Re: [BLUG] Android - competition for iPhone?

I'd say that Apple is a little better overall in that they use many
open Unix protocols rather than reinventing the wheel. While many of
their apps use proprietary formats, many (like their mailbox format in
OS X Mail) are still accessible via Unix tools for troubleshooting and
hacking. That is, they don't go out of their way to make it impossible
to hack their stuff, they just don't bother catering to the hacker
crowd. This is a double-edged sword... On one hand, their products
have great focus and this is a great part of their success. On the
other hand, it's a minus for me personally, often times...

As far as the DRM thing, I don't know exactly what went on there. I
see that Apple is now removing DRM from many of their iTunes tracks
and have phased out iTunes Plus, making non-DRM stuff available at no
additional charge. It seems feasible to me that the labels could have
stipulated that Apple utilize DRM in the infancy of the digital
download store, and that this was the only way their product would be
available, but then when Amazon comes along and make their entire
library available w/o DRM, one has to scratch their head...

I like hacking stuff as much as the next guy, but there are times when
I simply don't want to put in the time or effort to do so and am happy
with the little comfortable bubble Apple has provided me. For
instance, I don't think I'll ever hack into my 3G iPod. On the other
hand, I run MythTV rather than paying for my own PVR, so I guess it's
just a matter of what seems like it is worth my time to me at that
moment.

I think there is room for commercial software and proprietaryness. I'm
a much bigger fan and advocate of open protocols and formats than I am
of all OSS. I don't think that all software should be free, and in
fact think that there are often several benefits of having commercial
software choices available.

Just my two cents...

On Nov 13, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Simón Ruiz wrote:

> Not sure about that myself.
>
> "You hack us, we hack you"?
>
> I can't think of any way that Apple is better than Microsoft, other
> than the fact that they make better performing, better designed
> products. Since this includes their DRM (however much Jobs claims to
> abhor it, right?), it ends up no longer being a positive IMO.
>
> The only positive I can think of is that when their products finally
> get hacked so we DO have some freedom to use them as we wish (which
> pretty much means it's several generations old), we'll have that nicer
> hardware to work with.
>
> I, myself, have an iPod Nano (first generation) running Rockbox. I
> wouldn't get a newest generation iPod (were money not an issue
> anyways), simply because I'd be stuck with Apple's interface, and
> locked into their way of doing things, or I'd have to wait until
> someone hacked it so it'd would finally work with me.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Simón
>
> On 11/13/07, Joe Auty <joe@netmusician.org> wrote:
>> This isn't to say that I *want* Apple to dominate this industry, but
>> then again... better Apple than Microsoft :)
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug