"They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.? - Benjamin Franklin
I think the key word in the above quote as it applies here (questionable) is 'essential'. There is no essential liberty given up here. At least not for a conservative 99% of the population.
Quote:
Can?t the solution be to let us check a box to install unauthorized apps, a la Android? Seems like the best of both worlds. Apple stops taking heat, and it would be the users liability if stuff like this happened. At the same time, it would allow for some of the amazing Cydia apps to get a broader audience.
Apple isn't all about limiting choice and controlling its users as some would have it, but Apple is very much about simplifying the user experience, or to put it another way - making computing main stream. In so doing Apple removes certain options, for better or worse. It's analogous with the automobile. Every man used to tinker with his car, tune the engine and so on. Now only the uber home mechanic does. Options have been taken away but car ownership has gone main stream. Personally I can't see why Apple should include a checkbox to allow the installation of unauthorized apps. It makes no sense. For people like us there are work-arounds. If that ain't good enough there are, like many have pointed out, alternatives.
This article is about phones. Last thing I want in a phone is worrying whether an app is going to compromise my phone, cause it to crash, dial an expensive phone# to the arctic circle, or worst yet, prevent me from using it in an emergency. Millions of iPhone users (including myself) are more than happy with letting Apple take care of the house-cleaning chores.
You want all the micro-managing endless choices fit for someone with ADHD, then go right ahead and go to the greener pastures of Android and Windows Mobile. You'll do exactly what you want, how you want it, and by the time you finally get your phone working the way you want, the next OS release will come out. Keep clicking all those numerous checkboxes to allow you to do the most basic things just like a desktop OS lets you do.
And while you're at it, please cancel your AI account if all you plan on doing is trolling this forum.
Steady on, there. His concerns are valid even if you see it differently. There has been no trolling. I think you need to apologize before you go to your room
What a crappy article. Should we have Apple tell us what we can and cannot put on our Macs too, so we never get a virus? This article just reeks of desperate justification for Apple’s policies.
I love Apple as much as the next guy, but damn, I just cannot handle when people claim censorship and gate-keeping are positive things.
"They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” - Benjamin Franklin
Can’t the solution be to let us check a box to install unauthorized apps, a la Android? Seems like the best of both worlds. Apple stops taking heat, and it would be the users liability if stuff like this happened. At the same time, it would allow for some of the amazing Cydia apps to get a broader audience.
You have choices. Pick them wisely -
Apple iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch << aka control freak >> you don't like but i want!
Android OS based phones << aka eat all u can >> good luck to u but I don't want!
Windows based (wat ever) << aka it happens again >> nop I'm done with anything Windows.
Symbian phones << aka dinosaur in the making >> they don't innovate sorry not on my radar screen
I think the key word in the above quote as it applies here (questionable) is 'essential'. There is no essential liberty given up here. At least not for a conservative 99% of the population.
Fair enough. As I mentioned above, I wasn’t trying to use the quote in 100% seriousness.
Quote:
Apple isn't all about limiting choice and controlling its users as some would have it, but Apple is very much about simplifying the user experience, or to put it another way - making computing main stream. In so doing Apple removes certain options, for better or worse. It's analogous with the automobile. Every man used to tinker with his car, tune the engine and so on. Now only the uber home mechanic does. Options have been taken away but car ownership has gone main stream. Personally I can't see why Apple should include a checkbox to allow the installation of unauthorized apps. It makes no sense. For people like us there are work-arounds. If that ain't good enough there are, like many have pointed out, alternatives.
Great post. Thanks. Good way to frame it. However, this is not how many people frame it (including the AI article), hence my initial post.
At the same time, it is still very much about limiting choice. My opinion obviously is that they have taken that too far. You (and most on this site) see it differently.
This is what make me sleep well at night, knowing that my original 2G, and 3Gs iphone will work without any problems. Granted, i know that no OS of any kind is completely perfect, but the chances of the Mac OS/Iphone OS getting any virus is slim. Thumbs up for Apple on this one!
I’m wondering where many of you stand on the open-source vs. proprietary software debate. Which is more secure? I believe most of the responses here would align more with being pro-proprietary software in terms of security, which has really been found to be quite the questionable stance.
