tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-970055329001593038.post5089314077142476725..comments2024-03-26T03:40:08.295-07:00Comments on I Still Know What You Learned Last Summer: With a partner like Apple, who needs competitors?Philhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12760478278391942483noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-970055329001593038.post-58064022944137798102009-12-28T14:14:14.369-08:002009-12-28T14:14:14.369-08:00I agree that there is definitely _something_ "...I agree that there is definitely _something_ "right" about how OS X is done. For making the system work in a largely sane and consistent way out of the box, Apple should be commended (and other software makers should try to emulate it in this respect!). But for making it all but impossible to escape from the "defaults", Apple deserves the beration it's getting. These are two logically separate notions that should not be conflated. The high polish of Apple products is praiseworthy, but their second-guessing of users' intentions requires a *really* good justification, which they don't have.<br /><br />Yet, supposing that Apple's philosophy is unchangeable, if we have to choose between having both good defaults and a locked-down architecture, and having neither, I would choose the latter in a heartbeat, and here's why:<br /><br />Apple is the beneficiary of a long and rich history of freedom and openness in software. Yet they are setting up roadblocks to ensure that no one can build upon their own products in this way.<br /><br />The rising popularity of Mac OS has been, to some extent, facilitated by the increasing capabilities of web browsers, leading to platform-independence for many common apps. If Microsoft had had the technical ability to prevent Firefox from running on Windows, Apple (and the world at large) would have been much the poorer for it. Yet, Apple's own policies today prevent Firefox mobile or anything resembling a full-featured web browser from being installed on the iPhone.<br /><br />Mac OS too, though it contains many original elements, has also borrowed substantially from those that came before-- from the foundations (the kernel, WebKit) all the way up to the chrome. Yet, if the tables were turned, and Apple had written the BSD kernel and KHTML, do you believe they would have made it possible for someone else to write a whole new OS or a new browser based on them today? I find it strange that OS X can implement virtual desktops, or tabbed browsing, but Apple will sue Palm for implementing pinch-to-zoom.<br /><br />This double standard is quite irksome.<br /><br />While I do appreciate your sentiment, I think the "price" people pay for Apple's products is larger than you've suggested. Apple gets to pick and choose from ideas that have been implemented elsewhere and which held their own under scrutiny. Many of the innovations in computing we take for granted today came about because people were able to do things with their systems that were fundamentally different from their intended uses. Yet, ironically, Apple has used them to build a platform on which this innovation could likely never have happened in the first place!<br /><br />The fact that Apple has made things "just work" is admirable, but it did not happen in a vacuum. The true price of Apple products is not just a little customizability but the cost of foregone innovation.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12760478278391942483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-970055329001593038.post-89775577363187415522009-12-28T00:58:45.711-08:002009-12-28T00:58:45.711-08:00So I do agree the app store is a major screw up, ...So I do agree the app store is a major screw up, and has burned a lot of developer goodwill in it's lack of transparency, especially when it comes to the approval process.<br /><br />However, I don't think anyone should really be surprised about Apple wanting it their way-- this is how they've always behaved, and to be honest, I think it's why we do in fact buy their stuff.<br /><br />Up until a few years ago, I was anti-Apple, pro Linux, but after having seen what can be done by enforcing constraints on the system rather then leaving it wide open, it's clear that something with that system is right. Mac OS X is _tight_ and polished. Little things are sorted out, it does what you expect, and if the price for that is a little customizability , so be it.<br /><br />I'd say that's even _more_ important with the phone market. Android is self-imploding due to the fragmented nature of it's releases (half a dozen versions on a dozen different phones and it's all up to the carrier to update?). Apple knows the limits of the device, and are trying to make sure the user has a decent experience. Nintendo has always done similar things in the game industry, and as much as that can bite them, it has also done them a service. Overall the games are of high quality, even if they do lack some of the more racy titles.<br /><br />Anyways, as Apple's star rises and gains more market share in all it's things, this does become a much more serious issue. It's unfortunate I think, because it will mean worse products. Microsoft wasn't allowed to include a browser with it's OS, but somehow Mac OS X can include a sound editor, a photo editor, email, media center, etc etc etc? Perhaps at that point we should worry, for now I'm happy with my computer that "just works"Greghttp://www.anonymous.comnoreply@blogger.com