[NTLK] OT: was C64 on app store? now Is IBM evil?

[James Fraser]

Hello,

--- On Wed, 9/22/10, Riccardo Mori <rick at newted.org> wrote:

> Apple has never been 'scared' by the jailbreaks because it happens on 
> iPhones that have already been sold. But there are also people who
> have jailbroken their iPhones and then, noticing some performance hiccups > or unexpected results, blamed Apple for that. And that's unfair.

Point taken.  However, I think it's equally unfair to treat people who wish to modify a device that they own (at least ostensibly) as though they are criminals.  Which is the attitude that Apple seems to take.

I suspect that there is a middle ground here somewhere and hope that with the EFF victory, Apple will feel compelled to work a bit harder at reaching it.

>All this talk about 'control', about this Evil Orwellian Apple -- with due >respect -- makes me chuckle. 

Hey, I'm laughing too, sir.  We're just laughing for different reasons, is all. :)

>No one is forcing you guys to buy Apple products. No one is taking
>Choice away. No one forces you into a Walled Garden. You choose to go >there or not. 

What if an end user does not understand that they are -in- a walled garden in the first place?  That is, if you have grown up in a walled garden, how is it possible for you to understand and appreciate the world outside that garden?

If buying apps through an app store is all you've ever known, how can you understand and appreciate what it's like to install whatever software you happen to feel like installing on your device?  Can installing software and wrestling with the bugs (or should I say "the degraded user experience?") be frustrating?  Yes.  But it can be liberating, too.  I think it all depends on whether you choose to view it as a nuisance or a learning experience.

>If you go there -- as a user or a developer -- you know there are rules >and that is a somewhat controlled enviroment. 

With all due respect, please let us just tell it like it is: it's a controlled environment. :)

Those six page of rules and regulations are not "suggestions," sir.  Either you follow them, and follow them carefully, or your app does not get approved, full stop.  This, to me, matches the definition of a "controlled environment."  

Frankly, I just don't see any "somewhat" about it, myself, but that could well be my own cockeyed view of things.  I've never claimed to be The World's Smartest Man and I'm not going to start now.

>('Somewhat' because, let's be honest: hundreds of thousands of approved >apps, all kinds of apps, from stupid to useless, from funny to brilliant, >from crappy to amazing. It's a Walled Garden, yes, but undoubtedly >enormous in size.)

I agree, let's be honest: the App Store is Apple's attempt at imposing central planning on software. :)

I also agree that Apple's Walled Garden is enormous in size.  However, the fact that if Apple does not like an app for whatever reason (and with six pages of rules, there are a lot of reasons for them to choose from) it doesn't get -into- the Walled Garden is, for me, the entire point.  The Walled Garden may be nice, (and I'm not saying that it can't a pleasant place to be) but it's as big or as small as Apple chooses it to be.

It's all a matter of whether you think central planning for software is a good idea or not. 

> I have used Apple products since 1988, and I've always
> preferred them over the competition because of the user
> experience, because of the design (and I'm not referring to
> aesthetics here), because they helped me work better and
> more efficiently. 

I'll be honest: I like their stuff, too.  I just don't like the direction Apple seems to be headed in, is all.

I can understand the allure of central planning: making choices takes time, and when choices are already made for you beforehand, it helps cut down on the time you have to spend sorting things out for yourself.  It's just that if the Walled Garden is something you've seen before, and you didn't like what you saw, you might not view it with the same enthusiasm as someone who has always gotten their software that way and never known anything else.

I guess that, from my own perspective, people seem to work better and more efficiently (in the long run) when they are making their -own- choices, not when choices are made -for- them.  That's just how I feel and, no, I don't expect everyone to share the same view.  

As I say, I understand the allure of central planning, it's just not something I happen to personally agree with because there are past examples of this; they are not always recalled with a wistful sigh.  Sometimes they are recalled with a sigh of relief at having lived to see them relegated to the past.

>I've never felt I was losing control over them. Not with Macs, and not 
> with my iPhone. No one forced me to install iPhone apps I didn't want. 
> I'm aware that all the 90 apps I've purchased on the App Store these past > 2 years were all applications that had to be approved before being 
> released on the App Store, and I'm fine with that because if a developer > creates something useful, well-designed, well-implemented, his/her app 
> _will_ enter the App Store. 

I have to ask: just how do you know this?  How do you know what apps Apple -hasn't- approved of, and whether they were any good or not?  

I guess you're taking the point of view that Apple will always do what's best for their end users rather than what's best for Apple.  Fair enough.

Perhaps IBM, once upon a time, could have made the exact same claim you seem to be making here: if there's something useful, well-designed, and well-implemented, our customers can expect to have it installed on their mainframes.  By us.  When we get around to it.  -If- we get around to it.

Do you see the similarity?  I'm not saying that IBM necessarily neglected their customers, only that IBM's customers received whatever IBM got around to giving them.  And whatever it was the customers -did- get, they paid dearly for.

That's not a model of computing everyone is particularly anxious to revisit.

> Many have brought up the walled garden image, and I see
> their point, but have you seen the alternatives? Have you
> seen the competition? Me neither: where is it? Where is the
> great Other-App-Store that is so successful because anyone
> can do what they please, can publish whatever buggy
> application written overnight, and end users rejoyce because
> of the amazing, enhancing user experience?

Perhaps there's no other App Store quite like Apple's because Apple is the only firm right now that's so enthusiastic about taking us back to the Bad Old Days because, well, it benefits Apple? :)
 
> It's a pity there's no real competition there, because that
> would push Apple to do even better. Competition is always
> healthy.

I agree, it -is- a pity, but Apple doesn't seem to share that view and their business practices seem indicative of their opposition to competition.

> There is no Apple loyalty or fanaticism behind my words. 

I'm glad to hear that.  For my own part, I do not begrudge Apple their success.  I will be the first to admit that it is not easy to please consumers, and companies that can make their own way in the marketplace have my respect as far as that is concerned.  

It's just that if Apple chooses to behave as though they are the IBM of old, (with corporate policies to match) I reserve the right to point and laugh at them.  

(And, I suppose, you can point and laugh at me for pointing and laughing at them.  As long as there is laughter involved, I think we're okay.)

It's up to each of us as individuals to decide for ourselves if Apple behaves as though they are still two swell guys in a garage or if they behave in the manner of a corporation keen on dominating and controlling things, same as they once pointed their finger at another corporation (naming no names) for doing.  Your six pages of helpful guidelines for developers are my six pages of Application Purification Directives. :)

>I just believe that one has the choice to try different things
> and to stick with what works best for him/her. In my case,
> I've chosen Apple. And I feel that no one is 'controlling'
> my iPhone but me. In the very moment something happens that
> makes me lose that feeling, I will certainly consider trying
> other phones. 

Personally, sir, I wish that you -had- tried out other phones before handing Apple your hard-earned money.  It's the anal-retentive completist in me. 

> To close in-topic, when a better PDA shows up, I'll stop
> using my Newtons. I don't think that'll happen soon, though
> :)

Even if we can't reach agreement on anything else, (though I must say that our disagreeing is jolly good fun! I hope you agree, sir!) we're certainly in agreement here.  It would indeed be nice to see Apple focus their time and effort on surpassing themselves as opposed to oppressing their end users. :)



Best,

James Fraser