First off, it is not so much "OK" as let's be honest about Apple's actual policy. I don't think anything is gained by easily disproven propagandistic lies and I think the FSF has done themselves a real disservice in misdiscribing Apple's policies in a way that started this whole meme.
I don't think of this in the abstract so much as in the particular. Apple is on balance providing a really valuable service with their iOS store and policies as it exists today that is greatly to the benefit of developers, consumers and IT telco administration. The system is good and it works. In theory, this system would be kind of yucky. It works well because it is Apple doing the administration, good judgement is a key component of what makes the Apple system work.
Microsoft does not tend to show the same sort of good judgement at least so far. As you know I'm very excited about the direction for Windows 8 and their attempt to implement ubiquitous computing. When it comes to exercising good judgement on tens of thousands of apps a month I'm not sure Microsoft is up to the task. What works well for Apple may be a disaster for Microsoft.
Almost. Apple bans copylefted software without a special distribution license for Apple. I.E. copylefted software from non copyright owners. So for example if the FSF wanted to distribute emacs for iOS Apple wouldn't care but they wouldn't let you do it.
I agree with both points, except for there was a pass through of 5.25 hard disk drives. The change to 3.5 came more from small form factor desktops and portables (i.e. the predecessors to laptops) i.e. smaller cases. I agree we have serious quantum effects but quantum effects and density issues were problems with microprocessors for many years while miniaturization still happened. I think it is likely they will be overcome in the 3.5 -> 2.5 migration, assuming there isn't a HDD -> SSD migration which eliminates 2.5 drives.
After your developer license expires, you can't install your own software.
After you stop breathing you are dead, that doesn't make you dead now.
You should qualify your statements when you make them. From "you can't install your own software" to something honest like, "Apple allows you to install your own software providing you have access to a developer license which costs $99".
Well I have a 1.5T 2.5" drive that's over a year old. But yes I understand. However all those arguments would apply equally well to the original 14" drives. Traditionally as we have moved from 14 to 8 to 5 1/4 to 3 1/2 the technology advances have shifted to the smaller drive with large production and that has led to faster speeds and lower cost per byte. I'd assume most technology innovations in the pipeline are already going for 2.5". SSD and hybrids strike me as the likely thing to push 3.5" into niches.
I admit the GNUstep community is an edge case, but it's still greater than zero.
Fair enough but... I'm not sure that's still not 0. The GNUStep community are Apple fans or at the very least NeXT fans. They mostly all have Apple developer licenses and the ones that don't know enough about iOS to install without them. I doubt you would find many GNUStepers that don't own several Macs. The whole point of GNUStep is to bring NeXT/Apple features to Linux.
You can't develop for iOS on an iPad.
I agree. That's a very different statement than your original claim about not being able to install your own software.
If you don't own a Mac and have a developer license then you likely don't know enough about iOS to develop your own applications for it. How many Objective-C developers on PC, more than 0?
DRM as it is actually being implemented isn't going to require your locked down world of closed systems. Because closed systems (capability based systems) are far more secure than permissions based systems they can run unsafe permissions (or even no permissions systems) as guests. You have to be careful on permissions systems because applications aren't really effectively locked in their sandbox. But on capabilities systems... no one has to be careful. So DRM runs on a secure subsystem and the open modifiable system runs as a guest. That doesn't stop you from doing anything other than tampering with data from the secure side of the wall.
And how is that going to happen? We are far further away from that than anytime during my lifetime. We have an enormously diversified hardware manufacturing base using a huge range of equipment. We have about 1/2 dozen OSes selling 10m+ year and another 30 or so, doing 1m+. Freedom is doing better now than it ever has.
There are ways to limit the damage that malware can cause without forcing everybody who buys a computer to rely exclusively on a single application repository curated by the operating system publisher and subject to said publisher's ulterior motives.
Apple doesn't do that. You can point your phone at any repository you want. You just get the University or Enterprise SDK and you setup your own.
what platform allows people to run both major-label applications and homemade applications that haven't been approved by the operating system publisher?
Both Android and Apple. Just get developer SDK and you can install what you want.
Low end computers in the 1980s were cheap. The Sinclair ZX81 was $100 even back in 1981. The Vic20 which was a home computer was $300 and that was the mainstream home computer. The market was more diverse back then from a price perspective. You had people buying workstations like the IRIS for $50k for semi-personal use.
I installed 8" hard drives in the mid 1990s. There was still a market on the high end. Sure there may be 3.5" drives for another decade or two but they will be an ever decreasing percentage of the market, then an ever decreasing percentage of storage in bytes, then finally a decreasing gross revenue.