Sorry if I didn’t touch on all the replies generated. I tried to hit on the most direct ones, but alas, my post seems to be oft quoted and much loathed. I was a little disappointed in the general negativity and/or insulting nature of the responses, but what can you do.
I am all in favour of open standards but that's not the same as open-source (not against open source). I am not in favour of proprietary anything as a matter of principle but I do understand the need / wish to protect one's corner. So proprietary software using open standards may be acceptable although the picture is surely more complex than that.
Don't take the vindictiveness of the responses personally. Sometimes the AI forums come across like Cnet discussions, other times more measured. Its part and parcel of nerd-dom, I guess.
I don't understand why people are still talking about this. It's a classic curated environment vs. open environment debate. There is no right answer or one-size-fits-all solution. It's good people have the choice. If you argue against Apple's curated platform you're basically trying to take that choice away from people. That is wrong. It would be wrong to argue that Android should be a curated environment for the exact same reason. You have choices -- use them.
Trust me, I have perspective. I don?t take this that seriously. But this sort of thing actually has pretty large ramifications in the technology world. Big enough ramifications that it?s worth at least discussing, and not mindlessly accepting it.
But Apple isn?t just preventing harmful or malicious apps from being installed. If they just did that, I would say ?great!?. No, they prevent applications like Google Voice, the political cartoonist (I know they reversed it after the outcry), etc. Apps have to meet MUCH stricter criteria than just not being harmful. That is where I (and others with my viewpoint) see a problem.
There's no argument here. Apple is not the government. They are a for profit corporation. Apple has offered a product they have designed for the consumer. If you like it, you'll buy it. If you don't, you won't. When the Gremlin came out on the 70s, did we demand that it be modeled like a Mustang. No, we just didn't buy it and the market decided. Has the market decided in Apple's favor? I think it has. I think it's safe to say that you and others with your viewpoint are in the minority.
If you're so concerned about loss of liberty try working toward repealing the Patriot Act or AZ SB 1070. Those are real issues of loss of liberty. Ranting against Apple is just whining like a child because you can't have it your way.
"They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.? - Benjamin Franklin
Don't be silly. The government has to be kept on a tight leash because they have guns and tanks and planes. A private company, you just buy their products or don't.
I would remind people that there is a way to install apps on your phone that did not come from the app store, without jailbreaking. Just buy a $99 developer membership and you can write and install anything you want on it. I myself have apps on my phone that I wrote *for me* and no-one else will ever see. But this does not break security for the masses because it's only your own phone, the iTunes Store is still needed for (widespread) distribution.
For the last few years MS has been all about excuses. Excuses about missing the mobile boat, excuses about half-assing their core business, excuses about being the last to the slate party, etc.
And what do customers get in return: ugly, barely usable, and sometimes downright pointless products.
Don't be silly. The government has to be kept on a tight leash because they have guns and tanks and planes. A private company, you just buy their products or don't.
I would remind people that there is a way to install apps on your phone that did not come from the app store, without jailbreaking. Just buy a $99 developer membership and you can write and install anything you want on it. I myself have apps on my phone that I wrote *for me* and no-one else will ever see. But this does not break security for the masses because it's only your own phone, the iTunes Store is still needed for (widespread) distribution.
And this could be applied to distribute open source software, just download an open-sourced Xcode project and compile it on your computer.
Yes, there is the $99/y but in the overall annual cost of an iPhone this will not be a dealbreaker for most people.
For the last few years MS has been all about excuses. Excuses about missing the mobile boat, excuses about half-assing their core business, excuses about being the last to the slate party, etc.
And what do customers get in return: ugly, barely usable, and sometimes downright pointless products.
I think even Steve Balmer is sick of excuses which is why in his discussion at D8 he said that the mobile team now reports directly to him.
Trust me, I have perspective. I don?t take this that seriously. But this sort of thing actually has pretty large ramifications in the technology world. Big enough ramifications that it?s worth at least discussing, and not mindlessly accepting it.
But Apple isn?t just preventing harmful or malicious apps from being installed. If they just did that, I would say ?great!?. No, they prevent applications like Google Voice, the political cartoonist (I know they reversed it after the outcry), etc. Apps have to meet MUCH stricter criteria than just not being harmful. That is where I (and others with my viewpoint) see a problem.
