11 ms·

Steve Jobs’ Email Debate With Gawker Blogger

138 points by rooshdi 16y ago

statictype 16y ago
I have to say, nice response from the CEO. His straight no-bullshit response is commendable and will, for many people, distract from the ridiculous definition of freedom he uses.
evo_9 16y ago
Man, gotta give credit to Jobs on those replies. He's one of the few CEO's out there that actually answers things honestly versus just spewing some marketing lines or other prepared statements. Even if I don't entirely agree with him I have to respect his standpoint, it is his company.
- sabat 16y ago
  Agreed. You know, if Jobs would lighten up just a tad, I'd respect him a lot more. He's done great things, but his perception of how far he should impose his views on the world has become distorted.
  - IdeaHamster 16y ago
    Gah! See my above rant, but seriously, how is he imposing his views on you when you are the one with the choice of how to spend your money! This is the sort of complaint I would expect to hear about how the government is spending tax dollars, which you don't get a choice about paying or not.
    - nkassis 16y ago
      Why can't potential customers or "partners" voice their opinion about what they find crappy about the product they would like to buy or develop for? It's feedback any company would want to get in my opinion. Consumers can't vote with their money but that has far less reach than we would like to assume.
      - IdeaHamster 16y ago
        You know...you're right. No single person ever did anything of significance. My vote with my money won't do anything. My vote on election day won't do anything. My life will never amount to anything. I might as well go buy and iPad and bitch about Apple's walled garden... ...nice attitude you've got there
        xanados 16y ago
        Even if I do great things, I can only do them in so many domains in a single lifetime. In all other domains, my only recourse is to complain about how they should be. The idea that no one can complain unless they would choose to overthrow the status quo within every domain is silly.
        IdeaHamster 16y ago
        Complaining and offering criticism is a different thing than claiming violation of personal freedom. I sometimes wonder if most Americans have forgotten how to criticize without, at the same time, vilifying.
    - krakensden 16y ago
      Network effects- just because I don't own an iPhone doesn't mean I don't have to deal with people (more importantly: customers) who do.
    - sabat 16y ago
      Apple is a cult. You either buy into the whole philosophy, or you go elsewhere. Steve has every right to run his company that way -- whether that makes him a dick or not.
biafra 16y ago
I have seen this Story here [dead] at least 7 times (with a link from gawker.com). Were they all duplicates? If so, how do find the comments page to the first submission?
- bbatsell 16y ago
  Unless something has changed in the intervening year (and I sincerely doubt it), gawker.com is on the HN banlist. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=499044 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=499044
IdeaHamster 16y ago
Key line: Gosh, why are you so bitter over a technical issue such as this? Its not about freedom, its about Apple trying to do the right thing for its users. Users, developers and publishers can do whatever they like - they don't have to buy or develop or publish on iPads if they don't want to I have this theory. You see, Apple (mostly) tends to not engage in the all-too-common tricks to try and con you out of your money. Store staff is typically honest and straight-forward, very little pushing and no hidden fees. Apple Care is probably a better value than most extended warrantees, and at least you know you're going to get Apple's level of customer service. Yes, there are lock-ins, but they've always been a trade-off in order to provide a better experience for their customers (i.e. DRM on iTunes sucks, but it was the only way to get the majors to play ball). In general, Apple believes that you should give them money only if you believe their products are worth it. I think it's just that we've gotten so used to capitalism being such a hostile activity between producer and consumer that we forget that there was a time when you would've wanted to pay for something. So, it's no wonder that people want to think that Apple is somehow conning them into giving up their freedom or being locked-down unnecessarily. Really...trust me...you don't have to buy an Apple product. No, seriously, you don't! So why don't you take your "freedom" and "open platform" rant and turn it into a why isn't anyone even close to competing on Apple's level missive.
- Osmose 16y ago
  It makes me angry that a company that appears to go against my ideals is so popular and successful, because I believe my ideals are better. It's not in any way a good argument, but I might as well admit it rather than claiming otherwise.
  - jballanc 16y ago
    So I presume you have started a company based around your ideals? I think people don't realize that there is no magic fairy dust at 1 Infinite Loop. Apple's success is really quite easy to reproduce. It only takes one thing: guts!
