babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
I use Ubuntu and I'm far from being a "technophobe". I don't have any problems with any of my hardware connected to the computer and help is always at hand if needed.
The arguments against software freedom are mostly "FUD" (fear uncertainty and doubt)...fear that you won't be able to"do X" without the "officially blessed" proprietary corporate software. Even if a tenth of those arguments were true, it still is not a reason for a progressive site to promote the use of proprietary software.
Sven...I used this as an example of the ability of free software to keep old computer hardware out of the landfill. And the "futzing" in this particular case involved pushing the "on" button and inserting a CD into the drive.
Actually I read rabble content quite well on Safari on my internet ready iphone. All the app does is make it more convenient, if they pull the app I will go back to reading it on Safari. The same with my suggestion with having a babble app, I currently use it on my computer and on my iphone in Safari, no control by apple. It would just be more convenient if I could press an App.
I agree with Michelle, I need a phone that could do everything that the iphone could do for my business. I used my old phone for 4 years until it broke and had to replace it. I have had my iphone for almost two years and even though the new iphones are out the one that I have still does everything I need it to so will be using it for years to come until it breaks, thus keeping a perfectly good phone out of a landfill. My brother has a phone that he used that he is giving to a group who gives them to women's shelters, thus keeping his phone out of a landfill AND helping a woman who may need it, does that make him better than someone who just throws out their phone? I don't think so but I also don't keep a points system on these things.
I see the point people are making, though, about perhaps supporting people who are writing innovative and small programs to be used on older hardware.
I mentioned that I have a blackberry. It's the first cell phone I've had since 2003 (when I decided not to ever use cell phones again until they came down in price - famous last words). I was given a deal I had a hard time refusing. Maybe I should have got a used cell phone and put my service on that, but used phones don't do what the new blackberry does. And most people don't just dump old blackberries that are in good working condition - they usually replace them when they break.
The question, however, as I know, is this: how badly do I need to be able to read my e-mail on my blackberry? How many times have I found that I was saved by getting an e-mail on blackberry that couldn't wait until I got to a computer (which I have at work and at home)? The answer is: not much. A couple of times I found directions to someplace on the bb. On the weekend, I looked up an after-hours emergency number at a venue where I didn't have access to a computer but needed to reach someone immediately.
But if I hadn't had the bb, would someone have died? No. It's basically a phone (which is useful to me when I'm on the road), and all the other features are really neat toys. How badly do I need to be able to upload pictures I take with it to Facebook and Twitter? Well, we know the answer to that, although that can be useful, say, during a protest if you want to get something out there quickly. For instance, Judy Rebick used her blackberry from inside the Israeli Consulate in Toronto during the Jewish women's occupation of it to take pictures from inside during the protest and send it to alternative media and Facebook. That was useful. A necessity you can't live without? Well, not really. But heck, a home computer is a necessity you can live without, strictly speaking.
But I realize that the basic necessity part of my phone (and I'm still not convinced that a cell phone is a "necessity") could've been covered by a plain old (used) phone and basic service.
If you feel that your iPod or iPhone is unnecessarily restricting you from, say, writing your own apps (you can write C code, yes?) then you can always jailbreak it. Good grief... when your Linux computer was brand new it probably had some version of Window installed on it until someone wiped it clean. Same with your iPod. Expecting Apple to jailbreak it FOR YOU might be asking a bit much.
But I certainly agree that rabble could have shown that they "get it" by offering, say, the Coby 4Gb .mp3 player from Canadian Tire. Not only is it approximately 1/5 of the cost of an iTouch, it has none of those "locked down" proprietary features like apps, or a calendar, or a web browser, or e-mail, or Wi-Fi, or YouTube (ever notice that YouTube restricts you from downloading and editing videos?) and so on. It will, however, play music in glorious Stereo Sound (tm).
It also features an "FM tuner" that allows you to capture free music over the airwaves.
I think that in the interest of its own progressive "cred", babble should at least offer any iPod (ptui!) winner the option to exchange their Korporate Krap for the Coby. Can you do that, babble?