Does a shop keeper have the right to decide what they sell? YES.
Apple is the shopkeeper it decides what it will have in it's store.
By your argument can we force the Microsoft Stores to sell Apple products (Mac OS X, MacBooks, etc)? No, why because they choose not to.
You are not forced to buy an iPhone, it is not the only one on the market. You knew the rules when you bought it. So shut up or move to another platform.
There's no argument here. Apple is not the government. They are a for profit corporation. Apple has offered a product they have designed for the consumer. If you like it, you'll buy it. If you don't, you won't. When the Gremlin came out on the 70s, did we demand that it be modeled like a Mustang. No, we just didn't buy it and the market decided. Has the market decided in Apple's favor? I think it has. I think it's safe to say that you and others with your viewpoint are in the minority.
If you're so concerned about loss of liberty try working toward repealing the Patriot Act or AZ SB 1070. Those are real issues of loss of liberty. Ranting against Apple is just whining like a child because you can't have it your way.
Even when then can have it their own way, i.e. don't buy an iPhone!
Ok, I have been enjoying the responses and legitimate discussion up to this point. Seriously? I?m ?trolling?? I believe you need to brush up on your definition of what a troll is. I think the term you?re looking for is ?dissenting opinion,? which, to the best of my knowledge, is generally acknowledged in our society.
Seems like a decent portion of the other responses have been ?buy another phone then.? Pretty poor attitude. Sure, it?s just the tech geeks voicing these complaints now, but what happens when the average consumer starts getting mad (Google Voice is probably the best example to date, or perhaps the denial of the political cartoonist)? Are you just going to keep telling everyone to go buy another phone? Seems like a better solution would be to either constructively deal with the problem or give proper justification for why the policies are in place. This AI article did not provide a very good justification.
Further, as it has been mentioned, the easy way around all this is by jailbreaking. I do this, hence the reason I use the iPhone over a different device. A jailbroken iPhone is the best phone in the world. And yet, even with the open Cydia, I have yet to download an application that destroyed my phone. All the applications I?ve downloaded have been nothing short of phenomenal. I think this is a decent point to be made. Cydia has faired fine.
However, to say this isn?t a problem because you can jailbreak is incorrect. Apple actively tries to prevent and break our ability to jailbreak the phone, thus, jailbreaking can only be looked upon as a temporary solution.
I?m wondering where many of you stand on the open-source vs. proprietary software debate. Which is more secure? I believe most of the responses here would align more with being pro-proprietary software in terms of security, which has really been found to be quite the questionable stance.
Sorry if I didn?t touch on all the replies generated. I tried to hit on the most direct ones, but alas, my post seems to be oft quoted and much loathed. I was a little disappointed in the general negativity and/or insulting nature of the responses, but what can you do.
For you a jailbroken phone is best, for the majority it is not.
Don't force your unwelcome requirement on to the millions of users who are more than happy for Apple to control what we put on our iPhones. You really do not understand how important it is to people to have a secure managed environment, just because it does not fit your requirement. You have a solution, so why the moaning?
Most users of the iPhone care not one bit about what is and is not available in the App Store.
What a crappy article. Should we have Apple tell us what we can and cannot put on our Macs too, so we never get a virus? This article just reeks of desperate justification for Apple?s policies.
I was thinking the same but it's quite a strong point. Apple have well over 85 million units out there and have been in the market for 3 years and make up over 50% of all mobile traffic. If the target was about marketshare as well as wealthy people then the iPhone is ideal.
The point about the Mac isn't valid because users don't have complete access to the iPhone OS from the device unlike on the Mac where you can remove a kernel extension or startup item yourself and have console logs to trace problems.
If you consider the advantages and disadvantages, the App Store is better for the consumer. It mainly harms developers because Apple can pull your app for replicating future iPhone functionality or for emulating code and so on.
Apple's setup is far from perfect but their system has worked better than any of their competition so far and the competition always end up moving to the same models that Apple uses.
