Introducing the rabble.ca app for iPhone, iTouch and iPad! And how you can win an iTouch!

Why is rabble promoting the locked-down proprietary software world of Apple Computers?

When you create a software application for any of these "i" devices, you have to get Apple's permission in order to distribute it...and it can only be distributed via Apple's "app store".    If you have an Apple device, you don't own it.   You are merely a tenant on that device and can only do the things that Apple "allows" you to do with it.

Why would rabble see this as a good thing?   Why is rabble buying into Apple's "digital restrictions management" schemes?

Rabble should be promoting a progressive approach to computing ...namely...software freedom, open devices and an open internet.   Apple doesn't represent any of these things.

Corporations like Apple and Microsoft are the Alberta tarsands of computing.

See photo of Free Software Foundation's "Defective by Design" campaign picket at the Apple iPad launch

Quote:

Can't say I know about this...do you have a source?

No. I just meant that they are made of plastic (i.e. oil). They're also made with sweatshop labour in China. I guess the hipsters at rabble who dreamed up this contest forgot about labour and the environment as they were so bedazzled by that cool touch screen.

ok: Istooges.

is hipster a bad name? i thought that it was just what you call left-leaning people with iPhones?

i read rabble on a used laptop off kajiji running Ubuntu.

Now if rabble started giving away re-furbished linux machines for a contest they might be onto something!

P.S. That would be an amazing idea for a contest. :)  I will pass that suggestion along!  Especially since our site now runs on free software (Drupal).

Quote:

Was your used laptop made by well-paid union members in North America using environmentally-friendly products?

Of course not. I did manage to divert someone else's computer from becoming part of the environmental disaster that we are inflicting on oppressed regions with our trinkets for another few years.

I don't get your logic. You think that because all electronics are made with bad enviro and labour practices that makes rabble's decision to give away new iTouches and support the spread of these products ok?

Would it be cool if rabble gave away a hummer that came with episodes of rabble tv pre-loaded on the DVD player?

ps- i would enter any rabble contest that might end with me getting a used linux machine!

Hey, that's a great idea, re: the Hummer!  I'll pass that along! :D

(Kidding, kidding.)

I agree. At the current rate of consumption, scientists say we will need another couple of planets to supply the raw materials at some point. I think the world of computing will become a lot smaller in this next decade. Computer and memory chips will continue to shrink and become more powerful than ever. We'll have teleputers, and more powerful than desktop computing technology of today, in the palms of our hands.

Michelle wrote:

Hee.  This is true (re: wanting less computer stuff around the house). ;)

Le T, I definitely take your point, though, about refurbishing old computers.  You're right that it is way more environmentally-friendly to make an old computer run much longer on free software than to throw stuff away every other year and get new stuff that runs all the latest proprietary software.

That said, though, there ARE new innovations in technology that newer devices do that old ones don't.  Are we killing the environment because of this?  Yeah, we are.  It's a difficult thing - do we want new innovations in communications? Sure. Do we want to pay the environmental price for it? Nope, I don't. And I know they're not mutually compatible.

One of those innovations is writing free software that is specifically designed to run on old computer hardware.   There are dozens of "lightweight" versions of GNU/Linux that are designed for this purpose.    For instance there's a version called "Slitaz" that fits into a mere 30 MB.   I had a later vintage Pentium III computer with a defective stick of RAM in it.   I was able to boot this computer and get it up and running because of the small size of this operating system.

In any case the proprietary software world will never write software for "out of date" computers.   There's no money to be made.

radiorahim wrote:

...there's a version called "Slitaz" that fits into a mere 30 MB.   I had a later vintage Pentium III computer with a defective stick of RAM in it.   I was able to boot this computer and get it up and running because of the small size of this operating system.

I quoted that only because it implicitly highlights the necessity to futz with hardware and software when trying to work on a non-standard system (i.e., I read "I was able to..." to really mean, "After several hours of futzing with this and that hardware and software, I was able to...").

I think a lot of people enjoy futzing around with hardware and software...the futzing, itself, is fun.

But, most people do not enjoy futzing with hardware or software (more precisely, they positively hate it).  They simply want to surf the web, play around on their Facebook page, listen to music or watch video clips, send and receive email, etc. ... and they simply want their device to work with an absolutely minimum amount of effort.

For them, an out-of-the-box Mac, PC, or iPad works perfectly.

...like any other Intel system.

The point is that there is nothing special about Mac. Originally Macintosh looked towards creating a specialized product, especially in the area of high end graphic utilities, and up until 2005 even used the G series chip which allowed for higher speed execution of certain applications, if the applications were pre "futzed" to properly integrate with the Mac OS, and the G chip. Now of course the pre-futzing was expensive to do, and so elminating the Macintosh (Motorolla) specific hardware, and going over to Intel, meant not only that Mac could assemble its machines for cheaper, but also basically get them to run any Mircosoft application with the minimum of futzing, reducing costs there as well.

Now they are just as slow as any other Intel machine at running any standard microsoft product. In essence, they took the Mac brand, removed everything that made it unique, cut costs by going over to generic parts, and huge amounts of overhead caused by having to make popular programs take advantage of G chip features, and continue to market the their computers on the brand alone.

An absolutely classic case of a corporate cost efficiency hatchet job, designed to sell you an product that for all intents and purposes is no different than anything else, and then sell it to you at boutique prices.

In other words: Macintosh is Icandy,

I don't think that you know what you're talking about, Fidel. There are many distros of linux, all very different.

I would say that Ubuntu is easier to figure out and use than Vista. If you are a "technophobe" and, like Sven, just want to read emails, surf the net, write stories, edit photos, listen to music, etc. you don't have to do anything complicated. I installed windows and ubuntu on an older dell machine and ubuntu recognized all hardware automatically. Windows needed me to download drivers for graphics, sound, and usb cards. The sound card still isn't working right in windows.

I would encourage people just to try a user-friendly distro like Ubuntu. It's much easier than you would believe by listening to people like Fidel and Sven.

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. 

Sven wrote:

 

I quoted that only because it implicitly highlights the necessity to futz with hardware and software when trying to work on a non-standard system (i.e., I read "I was able to..." to really mean, "After several hours of futzing with this and that hardware and software, I was able to...").

I think a lot of people enjoy futzing around with hardware and software...the futzing, itself, is fun.

But, most people do not enjoy futzing with hardware or software (more precisely, they positively hate it).  They simply want to surf the web, play around on their Facebook page, listen to music or watch video clips, send and receive email, etc. ... and they simply want their device to work with an absolutely minimum amount of effort.

For them, an out-of-the-box Mac, PC, or iPad works perfectly.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Snert wrote:

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.

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.

Quote:

This would be like Microsoft preventing you from installing Firefox and saying you could only browse the web through Internet Explorer.

I wonder if Apple is headed towards an anti-trust-type lawsuit like microsoft?

Le T wrote:

Quote:

Who should control the devices that you paid good money for...you...or the vendor?

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.

Snert wrote:

 

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?

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 ;)