Sheesh. Apple announced a new model iPhone, the iPhone 7, and once again, they’ve jiggered cables and connectors. I’m a big Mac fan, and have been since the early 1980s, but there are two things I detest about their products.
-
iTunes is a clumsy, ugly abomination. Why a company with a reputation for clean interfaces persists in retaining this kludge is a mystery.
-
Cables. Fuck but I hate Apple’s constant game of musical chairs. I’ve lived through SCSI (various flavors), weird buses, incessant games with power connectors, firewire, thunderbolt, etc., etc., etc. I have a huge collection of oddball cables and adapters at home and in the lab.
And now, with this new phone, they’ve discarded a simple, robust connector: the simple 3.5mm audio port. The one every other phone and music player has by default; I’ve got one on the dashboard of my car, for heck’s sake. The most reliable connector I’ve got. The one I use for the really nice high quality headphones I just bought.
And what do we get instead? No connector. It uses a wireless signal. And worse, it’s not anything standard — it’s a proprietary Apple signal. The only thing that works with it are Apple’s $159 wireless earbuds…or alternatively, you use a dongle that plugs into the thunderbolt port and has a standard microphone jack.
I will not buy it. It’s dumb. And unfortunately, I’m using an iPhone 4 (which is fine, I’m in no rush to update), and if I were to need a new model, I’m not going to get one that saddles me with an additional battery and has a couple of easily lost overpriced tiny earbuds. Android would look more attractive at that point.
I’m just going to have to hope that they see reason with iPhone 8, and revert back to something standard. They have in the past, many times.
Richard Stallman, creator of GNU / Linux, outlines the reasons not to use Apple:
Apple uses Chinese slave labor and its CEO openly supports and raises money for Paul Ryan.
Those two things alone should be enough to keep you from ever buying anything Apple.
If you like walled gardens, Apple is great. For everyone else….not so much.
So I guess maximizing profits trumps gay rights, even for a gay CEO.
Once you finally make the move to Android you’ll wonder why you held out so long (I know I did).
Apart from the cost of having to buy your apps again how your data is tied to Apple, is there anything really keeping you to an iThing? I went with an android tablet that’s tied to my Google+ account so when my first tablet broke, nearly everything transferred over to the new tablet without any problems – including the programs I bought.
I installed iTunes on a computer years ago and could never get it off. It kept re-installing itself after I removed it. I won’t make that mistake again.
Great post, penalfire. Apple gets away with it because 1) people don’t care and 2) it makes Apple money. Capitalism – exploiting people in any way it thinks it can no matter who it hurts.
I originally migrated from Windows to Apple to avoid this type of corporate gouging (i.e. forcing customers to buy way overpriced items to maintain compatibility with basic functions). I always knew that Apple would start doing the same thing once it got big enough to get away with it. It’s been gearing up for a few years now, but this is clearly the apex. There is absolutely no technical justification for this change (despite the people arguing for the superiority of the new connector). The 3.5mm jack is small, cheap, effective, passive, and universal.
[quote]Apple’s constant game of musical chairs[/quote]
For some people the last straw was getting rid of 3.5″ floppies, for others it was not supporting Flash. We really are worse off for getting rid of old industry standards.
[quote]I have a huge collection of oddball cables and adapters at home and in the lab[/quote]
So you ARE in support of getting rid of extra cables?!?
[quote]It uses a wireless signal. And worse, it’s not anything standard — it’s a proprietary Apple signal[/quote]
Bluetooth is “proprietary Apple signal”?!?
Don’t get me wrong, I agree that iTunes is Apple’s biggest shame; a bloated, unusable mess. And I am indeed in two minds about the wisdom of removing the headphone jack (I don’t really care, as I already use wireless headphones, after breaking the cables on half a dozen normal ones in the space of two years).
Still, the pros for Apple products vastly outnumber the cons, especially in the mobile space. The dodginess of Android space due to slow or non-existent software updates by the manufacturers, the awful Marketplace, certainly keeps me away from that.
One has to deal with the 1/4″ jack on stereo receivers, but the adapter for
the 3.5mm cable is easily available and inexpensive.
Apple will probably claim wireless is the future. But I stopped using
wireless keyboards and mice because of signal unreliability. Cables are far
from obsolete.
chrislawson I’m not sure when Windows forced customers to buy stuff to maintain compatibility, but I’ll take your word for it. Thing is for decades if you used Windows you had options in terms of hardware and software. Don’t like MS office? There is/was WordPerfect. Don’t like Outlook? Thunderbird. IE had Firefox and Chrome. Windows Media Player has a host of other programs. Apple has been more restrictive in what it allows on its system. I built my last 4-5 computers using parts bought from a store. I can’t do the same with a mac I can customize it, but I don’t have nearly the options I do with PCs.
Thing is, it’s pretty much always been this way. If you have a working, older, Apple computer you could probably sell it to someone who doesn’t like the changes in the new OS or doesn’t want to buy their programs again. Meanwhile I could dig through my old DVD-ROMS and install a game I played 12 years ago and it would still work.
chrislawson@8: you live on a different world than mine.
Apple has *always* used expensive non-standard peripherals. It’s usually technically better stuff. And it’s tested so it works well for a few versions of Apples — until suddenly they switch to the latest shiny dongle.
Windows on the other hand is compatible forever and can be set up on low-grade flimsy hardware available in any corner bazaar. Which means nothing ever quite works, and it’s impossible to write decent software, but nothing quite breaks.
ginckgo
[quote]Still, the pros for Apple products vastly outnumber the cons, especially in the mobile space.[/quote]
What pros? I haven’t found any. I check out Apple products occasionally I don’t see anything that justifies their higher price. Between that and how they act like you don’t really own your own device, I can’t trust them with anything.
[quote]The dodginess of Android space due to slow or non-existent software updates by the manufacturers[/quote]
Really? My android tablet gets an update about once a month. I haven’t experienced this “dodginess” either.
[quote]the awful Marketplace[/quote]
Again, your opinion. I don’t have an issue with it.
[quote]certainly keeps me away from that.[/quote]
Then how do you know about this alleged “dodginess” or the “awful” marketplace?
The iPhone SE had been a fine replacement for my 4s (which probably just needed a new battery, but it was scratched and slow).
Android seems fine too. Certainly easier to tinker with.
rms is reliably rms. Good on him that he can give away his work for free and still make a living. Most of us don’t get to do that, which makes us all evil, which is fine by me.
They’ve finally jumped the shark… many times before they’ve come close, but to me it’s kinda the last straw.
So you know how, on a normal computer, you can choose which OS you want to run, be it Windows, Linux, OpenBSD, or even something you wrote yourself? You know, how the computer is yours to do with as you please?
Yeah, with Android devices it’s the same (especially with the phones actually built by Google). You can run the stock OS (and let it update itself), you can run a different version of Android designed by hackers, you can even run some other version of Linux (i.e. Ubuntu) if you like. It’s your choice.
You can also choose to install software that doesn’t come from Google’s app store. There’s a security button you press first for safety, but it’s up to you. There are even other app stores: Amazon has one, there are vendor ones, there’s even a hacker one.
Meanwhile, Apple sues people who merely publish information about how to use their phones in unapproved ways. Obey. The Ghost of Jobs commands you. Disobey and be punished.
If I wasn’t so cynical about these things already, I’d be frankly shocked that people are looking at a silly headphone jack as the last straw. I mean really?! They give you a freakin’ dongle. And it still does ordinary Bluetooth.
@1 penalfire, can you toss me a link please? That’s great stuff!
Apple products are okay for my 87-year-old grandmother, who got her first iPad (and first computer ever) at 80, and an iPhone last year (and more power to her, frankly…most octogenarians don’t even scratch the surface of the vast world of experiences and information available online, but she saw the potential and decided to dive in). But to me, they are a bit too much of a “black box”…I like to tell my devices to do things before they do them. I like to know where my files are stored and to have access to them in whatever program I choose. And iTunes is the biggest pile of shit music player/interface ever designed. I mean it’s worse than Windows Media Player. By far. Apple is interested only in Apple, and it curates people’s experiences to get them to commit to Apple products over others. Not because they necessarily want to, but because they have to. And that’s fuckin’ manipulative as hell. Plus they practically use slave labor in China. Assholes.
I don’t know how much better an experience my grandmother would have had with, say, a Windows computer, or Android device, or if that would be too much, but I hate that Apple are deliberately marketing themselves as the best option for people like her, because I don’t think it’s true. Apple devices limit people into carefully designed boxes that Apple wants you to stay in. Windows is not perfect (that’s an understatement), and we should all probably using open-source platforms for best results anyway (if I had any courage at all I’d switch, but I’m just so used to the Microsoft Windows experience, it’s comfortable for me), but I hope Apple continues to make horrible decisions like this headphone jack thing, so less people buy their devices. They were progressive and innovative as all hell back in the 80s and 90s…today they’re just a faceless corporation that hates humanity. It seems.
https://stallman.org/apple.html
The “what’s bad” series is great:
GOOGLE
https://stallman.org/google.html
FACEBOOK
https://stallman.org/facebook.html
His website is a good resource for criticism of the tech world.