Comments
"They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.? - Benjamin Franklin
I think the key word in the above quote as it applies here (questionable) is 'essential'. There is no essential liberty given up here. At least not for a conservative 99% of the population.
Can?t the solution be to let us check a box to install unauthorized apps, a la Android? Seems like the best of both worlds. Apple stops taking heat, and it would be the users liability if stuff like this happened. At the same time, it would allow for some of the amazing Cydia apps to get a broader audience.
Apple isn't all about limiting choice and controlling its users as some would have it, but Apple is very much about simplifying the user experience, or to put it another way - making computing main stream. In so doing Apple removes certain options, for better or worse. It's analogous with the automobile. Every man used to tinker with his car, tune the engine and so on. Now only the uber home mechanic does. Options have been taken away but car ownership has gone main stream. Personally I can't see why Apple should include a checkbox to allow the installation of unauthorized apps. It makes no sense. For people like us there are work-arounds. If that ain't good enough there are, like many have pointed out, alternatives.
This article is about phones. Last thing I want in a phone is worrying whether an app is going to compromise my phone, cause it to crash, dial an expensive phone# to the arctic circle, or worst yet, prevent me from using it in an emergency. Millions of iPhone users (including myself) are more than happy with letting Apple take care of the house-cleaning chores.
You want all the micro-managing endless choices fit for someone with ADHD, then go right ahead and go to the greener pastures of Android and Windows Mobile. You'll do exactly what you want, how you want it, and by the time you finally get your phone working the way you want, the next OS release will come out. Keep clicking all those numerous checkboxes to allow you to do the most basic things just like a desktop OS lets you do.
And while you're at it, please cancel your AI account if all you plan on doing is trolling this forum.
Steady on, there. His concerns are valid even if you see it differently. There has been no trolling. I think you need to apologize before you go to your room
What a crappy article. Should we have Apple tell us what we can and cannot put on our Macs too, so we never get a virus? This article just reeks of desperate justification for Apple’s policies.
I love Apple as much as the next guy, but damn, I just cannot handle when people claim censorship and gate-keeping are positive things.
"They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” - Benjamin Franklin
Can’t the solution be to let us check a box to install unauthorized apps, a la Android? Seems like the best of both worlds. Apple stops taking heat, and it would be the users liability if stuff like this happened. At the same time, it would allow for some of the amazing Cydia apps to get a broader audience.
You have choices. Pick them wisely -
Apple iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch << aka control freak >> you don't like but i want!
Android OS based phones << aka eat all u can >> good luck to u but I don't want!
Windows based (wat ever) << aka it happens again >> nop I'm done with anything Windows.
Symbian phones << aka dinosaur in the making >> they don't innovate sorry not on my radar screen
I think the key word in the above quote as it applies here (questionable) is 'essential'. There is no essential liberty given up here. At least not for a conservative 99% of the population.
Fair enough. As I mentioned above, I wasn’t trying to use the quote in 100% seriousness.
Apple isn't all about limiting choice and controlling its users as some would have it, but Apple is very much about simplifying the user experience, or to put it another way - making computing main stream. In so doing Apple removes certain options, for better or worse. It's analogous with the automobile. Every man used to tinker with his car, tune the engine and so on. Now only the uber home mechanic does. Options have been taken away but car ownership has gone main stream. Personally I can't see why Apple should include a checkbox to allow the installation of unauthorized apps. It makes no sense. For people like us there are work-arounds. If that ain't good enough there are, like many have pointed out, alternatives.
Great post. Thanks. Good way to frame it. However, this is not how many people frame it (including the AI article), hence my initial post.
At the same time, it is still very much about limiting choice. My opinion obviously is that they have taken that too far. You (and most on this site) see it differently.
No malware for iPhone, despite market share...
iPhone security features deter malware
This is what make me sleep well at night, knowing that my original 2G, and 3Gs iphone will work without any problems. Granted, i know that no OS of any kind is completely perfect, but the chances of the Mac OS/Iphone OS getting any virus is slim. Thumbs up for Apple on this one!
I’m wondering where many of you stand on the open-source vs. proprietary software debate. Which is more secure? I believe most of the responses here would align more with being pro-proprietary software in terms of security, which has really been found to be quite the questionable stance.
