"iPhone exposes your whereabouts and provides ways for others to track you without your knowledge."
Stallman has asserted on several occasions that you can be tracked through any cellphone. Even when it's turned off. He's not batshit insane. Not at all.
JB
· 1 year ago
Wow... Apple's technology is "explicitly chosen to divide people"... these lifehacker fucks sound like they've written some George Bush speeches before...
I wonder what they think of the happy minimum security prison that is the Microsoft "ecosystem"? If Apple didn't have a secure system of okaying iPhone apps, these dumbshits would be complaining that the iPhone is too insecure...
Idiots.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@JB: To be fair, that's the FSF saying that not Lifehacker. Lifehacker (like all Gawker properties) is just doing what it takes to keep the hitcount high.
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Huh. Except for the claim that Apple hardware doesn't run software that only exists in their imaginations, all their reasons are (Sorry for my lapse into technical jargon) squirrel jism.
Dear Freetards: Your parents' basement may be comfortable, but someday you too may be called upon to pay rent and buy groceries. When that happens, you'll want to be paid for your work assuming you ever do any.
When that happens, you'll be glad there is a company and a culture that thinks freetards are fuller of shit than a stopped toilet in an abandoned Greyhound depot.
For those of you who haven't kept up in the student textbook:
STFU = Shut The Fuck Up
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Fuck Richard Stallman. (I don't mean you personally should actually do that so please don't hate me. I mean, that's just nasty to even think about.)
justin
· 1 year ago
I think their point is that Apple has you by the balls when you buy an iPhone. Apple might be wearing a nice cotton glove with very clean hands and a feather grip, but they still have you by the balls. And if you'll notice, the grip got a little tighter with the release of the iPhone 3G.
I don't see how you can debate that.
bkharmony
· 1 year ago
It all needed to be said. Thanks.
Grant
· 1 year ago
"Gods, this one again. These wastes of skin say the same thing about the iPod, look how that turned out. Earth to Moonvile, no one cares."
Oh man - thank you for this. Love the whole rant, but this tidbit made my whole day.
Jon T
· 1 year ago
I emailed these nitwits this morning when I read their totally weird rant.
It's a pity that there are plenty of the Apple-Hating-Taliban out there that will regurgitate this claptrap though...
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@justin: No, their "point" is that the iPhone doesn't fit into their narrow dogmatic world view. To which the rest of the non-whackadoo world say, so what. And what sort of bullshit is "...has you by the balls..." it's a cell phone, not a fucking inalienable civil right.
Phoneman
· 1 year ago
@justin:
> I don’t see how you can debate that.
I can get rid of my iPhone tomorrow. I just don't want to. There is, in fact, no Apple thug in jackboots standing outside my house forcing me to keep my iPhone. So, how, again, does Apple have me "by the balls"?
t3knomanser
· 1 year ago
Is there an option for: "Everyone's a loser"?
The FSF does a lot of good stuff, and the Open Source movement is a great idea. The idea of openness is a wonderful thing and it definitely should be encouraged.
Apple's platform is very tightly controlled. It does limit what you can do and who can do what. All of that is true.
But the FSF is thinking of the phone as a computer, not as a widget of consumer electronics. Openness breeds complexity- more options are daunting to an end user. Let your average luser try and make an informed choice between Gnome, KDE or Fluxbox, and see what happens.
People don't particularly want an open phone. They want a simple, easy to use phone that makes key tasks easy. The iPhone does that very well, so people are buying it (and if the local Apple store ever restocks on 16G phones, I'll be joining their ranks).
Most people don't care if they can run Open Office on their phone.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@justin: Oh, and when 20% of their argument is a flat out lie i.e. that Location Services reports your location behind your back; I have a hard time taking any of their arguments seriously.
TheIndustry
· 1 year ago
@justin: "I think their point is that Apple has you by the balls when you buy an iPhone"
Uh, what phone manufacturer/Carrier in the US doesn't? Shouldn't this be "don't buy a cell phone, keep using the telegraph"?
Why focus on Apple? Oh yeah, because they are publicity whores.
justin
· 1 year ago
Ok, the location services thing is kind of a frivolous argument, because it applies to just about any phone and the entire wireless industry. But that doesn't mean it is not bullshit.
@Phoneman: Uhh, isn't a two year contract with AT&T and the inability to use it on another carrier kind of like a thug forcing you to keep your iPhone? Just sayin'.
justin
· 1 year ago
@TheIndustry
You can run any number of phones of comparable price, unlocked, without a contract on T-Mobile or (presumably) AT&T. Some of them even have a webkit-based browser.
Uhh, isn’t a two year contract with AT&T; and the inability to use it on another carrier kind of like a thug forcing you to keep your iPhone? Just sayin’.
What complete and utter entitlement bullshit. Last time I checked no one was forcing you to buy the gods damned thing.
And, while were at it, let me check my copy of the Declaration of Independence. Lesse, Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness; but no mention of an iPhone. I guess old Tommy J. just forgot that.
You don't like the iPhone, don't fucking buy it. Just sayin'.
Sebhelyesfarku
· 1 year ago
Pull your head out of Jobs' colon, Mactard.
dwarfland
· 1 year ago
me, i think the ugly-as-f*ck screenshot/photo of their "FreeRunner" says it all...
... there's nothing preventing open-source apps on the iphone.
Kevin Smith wannabe
· 1 year ago
lol freetard ur helareus
oomu
· 1 year ago
the point is , the iphone is GREAT but DRM is NOT GOOD FOR CONSUMER !
get it ?
and yeah, I fucking hate DRM files telling me I can't use it on my family computer or works computer or whatever.
and YEAH , I fucking hate too I can't program as I want on MY iphone.
- and yes it's true iphone is a really easy and nice phone, internet device and music player.
- ho, and these filthy insane fuck gay-hetero-bisexual daemons beast putrid blasphemous indicible "freetards" are those working on many insides of Mac os X and iphone.
so yes, you can insult them, beat them and spit on them.
Why we should care about people creating software at all ? do the same to Apple to. fuck their engineers !...
very sad.
Jamie
· 1 year ago
@justin
The point is that total control by the vendor isn't anything new in the phone ecosystem and people are used to it.
People also expect phones to 'just work' which is what Apple are good at getting right. From what I've heard about some of the OpenMoko alternatives, they don't just work and if Linux is anything to go by, it will be years before the design by committee approach comes up with something as simple and elegant as the iPhone.
Savjo
· 1 year ago
On the iPhone being closed: The iPhone is very much wide open, as long as you dare to void our warranty. Your dishwasher may even become a drum machine if you reach the FPGA and reprogram it, you'll just void your warranty of course. The same for iPod, that's what iPodLinux is made for, do what you want with the device. The way the default iPhone OS is locked makes me just comfortable for the fact that apps cannot bypass security measures, like filesystem sandboxing and gps/other hardware access. Apps in the default system just can't do very much damage.
jhn
· 1 year ago
Since the mind-90s, any day now, free software has been supposed to stop sucking for users. It hasn't yet. Show me non-shit products I can actually use today, and I'll use them. To whit, Firefox. It's silly to live in some imaginary fantasy-land of future software that never materialized.
(And nope, Ubuntu doesn't not suck. Anarok also doesn't not suck.)
OS X pounds Linux in every way I care about.
(Yeah, free software is great for behind the scenes infrastructure stuff and for programming tools.)
oomu
· 1 year ago
@Simon :
the iphone even uses Free software inside (mostly the whole unix layer and Webkit).
it's not the problem. the problem is, you are forced to use itunes to get software. so, by definition, there are no freedom beside Apple.
- and, itunes app store is clearly, the best way to get and install software I saw for any device. pretty impressive.
We can understand the reason apple want to impose itunes (avoid virus, missteps and mischievous people sending bad applications) but in the same time, you loose what you can do on a mac or pc.
- so , it's all about different priorities. Some people care more about uses than easiness. others want More.
not complicate. and not insane to understand. There are no Bad Guy to kick and insult.
t3knomanser
· 1 year ago
@oomu: No, DRM is not good for the consumer. If you purchase apps through the app store, sadly, you're stuck with it.
But odds are, you're only trying to put those DRMed files on a very small set of Apple branded devices- unlike an MP3, which should work anywhere, these are obviously bound to OSX Mobile.
And, correct me if I'm wrong: the SDK is a free download, you can load apps onto a test device with it, but you have to pay a $99 fee to actually host them in the App Store. Doesn't that imply that you can program how you want on your phone?
And, you can STILL jailbreak your phone. So to say you can't use your device how you like is still not true. You can't use your device how you like and get Apple to play along, but it's retarded to expect such a thing anyway.
Apple cannot stop you from jailbreaking your phone. Apple doesn't want to stop you from jailbreaking your phone, because they just want you to buy the damn phone. With the new must-activate model, they also guarantee that AT&T gets their pound of flesh no matter what you do when it comes to unlocking.
t3knomanser
· 1 year ago
@oomu: But you aren't forced to get it from the App Store. You can also jailbreak your phone.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@oomu: Gods damn it, I won't tolerate any reasonableness here!
James
· 1 year ago
These FSF people are idiots. Their five "reasons" are all bullshit, factually wrong in every case.
An Apple "tax" on free apps? Uh, no. Developers can put them on the App Store for free, and users download them for free.
And DRM does not stand for "Digital Restrictions Management," but rather, "Digital Rights Management." Both the iPod and the iPhone play lots of DRM-free file formats--just not the specific formats the FSF idiots cite (formats that no one uses anyway).
And all that "prison" talk? WTF? Have any of these people ever actually been to prison? Um, yeah -- like, maybe they should just not buy an iPhone if they don't like it?
Sounds to me like a bunch of fools who can't afford an iPhone thinking up reasons why no one else should have one, either.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
I have been quietly stewing over the FSF "announcement" since I read it. They're completely, totally clueless. The only point that might even have merit is the "DRM is bad!", and he immediately blames Steve Jobs personally for the labels refusing to drop DRM. Riiight.
Anyway, now I think I can let my rant die on the vine.
Lol
· 1 year ago
> More to the point ... they dismiss the hundreds, if not thousands of developers who a) don’t give a shit about “free” software and b) might actually like getting paid for their efforts.
"Free" software is not about not being paid for making it
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
We can understand the reason apple want to impose itunes (avoid virus, missteps and mischievous people sending bad applications) but in the same time, you loose what you can do on a mac or pc.
Why, that would be because the iPhone is neither a fucking Mac nor a fucking Wintel computer. It's a smartphone. It does a lot, but it's not a fucking full-blown general purpose computer.
I can put 3 big ass video cards in my wife's Mac Pro, can I do that in an iPhone? No.
I can add dozens of USB and FireWire devices to an iMac or a Mac Mini. Can i do that with an iPhone? No.
Why?
Well, it's not because Steve Jobs and Apple aren't marching lockstep to that folk dancing retard's song of judgemental stupidity.
It's because they're DIFFERENT FUCKING THINGS. Apple, Orange, Pear, Dildo. One of these things is not like the other...
For fuck's sake is it even possible for the freetards to not bitch that a car is not a condor?
Did you *read* the contents of the link I gave ? Where I downloaded the source-code of an application, compiled it, and installed it onto my phone without going anywhere near the app-store ?
It is *easy* to distribute open-source apps for the phone without using the app-store. The FSF piece is pure FUD, which is sad. I think they let their politics get in the way of their research before writing the piece, and my opinion of them as an organisation has suffered because of that.
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
@Simon
Of course the freetards aren't going to acknowledge the reality of jailbroken phones et al, because then they lose hit counts.
The only reason they even published this is because ragging on the iPhone gets you attention, and with people realizing that Open Source does not in fact require you to be part of the Stallmanolgy cult, and Torvalds telling Stallman and the FSF to go fuck themselves on a regular basis, they're starting to feel a little insignificant.
I'm still waiting for them to eventually admit that the only purpose they serve is a collection point for whining entitlement queens.
Gene
· 1 year ago
AT&T is complicit with illegal spying by the worst administration in history, and these guys are worried about the lack of open source software on the phone using their network? The forces of evil in our country are gleefully watching as organizations like this one waste their time and resources on completely unimportant and, frankly, stupid causes.
Simon
· 1 year ago
@JCW
But this isn't even with a jailbroken iphone. This is official apple-supported policy! It's all legit - you just use the ad-hoc certificate rather than the distribution certificate. Since you're distributing source-code, each developer can sign the program *while* they compile the code, with their *own* ad-hoc certificate. That's it - the resulting binary will work on the developer's iphone.
Honestly, I don't think Apple could have bent over much farther...
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
@Simon
Oh yeah, I forgot about that one. But again, why would the FSF let reality get in the way of their attention-whoring.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Gene: Thank you. Want a reason to boycott the iPhone; that's one I could understand. Oddly, the FSF doesn't seem to have an opinion on FISA. I guess the spying is OK as long as you use Linux to do it from. note, the GNU/ prefix was intentionally omitted to annoy Richard Stallman
Don't forget about us thugs who prefer Chinese slippers to jackboots. There's a lot of us out here.
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
@Angry Drunk
Fuck that "GNU/Linux" shit. GNU makes tools. Good ones, and that's honorable. But just like I don't own a "Makita/Toyota" or a "Snap-On/Chevy", it's not GNU Linux.
Stallman wants an OS with his name on it, maybe he should, you know, FINISH HURD.
But that would require him to do, you know, actual work.
t3knomanser
· 1 year ago
@John C. Welch: I HURD that was just vaporware, and always would be.
//And the hardware isn't quite there for a true microkernel yet.
itchy
· 1 year ago
I just bought a Sunbeam toaster oven, and, man, does Sunbeam have me by the balls!
Say I want to make toast in my Frigidaire refrigerator -- no dice. Maytag dishwasher? Nice try.
And it's not just toast. It's cheese toast, cinnamon toast, the occasional toasted bagel, you name it.
So it also comes with this little baking pan. Great, I also can use this in the microwave, right? NO! This damned proprietary pan is made of metal and will explode and give me genital herpes if it comes near any other appliance!
Not only that, if I take it to my friend's house and try to put it in his Black & Decker toaster oven ... it's too wide. Won't fit at all.
When it comes to my toasting needs, Sunbeam has the whole gig locked up. It's like those bastards want to divide us.
Jesse
· 1 year ago
So basically this blog is one reactionary swearing prolifically at people who disagree with him, with his fanboys following suit?
The argument you've laid out is a total joke, you'd be laughed out of a high school debate for trying to put forward this kind of "reasoning" and the only reason your commenters can't see that is because their minds are so poorly stimulated that they are titillated by almost-clever swearing.
Whine about the FSF but at least they have the discipline (and education?) to outline a real argument with structured points. What you do is name-calling, but you haven't rebutted any of their points, you've just laughed at them. Probably hastily and out of ignorance.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@47itchy Awesome!
cosumer products are for consu
· 1 year ago
So when my freerunner throws up a "no space on device /usr/bin" black screen of death, what number does my Mom/Dad/Girlfriend/Boyfriend not "build from source" friend call for support?
Oh yeah, none.
I'll just tell them to log onto alt.bin.phone.open.moko.help.help.help and wait 24-48 hours for a solution.
also, fuck OGG and fuck theora, nobody gives a shit about your free formats. I could distribute a book on microfiche for free, doesn't mean anyone would use it.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@Jesse Arguing points in the FSF's post just isn't worth it. It'd be like arguing with the TimeCube guy.
jfatz
· 1 year ago
I hope they have some REAL hate saved up for the Nintendo DS, the PSP, all the cell carriers and all their software/media offerings, and the dozens upon dozens of other mobile devices and platforms out there that run similarly... No? How odd.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Jesse: I see the train from ad-hominem town pulled in (look up the term if it confuses you). The FSF's "argument" boils down to "But, you guys, why doesn't anyone listen to me, anything we don't agree with is evil; I'm being super serial." They are an intellectual joke; their "arguments" were crap; and I delight in yelling at stupid people. I also enjoy scaring children and beating puppies. Deal with it.
Randy Smith
· 1 year ago
FSF is a little daft on this one. Location service can be turn off as a system preference. There are no free apps....OK let's ignore the free apps you can download at the itunes store, if you jailbreak your iPhone you can use a ton of free apps that are out there....some of those apps are becoming free apps on the itunes store. It does not play DRM free formats like Ogg Vorbis and Theora. So the hell what. It plays MP3 and AAC files that are DRM free.....and some of those DRM free files are ones I bought from Apple.
Does Apple refuse some programs on the app store? I hope so! There is nothing worse than crappy, bug ridden software on a device as important as a phone. Windows programs, before they put out UI guidelines, were always great to track down where the developer decided to put the preference menu item. Microsoft still have not followed all the guidelines they set forth in their own UI standards. I think the biggest problem the FSF is having with the iPhone is that it is popular and it is making money. God forbid anyone making money on a product.
Jesse
· 1 year ago
@The Angry Drunk:
From what I can tell, you're the engineer on that train, making several trips daily. Sure, you don't outright say "the argument is wrong because they suck" but that's still the effect of littering your diatribe with swears and insults directed at them. Gods only know what your intent is with that, I suppose it's your style but that doesn't mean I can't call you on it.
Your summary of their argument is a total caricature and focuses on about 15% of their overall essay. Did you actually go read their article or are you just responding to Gina Sattrapi at LifeHacker? What you're asserting as their argument is some kind hybrid between interpretation and projection. Perhaps "interprojection"?
When one of your refutations is to laugh and dismiss the point, that smacks of the same kind of elitism you seem to imagine them entertaining.
Blain
· 1 year ago
Re: Location
Here's the fun part. Yes, the cell phone companies know where your iPhone is, even if you turn off location-based services. But to that same degree, so does any OpenMoko or Nokia or Android.
Because it's required by law for finding out where a 911 call came from. The difference is that the iPhone allows apps, if the user so chooses, to access that same information. So this means Android, OpenMoko, etc, are one of two things:
Like Apple, they 'lock out' the developer from the system by denying this functionality. Oooh! Evil closed system!
or,
Like Apple, they 'let others track you' by allowing this functionality. Oooh! Evil spying system!
Thomas
· 1 year ago
Dear Drunken Jerk,
Tripe is a wonderful, honest, straightforward food. The right thing to do with it is to fry it up, wrap it in a grilled tortilla with salsa, onion and cilantro, and use it to help soak up the tequila in your stomach. The right thing to do with an FSF skreed is to use it to wipe your ass. Please note the difference.
Summary for the slow: tacos de tripas = yummy. FSF = yucky. Thank you for your time. And go support your local taco cart guy, like, now.
whlteXbread
· 1 year ago
I think that while the FSF statement may have been over-dramatic and misled, they're exactly right. If you care about the beliefs that they care about, you shouldn't buy the iPhone. THAT'S all they're saying, and comments on this page have said the same thing--if you care about those rights, don't buy the iPhone.
No one likes poorly constructed arguments, and reactionary rants are pretty entertaining. We all have our positions, beliefs, etc., but there are MUCH bigger problems to spend our time on, as a @Gene pointed out.
Jesse
· 1 year ago
@Steve Fisher
Did you read the article at FSF's website? It's decidedly more lucid than any of TimeCube guy's rants.
Any of the points can be contested reasonably, there's no need to summarily declare it invalid and ideological.
Arrr
· 1 year ago
Fuck the FSF and their clueless bullshit. I don't want to fuck with my phone - I want to use it. I don't want to play crap on Ogg or whatever free format is out there. I don't want to have open source that expects me to fix my goddamn device.
Freetards can use their crappy, boxy Linux handhelds with 1 hour battery life and incomprehensible user interface.
If I want to write and sell an app and make money its my right. Piss off.
Sergio
· 1 year ago
Hahaha... weakly veiled fluff piece to promote that land mine called the FreeRunner. Jebus FSF is retarded can they name any other phone on the market that allows as more control than the iPhone? i think not
RM
· 1 year ago
@Jesse: "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." - Thomas Jefferson
Um, and then some shit about fiat and topicality. Thank you judge.
