I don't dispute that we seem to have taken a step back by flocking to such a closed product, and I do understand/appreciate the frustration. To be frank we had it coming! Corporations love lock-in. There is no way they'd have it any other way. If you hear openness preached by Large Corporation (particularly if said corporation is publicly traded), remember to don your sceptic's hat. So we must be prepared to fight on. Forever. It's the only way to keep them honest.
As to Apple's walled garden, it's all been tried before (remember AOL in the early days of the Internet). And I think it will ultimately fail. Here's why: Apple's business is about pushing boxes (proof: http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Apple-Q3-2009-by-the-numbers/1248218543 ). Sure they've lately developed a taste for services (iTunes music & apps, data fees for the iPhone), but they don't have an overwhelming comparative advantage on that front. The reason these walled gardens have to come down is precisely because of the real reason they were put in placen: Content creators demand them. If you are a music label, a movie studio, a newspaper/book publisher, you want assurances that you can collect all that's due. Apple provides that. In the process however, Apple gains so much power! It demands large cuts of the profits (try buying an iPhone from Orange UG, let me know how that goes with your wallet). There is a power shift. With the iPhone, networks allowed Apple to have a direct relationship with their customers, with the network as a mere bit pipe -- something they should ordinarily have blocked. (Which is why I laughed so hard when certain networks here launched Nokia's OVI Mail. You really have to wonder which genius thought that was a good idea!) So, Apple is opening up access to stuff. Like it did with music (where you can now buy just one track, rather than a whole album), it is now aiming for news, video, etc. But at the same time, the others are not going to sit around and watch this power grab. They'll want to get in on it. And what better way than to dust off those mantras about openness? And then Apple will have to turn around to the content guys and say "look, we have no choice here". And the content guys will scream in pain, but it will be too late. And on it goes... P. Ps. May be. On Apr 04, 2010, at 12:28, Victor van Reijswoud wrote: > Yes, you are right Paul, Apple has done a good job in dragging incumbents out > of their slumber. With the iPad this will be case for the newspapers and > other traditional written media (as they hope). They will also solve the > technical limitations. However that was not my point. > > I am glad that to see that you have positive expectations that the walled > garden will soon disappear. Personally I still find the AppStore trend (and > what the people copying them do - Sanga, thank you for enlightening me) a > frightening future. John Naughton summarizes my fears very well in today's > entry on his blog: http://memex.naughtons.org/archives/2010/04/04/10578. He > also had an article in this weekends Guardian > (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/04/debate-apple-steve-jobs) > > I sincerely hope you are right. I and many with me have fought hard to keep > software open and accessible/affordable for all people. That we can translate > our favourite tools in our own language, with our own colors, so to say. > Offer a legal and free alternative to software piracy. Etc. This model is > under threat. That is what worries me deeply. And I think that all who value > Free and Open Source Software/Content should be worried. > > But, I think my analyst will buy me an iPad as she also bought me an iPod and > the other Apple stuff. I find it hard to discourage her. ;-) > > Victor > > PS: Are you going to bring baraza to the appstore? > > > > > On Apr 3, 2010, at 11:11, Paul Bagyenda wrote: > >> An important point is being missed: That Apple has done a rather good job >> dragging the incumbents out of their slumber. They did it with the laptops, >> they did it with the iPod, they did it with the iPhone. You only have to >> look at the field of imitations to see that this is true. iPad? Why of >> course this is the netbook done right! No need to take bets on how long >> before others pile in (with, yes, more openness, multitasking, etc.). For me >> this is the most important aspect of this thing. At first I'd also taken the >> whats-the-point view. But the more I think about it... I think the walled >> garden will disappear soon enough, so will the multi-tasking limitations >> (iPhone/iPad OS 4.0)... The competition is going to force it on them. And >> yet Apple will still prove able to out-design them all (just look at the >> field of iPhone wannabes). >> >> So yes, my analyst (if I had one) would recommends BUY! >> >> :) >> >> P. >> >> On Apr 02, 2010, at 12:25, Christopher Nambale wrote: >> >>> Well it should care for their thoughts at the very least, considering that >>> OS X and Iphone OS borrow their core from the open source Freebsd community. >>> >>> Granted some of Apples products are brilliantly engineered and >>> groundbreaking, however, isn't this whole Apple worshiping thing going a >>> bit too far?Well I guess the tech sector has its high fashion supplier now. >>> >>> CN >>> >>> --- On Fri, 4/2/10, Mwirima Byaruhanga <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> From: Mwirima Byaruhanga <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [LUG] The 5 best excuses for not buying an iPad >>> To: "Linux Users Group Uganda" <[email protected]> >>> Date: Friday, April 2, 2010, 3:55 AM >>> >>> > Free software proponents fought hard to give choice back to the >>> > people >>> >>> unfortunately for the free software proponents (and >>> fortunately for apple), they are not apple's target >>> market and apple couldnt care less about their dime >>> or thoughts >>> >>> eb >>> _______________________________________________ >>> LUG mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug >>> >>> LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ >>> >>> All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >>> >>> The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including >>> attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. >>> --------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> LUG mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug >>> >>> LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ >>> >>> All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >>> >>> The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including >>> attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. >>> --------------------------------------- >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LUG mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug >> >> LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ >> >> All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >> >> The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including >> attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. >> --------------------------------------- >> > > _______________________________________________ > LUG mailing list > [email protected] > http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug > > LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ > > All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including > attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. > --------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