The government under the Communications act of 1934 can grab any spectrum for national defense reasons: 47 U.S.C. 606 (c), (d) . All of it is under ultimately government control, with commercial use being secondary. That isn't a change.
Well Tim Cook was making changes even before Jobs left. Apple's designs have gotten vastly more complex as Apple has been willing to commit to complex supplier relationships and become excellent at logistics. You can already see some differences in that Apple products are becoming more interesting from a hardware perspective while less innovative in terms of positioning their software. Apple is willing to take on less glamorous but vastly more complex problems (map data being a wonderful example).
I agree with you that the generation after Ive and Cook is where the danger lies, but that's likely decades off. The board is more likely to reassert control and start to derail products in exchange for profits sometime when Apple has some bad quarters.
This is all good policy. I wish the FCC were being more aggressive about reallocated spectrum but at the very least this is a step in the right direction.
So if the US seizes a.com domain for violating US law when the foreign-hosted site has not violated the laws of its own country, that would be censorship of an international domain.
No it wouldn't. Censorship doesn't become censorship based on the legal status of the information. You can censor illegal and legal information, for example child pornography is censored even though its production is illegal, while simulated child pornography is censored even though its production would otherwise be legal.
If the US seizes a.com domain for violating US law what they are doing may be bullying and possibly should be subject to international regulation but it is not censorship unless they were otherwise censoring the information.
There are lots of Americans that have been to places you could travel without a passport, traveled in ways that didn't require a passport (like in the military) or had a passport at one point and do not now have one.
Bullshit! Even New Zealand's courts said the government blew it and should never had raided megaupload, which was legal locally, for shit going on in other countries. The entire raid was deemed illegal. The US may pay for this in less partnering from NZ later.
Your missing the point.
The question is censorship / not censorship You are presenting evidence for legal under NZ law / illegal under NZ law
That isn't the same question. The US government's interest in megaupload was they believed them to be engaged in piracy. Their interest was not to surpress ideas megaupload was spreading.
Slashdot Mirror
Margin generally requires a differentiator otherwise you are a commodity.
Google did not want to give Nokia an exclusive they were doing too well.
Microsoft was willing to give Nokia cash.
First off, it is not so much "OK" as let's be honest about Apple's actual policy. I don't think anything is gained by easily disproven propagandistic lies and I think the FSF has done themselves a real disservice in misdiscribing Apple's policies in a way that started this whole meme.
I don't think of this in the abstract so much as in the particular. Apple is on balance providing a really valuable service with their iOS store and policies as it exists today that is greatly to the benefit of developers, consumers and IT telco administration. The system is good and it works. In theory, this system would be kind of yucky. It works well because it is Apple doing the administration, good judgement is a key component of what makes the Apple system work.
Microsoft does not tend to show the same sort of good judgement at least so far. As you know I'm very excited about the direction for Windows 8 and their attempt to implement ubiquitous computing. When it comes to exercising good judgement on tens of thousands of apps a month I'm not sure Microsoft is up to the task. What works well for Apple may be a disaster for Microsoft.
That's not true. Once you have a provisioning file for an application, it continues to work until you replace the device.
Also any developer can create a provisioning file for any device.
Almost.
Apple bans copylefted software without a special distribution license for Apple. I.E. copylefted software from non copyright owners. So for example if the FSF wanted to distribute emacs for iOS Apple wouldn't care but they wouldn't let you do it.
I agree with both points, except for there was a pass through of 5.25 hard disk drives. The change to 3.5 came more from small form factor desktops and portables (i.e. the predecessors to laptops) i.e. smaller cases. I agree we have serious quantum effects but quantum effects and density issues were problems with microprocessors for many years while miniaturization still happened. I think it is likely they will be overcome in the 3.5 -> 2.5 migration, assuming there isn't a HDD -> SSD migration which eliminates 2.5 drives.
After your developer license expires, you can't install your own software.
After you stop breathing you are dead, that doesn't make you dead now.
You should qualify your statements when you make them. From "you can't install your own software" to something honest like, "Apple allows you to install your own software providing you have access to a developer license which costs $99".
Well I have a 1.5T 2.5" drive that's over a year old. But yes I understand. However all those arguments would apply equally well to the original 14" drives. Traditionally as we have moved from 14 to 8 to 5 1/4 to 3 1/2 the technology advances have shifted to the smaller drive with large production and that has led to faster speeds and lower cost per byte. I'd assume most technology innovations in the pipeline are already going for 2.5". SSD and hybrids strike me as the likely thing to push 3.5" into niches.