You should try using a virtual machine (VMWare or Virtual Box) to run a
distro of GNU / Linux within Windows. You can wean yourself off that way,
with no loss of productivity (due to a sudden transition).
It takes some time to get used to the different environment, but Ubuntu has
become unbelievably user friendly. The codebase is so polished now that I
find it less buggy than Windows in some ways.
Just make sure you have 8+ GB RAM.
When considering the value of water resistance, it makes sense to remove that 3.5mm hole in the shell of the device. replacing it with a adapter that connects to the surface dots makes a little more sense to keep water out of the insides.
and wireless earbuds makes a little more sense to free ones head from that device dangling from ones ears.
yes Apple is arrogant and overprotective and exclusive, yet there are advantages to some of the features they’re implementing.
sincerely, not paid for by Apple Ovelords
First, the new phone does come with wired EarPods, so you can have your tether to the phone. It uses the Lightening connector. I’m sure there will be third-party versions on the shelf soon.
The 3.5mm audio connector has been around since the mid-60s. It’s probably one of the oldest technologies in any modern device. It’s not without it’s share of problems. As a musician I’ve cursed them when I had to use them because they’re noisy and flimsy. In pocket-carried devices, they tend collect gunk that is difficult to get out…and doing so can damage the device. Plus it’s a way in for water, a devastating problem for mobile devices. I suspect to get iPhone 7 into the “water resistant” class, the 3.5mm had to go.
As for the new short-range wireless stack, my guess is Apple has developer specs so you won’t have to buy an Apple branded products if you don’t want to. There will be others, some of which will be cheaper. You can also continue to use Bluetooth earphones. I personally use Bluetooth headphones and earbuds regularly because I don’t like the tangle of wires. Bluetooth, which dates from the late 80s, is another aging technology and probably on the bubble.
As for the constant churn in connectors and so forth. Yep, it’s a hassle and I’ve got the boxes of useless cables and this-and-that’s to prove it, too. But, would you really want to still be using a SCSI connector? I wouldn’t. SCSI was, well, scuzzy. Part of progressing these devices is introducing new technologies at every component, including connectors, so until we reach perfection we’ll have to put up with some evolution.
And the more flexible/advanced computing-stuff your iStuff is supposed to do for you (not merely being a simple one-size-fits-all phone), the more you want it to be that way. It’s kind of stunning that they keep doubling-down like this… not surprising, since like others have said this has always been their strategy. But at some point it’s just going to become too absurd, right?
For my iThing, we have the old HD model iPods. I just replaced the battery in my wife’s unit. A whopping $7.00 for a new battery, no need to buy new devices to interface with it (she has a Bose speaker/base for her ancient iPod).
I’m still using a 2009 MacBook Pro, the later models are just overpriced MacBooks, not worthy of attention. Pity, Apple used to beef up the hardware in the Pro models, not so much any longer.
I *might* eventually get a mini, just might. If I were to go for a workstation, I’d go with a Dell, with 12 – 16 cores, which Apple doesn’t even come close to.
But, changing connectors after using the same damned connector for years is way too much like some engineer justifying his damned job.
Although, I rather wonder about PZ’s objection to SCSI, which was a standard for quite a few years and had backward compatibility. Hell, I used to have a SCSI scanner and SCSI expansion drives. That’s been taken over by SATA and SAS, to good effect.
Back in the day, Apple II’s weren’t nearly as locked down and proprietary. But they got cloned like mad. The first Macs were when Apple went control-freaky.
I kind of live in both worlds but mostly not Apple.
I fell for Apple once. I was a teenager and was really impressed with whatever version of the iPod was available at the time. That was the last time I privately owned an Apple product, because I absolutely grew to loathe how they try to tie you to their specific accessories and plugs and want to force you to get their overpriced, overdesigned, underwhelming stuff. For a computer I’ve always used a PC and been used to, say, buying additional RAM and plugging it in or replacing a graphics card or whatever. And with my mp3-players I could always cheaply replace my headphones when the wire broke or a bud tore off or what have you. I value the ability to replace parts too much. Now the only Apple product I use is a MacBook I sometimes need for bioinformatics work, but I don’t privately own that one and I would never buy one for myself, or any other Apple products for that matter.
I’m eternally at loss as to what Apple (and to some extent Samsung) are offering for the money. I like a shiny new thing as much as the next geek, but I can’t see what I’m getting with a phone that’s three times the price of my current shiny new phone (headphones not included).
Apple brought the craze for new gizmos as status symbols to new heights.
They also pioneered technologies that *actively work against the user*, which is something I can’t come to terms with.
I bought it, it is mine, it MUST do *MY* bidding, not that of its manufacturer.
Apple stuff is technically superior to Microsoft’s, but I value my freedom more than corporate eye candy, so I’ll stick to Linux, thank you very much.
As long as you do not depend on a specific, Mac-only or Windows-only application, Ubuntu is easier to install and configure than Windows, runs on far cheaper hardware and actually respects the user.
Also, the reason Apple wants to get rid of the analog connector, is that it is the last technology that cannot be put under control of DRM.
Once sound reaches the jack connector, it is yours to do whatever you want with it: you can listen to it with whatever device you want or even record it, and Apple can’t have it.
The fully-digital plugs will ensure that the DRM chain is uninterrupted, giving Apple full control of what you do with the sounds you play with your device.
Wanna play your audio on a larger stereo? Maybe you’ll need to pay a special licence for that.
Wanna develop a new listening device? You will need the official blessing of Apple.
https://www.fastcompany.com/3062741/the-iphones-disappearing-headphone-jack-reason-for-concern
Fun fact: Apple’s iPhone business alone is bigger than the whole of Microsoft.
Earbuds without a cord? They’ll easily get lost. Also, how will people know you don’t want to talk to them, if they don’t see a cord?
@28 F.O.
Bahahahaha! That comment really made me chortle.
Pretty sure my Blackberry has a jack … and bluetooth, if I ever want to use it. What’s the problem?
Me too. :)
I suppose it’s dependent upon what metrics are used to determine “superior”. By the metrics important to me, Apple rates rather low. By my wife’s, quite high.
Alverant@11 — MS has been forcing customers to upgrade for as long as I can remember. You’re probably thinking of their OS upgrades but that’s not what I’m referring to. (Yes, MS had the egregious habit of needing to release a new OS version every 3-4 years to keep their revenue turning over even though they only had an important design change to implement every 6-8 years, but at least you could usually get by on an old OS version for a long time — my current work offices have only just abandoned XP.) But it’s their Office suite that drove me up the wall.
The thing that finally exhausted my patience with MS was being forced me to upgrade my Office Suite for the third time in about 10 years. Now, Office is backwards compatible, but the genius of MS’s marketing is that they are aggressively, and deliberately not forwards-compatible. What this meant was that as more of my work colleagues upgraded to new versions of Office, I could no longer read their documents because MS kept making changes to the file formats that served no useful function other than to make previous versions unable to read them.
Had these been important updates for better functionality, I would have understood. But they were not. With only one or two exceptions, the newer file formats did not improve the ease, efficiency, storage capacity, or any other significant function of the software. They existed solely to force old users to upgrade even though their existing software was perfectly functional.
numerobis@12:
Yes, Apple has been the king of overpriced accessories ever since the iPod, but by and large I found I can live without those accessories or I can find a good, much cheaper third-party alternative. For sure, that genuine Apple Magic aluminium wireless keyboard looks fantastic and can run for weeks on one charge, but I can get an excellent Logitech keyboard for less than a third the price.
I guess it helps that I only ever bought Apple laptops and one or two of the cheaper iPod variants and I never bought cables from them unless there was absolutely no alternative. I’ve also never bought an iPhone, being more than happy with a good one-generation-behind-the-cutting-edge bloatware-free Android (Motos have been pretty good for this). I also change my own batteries in my MacBooks. You have to invest in the tools (about $20) and the battery (which takes about 18 months for battery manufacturers to bother cloning). Because I don’t use a lot of power-hungry applications, I can get a good 4 years out of my laptops, so that up-front expense isn’t so bad.
(Quick reminder — long before Apple got into this scam, a lot of PC-compatible peripheral manufacturers used to switch a couple of the wires in their SCSI ports just to force the purchase of way overpriced cables.)
chrislawson@35: it’s almost impossible to maintain forward-compatibility. Just being able to save as the old format is a ton of work, and even merely loading the old format is a substantial effort. MS is spending a lot of money every release maintaining compatibility, which is a strong indication there’s profit in maintaining compatibility, contra your assumption.
The way to handle these upgrades in a common office is to make sure everyone uses the same version. Either upgrade everyone or no one. Then people complain that the IT department won’t let them upgrade to use the latest features — or that IT forces them to upgrade all the time.