Phoneman
· 1 year ago
By the way, there is probably no bigger drain on our emergency services personnel than assholes phoning in bogus 911 calls from their cell phones. I could only wish the government had better means than cell tower triangulation to locate said individuals. They don't. So quit your whining and fear mongering.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@Jesse - Yes, I've been reading the FSF for years. He is more lucid, but that wasn't my point. My point was he has an equal grip on reality and equal zealotry in pushing it on others. There's absolutely no point in arguing with a zealot. Facts just don't matter, as we see from the story you're defending.
Ay Karamba
· 1 year ago
Actually it isn't "complete and utter entitlement bullshit" to expect a cellphone maker to have the freedom to offer the hardware unlocked. Its a matter of public law. I'm in the Netherlands and the iPhone here HAS to be unlocked and able to be sold independent of any carrier. I think that's good for customers and the cellphone maker. Apple has nothing to do with it, its a matter of regulation to keep the market open. In the states, you can see the effect of the failure to keep some markets open in wireless carriers, cable systems and internet providers. Corporate socialism in action. The companies themselves have nothing to do with it. Regulation does.
Government "regulation" fails to impress me. I've worked in government and the one point I took home from the experience is that government is utterly incompetent at almost everything it does, especially "regulation."
The markets are already open. Buy a different phone if you disagree with AT&T or any other carrier. Nobody is forcing you to use an iPhone.
Phoneman
· 1 year ago
And, no, I fail to see why a company should be forced to sell you a product in a particular manner.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Ay Karamba: Good for the Dutch, I heard you can get some great weed and wooden shoes there too. But it is "entitlement bullshit." Apple doesn't owe you an iPhone. If you don't like the carrier options, buy a different fucking phone.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Ay Karamba: And here's the sensible position regarding carrier choice. In the U.S. no manufacturer is required to provide an unlocked phone, but at the same time they are prevented from using the DMCA to take action against any user who chooses to unlock their phone.
Yoz
· 1 year ago
Um, you people do realise that without the contributions of these "freetards", your iPhone would be running OS 9 (or something equally shit), right? BTW, the fact that it's running OS X, and that one develops software for it using the same tools and APIs, should be a clue that perhaps it *does* count as a computer of some kind. ("It's not! Look, I'm holding it in my hand and making phone calls on it!" Er, right. OK. See you in the funny papers.)
Yes, the FSF argument isn't put particularly well (especially the bit about privacy). Yes, most Free Software has shit usability, and god knows that I'd much rather use an iPhone than whatever the current state of OpenMoko or Android is. Trouble is, most of the arguments appear little more than "Freaky beardy guy hates my shiny new toy! BAD beardy man! BAD!" And then they have the gall to complain about irrational zealotry?
If I had to pick which kind of zealot I'd rather meet in a dark alley... I'd pick the Apple kind. Because they have fuck-all attention span.
diskgrinder
· 1 year ago
I agree with what everyone has said, except the those I don't agree with. They really need to get their facts straight. It's not rocket science, what they are saying is obviously wrong. But the people who I agree with are right. However, one of the people who I don't agree with made a good point somewhere, and I agree with that, but it doesn't contradict my position that those who I agree with have won the argument.
Ken
· 1 year ago
FSF version of the iPhone.
Buy all your parts at cheap bastard-R-Us Take the weekend to assemple them, some soldering may be required. Connect your phone to a serial connection du this boot image use wget or curses to find the libraires you may want do the ./configure;make;make install song and dance find the applications you may want do the ./configure;make;make install song and dance now find a carrier that will let you put it on your network and then another carrier if you don't like the first one you got
Agreed, this works (it's a LONG shot, but for sake of arguement it could), but I'd rather give someone $200 and have it working relatively quickly. Let's assume you're consulting at $50 and hour, this "free" phone actually cost you $2,400+ (assuming this was a weekend project)
Disclaimer: I use HP-UX, Linux and Windows at work, I'm 100% Mac at home. I use gcc, perl adn python daily. I also pay for things when I don't want to mess with it.
@Yoz: That's funny, I don't remember the FSF having anything to do with the development of UNIX or BSD.
Scott
· 1 year ago
Every time you call someone a name, it weakens your position. Also adding explanations and all caps doesn't help.
But I guess it's drunken, so what do I expect? It's just that you seem to care so much about these things. Maybe you need to de-stress.
Brian
· 1 year ago
I agree with Jesse. It would really be nice to find a response to the FSF's post that actually addressed the content of their argument. So far I haven't found one.
Unfortunately, a rejoinder like "HAHAHAHAHAHA!" doesn't give me much insight into why the Neo Freerunner isn't a "better alternative...that respect[s] your freedom, [doesn't] spy on you, play[s] free media formats, and let[s] you use free software."
The response to point 1 (developers must pay a tax to Apple, who becomes the sole authority over what can and can't be on everyone's phones) is to point to the iPhone hacking community. But surely the FSF's point is not at all about the technical challenges of hacking the phone but, rather, about the contractual restrictions that go along with developing for and using the phone. Sure, anyone can break a contract (the iPhone's license is here [pdf]). But the FSF's position on honoring licenses is fairly well known: if they thought it was acceptable for anyone to break a license agreement, they wouldn't have bothered to author the General Public License. If The Angry Drunk thinks the FSF is wrong, and that it's acceptable to break contracts, I'd invite him to give his reasons.
Jesse
· 1 year ago
@The Angry Drunk
I think it's a pretty non-controversial thing to say that the people who have worked on BSD over the years and the neck-bearded freetards you're basting here run in overlapping circles.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Brian: I addressed the "content" of the FSF's argument in the only way a rational person can; by mocking it. It just kills you people that no one actually cares about your precious software "freedom" doesn't it.
Nope but I had the misfortune of trying one. Utter garbage.
Ben Darlow
· 1 year ago
Heh, somewhat amusingly, I emailed the FSF after reading that article whilst blind drunk last night. I think I said some similar things, although I might have been more rude.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Ben Darlow: More rude! Shit, I have to try harder next time.
Simon
· 1 year ago
@Brian, Jesse
Please *read* my posts (#22, #40) above - Apple make it easy to distribute open-source apps which anyone can compile without any reference to the app-store. If you pay the $99 for the devkit program, you can install these open-source apps on your phone too, without reference to the app store.
The FSF rant is built on a house of straw, because its fundamental tenet is just not true.
Does that address their position sufficiently ?
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
Yay, the concern trolls have arrived to tell me how I can better present my "message" and question my use of time and resources.
Nathan
· 1 year ago
@The Angry Drunk: I think the problem is that you're an unfunny toll being linked to by and otherwise respectable mac blog for reasons beyond comprehension.
Nathan
· 1 year ago
Apparently I'm unable to spell today, either.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@Yoz: Not true. "Freetard" has nothing to do with whether or not you like coding open source software. I've done that myself and enjoyed it thoroughly. Rather, "freetard" has everything to do with the entitlement attitude, religious zealotry and deliberate blindness to reality and facts.
Compare Raymond or Torvalds. Both are heavily into open source, but I don't think I'd call either of them freetards.
Jesse
· 1 year ago
@The Angry Drunk
I don't know where you get off calling anyone a zealot. You are attacking people for criticizing a phone and the industrial giant that sells it. None of that criticism applies to you.
On the one hand we have the FSF who makes some points (legitimate or not) about Apple's technology and business choices. They publish a well-structured argument detailing their reluctance about owning an iPhone. Agree with their argument or not, it conforms to the structure of a logical proposition.
Then, on the other hand we have a person who is not named in that article, a wholly unrelated person who becomes offended by this and takes it upon himself to defend Apple. He does this by responding in a fury of insults and absurd attacks. He claims to be rational about it, while dismissing points by laughing at them. He summarizes the long essay by the FSF, which visits many complex points, as simply: “But, you guys, why doesn’t anyone listen to me, anything we don’t agree with is evil; I’m being super serial.” And he's actually serious about that.
Who's zealous?
Frankly, you embody everything that's wrong with the Internet and this country (America). Anyone who can pay $10/month to host a blog suddenly thinks he's a genius and that his opinion is automagically made of gold because his blog got linked.
No humility, no justification for your attacks, you make no attempt to conduct yourself in a civil manner. You call it your style, but really it's a crutch and excuse for your actual style: undisciplined ranting, blindly spewing verbal vomit. You are the Internet equivalent of the ill homeless person who stands on the corner yelling at real and imagined people about real and imagined grievances.
Tom W Browning
· 1 year ago
@justin: Got me by the balls? How? Maybe O2 has me by the balls as I signed a contract to them, but Apple?
By your logic, every manufacturer whose products I own, that I cannot hack apart or install random crap on (in ways I am not interested in doing) has me by the balls.
Samsung, who make my TV. Nintendo, who make my Wii and DS. Sony, who make my PS3. Thomson, who make my microwave. Sky, who make my DVR. Logitech, who make my Surround sound.
Need a keep listing things?
Why do you believe you have the right to be encouraged to use things in alternative ways? You do have the right, and the facility, but its not up to Apple to support you doing it. Why would it be?
Gary Niger
· 1 year ago
1] Ogg, Theora, etc are great. Would be nice to see them supported on the iPod/Phone. However, I'm not exactly heartbroken about the lack of them, because they don't have some "killer app" feature that makes me want to use them -instead- of MP3/MP4s.
2] Free/OSS is also great. OS X wouldn't really exist without that BSD subsystem that NeXT borrowed from the OSS movement back in the day, and I'm quite glad we're not using some shitty "in-house" core system like Mac OS 9 and most versions of Windows use. I don't need to describe to this audience that those suck; we all know.
However, the FSF is really off their gourd, here.
1] The location business is no different than any other cellphone; and is in fact actually better because apple enforces the users ability to decline an apps permission to use it.
2] The iphone has no limitations that "all other cellphones" don't have.
3] The app signing/sandboxing is also no more limited than any videogame console. As with the consoles, the whole point is RELIABILITY. This is not a software development sandbox, this is a tool. The reliability of most computer systems, whether mac, win, or linux, is completely unacceptable for this kind of use. For most people, it is an absolute necessity that their phone's software be guaranteed to always work, and sandboxing/signing the apps does exactly this. You can't get laid but remain a virgin - likewise, you can't "give apps the power to screw up the system" but "ensure apps won't screw up the system" at the same time. I'm glad apple's doing this, and furthermore, I'm glad it's opt-out, rather than opt-in, because only those who understand enough to opt out of it are those who would find any benefit from opting out - everyone else would be hurt by that freedom.
4] Steve isn't lying about not supporting DRM; rather, he's taking a different strategy at eliminating it than the FSF is. Rather than boycotting it, he's trying to strongarm the record industry into dropping it, which unfortunately requires sucking up to it long enough to become such a huge part of their bottom line that they have follow his requests. It's only because of his actions that ANY online music is sold without DRM.
5] You can completely do the Open Source thing on an iPhone without paying a dime (except for the phone+service). You can write the software, and you can follow the 'old standard' of OSS which is building from source. The only thing you have to pay a one-time $100 fee for is distributing binaries, which I do seem to remember runs contrary to the OSS mantra of distributing the source.
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
From what I can tell, you’re the engineer on that train, making several trips daily. Sure, you don’t outright say “the argument is wrong because they suck” but that’s still the effect of littering your diatribe with swears and insults directed at them. Gods only know what your intent is with that, I suppose it’s your style but that doesn’t mean I can’t call you on it.
Okay, it's "profanity". Not "swears". "Profanity". Anyone calling profanity "swears" is too fucking stupid to say shit about anything, and lord knows, can't be taken seriously unless they're calling bingo numbers at church. Even then, you want to double-check.
Your summary of their argument is a total caricature and focuses on about 15% of their overall essay. Did you actually go read their article or are you just responding to Gina Sattrapi at LifeHacker? What you’re asserting as their argument is some kind hybrid between interpretation and projection. Perhaps “interprojection”?
The argument is the same one they have against anyone not licking their asses. "You don't do it our way, you suck". The only thing that changes is the company they're yelling at.
When one of your refutations is to laugh and dismiss the point, that smacks of the same kind of elitism you seem to imagine them entertaining.
When something's fucking stupid, you point and laugh.
I think mockery can be a useful tool, and great fun to boot (you're clearly having fun), but I disagree that it's the only way "a rational person" can respond to the FSF's argument, or any argument.
I'm not sure to whom you're referring by "you people." I don't think I gave any indication of my own views about "free software" in my comment. In fact, I thought I indicated that I actually wanted to read a more substantive response to their argument. If I were a partisan of the FSF, why would I want that? Wouldn't I just be happy with what they said?
If you misread my comment as merely an attempt to score rhetorical points for the FSF, then I apologize for being unclear. I assure you that nothing I said was intended as an endorsement of their views. I did, certainly, attempt to clarify what I think their views are. My invitation to clarify your views regarding a specific aspect of the FSF's philosophy was quite sincere. A rational person must have some rational reason for finding an argument laughable.
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
Um, you people do realise that without the contributions of these “freetards”, your iPhone would be running OS 9 (or something equally shit), right? BTW, the fact that it’s running OS X, and that one develops software for it using the same tools and APIs, should be a clue that perhaps it *does* count as a computer of some kind. (”It’s not! Look, I’m holding it in my hand and making phone calls on it!” Er, right. OK. See you in the funny papers.)
Oh lord. Funny, but I think there were free compiliers before GNU and there would have been free compiliers without GNU.
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
@nathan
@The Angry Drunk: I think the problem is that you’re an unfunny toll being linked to by and otherwise respectable mac blog for reasons beyond comprehension.
Not nearly as big a problem as you trying desperately to be superior to him. Maybe you should try getting people to actually read your shit instead of ragging on someone else's stuff.
Carl
· 1 year ago
>I think it’s a pretty non-controversial thing to >say that the people who have worked on BSD >over the years and the neck-bearded freetards >you’re basting here run in overlapping circles.
That's actually a pretty hefty assumption. In fact, you'd probably find some pretty huge philosophical differences between the FSF people and the BSD people. OS X is squarely in the BSD camp.
IMHO, it's almost like Catholics vs Protestants. Yeah they both believe in Jesus but damned if one is gonna believe in the Pope.
Aha! An actual reason to avoid the Freerunner! Someone actually tried it out, and it was garbage. Hurray for empiricism!
Phuul
· 1 year ago
@Jesse
I'm really not sure why you think the FSF made a well structured argument. It's basically a few facts mixed with blatant half truths and outright lies. But the biggest false hood they attempted to sell was the Freerunner as a viable alternative to the iPhone, or any phone for that matter.
From http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Neo_FreeRunner "The FreeRunner can be purchased from the Online Store as of July 3, 2008. The software available on the phone makes it suitable for power users and developers only, it is not ready for the general consumer yet. Email announcements and found on the announce mailing list. For frequently asked questions please check FAQ. Approximately twice a month an Openmoko team member writes an update to the project at Community Updates. "
Yup you read that right, "not ready for the general consumer yet." But even if it was, you can't actually buy it. Once you make your way through the Byzantine website (oh and manually check which model you want based on what bands are available in your area, you would think they could automate that a bit) you find that it's sold out. Yup sold right the hell out.
So please tell my why the idea of FreeRunner being a viable alternative to any phone, much less the iPhone, isn't deserving of derisive laughter. Seriously I'm really interested in how a software and hardware platform, that has been in development for years, that the developers freely admit isn't suitable for average users and that you can't actually buy should even be mentioned in that screed. Oh right, it fills all the FSF dogmatic checkboxes.
If the FSF want's to encourage discussion they need to actually try living in the real world a bit. Foaming at the mouth and spinning all their arguments is a real turn off to rational people. The FSF has fully embraced the "means justify the ends" philosophy that has made PETA and Greenpeace jokes. While they may do some good works, the fallout from the abhorrent actions of the rest of things they do poison their reputation.
So to sum up, when they stop being a laughingstock I might pay attention. Until then laughing at them is what they apparently want.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Brian: Ok, seeing as how it's Friday I'll go ahead and try and respond seriously to this.
First, you have to understand that sometimes people hold philosophical opinions that are so orthogonal that "reasoned debate" is literally not possible. For instance, if I wrote a "5 reasons not to get an iPhone" post in which the 5 points were predicated on the belief that there is no such thing as an electromagnetic spectrum, would you seriously try and engage me in rational debate, or would you just say, "this dude is a loony"?
Having said that, I fundamentally disagree with the Free Software Foundation's assertion that software "freedom" is is an important goal; or even that an abstract entity such as "software" can be "free."
So, with that in mind, let's look at the FSF's 5 reasons.
The first 2 boil down to "This product doesn't conform to or philosophical model." To me, and arguably to 99.9% of the consumer world, the FSF's philosophical model has as much relevance as the Music of the Spheres. Supporting Free Software and eschewing DRM Just Doesn't Matter.
Point 3, that the "iPhone exposes your whereabouts and provides ways for others to track you without your knowledge." is a flat out falsehood and borders on paranoid delusion.
Point 4 is really a variation on 1&2, but we'll take it separately. So, the iPhone doesn't support the FSF's anointed audio and video formats. Guess what, it doesn't support WMA/WMV either. This only matters if you subscribe to the philosophy that this matters in the slightest. Again, to the vast majority of the iPhone's target market it doesn't.
Point 5 is just the blunt assertion that the Freerunner is a better alternative. Not a single specific reason other than "It's Fweeeee!" In my view that doesn't cut it.
So that leaves us with the remainder of he article, which was a tin-foil-helmet screed against Apple for somehow locking it's users into a prison of style and marketing. I'm sorry, but that just isn't worth refuting.
Now, here's a question to ask. Why an article specifically targeting the iPhone? Nothing they wrote doesn't apply to any other phone on the market.
Joseph
· 1 year ago
I agree that the article referenced is, in fact, "tripe." That being said, calling the person/people behind it names and writing off arguments with a simple "no one cares" doesn't actually refute anything. Your response to the "by the balls" comment earlier doesn't help you here. It's a fucking metaphor. You can't write off your opponent's arguments by ignoring the metaphor and subsequently call him on it when he does the same.
The FSF article is tripe, but so is your response.
Simon
· 1 year ago
Neo Freerunner instructions:
"Adjusting the Volume As of this writing, there is no way to adjust the volume from the screen. For now, run the terminal application or log in via usb, and run the alsamixer application. The mixer is simpler than it looks. Just use the left and right arrow keys to select "headphone" or "PCM" and use the up and down arrow keys to adjust the volume. You can also adjust your microphone volume with the "mic2" adjustment. Press ESC when finished. Then exit the terminal application or log out of the USB login. You may need to update configuration files in /usr/share/openmoko/scenarios/ to make the microphone setting permanent. Use alsactl -f path-to-statefile store"
MASSIVE FUCKING LOL THE SIZE OF A MONSTER TRUCK
Nathan
· 1 year ago
@John C. Welch: Why would I want people to read my shit? I know I have an unimportant blog. At least I don't run around half-cocked about some article about how the FSF doesn't like the iPhone (let alone get linked-to by a respectable person). It's a non-article. The FSF doesn't like *any* phone that doesn't live up to their lofty goals. I'm not sure why anyone cares that the FSF doesn't like the iPhone -- they also don't care much for the Blackberry.
My point is that his response is equally absurd because he flies off the handle and makes personal attacks his form of counter-argument.
Superior? Hardly. I just have tact.
Phuul
· 1 year ago
@Simon
Oh man. I just, BWAHAHAHA, gasp, BWHAHAHA.
Ahem. Well I guess I'm proven wrong on my anti-FreeRunner comment. If changing the volume is that easy then what the hell am I doing with an phone that uses buttons for that?
Now to get a FreeRunner I apparently have to stalk RMS, mug him and take his. Oh and I might need all the other stuff so I'll just rob his house. Hmm, that sounds like an awful lot of work. I guess I'll just walk down the street and get a phone. With, you know, volume buttons.
