On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Roy <[email protected]> wrote:
> This has to be the most absurd thing that I have heard in a long time. Apple
> championing an open standard and dissing proprietary software. LOL

They did.

*/me listens to bubble of ignorance going pop*

> They are worse than MS for protecting their IP and running closed systems.

They aren't.

> Apple wants DRM more than anybody. Even apps for their Apple store need

They don't.  Maybe you aren't up on recent news, but Apple just (as
in, last year) removed DRM from music in the iTunes store as part of
their iTunes Plus program.  There is still content which hasn't been
switched over still, but from now on, it's all DRM free.

This only applies to music, however.  I don't think Apple was able to
wrestle DRM out of the agreement with Hollywood.

And DRM for the apps is necessary to protect application developers.
Piracy rates on iPhone OS devices are high enough as it is.  Until
users can demonstrate some basic respect for the property of
application developers, DRM will stay.  I don't really care if you
think that software should be free.  That's not your decision to make,
and if a developer doesn't make their software free, then piracy is
still theft.  And wrong.  While I personally think DRM is more trouble
than it's worth (any lock, no matter how expensive, can be broken) I
can understand and respect other developers for trying to use DRM to
prevent people from walking off with the developers' software without
paying anything.

> their stamp of approval. Let's stay real. Adobe, Microsoft or Apple; there

Yes, it really is so horrible that all those people who agree to
developer and user contracts in which they agree to Apple's
restrictive content policies on the iPhone actually have to abide by
the contract.  It really is so horrible that Apple has decided to vet
software for stability and appropriateness before it hits the store.
It's almost as bad as those Nazi-like package maintainers from Linux,
you know, those dickheads who make sure that half-baked software
doesn't get into the repositories, and that pictures of giant dildos
aren't snuck into downloads for poor users to find.  This whole
concept of a controlled computing environment is so horrible!

Grow up.

Apple controls what goes on the iPhone OS to make the whole user
experience better.  It's why there aren't a billion apps with
background processes slowing down the iPhone.  It's why you can buy an
app and expect it to work, no matter what other apps you already have
installed.

That they don't let you install things from other sources, well,
that's another matter.  But that's why you buy an iPhone and not Mac
OS X Mobile.  It is what it is, and complaining to myself and other
Linux users isn't going to do a lick of good, other than irritate
other people that would otherwise like you.

> is no difference. They all want to make money and protect their IP.
> Criticise Flash all you want but please spare us the hyperbole.

There is quite a bit of difference:

Microsoft: vendor lockin until the end of time.  Poorly built
libraries, usually a few steps behind what the consumer wants.

Apple: hip, vendor lockin until the end of time.  Actually builds the
devices and the software, so at least the stupid device will work
[most] of the time.  Usually a few steps behind what the consumer
wants.

Adobe: silly third-party company seeking to monpolise the platform on
which content is delivered.  They have helped to create a
Microsoft-facing world by being slow to port Flash to Linux, and have
been slow to update Flash for Mac.

It would only be hyperbole if I didn't know what the hell I was
talking about.  Either that or you are unfamiliar with what hyperbole
actually means.  In which case, I'll drop you a hint: it doesn't mean
that I'm wrong for agreeing with Apple when they accuse Adobe of
hampering web standards.

Just because Apple is idiosyncratic about their support of open-source
doesn't mean you should be so darn aggressive when they do support
open-standards.  Rather, your rabid anti-everything-but-Linux attitude
is the kind of response that is largely responsible for much
trepidation in corporate-types when it comes to migrating towards more
open systems.  Then again, you might not be that familiar with
techniques like positive-reinforcement, either.

But either way, if you're going to be tossing around accusations like
that [accusing me of hyperbole] you should be ready to suffer
retaliations as aggressive as mine given above (normally I'm much more
demure).  I've lived the life with Linux, Windows, and Mac for a long
time now.  So I'm confident my facts/opinions are grounded in actual
fact.  Are you so sure, mr-probably-is-a-fanboi?

-- 
Registered Linux Addict #431495
For Faith and Family! | John 3:16!
http://www.fsdev.net/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Linux Users Group.
To post a message, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit our group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/linuxusersgroup

Reply via email to