Updates always have some new important functionality. You in particular may not care for it, but if not, the update wasn’t about you — it was about supporting someone else’s workflow.
By the way, there’s options. OpenOffice is what we use at my current gig; free software. Google has an office suite that offers all the basics *and* is great for collaborative editing (and lets Google store all your data for you). Apple has an office suite of its own, which some of my friends work on (but if they told me any more they’d have to kill me, so I literally know nothing).
To hell with Apple. I have a $2500 IMac on my office desk. The USB ports are in the back, at the bottom of the (all in one) monitor. To insert a flash drive my choices are a) to work blind with my hand under the display, or b) stand up tilt the display forward, reach over the display and down to the bottom. All because some dispshit at Apple decided that convenient USB ports in the front were not aesthetically pleasing. When I complain about this to Apple disciples, they typically say: just go by a USB hub, they’re only $25. They actually view a solution that for nothing more than convenience purposes (that should have been provided) you have to buy a $25 peripheral for a $2500 machine as perfectly reasonable.
And don’t get be started on their power cords, should you want to purchase a spare.
Damn Apple to hell!
to me MS was for “hackers” who could cobble together random bits of hardware from numerous suppliers, with much effort to get it all working together. Apple attempted to provide a single piece of hardware that did everything anyone could possibly want,
That’s why all accessories to Macs etc were only through apple stores and no 3rd party sellers allowed.
I know that’s an obsolete viewpoint that is basically urban myth, but that’s all I can say at this point.
I kinda have a love-hate relationship with Apple. I’ve never liked their full-up computers, but I do generally like their mobile interfaces. I hate their business practices, but can anyone tell me if they are any more evil than any other big multinational that manufactures overseas? I mean, they’re pretty much the biggest, so as an aggregate they’re worse, but I don’t know how many big companies are any more ethical.
@5, jonmelbourne
Really? From a design perspective perhaps, but from an end user perspective I hate most Android interfaces. I have one Apple device and two Android devices, I stopped using the Android devices. While there is a lot to criticize about Apple, one thing that can’t really be disputed is the fact that it’s pretty damned intuitive. The first time I picked up an iPhone I pretty much figured out everything in a few minutes (with the exception of a few of the more arcane functions and shortcuts).
Also, the reason Apple wants to get rid of the analog connector, is that it is the last technology that cannot be put under control of DRM.
There will be old devices, or devices made that don’t support DRM. The only thing Apple will be able to do is make using Apple products inconvenient, and hurt their market. They might be dumb enough to do that, but if they are, it won’t last long.
I actually like organizing my digital media collection outside of iTunes; I only put something into iTunes’ sticky little fingers so I can transfer it to an iDoodad. It’s an extra step but I’ve been working on my digital media collection since WinAmp 1.0 came out, and I’m not going to have someone “re-curate” it for me.
Back in the days when people wore hard contact lenses, there was always the risk that one would pop out and you’d lose it. They were expensive, too: some people had insurance specifically for their lenses. You always had the option of wearing glasses instead, but if you wanted contacts, you took the risk of losing one.
I am having a great deal of trouble seeing how this is different from the new AirPods. If you don’t want to use them, you don’t have to: there are lots of options. If you do want to use them, you presumably understand that you might lose one, and that would be a big nuisance, but you’ve factored that assumption of risk into your purchase. If you’re infuriated by the use of a dongle and the Lightning port to listen to music, you can buy another kind of phone or limp along for another year or two with your current iPhone. Nobody is forcing people to buy and use Apple products: I’m astonished by the widespread anger over the direction the company is taking their technology.
FWIW, I do have an iPhone 5 which is 3 years old and a 4-year-old iPod (paired with wireless Philips earbuds I love), both still going strong. When the time comes to replace them, I’ll take a look at the current offerings and decide what I want to do. I’m certainly not going to lose any sleep over it. Also FWIW, I think the AirPods should have some kind of connecting cable: keeping them separate is just asking for it. But then, I’ve always thought that Apple earphones are horribly uncomfortable and have never used them.
Matrim
Funny, that’s how I felt about my first Android phone. A lot of this shit is about what you’Re used to, not about what is superior. Since MS Office has already been mentioned: I switched from MS Office to Open Office a few years ago and it was PITA. Then I got used to it. Then I worked at a school where the computers are, of course, equipped with MS Office. What a PITA! It often took me 3 minutes to remember how to print a page…
robertmatthews
Dotcha think there might be a difference between a necessary item and a fun gadget?
Yeah, why pay attention to decisions geared towards total control over items people have rightfully bought?
As someone who has loud sound induced hearing loss and tinnitus — a combination of youthful rock concert going and heavy equipment exposure in the military — I urge everyone to avoid ear buds at all costs, whether wired or not. There is an epidemic of tinnitus and hearing loss in 20 somethings across Europe and the U.S. due to the iPod and other MP3 devices. And there is no cure. Once you’ve got it, that’s it. Barring a medical breakthrough a young man or woman who has engaged in ototoxic behaviors, such as cranking up the volume on the ear buds while listening to their favorite tunes, is stuck with an at best annoying condition and at worst a debilitating one. It’s ironic that more can be done with correcting malfunctioning eyes than ears. The problem is that it is difficult to get into the inner ears to see what’s going on. Even an MRI can’t reveal too much and they are expensive (take it from me). There are few good ways to get medication inside the ears. Inner ear surgery is prohibitively expensive for most people, even with good insurance.
So, my advice is to ditch the ear buds. And if you absolutely must use them, keep the volume on low — preferably under 80dB (a lawn mower is 90 dB.)
Giliell
Arguably contact lenses aren’t a necessary item because you could always wear glasses or get Lasik: they’re basically a fun gadget. They’re the AirPods of eyeglasses.
And as I have already said, if you don’t like the direction Apple is going with the iPhone 7, you are free to buy any other kind of phone you like. Nobody is compelling anyone to be a part of that particular ecosystem, and Apple is not reverse-engineering existing phones which people have rightfully bought to eliminate the headphone jack. Technology moves forward, and people have the option of 1) buying wireless earphones, 2) using the included dongle, or 3) buying some other jack-containing phone. I don’t see how that’s so terrible.
Robert Mathews
Wrong. Contact lenses are a variation of a necessary aid for people with bad eyesight. While you can happily live without any earplugs, living without a seeing aid is much less fun. There are also some very good reasons for a particular person to wear contact lenses.
There’s some privileged crap right there.
1. As people have pointed out, with Apple’s policy it is hard to switch to any other system. Sure, there’s always a way to transfer stuff, but that’s another thing: not everybody has the time or skill to do so, so people are essentially forced to stay with Apple or lose content.
2. The new technology actively prevents you from using the current ways to transfer your things because Apple controls it all.
3. I guess you can say the very same things about pyramid schemes: Hey, nobody’s forcing you to play, what’s the fuss?
4. I love people taking the time to chastise people for caring about something.
@ =8)-DX #32, @ YOB – Ye Olde Blacksmith #34
If it wasn’t for user lock-in and abuse of dominant position, Microsoft would not exist.
That’s literally the only two reasons the company is still into business.
No start-up touches Windows with a ten-feet pole, and there’s many, many good reasons for that.
Apple managed to wrestle a big slice of MS’ market, and not among the fashion-chasers, but among **software developers**.
As a Linux user, I can still have respect for the technical skills of a developer using a Mac.
I am ok with your grandma buying a Windows computer because it’s what the shops sell, or a gamer buying Windows because that’s what runs videogames.
But someone who is given the choice and still picks Windows is an incompetent who does not know how to use a computer.
Huh. Well, I guess I’m just imagining my 20 year career as a professional software developer then…
Giliell
You’re just…determined to miss or misunderstand every point I make, aren’t you? That kind of blinkered stubbornness is almost admirable. The pyramid scheme comment, though: that’s just bad debate technique. You might want to work on that.
@43, Giliell
I wasn’t really used to anything when I picked up the iPhone 3S. My phone before that was a flip phone. Admittedly I had been using the iPhone for some time before getting an Android, so it’s possible I’d have found it intuitive if I’d come in as cold as I did with the iPhone.
@Matrim #50
I never used iPhone, but I went straight from super old mobile to a new modern smartphone with Android. It took me about 5 minutes to figure out most basic functions and I never got any trouble with the interface.
So I think that any anecdote telling how eithter Android or iPhone is more intuitive is just that – an anecdote.
Bill Buckner @38: The placement of the USB ports on the iMac is my most hated thing, too! Every time I have to put in a thumb drive, I’m reminded anew that someone in Cupertino needs a serious beating.
——-
For those saying folks should switch to a computer that they can customize or run other operating systems on: NO. Look, I get it, you love to tinker with your machine and make it do fancy things. You spend time programming and enjoy it. That is AWESOME for you! I really like gardening. I enjoy starting seeds under a lamp in March, and adding cow poop to the soil, and rigging weird trellises to grow my watermelons on so the slugs and bunnies don’t eat them.