P.S. @Steven this isn't directed at you, more of a rif on your comment and my previous one. You just made me crack up in the office with the directions on changing the volume.
Jesse
· 1 year ago
@Phuul & The Angry Drunk
If you re-read the article, you will find the following lines:
"The FreeRunner doesn't yet do as much as the iPhone and it's certainly not as pretty. "
and
"There are better alternatives on the horizon that respect your freedom..."
The article blatantly states that the FreeRunner cannot compete with the iPhone right now. Nobody says different. In fact, if I'm correct you can only buy development versions of the phone right now.
> Your response to the “by the balls” comment earlier doesn’t help you here. It’s a fucking metaphor. You can’t write off your opponent’s arguments by ignoring the metaphor and subsequently call him on it when he does the same.
It's a metaphor for what, exactly? Apple doesn't have me "by the balls" for owning an iPhone, neither metaphorically nor otherwise. Elaborate.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@Jesse: The opening of the FSF's brain leak says: "There are better alternatives on the horizon that respect your freedom, don't spy on you, play free media formats, and let you use free software -- like the FreeRunner."
The comment you suggested is about 15 paragraphs later.
Phuul
· 1 year ago
@Jesse
Ok so don't buy an phone now. Just wait for some distant future where you can buy a some phone that satisfies the FSF and RMS. On the horizon means vaporware. Nothing more, nothing less. Until you have a product that you can actually put in peoples hands, pointing to it as the answer is FUD pure and simple. I didn't raise the strawman, the FSF erected it on the archery range and I took a shot. Besides they conveniently left out the fact that you can't fucking by the damn FreeRunner. That is definitely not a strawman argument, it's a fact.
Until there is something out there that actually satisfies their philosophy and is available to the general public they are talking out of their ass. There isn't one argument they made against the iPhone that couldn't be made against most, if not all, commercial phones on the market.
So please tell me again why I shouldn't be laughing at them?
Jesse
· 1 year ago
@Steven Fisher
1) "On the horizon" means "not here yet".
2) How is this relevant? Would you reject a quote from a book because you opened it to page 10 and the quote is on page 20?
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Nathan: You know what, you're a jackass. I write for myself, no one else. I don't know why Gruber links to me. As far as I can tell it's some perverse desire to inflict self righteous prats like you on me as some sort of Biblical punishment. Here's some advice. If you don't like what I have to say, click the back button and get the hell out.
Jesse
· 1 year ago
@Phuul
No doubt you can laugh whenever you want. It's untrue that they claim that the FreeRunner is, right now, a competitor to the iPhone. That's my point.
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
@jesse
I don’t know where you get off calling anyone a zealot. You are attacking people for criticizing a phone and the industrial giant that sells it. None of that criticism applies to you.
It couldn't be because they were doing based on an absolutist idealism that were it about $deity$ would make people think you were into suicide bombing.
On the one hand we have the FSF who makes some points (legitimate or not) about Apple’s technology and business choices. They publish a well-structured argument detailing their reluctance about owning an iPhone. Agree with their argument or not, it conforms to the structure of a logical proposition.
Yes. It's a logical, well-structured pile of stupidty and entitlement whorism. Just because it's calmly stated doesn't mean it's not full of shit. Maybe you should stop being sucked in by structure and pay more attention to the actual point.
Then, on the other hand we have a person who is not named in that article, a wholly unrelated person who becomes offended by this and takes it upon himself to defend Apple. He does this by responding in a fury of insults and absurd attacks. He claims to be rational about it, while dismissing points by laughing at them. He summarizes the long essay by the FSF, which visits many complex points, as simply: “But, you guys, why doesn’t anyone listen to me, anything we don’t agree with is evil; I’m being super serial.” And he’s actually serious about that.
And then we have you, who came here with no other reasons other concern trolling and convincing yourself of your own superiority. I'd say you're first in the sad race.
Who’s zealous?
All pale compared to your desparate need to be recognized as a sooper-genyous
Frankly, you embody everything that’s wrong with the Internet and this country (America). Anyone who can pay $10/month to host a blog suddenly thinks he’s a genius and that his opinion is automagically made of gold because his blog got linked.
Unlike you, who can't even pay the ten bucks. So you're not only inane, but you're a cheap bastard too. Double Word Score for you!
No humility, no justification for your attacks, you make no attempt to conduct yourself in a civil manner. You call it your style, but really it’s a crutch and excuse for your actual style: undisciplined ranting, blindly spewing verbal vomit. You are the Internet equivalent of the ill homeless person who stands on the corner yelling at real and imagined people about real and imagined grievances.
Yes, we should all take your example, and go from link to link dictating behavior to all we see. All hail Jesse, the most smartest person on teh intartubes.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@Jesse: Come on. Don't be foolish. The lead says it's a better alternative on the horizon. An honest lead would have said "A better alternative may be on the horizon."
That also ignores that the iPhone doesn't spy on you, lets you use open source software, and supports free formats -- just not the ones the FSF believes in.
But you did a great job of defining "freetard" by example!
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
@Nathan
My point is that his response is equally absurd because he flies off the handle and makes personal attacks his form of counter-argument.
Superior? Hardly. I just have tact.
"He argued in a non-passive way that wasn't completely unopinionated and inoffensive to everyone, he sucks"
Tactfully full of shit is still full of shit.
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
@jesse
“There are better alternatives on the horizon that respect your freedom…”
The article blatantly states that the FreeRunner cannot compete with the iPhone right now. Nobody says different. In fact, if I’m correct you can only buy development versions of the phone right now.
"One day, we'll all live in giant flying zeppelins, and eat pills instead of food. We'll travel to Mars for our vacations"
If they didn't want to draw direct comparisons between the state of both devices, why bring up the Freerunner at all?
I know...it's an attempt to get some free marketing.
Please see: fallacy of the straw man argument."
Please also see the fallacy of calling every point you don't like a strawman. The original article brought the Freerunner into play, therefore, it is completely legitimate to point out it's shortcomings.
Jesse
· 1 year ago
@Steven Fisher
I'm sorry to see that you and the author here have so much in common. I was liking your style, too bad you had to take it so personally.
On a larger point, is it an accident that everyone who finds it necessary to defame the FSF also needs to sling some truly terrible insults at anyone who disagrees with them. Most notably, John Welch, who ought to be a co-author on this site.
No, I don't think it's an accident. It's pretty clear to me that you all suffer inferiority complexes of a high-degree and other kinds of strange compulsions that require the world around you to sit in complete agreement with your hateful, small minds.
Thus, John Welch accuses anyone who strongly disagrees with him of thinking themselves superior, because he is, in fact, an inferior person. Or Steven, who resorts to insults in an otherwise rational exchange. And so does the author here, the angry drunk, feel compelled to jump in to defend a billion-dollar multinational from criticism by insulting reasonable people discussing matters reasonably.
You all are my own number one reason to avoid owning an iPhone.
Dan
· 1 year ago
I think you missed Gina's point:
When the FSF refers to "free software," it doesn't mean the free apps in the iTunes App Store. Those are "free as in beer," essentially giveaways, when "free as in speech," is software built with the belief you have the right to manage your own data and use it and modify it the way you please.
They're not conflating the iPhone with the App Store at all. Otherwise, I agree with your position.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Jesse: You're either a troll or an idiot; and you've repeated yourself enough. Stop posting.
Simon
· 1 year ago
@Dan
Actually, I think they are conflating the phone with the app-store. They're not taking into account the other way of distributing apps (the ad-hoc method). At http://blog.gornall.net/files/c61bbf0ba50b9a770..., I point out just how easy it is to develop open-source apps for the iphone. Trivial, in fact.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Dan: Read the comments, I know exactly what the FSF means by "free." I just don't care.
Brian
· 1 year ago
@: a href="#comment-581">The Angry Drunk:
Woo-hoo! I got The Angry Drunk to be serious! *Does a little victory dance*.
Seriously, that was quite cogent (and well structured; note the difference, Phuul), and I'm glad you took the time. I especially appreciate that you explicitly laid out your fundamental disagreement with their philosophy of "software freedom" as "an important goal." The idea that software may be too abstract an entity to be "free" is intriguing, but probably too hairy an issue to get into here... For what it's worth, I think the word "freedom" is the more problematic (not to mention loaded) part of the FSF's philosophy (or dogma). The GPL is actually a pretty restrictive license, making me wonder: Whose freedom? Freedom to do what? (Public Domain software--now that's free!)
For my own part, I question not so much the value of the goal as its (complete) attainability: as a user it's nice to have both commercial and free (as in freedom or as in beer) options, and as a programmer it's nice that so many of the tools that come with my Mac (yep, I'm one of "you people") are free (whatever that means). Some of them are, in fact, FSF/GNU products (bash and gcc, for example). If their philosophical/political zeal is what inspires them to make useful products, great: it's benefited me.
Tangentially, here's a minor point regarding the whole Freerunner issue: I don't think they're saying that it is a better alternative to any phone. They put it among the "better alternatives on the horizon." [emphasis added!] As an earlier commenter noted, the openmoko website (somewhere) says that the phone is "not ready for general consumption." And as Phoneman put it so succinctly, the phone as it exists right now is utter garbage. Clearly, using the word "better" is debatable. They probably consider that its "freeness" is what makes it better, not its usability, but in that case the debate would be about basic philosophical issues again, not Freerunner's ugliness or unusability or some other aspect of its complete and total suckitude.
You all are my own number one reason to avoid owning an iPhone.
Oh, Jesse, Jesse, Jesse. You of all people should recognize what a terrible reason that is. What a shame.
john
· 1 year ago
Before I started reading this article, I was expecting to take your side on this one, but instead you just come across as stupid and clumsy.
Perhaps you're trying to play up to the "drunk" part of your blog title... but you only succeed insofar as "drunk" can often be synonymous with "stupid."
In any case, you've completely undermined what is actually a pretty sound counterpoint and, ironically enough (referring to your comment @Dan, above) are consistently both a troll and an idiot.
But, hey. At least you got the page views, right?
Oh, wait -- you've already condemned Gawker for the whole hit count chasing thing. Looks like there's enough hypocrisy to go around.
Weren't you also condemning hypocrisy...?
iPhones are great. Free software is great. In fact, without free software, you'd still be using OS 9 right now. Or Windows.
The choice really is yours, I guess.
Anyhow, here's some help on just the DRM point. I'll leave the picking up of the other pieces as an exercise for you (and trust me, you need it):
Although Apple my want to remove DRM from song downloads, they *love* the DRM for the apps. And with arguably good reason -- it allows them to unilaterally pull any application that's found to do anything malicious, or that needs removal.
Can this be abused? You bet. Is this a prison? Considering how many other phones are out there, no fucking way. Does it really serve Apple's interests to abuse the depths of the power DRM theoretically provides them? No way.
If this is something that really troubles you, you may take comfort knowing that you'll be able to hack your phone...
On the other hand, don't come crying to anyone if your phone actually DOES start reporting your exact location, browsing / calling / texting habits, and even address book contacts to some untrusted entity.
iPhones are a healthy and blossoming market. iPhone owners have money (just the demographic that black hats like to target). Doing the math here, the frequency of malicious attempts to breach their security will therefore rise.
Now, hopefully, Apple did a good enough job with their sanboxing to keep malicious software from accessing data that isn't theirs. But, for when an exploit is found, and a piece of software discovered to be leveraging it, Apple can yank all instances of said software from existence.
Suddenly, it might suck just a little less to have DRM in your soup.
Phuul
· 1 year ago
@Jesse
Well your point is not valid. They are the ones that brought up the FreeRunner and vaporware phones "on the horizon." The FSF made the point that sometime really soon now you can buy something that they agree is the most wonderful phone ever. They made an explicit point to mention these things.
So we should let them off the hook when these things don't exist yet? When they have completely failed to create and deliver something comparable to the iPhone or any existing phone? Because the thing they are arguing for doesn't exist except in their fantasies? That a closed source, non-free, DRM "infested" company managed to create something that they couldn't but will do any day now for reals?
Oh sure they mention that you can't get the "on the horizon phone" (I'm assuming they mean Android) but the say you can get FreeRunner now. Except that you can't. The one caveat they don't add to the FreeRunner is that you can not buy it at this point. Period. Doesn't matter how pretty or ugly it is. It's not an option.
Or maybe we should let them off the hook for making a very quotable statement that strongly implies that the FreeRunner is a competitor to the iPhone (or any other phone really) then spend the time writing sentences back peddling on that statement? That is more than a bit disingenuous.
They brought up the FreeRunner because they needed something to point to and that is all they had. They didn't bring up Android by name since that platform has been getting dinged by their theoretical core audience due to Google's miss-steps. The truth is they don't have an alternative to offer. They have nothing. But with a bit of hand waving, fancy steps and fast talking they hope to convince someone that there is an alternative to every other phone out there.
Sorry, I'm calling bullshit.
The truth is they could have written this same article but substituted any other phone manufacturer and model. It still would be over the top hyperbole and excrement. Their points are at best overblown and at worst out right lies.
So tell me again why I should treat them with any respect?
Xaqtly
· 1 year ago
@Jesse: Attacking people for criticizing a phone? No no no no no. Clearly you are confused as to what the problem is here.
In the FSF diatribe, they say things that are *FACTUALLY INCORRECT*. They're not criticizing the iPhone, they're LYING about its capabilites, or lack of them. FSF said: "iPhone exposes your whereabouts and provides ways for others to track you without your knowledge."
BULLSHIT. When any app wants to use CoreLocation on the iPhone, you are presented with a big fat Do Not Allow button, and you can push it if you want. Does that sound like it's accessing your location without your knowledge?
How about this, Jesse: Instead of misguidedly flaming The Drunk, why don't you look up the facts first? The FSF deserve every iota of The Drunk's rant.
Their points are NOT valid. That's not an opinion, that's a FACT. What is logical about a proposition that's based on things that are completely untrue?
They're also guilty of lies by omission. The FSF said: "iPhone won't play patent- and DRM-free formats like Ogg Vorbis and Theora."
But the iPhone DOES play DRM-free formats like MP3, MP4, WAV, AIFF, Lossless, etc. Why do you suppose they left that out? Could it be because that would kind of derail their entire idiotic, oh I'm sorry "logical" proposition?
Seriously, get a clue before coming in here to knee-jerk defend the FSF for spouting a bunch of bullshit lies and lies by omission. They deserve every piece of crap people can fling at them.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@john: Ok, last response for a while; I have better things to do with my time. What the fuck is this bullshit. Another "your point is valid but I disagree with the presentation" comment. I'm sorry, I didn't realize that I had some sort of moral obligation to respond to every retarded blog on the internet that raises my ire with a fucking PhD. dissertation. Do you pompous fucks correct the grammar in LOL Cat pictures too?
As for the link-baiting issue, you bet you're ass Gawker is link-baiting; they get their revenue from advertisements. As for me, the whopping $4.00 n my Google account not withstanding; this shit costs me money.
Arrr
· 1 year ago
Ignore the sniveling freetards, Drunk. They're all worthless girly-men who are going to spend all Friday night editing a conf file.
As for me, I'm going to a tip a few myself.
john
· 1 year ago
LOLcats? Really?
Look, bud. If all you wanna do is to have a blind and furious pissing match with the so-called "freetards," fine. Be true to that. But in this case, you may as well just stick to slinging comments about their stereotyped appearances, and not bother trying to refute their points.
You certainly put forth an obvious effort to frame them as making a shitty argument. Problem is, they're not the only ones.
Glass houses, pots and kettles, whatever -- you pick.
You bothered to put this out in public. If you put out crap, expect to be called out. I know this is just a blog (and not, as you say, a PhD dissertation), but at least think deeply enough about what you write that your own arguments ridicule can't be turned so easily and applied against you.
No-one's as fun to heckle as a bad heckler.
ophiochos
· 1 year ago
I am really tired of the fact that my bicycle doesn't fly. Aeroplanes fly, don't they? Why do the people that make my bike not let me fly it? I'm furious. I blame Steve Jobs AND Bill Gates. It's a violation of my human rights. Why did it not come with a solar-powered rocket, exactly?
I'm getting my iPhone next week. Not going to jailbreak it. gonna use it as a phone, a data device and an iPod. I must be some kind of conformist, right?
And all the people who don't like the Angry Drunk - don't read it. Go to another site. It's called 'The Angry Drunk' not the 'Boring both-sides-of-the-story I-have-no-position-blog'. What did you expect?
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Dear Mr. Angry Drunk,
I used to think I wanted to be mentioned by Gruber. You've taught me otherwise. If I might, I'd like to take a moment to address the crowd.
Dear Dumbasses,
The iPhone is a phone. There are many phones. You have other options for writing and using free software. Please go write free software for those other platforms. If you write some free software for the iPhone, and if that free stuff is worth the price, I'll try it.
If you can get one of those devices for free, load your free crap on it, and then use it without paying for service, please do.
To those of us who work for our money and pay for our groceries, you sound incredibly self-serving, stupid, and unshowered.
Shut the fuck up.
Really.
Thanks, Darby. Have a lovely evening.
WHO
· 1 year ago
I really hope in 2012 everything will be over, I'll laugh my head off
Another Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
Nathan, your neck-beard is showing in your photo. Just sayin'.
rant!
· 1 year ago
Fuck! Retards! Fucking retards! Retards with beards! Fuck!
Is "John C Welch" a sock puppet, or just an asskissing wannabe?
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@rant!: Oh you rampaging moron. "John C. Welch" has been yelling at idiots long before I decided to let the crazy out.
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
@rant!
John C. Welch is one of the the originals.
I dream of someday being recognized as significant enough to carry Master Welch's hockey-puck mouse.
I have farted more intelligence than you've posted.
Punk.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Rip Ragged: Truly, to have one one of these morons think that John is my sockpuppet is both the ultimate complement and, at the same time, the ultimate sign of ignorance.
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Someday, I'd like to have someone for a sockpuppet, but I'm thinking more of Gisele Bündchen
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Hey. That's a good picture. Dammit.
AND I'm out of beer.
Shit.
Also, there's supposed to be a space between Bündchen and http....
Bucky Slingshot
· 1 year ago
I find the FSF's biggest hypocrisy to be that of hardware. Surely, if their philosophy is so pure and wonderful, it should also apply to hardware?
But their gripe about the iPhone includes a product placement for a hardware device. Now, to the FSF, any software or protocol that is "patent encumbered" is a serious issue. But they are selling hardware. Is there any doubt that the hardware on their Freerunner phone is covered by patents?
I doubt very much that the chips used to power their hardware is free from patents. I doubt that these pieces of silicon and metal were designed by people working for principles of freedom or the common good. I'm 100% sure that the hardware was manufactured in plants belonging to corporations with a for-profit motive.
So, what's so special about software? Why does software have to be ideologically pure, but hardware can be designed "patent encumbered" by engineers working for big business, and probably assembled by sweatshop workers who lack all kinds of freedoms?
The other strange thing is how they will always emphasise that they are talking about freedom (as in the freedom to have sex while reading the Constitution) and not freedom (as in warm beer). But then in their rants, they constantly talk about freeness (as in free from monetary costs) with their mention of taxes?
Stallman says that the FSF philosophy doesn't mean you can't charge money for software, but they constantly bitch about having to pay money for stuff (i.e The Apple Tax).
Particularly ironic when they complain about the "developer tax" that Apple charges - when Apple is charging that money for a SERVICE - they provide you the service of hosting and promoting your application in the App Store, dealing with support issues, etc.
Now, isn't that pretty much the hallowed Free Software business model? Charge for services, not the software. But when Apple does charge for their services, they are evil?
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
@Bucky
That was very well thought out, cogent, reasoned, and sensible.
The FSF dorks can't grasp shit like that.
Just call them names and laugh at them from a safe distance (they can smell a lot better than they look and still be scary).
