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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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...
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.
Not everyone shoud need to be a developer just to avoid a store. Ramming a store down people's throat benefits only the store owner.
And a time machine to get GCC from 2 years in the future.
For the love of god, please stop adding letters to the abbreviation of "open source"!
You don't need to be a developer, you just need a developer license - getting which is about as hard as entering your Live ID info and clicking "OK". The only problem is that you have to do that every month to extend it to keep the apps running.
I meet people all the time that have "control" over their computer. Random files all over the desktop, no clue of what is going on, a web browser with 10+ toolbars which they have no idea how they got there, and so on. Ordinary people don't have control over their own hardware and/or software. It doesn't matter if it's Windows or Linux. Ordinary people want it to work, and 30 years of personal computing have not made that happen. The closest thing so far is an iPad.
There will of course always be some people that want control over their hardware. Some people.