    - glhaynes 16y ago
jarek 16y ago
Man, I hate not having the freedom from porn. Thanks, Apple!
- IdeaHamster 16y ago
  Mobile Safari. That is all...
  - jarek 16y ago
    Exactly.
itistoday 16y ago
Anyone else a little surprised that Jobs even got into this debate in the first place? Like, shouldn't he have had this already with some employee on the inside? It seems to suggest that at Apple he has no opportunity to have such debates. Everyone is too scared, it's almost like he's surrounded by yes-men and is therefore astonished at the negative response he's getting. "Why can't people just understand me?" type of thing. Here's a thought. If no one at Apple is actually standing up to Jobs, and since he seems open to outside input via email, perhaps it's a good idea to let him know how you feel? Maybe he actually doesn't get how much he's turned Apple into the 1984 Big Brother that Apple was supposed to vanquish?
- bbatsell 16y ago
  > Like, shouldn't he have had this already with some employee on the inside? How is this e-mail chain in any way evidence that Apple has not had internal debate or that no one has the guts to disagree with Steve Jobs?
  - itistoday 16y ago
    I'm not claiming it's definitive evidence, I'm just saying it seems to suggest it. Apple has made a lot of really ethically questionable moves, and is being quite hypocritical in many cases. This is obvious to me, and others. So when someone on the outside brought this up, Steve Jobs responded in a way that almost seems like it's the first time he's having this debate. That's just my take on it. Or do you really think that many at Apple had this same or similar kind of debate with Jobs, and then he's willing to publicly have it again with Tate? His arguments are just too weak and unpolished for it, and it's surprising he's responding to Tate at all if he's already deliberated it internally and settled on his position.
    - bbatsell 16y ago
      I think the willingness of a famously reclusive CEO to engage in a debate at 1 AM on a Friday night with a random, verbally aggressive blogger with whom he has no familiarity is not indicative of an executive who shies away from internal debate.
krav 16y ago
Best part is Job's last comment: By the way, what have you done that’s so great? Do you create anything, or just criticize others work and belittle their motivations? Creating something of value is hard. It takes dedication, iteration, consistent work, focus, and sacrifice. And to do it again and again? Rare. Apple - regardless of motivation - has done that under Jobs. The sales show the result. I'd respect him, a doer, above a talker like Gawker any day.
- jarek 16y ago
  Without expressing an opinion about the value of Apple products, I would be careful about implying a causation between a product's sales and its value or "greatness".
  - krav 16y ago
    Fair enough - I was going for an "unbiased" metric. Could have been market cap, stock price, etc. In a nutshell, my respect goes to the builders and hackers of the world, not the talkers.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
    - _delirium 16y ago
      Sounds like you're saying your respect goes to the businessmen and marketers of the world, if your primary criteria for greatness are sales, market cap, stock price, etc. Those might sometimes correlate with creativity and technical merit, but they certainly aren't directly measures of it (and often don't correlate). To put it differently: What has Jobs made in the past 10 years? I don't mean: what have employees over which he's had supervision as CEO made. What has Jobs made? Is he really a "builder and hacker"? My impression of the early days is that he wasn't even then: Woz was the builder and hacker; Jobs was the suit.
      - krav 16y ago
        The ceo of a company is responsible for success and failure. When I was in the Army, the success or failure of my squad rested with me - I was ultimately responsible. So, yes, in this case, the guy who took apple from the dumps to one of the biggest consumer devices companies in the world, he gets credit.
tmsh 16y ago
You can disagree with us, but our motives are pure. I think that's the main problem. It's not enough to simply have pure motives. Nobody actually understands the complete extent or realization of their motives, and whether or not they're truly 'pure'. Hence, the importance of listening. You can 'envision' all you want, but if you don't have good feedback loops, you're going to run into serious problems.
- flyosity 16y ago
  The motives may be complex but I'm guessing it comes down to Apple not wanting garbage clunking up their beautiful and "magical" device. Random runtime environments that Apple can't control? Hell no. Cross-platform apps that use the lowest common denominator of features and are slow? Nope, sorry. Apps that sit outside the walled garden that might be nefarious? Yeah, right. Jobs wants elegant and beautiful apps on his "revolutionary" device. If it's not one or both of those things, then he's probably not happy with it and doesn't want users to see it.
  - tmsh 16y ago
    I didn't notice it until reading your response, but I suppose there's a pun on 'pure'. Pure environment, pure performance ('not wanting garbage clunking up their beautiful and "magical" device' as you mention), and also pure as in honest. But purity is not really a word you want to overload.... Fundamentally incoherent to conflate two ideas about purity. And really deeply problematic. Anyhoo, thx for your thoughts.
mkramlich 16y ago
I'm not happy with some of the things Apple has done in the iPhone realm but reading that email thread, I'd have to say Steve had a stronger and more mature case.
quizbiz 16y ago
I don't understand how sjobs manages this. I can't imagine how many emails he gets now that people are expecting responses. He must enjoy interacting directly with his consumers a great deal.
xenophanes 16y ago
> Yep, freedom from programs that steal your private data. Freedom from programs that trash your battery. Freedom from porn. Yep, freedom. The times they are a changin’, and some traditional PC folks feel like their world is slipping away. It is. What he's advocating for the app store may be a good thing, but it's certainly insane to call it freedom. Freedom is when you can do whatever you want. When you restrict stuff, for better or worse, that's less freedom. Taking away all meaning from the word "freedom" is a really bad idea. There is simply no such thing as freedom from the option to watch porn if one wants to watch it. That's like freedom from truancy, or freedom from marijuana, or freedom from leaving your jail cell, enforced by the police. Some will argue those are good things, but none should argue those are freedoms.
- ellyagg 16y ago
  Actually, I think it's fairly well known that there's a tension between two real concepts of 'freedom from' and 'freedom to'.
  - xenophanes 16y ago
    Yes, it's well known that there is an ongoing attack on the liberal idea of freedom which seeks even to destroy basic terminology. They're the same kind of people who made the word "liberal" mean "socialist" or "interventionist" which is something of the opposite of its original and true meaning. But the fact is freedom has a simple and plain meaning, and it's a meaning we need to have a word for. If you want to say that police stopping you from using marijuana is good, whatever, just make up some other word for that because that's the opposite of freedom. Or if you think people have the right to "freedom from want" at the expense of others, it's nothing but a nasty and misleading rhetorical trick to call that freedom. It may or may not be good, but you're taking away people's freedom of choice when you force them to provide for the poor. Force is not freedom, it's force, end of story.
    - starkfist 16y ago
      What is the simple and plain meaning of freedom?
statictype 16y ago
How does the iPad prevent you from watching porn?
- pohl 16y ago
  He was referring to porn apps in the store.
  - petercooper 16y ago
    Which makes his "freedom from porn" schtick a bit crazy. Freedom - just as long as you don't ever use Safari. He implies that once you become a parent, porn is a taboo. It isn't in my neck of the woods, and I'd much rather my daughter stumbled across some people banging on the TV in future than most of the bullshit violence that passes for "entertainment" nowadays. But, hey, I'm European.
    - jsz0 16y ago
      Apple can only control their own store. The Internet is beyond control. You can block Safari via parental controls though. The real issue is what Apple wants to sell in their store. You can't goto a brick and mortar store and buy the latest issue of Hustler. I don't think anyone would argue Apple should have to sell porno DVDs next to the iPods in their stores. Jobs is simply saying for anyone who doesn't like it there are other stores to shop at. Seems reasonable to me.
      - petercooper 16y ago
        Jobs is simply saying for anyone who doesn't like it there are other stores to shop at. It's more like an entire state prohibiting any stores whatsoever except Walmart and then dictating Walmart can't sell pornography. So, sure, if you don't like it, you can up sticks and go a long way away (or just use Safari to get stuff off the Web, like anyone sane does).
      - jasonlotito 16y ago
        "The Internet is beyond control." For now. Do you really think Apple isn't trying to find a way to control that as well? They are. Safari is a prime example of Apple's attempts to exert control. Apple's interest in "open" stops at their business interests. They are open because at the moment, they have to be.
petercooper 16y ago
Jobs claims that "magazine apps will be far better in the end because they're written native." Does he think magazines will natively code an app for every single issue of their magazine to make all the content features, animations, interactive elements, and fancy indexes work? Before you say "don't be crazy, the magazines will be creating specially formatted documents that their readers will load", why can't Adobe make a "Flash Player" app that can load "specially formatted documents" (i.e SWF files) too? Is it merely because SWFs often contain ActionScript fun rather than Jobs' preferred JavaScript fun?
- pohl 16y ago