But I want my computer to just fucking WORK. I don’t want to fiddle around with the guts. EVER. Just as I want to get into my car and turn the key and it starts up and all I need to do is put it in gear and pay attention to what I’m doing. Yes, it was fun replacing a headlight bulb myself, but I’m not really interested in tuning up the engine or replacing the alternator or even changing the damn oil myself. I will take the car to professionals who do this for a living and they will charge me an exorbitant fee but I will be doing other things with that time, such as harvesting weird breeds of potatoes.
Back when Macs were running System 5, it was still possible for a regular person to learn a minimum of cool stuff that would allow them to tinker with their computer and make the interface look how they wanted it to look. But it has gotten to where the level of interest needed to fiddle with a computer’s inner workings is “You maybe could do this for a living, or at least get a few reasonable freelance gigs.” And that interest has to be ongoing, because as things change, the user needs to learn new things about the inner workings of the programming.
Whatever the flaws of the walled garden–and yes, you are all 100% right about that!–Macs still remain a computer you can plug in and go. Swearing at the poor design, but okay. (I don’t know about Windows PCs, but I suspect they are in the same category now.) When I buy things from the App store, I have reasonable confidence that at least they won’t come with a virus or otherwise crash my system (unless they’re made by Adobe). And when it needs updates, it updates automatically.
(And you can still tell it to not update. I haven’t updated iTunes on any computer in years, and I won’t until they stop having the least-competent summer interns work on it.)
———-
I don’t have a smartphone (I enjoy the slap of closing the clamshell), but when I do decide to switch, I have always planned to go with an Android model. I do have an iPad, and I love it, but it’s a fancy entertainment toy for me: books, games, Twitter. I chose the iPad over other options because the Mini was the exact size and dimensions I wanted. If Samsung or someone offers a similarly light device with similar dimensions, I may switch over when time comes to upgrade.
What I really want is some company to “disrupt the market” and come out with a plug-and-play computer/laptop/tablet/phablet/phone line that will run as easily and unfussily as Apples used to, but with the robustness and open playground of PC/Android. And perhaps offering free upgrades to their version of one’s Apple-based apps and software. That would be a hell of a marketing incentive to get folks to switch.
robertmatthews
Bless your heart!
F.O.
How’s the well doing?
Really? I’ve got 4 GB, and usage rarely goes above 2 GB. I’m not convinced that the paging memory has ever been used.
Re iPhone7, the top one has a 919 GBP price tag on it this side of the pond. For that, I can buy eleven of the Android phones I currently use. …or 4 PCs of the sort I’m typing this on…
It’s late in this thread, but I’ll pile on anyway, ’cause I have had an antipathy for Apple from way back.
I don’t understand those who think that Apple is a computer company — it doesn’t make computers, it makes devices that incorporate computers. Somebody said that it made things to do anything you want. No it doesn’t. It makes things, objects, devices, that do a limited number of things that a good number of people want; and if you have something new to do, Apple expects you to apply to them for approval, which they will give if it brings them more money. They made that very clear very early in their corporate history.
In the early ’80’s, I used an inheritance from my grandmother to buy an Apple III and a heavy duty daisy-wheel printer. The word processor that came with it was written in what they called Business Basic. My wife built a home business around it, doing manuscript preparation for academics. Over the next year or two, I was able to add many extra features to the program to make it work better for her. She got requests to do mailing lists, but there was no software for that, so I wrote some. I taught myself 6502 Assembly Language, and wrote graphics programs. I wrote a game that displayed a US map and taught my daughter the names of the states and their capitals. I expanded that to a business program that would take spreadsheet data for states and make colored or shaded graphs. I wrote it up for a computer magazine for the Apple III. It was accepted by the magazine, but it ceased publication before the article could come out, because the writing was on the wall that Apple was abandoning the Apple III and its “Sophisticated Operating System” (SOS) for the new Macintosh.
So, I said, OK, I’ll look into this Macintosh thing. What I found was a computer that was so “proprietary” that you literally had to buy another separate Apple computer (the Lisa) in order to be able to write programs to run on the Macintosh.
So I sold the Apple III to a collector, bought a Commodore 64, which was programmable, and never looked back. I used the Commodore, and the later DOS and Linux based computers to develop systems for scientific research, data collection and analysis, quality control, and communication. And the only other Apple product I’ve ever laid down money for was $5.00 for a used Ipod at a garage sale a year or so ago. It’s now full with only a few symphonies and operas, so I guess that wasn’t a good investment even at that cheap price. (I’m still looking for a mobile music solution).
Apple took the computer, something that was supposed to be a general use tool, and turned it into a black box to do their corporate bidding, not to serve the needs of the user. Buying anything Apple is like paying for a hammer that works only if you use the proprietary nails and building plans that you can only get from the same source. A pox upon their proprietary corporation.
And the saintly departed Steve Jobs was a damned fool.
There is a lot to hate about Apple, but seriously? People are still that pissed over those monsters giving them a free U2 album? Yes, it’s not nice forcing gifts on people, but for crying out loud, it’s hardly an example of a company being evil.
Wow, okay. Apple’s forcing you to use their things on their devices might be a user unfriendly practice, but I don’t really see how that makes them a morally evil company. The “using overseas slave labor” part is what does that, imo, not the kind of lame restrictions on what you can do with an iPhone that isn’t jailbroken.
A lot of this reeks of “Anything but open source software is teh ebil and you should stop using every program or website ever, fuck convenience, friends, or business facilitated by these services” Stallmanism.
I’m surprised the poopyhead still has a functioning iPhone4. My 4S’ battery got to the point where it wouldn’t keep running (even after force stopping all apps) for more than about 2 hours before completely draining.
I switched to Android (Samsung Galaxy 6) and have been extremely happy with it. It came pre-loaded with a bunch of crap that I had to delete, but that’s not the phone, that’s the carrier. The music interface is simpler than itunes, but in general, I’m just happy that the battery is much, much more robust (which I understand is a combination of programming and hardware).
Well, first of all, there are a whole lot of concerns about software freedom, openness, respect for users’ autonomy, privacy, security, etc. Those are real issues. It’s not about friendliness or accessibility or something like that. You are not using it; they are using you, often without your knowledge or consent. That is not how it should be.
But aside from that, you don’t want companies driving out competition and creating monopolies and so forth. It’s not that Apple offers some original product or service that others won’t — it’s that Apple is creating these artificial barriers which are “forcing you,” as you said, to use only their products/services if you use a single one of them. They create this little bubble around you, which isn’t useful to you or anyone else except Apple.
They could have their patents and copyrights and so forth, but why make it impossible (or illegal, because of course the government is backing them on this) to have this thing interact usefully with products/services made by other companies (or nonprofits or even yourself)? Don’t these other independent autonomous entities have a right to make/sell things of their own, which will enhance your experience of an Apple product/service? Is there any reason why your products/services need to be consecrated by Apple, and all of the money and control needs to go directly into their hands (not yours), in order for these things to simply be compatible with one another? Why should one company be deciding what you can/should want to do with your own stuff, or what others do with theirs? When and where and why did anyone decide that they have some kind of a right to do that?
re 56:
only the first line was the blockquote, oops
Right, but I don’t think that’s necessarily a moral evil.
I’m not really bugged at all by not being able to use non-apple-approved stuff on my pre-jailbroken phone. It made calls, took pictures, played music, and browsed the internet for me. That I had to use apple-approved programs to do that seems morally insignificant to me,
If I pay to go to the theatre and they disallow me from eating outside food or drink while I’m on the premises, I’m inconvenienced but not offended on a moral level. Their service, their rules, and I can always stream a movie at home or go to a different theatre if bringing outside food is that important to me.
They’re just as allowed to make their programs as the restaurants in my example are to make food. Doesn’t mean that apple has to let you use them on their devices, and doesn’t mean that the theatres have to let you bring that food inside.
There’s no reason why they need to be, but I’m not bothered by the fact that they are. It’s fine to not like it, I just disagree that it’s some huge moral issue.
Because that’s their prerogative, and you agreed to use it in a certain way when you purchased their product? If I sell you a sewing machine with an agreement that you only use it to sew certain things, those would just be the terms of a contract. You can always just buy a different sewing machine, if my limitations are too restrictive for your taste.
I see no moral or legal problem with providers of a service contractually limiting the ways you use that service, but even if there is one in the latter case, I disagree with it.
I’m generally a big fan of Android phones myself, and Android has been improving by leaps and bounds over the last few years. But they’re definitely not without their drawbacks. For one, there’s a huge variety of Android phones and it’s sometimes hard to know which phones are going to be good value. Samsung are the most popular, but I really don’t like their skins (plus the fact that they have their own UI implementation means that they are very slow to release Android updates). I personally like Nexus devices, and use a Nexus 6p as my phone.
