Hacker News Reader

Comment by alberich | Hacker News Reader

I always wonder if this is what they call the reality distortion effect. You get what you pay for?

Long time ago I had an ibook g4. Supposedly it was very nice back then, and very pricey too. However, after playing with it sometime, it just looked cute. Overpriced and cute. Apple products are a jail that looks very nice, but its a jail anyway.

Now I have an IPad (don't remember the generation) because my job. It is still overly priced and cute. Oh, and a jail. Is this what you are supposed to get for paying a high price?

Guess I'll never "get it". For me, it's just stylish and pricey stuff, that locks you in. Paying to give up your freedom... go figure.

View on HN

I'm not afraid to say that on iOS, the "jail" makes the experience better for me. The entire iOS is amazing for what I need it for and for what many people need it for. I'm happy to pay the higher price because there's no other product that can substitute for the experience. I don't care about the "jail". If this is a jail then lock me up for life because it's a damn nice jail.

OSX on the other hand isn't a jail. You can install whatever you want. It's a computer. In fact I prefer Apple's jail to Microsoft's jail and pay more because I get a better experience and have found no substitute. Can I customize the OS? Fuck no! But if I wanted to then I wouldn't buy Apple because I know what I'm getting into before I buy. As a developer there isn't anything I can do on another platform that I can't on OS X. In fact, because its based on BSD I get the best of the Unix world and Apple's world. And Apple's world, or jail as you call it, is beautiful, well designed, has better font rendering, it's fast, it makes the right assumptions about my use, and so one. So I can't hack the kernel. So what? I don't need or want to. That's kind of why I bought an Apple to begin with.

Philosophies about freedom, free software, or really any philosophies or beliefs do not apply here. That argument is just a red herring. The value of the machine is in its substitutes. My Macs don't have any substitutes. There's not a single PC out there that can match the quality, beauty, and experience of my Macs. But not everyone uses them like I do so I can understand if others don't believe they're valuable. But as far as Samsung goes, what they did was basically try to trick people into thinking that they'll get the Apple experience on a Samsung just because they look alike.

And just so everyone knows, at my job I work 8+ hours a day on a Windows7 PC. I've had an Android phone. I also have a Linux laptop. I love my Linux box but it still doesn't hold a candle to my MacBook Air. This isn't about fashion. It's about people finding a product so impressive that they truly love it. I own a lot of stuff but very few of my possessions are as valuable to me as my Macs. Call me a fanboy. I don't give a shit. That argument is a lame copout. People see people like me being truly impressed with something, they don't get it, then they write it off as fanboyism. It's just a meaningless argument meant to explain something people don't understand. A lot like how people ascribe religious significants to events they don't understand. No, that's not hyperbole. It's just like that.

OSX on the other hand isn't a jail. You can install whatever you want. It's a computer.

As long as your credit card is on file with apple.

You might be surprised what happens to 'your' computer after an attempted purchase fails for any reason. You won't be able to update or install any software from the app-store anymore. This includes updates for and re-downloads of apps that you have 'bought'.

Downloading a previously purchased digital asset requires confirmation of financial responsibility‽ Who would have thought!

I don't understand. He already bought it. Why should he have to have a valid credit card again? Aren't purchases locked to an account with a password and such?

Totally false. The app store is for people who want simplicity. It's for the consumer market. Those people who infect their computers with viruses constantly because they think that sketchy looking banner telling them they've won todays lottery isn't sketchy at all and click it.

There's nothing stopping me from downloading and installing any app I want from whatever source I want on my Mac. Everyone all of the sudden thinks that the Mac App Store is the final nail in the iOSification coffin but it isn't. It's just a good idea for people totally unlike us and those people actually get a far better experience than any "free" system because of it. But again, no one is forced to go through the app store to download applications.

Honestly, I haven't even set Mountain Lion to let me download anything unrestricted. I set it to the medium setting where it'll give me a warning before installing non-app store apps and I like it that way. I like being reminded that what I'm about to install hasn't been vetted by Apple. That's fine with me. I just control+click it and run it the first time and I'm never bothered again. Sure, I could set it so I get no hassles but I like the feature.

When it comes down to it, I know what I'm getting into. I'm not so completely risk averse that I refuse to use something because some worst case scenario or edge case might happen at some point down the road to me.

That argument only applies to the Mac App Store, which is still getting mixed responses from users and devs.