  Where's the line between a document and an app, after all? It's usually the same as the line between code and data. Yes, this line has been crossed before, but the practice is not without downsides one might want to avoid, and so a Turing Complete format like Postscript was supplanted by a static representation of the same drawing model in the form of PDF documents. Word macro viruses may not have done the same to the Doc format, but I still think it should be considered an antipattern.
  - petercooper 16y ago
    To provide another example that does work on the iPad, though, SVG files can contain code, such as this analog clock: http://anomaly.org/wade/projects/svgClocks/simple-analog.svg http://anomaly.org/wade/projects/svgClocks/simple-analog.svg
- flyosity 16y ago
  They can easily write an application that uses in-app purchases to allow the user to purchase (each week, or month) the next issue. What can the issue be? Well, that's simple, it can be HTML (5 if you want, or anything else) and then it can be displayed in a UIWebView within the application.
  - petercooper 16y ago
    And what is the issue? Is it something that is being interpreted? If so, it had better be in JavaScript otherwise it would contravene 3.3.1. Anyway, if you look at most of the magazine apps that do this so far, they are far more elaborate than HTML and JavaScript creations.. Given there is scripting involved somewhere down the line, they must be using JavaScript or will ultimately violate 3.3.1.
jrockway 16y ago
After reading this article, I want to start a company that makes computing products to free users from the oppression of Jobs' proprietary software. The advertisement will be the face Steve Jobs reading this email on a huge monolith-like television screen. A woman will run up to it, and throw a hammer at Jobs' face, smashing the monolith into millions of pieces. This represents the freeing of the users and developers from the tyranny of Jobs. For some reason, though, I think I've seen this before... somewhere...
- jballanc 16y ago
  After reading this article, I want to start a company Do you really want to? or do you just want to pontificate on the internet using this as a coy rhetorical device? Because, you know, if you really wanted to...well, you might just be successful!
  - jrockway 16y ago
    If you don't like pontification on the Internet with coy rhetorical devices, I'm somewhat confused as to why you read the comment sections of social news sites. And reply.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
weilawei 16y ago
Steve Jobs' response irks me because he equates (by association) "freedom from porn" with "freedom from programs that steal your private data" and "Freedom programs that trash your battery," "Yep, freedom," itself. "[...] their world is slipping away. It is." Freedom from porn? Steve pulls no punches--what does porn mean to us? Is it something evil, something that only subjugated people will perform in? Does it provide an legitimate outlet for a different sort of sexual fetish? Who uses whom? I don't know the answers, but I'm sure there are a multitude, many of them with a nugget of truth. I don't feel as if we need to be protected from ourselves. This is a statement--assuming that it was, in fact, reported in good faith--written by a man in a position of power which asserts a sort of moral judgement about our culture. Please, don't misunderstand: Mr. Jobs is entirely correct in his statement that, "Microsoft had (has) every right to enforce whatever rules for their platform they want. If people don’t like it, they can write for another platform, which some did. Or they can buy another platform, which some did." Indeed, Apple appears (from my non-lawyerly perspective) to be exercising the same supposed right without serious challenge in a court of law. I, myself, write on a MacBook. I enjoy using and working with the technology that Apple offers--but I'm not married to Jobs' vision. I wonder what the future holds, and Jobs' words don't paint a great picture for me. What does the world he and Apple envision for us look like?
seshagiric 16y ago
Steve Woz, Steve Jobs, Bill gates and even Richard Stallman - all have commented on that post :)
cageface 16y ago
It's unfortunate that this conversation wasn't initiated by someone more mature and articulate than Ryan Tate. There is a strong case to be made against Apple's current approach but Ryan didn't make it.
wsgeek 16y ago
Gentlemen, Steve is not being overly controlling... You are all looking at his "blocking" of Flash as a closed-minded policy. Consider this: Do Active-X controls run on the iPhone (or Android)? No -- they never have, and this is for technical AND business reasons. It would be fairly easy to support them -- just have WINE as part of OS X. The reason Apple doesn't do this is because they would be letting the fox into the henhouse and adding unnecessary bloat to a mobile device. Everyone seems to get this, which is why you don't hear complaints from all of the Java and Silverlight people about not being able to code for iPhones. To another point: Ask yourselves -- What is Adobe's business model? They make NO money on the Flash plugin. It's free. They make their money on tools. If I'm the Adobe CEO, I would strive to have every app in the