That being said, not a big fan of having my data seen without my consent, but if they just wore that openly as part of their contract for using their device, I wouldn’t have a problem with that any more than I would with any other kind of consensual data gathering.
I would never buy the new iPhone and iTunes has become useless. I have a few android devices and they are horrible.
Slow and glitchy to the point of being even more useless than iTunes. It’s a race to the bottom for both brands.
And they ruined the Apple TV too. You have to have a computer running and stream videos to your Apple TV to see homemade movies or photos. You can’t upload your own content to the Apple TV anymore. You can only download media you buy from Apple.
Vivec:
Some people are not like you. I don’t care whether you want to do so, and that isn’t the question. Why should Apple be able to legally and technologically and economically obstruct others from doing so? Where did they get this power over our lives?
That’s not analogous. What’s at stake here is something more like your capacity to watch the movie. They make a computer, and you want to compute with it. (Maybe you’d describe it as “taking pictures,” but you’re computing.) There are ways of computing with it which they will not let you do. Only those which have received the Apple imprimatur are allowed.
This is like the theater insisting that you can’t blink while the film plays, or that you must be interpreting it in a certain way. The reason you went to see the film, how you intended to watch it, what you’re able to get out of it, etc., is not decided by you but by the theater. If you read some other content like a review or a book that helps you understand the film in some useful or interesting way (useful or interesting to you and not the theater, I’m assuming), that will all need to be approved by the theater in advance or it is not allowed.
Well, I haven’t agreed and haven’t purchased their products. I submit that you shouldn’t agree to those terms, and even if you do agree to them that they should not carry so much legal and economic weight behind them.
We’re not talking about an isolated transaction or contract. They are a huge company which is manipulating the entire market (indeed, many different hardware and software markets, on a global level). So how easy is it really to “just buy” a different product which doesn’t come with that baggage, when they’re able to set that precedent and push many other software/hardware companies into using the same absurd tactics? What happens when you no longer have these alternatives — where is your complaint going to be coming from and what will it be about?
@frog
I use a chromebook as my main day to day computer.
The chromebook boots in 6-8 seconds and you are off to the races. Its basically a chrome browser with an app store.
I have been a PC guy since DOS v3.3 and never thought I would see the day when some type of PC would not be my preferred machine.
Extra bonus is that use an Android phone and that integrates very nicely with chrome(book).
I do have a couple of ‘proper’ laptops for very specific tasks. But they will often lie idle for weeks on end.
I avoid the Apple restrictions by not buying Apple products. I’m not missing anything in life by not owning any Apple products.
There are some businesses that, if you don’t like the way they do business, don’t have any real effect on you if you choose to not do business with them. It’s not like Apple is a monopoly.
Their service, their rules. If you find their limitations too restrictive, feel free to get an Android phone or a Windows computer.
I don’t see how that’s morally wrong. Even if X company’s theatres said “you’re not allowed to use our theatre unless you also only use our other products”, I support their ability to do such, and your ability to use a different theatre chain.
So what’s the problem? You don’t like that other people are okay with terms you consider unreasonable?
I have yet to see any actual argument against those terms that is remotely compelling, and as of yet it’s just been copy+pasted Stallman kookery about how everything but open source programs and Linux is teh ebil.
As of yet, the only downside of their business practice I’ve personally noticed is the most recent version of iTunes being clunky, a problem I quickly fixed by downloading an alternative program.
Uh, very easy? Did you miss the numerous people in this very threat extolling the virtues of said alternative goods? Just buy an Android phone if it’s that big a deal to you.
I reject the assumption that said alternatives will necessarily disappear, and the same argument could be made about literally any business everywhere.
What happens when every restaurant but Subway magically disappears?
Like, if some hypothetical megacorp said “You can’t come into our theatre unless you only wear our clothes, eat our food, and read our publications”, I’d think they’re a stupid company with ridiculous restrictions, but I think that people should be free to use their service if they’re fine by the terms of agreement.
It’s so interesting to me to see the level of vehemence this topic can bring forth. Almost as bad as when my dad and my brother would argue about Ford vs. Chevy. And just about as relevant.
Not worried because that’s not even remotely close to happening. Because…
Quite easy. Why, I did it just two weeks ago. With the high price point of Apple, it is in fact, harder to get an apple than otherwise.
The math seems simple to me. Don’t like Apple (as I do not), don’t buy it. If you do, well then, do. By all means criticize the product, the company, etc. but to level vitriol at a consumer (or non-consumer, as the case may be) seems to me to be kind of cultish.*
*This paragraph is not directed at any particular comment on this thread. Just a general observation.
Vivec:
Hold on. There’s no moral problem with mind control? It’s not a problem that a theater gets to enforce how you think? Why should a democratic society allow any such business to operate, whether or not you personally agree to it, or whether there exist alternative businesses which aren’t engaging in those practices?
Now, I’m not claiming that they’re involved in mind control, just trying to make sense out of the analogy you offered. The point is that you should have some autonomy over how you use your own computing systems. Computers aren’t thinking but you are — what you do with your information (or your property) is nobody’s business but your own. This doesn’t only affect the use of Apple hardware/software, but lots of other stuff made by various other parties. And they don’t have some kind of divine right to make all of these choices for everyone else. So why create a system (not why decide to make a specific transaction/contract) which treats them as if they do?
I don’t like that they’ve granted themselves this kind of control over the markets and our lives (not just yours, ours). I don’t blame ordinary people for the extent to which they’re complicit in that. I do blame businesses that create an environment with all of these arbitrary, unnecessary, predatory rules which only benefit them. I don’t think it needs to be this way — do you think it should be this way?
I honestly have no idea how to make heads or tails of your version of my analogy, and I fail to see how “Theatre won’t let you bring outside food in” isn’t analogous to “Apple only lets you use Apple-approved apps”
That being said, I said what I meant.
If said theatre could somehow tell whether or not you read media produced by other companies, and made that a disqualifying factor for using their service, fine by me. I probably wouldn’t use their theatre, but I don’t think that’d be inherently morally wrong.
Who said anything about a divine right to it?
They have a legal right to do what you agree to let them do with your data, and I don’t see any moral principle forbidding their practices.
You’re not just purchasing their product/service, you’re purchasing a license to use that product/service in ways defined in the contract. If you think those terms are too stringent, feel free to buy a product/service with a less restrictive terms of use.
Yes, absolutely. They should be free to make terms of use, and require you to follow them if you want to use their service.
We can quibble over whether or not their terms of use go too far – I think they don’t remotely go too far, but that’s largely a question of taste – but I think it’s absurd to hold the very idea of having a terms of use as some moral evil that our GNU messiah will save us from.
Numerobis, you missed my point. MS changed their Office Suite file formats for no other purpose than to break forwards-compatibility. It was crucial for them to maintain backwards-compatibility because nobody would upgrade if it meant their old files would become unreadable. As you say, it is a hugely expensive and difficult process to maintain backwards compatibility with three decades of software heritage. So why would MS keep changing the file formats even though this introduces a huge workload? One answer is that the new file formats offer an improvement in functionality that makes up for the extra work. But this was demonstrably not the case with most of the Office upgrades. With a few notable exceptions (the introduction of shared editing, for instance, which I will certainly defend as a valuable step forward) in no way was working on the newest, latest file format any better, faster, or more efficient than working on a document in a previous format.
Changing file format that offers no increase in functionality but breaks forward compatibility is a decision borne not from software engineering but from marketing.
What mind control? I call hyperbole on this.
If you don’t want to buy Apple products, don’t. But let others make up their minds without YOU trying to control their decisions. Not all of us want unlimited choices, which leads to problems, and indecision. I buy Apple products because they work with a minimum of fuss, including video media for Apple TV from a number of sources (for the Redhead). As I will demonstrate next week, when the replacement iMac arrives. Plug in power and cables, then up and running. All previous software working like it does now.
Vivec:
You should probably be concerned about the “how.”
I don’t know what work “inherently” is doing, but alright. So you’re telling me that it’s okay for a company to engage in mind control…. I didn’t think I’d need to argue this particular point. Maybe I should just leave it alone, because I think you might not be expressing this clearly or not saying something I should take seriously.
Here’s a claim, and assume it has nothing to do with our discussion of Apple: It should be illegal for companies or individuals to engage in mind control, because people have a right to control their own minds. Agree or disagree?
Here’s another: if you own something, you should be able to use it however you like, as long as that doesn’t cause anyone else significant harm. Agree or disagree?
This is ridiculous. I never held that “the very idea of having terms of use” is bad in any way, or that anybody needed to be saved from it. And I don’t have some kind of general problem with the existence of patents, copyrights, commercial software, etc. Yes, there are free/open-source alternatives. But there are also commercial/proprietary alternatives which I think are better (maybe not ideal in some cases, but not problematic in the way that Apple is). I’ve been focusing criticism on what specifically Apple does (and some other specific companies), not all commercial software, all terms of use, or something of that nature.
