It's because it is special technology. There's no BIOS on a Mac, Bootcamp is there to emulate some functions needed to boot under x86 OSes. It's not just plain old dual-booting, like "you people" call it.
And there would be nothing Apple could do legally to them
Sure there is. Anti-competitive tactics are covered by Anti-trust laws. With Microsoft already proven to have a Monopoly with Windows, it would be smooth sailing in court if they were to forceably make Windows not work on one competitors machine (where it worked fine before).
It's what Apple calls it, it's not some kind of weird Internet forum thing. Did you ever wonder why the icon you click on to perform the initial install had that "weird Internet meme" name to it ?
Yes and No. Acura and Honda are made by the same company, but are not the same exact car.
Yes and No. Acura is only a North American brand. Everywhere else, Acuras are called Hondas. In fact, the Acura CSX is just a Honda Civic with it's JDM front-end (the NA Civic got a different front-end). The Acura TSX is actually the Honda Accord (the NA Honda Accord being an Honda Inspire), etc.. etc..
Foreign car maker ? Honda builds more models in the USA and any of the big 3. It uses more parts from local providers than any of the big 3. Honda gives back to the USA more than the american car makers. I'd say if you're American, you should definitely buy a Honda if you're into protectionism.
The problem with Microsoft's business tactics and the reason they are anti-competitive is because they are a monopoly to begin with. Forcing OEMs to sell Windows only and forcing them to charge for Windows for every PC sold wouldn't have worked otherwise. They'd get the finger and the OEM would simply sell something else as their OS. After enough OEMs were pissed off, Microsoft would have basically driven itself out of the market completely.
This is precisely why Apple isn't being anti-competitive, because they can't. They don't have a Monopoly and if they piss off someone, he just goes to Android or RIM or Windows Mobile or Palm. Hence why you can't compare them to Microsoft. If they do a boneheaded move, the world is not stuck feeling the consequences, because other products exists in the market place and competition is very much alive. Calling Apple a monopoly (which it isn't) and then comparing them to Microsoft (which is impossible given their situation) doesn't help anyone.
When it comes to government control and laws I have to follow that limit my freedoms ? Yes, very wrong. When it comes to private entities that want to administer their private assets from which I can simply walk away and give my money to the competition ? No, not wrong at all.
In the end, it's their assets and their profit. I fully support their right to do what they want with it as long as they fully support my right to vote with my wallet. Which Apple does, until they have a monopoly on smartphones (like that will ever happen). If they want the "Think of the children" crowd as iPhone users, that's their prerogative and who are we to say it's ethically or morally wrong ?
I applied the 275 MB update (I have a few Macs here, so SU was a bad idea and my bandwidth is metered, no way I'm wasting 3/4 of a gig on updates). Everything went without a itch. They all were 10.5.7, fully updated to begin with.
No, they really don't. As long as 1 person pirates, they can make a point about it and justify any and all measures they put in place to prevent it. Be happy today it's all automatic measures that you don't have to interact with. I remember the days anti-piracy measures were typing in words from the manual each time you saved, or using a special wheel to form words by matching symbols... Even if you bought the game, hope you never lose any of the crap that came with it.
Open doesn't necessarily mean Open source. It could just mean that a SDK is available with dev tools to anyone and that apps can be installed from anywhere.
So wait, Apple don't have a Monopoly but we blast them as if they had one anyway ? I don't quite get the logic behind it. We blast Microsoft because they are a monopoly and we don't have an alternative. With Apple, what good is all that negative energy ? Just walk away and get another smartphone.
The OP simply qualified his criticism of Apple by comparing them to Microsoft. I simply told him why the comparison couldn't be made. Microsoft have legal factors around them that would prevent this type of abuse, Apple doesn't. You thus can't compare both those entities on these issues since they don't play by the same rules.
No, but Users don't submit apps and get them rejected either. Users decide to purchase the iPhone based on the apps available, which have already gone through the screening process. They choose iPhone based on if it fills their needs or not. Developpers get apps rejected if they don't follow the rules and as such, it's important for them to know the rules.
And if it's not a BIG PROBLEM, why did you say it was ? It's a small problem and the discussion here could be about alternatives instead of just whiny babies saying "Apple don't wanna gimme the iPhone I want WAAAAAAA". I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss this, but that the discussion around it could be a bit more intelligent.