world written in Flash. Now who is close-minded? And by the way, Adobe could solve this VERY easily by making their tools output in HTML5, etc. Why don't they want to do this? Because they feel that HTML5 might be slow to adopt features that they already have. Oh wait -- now the shoe is on the other foot! Adobe realizes that the innovation of their platform would be stifled by any lack of features in HTML5. So why don't they have their tools output Objective-C code which could then be compiled by Apple's tools? My understanding of section 3.3.1 is that this is allowed. Developer tools are the gateway to a platform. Microsoft knows this -- which is why they have some of the most mature tools around. When Microsoft adds a feature to their operating system, why do you as developers feel comfortable waiting for Flash, Java, etc to create an interface to that new feature? If I were a software company, I would embrace a platform and strive to be the best on it -- use every new feature to its fullest extent. Guys, this is what you get paid to do -- innovate, using whatever tools are necessary! It's about the end user experience. This is what makes an app sell. So what Steve is gambling on, and it's a bold yet well-considered move, is that the iPhone/iPad/iPod platform (hardware + OS) will always be slightly ahead of competitors. And the developers who agree will retrain themselves to take advantage of the platform. Development tool vendors will do the same. If Apple were to release a killer hardware feature on the iPhone (which is their business model to do so!), how long would it take for Flash to incorporate it into not only their player but also their development tools? Would they wait until Android implemented it too before doing the release? This harms Apple, it harms developers, and it harms consumers. Flash has a cross-platform, least-common-denominator approach to computing. This is a thing of the past! You might be saying to yourselves that Microsoft never blocked anything -- Flash, Java, RealPlayer, etc. Well, they have a different business model. They want people to consider Windows as the defacto OS platform, and they want to support an ecosystem of ISVs that fill in all the gaps. It's a very well-conceived plan, and it only works because they have a near monopoly on the desktop. If they did not, then their business model would not work. Imagine if you will a world where Linux itself was not free AND they charged for the development tools AND those were the only tools you can use to develop for the platform (as is DevStudio). As you can see, Linux's lack of market share would make this an untenable business model. Why do you think they charge money for their development tools? Eclipse, XCode, and dozens of others are free of charge (yes, I know there is a free version of DevStudio but it is missing some key features). They charge money because they CAN. Adobe charges money because they CAN. If Apple were to charge money for XCode, it would kill the platform. Think about this anytime you are bashing Apple for the high perceived cost of their computers relative to humdrum PCs -- you're getting software that was developed by companies that got the tools for free, and this means you will get better software. Flash developers, you are right to be up in arms over the omission of Flash as part of the iPhone OS. But you're directing your anger at the wrong party. First, I understand that you are loathe to have to learn a new toolset (which you feel is inferior to Flash) to get your apps out there. Years of experience that you have will help to bridge that gap! You are good developers and you will find a way. You should instead be asking yourselves, why are there no 3rd-party Flash development tools that compare to Adobe's? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash#Third-party_tools http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash#Third-party_tools Why is the .SWF format not entirely open? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.swf#Licensing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.swf#Licensing Adobe has great tools that create compelling apps -- there's no denying that. Microsoft has great tools that create compelling apps -- there's no deny that. And Apple has great tools too. Closed systems are a thing of the past (remember when Microsoft had "hidden" APIs that their apps used?). By being forced to expose the hidden APIs, it removed the need for cross-platform emulation/library layers. Yes, it's more work for you, but c'mon, you're good developers, the best at what you do. You will find a way.
lawn 16y ago
"By the way, what have you done that’s so great? Do you create anything, or just criticize others work and belittle their motivations?" I immediately thought about the movie Thank you for smoking where this guy said that the best way to win a discussion was to prove the opponent wrong. You didn't have to be right, as long as he was wrong.
FabriceTalbot 16y ago
This was simply an EPIC email exchange! The blogger made some really good points there. And Steve kept his cool remarcably well, until the end. It kind of makes you wish he hadn't pulled that "what have you done that's so great" card.

