Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple changes words in order to change the debate

37signals.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 143 posts

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#61

Post by jsz0 »

jsankey wrote: post #51
danilocampos wrote: post #14

It's easy to look at this cynically but it's not unreasonable to change the conversation. Google's exploitation of "open" has been disingenuous at best. When you try to square their high ideals against reality, you end up in an uncomfortable spot. The fact is, Android's openness does not make it to the end user . Its openness is exploited for the benefit of the carriers to load branded crapware onto the device, disab…

Although I agree with the general point that Android is not totally open in an absolute sense, I think you too easily ignore the ways in which it is open relative to the iPhone. First and foremost, I don't have to jailbreak my phone to install apps not "approved" by Google/the carrier/whoever. I can download an APK from anywhere. Secondly, the code is open. This does matter in practice, because there are people who c…

Carriers can actually disallow side loading of applications. AT&T seems to be the only US carrier to do this so far and there are work arounds but the power is there for carriers to do it.

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#62

Post by wtallis »

endtime wrote: post #37
napierzaza wrote: post #10

Debating 101: Frame the argument. Both sides of any argument do this. Google by calling it "open" which means more than it really does. Apple doesn't debate it's not open, it just debates that the results aren't any good because of the confusion of choices. "Open" is supposed to be a good thing, Apple doesn't believe it is. But the fact is that Apple is crying about it, they're explaining why they made the decisions…

>That's why people are "Pro Life" not anti-abortion. That's a pretty touchy example. Honestly, I've always thought that "pro-choice" was stretching the truth more than "pro-life".

If you want to see where "pro-life" may be stretching the truth, consider that not all "pro-life"-ers are vegans. When they say "pro-life", they're trying to imply that embryos are people, which is really the crux of the debate.

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#63

Post by daten »

rufo wrote: post #38
sjs382 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The fact is, Android's openness does not make it to the end user." Android's openness has made it to those who want the openness. The fact that my phone OS is open is the thing I care about. (I'm running SkyRaider 3.3 on my HTC Incredible on Verizon.)

That's great for now, but phone manufacturers seem to be trying to close down holes as fast as they can - see the Droid X and G2. (Not that people won't figure out ways around them, but if Android were truly open to users you wouldn't need exploits to get around limitations...)

I think it's inaccurate to say "Android" isn't "truly open". It's open when it leaves Google and the code is still out there. I can still benefit from that openness even on a phone that carriers added some restrictions to.

The blame should rest entirely with the carriers.

This isn't "Apple vs Android" this is "Apple vs Carriers".

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#64

Post by linuxhansl »

dman wrote: post #53
danilocampos wrote: post #14

It's easy to look at this cynically but it's not unreasonable to change the conversation. Google's exploitation of "open" has been disingenuous at best. When you try to square their high ideals against reality, you end up in an uncomfortable spot. The fact is, Android's openness does not make it to the end user . Its openness is exploited for the benefit of the carriers to load branded crapware onto the device, disab…

Agree with you about android's openness not making it to the end user completely. Its not just an issue with android, even linux based devices (like the Creative Zii) do ship with the source for GPL components but omit the tools required to flash a user built image to the device. I think this takes away the freedoms that the GPLv2 intended to deliver to the end user.

Agreed too. The Android is not open unless I can easily modify/recompile/deploy code to it.

GPLv3 would fix that, incidentally.

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#65

Post by sssparkkk »

How about Jobs misinterpreting a blog-post bij the makers of TweetDeck, by using it as an example of how terribly difficult it is for developers to write for the 'fragmented' android platform.

Just a little later the CEO of TweetDeck (@iaindodsworth) tweets this: "Did we at any point say it was a nightmare developing on Android? Errr nope, no we didn't. It wasn't."

Help me out, is this a typical case of 'FUD'?

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#66

Post by jsz0 »

credo wrote: post #22

Good point, it is in Apple's interest to reframe the debate. Theoretically, Apple could argue that Google's core assets (search and advertising) aren't open-sourced. Their Android apps (like Maps) aren't open-source and Apple could say that "open" is just a marketing buzzword that Google uses to try and beat Apple with. However, that will be an argument on turf picked by Google. "What is best for the customer" (and a…

Apple could probably open source ARM Darwin in the same way they open sourced x86 Darwin to counter this argument if they really wanted to. Here it is -- but we're keeping all the interesting bits to ourselves.

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#67

Post by lsc »

Growing up, my stepmother was very big on the power of words, and how you can change people's minds based on how you say a thing. She was right, of course... but to my mind, that seemed like protecting myself from this manipulation was more important (and more ethical) than using this knowledge to manipulate other people. For a long time, I'd practice re-writing everything I heard using words with the most negative connotations I could without changing the meaning of the sentence.

"I gave him a job, and his skills and abilities are helping my business do well." vs. "I am profitably exploiting his skills and abilities."

the meaning is essentially the same, but don't say the second one in public. (in my teenage years I tried that, too.. it ended badly.)

Anyhow, I don't spend as much effort on it as I did, but I still think being aware of this sort of thing is an important part of everyone's mental self-defense.

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#68

Post by danilocampos »

daten wrote: post #63
rufo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's great for now, but phone manufacturers seem to be trying to close down holes as fast as they can - see the Droid X and G2. (Not that people won't figure out ways around them, but if Android were truly open to users you wouldn't need exploits to get around limitations...)

I think it's inaccurate to say "Android" isn't "truly open". It's open when it leaves Google and the code is still out there. I can still benefit from that openness even on a phone that carriers added some restrictions to. The blame should rest entirely with the carriers. This isn't "Apple vs Android" this is "Apple vs Carriers".

> This isn't "Apple vs Android" this is "Apple vs Carriers".

That's an academic distinction, though, wouldn't you agree? Android as software is perhaps "truly open" but what about Android as a user experience?

Android, from the perspective of the vast majority of people who will interact with it, is what the carriers say it is.

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#69

Post by shill »

GHFigs wrote: post #54
jsankey wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although I agree with the general point that Android is not totally open in an absolute sense, I think you too easily ignore the ways in which it is open relative to the iPhone. First and foremost, I don't have to jailbreak my phone to install apps not "approved" by Google/the carrier/whoever. I can download an APK from anywhere. Secondly, the code is open. This does matter in practice, because there are people who c…

I can download an APK from anywhere. Out of curiosity, do you (or any Android users reading this) find yourself doing this with any frequency?

Only to keep SL4A updated. It hasn't made its way to the marketplace yet.

http://code.google.com/p/android-scripting/

Re: Apple changes words in order to change the debate

#70

Post by Osiris »

GHFigs wrote: post #54
jsankey wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although I agree with the general point that Android is not totally open in an absolute sense, I think you too easily ignore the ways in which it is open relative to the iPhone. First and foremost, I don't have to jailbreak my phone to install apps not "approved" by Google/the carrier/whoever. I can download an APK from anywhere. Secondly, the code is open. This does matter in practice, because there are people who c…

I can download an APK from anywhere. Out of curiosity, do you (or any Android users reading this) find yourself doing this with any frequency?

I've done it for beta apps and some other things I've found on websites. Often there's a QR code to scan to download the file that's not in the market.

Swype keyboard is an example of an app that's not in the market but can be installed via APK. For most users, it's not a big deal, but I think that's mostly because the Market has far fewer rules than the AppStore, so even apps that require root access can be uploaded to the Market.

Post reply on HN