
The iPad is 99% more open than any other computer - shawndumas
http://jpteti.com/post/4072771125/the-ipad-is-99-more-open-than-any-other-computer
======
jokermatt999
_irrelevant aside, skip if desired_

At first, I was annoyed because I knew this was going to be the same foolish
logic of "It is more free because I am _free_ from worry with it! See, I can
use the word _free_ too!" logic that makes me repost that lovely quote from
George Orwell's Politics and the English Language about words having
contradicting meanings and people arguing over them pointlessly. Then I RTFA
and found out it was written by an 8th Grader. _Whew_ , I feel better now. If
other people making this argument would realize they were using 8th grade
logic as well, I'd feel a lot better about this. Every time I see an adult
making an argument stemming from poor understanding of the fact that words
have multiple meanings, I want to bonk them over the head with a dictionary
while shouting "see definiton (2)!" It is..a pet peeve of mine.

 _irrelevant aside over_

This is still a terrible argument, because it ignores what the people
complaining about the iPad being not open is all about. It has nothing to do
with it being open meaning accessible, free meaning with a lack of worry, or
any similar semantic strawmen. It has to do with the fact that you cannot put
any application you want on an iOS device without Apple's permission.
Jailbreaking is not an excuse, and neither is the "you just have to pay $100 a
year and join a developer program". Users should be able to install what they
want, when they want, without asking anyone's permission. You should own the
hardware you purchase. Apple disagrees, and thus iOS devices are not free and
open in the sense of being able to do with them as you please.

~~~
glhaynes
_Users should be able to install what they want, when they want, without
asking anyone's permission. You should own the hardware you purchase._

 _Why_ , though? "Should" is a strong word that implies a more overarching
requirement than just a desire on the part of an individual purchaser.

I understand that you want to be able to do anything you want with your
hardware, and I'm very very glad that there exist systems that you can buy to
do this on — I'd be extremely concerned too if all systems became walled
gardens, but I don't see any reason to think that there's even a chance of
this happening since Android is so very successful — but it's hard for me to
see why that requirement "should" be a part of every product.

In fact, the idea that this form of openness is some sort of moral imperative
(and thus should exist on all systems) ignores the fact that by the same
reasoning I _should_ be able to buy a system that trades-off binary-
installation freedom for the benefits that come from the closed-down approach.

~~~
jokermatt999
You're correct. I _should_ (I think we can agree on this one :) have mentioned
that the last section was my personal opinion and what _I_ mean when I say the
iPad being not "open" is a bad thing. The argument that you're making here is
the argument that I'd like to see, because it's acknowledging the "not open"
side's actual opinion, and challenging it. Thank you.

As for an answer, I mostly take offense at the fact that iOS does not allow
for installing apps outside of the closed down market. I'm actually absolutely
fine with Apple censoring the App Store, it's the lack of an advanced option
to install non-market apps that I dislike. I don't think their method adds
much security (you could jailbreak the thing through a web page for a while),
but it does close off a lot of opportunity.

Edit: and to expand on why I feel its necessary to argue against iOS when I'm
happily on Android, it's because I feel that it's a lot easier to convince
people to give up freedom for security than it is to get freedom back in
exchange for some risk. If the iOS model becomes the norm, I might not have an
option like Android's sideloading, and it's not easy to get that back. I think
a compromise between the two would be the best, but I've never felt like
installing apps on Android is risky. Generally the popularity of an
app/program is somewhat indicative of its safety.

------
lukeschlather
>By giving people freedom to explore the app store without having to worry
about anything (except their wallets), Apple has possibly made the best move
they could make by locking down the iPad’s installation sources.

What a brave new world that has such people in it.

~~~
CaptainZapp
Interesting, I wanted to comment along the line of

Hate is Love War is Peace etc ...

Brave new world (in combination with Newspeak) just about captures it.

~~~
StavrosK
Given that Brave New World described a utopia, I think "Hate is Love" is the
only way to put what the article's saying.

------
turtle4
Why do people get hung up on wording? It is a shame people are just going to
dismiss this because he worded it as "open". In reality, what he is saying is
that the iPad is more useful than a regular computer, and usefulness trumps
openness.

