On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 11:53:55AM +1100, Noah O'Donoghue wrote: > I think the main part of my argument was that there is vendor lock > in on any platform. Google has less, but it's more of a technicality > in the frame of the larger argument which was tablets in school > environments. Because it's a technicality, you have to assess either > platform on their merits in an educational environment..
Perhaps we have different ideas about what is meant by vendor lock-in. From Wikipedia: "In economics, vendor lock-in, also known as proprietary lock-in or customer lock-in, makes a customer dependent on a vendor for products and services, unable to use another vendor without substantial switching costs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendor_lockin On that page, Apple has an entire section all to itself. Google isn't mentioned at all. Now I'm certainly not a Google fan, but until they remove the option to install apps manually, or prevent use of 3rd-party application catalogue software, and lock the device down with the intent to prevent such options from being re-added, it's hardly vendor lock-in. And vendor intent is important to consider. You may be able to "jailbreak" out of Apple's closed ecosystem on certain devices, but it is not Apple's intent to allow it. By contrast, Google does nothing to prevent it. Even if Jailbreaking was always available, just as easy as checking the "Unknown sources" option in Andoid's security settings, etc., we still cannot be confident that Apple will not delete apps installed through jailbreaking (and they are currently in trouble for doing something along these lines). http://m.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/04/apple_ipod_itunes_antitrust_court_case/#content > I'm not saying we shouldn't embrace app stores like F-droid, they are > great, I was more just responding to the individual needs of a school, > which aren't really met by f-droid's 30 or so total educational apps... > Hopefully the situation improves over time. The reason why (from my POV) avoiding vendor lock-in is so important is that it means students with Android tablets can write their own application (on any device), and not have the device prevent the software from being effectively free (ie. software can be copied, distributed to fellow students, modified, modifications by fellow students shared, etc.). As soon as you tell people "you can have my app, but you need to own a Mac if you want to modify it, pay Apple $100 a year, etc", in practise it's hindering the possibility of sharing free software, restricting the usefulness of the device, and inhibiting a student's ability to learn tablet programming because of it. I don't think anyone here is saying the school needs to source all its apps from F-Droid (although it would good to have apps there considered for use if appropriate). Only Apple is saying that you must source all apps from Apple if using an Apple device. :) -Adam
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list [email protected] http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb Free Software Melbourne home page: http://www.freesoftware.asn.au/melb/