Sorry if I didn’t touch on all the replies generated. I tried to hit on the most direct ones, but alas, my post seems to be oft quoted and much loathed. I was a little disappointed in the general negativity and/or insulting nature of the responses, but what can you do.
I am all in favour of open standards but that's not the same as open-source (not against open source). I am not in favour of proprietary anything as a matter of principle but I do understand the need / wish to protect one's corner. So proprietary software using open standards may be acceptable although the picture is surely more complex than that.
Don't take the vindictiveness of the responses personally. Sometimes the AI forums come across like Cnet discussions, other times more measured. Its part and parcel of nerd-dom, I guess.
You have choices. Pick them wisely -
Apple iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch << aka control freak >> you don't like but i want!
Android OS based phones << aka eat all u can >> good luck to u but I don't want!
Windows based (wat ever) << aka it happens again >> nop I'm done with anything Windows.
Symbian phones << aka dinosaur in the making >> they don't innovate sorry not on my radar screen
spiced, nicely put
Trust me, I have perspective. I don?t take this that seriously. But this sort of thing actually has pretty large ramifications in the technology world. Big enough ramifications that it?s worth at least discussing, and not mindlessly accepting it.
But Apple isn?t just preventing harmful or malicious apps from being installed. If they just did that, I would say ?great!?. No, they prevent applications like Google Voice, the political cartoonist (I know they reversed it after the outcry), etc. Apps have to meet MUCH stricter criteria than just not being harmful. That is where I (and others with my viewpoint) see a problem.
There's no argument here. Apple is not the government. They are a for profit corporation. Apple has offered a product they have designed for the consumer. If you like it, you'll buy it. If you don't, you won't. When the Gremlin came out on the 70s, did we demand that it be modeled like a Mustang. No, we just didn't buy it and the market decided. Has the market decided in Apple's favor? I think it has. I think it's safe to say that you and others with your viewpoint are in the minority.
If you're so concerned about loss of liberty try working toward repealing the Patriot Act or AZ SB 1070. Those are real issues of loss of liberty. Ranting against Apple is just whining like a child because you can't have it your way.
"They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.? - Benjamin Franklin
Don't be silly. The government has to be kept on a tight leash because they have guns and tanks and planes. A private company, you just buy their products or don't.
I would remind people that there is a way to install apps on your phone that did not come from the app store, without jailbreaking. Just buy a $99 developer membership and you can write and install anything you want on it. I myself have apps on my phone that I wrote *for me* and no-one else will ever see. But this does not break security for the masses because it's only your own phone, the iTunes Store is still needed for (widespread) distribution.
And what do customers get in return: ugly, barely usable, and sometimes downright pointless products.
Don't be silly. The government has to be kept on a tight leash because they have guns and tanks and planes. A private company, you just buy their products or don't.
I would remind people that there is a way to install apps on your phone that did not come from the app store, without jailbreaking. Just buy a $99 developer membership and you can write and install anything you want on it. I myself have apps on my phone that I wrote *for me* and no-one else will ever see. But this does not break security for the masses because it's only your own phone, the iTunes Store is still needed for (widespread) distribution.
And this could be applied to distribute open source software, just download an open-sourced Xcode project and compile it on your computer.
Yes, there is the $99/y but in the overall annual cost of an iPhone this will not be a dealbreaker for most people.
This, it must be said, is also entirely incorrect.
For the last few years MS has been all about excuses. Excuses about missing the mobile boat, excuses about half-assing their core business, excuses about being the last to the slate party, etc.
And what do customers get in return: ugly, barely usable, and sometimes downright pointless products.
I think even Steve Balmer is sick of excuses which is why in his discussion at D8 he said that the mobile team now reports directly to him.
I think even Steve Balmer is sick of excuses which is why in his discussion at D8 he said that the mobile team now reports directly to him.
Which can only mean good news for Apple.
Ballmer IS the problem.
Trust me, I have perspective. I don?t take this that seriously. But this sort of thing actually has pretty large ramifications in the technology world. Big enough ramifications that it?s worth at least discussing, and not mindlessly accepting it.
