Yeah this pretty much covers my intent. Apple's mobile approach is actively hostile even where the capabilty to do more is there and isn't actually a harm to anything. This sickens me. There is an argument that things like the iPad enable far less technically inclined people to use "computers" means well enough, but the device doesn't deliver. A web browser without flash? USELESS. As a picture frame? Made less convenient for having no SD card input. This would have been cool for truly portable iChat video-conferencing. NO CAMERA. **WTF** No optical drive. Liveable, but no USB to connect any aforementioned tools even if you wanted to. This is like the lowest level of accessibility one could imagine these days.
So, in summary, what the iPad ISN'T : A reasonable web-browser (My 3 year old HTC Touch is better) A phone A home theater player (No HDMI out) PMP (Too big) A camera. An office productivity tool (keyboard factor, no multi-tasking) A convenient picture-frame. GPS. Only the 3G enabled versions have this (and your balls once you do) So I get pretty hardware without any special place in the scope of common needs, and little hope that the software will get better to raise its value. When Acer, MSI, etc make one it will likely kick the iPad squarely between the legs on most of these fronts. It won't be as friendly. It won't looks as pretty, but it will actually do something. Andrew > Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:27:15 -0500 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: [MLUG] Us-things > > On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 11:49:01AM -0500, Jeremy wrote: > > You know what is funny to me with this idea of a gatekeeper and locked > > down apps? Ever seen how repos are run for distros? > > > > Of all the people out there, linux users should be most used to this > > idea, the debian maintainers have been "keeping us safe" for a long time > > now :) > > > > I know it is not the same with DRM and all, just an interesting parallel. > > On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 11:58:09AM -0500, Jeremy wrote: > > Andrew Oulton wrote: > > > I wouldn't draw the same parallel. Repo's make common software > > > acquisition EASY... bu t all of these distro's give you the complete > > > toolset to install whatever you want from wherever you want. That's > > > what compiling is for :) > > > > > > Andrew > > > > Just like you can do with a jailbroken iphone, you have the option. > > That's simply not true. As was seen in the recent Android/Rogers > debacle, those people are actively working *against* you being the owner > of your own machine. They are actively removing you root access. They > are actively preventing you to install your own software. They are also > actively refusing to accept software (e.g. flash, google voice) that go > against their own interest. > > The parallel with open source software distributions is preposterous. I > see where you come from, and I have some experience with new Ubuntu > users trying to work around the "synaptic straightjacket", but the > limitation is technical, it's is not political: nobody is trying to keep > users from learning and trying their own applications on their machine. > > For me, it's even the exact opposite: I encourage people to follow > howtos and tutorials, and the Ubuntu forums are crowded with step by > step examples of how to compile applications not provided by upstream > for whatever reason. I strive to help people understand and learn, and > while the learning curve is sometimes steep, it's nothing compared to > the firewall of proprietary software. > > Besides, if it compiles and works, it will very probably be packaged and > shipped with the distribution. The distribution is an enabler, not > something that is in the way. We provide compilers, development kits, > for zillions of languages, all this for free. And what's more, you're > free to not use all of this and build your own, because it's your > machine, your software. > > In parallel, Apple *enforces* the applications distributed. The > application development kit were proprietary until recently (I may be > wrong here) and they actively keep you from running your own stuff on > your machine. > > This is all very patronizing for everyone. Us geeks are especially > touched by this, but it's simply false to assume that "regular people" > are not frustrated by being completely stripped out of control over > their things. Just look at how cars can't be repaired by your > brother-in-law anymore... > > People are not happy about that, and rightly so. They will connect the > dots with Apple and the other suckers eventually. > > A. > > -- > Seul a un caractère scientifique ce qui peut être réfuté. Ce qui n'est > pas réfutable relève de la magie ou de la mystique. > - Popper, Karl _________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________ mlug mailing list [email protected] https://listes.koumbit.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlug-listserv.mlug.ca