I get what you are saying Michelle but unfortunately for me it is a necessity for my business. I do need to read my emails when I don't have access to using my computer, I have families that are needing information from me immediately or that I need to send out immediately so that programs keep on running. If I am going to a new family or a meeting at a new place I need the directions and would have to buy map books before I had a maps on my phone, that is a lot of paper every couple of years that is now saved plus a lot of time and other paper looking up places and routes to get there. I am almost completely paper free on my business now, which is a huge environmental bonus as well.
On another thread someone mentioned about how people shouldn't have to work 5 days a week. Well, I don't and I have been able to cut one day a week essentially because of technology because it really does save time (I am not one of those people who saves time and then adds extra tasks anyway) so it is also helping me to live a more balanced life.
I think the key is looking at what you need and then making the best choice that you can. Yes, technically I could go back to doing everything by paper and using just the phone for communicating (I also don't have an office to work out of so it would be a second phone in my home that I would only be able to get messages at night from if I didn't have a cell phone) with parents but the children that I work with have much more smoothly running programs which means they progress better and the workers feel more comfortable because they don't have to wait when things are going wrong. It has helped immensely in helping the kids get better as well as reducing my workload. It also cuts a lot of paper for notes for families and me out of the garbage and from being made in the first place.
Actually, you can download videos from YouTube using Download Helper for - you guessed it! - Firefox.
I read the thread title and opened the thread waiting for the punchline.
We can argue till the cows come home as to whether or not we "need" this, that or the other
device.
The "smartphone" (defacto small mobile general purpose computer) is not going to go away.
Over the next few years we're only going to see an increase in the use of these kinds of
devices. "Tablet" computers are not going to go away either.
The main question for me is whether or not you as a user have the maximum possible control
over your devices.
There are other GNU/Linux based mobile computer operating systems such as Google Android,
WebOS, Maemo, Moblin, Open Moko etc. which even if the device manufacturers impose digital
restrictions management (DRM) at least offer the possibility of an open mobile computing
platform.
The Apple mobile computing platform offers the end user the least open smartphone/tablet
computing platform.
In an open mobile platform users would be able to install their own apps from wherever
they happened to get them, and developers could create apps without having to seek
permission from the smartphone vendor. There would never be a concern that the device
vendor could remotely wipe an application off your mobile computing device that they didn't
happen to like.
That IMHO is what progressives should be aiming for in an open mobile computing platform.
Crowing about the new Apple iPhone app and offering an Apple device in a contest makes it look like rabble.ca is "endorsing" a particularly nasty model for mobile computing.
What most of us come to rabble.ca for is critical analysis from a progressive point of view.
That critical analysis needs to apply to the world of computers, technology and the internet.
This app and the promo around it represents the opposite of that.
Over the summer, I actually needed my blackberry. I was running a bunch of editing projects and I need to be in near constant contact with the clients so that they could consult with me about changes, etc., but I don't need it now. I got locked into a 3 year contract because I absolutely needed one then, but couldn't afford a lesser term on the contract. Nowadays it gets used as my sole MP3 player, digital camera, and a bunch of other things. I could use a digital camera and get better pictures, could get an mp3 player and have more options/better sound, etc. Its already been paid for and I'm stuck with it so I squeeze the most out of it. I read about 4 newspapers on it daily. The amount of paper I save is astronomical, I suppose.
OK, but I stand by my statement that YouTube restricts you from downloading videos. So does babble. I'm looking at Humberto's videos on rabbleTV. Where's the button for me to download them and recut them with funny cartoon voices and such? Why is babble "locking down" its content like that?
The key difference here is that on my PC or Mac, I don't need to jailbreak it to install another OS. The computer will simply run whatever OS I give it. On the iPod or iPhone, there's a check in the hardware that looks for their OS and if it doesn't find it, the device won't run. In order to make it run, you have to find a bug in their code that will let you install it, which is jailbreaking. It's not simply a matter of them not supporting it, they've spent time to program an actual lock on the device to prevent you from doing it. Then, they don't allow you to install any apps except the ones you download from them. This would be like Microsoft preventing you from installing Firefox and saying you could only browse the web through Internet Explorer.
That's why Sven's bringing up Linux is a red herring for this discussion. The issue isn't that you don't get the source code, it's that you're giving up freedoms that Windows and MacOS have always had.