I guess I don't see it as a "BIG PROBLEM" (tm). It's their platform to begin with, they made it and decided what it would be. Their rules are made known when downloading the SDK and paying the 99$ fee. It would only be a "BIG PROBLEM" (tm) if they were the only game in town. Vote with your wallet.
As for complaining about it, sure you're free to complain. However, reading most of the comments here, it seems like people aren't actually complaining more than trying to insinuate that Apple is acting against some ethical or legal code.
What is Apple censoring on the net exactly ? Apple is choosing what goes and doesn't go into the App Store, a private entity under their control. They haven't censored anything on the Internet yet. This guy is free to register ninjawords.com and put up his dictionary as a web application and it will show up on Safari on the iPhone without any kind of censorship.
Also, Microsoft doesn't play by the same rules Apple does, so not only is your argument is a slipery slope, it's also a strawman. Monopolies have to abide by the rules of anti-trust laws. Apple doesn't.
Touche. However as I said in another post, I don't see what consumer protection has anything to do with Apple's control over what they sell. How are consumers harmed exactly by Apple censoring "Ninjawords" ?
I think people saying things like "There's Safari on the iPhone" don't quite get the difference. Apple isn't responsible for all the web pages on the Internet even though they make a browser (as per your urbandictionary.com quip). However, what is sold in the App Store is directly under their responsibility. They get to decide what goes on there and what doesn't, and if you don't like, well you can just get the competition's phone. I don't see what's so wrong with them deciding what goes and doesn't go up on their own store. Do I get to decide what you put in your slashdot journal ?
Wait, you define better as "A dictionary app with naughty words in it" ? On a device connected to the Internet ? Seriously, why do you even need a dictionary like "Ninjawords" in the first place... Sounds like some guy just took an hour to code an app and hopes to make big bucks off it through publicity like this.
What would the FTC do to Apple and why exactly ? Unless the iPhone interferes with other devices in the radio spectrum, I don't see what jurisdiction the FTC hold over Apple.
Slashdot Mirror
It's because it is special technology. There's no BIOS on a Mac, Bootcamp is there to emulate some functions needed to boot under x86 OSes. It's not just plain old dual-booting, like "you people" call it.
And there would be nothing Apple could do legally to them
Sure there is. Anti-competitive tactics are covered by Anti-trust laws. With Microsoft already proven to have a Monopoly with Windows, it would be smooth sailing in court if they were to forceably make Windows not work on one competitors machine (where it worked fine before).
(what you people call "boot camp")
It's what Apple calls it, it's not some kind of weird Internet forum thing. Did you ever wonder why the icon you click on to perform the initial install had that "weird Internet meme" name to it ?
Yes and No. Acura and Honda are made by the same company, but are not the same exact car.
Yes and No. Acura is only a North American brand. Everywhere else, Acuras are called Hondas. In fact, the Acura CSX is just a Honda Civic with it's JDM front-end (the NA Civic got a different front-end). The Acura TSX is actually the Honda Accord (the NA Honda Accord being an Honda Inspire), etc.. etc..
Foreign car maker ? Honda builds more models in the USA and any of the big 3. It uses more parts from local providers than any of the big 3. Honda gives back to the USA more than the american car makers. I'd say if you're American, you should definitely buy a Honda if you're into protectionism.
Look, Xboxen are expensive
Maybe you should try this query instead of wasting your time with something already proven not to be a troll by everyone else : Plural of Box.
The problem with Microsoft's business tactics and the reason they are anti-competitive is because they are a monopoly to begin with. Forcing OEMs to sell Windows only and forcing them to charge for Windows for every PC sold wouldn't have worked otherwise. They'd get the finger and the OEM would simply sell something else as their OS. After enough OEMs were pissed off, Microsoft would have basically driven itself out of the market completely.
This is precisely why Apple isn't being anti-competitive, because they can't. They don't have a Monopoly and if they piss off someone, he just goes to Android or RIM or Windows Mobile or Palm. Hence why you can't compare them to Microsoft. If they do a boneheaded move, the world is not stuck feeling the consequences, because other products exists in the market place and competition is very much alive. Calling Apple a monopoly (which it isn't) and then comparing them to Microsoft (which is impossible given their situation) doesn't help anyone.
When it comes to government control and laws I have to follow that limit my freedoms ? Yes, very wrong. When it comes to private entities that want to administer their private assets from which I can simply walk away and give my money to the competition ? No, not wrong at all. In the end, it's their assets and their profit. I fully support their right to do what they want with it as long as they fully support my right to vote with my wallet. Which Apple does, until they have a monopoly on smartphones (like that will ever happen). If they want the "Think of the children" crowd as iPhone users, that's their prerogative and who are we to say it's ethically or morally wrong ?