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Rip Ragged: Sweet Zombie Jesus Rip, I don't know what you were doing with that link, but I hope I fixed it. ON that note, I'm passing out.
timb
· 1 year ago
I for one think the FreeRunner is revolutionary. It's the Che Guevara of mobile devices!
Imagine a world when that model is applied to all facets of consumer goods!
Go ahead, imagine it. Just close your eyes and picture an unwashed neckbeard standing outside of a car dealership. As a well dressed couple walks in, he approaches them:
“Hey, you!” he shouts. “Don’t be a slave to Detroit! You should buy a FreeCar instead.”
The couple looks him up and down, eyeing the Doritos crumbs stuck in the pube like follicles of his greasy beard. The man nervously replies, “Oh? What’s a ‘FreeCar’?”
The neckbeard scoffs, “It’s only the most amazing car ever! It runs on diesel or petrol, gets great gas milage, can be serviced anywhere and costs half of what a Prius does!”
The man raises a well groomed eyebrow and exclaims, “Really?!”
His wife ponders for a moment and then asks, “Well, where can we buy one?”
The neckbeard rolls his eyes, “It’s available at FreeCar dot com,” he says in a throughly insulting tone.
The couple can’t believe the deal they’ve stumbled upon; they rush home an order one!
Two weeks later, a load of bauxite and steel beams is dropped off on their lawn, along with a 5,000 page set of assembly instructions.
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Note:
The assembly instructions have been translated from the original German to Japanese, then to English by a Frenchman as part of his English as a Second Language class.
The illustrations will be annotated in a mix of Arabic and two dialects of Spanish.
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
@Scott
TAD has announced that he's passing out now. I just read your comment about name calling, profanity, and all caps. Darby won't be here until later today to discuss that, but as a recent regular commenter, I feel compelled to say on his behalf,
GO MASTURBATE IN A CORNER, YOU FUCKING RETARD.
I hope that's okay. I'm sort of out of practice at that sort of thing.
Anthony
· 1 year ago
TAD, you and your shit dip don't know what's coming to ya. Even if Jobs is well intentioned the current recipe will ultimately result in a corporate controlled internet.
2097
· 1 year ago
@Bucky
Is the $99 fee just for putting apps on the AppStore, or is it required for everyone who wants to compile apps for her own phone, using the ad-hoc method? I've been told the latter, in which case it seems like a big demotivator.
Making free software for the iPhone that users have to pay $99 dollars for (and that money doesn't even go to me, it would go to Apple) kind of defeats some of the purposes of making free software in the first place.
It basically boils down to whether or not workers should controls the means of production and enjoy the fruits of their own labor, as intended by the founding fathers of good old free United States of America. Do we want it in our hands, or in Apples? It's your choice.
(Btw, just because point 1, 2 and 4 isn't relevant to what you want to do doesn't mean they're false. There are no ogg players yet (there will probably be soon, though, even on the iPhone) and Apple has implemented and marketed several DRM systems in the past, for various record labels and movie studios, and there are significant hoops to jump through just to run any free software you want. Those points are true and if you don't care about them, you don't, but they're still points.)
Lee
· 1 year ago
Amen and spot-on on all counts. I had to laugh when I read this shit the other day. The gem in the whole piece was that the Openmoko crap was a viable alternative to an iPhone. How can even the most devoted Linux dweeb look at this gorgeous, elegant, and simple UI and then say that crap is anywhere near comparable?
As for Ogg, only the portliest of neckbeards care about free music formats. Normal people with normal lives that just want to get their music on a device and get on with their lives pick Apple products. Free software will NEVER go anywhere because it has no focus and makes you jump through hoops to use it. The "Neo1974" or whatever actually makes you SOLDER SHIT before you can use it.
foolano
· 1 year ago
"More of the same tripe. Waah, waah, the other people won’t join our cult."
You made your point quite clear. You are stupid. Thanks, because otherwise I would continue reading the rest of your stupid post.
Cloud
· 1 year ago
These comments are so good! Some of these posters, deride you for being immature, then in the next sentence call you "stupid." I love it! I'm eating this up! I put off sex to keep reading these golden jems of jackasery... Damn, now she's fallen asleep... You guys suck!
Ok, some quick notes.
• Gruber droped some links as to why nobody touches ogg vorbis.
• The to argue; "If apple hadn't used freetard software, you all would be using os 9!!!" That is utter nonsence. Apple had some cool os ideas in the works before jobs came back. Apple chose the seemless blend of Free software and proprietary code because they saw it as the best business decision... To make money... Not because they love you.
• If you're posting just to ridicule drunk for ridiculing fsf, what are you doing with your life? I mean really.. This is how you choose to spend your time? I'm in my 20's live in Hawaii and am joining the Naval Nuclear Power Program. If you call drunk, and the readers/posters who dead on agree with both his message and his execution stupid... God damn, you had better be 4 kinds of kick ass. I mean if I'm this young and have this going on, imagine how cool Drunk, John C, and Rip, in addition to all the other posters who have battled this nonsense. Phuul, fisher, tip of the cap to you two as well.
Aloha
Cloud
· 1 year ago
:: improper spelling/punctuation above! :: It's 2:30am and I typed that on my iPhone.... Yeah... 'night folks..
acl
· 1 year ago
My God,
The title of the Blog is The Angry Drunk and people are upset he is angry and not framing his arguments in a calm and ordered fashion??????
On a larger point, is it an accident that everyone who finds it necessary to defame the FSF also needs to sling some truly terrible insults at anyone who disagrees with them. Most notably, John Welch, who ought to be a co-author on this site.
Oh sonny, I've my own site for ranting. But I do feel a certain kinship with AG, he's like my brother from another mother. Although, sadly, he's more profane than I, and the personal shame of my failure there wounds me. It wounds me deeply.
We're not insulting you or the FSF in this case because you disagree. We're insulting you because you're being stupid and whiny about it. There's a difference.
No, I don’t think it’s an accident. It’s pretty clear to me that you all suffer inferiority complexes of a high-degree and other kinds of strange compulsions that require the world around you to sit in complete agreement with your hateful, small minds.
"I'm so much better than all of you, and the only reason you all don't see this and agree with me is because you're insecure, crazy, small-minded POOPYHEADS!"
Thus, John Welch accuses anyone who strongly disagrees with him of thinking themselves superior, because he is, in fact, an inferior person.
No, it's because you have all the maturity of a colickly two-year-old, and all the logic skills of a kumquat. I'm just not going to be particularly nice about pointing this out. Nor are a lot of people. That's the part you can't handle...that you're not getting a free ride on the stupid bus here. Don't worry, even though your bus is short, I'm sure you can all have lots of fun.
Or Steven, who resorts to insults in an otherwise rational exchange. And so does the author here, the angry drunk, feel compelled to jump in to defend a billion-dollar multinational from criticism by insulting reasonable people discussing matters reasonably.
Never mind the "criticism" contains one point that is at best, completely incorrect, but considering the average technical ability of freetards, is probably a deliberate attempt to make people think the wrong thing, ergo, a lie. Never mind that their "solution" doesn't exist yet, and given the history of FSF software development, never will.
No, no, it couldn't be based on that.
You all are my own number one reason to avoid owning an iPhone.
YOU PEOPLE ARE ALL MEANYHEADS, SO I'M NOT GOING TO PLAY WITH YOU!
I bet when you leave a forum, you make a loud, whiny-assed final post, just to show everyone what they did. You do, don't you.
Fuck! Retards! Fucking retards! Retards with beards! Fuck!
Is “John C Welch” a sock puppet, or just an asskissing wannabe?
No, I'm a loudmouthed pain in the ass with high typing and reading speeds who derives unholy enjoyment from fucking with testicularly deprived nimrods like you. But here, if you MUST see that I don't just exist in AG's mind:
Everything from fecophiliac analogy to extended explanations of SNMP. Bring the whole chair when you read, BUT YOU'LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE!
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
Awww...Rip, AG, Cloud...y'all are going to make me blush.
And Cloud, you got into the Navy Nuke Power Program? Damn dude, congrats. Just getting accepted to that is saying something.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@John C. Welch: John, you're mixing up your "G" and "D" keys.
John B.
· 1 year ago
I think the "tax" might be the $99 entrance fee to distrubute apps via the App Store. I don't think there's a legitimate way around that.
I'd say, given a few of the apps that have appeared on the App Store, that Apple isn't doing a whole lot of quality checking from a usability/value standpoint.
Wrinkle in Time
· 1 year ago
[wipes away tears of laughter] Fuck me! This is a classic comments thread.
As soon as Happy Hour rolls around (it's a little early, even for me) I'll raise a toast to all the rational posters above... and a finger to the rest of them. Nice work, guys.
What pisses me off in the free software crowd is their short commitment to their cause. Really. They do not follow the philosophical and moral implications of what they advocate to its real end: the questioning of market economy and liberal democracies. Please, bear in mind that I'm not presenting an argument against or for such entities, that would be another post, all I'm saying is that they do not have the balls to follow the logical conclusions of their self-professed philosophy. This makes them one of two things: either they are stupid or hypocrites.
I'll leave you with an intellectual exercise: read Karl Polanyi's The Great Transformation and tell me if the free software phenomenon is not the logical result of:
1. Structural unemployment. 2. Companies needing to cut costs. 3. The need for an infrastructure so that Capital (that's right, with a capital C) could start its globalization movement.
I mean, free software is one of the staples of our present-day 1984 world and they want me to buy them as freedom fighters?
As the great late George Carlin would say: Where's the logic in that? That is some big time BULLSHIT!
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Cloud,
Congratulations on the Navy Nuclear Program from me, as well. I went through Navy Nuke School in 1977. Get ready for a wild ride. At the other end, things look pretty rosy, though. It looks like commercial nuclear power is going to make a comeback.
Nuclear knowledge will be selling for good bucks, soon.
Cloud
· 1 year ago
Thanks, John, Rip. I'm waiting to ship out. It's all new and exciting. Can't wait to have my ass handed to me by all the schooling. Any cool stories?
On the point at hand, another point that has been tickling me; is the fact that many self righteous posters have commented on the "logic" and "scructure" of the fsf article. All I could think of is "this guy is off his rocker." How in the world could somebody even pretend to understand the personal thoughts and motives of Steve Jobs at various points of the decision making process?! To frame Steve as "reluctant" in writing the open letter to the music companies. How would anyone know that? The author of that piece was frothing at the fouth with personal attacks on Steve Job's character and motives. Oh, but it's okay if it's structured properly.. Sorry, forgot that part in English class.
Bucky Slingshot
· 1 year ago
@2097:
A couple of issues here:
"Making free software for the iPhone that users have to pay $99 dollars for (and that money doesn’t even go to me, it would go to Apple) kind of defeats some of the purposes of making free software in the first place."
The FSF's definition of "Free Software" does not mean software that's free of monetary costs. It's free as in "freedom of speech". Go read the FSF manifesto. They explicitly state that it is perfectly OK to charge money for Free Software. You are allowed to charge $1 million for your application, as long as you grant the buyer the freedoms they outline in the GPL (source code, right to modify, etc.)
Proprietary software that is free of monetary cost is usually known as "freeware". The FSF are equally as opposed and outraged by proprietary freeware, as they are by proprietary software that costs money.
As for "defeating the purpose of making free software", that's a non-sequitur, as people have many different purposes when they make free software. Some do it just to be generous. Others having various business models - such as giving away an application that allows you to use their subscription-based products. Or using free applications as promotional tools for their other applications that cost money.
In any case, $99 is not a serious obstacle to free software developers. The time it takes a programmer to create even the simplest application is worth more than $99. programmers commonly earn hundreds of dollars per hour. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the FSF charges something in the order of $99 per year to be a member of their organization?
"It basically boils down to whether or not workers should controls the means of production and enjoy the fruits of their own labor, as intended by the founding fathers of good old free United States of America."
Hmmm... I thought that was the Communist ideal?
The US model is more about freedom of association, and the right to freely enter into contracts and arrangements. Even the most basic businesses are dependent on contracts and arrangements with other entities - from webhosting, to insurance, to distribution.
For some developers, they would rather distribute their own wares, pay for their own hosting, advertising, and credit-card processing fees. For others, it's a much better deal to use Apple's services to get their product to end users. That's not "putting the means of production" in Apple's hands. After all, the developer creates the applications and can choose to stop producing that application, or distributing it via Apple's store at any time. It's not like you sign a contract where you MUST produce a certain number of applications for Apple.
By your logic, then software developers who use distribution or fulfillment services such as Kagi, are signing their means of production over to Kagi.
That's simply not the way it is. Kagi provides services that many developers feel is superior to handling that side of the business themselves. It allows them to focus on developing software, rather than all the other issues of business administration that come with selling applications online.
God of Biscuits
· 1 year ago
I loved that they yammer on and on about this privacy stuff only to admit they're "creeped out" by a "don't allow" (to show my location) button.
And as far as the openness, eventually the rubber hits the road and they're required to choose from one of a handful of ugly, nasty megacorps in order to actually USE a phone.
Marcos El Malo
· 1 year ago
If you care about freedom and are against the terrorists, you should but OpenMoko instead of the iPhone.
On the other hand, if you want to make calls, browse the web, use third party apps with an easy to use interface, and want the terrorists to win, but the iPhone.
From all legitimate (i.e., non-freetard) reports, OpenMoko might be neato for hacking and fucking around if you're into that sort of thing, but it's not a functional product for people that just want a cutting edge smart phone. And that support terrorists.
Yeah...I think that comment just won an award. Not the kind you'd want to win either.
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Oh, NOW I get it. It's free, it's just not free. It's communist except for the free enterprise part, and it's okay if it's proprietary if you're a member of the proletariat.
That makes me just want to run out and hug a butterfly until I get bug shit on my polo shirt.
I remember reading an observation once that describes this fairly well:
In capitalism, man oppresses man. In communism it's the other way around.
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Cloud,
No stories, but I can tell you for certain, if you don't have good study habits right now, you will have soon.
Navy Nuke School is one tough son of a bitch. But the positives outweighed the negatives for me.
Have fun.
john
· 1 year ago
@Cloud
You mentioned that "Apple had some cool os ideas in the works before jobs came back." Check your history, son.
They bought NEXT coz Apple had nothing. Literally.
And with NEXT, they basically got a BSD UNIX. Yes, there are hairs to be split with that statement, but -- and believe me, coz I use the bowels of the OS every dang day -- there's a shit-ton of "free" software running down in there.
And up closer to our faces, too: Apple took the open source KHTML rendering engine and has in recent years turned it into WebKit (which is "free" software)... this is the software that powers Safari.
So, if you like Mac OS X (and if you like iPhone OS) you're at least in partial debt to *some* amount of "free" software.
And I see this site's running WordPress... Free software abounds; enjoy it.
Anyhow, good luck on your stint with the Navy.
john
· 1 year ago
@Wu Ming - That's sorta interesting, actually.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@Jesse:
Not taking it personally, actually. Sorry you are. Someone asked what a freetard was, and I said part of the definition included a willingness to ignore facts. If the lead of a front page story suggests something, it hardly matters that the second continuation on page C73 says "Of course, actually doing this will cause cancer." That's what you just did, so I thought I'd point that out to those curious how I define it. I was actually hoping you were parodying it, but I guess I have the answer to that now.
But what's wrong with your cinnebt? Put it this way: If the lead of an article in your local paper said the open source was extremely dangerous to the economy, and an end to all technology advances, then on the bottom of the continuation in the second from last paragraph it said casually "Some have suggested that open source might have a place beside traditional systems," would you be satisfied with the article as a whole or the balance of it? I really doubt it.
And that's not quite what the FSF did. What it did was more equivalent to that same local paper suggested gargling with some new product, and went on and on about the virtues of it. But on the continuation, said "Trials have shown this does not actually work, will make your breath worse and may lead to rapid tooth decay."
THAT is exactly what the FSF has done: Preloaded their article with advice, then in a meaningless part of a long rant explained that the advice is not actually relevant to anyone. It is, frankly, an obnoxiously underhanded thing to do to readers.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@john Actually, Apple did have some really cool ideas. Spotlight, for instance, has been on the radar for a long time. The problem was they were completely incapable of building a new foundation upon which to build those great ideas.
Without NeXT and had Mac OS survived long enough (doubtful), I expect the Mac OS would have turned into a fully loaded Yugo with a donut spare tire on opposite diagonal wheels, with roughly 10% of the advanced options working, 30% not working, and a full 60% causing the car to explode if you tried to use them. In short, it would have sucked immensely. But with a few cool ideas that would have made you wish they'd been executed atop an OS that could handle them.
john
· 1 year ago
@Steven Fisher - agreed, but note Cloud was specifically saying they had "cool os ideas".
And, actually, let me take a step back and acknowledge that -- as worded -- he's probably right: I'm quite sure they even had an overabundance of ideas, considering how creative their engineers have always been.... problem is: they had no working code.
Which is a bit of a blocker to shipping an OS meant to replace OS 9.
You mentioned that “Apple had some cool os ideas in the works before jobs came back.” Check your history, son.
They bought NEXT coz Apple had nothing. Literally.
Incorrect, in the extreme. The problem wasn't tech. They had that. NuKernel et al. The problem was, they didn't have a single damned person who would say "no". So Copland was ready for initial alpha/beta release, and marketing says "O NOES, the MUGS are upset that we won't support 68K"...changes. "O NOES, If we don't support {some other fucking thing that shouldn't have been supported} teh users will be unhappy" and on and on. Different groups in Apple wanting their own way, etc.
Copland got "just one more change"-d to death. But they had a lot of shit in there that ended up making it into Mac OS X over time. As I told Scott Forrestal after the initial leopard announcement at the WWDC: "All we need is knowledge navigator, and Copland will finally have shipped". Half the room gasped, half laughed. Good reaction. I thought he was going to kill me.
And with NEXT, they basically got a BSD UNIX. Yes, there are hairs to be split with that statement, but — and believe me, coz I use the bowels of the OS every dang day — there’s a shit-ton of “free” software running down in there.
Indeed. But let's keep proper perspective here.
And up closer to our faces, too: Apple took the open source KHTML rendering engine and has in recent years turned it into WebKit (which is “free” software)… this is the software that powers Safari.
Oh, and aren't the freetards all snippy about that. Apple took a project that was galumphing along and turned it into something seriously worthwhile. Apple, not the freetards.
So, if you like Mac OS X (and if you like iPhone OS) you’re at least in partial debt to *some* amount of “free” software.
Along with an assload of patents and proprietary stuff. It's never some simple answer.
And I see this site’s running WordPress… Free software abounds; enjoy it.
And, actually, let me take a step back and acknowledge that — as worded — he’s probably right: I’m quite sure they even had an overabundance of ideas, considering how creative their engineers have always been…. problem is: they had no working code.
Actually they did. They just didn't have the internal discipline to get it past one early beta release.
Cloud
· 1 year ago
hahaha, considering the close scrutiny of the words being traded here, I should have been clearer. Thanks for making me get off my lazy ass and cite references to what I'm spouting. The point I was getting at was the statement I've read from several posters who said "without free software you all would be using os 9!!" Apple had other projects in the works.
Like this one: Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/taligent
Oh, and this one: Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copland_%28operating_system%29
So, yeah I guess Apple did have other cool things in the works... But my point wasn't to debate the merrits of os 10, vs Copland. We all know apple made the right choice and that Job's is the man. We all know without all the foundation that free software has laid, iPhone would be an apple branded open moko level phone. Or as was put perfectly above; "a full 60% would cause it to expload."
My point was to say that had apple not gone the unix route, they would have stood still. They might have produced uncool, buggy, incombatable devices. But whatever they chose, it wouldn't have been os 9.
More to the point, many might frame apple as a leech on the free software universe. As if apple is using all this sick technology that was developed with a free-as-in-freedom mindset, and twisting to make money and develop proprietary code. Well, before that argument is brought up, i'd like to shoot it right down.