Up until recently, there was a feature on the Sony PS3 called "install other OS" that allowed you to install a GNU/Linux based operating system. But, Sony pushed through a firmware update recently that wipes this capablity.
Who should control the devices that you paid good money for...you...or the vendor?
I wonder if Apple is headed towards an anti-trust-type lawsuit like microsoft?
Can you imagine buying a house where you were forbiden from doing any renovations and could not plant a tree in the backyard without the prior approval of the builder (who could come and cut down the tree if it didn't grow the way they wanted)?
Thread drift...actually...this kind of stuff does happen...particularly in the U.S. in new suburban developments where there are all kinds of restrictions on what you can do with the "outside" of your house.
I had a friend who paid good money to live in a Co-op that restricted what kinds of holiday decorations she could hang on her door, and when she could and could not hang them. I assume this means the Co-op model is broken too?
Anyway, what I can't figure out is why this is Apple's problem. What luck do we expect to have in forcing an Apple to become an orange? Isn't the obvious answer to build and market a mobile device that's just as cool as the iPhone, but with no restrictions? And then sit back and watch market forces bankrupt Apple?
The only possible Achilles' Heel of that plan would be if the people buying iPhones were satisfied with the million or so apps they have access to, or if they don't all hate using iTunes to load music on their device. But they do care, right? I mean, they're all pretty much miserable aren't they, and just waiting to jump ship to some other device?
And then we can move on to other things. Like what's with that label on my couch cushion that says "Do not remove under penalty of law". Whose cushion is it, anyway??
Try Snow Leopard.
That's actually happening...the "up and coming" computer operating systems for mobile devices are all GNU/Linux based. Lately both Apple and Microsoft have been losing market share to devices running the Google Android mobile OS. Google's own smartphone isn't all that open...but the OS is and other vendors can use it and modify it for their own devices...which hopefully could be more open.
Anyway there is a "market" of at least one unit for whoever puts out the most "open" smartphone...namely me ;)
I was pretty surprised over this too.
Funny. This doesn't turn up on the active discussion on Babble section on Rabble. Is it because it is in the reactions section?
iPAQ (HP) allows for alternative OS, like Linux and netBSD. I think it will even dual boot. Are there any more handheld devices or phones like iPAQ? There has to be. I wouldn't get too attached to your handheld these days. There should be lotsa competition in the next few years from Nokia and Motorola. Personal devices will become smaller and more capable than current versions, we can count on it. Droid phones look pretty cool.
Actuallly I think that the question should be whether or not you as a user have the maximum possible control over your devices that you want to have.
Personally I am a small time programmer. I can do basics like HTML and fool around with coding. Once it gets beyond that I don't have the ability. I got screwed by open source programming on my last phone - I am not sure if it had a virus or if it just didn't work properly and ended up interfering with the rest of the phone. But it wiped my phone clean three times before I figured out which of the three open source programs was the one that was wrecking my phone's programming. I like being able to know that the programs that I download are safe, something that I could never do with my last smartphone unless I was willing to pay IBM big money for their programs (the free ones were few and silly).
I have as much control over my iphone as I want to have. I understand that you would want more but that does not mean that everyone wants more and I thought the left was about providing choice to people. If they want to have security in downloading apps and don't care about the fact that the "safe" company they are downloading from has control over which are displayed as long because that control means they are safe to download without having to worry about being techy (and the programs I downloaded to my smartphone you had to be a little savy to figure out how to install and where to put them on the phone) people should be able to choose that. If people want more control than they can go to a different system which gives them more control. Now if there was a campaign to destroy all computers except the apples software which does not give control then, yes I would agree with you, not leftist at all but there is not. Apple is just one option for people who don't want or need the control of being able to create or download apps or programs because they don't know how to do it or how to fix it if something goes wrong.
Exactly. If you are happy with it stick with it or buy it, if not choose another option but please don't take this option away from people who are happy with the iphone and the way that it works, to me that would be very un-leftist.
Why iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad Owners Should Use Linux.