I applied the 275 MB update (I have a few Macs here, so SU was a bad idea and my bandwidth is metered, no way I'm wasting 3/4 of a gig on updates). Everything went without a itch. They all were 10.5.7, fully updated to begin with.
No, they really don't. As long as 1 person pirates, they can make a point about it and justify any and all measures they put in place to prevent it. Be happy today it's all automatic measures that you don't have to interact with. I remember the days anti-piracy measures were typing in words from the manual each time you saved, or using a special wheel to form words by matching symbols... Even if you bought the game, hope you never lose any of the crap that came with it.
Open doesn't necessarily mean Open source. It could just mean that a SDK is available with dev tools to anyone and that apps can be installed from anywhere.
Why link only the 750 MB Combo update ? People who already have 10.5.7 don't need it, they can just get the 275 MB Update : http://support.apple.com/downloads/Mac_OS_X_10_5_8_Update
So wait, Apple don't have a Monopoly but we blast them as if they had one anyway ? I don't quite get the logic behind it. We blast Microsoft because they are a monopoly and we don't have an alternative. With Apple, what good is all that negative energy ? Just walk away and get another smartphone.
Apple doesn't have a monopoly on anything. This claim was stupid the first time it was made, and guess what, it still is.
The OP simply qualified his criticism of Apple by comparing them to Microsoft. I simply told him why the comparison couldn't be made. Microsoft have legal factors around them that would prevent this type of abuse, Apple doesn't. You thus can't compare both those entities on these issues since they don't play by the same rules.
Users have to download and SDK and pay a fee now?
No, but Users don't submit apps and get them rejected either. Users decide to purchase the iPhone based on the apps available, which have already gone through the screening process. They choose iPhone based on if it fills their needs or not. Developpers get apps rejected if they don't follow the rules and as such, it's important for them to know the rules. And if it's not a BIG PROBLEM, why did you say it was ? It's a small problem and the discussion here could be about alternatives instead of just whiny babies saying "Apple don't wanna gimme the iPhone I want WAAAAAAA". I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss this, but that the discussion around it could be a bit more intelligent.
He's free to sell it for other platforms/through other stores not under Apple control.
I guess I don't see it as a "BIG PROBLEM" (tm). It's their platform to begin with, they made it and decided what it would be. Their rules are made known when downloading the SDK and paying the 99$ fee. It would only be a "BIG PROBLEM" (tm) if they were the only game in town. Vote with your wallet.
As for complaining about it, sure you're free to complain. However, reading most of the comments here, it seems like people aren't actually complaining more than trying to insinuate that Apple is acting against some ethical or legal code.
What is Apple censoring on the net exactly ? Apple is choosing what goes and doesn't go into the App Store, a private entity under their control. They haven't censored anything on the Internet yet. This guy is free to register ninjawords.com and put up his dictionary as a web application and it will show up on Safari on the iPhone without any kind of censorship.
Also, Microsoft doesn't play by the same rules Apple does, so not only is your argument is a slipery slope, it's also a strawman. Monopolies have to abide by the rules of anti-trust laws. Apple doesn't.
Touche. However as I said in another post, I don't see what consumer protection has anything to do with Apple's control over what they sell. How are consumers harmed exactly by Apple censoring "Ninjawords" ?
I think people saying things like "There's Safari on the iPhone" don't quite get the difference. Apple isn't responsible for all the web pages on the Internet even though they make a browser (as per your urbandictionary.com quip). However, what is sold in the App Store is directly under their responsibility. They get to decide what goes on there and what doesn't, and if you don't like, well you can just get the competition's phone. I don't see what's so wrong with them deciding what goes and doesn't go up on their own store. Do I get to decide what you put in your slashdot journal ?
Wait, you define better as "A dictionary app with naughty words in it" ? On a device connected to the Internet ? Seriously, why do you even need a dictionary like "Ninjawords" in the first place... Sounds like some guy just took an hour to code an app and hopes to make big bucks off it through publicity like this.
What would the FTC do to Apple and why exactly ? Unless the iPhone interferes with other devices in the radio spectrum, I don't see what jurisdiction the FTC hold over Apple.
Needs clarification : Monopoly on what ?
Not much of a challenge then. Unless you were trying to challenge yourself to not be retarded, in which you just failed miserably.