With the imminent release of the iPad on April 5, it and its older cousins the iPhone and iPod Touch are getting increasing attention by the tech pundits. While most of what I read are from pro-Apple sites — and are therefore biased, some of what I read is from pro-not-Apple sites — and are therefore biased. I have an iPhone, and I generally like it, but it seems to stand for everything I despise about where technology is headed. I love and hate Apple, Inc. Here’s why.
Since Apple is a hardware and software company, the two ‘wares work well together. Apple’s design principles stress ease-of-use, elegance, and professional results. I’m speaking, here, of the MacOS, an operating system I have used for about 25 years. The current MacOS is built on open-source software and is perhaps the best available for any price. I know Windoze users will argue, and I frankly don’t care, nor is Windoze v. Mac even relevant here. Essentially, Windoze and the Mac are the same: they are both proprietary operating systems written by corporations for the sole purpose of making their respective companies wealthy and powerful.
At the heart of this debate is the perennial open source software versus proprietary software question. I have an iPhone for some of the same reasons that I prefer to use the MacOS. Since it’s proprietary, certain standards in interface and design keep my computing experience consistent and predictable. The iPhone (and soon, iPad) are new products, so I’m more willing to cut them the slack I wouldn’t with a traditional computer operating system. They’ll hammer out the wrinkles soon. Where the iPhone gets in trouble is new territory: not only is the operating system proprietary, Apple now controls what we — the users — can do with it in a draconian way, it seems.
Unlike the MacOS, the iPhoneOS is even more closed; I might even call it super-proprietary. On the former, I cannot change the code of the OS, but I can download programs that can significantly alter the operating system and how I use it. I can install modifications and other software that the powers-that-be might not like me having, like BitTorrent, pornography, warez, cracks, and other socially unacceptable forms of software that give the middle finger to any company (or person) that doesn’t like it. This is a question of my personal ethical codes and scruples. Apple supplies the container, but I can put anything in that container that I want, including elements that might not be good for it or me. I purchased a computer complete with operating system. And even though it comes with a proprietary end user license that I have to agree to before using said computer, I’ve never read the license and am pretty certain I’ve violated it many times. The point is: even with a proprietary operating system as we have known them from the beginnings of the personal computer until now, I can choose to ignore the licenses and the legal limits the corporations try to impose on me. I choose, not them.
Yet, it seems that these sorts of mostly open operating systems allow customers — users, programmers, hackers, and crackers (are we all just criminals?) — too much freedom. Enter the iPhone and the super-proprietary operating systems, or what we might more accurately describe as the closed-source-to-modification systems. With Apple’s app store as gateway to my iPhone/Pad/Pod, I can no longer really decide what to put on my computer — Apple decides for me and then gives me a pretend choice. This is analogous to Burger King being the only restaurant in town and saying “have it your way.” This is not a real choice, is it?
Tim Bray, Google’s newest Android bitch, puts it this way:
The iPhone vision of the mobile internet’s future omits controversy, sex, and freedom, but includes strict limits on who can know what and who can say what.
It’s a sterile Disney-fied walled garden surrounded by sharp-toothed lawyers. The people who create the apps serve at the landlord’s pleasure and fear his anger.
I hate it.
I hate it even though the iPhone hardware and software are great, because freedom’s not just another word for anything, nor is it an optional ingredient.
Yes, he is a corporate spokesman, but he is also exactly right.
Every fiber of my being should be resisting Apple and their path to techno-tyranny. I have championed Apple over Microsoft for years, but it seems that with the success of the iPod, then iPhone, and soon the iPad, they are becoming just as evil as corporations I’ve demonized in the past. I keep hoping that it will not turn out this way, but every day I seem to read something to the contrary. First came news of alleged stock malfeasance, then Jobs’ reputation as a techno-despot, then Fair Play DRM, then its rigid restrictions on how I use my iPod, then its exclusive deals with cell provides, to the iPhone/PadOS. As much as I wish it wasn’t, Apple seems to be changing into a typical ’Merican corporation.
So what are my responsibilities as a citizen and a consumer? I do have an iPhone, but my contract with AT&T is up in June. No matter what I do, it seems a necessity to sign a two-year contract with a cell provider (boooo!), but I could get an open-source phone, like one that runs Android. That leaves me buying hardware from another corporation, like Motorola or HTC. Are they really any different? Yes, Apple controls the applications I can put on my phone, but there are still more to choose from that I will ever need or want. Yes, Apple’s developer license is crap, and it needs to be fixed. Apple did get rid of their music DRM. Is it as bad as Bray and others make it sound?
I currently use Ubuntu on a cheap Acer laptop I bought last November, and it’s fine. But, I find myself missing my Mac more everyday.
Apple, I used to only love you, but your actions lately have been inspiring a lot of hate, consternation, and thoughts of jumping ship. Maybe you should consider that, change some of your policies, and make amends. Please don’t push me away. We’ve been together too long.