I don't think anyone here is arguing that Apple shouldn't exist, or that computing shouldn't be user-friendly, or that they shouldn't have an app store filled with "safe" apps. Personally, I'd be perfectly happy if they did what Android does: allow apps to be loaded from outside the app store, but with the option turned off by default. If you don't want to take the risk, don't load any apps from outside the app store. If Apple doesn't want to sell an app, that's fine, it's their store. Consumers can go elsewhere to get it if they want to. Everyone wins, right?
And sure, people are happy with their iPhones. I was quite happy with mine, it did most of what I wanted and it did it quite well. But what if, tomorrow, someone came out with some new app that would make your life better? If Apple rejected it for whatever reason, you wouldn't have the option to take the chance. Sure, you could buy a different phone and get it that way, if you can afford to drop hundreds of dollars on a phone. If the app store only model becomes the industry standard (and Microsoft is copying it in their new phone OS), you may not even have that option.
Maybe the people driving Hummers are quite happy with them too. That's not the problem - the problem is what they do to the world around them. This is the same thing.
Well, I've said it before and I'll say it again: The whole open source thing has little if any political significance. It's not "progressive" to use Linux. Moreover, open source software generally would be a disaster on devices like the iphone/ipad, which need to keep things exceedingly simple and the possibility of "things getting screwed up" to a bare minimum. But what's the use? This isn't a rational debate.
(Anyway, I downloaded the app. And I'm as geeky as anyone else here.)
Marx would say let the capitalists build it and even globalize it. Because the workers will take possession one day in the future regardless. At that point we will truly decide what we want the internet to be.
I disagree with this. The way every other computer works is that you have to pay for the security of downloading or buying software from safe sources such as IBM. The way the apple model works is they entice customers with free apps. I have about 60 apps on my phone and I paid for 2. Are there apps out there that would make my life better that I would have to pay for? Undoubtable yes. But I didn't buy the phone so that I could get apps that would make my life better in ways I never imagined. I bought it for the features it came with that are a necessity for running my business. Everything else is just cake.
If the model were to change so that you could download software from anywhere, and for free, then they would have to go to the current model of providing safe apps, that are user friendly - for a fee. Right now the incentive to explore paid apps is to get the free version or look for free version and then move to paid versions of software. I like the model the way that it is because I have so many useful apps on my phone that I did not have to pay for. If you want to get apps downloaded to your phone that is not provided by the company (in this case apple) don't buy apple, buy something else that you can get whatever you program you want. My old smart phone was a windows based smart phone and I could have downloaded whatever I wanted onto it. But because I had this freedom if I wanted safe, reliable downloads I had to pay because IBM had no incentive for providing them for free because you could get downloads from anywhere for free. But those downloads may have bugs, be hard to install, hard to use for a non tech person or have viruses. To avoid that you had to go to IBM (or other similarly safe company which makes programs for Windows based systems) and pay for the privilege to have downloads or programs free of bugs, easy to install and without viruses.
I am not saying that the apple way of providing things is for everyone. For people who are willing to spend hundreds of dollars on programs for their smart phone it might be better to buy another device that they can download programs from anywhere if they want safe, easy software. For techy people who find it easy to figure out how to do things on a computer or if something goes wrong how to fix it it might be better for them to get another phone that they can fool around with to put stuff on. The list goes on. But for me this system works perfectly by providing free apps that are easy to use and secure. So please don't take that away from me because it doesn't suit your needs.
Whowwwow I've gotta have this app. Because I just can't tell the diff between a Modaglini and a Leonard Devinsee
I've always thought that Linux tinkerers and the pious followers of the Church of St. Richard of Stallman are a bit like those guys who tinker with their cars on a Saturday afternoon. Thing is, those car guys really just can't wrap their head around why anyone would take their car to some STRANGER for an oil change! What kind of undeserving car owner would let some other man handle their car's oilpan like that?? And if one or another car has a really easy-to-access timing belt, why don't people care about that? That's really important when you go to adjust your timing! How are people so wilfully blind?
And so it is that the FOSS crowd just can't seem to wrap their head around the idea that most people like "Free as in 'I don't have to pay money'" and that's about it? If you manufactured a car (and I'm not sure this hasn't been done) whose electronic fuel injection can only be repaired by a professional, people would still buy that car. Because they don't really care about tuning their own injectors. I'll make it simple: it's just not important to them. Driving their car is.