Apple actually started webkit for the sole purpose of community development Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/webkit
Turns out, apple kicks ass with their open source lovin'
Cloud
· 1 year ago
Yeah, my PowerBook is down, so my posts are all iPhone, all the way.. Pardon the typos.
Thanks above posters for bringing a little, well history to our apple history discusion.
There are many reasons not to be an iPhone. Absolutely none of them apply to me. iPhone has literally revolutionized the way I live. Access to data 24/7 is an amazing thing. No need to wait to get home from work to bash that troll with the hammer of wisdom, just take a bathroom break. iPhone has replaced my laptop for common tasks.
How about y'all, besides the nitty gritty. Would any of the points raised in the fsf article cause you to not get an iPhone?
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
FSF must compete in the marketplace, which requires that you have something your competitors do not have. I also requires that you do things your competitors either don't or can't do. It's impossible to bluff efffectively if all your cards are face up.
Also, for anything – product or service – to succeed there must be an individual responsible for the overall success or failure.
With the exception of Apple, no other platform can lay claim to a single point of contact in the case of a big fuck up.
Every tech company or developer can point a finger. Developers can blame the OS and the hardware. Dell and HP and BlackBerry can blame the OS and the developers. Microsoft can blame everybody else.
Apple stands alone. The face of Apple is Steve Jobs. He makes decisions that decide (not "affect," decide) the fate of a multibillion dollar global corporation. That takes balls of solid rock.
The person who steals Steve Jobs' thunder won't be a committee, cartel, or consortium. It will be an individual who assumes responsibility for the quality of the entire product. That individual will be willing to blame no one but himself for failures. That individual will be a tech visionary with titanium testicles.
It won't be Richard Stallman.
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
Second sentence should say "It also requires...." I shouldn't comment before my second cup of coffee.
Doug Whitfield
· 1 year ago
Um, I think the FSF means the Apple legally locks out free software, which it does. Your dismissiveness of the free software community is just as arrogant and misguided as FSF's zealotry. Some of us DO care about having an open standard for media such as .ogg. If the iPhone did support .ogg, I'd be much more likely to get one. I for one am planning on getting an OpenMoko, for all of it's faults. I'm happy to be an early adopter.
Do I think the iPhone is evil? no Do I think people that believe in FOSS buying an iPhone is terribly misguided? Very much so.
If you're not of the FOSS persuasion, by all means buy your iPhone. If you don't care about legalities, by all means crack it.
Um, I think the FSF means the Apple legally locks out free software, which it does.
No, but since Jobs isn't giving Stallman and the rest of the FSF their daily rimjobs, therefore making them succumb to the onerous task of actually using toilet paper, it's not like you're going to care about the facts of the situation, already posted here.
Your dismissiveness of the free software community is just as arrogant and misguided as FSF’s zealotry. Some of us DO care about having an open standard for media such as .ogg. If the iPhone did support .ogg, I’d be much more likely to get one.
Other than being politically correct for the freetard Stallmanites, what does OGG offer that AAC doesn't on a technical level. What great advantage does OGG offer as a sound format?
I for one am planning on getting an OpenMoko, for all of it’s faults. I’m happy to be an early adopter.
I like shit that works without having to endlessly fuck with it. When the OpenMoko gets to that point, you let us know.
Do I think the iPhone is evil? no Do I think people that believe in FOSS buying an iPhone is terribly misguided? Very much so.
Right. They're not evil, just stupid. Honky please, just come out and say it, because it's obvious that you cannot comprehend that not every computer purchase is made with FOSS in mind. Do you have only GPL software in every computer in your house? I already know the answer, and it's "no" because you're forgetting embedded stuff.
Do you only use computing hardware with no patents attached to it whatsoever? No. No you do not.
If you’re not of the FOSS persuasion, by all means buy your iPhone. If you don’t care about legalities, by all means crack it.
If you think that "zealotry" and "logic" are the same thing, by all means, keep your head up Stallman's ass.
john
· 1 year ago
@Cloud
"Turns out, apple kicks ass with their open source lovin’"
Yep. They sure do. And, at the risk of getting somewhat flamed, I gotta be honest: I actively respect that about them.
Granted they haven't been accommodating to the most extreme Free Software devotees, but they've got a business to run, after all. What pleases me about how they handle everything is how well they juggle the at-times conflicting concerns.
I'm not sure Jobs himself cares very much at all about it, one way or the other, except in a political capacity... but many of his engineers and project leads certainly do, and it shows.
Plus, special shout-out to Dave Hyatt from the WebKit team, who is not only an excellent project lead, but is very active in the open web community, and excellently transparent about the WebKit team's work.
Um, I think the FSF means the Apple legally locks out free software, which it does.
Except that it doesn't. Do you have evidence of this accusation? Why couldn't one develop a GPL-licensed iPhone application and distribute it through the application store?
Do I think people that believe in FOSS buying an iPhone is terribly misguided? Very much so.
What do you mean by "believe in"? I believe that FOSS exists. I believe it is very good for certain things, and I use plenty of FOSS.
But that doesn't mean that I don't also use proprietary software. Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why should "believing in FOSS" mean only using FOSS to the exclusion of all else? Why does it make it bad to buy and use things that aren't FOSS based?
That's the difference between a freetard and a regular FOSS user/developer right there. The single-minded zealotry and insistence that there is only one correct way of doing things.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@Doug Whitfield
Apple in no way blocks free software unless the license it is shipped under requires the code signing key it was signed with be available EVEN IF another code signing key is readily available. If that's the case, blame the person who wrote the license that way.
Honestly, it's also worth noting that even though I -- and most others -- don't care one bit for Ogg, nothing stops a developer from developing a custom player that can play Ogg files. Sure, it wouldn't be iTunes, but the FSF is so talented surely they could come up with something far better, right? So why don't they just write the freaking code and shut up about it?
Oh, I'll tell you why. Because they're a bunch of mouthpieces.
john
· 1 year ago
@John C Welch
Actually they did [have working next-generation OS code before acquiring NEXT]. They just didn’t have the internal discipline to get it past one early beta release.
I dunno... speaking as a software engineer, that's a very (very!) fine hair you're splitting.... ;-)
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
You know, I'm not entirely convinced Apple made the best decision. Clearly, they made a good one in bringing back Steve Jobs, but I'm less convinced they handled Mac OS X as well as they should have.
I wonder if there was an alternative that would have yielded better results, though. Don't get me wrong: Clearly Copland with the current management team was not it.
john
· 1 year ago
@Bucky Slingshot
Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why should “believing in FOSS” mean only using FOSS to the exclusion of all else?
Word.
Gatesbasher
· 1 year ago
@Steven Fisher:
There might have been an alternative: if I remember correctly, Apple's first choice was BeOS, but they priced themselves out of the market.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@Gatesbasher
Sure, Be might have worked. But with Be, there'd have been no Steve Jobs. Instead, we'd have had Jean-Louis Gassée. Mac OS X working without Jobs is certainly possible, but I think it's less likely.
Strictly academic, but I wonder anyway.
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
No Steve Jobs? Or a NeXT logo on the iPod instead of Apple's?
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
I think NeXT was already out of crash. :)
Gatesbasher
· 1 year ago
@Steven Fisher:
Oh, absolutely: without Steve Jobs, Apple would be out of business by now (IMO,) and I don't know anyone else who could have turned them around quite like he has. He has a few bees in his bonnet that I disagree with, but you can't argue with success. My only point is that history could have played out differently if Gasée hadn't been such a prick; I didn't say it would have been better.
Bob
· 1 year ago
"FSF said: 'iPhone exposes your whereabouts and provides ways for others to track you without your knowledge.'
"BULLSHIT. When any app wants to use CoreLocation on the iPhone, you are presented with a big fat Do Not Allow button, and you can push it if you want. Does that sound like it’s accessing your location without your knowledge?"
The fact that you see that dialog does not mean that what the FSF said was wrong. The iPhone won't give you that dialog when you dial 911. (Their problem here is that any other phone would be required to do that as well.)
"They’re also guilty of lies by omission. The FSF said: 'iPhone won’t play patent- and DRM-free formats like Ogg Vorbis and Theora.'
"But the iPhone DOES play DRM-free formats like MP3, MP4, WAV, AIFF, Lossless, etc. Why do you suppose they left that out? Could it be because that would kind of derail their entire idiotic, oh I’m sorry 'logical' proposition?"
All formats that are encumbered by software patents. So, where is the lie again?
The fact that you see that dialog does not mean that what the FSF said was wrong. The iPhone won’t give you that dialog when you dial 911. (Their problem here is that any other phone would be required to do that as well.)
However, that's not anything Apple nor any other phone manufacturer in the US can do anything about. They're required to provide location info to 911 automatically so, you know, you can actually get the help you're calling for.
For the FSF to use that to imply Apple is allowing any and all to track you is an absolute falsehood, and they know that. So they're stilly lying weasels about that.
All formats that are encumbered by software patents. So, where is the lie again?
Interestingly, there's some current thought that the only reason Ogg hasn't been really scrutinized there is because honestly, no one of consequence is using it.
The other thing is, again, without regards to ideology, Ogg is not "better enough" to justify everyone switching to it. It's a good codec. So is AAC. Both are somewhat better than MP3.
But barring Ogg suddenly being ASTOUNDINGLY better than everything else, why switch?
Wu Ming
· 1 year ago
I guess it was already posted, but it seems no one is paying attention to a deeper problem with Ogg: patents.
@Bob: First, who are you quoting there, omitting attribution makes it hard to figure out what you're on about.
Second, dialing 911 has fuck all to do with CoreLocation or the OS in general; it's a feature of the phone and, in the U.S. at least, providing GPS when dialing 911 is mandated by law. Do you really want the phone to not provide your location when calling for emergency services. There is a point where you've taken "freedom" just a little too far.
Lastly, just because the FSF claims that Ogg is not patent-encumbered doesn't make it so. There are those of the opinion that Ogg is in violation of at least one major patent.
baxtrice
· 1 year ago
Gotta say man, you've certainly made a name for yourself here. Keep it up ( I mean the drinking, no one should take themselves so seriously as the FSF).
Scott
· 1 year ago
@The Angry Drunk: You don't like their views don't read 'em. I'm just say'n.
Cloud
· 1 year ago
@Scott
I'm sorry, but " if you don't like their views, don't read em" just doesn't cut it. Honestly, how do you even come up with a comment like that? Umm, how about the fact that, had I not read their views, how would I know if I agree or not? So now that I've suddenly discovered that fsf is full of fearmongering whack jobs. I wish to detail the reasons that they are factually incorrect..
But, you know, I'm just sayin' is all..
RipRagged
· 1 year ago
@The Angry Drunk
You don't like their views point out that they're fucking retards breathing up perfectly good oxygen for no apparent reason.
All formats that are encumbered by software patents. So, where is the lie again?
The lie is that Ogg is most likely also encumbered by patents. It just hasn't been tested in court yet. That's why companies such as Apple are wary of it.
As a matter of fact, if Apple (or microsoft, etc) did go ahead and implement Ogg as many FOSS fans are screaming for - then it most likely would result in a legal attack, taking Ogg away from the FOSS fans themselves (as much as it could be taken away). Is that what they want?
All Comments
Stallman has asserted on several occasions that you can be tracked through any cellphone. Even when it's turned off. He's not batshit insane. Not at all.
I wonder what they think of the happy minimum security prison that is the Microsoft "ecosystem"? If Apple didn't have a secure system of okaying iPhone apps, these dumbshits would be complaining that the iPhone is too insecure...
Idiots.
To be fair, that's the FSF saying that not Lifehacker. Lifehacker (like all Gawker properties) is just doing what it takes to keep the hitcount high.
Dear Freetards: Your parents' basement may be comfortable, but someday you too may be called upon to pay rent and buy groceries. When that happens, you'll want to be paid for your work assuming you ever do any.
When that happens, you'll be glad there is a company and a culture that thinks freetards are fuller of shit than a stopped toilet in an abandoned Greyhound depot.
For those of you who haven't kept up in the student textbook:
STFU = Shut The Fuck Up
I don't see how you can debate that.
Oh man - thank you for this. Love the whole rant, but this tidbit made my whole day.
It's a pity that there are plenty of the Apple-Hating-Taliban out there that will regurgitate this claptrap though...
No, their "point" is that the iPhone doesn't fit into their narrow dogmatic world view. To which the rest of the non-whackadoo world say, so what. And what sort of bullshit is "...has you by the balls..." it's a cell phone, not a fucking inalienable civil right.
> I don’t see how you can debate that.
I can get rid of my iPhone tomorrow. I just don't want to. There is, in fact, no Apple thug in jackboots standing outside my house forcing me to keep my iPhone. So, how, again, does Apple have me "by the balls"?
The FSF does a lot of good stuff, and the Open Source movement is a great idea. The idea of openness is a wonderful thing and it definitely should be encouraged.
Apple's platform is very tightly controlled. It does limit what you can do and who can do what. All of that is true.
But the FSF is thinking of the phone as a computer, not as a widget of consumer electronics. Openness breeds complexity- more options are daunting to an end user. Let your average luser try and make an informed choice between Gnome, KDE or Fluxbox, and see what happens.
People don't particularly want an open phone. They want a simple, easy to use phone that makes key tasks easy. The iPhone does that very well, so people are buying it (and if the local Apple store ever restocks on 16G phones, I'll be joining their ranks).
Most people don't care if they can run Open Office on their phone.
Oh, and when 20% of their argument is a flat out lie i.e. that Location Services reports your location behind your back; I have a hard time taking any of their arguments seriously.
"I think their point is that Apple has you by the balls when you buy an iPhone"
Uh, what phone manufacturer/Carrier in the US doesn't? Shouldn't this be "don't buy a cell phone, keep using the telegraph"?
Why focus on Apple? Oh yeah, because they are publicity whores.
@Phoneman:
Uhh, isn't a two year contract with AT&T and the inability to use it on another carrier kind of like a thug forcing you to keep your iPhone? Just sayin'.
You can run any number of phones of comparable price, unlocked, without a contract on T-Mobile or (presumably) AT&T. Some of them even have a webkit-based browser.
What complete and utter entitlement bullshit. Last time I checked no one was forcing you to buy the gods damned thing.
And, while were at it, let me check my copy of the Declaration of Independence. Lesse, Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness; but no mention of an iPhone. I guess old Tommy J. just forgot that.
You don't like the iPhone, don't fucking buy it.
Just sayin'.
Suck a dick, freetard.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=617555&...
... there's nothing preventing open-source apps on the iphone.
get it ?
and yeah, I fucking hate DRM files telling me I can't use it on my family computer or works computer or whatever.
and YEAH , I fucking hate too I can't program as I want on MY iphone.
-
and yes it's true iphone is a really easy and nice phone, internet device and music player.
-
ho, and these filthy insane fuck gay-hetero-bisexual daemons beast putrid blasphemous indicible "freetards" are those working on many insides of Mac os X and iphone.
so yes, you can insult them, beat them and spit on them.
Why we should care about people creating software at all ? do the same to Apple to. fuck their engineers !...
very sad.
The point is that total control by the vendor isn't anything new in the phone ecosystem and people are used to it.
People also expect phones to 'just work' which is what Apple are good at getting right. From what I've heard about some of the OpenMoko alternatives, they don't just work and if Linux is anything to go by, it will be years before the design by committee approach comes up with something as simple and elegant as the iPhone.
The same for iPod, that's what iPodLinux is made for, do what you want with the device.
The way the default iPhone OS is locked makes me just comfortable for the fact that apps cannot bypass security measures, like filesystem sandboxing and gps/other hardware access. Apps in the default system just can't do very much damage.
(And nope, Ubuntu doesn't not suck. Anarok also doesn't not suck.)
OS X pounds Linux in every way I care about.
(Yeah, free software is great for behind the scenes infrastructure stuff and for programming tools.)
the iphone even uses Free software inside (mostly the whole unix layer and Webkit).
it's not the problem. the problem is, you are forced to use itunes to get software. so, by definition, there are no freedom beside Apple.
-
and, itunes app store is clearly, the best way to get and install software I saw for any device. pretty impressive.
We can understand the reason apple want to impose itunes (avoid virus, missteps and mischievous people sending bad applications) but in the same time, you loose what you can do on a mac or pc.
-
so , it's all about different priorities. Some people care more about uses than easiness. others want More.
not complicate. and not insane to understand. There are no Bad Guy to kick and insult.
But odds are, you're only trying to put those DRMed files on a very small set of Apple branded devices- unlike an MP3, which should work anywhere, these are obviously bound to OSX Mobile.
And, correct me if I'm wrong: the SDK is a free download, you can load apps onto a test device with it, but you have to pay a $99 fee to actually host them in the App Store. Doesn't that imply that you can program how you want on your phone?
And, you can STILL jailbreak your phone. So to say you can't use your device how you like is still not true. You can't use your device how you like and get Apple to play along, but it's retarded to expect such a thing anyway.
Apple cannot stop you from jailbreaking your phone. Apple doesn't want to stop you from jailbreaking your phone, because they just want you to buy the damn phone. With the new must-activate model, they also guarantee that AT&T gets their pound of flesh no matter what you do when it comes to unlocking.
Gods damn it, I won't tolerate any reasonableness here!
An Apple "tax" on free apps? Uh, no. Developers can put them on the App Store for free, and users download them for free.
And DRM does not stand for "Digital Restrictions Management," but rather, "Digital Rights Management." Both the iPod and the iPhone play lots of DRM-free file formats--just not the specific formats the FSF idiots cite (formats that no one uses anyway).
And all that "prison" talk? WTF? Have any of these people ever actually been to prison? Um, yeah -- like, maybe they should just not buy an iPhone if they don't like it?
Sounds to me like a bunch of fools who can't afford an iPhone thinking up reasons why no one else should have one, either.
Anyway, now I think I can let my rant die on the vine.
"Free" software is not about not being paid for making it
Why, that would be because the iPhone is neither a fucking Mac nor a fucking Wintel computer. It's a smartphone. It does a lot, but it's not a fucking full-blown general purpose computer.
I can put 3 big ass video cards in my wife's Mac Pro, can I do that in an iPhone? No.
I can add dozens of USB and FireWire devices to an iMac or a Mac Mini. Can i do that with an iPhone? No.
Why?
Well, it's not because Steve Jobs and Apple aren't marching lockstep to that folk dancing retard's song of judgemental stupidity.
It's because they're DIFFERENT FUCKING THINGS. Apple, Orange, Pear, Dildo. One of these things is not like the other...
For fuck's sake is it even possible for the freetards to not bitch that a car is not a condor?
Way to miss the point there chief.
Did you *read* the contents of the link I gave ? Where I downloaded the source-code of an application, compiled it, and installed it onto my phone without going anywhere near the app-store ?
It is *easy* to distribute open-source apps for the phone without using the app-store. The FSF piece is pure FUD, which is sad. I think they let their politics get in the way of their research before writing the piece, and my opinion of them as an organisation has suffered because of that.
Of course the freetards aren't going to acknowledge the reality of jailbroken phones et al, because then they lose hit counts.
The only reason they even published this is because ragging on the iPhone gets you attention, and with people realizing that Open Source does not in fact require you to be part of the Stallmanolgy cult, and Torvalds telling Stallman and the FSF to go fuck themselves on a regular basis, they're starting to feel a little insignificant.
I'm still waiting for them to eventually admit that the only purpose they serve is a collection point for whining entitlement queens.
The forces of evil in our country are gleefully watching as organizations like this one waste their time and resources on completely unimportant and, frankly, stupid causes.
But this isn't even with a jailbroken iphone. This is official apple-supported policy! It's all legit - you just use the ad-hoc certificate rather than the distribution certificate. Since you're distributing source-code, each developer can sign the program *while* they compile the code, with their *own* ad-hoc certificate. That's it - the resulting binary will work on the developer's iphone.
Honestly, I don't think Apple could have bent over much farther...
Oh yeah, I forgot about that one. But again, why would the FSF let reality get in the way of their attention-whoring.
