectively not merely bar open source software from the market (And thus Windows RT entirely, as well as use of the metro interface), but possibly even prohibit any Windows dev hoping for commercial success or any accessibility to the ARM mobile users from even utilising open-source development tools.
My dentist is going to be pissed.
There is nothing inherent to the repository / app store model that is incompatible with the GPL. It's Apple's policies that are incompatible with the GPL, whic was a deliberate decision on the part of Apple to maintain their power over users.
Palm trees and 8
I think that lock-down is the direction in which they're moving all Windows, to cash in as Apple has.
How are we ever going to survive ?? How can we floss if we got no teeth ??
they can build it however they want - you're not obligated to buy it.
Say I want a video game console on which I can run homemade video games. Should I get a Microsoft, Nintendo, or Sony console? They're all locked down.
nothing should stop you from at least trying to unlock it and load some other OS
Nothing should stop people, but copyright law does stop people. Sony v. Hotz.
if they try to exploit their non-tablet clout they will find themselves in a world of hurt legally
With the US DOJ being rendered toothless by the right wing and the EU allegedly about to break up over debt crises, from whom will this hurt come?
you can make the application available to anyone else who wants it by telling them where to download it
How does that satisfy the requirement for "Installation Information" (GPLv3) or "scripts used to control [...] installation of the executable" (GPLv2)? One still has to buy a $649 Mac and a $396 certificate (assuming four-year service life of an iOS device) to install it.
What else does HTML5 offer? It's easily sandboxed and thus compatible with an enforced channel
I don't see how the public will buy a device marketed for accessing web sites yet incapable of accessing web sites that the manufacturer has not whitelisted. It's not "Internet Explorer" if it specifically blocks the owner of a device from Exploring a given valid-HTML5 web site on the Internet. Or are you talking about using an origin whitelist to control access to new HTML5 features such as the Media Capture API, the File API, the application cache, and local storage?
If Microsoft wants to lock down THEIR device, it is entirely up to them, just like it is for Apple and their devices.
There are plenty of open tablets out there. Go get them and scrub them from the default OSes.
Better yet, stop whining since as soon as it comes out it will be cracked open in seconds since it is Microsoft Security we are speaking about here.
For Metro apps, why can't a developer use the workaround of requiring all users to sign up as developers? If Microsoft were to announce plans to require users of Visual Studio Express to pay for a certificate, that would defeat the purpose of Visual Studio Express.
This article is obviously written by someone who hasn't bothered to take a look at Metro development on Windows Phone. Having a locked-down environment does not prevent anyone from placing free apps in the Marketplace nor providing the source code. Marketplace, like iTunes, does have some control of what can get published, as all apps have to meet established criteria. Tell me, do we really need to tout 500,000 apps, when 100,000 have some sort of flatulence sound as their reason for being? Not having Chrome or Firefox or Opera on Windows Phone bothers me not a bit. The environment is web-based, and the evermore slight variations in the way the different browsers present the display can wreak havoc on the user experience. Microsoft is right to control this. The fact that API's are not available to allow an alternative browser to function on Windows Phone/Windows RT as it would on a full Windows 7/Windows 8 client probably points more to the relative youth of the OS. For once, Microsoft is taking direct control over its future, and following in the footsteps of the beloved Jobs. Windows RT tablets will directly compete with the iPad, and offer pretty much the same user experience. If you want something more robust, use Windows 8. If you want to write more robust applications and provide you sourcecode, write for Windows 8. It will be a much larger audience anyway.
Nothing to see here but us trolls...move along...
Just buy the correct version.
Except I don't think members of the general public will be able to afford the correct version. What MSRP do you expect for each of the two configurations?
While Microsoft has never locked out apps based on license, it's not impossible that they might chose a more locked-down Apple-esque approach for Surface
It's not impossible that they'll kick a puppy for every copy of Windows 8 sold, either. Won't someone please think of the puppies?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
If it's not completely obvious by now, Microsoft is imitating Apple to a T, from the verticalization of their platform (in-house hardware + software) to the hip dictator face of their new product line (Sinofski). Their complete reversal on user freedom and customization is also a sign of the changes in Redmond.
If you view it from a corporate perspective, why should they pass on making extra dollars on App Market subscriptions, cashing 30% of each downloaded app and be able to reject apps that could compete with their own in-house variants? Why would they let you use VLC if they could pocket $5 for an upgrade to your Windows Media Player?
Although I deem it unlikely that free/OSS software won't be available at all to the platform, I do expect that these programs will be limited to the less-than-ideal sandbox mode, without access to the system APIs, all under the guise of (revenue) security. In which case the in-house variants will always (miraculously!) outperform any third-party options, creating a tilted playing field.
Because there aren't any free Apps on either Itunes or Play now.
if they lock it down , i put 10$ on the opensource community for an unlock and a unsecure rom within 90 days
Though, I don't recall there being any rules which state that products not designed for Windows or iOS having to be locks down.
I figure that the UEFI BIOS for ARM is open source, Linux is open source... Shouldn't be so hard to produce a non-Windows or Apple tablet. I just don't see any problem with Microsoft and even other vendors locking the devices they make. Why not just buy something else?
Oops... Forgot.. Slashdot... People here intentionally buy locked down devices do they can bitch about their lack of freedom
If they price these things higher than an iPad, then it'll be completely irrelevant in six months or less. I can still find brand new acer windows xp machines for $250 at target/walmart etc... If these new surface things dont start at this pricepoint then it wont matter, nobody will buy them.
In effect, what the sandbox "allows for" can ultimately be whatever the company controlling the platform says it will be.