But Apple isn?t just preventing harmful or malicious apps from being installed. If they just did that, I would say ?great!?. No, they prevent applications like Google Voice, the political cartoonist (I know they reversed it after the outcry), etc. Apps have to meet MUCH stricter criteria than just not being harmful. That is where I (and others with my viewpoint) see a problem.
Does a shop keeper have the right to decide what they sell? YES.
Apple is the shopkeeper it decides what it will have in it's store.
By your argument can we force the Microsoft Stores to sell Apple products (Mac OS X, MacBooks, etc)? No, why because they choose not to.
You are not forced to buy an iPhone, it is not the only one on the market. You knew the rules when you bought it. So shut up or move to another platform.
There's no argument here. Apple is not the government. They are a for profit corporation. Apple has offered a product they have designed for the consumer. If you like it, you'll buy it. If you don't, you won't. When the Gremlin came out on the 70s, did we demand that it be modeled like a Mustang. No, we just didn't buy it and the market decided. Has the market decided in Apple's favor? I think it has. I think it's safe to say that you and others with your viewpoint are in the minority.
If you're so concerned about loss of liberty try working toward repealing the Patriot Act or AZ SB 1070. Those are real issues of loss of liberty. Ranting against Apple is just whining like a child because you can't have it your way.
Even when then can have it their own way, i.e. don't buy an iPhone!
Ok, I have been enjoying the responses and legitimate discussion up to this point. Seriously? I?m ?trolling?? I believe you need to brush up on your definition of what a troll is. I think the term you?re looking for is ?dissenting opinion,? which, to the best of my knowledge, is generally acknowledged in our society.
Seems like a decent portion of the other responses have been ?buy another phone then.? Pretty poor attitude. Sure, it?s just the tech geeks voicing these complaints now, but what happens when the average consumer starts getting mad (Google Voice is probably the best example to date, or perhaps the denial of the political cartoonist)? Are you just going to keep telling everyone to go buy another phone? Seems like a better solution would be to either constructively deal with the problem or give proper justification for why the policies are in place. This AI article did not provide a very good justification.
Further, as it has been mentioned, the easy way around all this is by jailbreaking. I do this, hence the reason I use the iPhone over a different device. A jailbroken iPhone is the best phone in the world. And yet, even with the open Cydia, I have yet to download an application that destroyed my phone. All the applications I?ve downloaded have been nothing short of phenomenal. I think this is a decent point to be made. Cydia has faired fine.
However, to say this isn?t a problem because you can jailbreak is incorrect. Apple actively tries to prevent and break our ability to jailbreak the phone, thus, jailbreaking can only be looked upon as a temporary solution.
I?m wondering where many of you stand on the open-source vs. proprietary software debate. Which is more secure? I believe most of the responses here would align more with being pro-proprietary software in terms of security, which has really been found to be quite the questionable stance.
Sorry if I didn?t touch on all the replies generated. I tried to hit on the most direct ones, but alas, my post seems to be oft quoted and much loathed. I was a little disappointed in the general negativity and/or insulting nature of the responses, but what can you do.
For you a jailbroken phone is best, for the majority it is not.
Don't force your unwelcome requirement on to the millions of users who are more than happy for Apple to control what we put on our iPhones. You really do not understand how important it is to people to have a secure managed environment, just because it does not fit your requirement. You have a solution, so why the moaning?
Most users of the iPhone care not one bit about what is and is not available in the App Store.
What a crappy article. Should we have Apple tell us what we can and cannot put on our Macs too, so we never get a virus? This article just reeks of desperate justification for Apple?s policies.
I was thinking the same but it's quite a strong point. Apple have well over 85 million units out there and have been in the market for 3 years and make up over 50% of all mobile traffic. If the target was about marketshare as well as wealthy people then the iPhone is ideal.
The point about the Mac isn't valid because users don't have complete access to the iPhone OS from the device unlike on the Mac where you can remove a kernel extension or startup item yourself and have console logs to trace problems.
If you consider the advantages and disadvantages, the App Store is better for the consumer. It mainly harms developers because Apple can pull your app for replicating future iPhone functionality or for emulating code and so on.
Apple's setup is far from perfect but their system has worked better than any of their competition so far and the competition always end up moving to the same models that Apple uses.