As someone who is very technical, is a computer (or ipad) more useful to me if
I can install whatever I want, and program it however I want? Yes. Are most
users very technical? No.

People just want to use their computers to do something, and quickly. Why
don't alot of people who aren't comfortable with technology install software?
Well, they have experience that they download something and install it, and
suddenly their computer runs like crap or they have a virus. They have learned
they are better off just to leave it be. That's why so many users just stick
with the default. They install something, they get hosed. Again and again. The
alternative is to spend a great deal of time determining whether the source is
trusted, or official, or whatever.

The app store removes that restriction, making it more useful to the -average-
user. Apps don't write all over each other, they don't bog down the ipad, and
the source is already trusted. Those things mean that a typical user is able
to do more, because those are all barriers to -doing something- that don't
exist on the iPad that do on other platforms. That's all he is saying. That's
the point, and one that people who are building businesses here should
recognize. Don't get hung up on wording.

You can sit around and argue all day that people should be willing to take the
time to understand their devices better, and then they would benefit from a
more open system, but you are wasting your breath. People aren't interested in
that, by and large. They just want to do something else, and do so without
opening themselves up to a giant hassle.

------
delinka
The author is 14yo. I am truly stunned at his ability to articulate his
experience and opinions to the world. He should be commended for that if
nothing else.

Now to the topic at hand: I own Apple products and they serve me well.
However, I have to agree with dazzla that JP describes accessibility rather
than openness.

------
gfodor
Not going to say I agree with his point of view, but this is absolutely
incredible writing for an 8th grader.

~~~
StavrosK
Why do you say that? I don't see anything that's different from even everyday
speech.

~~~
Tycho
It's more about capturing that balanced, professional, editorial tone than
about the words themselves.

------
tomlin
I upvoted because I dig the psychological aspect of the article -- _The
teenage market is where I like to turn for a prediction of where the general
market will be in a few years. Because while teens aren’t nerdy, they tend to
be early adopters because it’s cool_

But the argument about _openness_ is greatly flawed.

~~~
mrspandex
Now, I am a fairly young person myself, but the author is in 8th grade. I'm
not sure he's qualified to talk about changes in the market over a few years.

~~~
sp332
It's not too young for an interested person to know this stuff. In the eighth
grade, I was already dual-booting Linux on the family computer, was following
VA Linux Systems' and Red Hat's IPOs, and was looking for alternatives to MS
Office for my school.

------
Pewpewarrows
This is a cute read, and as others have stated, it's well-written for a 14
year old.

The idea that the iPad is opening up more people to technology than other
products though is quite naive. It might get the most press, fan-fair, and
attention with an exclusive event to debut it every year, but that doesn't
make it any friendlier to non-tech-savvy users than its competitors. Has the
author even touched another tablet-like device on the market?

The iPad might be "open" in the sense that it is making technology accessible
to regular users. But more "open" than the rest? That's the product of good
marketing. Sure, the device itself has to stand on its own, but so do its
competitors. The media loves to give Apple plenty of attention, and combined
with aggressive advertisement its products are now household names.

------
dutchrapley
Well said. It's not about the platform or OS being open. It's about opening up
possibilities for people.

One way Apple did this was with the App Store. Apple didn't create this model
for distributing apps, they simply discovered it, allowing more people to
discover what is possible. The same goes for the App Store on OS X. I,
personally, have discovered a couple of applications I otherwise wouldn't
have.

------
mcantelon
This kid's coming for _you_ , John Gruber.

------
dfj225
I don't think you can reach the conclusion that the iPad is more open than any
other platform because one person, who doesn't even own an iPad yet, thinks it
does more.

Although, it would be interesting to know why the author's friend has that
impression. I wouldn't think it's common, at least it isn't in my (admittedly
tech savvy) circles.

~~~
roboteti
I use a specific example because I prefer them. But everyone thinks that, and
it's not just teens. All the adults I've talked to all think so too.

~~~
dfj225
Have you asked why they think that? I'd like to know their reasoning. I
certainly understand the allure of the device, I just can't see where the idea
of it doing more than they are already doing on their computers comes from,
unless they are simply referring to apps that are only available on iPad.

