The iPad is 99% more open than any other computer

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.

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

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.

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.

But the argument about openness is greatly flawed.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.