I think we already agree that there are certain kinds of terms which aren’t acceptable. There are child labor laws, for instance: kids might after all think they want to work for a company which is willing to hire them. We shouldn’t allow companies like that to exist, and we shouldn’t pretend minors can give consent or that such contracts have any legitimacy. Some might be willing to do the work and might even benefit from it personally, but it is a bad thing for the society which everyone else has to live in. At the very least we shouldn’t be creating a system which actively supports certain types of businesses like this, but in many case it’s fairly obvious that we should be actively trying to stop them. There is no universal rule anywhere that says “if it’s a term you agreed to, it’s all good” — not a rule that you should believe, anyway. So, the issue here is explaining why we should accept the particular kinds of “agreements” (if you can call it that) which I’ve been talking about.
@Vivec and CR
I think the main problem for the end user of these types of products is that there is a simplistic marketing veneer attached to the products. When you buy an iphone you are not simply buying a just a phone. You are buying into a whole eco-system where apple is the gatekeeper. You are agreeing to software licensing, terms and conditions of use, etc – which most people don’t read or fully understand if they have cared to read them.
It is in the gatekeepers interest to keep the average user away from the fact that they have agreed to a load stuff that they don’t actually realised that they have.
This is where the marketing comes in -Look at the shiny, it can do this….when that screen of text comes up, just click next, I agree – its all just standard stuff you are told.
@CR
I’m not concerned with the sudden development of telepathy any time soon.
Agree. Are we talking about Jedi mind tricks or Demonic Possession? Because mind control doesn’t exist the way you’re describing in the real world.
Agree, but largely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
You don’t just purchase a physical item when you buy an Apple product or use a service like the iOS, you purchase license to use said product/service in ways detailed by the terms of use, You can either follow the terms of use as described, break them and suffer some form of recourse, or buy a different license.
Right, and I see no reason why “you can only use programs we approve on the device we’re licensing you to use” is a particularly objectionable term of use, nor do I think it’s something that needs legislating against.
If I offer you a contract to use my car, but only to travel to locations I approve, what’s the problem? No one’s forcing you to sign the contract, and you can very easily get a different form of transport. For some people, my list of locations is perfectly fine – it either encapsulates everywhere they want to go, or doesn’t exclude anywhere they’re interested in going to.
@Mond
Well, yeah, I’ve said that like thrice now. I just don’t see that as a moral evil we need to legislate out of existence and destroy by any means necessary, as our upthread Stallman-worshippers hold.
cr @77:
It should be illegal to try to convince people to buy a product or an idea that is wrong, or that they don’t need, or is bad for them? I’d love to see how you translate that into actual law, with words and definitions and all that tiresome but necessary nonsense. Madison Avenue and every political party and PR/Spin company ever eagerly await the wording.
Thankfully, it’s long-established legal matters that the US federal congress can come down hard on such thing as “anti-competitive business practices”, and I wish they did it more often and with more vigor. This is my position, because I am not a libertarian, and because I favor proper government interferences in the market in order to make it better for the common person.
You sound like a libertarian. You’re making quite standard-fare libertarian arguments. It’s time for an introspection.
Really? I don’t think I’ve said my points well, then.
I absolutely support government regulation and interference in the market – I was implying that in @74.
I just don’t think Apple’s “Either use programs we approve or void your warranty” term is that big a deal, and I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with terms of use/licensing in a moral sense.
From what I’ve gathered of Stallman’s stuff – as was posted in the beginning of this thread – he is morally opposed to the existence of closed-source software and licensing, which I think is ridiculous.
Well, some intelligent people did point out that marketing is an inherently immoral job. I actually have an acquaintance who abandoned a career in marketing after only a few weeks out of sheer disgust after learning some of the tactics employed in advertising.
Vivec:
I’m not assuming telepathy or anything like that. But it doesn’t exactly matter if you want to assume it hypothetically, and because it’s hypothetical it makes no difference if it’s happening any time soon. We could have the same conversation about telepathic movie-going dinosaurs, for all I care.
What I was saying is that it would be a little weird if you’re not concerned with how they (physically or otherwise) go about invading your privacy and exercising some kind of control (telepathic or not) over what you should think. Those details might affect whether this is acceptable (or to what extent or in which situations it’s acceptable). So I was trying to point out that treating it like a black box that “somehow” does this trick might not be helpful for evaluating that question.
The theater gets to legally decide what you should be thinking, and there are legal consequences when they believe you have violated their terms. It doesn’t matter why they believe that. They may use entirely unreliable and arbitrary methods to determine what you should think, or be as selective as they like about when/where/why this is enforced or who should be subject to enforcement. In any case, however that goes, they can decide that you will face legal consequences for this, if they believe (correctly or not) that you are thinking improperly.
That’s the basic idea that you should think is preposterously wrong on all sorts of levels.
We’re not only talking about legal terms here. They design their technology this way, which has technological and economic effects on how all sorts of other technologies and social/economic systems are designed. You don’t seem to appreciate that point: without ever agreeing to any such “terms,” it affects all of us. Maybe you’d want to argue that these effects are all beneficial — but acknowledging that there are such effects is the first step here.
There’s a separate question about whether those terms should be considered legitimate. You’re not giving me any serious argument about why somebody can dictate to me how to use something I own. Which kinds of data I compute on a computer, and how/if it gets used with other devices, should not be entirely up to them. That kind of claim is highly suspicious, so you should give some positive support for it — that is, if anybody is supposed to take it seriously enough for it to have a wide range of legal/economic/technological consequences.
How does “only use programs we want or we won’t fix your iPhone for free” at all affect you, as a non-iPhone user? If you buy an android phone, how do other people finding these terms perfectly agreeable affect you?
Because, in this case, you don’t own it, you own a license to use it in ways pursuant to the contract you signed.
If I sell you a car with no strings attached, sure, you can do whatever you want with it, within the law. If I sell you a license to use my car only in certain circumstances, you’re beholden by the terms of the contract.
Now, I would absolutely be fine with the government saying that I can’t have a contract that says “You can only use my car for -insert obviously bad thing here-” or “If you break the contract, I can kill you”, but I don’t think the act of having a contract that dictates the terms of use for a license you purchase is at all bad in and of itself.
Basically, in as succinct terms as I can put it.
A. I think it’s fine for people to sell licenses to use a good or service, and to restrict how you use said good or service by a contract.
B. I think it’s fine for the government to restrict said licenses and contracts.
C. I don’t think “use our programs or we won’t fix your iPhone” is something that needs legislation against it, nor do I think that it is an immoral practice.
Pursuant to US federal law, concerning a physical device that is sold in a store such as an iphone, this is probably false.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
Having said that, this is a complex area of law. However, US federal courts, AFAICT, have tried to take a reasonable approach where mere marketing tactics and fine print EULAs cannot change a sale into a license. The above wiki link discusses some of the legal details, see “Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc.”.
The short of it is that you very probably do own your iphone. Even when you buy a piece of software such as a video game, AFAICT US courts would probably rule (and have ruled?) that it is a sale, not a license, and that you have ownership of that particular copyrighted piece of material, in spite of words in the EULA that say it’s a license, not a sale. Again, contract law is a wonderful and complicated thing.
For example, from memory, my understanding of the legal matters of the people who have modded Blizzard games is that the court declared that it is a sale, not a license, but the modding efforts violated the DMCA, and that the EULA had very little legal effect. I’d have to check again to be sure.
PS: I am not a lawyer.
@86
Fair enough. Even if that’s true, I don’t think it’s morally wrong to have things governed by licenses and contracts, which is like 80% of the Stallman argument.
That being said, I’d personally prefer a system of government-regulated licensing and contracts, so even if that system isn’t how it works now, I think that’s how it should work.
To Vivec
I think you’re getting hung up over your particular understanding of the word “morality”, and other people are using slightly different meanings of the word.
What Apple is doing is abhorrent, but currently legal. In a better world, the US federal congress would continue to enact rules in the very long and well established line of laws regarding the first-sale doctrine and anti-competitive business practices.
PS: Stallman says a lot of things. I can disagree with you on some points, and I can disagree with Stallman on some points. I am a professional programmer by day, who writes software that is sold and is only available by money sale, and who is paid money wages for this, and I don’t have any moral problems with this, at all.
<cynicism>Well, this should be good news for Apple’s licensing department through its Made for iPhone programme. Apple killed the last physical port on the phone you could design and attach devices to without paying Apple licensing fees. Can the demise of Bluetooth on iPhone be far behind? I hear the AirPods don’t use it, after all…</cynicism>
Tim Cook: ever the beancounter.
@86
Also, if you’re referring to MDY vs Blizzard, the appeal court held that WoW players are licensees, not owners, but that modding the game is just a breach of contract, not a case of copyright infringement.
Right, but I don’t think this point has been sufficiently demonstrated to be true. If it can be, I’d probably agree, but as of yet I’ve just had it said over and over again with no actual argument for why it is such.