I admit the GNUstep community is an edge case, but it's still greater than zero.
Fair enough but... I'm not sure that's still not 0. The GNUStep community are Apple fans or at the very least NeXT fans. They mostly all have Apple developer licenses and the ones that don't know enough about iOS to install without them. I doubt you would find many GNUStepers that don't own several Macs. The whole point of GNUStep is to bring NeXT/Apple features to Linux.
You can't develop for iOS on an iPad.
I agree. That's a very different statement than your original claim about not being able to install your own software.
If you don't own a Mac and have a developer license then you likely don't know enough about iOS to develop your own applications for it. How many Objective-C developers on PC, more than 0?
To point your device costs nothing. And you wouldn't buy a repository for one device. For one device you just use a developer SDK.
DRM as it is actually being implemented isn't going to require your locked down world of closed systems. Because closed systems (capability based systems) are far more secure than permissions based systems they can run unsafe permissions (or even no permissions systems) as guests. You have to be careful on permissions systems because applications aren't really effectively locked in their sandbox. But on capabilities systems... no one has to be careful. So DRM runs on a secure subsystem and the open modifiable system runs as a guest. That doesn't stop you from doing anything other than tampering with data from the secure side of the wall.
And how is that going to happen? We are far further away from that than anytime during my lifetime. We have an enormously diversified hardware manufacturing base using a huge range of equipment. We have about 1/2 dozen OSes selling 10m+ year and another 30 or so, doing 1m+. Freedom is doing better now than it ever has.
I think you'll like this video from Microsoft about their long term direction:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=a6cNdhOKwi0
There are ways to limit the damage that malware can cause without forcing everybody who buys a computer to rely exclusively on a single application repository curated by the operating system publisher and subject to said publisher's ulterior motives.
Apple doesn't do that. You can point your phone at any repository you want. You just get the University or Enterprise SDK and you setup your own.
what platform allows people to run both major-label applications and homemade applications that haven't been approved by the operating system publisher?
Both Android and Apple. Just get developer SDK and you can install what you want.
Low end computers in the 1980s were cheap. The Sinclair ZX81 was $100 even back in 1981. The Vic20 which was a home computer was $300 and that was the mainstream home computer. The market was more diverse back then from a price perspective. You had people buying workstations like the IRIS for $50k for semi-personal use.
I installed 8" hard drives in the mid 1990s. There was still a market on the high end. Sure there may be 3.5" drives for another decade or two but they will be an ever decreasing percentage of the market, then an ever decreasing percentage of storage in bytes, then finally a decreasing gross revenue.
The government under the Communications act of 1934 can grab any spectrum for national defense reasons: 47 U.S.C. 606 (c), (d) . All of it is under ultimately government control, with commercial use being secondary. That isn't a change.
Well Tim Cook was making changes even before Jobs left. Apple's designs have gotten vastly more complex as Apple has been willing to commit to complex supplier relationships and become excellent at logistics. You can already see some differences in that Apple products are becoming more interesting from a hardware perspective while less innovative in terms of positioning their software. Apple is willing to take on less glamorous but vastly more complex problems (map data being a wonderful example).
I agree with you that the generation after Ive and Cook is where the danger lies, but that's likely decades off. The board is more likely to reassert control and start to derail products in exchange for profits sometime when Apple has some bad quarters.
This is all good policy. I wish the FCC were being more aggressive about reallocated spectrum but at the very least this is a step in the right direction.
No it wouldn't. Censorship doesn't become censorship based on the legal status of the information. You can censor illegal and legal information, for example child pornography is censored even though its production is illegal, while simulated child pornography is censored even though its production would otherwise be legal.
If the US seizes a .com domain for violating US law what they are doing may be bullying and possibly should be subject to international regulation but it is not censorship unless they were otherwise censoring the information.
No your information has been seized not censored.
If your information were censored it would be illegal for you to publish that information in another forum but you would still have it.
There are lots of Americans that have been to places you could travel without a passport, traveled in ways that didn't require a passport (like in the military) or had a passport at one point and do not now have one.
Bullshit! Even New Zealand's courts said the government blew it and should never had raided megaupload, which was legal locally, for shit going on in other countries. The entire raid was deemed illegal. The US may pay for this in less partnering from NZ later.
Your missing the point.
The question is censorship / not censorship
You are presenting evidence for legal under NZ law / illegal under NZ law
That isn't the same question. The US government's interest in megaupload was they believed them to be engaged in piracy. Their interest was not to surpress ideas megaupload was spreading.
I don't see much evidence of censorship. Where is this actual censorship?