Thank you. Want a reason to boycott the iPhone; that's one I could understand. Oddly, the FSF doesn't seem to have an opinion on FISA. I guess the spying is OK as long as you use Linux to do it from.
note, the GNU/ prefix was intentionally omitted to annoy Richard Stallman
Fuck that "GNU/Linux" shit. GNU makes tools. Good ones, and that's honorable. But just like I don't own a "Makita/Toyota" or a "Snap-On/Chevy", it's not GNU Linux.
Stallman wants an OS with his name on it, maybe he should, you know, FINISH HURD.
But that would require him to do, you know, actual work.
//And the hardware isn't quite there for a true microkernel yet.
Say I want to make toast in my Frigidaire refrigerator -- no dice. Maytag dishwasher? Nice try.
And it's not just toast. It's cheese toast, cinnamon toast, the occasional toasted bagel, you name it.
So it also comes with this little baking pan. Great, I also can use this in the microwave, right? NO! This damned proprietary pan is made of metal and will explode and give me genital herpes if it comes near any other appliance!
Not only that, if I take it to my friend's house and try to put it in his Black & Decker toaster oven ... it's too wide. Won't fit at all.
When it comes to my toasting needs, Sunbeam has the whole gig locked up. It's like those bastards want to divide us.
The argument you've laid out is a total joke, you'd be laughed out of a high school debate for trying to put forward this kind of "reasoning" and the only reason your commenters can't see that is because their minds are so poorly stimulated that they are titillated by almost-clever swearing.
Whine about the FSF but at least they have the discipline (and education?) to outline a real argument with structured points. What you do is name-calling, but you haven't rebutted any of their points, you've just laughed at them. Probably hastily and out of ignorance.
Oh yeah, none.
I'll just tell them to log onto alt.bin.phone.open.moko.help.help.help and wait 24-48 hours for a solution.
also, fuck OGG and fuck theora, nobody gives a shit about your free formats. I could distribute a book on microfiche for free, doesn't mean anyone would use it.
I see the train from ad-hominem town pulled in (look up the term if it confuses you). The FSF's "argument" boils down to "But, you guys, why doesn't anyone listen to me, anything we don't agree with is evil; I'm being super serial." They are an intellectual joke; their "arguments" were crap; and I delight in yelling at stupid people. I also enjoy scaring children and beating puppies. Deal with it.
Does Apple refuse some programs on the app store? I hope so! There is nothing worse than crappy, bug ridden software on a device as important as a phone. Windows programs, before they put out UI guidelines, were always great to track down where the developer decided to put the preference menu item. Microsoft still have not followed all the guidelines they set forth in their own UI standards. I think the biggest problem the FSF is having with the iPhone is that it is popular and it is making money. God forbid anyone making money on a product.
From what I can tell, you're the engineer on that train, making several trips daily. Sure, you don't outright say "the argument is wrong because they suck" but that's still the effect of littering your diatribe with swears and insults directed at them. Gods only know what your intent is with that, I suppose it's your style but that doesn't mean I can't call you on it.
Your summary of their argument is a total caricature and focuses on about 15% of their overall essay. Did you actually go read their article or are you just responding to Gina Sattrapi at LifeHacker? What you're asserting as their argument is some kind hybrid between interpretation and projection. Perhaps "interprojection"?
When one of your refutations is to laugh and dismiss the point, that smacks of the same kind of elitism you seem to imagine them entertaining.
Here's the fun part. Yes, the cell phone companies know where your iPhone is, even if you turn off location-based services. But to that same degree, so does any OpenMoko or Nokia or Android.
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/wireless91...
Because it's required by law for finding out where a 911 call came from. The difference is that the iPhone allows apps, if the user so chooses, to access that same information. So this means Android, OpenMoko, etc, are one of two things:
Like Apple, they 'lock out' the developer from the system by denying this functionality. Oooh! Evil closed system!
or,
Like Apple, they 'let others track you' by allowing this functionality. Oooh! Evil spying system!
Tripe is a wonderful, honest, straightforward food. The right thing to do with it is to fry it up, wrap it in a grilled tortilla with salsa, onion and cilantro, and use it to help soak up the tequila in your stomach. The right thing to do with an FSF skreed is to use it to wipe your ass. Please note the difference.
Summary for the slow: tacos de tripas = yummy. FSF = yucky. Thank you for your time. And go support your local taco cart guy, like, now.
No one likes poorly constructed arguments, and reactionary rants are pretty entertaining. We all have our positions, beliefs, etc., but there are MUCH bigger problems to spend our time on, as a @Gene pointed out.
Did you read the article at FSF's website? It's decidedly more lucid than any of TimeCube guy's rants.
Any of the points can be contested reasonably, there's no need to summarily declare it invalid and ideological.
Freetards can use their crappy, boxy Linux handhelds with 1 hour battery life and incomprehensible user interface.
If I want to write and sell an app and make money its my right. Piss off.
Um, and then some shit about fiat and topicality. Thank you judge.
Government "regulation" fails to impress me. I've worked in government and the one point I took home from the experience is that government is utterly incompetent at almost everything it does, especially "regulation."
The markets are already open. Buy a different phone if you disagree with AT&T or any other carrier. Nobody is forcing you to use an iPhone.
Good for the Dutch, I heard you can get some great weed and wooden shoes there too. But it is "entitlement bullshit." Apple doesn't owe you an iPhone. If you don't like the carrier options, buy a different fucking phone.
And here's the sensible position regarding carrier choice. In the U.S. no manufacturer is required to provide an unlocked phone, but at the same time they are prevented from using the DMCA to take action against any user who chooses to unlock their phone.
Yes, the FSF argument isn't put particularly well (especially the bit about privacy). Yes, most Free Software has shit usability, and god knows that I'd much rather use an iPhone than whatever the current state of OpenMoko or Android is. Trouble is, most of the arguments appear little more than "Freaky beardy guy hates my shiny new toy! BAD beardy man! BAD!" And then they have the gall to complain about irrational zealotry?
If I had to pick which kind of zealot I'd rather meet in a dark alley... I'd pick the Apple kind. Because they have fuck-all attention span.
Buy all your parts at cheap bastard-R-Us
Take the weekend to assemple them, some soldering may be required.
Connect your phone to a serial connection
du this boot image
use wget or curses to find the libraires you may want
do the ./configure;make;make install song and dance
find the applications you may want
do the ./configure;make;make install song and dance
now find a carrier that will let you put it on your network
and then another carrier if you don't like the first one you got
Agreed, this works (it's a LONG shot, but for sake of arguement it could), but I'd rather give someone $200 and have it working relatively quickly. Let's assume you're consulting at $50 and hour, this "free" phone actually cost you $2,400+ (assuming this was a weekend project)
Disclaimer: I use HP-UX, Linux and Windows at work, I'm 100% Mac at home. I use gcc, perl adn python daily. I also pay for things when I don't want to mess with it.
That's funny, I don't remember the FSF having anything to do with the development of UNIX or BSD.
But I guess it's drunken, so what do I expect? It's just that you seem to care so much about these things. Maybe you need to de-stress.
Unfortunately, a rejoinder like "HAHAHAHAHAHA!" doesn't give me much insight into why the Neo Freerunner isn't a "better alternative...that respect[s] your freedom, [doesn't] spy on you, play[s] free media formats, and let[s] you use free software."
The response to point 1 (developers must pay a tax to Apple, who becomes the sole authority over what can and can't be on everyone's phones) is to point to the iPhone hacking community. But surely the FSF's point is not at all about the technical challenges of hacking the phone but, rather, about the contractual restrictions that go along with developing for and using the phone. Sure, anyone can break a contract (the iPhone's license is here [pdf]). But the FSF's position on honoring licenses is fairly well known: if they thought it was acceptable for anyone to break a license agreement, they wouldn't have bothered to author the General Public License. If The Angry Drunk thinks the FSF is wrong, and that it's acceptable to break contracts, I'd invite him to give his reasons.
I think it's a pretty non-controversial thing to say that the people who have worked on BSD over the years and the neck-bearded freetards you're basting here run in overlapping circles.
I addressed the "content" of the FSF's argument in the only way a rational person can; by mocking it. It just kills you people that no one actually cares about your precious software "freedom" doesn't it.
> Unfortunately, a rejoinder like “HAHAHAHAHAHA!” doesn’t give me much insight into why the Neo Freerunner isn’t a “better alternative…
Maybe it's because Freerunner is like a cow having an explosive diarrhetic incident all over your living room couch?
I wouldn't know, because I don't own a Freerunner. Do you?
Good job. Keep up the drinking. It's really working for you.
Nope but I had the misfortune of trying one. Utter garbage.
More rude! Shit, I have to try harder next time.
Please *read* my posts (#22, #40) above - Apple make it easy to distribute open-source apps which anyone can compile without any reference to the app-store. If you pay the $99 for the devkit program, you can install these open-source apps on your phone too, without reference to the app store.
The FSF rant is built on a house of straw, because its fundamental tenet is just not true.
Does that address their position sufficiently ?
Not true. "Freetard" has nothing to do with whether or not you like coding open source software. I've done that myself and enjoyed it thoroughly. Rather, "freetard" has everything to do with the entitlement attitude, religious zealotry and deliberate blindness to reality and facts.
Compare Raymond or Torvalds. Both are heavily into open source, but I don't think I'd call either of them freetards.
I don't know where you get off calling anyone a zealot. You are attacking people for criticizing a phone and the industrial giant that sells it. None of that criticism applies to you.
On the one hand we have the FSF who makes some points (legitimate or not) about Apple's technology and business choices. They publish a well-structured argument detailing their reluctance about owning an iPhone. Agree with their argument or not, it conforms to the structure of a logical proposition.
Then, on the other hand we have a person who is not named in that article, a wholly unrelated person who becomes offended by this and takes it upon himself to defend Apple. He does this by responding in a fury of insults and absurd attacks. He claims to be rational about it, while dismissing points by laughing at them. He summarizes the long essay by the FSF, which visits many complex points, as simply: “But, you guys, why doesn’t anyone listen to me, anything we don’t agree with is evil; I’m being super serial.” And he's actually serious about that.
Who's zealous?
Frankly, you embody everything that's wrong with the Internet and this country (America). Anyone who can pay $10/month to host a blog suddenly thinks he's a genius and that his opinion is automagically made of gold because his blog got linked.
No humility, no justification for your attacks, you make no attempt to conduct yourself in a civil manner. You call it your style, but really it's a crutch and excuse for your actual style: undisciplined ranting, blindly spewing verbal vomit. You are the Internet equivalent of the ill homeless person who stands on the corner yelling at real and imagined people about real and imagined grievances.
By your logic, every manufacturer whose products I own, that I cannot hack apart or install random crap on (in ways I am not interested in doing) has me by the balls.
Samsung, who make my TV. Nintendo, who make my Wii and DS. Sony, who make my PS3. Thomson, who make my microwave. Sky, who make my DVR. Logitech, who make my Surround sound.
Need a keep listing things?
Why do you believe you have the right to be encouraged to use things in alternative ways? You do have the right, and the facility, but its not up to Apple to support you doing it. Why would it be?
2] Free/OSS is also great. OS X wouldn't really exist without that BSD subsystem that NeXT borrowed from the OSS movement back in the day, and I'm quite glad we're not using some shitty "in-house" core system like Mac OS 9 and most versions of Windows use. I don't need to describe to this audience that those suck; we all know.
However, the FSF is really off their gourd, here.
1] The location business is no different than any other cellphone; and is in fact actually better because apple enforces the users ability to decline an apps permission to use it.
2] The iphone has no limitations that "all other cellphones" don't have.
3] The app signing/sandboxing is also no more limited than any videogame console. As with the consoles, the whole point is RELIABILITY. This is not a software development sandbox, this is a tool. The reliability of most computer systems, whether mac, win, or linux, is completely unacceptable for this kind of use. For most people, it is an absolute necessity that their phone's software be guaranteed to always work, and sandboxing/signing the apps does exactly this. You can't get laid but remain a virgin - likewise, you can't "give apps the power to screw up the system" but "ensure apps won't screw up the system" at the same time. I'm glad apple's doing this, and furthermore, I'm glad it's opt-out, rather than opt-in, because only those who understand enough to opt out of it are those who would find any benefit from opting out - everyone else would be hurt by that freedom.
4] Steve isn't lying about not supporting DRM; rather, he's taking a different strategy at eliminating it than the FSF is. Rather than boycotting it, he's trying to strongarm the record industry into dropping it, which unfortunately requires sucking up to it long enough to become such a huge part of their bottom line that they have follow his requests. It's only because of his actions that ANY online music is sold without DRM.
5] You can completely do the Open Source thing on an iPhone without paying a dime (except for the phone+service). You can write the software, and you can follow the 'old standard' of OSS which is building from source. The only thing you have to pay a one-time $100 fee for is distributing binaries, which I do seem to remember runs contrary to the OSS mantra of distributing the source.
Okay, it's "profanity". Not "swears". "Profanity". Anyone calling profanity "swears" is too fucking stupid to say shit about anything, and lord knows, can't be taken seriously unless they're calling bingo numbers at church. Even then, you want to double-check.
The argument is the same one they have against anyone not licking their asses. "You don't do it our way, you suck". The only thing that changes is the company they're yelling at.
When something's fucking stupid, you point and laugh.
I think mockery can be a useful tool, and great fun to boot (you're clearly having fun), but I disagree that it's the only way "a rational person" can respond to the FSF's argument, or any argument.
I'm not sure to whom you're referring by "you people." I don't think I gave any indication of my own views about "free software" in my comment. In fact, I thought I indicated that I actually wanted to read a more substantive response to their argument. If I were a partisan of the FSF, why would I want that? Wouldn't I just be happy with what they said?
If you misread my comment as merely an attempt to score rhetorical points for the FSF, then I apologize for being unclear. I assure you that nothing I said was intended as an endorsement of their views. I did, certainly, attempt to clarify what I think their views are. My invitation to clarify your views regarding a specific aspect of the FSF's philosophy was quite sincere. A rational person must have some rational reason for finding an argument laughable.
Oh lord. Funny, but I think there were free compiliers before GNU and there would have been free compiliers without GNU.
Not nearly as big a problem as you trying desperately to be superior to him. Maybe you should try getting people to actually read your shit instead of ragging on someone else's stuff.
>say that the people who have worked on BSD
>over the years and the neck-bearded freetards
>you’re basting here run in overlapping circles.
That's actually a pretty hefty assumption. In fact, you'd probably find some pretty huge philosophical differences between the FSF people and the BSD people. OS X is squarely in the BSD camp.
IMHO, it's almost like Catholics vs Protestants. Yeah they both believe in Jesus but damned if one is gonna believe in the Pope.
Aha! An actual reason to avoid the Freerunner! Someone actually tried it out, and it was garbage. Hurray for empiricism!
I'm really not sure why you think the FSF made a well structured argument. It's basically a few facts mixed with blatant half truths and outright lies. But the biggest false hood they attempted to sell was the Freerunner as a viable alternative to the iPhone, or any phone for that matter.
From http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Neo_FreeRunner "The FreeRunner can be purchased from the Online Store as of July 3, 2008. The software available on the phone makes it suitable for power users and developers only, it is not ready for the general consumer yet. Email announcements and found on the announce mailing list. For frequently asked questions please check FAQ. Approximately twice a month an Openmoko team member writes an update to the project at Community Updates. "
Yup you read that right, "not ready for the general consumer yet." But even if it was, you can't actually buy it. Once you make your way through the Byzantine website (oh and manually check which model you want based on what bands are available in your area, you would think they could automate that a bit) you find that it's sold out. Yup sold right the hell out.
So please tell my why the idea of FreeRunner being a viable alternative to any phone, much less the iPhone, isn't deserving of derisive laughter. Seriously I'm really interested in how a software and hardware platform, that has been in development for years, that the developers freely admit isn't suitable for average users and that you can't actually buy should even be mentioned in that screed. Oh right, it fills all the FSF dogmatic checkboxes.
If the FSF want's to encourage discussion they need to actually try living in the real world a bit. Foaming at the mouth and spinning all their arguments is a real turn off to rational people. The FSF has fully embraced the "means justify the ends" philosophy that has made PETA and Greenpeace jokes. While they may do some good works, the fallout from the abhorrent actions of the rest of things they do poison their reputation.
So to sum up, when they stop being a laughingstock I might pay attention. Until then laughing at them is what they apparently want.
Ok, seeing as how it's Friday I'll go ahead and try and respond seriously to this.
First, you have to understand that sometimes people hold philosophical opinions that are so orthogonal that "reasoned debate" is literally not possible. For instance, if I wrote a "5 reasons not to get an iPhone" post in which the 5 points were predicated on the belief that there is no such thing as an electromagnetic spectrum, would you seriously try and engage me in rational debate, or would you just say, "this dude is a loony"?
Having said that, I fundamentally disagree with the Free Software Foundation's assertion that software "freedom" is is an important goal; or even that an abstract entity such as "software" can be "free."
So, with that in mind, let's look at the FSF's 5 reasons.
The first 2 boil down to "This product doesn't conform to or philosophical model." To me, and arguably to 99.9% of the consumer world, the FSF's philosophical model has as much relevance as the Music of the Spheres. Supporting Free Software and eschewing DRM Just Doesn't Matter.
Point 3, that the "iPhone exposes your whereabouts and provides ways for others to track you without your knowledge." is a flat out falsehood and borders on paranoid delusion.
Point 4 is really a variation on 1&2, but we'll take it separately. So, the iPhone doesn't support the FSF's anointed audio and video formats. Guess what, it doesn't support WMA/WMV either. This only matters if you subscribe to the philosophy that this matters in the slightest. Again, to the vast majority of the iPhone's target market it doesn't.
Point 5 is just the blunt assertion that the Freerunner is a better alternative. Not a single specific reason other than "It's Fweeeee!" In my view that doesn't cut it.
So that leaves us with the remainder of he article, which was a tin-foil-helmet screed against Apple for somehow locking it's users into a prison of style and marketing. I'm sorry, but that just isn't worth refuting.
Now, here's a question to ask. Why an article specifically targeting the iPhone? Nothing they wrote doesn't apply to any other phone on the market.
The FSF article is tripe, but so is your response.
"Adjusting the Volume
As of this writing, there is no way to adjust the volume from the screen.
For now, run the terminal application or log in via usb, and run the alsamixer application. The mixer is simpler than it looks. Just use the left and right arrow keys to select "headphone" or "PCM" and use the up and down arrow keys to adjust the volume. You can also adjust your microphone volume with the "mic2" adjustment. Press ESC when finished. Then exit the terminal application or log out of the USB login.
You may need to update configuration files in /usr/share/openmoko/scenarios/ to make the microphone setting permanent. Use
alsactl -f path-to-statefile store"
MASSIVE FUCKING LOL THE SIZE OF A MONSTER TRUCK
My point is that his response is equally absurd because he flies off the handle and makes personal attacks his form of counter-argument.
Superior? Hardly. I just have tact.
Oh man. I just, BWAHAHAHA, gasp, BWHAHAHA.
Ahem. Well I guess I'm proven wrong on my anti-FreeRunner comment. If changing the volume is that easy then what the hell am I doing with an phone that uses buttons for that?
Now to get a FreeRunner I apparently have to stalk RMS, mug him and take his. Oh and I might need all the other stuff so I'll just rob his house. Hmm, that sounds like an awful lot of work. I guess I'll just walk down the street and get a phone. With, you know, volume buttons.
P.S. @Steven this isn't directed at you, more of a rif on your comment and my previous one. You just made me crack up in the office with the directions on changing the volume.
If you re-read the article, you will find the following lines:
"The FreeRunner doesn't yet do as much as the iPhone and it's certainly not as pretty. "
and
"There are better alternatives on the horizon that respect your freedom..."
The article blatantly states that the FreeRunner cannot compete with the iPhone right now. Nobody says different. In fact, if I'm correct you can only buy development versions of the phone right now.