"Apple products are a jail that looks very nice, but its a jail anyway."

Please clarify this. I don't feel more restricted with my MacBook Pro than I did with my old Lenovo-laptop. In what way was it a jail to you?

Come on... You know what he's going to say. What's the point of asking? It just wastes yours and his/hers time.

I honestly don't know what he's going to say, or how he thought it was a jail, and would like to know.

I just couldn't install any other usable operating system on the hardware other then Apple's OS. The specifications were closed, you couldn't get much anything useful installed on it because it depended on proprietary software that, of course, only worked on OS X.

edit: besides, things don't look much better nowdays, eh?

> you couldn't get much anything useful installed on it

I have node, redis, mysql, couchdb, mongodb, autoconf/automake/cmake, ffmpeg, erlang, git, hg, gnuplot, groovy, memchaced, lua, lynx, lib* (a million of them), nmap, rabbitmq, phantomjs, postgresql, siege, httpd, squid, spidermonkey, coffee-script, mit-scheme,pcre, lkgconfig, mosh, HTTPie, python, ruby, cairo, pango, x11 installed on my OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion (among other tools that I've forgot or don't use regularly). And I'm not even a "pro" user - just a regular developer.

But your requirements clearly differs from mine. Because you don't find them "useful". It's okay, not all of us use the same tools. But I'm sure the majority of developers use the aforementioned tools, and care less about kernel programming or other things that can't be done on a MacBook as efficiently as on ThinkPads (although Torvalds uses an Air).

"besides, things don't look much better nowdays, eh?"

Sure they do. I can run both Linux and Windows without virtualization, and Apple even supports the latter officially through the Boot Camp-application.

I can't reply to Zirro's and pooriaazimi's posts, so I'll answear here.

Zirro: that is good to know. I wish it was the same with the IPad. Owning your hardware, in the sense that you can install alternative stuff on it, is very important for me.

pooriaazimi: the point was about the power to install anything, including a different OS. If it is like Zirro said, it is sure a big improvement on the desktop/laptop category. Sadly the IPad doesn't offer you the freedom for using anything that is not from Apple. I don't care much about it, because the IPad isn't mine anyways. I just wouldn't buy it if I had to choose (Android's devices look much more open).

ps. I'm sorry if I offended some people, it was not my intention. cheers :)

Why on Earth did you buy it if that isn't what you wanted?

It's like buying a hardcover book and complaining that you couldn't get it to be any other book. They're not selling iOS devices as hobbyist machines for tinkerers. You buy an iPhone to be an iPhone, an iPad to be an iPad. That's not a bad thing, it's an attribute of the product you bought as much as its price and processor.

I'm replying to you from Windows 7 running natively on my MacBook via Bootcamp.

What's your point, exactly?

I would be curious for some example of non-proprietary software you could install on Linux that would not work in one of the many options available to OS X users: homebrew/macports/fink, dual-boot (or replace the OS), virtualization, or just build from source.

Here's a list of keywords. Just feed them to a generic Markov random sentence generator and you'll get your response: Gatekeeper, walled-garden App Store, iOSification, hardware obsolescence in 4-5 years, closed-source, GPL, soldered RAM and SSD and battery, overpriced, eye-candy, skeuomorphism, big brother, reality-distortion-field.

I don't want to be a jerk or offend "alberich", but I strongly disagree with him.

That's ok, I believe we can agree to disagree :)

The comment was made about an iOS device, which it is more applicable too. Apple has a monopoly on legit iOS App distribution, where Android tablets and phones can install apps from the wild.

It may sound like a small point, but the feeling that I didn't own my iPhone is a big reason I prefer Android.

He comments first about the laptops. About laptops before the Mac App Store even...

I can agree with it in the case of an iOS-device, but in this case he said "Long time ago I had an ibook g4".

I am starting to get pretty tired of hearing that the products I use every day for professional work are toys, that I gave up my freedom to use them and worship Apple etc etc.

I agree. I was a Windows user for most of my life. Now that Apple products are better, I'll use them.

If something else comes along that's new and better, I'll use that.

Exactly. I don't pick my tools based on dogma. I like to have the best tools I can afford when I need them.

> Apple has a monopoly on legit iOS App distribution,

I know why you think that, but you're missing that there is a completely legitimate app distribution mechanism outside the AppStore.

You can install (and distribute) whatever apps you want for iOS devices, and users can download them from the web and install them on the device. And I'm not talking about jailbreaking.