What is abhorrent about having “only use our programs or we won’t fix your phone” as a term of a contract?
I have to correct myself. I had a bad memory. US Federal courts ruled that the EULA et al were legally enforceable contracts which waived the defendant’s normal “fair use” rights and the rights guaranteed to persons under federal copyright law. Shit sucks.
https://www.eff.org/document/eighth-circuit-ruling-affirming-district-court-grant-summary-judgment
In addition, they also lost on DMCA.
I’m still with Stallman on many of the general issues. Specifically, see here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.en.html
I’m still reading the decision, but I bet it’s still considered a “sale” for the purposes of other laws, such as the ability to re-sell. But then again, US copyright law is so fucked up, I would not be terribly surprised if it were otherwise.
PPS: I’m pretty sure an iphone is considered “sold” with transfer of ownership.
To Vivec
Let’s talk about a concrete case.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.
How do you feel about this one?
@92
According to the judgment:
Anyways if it is indeed true that said iphone is considered sold, sure, I concede that point.
I still hold that there is nothing wrong with a restriction like the one apple uses (until I’m convinced otherwise), and if it were actually the case that an iPhone user is only a licensee, would support that ruling.
It is dishonest to sell a computing device the way one might sell any other
appliance then to justify all these restrictions on use by claiming in
small print it was a contractual agreement.
Apple do not pitch their phones like movie theaters pitch movies. They
don’t say “we’re renting you this device.” Everything about their sell is
“this becomes a part of you,” a degree of ownership deeper than even normal
appliances.
There’d be no dispute if Apple advertisements indicated that the users
would never own the devices.
So it’s a con. One might argue that cons are morally neutral and anyone who
complains about being conned is a fool; but dishonesty is at least mildly
amoral.
To Vivec
The game, aka the CD, can be sold. No legal problems there. It can be installed on another computer and played locally. The account cannot be sold, fine. Transfer of the CD Key itself is an interesting question. I know of other similar cases, such as EA Games doing similar things. I don’t know if any court decision has ruled on that. I lean slightly that upper federal courts would rule that, if there are no other competing interests, of course the CD key can be transferred according to the first-sale doctrine, and they can make their own new account.
@95
Fair enough. In that case, though, the problem would be the dishonesty, not the mere act of having it be a license agreement.
In a hypothetical world where Apple said openly “you are licensing this phone and have to follow our EULA” and the EULA was legally enforceable, would there be a problem?
@93
Well, I’m not against bundling programs with an OS – every computer I’ve ever owned has come stock with IE, along with a host of other programs.
That being said, the case is indeed very strong that Microsoft engaged in a lot of shady anti-competitive practices aside from the mere act of bundling IE with Windows, so ultimately I think it was a good ruling.
@96
None of my Blizzard games came with CD’s or CD keys, they exist solely as files downloaded from Blizzard and tied to my battle.net account, including WoW.
If I wanted to sell my games, which only exist as files and only work when activated by an online Battle.net account, I’d be going against their EULA and their contract.
Sure, I could copy the files to someone else’s computer, but without the account, they’d be inaccessible, just like most steam games.
Not at all.
There would be a problem if society trended in that direction, the
perpetuation of contract peonage, but if that were what society wanted, I
could only blame society, not Apple.
But I doubt Apple would sell their phones if the pitch were thus revised.
If one installs Windows as a second operating system, the OS selection
screen disappears, blocking access to the other OS. Do you have a problem
with that?
Thus on dual-boots I always install Windows first, Ubuntu second.
Yeah, totally. I think its fine for windows to dictate what can be used on their OS, but they shouldn’t get to lay claim to the device as a whole.
Unless, as in the Apple case, its a Windows device purchased with a license disallowing the use of any other OS on the device on threat of loss of warrenty, in which case I’d be fine with it.
As yes, Blizzard’s new method of delivering games, just like Steam, a method in order to work around first-sale protections. I think it’s hideous. And this is as someone who bought Overwatch in that way. Reminds me back in the day of the original NES where Nintendo was pushing this ridiculous notion that selling used games was an illegal “gray market”. Different tech, same goal, subverting the first sale doctrine. US Congress should step in to end this nonsense.
In the case of desktop PCs and laptops, there should be a big sticker
indicating that the terms are contrary to the industry standard; otherwise
it is fine print legalized fraud.
In the case of game consoles it’s debatable. They block alternative
operating systems mostly to avoid game piracy, not competition. That is
understandable, even if they are putting no effort into communicating to
12-year-olds that a console is licensed, not owned.
Though there was plenty of controversy back in the 90s when Sony put
arbitrary regional restrictions on the PSX.
Also, regarding:
Regarding the specific quotes above, I’d need to know what’s in the EULA before I comment further. However, it sounds like both of you are saying that whatever they want to put in the EULA, as long as the customer knowingly agrees to it, then it’s ok. I have to very strongly disagree.
An EULA is just a contract. It’s not magic. Not all contracts are enforceable, and not all contracts should be enforced. It is one of the proper roles of government to distinguish between these two kinds of contracts, according to many, many principles.
For example, one of the responsibilities of a proper government is anti-trust.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law
One example of anti-trust is tying.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce)
For example, imagine a cable company that only offers internet service if you also buy cable tv service. That is an example of tying, and it’s an example of something where the government steps in and says “no, you cannot do that”.
Generally speaking, a company should not be allowed to put something in an EULA just because they can. Further, if some provision would violate the normal “fair use” rights or “first sale” rights of the customer, then there should be a legal requirement that the company needs to show some sort of reasonable and compelling and non-competitive business reason why they need that provision in the contract.
I get the feeling that you don’t agree with this, and if so, I have to call both of you quite naive, and also seemingly quite ignorant of actual contract law considering what I’m saying is just standard application of basic contract law principles and anti-trust principles, albeit taken slightly stronger than is ordinarily taken today. Specifically, again, this notion that “anything goes if both parties agree to a contract” is both legally wrong according to today’s standards, and horrifically naive concerning the likely outcome of allowing such a thing.
Reread my posts talking to EL, because I do not support “anything goes” contracts, and specifically agreed with anti-trust law.
I support limitations on what can be in a EULA, I just think “you can only use apple programs on an iPhone or we wont fix it” isn’t a bad thing that needs to be legislated against.
To Vivec.
Ok. I don’t care enough at this precise moment to reread the chain, but PZ’s point is valid. Consider some standard practices in iphone development: Always changing connector standards, and not allowing replacement batteries. Arguably, both have strong anti-competitive natures to them, although I’m not sure if it rises to something that I would want the government to address. I am undecided. I do know that this is a moral wrong to society, and society should shun their products while better products are available, and there are better products available where the companies do not engage in such blatant and offensive anti-competitive business practices.
Sorry for multi-posting.
Also, it’s not just merely “your warranty is void”. Apple goes through a lot of effort to make sure that their software and hardware cannot be freed from their default onerous restrictions of “apple approved software only”. Their firmware updates regularly contain changes that make it more difficult for open source developers to break their protections – legally might I add on both sides. Those regular and frequent changes serve no purpose except to make the life of the iphone owner more difficult, and at worst you can portray this as a sort of patronizing “the apple company knows what’s best for you” sort of thing, which I also object to strongly.
dacre @89:
um sorry to jump in, just to point out that I have heard AirPods do use Bluetooth, improved Bluetooth. Presumably improved the audio signal quality of the Bluetooth DAC. Supposedly, Airpods have better sound quality than any Bluetooth earbuds on the market today (according to Apple hypesters)
I don’t have any legal expertise in this area, but I don’t see a problem if
(a) the existence of the contract is known to both parties, (b) the terms
of the contract are legal and (c) the terms of the contract are made clear.
To expand on what EL said in #107.
Other manufacturers and developers can’t manufacture/develop things that you may want to use with your iJunk (or ways to fix/improve the iJunk that the company doesn’t care about fixing/improving) — not without Apple’s blessing. Their holy scriptures must not forbid it (and they need a cut of the profits) or you’re just out of luck, so what the law or the Constitution actually says is more or less irrelevant when you have that kind of dynamic. Anyway, these people don’t have a warranty to be voided, nor do they have a piece of iJunk which may need fixing. They’d like to be making their own products/services, entering into an independent arrangement with you as customer/user, which you might willingly agree to, if only…. There are all sorts of reasons why people should be allowed to do many different things like that with the goods/services they’re using in their own lives, whatever obscure claims might be made by some ridiculous internal document that Apple produces which is pretending to have the force of law, and the only thing stopping it is that it’s not in Apple’s own interests. The public interest has completely gone out the window at this point, which ought to raise the question of why the government is doing something other than serving those interests when they side with Apple’s absurd interpretation of their rights or authority.
Penalfire’s comment (#1) and others’ comments on Apple’s participation in human rights abuses are factually proven, reason enough not to by anything from that company. But even if they weren’t, the jackless iphone shows once again Apple’s disregard for customers, their assumption that suckers will keep buying their products. Because they will.