Please see: fallacy of the straw man argument.
> Your response to the “by the balls” comment earlier doesn’t help you here. It’s a fucking metaphor. You can’t write off your opponent’s arguments by ignoring the metaphor and subsequently call him on it when he does the same.
It's a metaphor for what, exactly? Apple doesn't have me "by the balls" for owning an iPhone, neither metaphorically nor otherwise. Elaborate.
The opening of the FSF's brain leak says: "There are better alternatives on the horizon that respect your freedom, don't spy on you, play free media formats, and let you use free software -- like the FreeRunner."
The comment you suggested is about 15 paragraphs later.
Ok so don't buy an phone now. Just wait for some distant future where you can buy a some phone that satisfies the FSF and RMS. On the horizon means vaporware. Nothing more, nothing less. Until you have a product that you can actually put in peoples hands, pointing to it as the answer is FUD pure and simple. I didn't raise the strawman, the FSF erected it on the archery range and I took a shot. Besides they conveniently left out the fact that you can't fucking by the damn FreeRunner. That is definitely not a strawman argument, it's a fact.
Until there is something out there that actually satisfies their philosophy and is available to the general public they are talking out of their ass. There isn't one argument they made against the iPhone that couldn't be made against most, if not all, commercial phones on the market.
So please tell me again why I shouldn't be laughing at them?
1) "On the horizon" means "not here yet".
2) How is this relevant? Would you reject a quote from a book because you opened it to page 10 and the quote is on page 20?
You know what, you're a jackass. I write for myself, no one else. I don't know why Gruber links to me. As far as I can tell it's some perverse desire to inflict self righteous prats like you on me as some sort of Biblical punishment. Here's some advice. If you don't like what I have to say, click the back button and get the hell out.
No doubt you can laugh whenever you want. It's untrue that they claim that the FreeRunner is, right now, a competitor to the iPhone. That's my point.
It couldn't be because they were doing based on an absolutist idealism that were it about $deity$ would make people think you were into suicide bombing.
Yes. It's a logical, well-structured pile of stupidty and entitlement whorism. Just because it's calmly stated doesn't mean it's not full of shit. Maybe you should stop being sucked in by structure and pay more attention to the actual point.
And then we have you, who came here with no other reasons other concern trolling and convincing yourself of your own superiority. I'd say you're first in the sad race.
All pale compared to your desparate need to be recognized as a sooper-genyous
Frankly, you embody everything that’s wrong with the Internet and this country (America). Anyone who can pay $10/month to host a blog suddenly thinks he’s a genius and that his opinion is automagically made of gold because his blog got linked.
Unlike you, who can't even pay the ten bucks. So you're not only inane, but you're a cheap bastard too. Double Word Score for you!
Yes, we should all take your example, and go from link to link dictating behavior to all we see. All hail Jesse, the most smartest person on teh intartubes.
Come on. Don't be foolish. The lead says it's a better alternative on the horizon. An honest lead would have said "A better alternative may be on the horizon."
That also ignores that the iPhone doesn't spy on you, lets you use open source software, and supports free formats -- just not the ones the FSF believes in.
But you did a great job of defining "freetard" by example!
"He argued in a non-passive way that wasn't completely unopinionated and inoffensive to everyone, he sucks"
Tactfully full of shit is still full of shit.
"One day, we'll all live in giant flying zeppelins, and eat pills instead of food. We'll travel to Mars for our vacations"
If they didn't want to draw direct comparisons between the state of both devices, why bring up the Freerunner at all?
I know...it's an attempt to get some free marketing.
Please also see the fallacy of calling every point you don't like a strawman. The original article brought the Freerunner into play, therefore, it is completely legitimate to point out it's shortcomings.
I'm sorry to see that you and the author here have so much in common. I was liking your style, too bad you had to take it so personally.
On a larger point, is it an accident that everyone who finds it necessary to defame the FSF also needs to sling some truly terrible insults at anyone who disagrees with them. Most notably, John Welch, who ought to be a co-author on this site.
No, I don't think it's an accident. It's pretty clear to me that you all suffer inferiority complexes of a high-degree and other kinds of strange compulsions that require the world around you to sit in complete agreement with your hateful, small minds.
Thus, John Welch accuses anyone who strongly disagrees with him of thinking themselves superior, because he is, in fact, an inferior person. Or Steven, who resorts to insults in an otherwise rational exchange. And so does the author here, the angry drunk, feel compelled to jump in to defend a billion-dollar multinational from criticism by insulting reasonable people discussing matters reasonably.
You all are my own number one reason to avoid owning an iPhone.
When the FSF refers to "free software," it doesn't mean the free apps in the iTunes App Store. Those are "free as in beer," essentially giveaways, when "free as in speech," is software built with the belief you have the right to manage your own data and use it and modify it the way you please.
They're not conflating the iPhone with the App Store at all. Otherwise, I agree with your position.
You're either a troll or an idiot; and you've repeated yourself enough. Stop posting.
Actually, I think they are conflating the phone with the app-store. They're not taking into account the other way of distributing apps (the ad-hoc method). At http://blog.gornall.net/files/c61bbf0ba50b9a770..., I point out just how easy it is to develop open-source apps for the iphone. Trivial, in fact.
Read the comments, I know exactly what the FSF means by "free." I just don't care.
Woo-hoo! I got The Angry Drunk to be serious! *Does a little victory dance*.
Seriously, that was quite cogent (and well structured; note the difference, Phuul), and I'm glad you took the time. I especially appreciate that you explicitly laid out your fundamental disagreement with their philosophy of "software freedom" as "an important goal." The idea that software may be too abstract an entity to be "free" is intriguing, but probably too hairy an issue to get into here... For what it's worth, I think the word "freedom" is the more problematic (not to mention loaded) part of the FSF's philosophy (or dogma). The GPL is actually a pretty restrictive license, making me wonder: Whose freedom? Freedom to do what? (Public Domain software--now that's free!)
For my own part, I question not so much the value of the goal as its (complete) attainability: as a user it's nice to have both commercial and free (as in freedom or as in beer) options, and as a programmer it's nice that so many of the tools that come with my Mac (yep, I'm one of "you people") are free (whatever that means). Some of them are, in fact, FSF/GNU products (bash and gcc, for example). If their philosophical/political zeal is what inspires them to make useful products, great: it's benefited me.
Tangentially, here's a minor point regarding the whole Freerunner issue: I don't think they're saying that it is a better alternative to any phone. They put it among the "better alternatives on the horizon." [emphasis added!] As an earlier commenter noted, the openmoko website (somewhere) says that the phone is "not ready for general consumption." And as Phoneman put it so succinctly, the phone as it exists right now is utter garbage. Clearly, using the word "better" is debatable. They probably consider that its "freeness" is what makes it better, not its usability, but in that case the debate would be about basic philosophical issues again, not Freerunner's ugliness or unusability or some other aspect of its complete and total suckitude.
Whoops, not sure what happened there. I'm going to blame it on the "Edit in TextMate" plugin. That was supposed to be in response to this comment.
Oh, Jesse, Jesse, Jesse. You of all people should recognize what a terrible reason that is. What a shame.
Perhaps you're trying to play up to the "drunk" part of your blog title... but you only succeed insofar as "drunk" can often be synonymous with "stupid."
In any case, you've completely undermined what is actually a pretty sound counterpoint and, ironically enough (referring to your comment @Dan, above) are consistently both a troll and an idiot.
But, hey. At least you got the page views, right?
Oh, wait -- you've already condemned Gawker for the whole hit count chasing thing. Looks like there's enough hypocrisy to go around.
Weren't you also condemning hypocrisy...?
iPhones are great. Free software is great. In fact, without free software, you'd still be using OS 9 right now. Or Windows.
The choice really is yours, I guess.
Anyhow, here's some help on just the DRM point. I'll leave the picking up of the other pieces as an exercise for you (and trust me, you need it):
Although Apple my want to remove DRM from song downloads, they *love* the DRM for the apps. And with arguably good reason -- it allows them to unilaterally pull any application that's found to do anything malicious, or that needs removal.
Can this be abused? You bet. Is this a prison? Considering how many other phones are out there, no fucking way. Does it really serve Apple's interests to abuse the depths of the power DRM theoretically provides them? No way.
If this is something that really troubles you, you may take comfort knowing that you'll be able to hack your phone...
On the other hand, don't come crying to anyone if your phone actually DOES start reporting your exact location, browsing / calling / texting habits, and even address book contacts to some untrusted entity.
iPhones are a healthy and blossoming market. iPhone owners have money (just the demographic that black hats like to target). Doing the math here, the frequency of malicious attempts to breach their security will therefore rise.
Now, hopefully, Apple did a good enough job with their sanboxing to keep malicious software from accessing data that isn't theirs. But, for when an exploit is found, and a piece of software discovered to be leveraging it, Apple can yank all instances of said software from existence.
Suddenly, it might suck just a little less to have DRM in your soup.
Well your point is not valid. They are the ones that brought up the FreeRunner and vaporware phones "on the horizon." The FSF made the point that sometime really soon now you can buy something that they agree is the most wonderful phone ever. They made an explicit point to mention these things.
So we should let them off the hook when these things don't exist yet? When they have completely failed to create and deliver something comparable to the iPhone or any existing phone? Because the thing they are arguing for doesn't exist except in their fantasies? That a closed source, non-free, DRM "infested" company managed to create something that they couldn't but will do any day now for reals?
Oh sure they mention that you can't get the "on the horizon phone" (I'm assuming they mean Android) but the say you can get FreeRunner now. Except that you can't. The one caveat they don't add to the FreeRunner is that you can not buy it at this point. Period. Doesn't matter how pretty or ugly it is. It's not an option.
Or maybe we should let them off the hook for making a very quotable statement that strongly implies that the FreeRunner is a competitor to the iPhone (or any other phone really) then spend the time writing sentences back peddling on that statement? That is more than a bit disingenuous.
They brought up the FreeRunner because they needed something to point to and that is all they had. They didn't bring up Android by name since that platform has been getting dinged by their theoretical core audience due to Google's miss-steps. The truth is they don't have an alternative to offer. They have nothing. But with a bit of hand waving, fancy steps and fast talking they hope to convince someone that there is an alternative to every other phone out there.
Sorry, I'm calling bullshit.
The truth is they could have written this same article but substituted any other phone manufacturer and model. It still would be over the top hyperbole and excrement. Their points are at best overblown and at worst out right lies.
So tell me again why I should treat them with any respect?
In the FSF diatribe, they say things that are *FACTUALLY INCORRECT*. They're not criticizing the iPhone, they're LYING about its capabilites, or lack of them. FSF said: "iPhone exposes your whereabouts and provides ways for others to track you without your knowledge."
BULLSHIT. When any app wants to use CoreLocation on the iPhone, you are presented with a big fat Do Not Allow button, and you can push it if you want. Does that sound like it's accessing your location without your knowledge?
How about this, Jesse: Instead of misguidedly flaming The Drunk, why don't you look up the facts first? The FSF deserve every iota of The Drunk's rant.
Their points are NOT valid. That's not an opinion, that's a FACT. What is logical about a proposition that's based on things that are completely untrue?
They're also guilty of lies by omission. The FSF said: "iPhone won't play patent- and DRM-free formats like Ogg Vorbis and Theora."
But the iPhone DOES play DRM-free formats like MP3, MP4, WAV, AIFF, Lossless, etc. Why do you suppose they left that out? Could it be because that would kind of derail their entire idiotic, oh I'm sorry "logical" proposition?
Seriously, get a clue before coming in here to knee-jerk defend the FSF for spouting a bunch of bullshit lies and lies by omission. They deserve every piece of crap people can fling at them.
Ok, last response for a while; I have better things to do with my time.
What the fuck is this bullshit. Another "your point is valid but I disagree with the presentation" comment. I'm sorry, I didn't realize that I had some sort of moral obligation to respond to every retarded blog on the internet that raises my ire with a fucking PhD. dissertation. Do you pompous fucks correct the grammar in LOL Cat pictures too?
As for the link-baiting issue, you bet you're ass Gawker is link-baiting; they get their revenue from advertisements. As for me, the whopping $4.00 n my Google account not withstanding; this shit costs me money.
As for me, I'm going to a tip a few myself.
Look, bud. If all you wanna do is to have a blind and furious pissing match with the so-called "freetards," fine. Be true to that. But in this case, you may as well just stick to slinging comments about their stereotyped appearances, and not bother trying to refute their points.
You certainly put forth an obvious effort to frame them as making a shitty argument. Problem is, they're not the only ones.
Glass houses, pots and kettles, whatever -- you pick.
You bothered to put this out in public. If you put out crap, expect to be called out. I know this is just a blog (and not, as you say, a PhD dissertation), but at least think deeply enough about what you write that your own arguments ridicule can't be turned so easily and applied against you.
No-one's as fun to heckle as a bad heckler.
I'm getting my iPhone next week. Not going to jailbreak it. gonna use it as a phone, a data device and an iPod. I must be some kind of conformist, right?
And all the people who don't like the Angry Drunk - don't read it. Go to another site. It's called 'The Angry Drunk' not the 'Boring both-sides-of-the-story I-have-no-position-blog'. What did you expect?
I used to think I wanted to be mentioned by Gruber. You've taught me otherwise. If I might, I'd like to take a moment to address the crowd.
Dear Dumbasses,
The iPhone is a phone. There are many phones. You have other options for writing and using free software. Please go write free software for those other platforms. If you write some free software for the iPhone, and if that free stuff is worth the price, I'll try it.
If you can get one of those devices for free, load your free crap on it, and then use it without paying for service, please do.
To those of us who work for our money and pay for our groceries, you sound incredibly self-serving, stupid, and unshowered.
Shut the fuck up.
Really.
Thanks, Darby. Have a lovely evening.
Is "John C Welch" a sock puppet, or just an asskissing wannabe?
Oh you rampaging moron. "John C. Welch" has been yelling at idiots long before I decided to let the crazy out.
John C. Welch is one of the the originals.
I dream of someday being recognized as significant enough to carry Master Welch's hockey-puck mouse.
I have farted more intelligence than you've posted.
Punk.
Truly, to have one one of these morons think that John is my sockpuppet is both the ultimate complement and, at the same time, the ultimate sign of ignorance.
AND I'm out of beer.
Shit.
Also, there's supposed to be a space between Bündchen and http....
But their gripe about the iPhone includes a product placement for a hardware device. Now, to the FSF, any software or protocol that is "patent encumbered" is a serious issue. But they are selling hardware. Is there any doubt that the hardware on their Freerunner phone is covered by patents?
I doubt very much that the chips used to power their hardware is free from patents. I doubt that these pieces of silicon and metal were designed by people working for principles of freedom or the common good. I'm 100% sure that the hardware was manufactured in plants belonging to corporations with a for-profit motive.
So, what's so special about software? Why does software have to be ideologically pure, but hardware can be designed "patent encumbered" by engineers working for big business, and probably assembled by sweatshop workers who lack all kinds of freedoms?
The other strange thing is how they will always emphasise that they are talking about freedom (as in the freedom to have sex while reading the Constitution) and not freedom (as in warm beer). But then in their rants, they constantly talk about freeness (as in free from monetary costs) with their mention of taxes?
Stallman says that the FSF philosophy doesn't mean you can't charge money for software, but they constantly bitch about having to pay money for stuff (i.e The Apple Tax).
Particularly ironic when they complain about the "developer tax" that Apple charges - when Apple is charging that money for a SERVICE - they provide you the service of hosting and promoting your application in the App Store, dealing with support issues, etc.
Now, isn't that pretty much the hallowed Free Software business model? Charge for services, not the software. But when Apple does charge for their services, they are evil?
That was very well thought out, cogent, reasoned, and sensible.
The FSF dorks can't grasp shit like that.
Just call them names and laugh at them from a safe distance (they can smell a lot better than they look and still be scary).
Sweet Zombie Jesus Rip, I don't know what you were doing with that link, but I hope I fixed it. ON that note, I'm passing out.
Imagine a world when that model is applied to all facets of consumer goods!
Go ahead, imagine it. Just close your eyes and picture an unwashed neckbeard standing outside of a car dealership. As a well dressed couple walks in, he approaches them:
“Hey, you!” he shouts. “Don’t be a slave to Detroit! You should buy a FreeCar instead.”
The couple looks him up and down, eyeing the Doritos crumbs stuck in the pube like follicles of his greasy beard. The man nervously replies, “Oh? What’s a ‘FreeCar’?”
The neckbeard scoffs, “It’s only the most amazing car ever! It runs on diesel or petrol, gets great gas milage, can be serviced anywhere and costs half of what a Prius does!”
The man raises a well groomed eyebrow and exclaims, “Really?!”
His wife ponders for a moment and then asks, “Well, where can we buy one?”
The neckbeard rolls his eyes, “It’s available at FreeCar dot com,” he says in a throughly insulting tone.
The couple can’t believe the deal they’ve stumbled upon; they rush home an order one!
Two weeks later, a load of bauxite and steel beams is dropped off on their lawn, along with a 5,000 page set of assembly instructions.
The assembly instructions have been translated from the original German to Japanese, then to English by a Frenchman as part of his English as a Second Language class.
The illustrations will be annotated in a mix of Arabic and two dialects of Spanish.
TAD has announced that he's passing out now. I just read your comment about name calling, profanity, and all caps. Darby won't be here until later today to discuss that, but as a recent regular commenter, I feel compelled to say on his behalf,
GO MASTURBATE IN A CORNER, YOU FUCKING RETARD.
I hope that's okay. I'm sort of out of practice at that sort of thing.
Is the $99 fee just for putting apps on the AppStore, or is it required for everyone who wants to compile apps for her own phone, using the ad-hoc method? I've been told the latter, in which case it seems like a big demotivator.
Making free software for the iPhone that users have to pay $99 dollars for (and that money doesn't even go to me, it would go to Apple) kind of defeats some of the purposes of making free software in the first place.
It basically boils down to whether or not workers should controls the means of production and enjoy the fruits of their own labor, as intended by the founding fathers of good old free United States of America. Do we want it in our hands, or in Apples? It's your choice.
(Btw, just because point 1, 2 and 4 isn't relevant to what you want to do doesn't mean they're false. There are no ogg players yet (there will probably be soon, though, even on the iPhone) and Apple has implemented and marketed several DRM systems in the past, for various record labels and movie studios, and there are significant hoops to jump through just to run any free software you want. Those points are true and if you don't care about them, you don't, but they're still points.)
As for Ogg, only the portliest of neckbeards care about free music formats. Normal people with normal lives that just want to get their music on a device and get on with their lives pick Apple products. Free software will NEVER go anywhere because it has no focus and makes you jump through hoops to use it. The "Neo1974" or whatever actually makes you SOLDER SHIT before you can use it.
You made your point quite clear. You are stupid. Thanks, because otherwise I would continue reading the rest of your stupid post.
Some of these posters, deride you for being immature, then in the next sentence call you "stupid." I love it! I'm eating this up!
I put off sex to keep reading these golden jems of jackasery... Damn, now she's fallen asleep...
You guys suck!
Ok, some quick notes.
• Gruber droped some links as to why nobody touches ogg vorbis.
• The to argue; "If apple hadn't used freetard software, you all would be using os 9!!!"
That is utter nonsence. Apple had some cool os ideas in the works before jobs came back.
Apple chose the seemless blend of Free software and proprietary code because they saw it as the best business decision... To make money... Not because they love you.
• If you're posting just to ridicule drunk for ridiculing fsf, what are you doing with your life?
I mean really.. This is how you choose to spend your time?
I'm in my 20's live in Hawaii and am joining the Naval Nuclear Power Program. If you call drunk, and the readers/posters who dead on agree with both his message and his execution stupid...
God damn, you had better be 4 kinds of kick ass. I mean if I'm this young and have this going on, imagine how cool Drunk, John C, and Rip, in addition to all the other posters who have battled this nonsense. Phuul, fisher, tip of the cap to you two as well.