------
mhd
…for some values of "open".

~~~
dazzla
I think this is a description of accessibility not openness.

------
roboteti
Just a few things (I'm the author).

First: I'm kind of blown away that anyone's reading this and thinking about it
at all -- including those of you who disagree. Thank you all. Second: I don't
want _anyone_ to think that I believe the iPad is more powerful than a regular
computer. Several people have said that I think that, and I don't. I know _I_
couldn't survive on just my iPad. But what I am saying is that the iPad is
kind of like computer training wheels. For a lot of normal people, it makes it
possible for them to explore without worrying. That doesn't mean in any way,
shape, or form that all computers should be like that. I don't think so. That
would be terrible. We need open computers, but there is a place for that and a
place for closed ones, and I think most people do better with a closed one.

Finally, I am well aware what the Android folks mean by "openness", and I am
deliberately redefining the term. Call it "relative openness" if you care that
much. Openness comes at a cost, and unfortunately, it doesn't scale. Have any
of you ever watched someone use an Android device? They don't get them. They
find them confusing and difficult. They make people hate their electronics
because they aren't worth using, and that's no way to push things forward.

I would _never_ want to live in a country made and run like iOS, but a country
is not the same thing as an electronic device used to communicate with others
and the same principles cannot be applied.

~~~
Raphael
We need a rich language in order to communicate effectively. By using a term
differently than expected in your post, and then mixing it with the original
meaning, you're making absolutely no sense. Let's call the iOS interface
"accessible" (covering any number of characteristics) and acknowledge the
missing feature of "arbitrary installs".

I'll grant that Android is not perfect. But the arbitrary install feature does
not seem to be the issue. The crucial non-nerdy segment would never need to
know about it, as they are free to explore the default market app to their
heart's content. In fact, arbitrary installs are disabled by default and have
to be enabled from deep in the settings menu.

As for the principle of disabling arbitrary installs, it's insulting, like a
pair of safety scissors (an inferior product for intended safety).

------
drcode
"There is more than one kind of freedom... Freedom to and freedom from. In the
days of anarchy, it was freedom to. Now you are being given freedom from.
Don't underrate it." - The Handmaid's Tale

------
ZeroGravitas
_"The iPad does everything that a regular computer user does. Facebook.
YouTube. Email. Web browsing. It does all this out of the box."_

Doesn't basically every device with a browser do these out of the box?

If we're talking apps I wasn't aware that the iPhone pre-installed Facebook
and I didn't think there was an iPad app for Facebook. Is this a new thing?
I've heard of Android phones having it installed, even having buttons for it,
but I don't remember seeing it on my iPhone.

~~~
roboteti
Fair point. But it does web browsing out of the box and that's all you need
for Facebook. And yes, every device does so out of the box. The point is that
for an average computer user, it does this out of the box and it does _more_
and they can still figure it out. But you're right about the Facebook thing.
Thanks for reading.

------
DavidChouinard
> As you may or may not know, this is my 8th grade year.

Interestingly, the sentence that completely blew me away had nothing to do
with the argument being made.

------
samlevine
Obligatory: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rights>

------
siglesias
Fun fact about the technology: if there can be spam, there will be spam. If
there can be porn, there will be porn. If there can be malware, there will be
malware. If there can be scams, there will be scams.

Apple's goal is that these things can't be. Their solution is the top down
approach and App Store. Other platforms will (or will not) have other
solutions. It's really that simple.

------
roboteti
My last comment. I'm sure this will make you guys even more sarcastic, but
haters gotta hate: <http://jpteti.com/post/4091718756/ipad-followup-post>. I
hope you folks are glad that I'm no prejudiced (probably unfairly) against all
of you because of the behavior of a few.

~~~
mukyu
haters _gonna_ hate

Frankly, it is disturbing how much of 4chan slips into the thoughts and
lexicon of today's youth.

------
shasta
I thought the article was terrible, but rather than contribute anything
useful, I'm going to mock the title. "99% less open" is idiomatic and means
"1/100 as open". It's a round number, conveying an order of magnitude. On the
other hand, "99% more open" implies you've measured precisely enough to claim
that the iPad is 1.99 times as open as the best alternative. Thank you.

~~~
roboteti
I thank you sincerely for your valuable criticism.

Ha!