And the developers of things like Chrome OS and Boot to Gecko have to make their HTML5 APIs full-featured enough to run the kinds of applications that users expect to be able to run. Thus the computer is fully accessible to whatever JavaScript code you want to run on it. The only way to keep arbitrary applications off a web terminal is either A. to make certain parts of the device completely inaccessible to JavaScript or B. to whitelist sites allowed to use advanced JavaScript APIs. So far, Apple has chosen option A by not implementing the Media Capture API or File API at all in Safari for iOS.
Basically, I don't want a Windows that is "a device marketed for accessing web sites"--I want a computer that is fully accessible to whatever code I want to run on the platform
In practice, you have to want the same thing that enough other people want, or people like CronoCloud will deem you an unprofitable edge case. What others want might not be a general-purpose computer. That's how we got in the mess with there not being a single general-purpose computer marketed for set-top use but only what amount to video game consoles and pay-TV decoder boxes. Enough people want the safety and convenience of a locked-down device to make locked-down devices dominant in some segments.
For the love of god, please stop adding letters to the abbreviation of "open source"!
So what if M$ locks down Surface? The benefits to them are obvious. OTOH, the cast of many other hardware vendors won't just roll over and die either. Their into it to make a profit too. I think for a time Win8/9/whatever may continue to run on third party hardware however these manufacturers want to stay in business simply because it earns a living. If they can't put Windows on their hardware or if they have to compete, they'll find alternatives, such as Android, a Linux distro, or create their own Linux distro, not to forget that there are a few *BSD alternatives out there too. Red Hat, Ubuntu, Mint, and others would love to fill the void. What about proprietary hardware? GPL can make it difficult however some hardware vendors have distributed binary drivers.As long as the API is documented and the ABI doesn't alter from one Linux release to the next, I'm sure they'll be more than glad to fill that void. I think there may be more opportunity for market share. The only thing I see that could cause any significant issue to this business model is the coolness factor. If Apple remains the cool gadget to have or if Microsoft shares Apple's coolness, then third party hardware vendors will slowly become extinct and FLOSS as we know it n the desktop, laptop, and tablet will be a thing of the past. It really depends on what the public wants and what they're willing to pay. With BYOD becoming popular,business doesn't have to pay for hardware or software, let the employee provide that.From this POV the bigger fish will eat the smaller fish and we may see the end of FLOSS as we know it. Ultimately it's hard to say because the fickle public which is usually enamoured with coolness will ultimately decide with their pocketbooks what to spend their money on. If the third party hardware manufacturers can produce cost effective products using FLOSS which have enough coolness to attract the masses, Open Source software will survive. if not, the big fish rule the pond. P.S. Given the trend of the last 40 years of bigger (the 1%) getting an increasing share of the pie, I feel that over time the world will become a place with fewer choices and more control in the hands of the few. We may not see this immediately but over the next 10-20 years there will be fewer choices.
Major vendors locking down their systems open an unprecedented opportunity for commercially successful open systems. So what if 90% of users are satisfied with walled garden? 10% or even 1% of *all computer users* *worldwide* is an enormous market. Now that Microsoft doesn't support pr0n apps, every young male (and many others) will be looking for a desktop/laptop that does. And scientific/business uses of open, inexpensive hardware are endless.
It's starting to become inevitable. Apple is the main culprit. We migrated away from Desktop's and Laptop PC's to "smart" phones and tablets that are all user limited for the sake of being cool. Now the very real threat that the PC revolution of the 70's and 80's will be overthrown by corporate inertia. They and Apple in particular, hate the idea that you may have control over your own hardware and/or software and are doing everything they can to curtail your choices. Don't blame MS, blame yourselves.
"If the only tool that you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." Donny Rumsfeld
I have. But there aren't a lot of PC games* in genres traditionally associated with consoles, and that's because not enough other people use a PC as a game console according to FunkSoulBrother and CronoCloud.
If you have a PC that currently runs Windows or Mac OS X, and you want to run a copy of Linux that you have on a CD or USB flash drive, you need the PC. If you have an iOS device, and you want to run software obtained outside the App Store, you need the iOS device plus a Mac plus a certificate. Therefore, it is cost prohibitive for even someone who already owns an iOS device to exercise freedom on said device
First, if you already owned the workstation, you could use GCC for no additional charge. If you already own an iOS device, you still need to buy the Mac and the cert.
Second, the price of a UNIX workstation has plummeted since then. A brand new laptop capable of running GNU/Linux, an operating system that is source-compatible with UNIX applications, costs about $300. (I acknowledge that some may define "workstation" differently; if so, please explain, and I'll post a correction.)
the geek dialect (and various sub-dialects) of english which eschews most capitalisation of words is as valid and legitimate as ANY other dialect, including mainstream dialects.
the geek dialects tend to use capitalisation for EMPHASIS, not for pointlessly highlighting that some nouns are proper nouns, or redundantly highlighting that the first word of any sentence is the first word of a sentence (a fact which is self-evident).
to someone who natively uses a geek dialect, mainstream english's excessive use of capitalisation looks almost as weird as the absurdly excessive use of capitalisation in, say, german-language text.
you're partly right, though - using "do" when you mean "does" is stupid. as is poor grammar. and e'specially apo'strophe abu'se.
Don't buy it.
Problem solved.
You didn't answer my question clearly the first time: Should people expect to have to buy two devices, one for only indie games and one for only major label games? If so, why is this fair, and if not, how should they be run on the same device?
Well you don't necessarily need to buy a gaming PC specifically for the loungeroom, you can just plug in your PC
Not if it's in a different room.
or laptop
Laptops not bought specifically for gaming are more likely to have an underpowered Intel "Graphics My Ass" IGP. But I'll admit that on an indie asset budget, a GMA is likely enough.
and it doesn't need to be an indie game, can be any PC game
I think people without a gaming PC in the loungeroom are likely to just buy the console version of a multiplatform major-label game instead of hauling in a desktop PC.