Aloha
It's 2:30am and I typed that on my iPhone....
Yeah... 'night folks..
The title of the Blog is The Angry Drunk and people are upset he is angry and not framing his arguments in a calm and ordered fashion??????
Unbelievable.
Oh sonny, I've my own site for ranting. But I do feel a certain kinship with AG, he's like my brother from another mother. Although, sadly, he's more profane than I, and the personal shame of my failure there wounds me. It wounds me deeply.
We're not insulting you or the FSF in this case because you disagree. We're insulting you because you're being stupid and whiny about it. There's a difference.
"I'm so much better than all of you, and the only reason you all don't see this and agree with me is because you're insecure, crazy, small-minded POOPYHEADS!"
No, it's because you have all the maturity of a colickly two-year-old, and all the logic skills of a kumquat. I'm just not going to be particularly nice about pointing this out. Nor are a lot of people. That's the part you can't handle...that you're not getting a free ride on the stupid bus here. Don't worry, even though your bus is short, I'm sure you can all have lots of fun.
Never mind the "criticism" contains one point that is at best, completely incorrect, but considering the average technical ability of freetards, is probably a deliberate attempt to make people think the wrong thing, ergo, a lie. Never mind that their "solution" doesn't exist yet, and given the history of FSF software development, never will.
No, no, it couldn't be based on that.
YOU PEOPLE ARE ALL MEANYHEADS, SO I'M NOT GOING TO PLAY WITH YOU!
I bet when you leave a forum, you make a loud, whiny-assed final post, just to show everyone what they did. You do, don't you.
No, I'm a loudmouthed pain in the ass with high typing and reading speeds who derives unholy enjoyment from fucking with testicularly deprived nimrods like you. But here, if you MUST see that I don't just exist in AG's mind:
Bynkii.com
Everything from fecophiliac analogy to extended explanations of SNMP. Bring the whole chair when you read, BUT YOU'LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE!
And Cloud, you got into the Navy Nuke Power Program? Damn dude, congrats. Just getting accepted to that is saying something.
John, you're mixing up your "G" and "D" keys.
I'd say, given a few of the apps that have appeared on the App Store, that Apple isn't doing a whole lot of quality checking from a usability/value standpoint.
As soon as Happy Hour rolls around (it's a little early, even for me) I'll raise a toast to all the rational posters above... and a finger to the rest of them. Nice work, guys.
PS: Gruber's continuing to fan the flaming links.
They do not follow the philosophical and moral implications of what they advocate to its real end: the questioning of market economy and liberal democracies.
Please, bear in mind that I'm not presenting an argument against or for such entities, that would be another post, all I'm saying is that they do not have the balls to follow the logical conclusions of their self-professed philosophy.
This makes them one of two things: either they are stupid or hypocrites.
I'll leave you with an intellectual exercise: read Karl Polanyi's The Great Transformation and tell me if the free software phenomenon is not the logical result of:
1. Structural unemployment.
2. Companies needing to cut costs.
3. The need for an infrastructure so that Capital (that's right, with a capital C) could start its globalization movement.
I mean, free software is one of the staples of our present-day 1984 world and they want me to buy them as freedom fighters?
As the great late George Carlin would say: Where's the logic in that? That is some big time BULLSHIT!
Congratulations on the Navy Nuclear Program from me, as well. I went through Navy Nuke School in 1977. Get ready for a wild ride. At the other end, things look pretty rosy, though. It looks like commercial nuclear power is going to make a comeback.
Nuclear knowledge will be selling for good bucks, soon.
On the point at hand, another point that has been tickling me; is the fact that many self righteous posters have commented on the "logic" and "scructure" of the fsf article.
All I could think of is "this guy is off his rocker."
How in the world could somebody even pretend to understand the personal thoughts and motives of Steve Jobs at various points of the decision making process?! To frame Steve as "reluctant" in writing the open letter to the music companies. How would anyone know that? The author of that piece was frothing at the fouth with personal attacks on Steve Job's character and motives.
Oh, but it's okay if it's structured properly.. Sorry, forgot that part in English class.
A couple of issues here:
"Making free software for the iPhone that users have to pay $99 dollars for (and that money doesn’t even go to me, it would go to Apple) kind of defeats some of the purposes of making free software in the first place."
The FSF's definition of "Free Software" does not mean software that's free of monetary costs. It's free as in "freedom of speech". Go read the FSF manifesto. They explicitly state that it is perfectly OK to charge money for Free Software. You are allowed to charge $1 million for your application, as long as you grant the buyer the freedoms they outline in the GPL (source code, right to modify, etc.)
Proprietary software that is free of monetary cost is usually known as "freeware". The FSF are equally as opposed and outraged by proprietary freeware, as they are by proprietary software that costs money.
As for "defeating the purpose of making free software", that's a non-sequitur, as people have many different purposes when they make free software. Some do it just to be generous. Others having various business models - such as giving away an application that allows you to use their subscription-based products. Or using free applications as promotional tools for their other applications that cost money.
In any case, $99 is not a serious obstacle to free software developers. The time it takes a programmer to create even the simplest application is worth more than $99. programmers commonly earn hundreds of dollars per hour. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the FSF charges something in the order of $99 per year to be a member of their organization?
"It basically boils down to whether or not workers should controls the means of production and enjoy the fruits of their own labor, as intended by the founding fathers of good old free United States of America."
Hmmm... I thought that was the Communist ideal?
The US model is more about freedom of association, and the right to freely enter into contracts and arrangements. Even the most basic businesses are dependent on contracts and arrangements with other entities - from webhosting, to insurance, to distribution.
For some developers, they would rather distribute their own wares, pay for their own hosting, advertising, and credit-card processing fees. For others, it's a much better deal to use Apple's services to get their product to end users. That's not "putting the means of production" in Apple's hands. After all, the developer creates the applications and can choose to stop producing that application, or distributing it via Apple's store at any time. It's not like you sign a contract where you MUST produce a certain number of applications for Apple.
By your logic, then software developers who use distribution or fulfillment services such as Kagi, are signing their means of production over to Kagi.
That's simply not the way it is. Kagi provides services that many developers feel is superior to handling that side of the business themselves. It allows them to focus on developing software, rather than all the other issues of business administration that come with selling applications online.
And as far as the openness, eventually the rubber hits the road and they're required to choose from one of a handful of ugly, nasty megacorps in order to actually USE a phone.
On the other hand, if you want to make calls, browse the web, use third party apps with an easy to use interface, and want the terrorists to win, but the iPhone.
From all legitimate (i.e., non-freetard) reports, OpenMoko might be neato for hacking and fucking around if you're into that sort of thing, but it's not a functional product for people that just want a cutting edge smart phone. And that support terrorists.
Yeah...I think that comment just won an award. Not the kind you'd want to win either.
That makes me just want to run out and hug a butterfly until I get bug shit on my polo shirt.
I remember reading an observation once that describes this fairly well:
In capitalism, man oppresses man. In communism it's the other way around.
No stories, but I can tell you for certain, if you don't have good study habits right now, you will have soon.
Navy Nuke School is one tough son of a bitch. But the positives outweighed the negatives for me.
Have fun.
You mentioned that "Apple had some cool os ideas in the works before jobs came back." Check your history, son.
They bought NEXT coz Apple had nothing. Literally.
And with NEXT, they basically got a BSD UNIX. Yes, there are hairs to be split with that statement, but -- and believe me, coz I use the bowels of the OS every dang day -- there's a shit-ton of "free" software running down in there.
And up closer to our faces, too: Apple took the open source KHTML rendering engine and has in recent years turned it into WebKit (which is "free" software)... this is the software that powers Safari.
So, if you like Mac OS X (and if you like iPhone OS) you're at least in partial debt to *some* amount of "free" software.
And I see this site's running WordPress... Free software abounds; enjoy it.
Anyhow, good luck on your stint with the Navy.
Not taking it personally, actually. Sorry you are. Someone asked what a freetard was, and I said part of the definition included a willingness to ignore facts. If the lead of a front page story suggests something, it hardly matters that the second continuation on page C73 says "Of course, actually doing this will cause cancer." That's what you just did, so I thought I'd point that out to those curious how I define it. I was actually hoping you were parodying it, but I guess I have the answer to that now.
But what's wrong with your cinnebt? Put it this way: If the lead of an article in your local paper said the open source was extremely dangerous to the economy, and an end to all technology advances, then on the bottom of the continuation in the second from last paragraph it said casually "Some have suggested that open source might have a place beside traditional systems," would you be satisfied with the article as a whole or the balance of it? I really doubt it.
And that's not quite what the FSF did. What it did was more equivalent to that same local paper suggested gargling with some new product, and went on and on about the virtues of it. But on the continuation, said "Trials have shown this does not actually work, will make your breath worse and may lead to rapid tooth decay."
THAT is exactly what the FSF has done: Preloaded their article with advice, then in a meaningless part of a long rant explained that the advice is not actually relevant to anyone. It is, frankly, an obnoxiously underhanded thing to do to readers.
Actually, Apple did have some really cool ideas. Spotlight, for instance, has been on the radar for a long time. The problem was they were completely incapable of building a new foundation upon which to build those great ideas.
Without NeXT and had Mac OS survived long enough (doubtful), I expect the Mac OS would have turned into a fully loaded Yugo with a donut spare tire on opposite diagonal wheels, with roughly 10% of the advanced options working, 30% not working, and a full 60% causing the car to explode if you tried to use them. In short, it would have sucked immensely. But with a few cool ideas that would have made you wish they'd been executed atop an OS that could handle them.
And, actually, let me take a step back and acknowledge that -- as worded -- he's probably right: I'm quite sure they even had an overabundance of ideas, considering how creative their engineers have always been.... problem is: they had no working code.
Which is a bit of a blocker to shipping an OS meant to replace OS 9.
Incorrect, in the extreme. The problem wasn't tech. They had that. NuKernel et al. The problem was, they didn't have a single damned person who would say "no". So Copland was ready for initial alpha/beta release, and marketing says "O NOES, the MUGS are upset that we won't support 68K"...changes. "O NOES, If we don't support {some other fucking thing that shouldn't have been supported} teh users will be unhappy" and on and on. Different groups in Apple wanting their own way, etc.
Copland got "just one more change"-d to death. But they had a lot of shit in there that ended up making it into Mac OS X over time. As I told Scott Forrestal after the initial leopard announcement at the WWDC: "All we need is knowledge navigator, and Copland will finally have shipped". Half the room gasped, half laughed. Good reaction. I thought he was going to kill me.
Indeed. But let's keep proper perspective here.
Oh, and aren't the freetards all snippy about that. Apple took a project that was galumphing along and turned it into something seriously worthwhile. Apple, not the freetards.
Along with an assload of patents and proprietary stuff. It's never some simple answer.
And I see this site’s running WordPress… Free software abounds; enjoy it.
Anyhow, good luck on your stint with the Navy.
Actually they did. They just didn't have the internal discipline to get it past one early beta release.
The point I was getting at was the statement I've read from several posters who said "without free software you all would be using os 9!!"
Apple had other projects in the works.
Like this one:
Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/taligent
Oh, and this one:
Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copland_%28operating_system%29
So, yeah I guess Apple did have other cool things in the works...
But my point wasn't to debate the merrits of os 10, vs Copland. We all know apple made the right choice and that Job's is the man. We all know without all the foundation that free software has laid, iPhone would be an apple branded open moko level phone. Or as was put perfectly
above; "a full 60% would cause it to expload."
My point was to say that had apple not gone the unix route, they would have stood still. They might have produced uncool, buggy, incombatable devices. But whatever they chose, it wouldn't have been os 9.
More to the point, many might frame apple as a leech on the free software universe. As if apple is using all this sick technology that was developed with a free-as-in-freedom mindset, and twisting to make money and develop proprietary code.
Well, before that argument is brought up, i'd like to shoot it right down.
Apple actually started webkit for the sole purpose of community development
Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/webkit
Here is a Linux guy asking the same thing:
www.linuxquestions.org/questions/other-nix-55/q...
Turns out, apple kicks ass with their open source lovin'
Thanks above posters for bringing a little, well history to our apple history discusion.
There are many reasons not to be an iPhone.
Absolutely none of them apply to me. iPhone has literally revolutionized the way I live. Access to data 24/7 is an amazing thing. No need to wait to get home from work to bash that troll with the hammer of wisdom, just take a bathroom break.
iPhone has replaced my laptop for common tasks.
How about y'all, besides the nitty gritty. Would any of the points raised in the fsf article cause you to not get an iPhone?
Also, for anything – product or service – to succeed there must be an individual responsible for the overall success or failure.
With the exception of Apple, no other platform can lay claim to a single point of contact in the case of a big fuck up.
Every tech company or developer can point a finger. Developers can blame the OS and the hardware. Dell and HP and BlackBerry can blame the OS and the developers. Microsoft can blame everybody else.
Apple stands alone. The face of Apple is Steve Jobs. He makes decisions that decide (not "affect," decide) the fate of a multibillion dollar global corporation. That takes balls of solid rock.
The person who steals Steve Jobs' thunder won't be a committee, cartel, or consortium. It will be an individual who assumes responsibility for the quality of the entire product. That individual will be willing to blame no one but himself for failures. That individual will be a tech visionary with titanium testicles.
It won't be Richard Stallman.
Do I think the iPhone is evil? no
Do I think people that believe in FOSS buying an iPhone is terribly misguided? Very much so.
If you're not of the FOSS persuasion, by all means buy your iPhone. If you don't care about legalities, by all means crack it.
No, but since Jobs isn't giving Stallman and the rest of the FSF their daily rimjobs, therefore making them succumb to the onerous task of actually using toilet paper, it's not like you're going to care about the facts of the situation, already posted here.
Other than being politically correct for the freetard Stallmanites, what does OGG offer that AAC doesn't on a technical level. What great advantage does OGG offer as a sound format?
I like shit that works without having to endlessly fuck with it. When the OpenMoko gets to that point, you let us know.
Right. They're not evil, just stupid. Honky please, just come out and say it, because it's obvious that you cannot comprehend that not every computer purchase is made with FOSS in mind. Do you have only GPL software in every computer in your house? I already know the answer, and it's "no" because you're forgetting embedded stuff.
Do you only use computing hardware with no patents attached to it whatsoever? No. No you do not.
If you think that "zealotry" and "logic" are the same thing, by all means, keep your head up Stallman's ass.
"Turns out, apple kicks ass with their open source lovin’"
Yep. They sure do. And, at the risk of getting somewhat flamed, I gotta be honest: I actively respect that about them.
Granted they haven't been accommodating to the most extreme Free Software devotees, but they've got a business to run, after all. What pleases me about how they handle everything is how well they juggle the at-times conflicting concerns.
I'm not sure Jobs himself cares very much at all about it, one way or the other, except in a political capacity... but many of his engineers and project leads certainly do, and it shows.
Plus, special shout-out to Dave Hyatt from the WebKit team, who is not only an excellent project lead, but is very active in the open web community, and excellently transparent about the WebKit team's work.
Except that it doesn't. Do you have evidence of this accusation? Why couldn't one develop a GPL-licensed iPhone application and distribute it through the application store?
What do you mean by "believe in"? I believe that FOSS exists. I believe it is very good for certain things, and I use plenty of FOSS.
But that doesn't mean that I don't also use proprietary software. Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why should "believing in FOSS" mean only using FOSS to the exclusion of all else? Why does it make it bad to buy and use things that aren't FOSS based?
That's the difference between a freetard and a regular FOSS user/developer right there. The single-minded zealotry and insistence that there is only one correct way of doing things.
Apple in no way blocks free software unless the license it is shipped under requires the code signing key it was signed with be available EVEN IF another code signing key is readily available. If that's the case, blame the person who wrote the license that way.
Honestly, it's also worth noting that even though I -- and most others -- don't care one bit for Ogg, nothing stops a developer from developing a custom player that can play Ogg files. Sure, it wouldn't be iTunes, but the FSF is so talented surely they could come up with something far better, right? So why don't they just write the freaking code and shut up about it?
Oh, I'll tell you why. Because they're a bunch of mouthpieces.
I dunno... speaking as a software engineer, that's a very (very!) fine hair you're splitting.... ;-)
I wonder if there was an alternative that would have yielded better results, though. Don't get me wrong: Clearly Copland with the current management team was not it.
Word.
There might have been an alternative: if I remember correctly, Apple's first choice was BeOS, but they priced themselves out of the market.
Sure, Be might have worked. But with Be, there'd have been no Steve Jobs. Instead, we'd have had Jean-Louis Gassée. Mac OS X working without Jobs is certainly possible, but I think it's less likely.
Strictly academic, but I wonder anyway.
Oh, absolutely: without Steve Jobs, Apple would be out of business by now (IMO,) and I don't know anyone else who could have turned them around quite like he has. He has a few bees in his bonnet that I disagree with, but you can't argue with success. My only point is that history could have played out differently if Gasée hadn't been such a prick; I didn't say it would have been better.
"BULLSHIT. When any app wants to use CoreLocation on the iPhone, you are presented with a big fat Do Not Allow button, and you can push it if you want. Does that sound like it’s accessing your location without your knowledge?"
The fact that you see that dialog does not mean that what the FSF said was wrong. The iPhone won't give you that dialog when you dial 911. (Their problem here is that any other phone would be required to do that as well.)
"They’re also guilty of lies by omission. The FSF said: 'iPhone won’t play patent- and DRM-free formats like Ogg Vorbis and Theora.'
"But the iPhone DOES play DRM-free formats like MP3, MP4, WAV, AIFF, Lossless, etc. Why do you suppose they left that out? Could it be because that would kind of derail their entire idiotic, oh I’m sorry 'logical' proposition?"
All formats that are encumbered by software patents. So, where is the lie again?
However, that's not anything Apple nor any other phone manufacturer in the US can do anything about. They're required to provide location info to 911 automatically so, you know, you can actually get the help you're calling for.
For the FSF to use that to imply Apple is allowing any and all to track you is an absolute falsehood, and they know that. So they're stilly lying weasels about that.
Interestingly, there's some current thought that the only reason Ogg hasn't been really scrutinized there is because honestly, no one of consequence is using it.
The other thing is, again, without regards to ideology, Ogg is not "better enough" to justify everyone switching to it. It's a good codec. So is AAC. Both are somewhat better than MP3.
But barring Ogg suddenly being ASTOUNDINGLY better than everything else, why switch?
Wee bit more on AAC
First, who are you quoting there, omitting attribution makes it hard to figure out what you're on about.
Second, dialing 911 has fuck all to do with CoreLocation or the OS in general; it's a feature of the phone and, in the U.S. at least, providing GPS when dialing 911 is mandated by law. Do you really want the phone to not provide your location when calling for emergency services. There is a point where you've taken "freedom" just a little too far.
Lastly, just because the FSF claims that Ogg is not patent-encumbered doesn't make it so. There are those of the opinion that Ogg is in violation of at least one major patent.
You don't like their views don't read 'em. I'm just say'n.
I'm sorry, but " if you don't like their views, don't read em" just doesn't cut it.
Honestly, how do you even come up with a comment like that?
Umm, how about the fact that, had I not read their views, how would I know if I agree or not?
So now that I've suddenly discovered that fsf is full of fearmongering whack jobs. I wish to detail the reasons that they are factually incorrect..
But, you know, I'm just sayin' is all..
You don't like their views point out that they're fucking retards breathing up perfectly good oxygen for no apparent reason.
I do.
I'm just sayin'.
The lie is that Ogg is most likely also encumbered by patents. It just hasn't been tested in court yet. That's why companies such as Apple are wary of it.
As a matter of fact, if Apple (or microsoft, etc) did go ahead and implement Ogg as many FOSS fans are screaming for - then it most likely would result in a legal attack, taking Ogg away from the FOSS fans themselves (as much as it could be taken away). Is that what they want?