Since the first day the iPhone has shipped, you've been able to download and install apps built with javascript from anywhere on the web.

These are full apps, written in Javascript and running on the machine. They have access to the iOS design components such as the navigation controller and tab bar UI, etc, can read touches and orientation and even your current location.

You can turn off the network- put the device in airport mode- and they still run. These aren't links to web apps running on the web, they are full apps.

Apple only curates what goes on in the App Store. Apps distributed outside the App Store are not curated. Apple built this platform for apps specifically so it wouldn't have to curate them.

Its just that once the App Store came out, everyone switched to writing native apps (And at the time, writing native apps are what people were clamoring for) that that native app distirbution model won out.

But the javascript app platform is still there on the device and completely un-regulated by apple.

It's also still supported by Apple, and each year at WWDC they have a couple sessions talking about it.

I know it fits some people's ideology better to believe that Apple will only let you run apps approved by Apple on your device, but it simply isn't true.

Further, if you want native apps of arbitrary origin, you can join the developer program and run whatever native apps you want.

But Apple has always allowed this other distribution mechanism. These apps can't spread malware and so there is no need to regulate them. Since native apps can, they need to be curated, hence the AppStore.

It is disingenuous for people to pretend like Apple only wants you to buy apps from the AppStore-- because the javascript app platform has existed since a year before the AppStore and they continue to maintain it.

Do you have any reference material or documentation for developing the javascript way? As a fairly new dev I would be interested in seeing that process as most of my "distribute outside of app store on ios" queries to the web say without jailbreaking, its impossible.

> Since the first day the iPhone has shipped, you've been able to download and install apps built with javascript from anywhere on the web.

Wow. I had no idea. I found a detailed HOWTO http://matt.might.net/articles/how-to-native-iphone-ipad-app...

I've done some mobile javascript development and do commend Apple for pushing the limits of what can be done in-browser. The accelerometer support comes to mind, which came sooner and better than the same support on Android.

That said, I wasn't aware that the two environments could be considered equivalent. Can you call the camera API from javascript? Write a music player?

It would be one thing (though still unfortunate) if the App store monopoly were used only for quality control, but instances where politics were at play really left a bad taste in my mouth. Grooveshark, Google Voice, and Opera mobile come to mind as projects that if I am remembering correctly were blocked or delayed for political reasons. They all require a native environment that's richer than HTML apps can provide, to my knowledge.

Google Music is a javascript app and works well on the iPhone, the remote etc. all behave properly and it can play while in the background.

> Further, if you want native apps of arbitrary origin, you can join the developer program and run whatever native apps you want.

If you want to run these native apps outside of the simulator, you need to pay $99/year, though..

The 'jail' is beneficial in that it allows high-quality apps to be made. If iOS users could just install apps from anywhere, piracy would mean a reduction in the quality and quantity of apps that developers are willing to make for it.

Even tech-savvy people buy iOS devices knowing that they are restricted in this way, and reap the benefits.

Do use a computer that is free (as in freedom) all the way down to the BIOS?

No. But considering that I paid almost nothing for it makes a big difference. It's not like paying U$ 1k and being locked in.

with my Ibook I couldn't install other OS on working conditions because Apple wouldn't just open the specs, so there wasn't really other OSs to install. It is also not really an option to install other OSs on the IPad. And it costs a lot of money, that makes a big diference. You pay to be locked in to Apple.

Then when Samsung comes around and offers almost the same features, people start to worry that their overly priced stuff will not be so special anymore, and act like Samsung's products are just a poorly made ripoff.

Maybe there was something funky about the hardware in the iBook G4 but I remember installing Yellow Dog Linux on my old PowerBook G4 without too much trouble.

It was years ago so I don't recall the details but it was definitely possible and not terribly difficult.

I had Yellow Dog Linux installed on my iBook G4 without issues ... not sure what OP is going on about.

That's what I figured.

If you want a challenge, try installing Arch on an 12" PowerBook G4. I spent three days one winter break in college getting that on there.

You've been able to run Unix on Macs going back to the 1980s. In the 1990s there were several variations of Linux that ran on Macs, and Apple hired the mklinux guy to make sure that linux kernels ran ok on Macs.

The only time in the Mac's history that Apple wasn't working to make sure it could run Unix was 1984-1987ish before they released their flavor of Unix.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com