In every generation of iThings, Apple repeatedly adds or drops something in one generation but returns it later (e.g. flash, USB and external ports, headphone jacks). They hype the current “must have” product, then the suckers find it doesn’t meet their needs and thus they buy the next “must have” as well.
Lather in anger.
Rinse people’s money out of them.
Repeat.
More concerning is the effect on habit-formation in the younger
generations. It’s bad enough that most of us grew up on Windows, but at
least we understood what it was to install and configure any programs we
wanted to. Worse still are generations that grow up in end-to-end walled
gardens.
Nevertheless, libre development still thrives — and at least there are no
harmful externalities to proprietary software. The bigger threat is mass
drone delivery and the T1s being developed at Boston Dynamics.
Two examples, one extreme, and one that is quite relevant to the real world.
One can sign a contract that sells oneself into permanent slavery, but such contracts would not be upheld, and they should not be upheld. (Personally, I like to think of this as just one example where the right to bankruptcy should be protected, but there’s also other arguments to be had, like slavery is just fucking immoral, even if initially voluntary.)
The one that is actaully quite relevant is mass-market contracts that have binding arbitration argreements.
What is a binding arbitration agreement? In a mass-market contract, such as the “terms of use” for your cell phone, it is a clause that stipulates that their side may seek remedial action in a court of law, and instead all such action must go to a private arbitration company.
Enter, this law:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Arbitration_Act
This great piece of federal shit allows and condones mass-market contracts that contain binding arbitrar. Not only that, but the courts have interpreted this as also saying that the individual states cannot enact state laws that ban binding arbitration agreements in mass-market contracts.
The net result is that it’s basically impossible to buy many goods and services, such as cell phone service, without entering into a binding arbitration agreement. And who does the arbitration? A private company, often with direct financial interests with the large company, i.e. the cell phone service provider. The net result is that in any sort of conflict or wronging, you the private consumer just lose, and you have no access to any legal remedy.
Not only should the federal arbitration act be repealed, a new act should be put in its place that bans the use of binding arbitration clauses in mass-market contracts.
Ugg, I didn’t proofread. Next time…
Also, can we please stop pretending that the market leader doing something will have absolutely no effect on the rest of the market?
“Just buy something else” is working fine now. It may not be in 10 years when all have switched to systems where the manufacturer can basically shut down your device because they disagree with what you have done.
When should we start paying attention?
To Giliell
Exactly. While I’m not a fan of the freeze peach crowd, I think that there can be a good argument made in the context of anti-trust regulations that the government can and should impose some free speech requirements on private companies. Most famously now IMHO is the recent US federal ruling that ISPs shall be classified as common carriers, which, AFAIK, does imply that the common carriers are going to be held to some free speech standards, which is deeply desirable. It’s quite a similar problem to your hypothetical example where a large market holder like Apple might use their power to shut down political discourse. Same issue. IMHO.
Necessary correction:
> […] , I think that there can be a good argument made in the context of anti-trust regulations that the government can and should impose some free speech requirements on some, a very few special private companies such as ISPs.
Also, this IS a social justice issue. It’s not hard to imagine a situation where access to a certain app can be crucial for your life and health.
I know for example that in Germany there is a project to map wheelchair accessible places and businesses.
What if that doesn’t run on the I phone?
What about an app that lets trans people share information on places where they can safely use the restroom? Are you going to tell a trans person they should just get a new smartphone?
We also already have businesses that impose their special TOS on the customers. They are called Catholic hospitals.
The whole “if you don’t like it, get a different one” argument is also horribly classist. As if gifts and hand me downs weren’t a thing, especially among vulnerable and disadvantaged people.
slithey tove (twas brillig (stevem)) wrote:
Fair enough, I stand corrected. Regardless, I still can’t shake the feeling this decision was made to benefit the Made for iPhone licensing royalties, and that more may follow if the outrage isn’t significant enough and the new phone does well. The only remaining accessories on the new iPhone that aren’t subject to the MFi program are things that use the standard Bluetooth profiles and non-electronic cases.
I’m far from fond of iPods since Apple dropped the model with the HD in it, we have two of them and one just got a battery replacement. I’m quite un-fond of some of Apple’s EULA conditions on the things, iTunes is a royal pain, but there are open source software packages that I can use instead.
I’m currently typing this on a venerable MacBook Pro, 2009 model. I’m underwhelmed with Apple’s current offerings, so I’ll keep this one going until it gets too expensive to repair (eventually, I’ll get my 17″ 2009 MacBook Pro fixed, as I like the larger screen). I use it for its unix utilities and networking capabilities. I also installed macports, to use GNU software packages.
I’m using the MacBook Pro simply because it’s physically closer to me.
My other computers are Ubuntu Linux boxes, including a Dell Precision notebook and docking station to a multi-head monitor setup.
I do have one Windows tablet, a concession for my wife, largely because of her use of Facebook Flash (argh) games.
My printers are a lot dated (don’t get me started on chips in toners requiring one use the manufacturer’s toners or cartridges), so I keep my HP Laserjet 5N up and running and have a spare, just in case. I also have an Epson multi-function device that I refuse to buy ink for, but use for fax and scanning. For a color printer, I have an older Xerox Phaser 9500 wax ink printer, which gives me photo quality and is cheaper to operate than an inkjet, but saddles me with the proprietary wax pellets to load into the printer (which is fine, as I found a generic replacement for a hell of a lot less).
When the movers finally get my household goods here, I’ll have my Dell Poweredge servers back and one OS will be changed from Windows 2003 domain controller/DHCP server to a Zentyal server that’ll do the same things, albeit it’ll be running in a Xen VM.
I’ll also reassemble my MythTV entertainment systems, while adding in another 7 TB of RAID 10 storage, which will be used for the video store via iSCSI.
I mention this (albeit relatively bare bones description), as I have successfully worked around a lot of the more onerous licensing issues by using open source software packages.
I also have a 200 disc DVD/Blu Ray changer, for more traditional video presentation (it came in handy when we were overseas).
As for “evil”, need I mention Sony’s rootkit debacle? That one got very expensive, very quickly for Sony!
As for smartphones, I much prefer my HTC One and they’re pretty good at keeping the OS updated. My wife likes her Samsung. Whichever one does the job for you, is reasonably secure and is comfortable to operate is the right one for the user.
Worriesome trends: Mandatory arbitration, which removed due process rights from end users. Restrictive licenses on software. Erosion of copyright expiration, starving us of public domain works, but locks a work for much longer and benefits publishers at the expense of the public interest. And finally, the Corporate States of America, where wealthy special interests have a greater say in government than the citizenry does.
The SCOTUS really screwed the pooch with Citizen’s United!
But, the United States of America does have the absolute best government that money can buy.
Frightening: ignorance of the populace about how our government is supposed to work, separation of powers, limitations of power and what an executive order can and cannot do. Hell, just general ignorance on what our Constitution actually says is frightening in the extreme. That’s one reason that I keep my “Pocket Constitution” with me at all times (thanks, ACLU!).
Apple uses Chinese slave labor …
Just like pretty much every other computer and phone manufacturer out there. (As long as we’re clear that while it’s brutal and exploitative, calling it “slave labor” is hyperbole.)
Foxconn, which assembles the iPhone, also assembles products for Acer, Amazon, Blackberry, Dell, Google, Huawei, HP, Microsoft, Nintendo, Nokia, Sony, Toshiba, and Xiaomi. They apparently don’t make things for Samsung, but that doesn’t mean Samsung has a clean supply chain. From this late 2014 report by China Labor Watch:
So, by all means, don’t buy Apple. Just make sure you don’t buy any other phones or computers, either, unless you’ve carefully checked their provenance and supply chains.
Cables. Fuck but I hate Apple’s constant game of musical chairs. I’ve lived through SCSI (various flavors), weird buses, incessant games with power connectors, firewire, thunderbolt, etc., etc., etc.
And this is different from other computer manufacturer how, exactly?
(Yeah, I remember SCSI. I also remember how you had to turn your computer off if you wanted to connect a new external hard disk. And no power supply over the cable, so genuinely portable hard disks were not possible. Gosh, how I miss the good old days. Also, get off my lawn.)
Yeah, or when a scanner or tape drive hung the SCSI bus, hanging the entire system until that device released the bus (although, there were some Seagate HD’s that also pulled the same crap), requiring SCIORESET to be sent by the kernel. Yeah, good times.
Bad enough someone on my lawn, I had a neighbor actually open my front door on Friday afternoon. When I asked him if I could help him, he avoided eye contact and silent. I followed him up his driveway, the same behavior ensued.
Around 20 minutes later, he wandered onto the sidewalk in front of my house and had a vigorous argument with nobody (no, he didn’t have a bluetooth headset on). Now, *he* can stay off of my lawn!
The garden out front takes care of itself, as I maintain a small poison ivy patch. ;)