138 points by rooshdi 16y ago

I have to say, nice response from the CEO. His straight no-bullshit response is commendable and will, for many people, distract from the ridiculous definition of freedom he uses.

evo_9 16y ago

Man, gotta give credit to Jobs on those replies. He's one of the few CEO's out there that actually answers things honestly versus just spewing some marketing lines or other prepared statements. Even if I don't entirely agree with him I have to respect his standpoint, it is his company.

sabat 16y ago
Agreed. You know, if Jobs would lighten up just a tad, I'd respect him a lot more. He's done great things, but his perception of how far he should impose his views on the world has become distorted.
- IdeaHamster 16y ago
  Gah! See my above rant, but seriously, how is he imposing his views on you when you are the one with the choice of how to spend your money! This is the sort of complaint I would expect to hear about how the government is spending tax dollars, which you don't get a choice about paying or not.
  - nkassis 16y ago
    Why can't potential customers or "partners" voice their opinion about what they find crappy about the product they would like to buy or develop for? It's feedback any company would want to get in my opinion. Consumers can't vote with their money but that has far less reach than we would like to assume.
    - IdeaHamster 16y ago
      You know...you're right. No single person ever did anything of significance. My vote with my money won't do anything. My vote on election day won't do anything. My life will never amount to anything. I might as well go buy and iPad and bitch about Apple's walled garden... ...nice attitude you've got there
      - xanados 16y ago
        Even if I do great things, I can only do them in so many domains in a single lifetime. In all other domains, my only recourse is to complain about how they should be. The idea that no one can complain unless they would choose to overthrow the status quo within every domain is silly.
        IdeaHamster 16y ago
        Complaining and offering criticism is a different thing than claiming violation of personal freedom. I sometimes wonder if most Americans have forgotten how to criticize without, at the same time, vilifying.
  - krakensden 16y ago
    Network effects- just because I don't own an iPhone doesn't mean I don't have to deal with people (more importantly: customers) who do.
  - sabat 16y ago
    Apple is a cult. You either buy into the whole philosophy, or you go elsewhere. Steve has every right to run his company that way -- whether that makes him a dick or not.

biafra 16y ago

I have seen this Story here [dead] at least 7 times (with a link from gawker.com). Were they all duplicates? If so, how do find the comments page to the first submission?

bbatsell 16y ago
Unless something has changed in the intervening year (and I sincerely doubt it), gawker.com is on the HN banlist. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=499044 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=499044

IdeaHamster 16y ago

Key line: Gosh, why are you so bitter over a technical issue such as this? Its not about freedom, its about Apple trying to do the right thing for its users. Users, developers and publishers can do whatever they like - they don't have to buy or develop or publish on iPads if they don't want to I have this theory. You see, Apple (mostly) tends to not engage in the all-too-common tricks to try and con you out of your money. Store staff is typically honest and straight-forward, very little pushing and no hidden fees. Apple Care is probably a better value than most extended warrantees, and at least you know you're going to get Apple's level of customer service. Yes, there are lock-ins, but they've always been a trade-off in order to provide a better experience for their customers (i.e. DRM on iTunes sucks, but it was the only way to get the majors to play ball). In general, Apple believes that you should give them money only if you believe their products are worth it. I think it's just that we've gotten so used to capitalism being such a hostile activity between producer and consumer that we forget that there was a time when you would've wanted to pay for something. So, it's no wonder that people want to think that Apple is somehow conning them into giving up their freedom or being locked-down unnecessarily. Really...trust me...you don't have to buy an Apple product. No, seriously, you don't! So why don't you take your "freedom" and "open platform" rant and turn it into a why isn't anyone even close to competing on Apple's level missive.

Osmose 16y ago
It makes me angry that a company that appears to go against my ideals is so popular and successful, because I believe my ideals are better. It's not in any way a good argument, but I might as well admit it rather than claiming otherwise.
- jballanc 16y ago
  So I presume you have started a company based around your ideals? I think people don't realize that there is no magic fairy dust at 1 Infinite Loop. Apple's success is really quite easy to reproduce. It only takes one thing: guts!
  - glhaynes 16y ago

jarek 16y ago

Man, I hate not having the freedom from porn. Thanks, Apple!

IdeaHamster 16y ago
Mobile Safari. That is all...
- jarek 16y ago
  Exactly.

itistoday 16y ago

Anyone else a little surprised that Jobs even got into this debate in the first place? Like, shouldn't he have had this already with some employee on the inside? It seems to suggest that at Apple he has no opportunity to have such debates. Everyone is too scared, it's almost like he's surrounded by yes-men and is therefore astonished at the negative response he's getting. "Why can't people just understand me?" type of thing. Here's a thought. If no one at Apple is actually standing up to Jobs, and since he seems open to outside input via email, perhaps it's a good idea to let him know how you feel? Maybe he actually doesn't get how much he's turned Apple into the 1984 Big Brother that Apple was supposed to vanquish?

bbatsell 16y ago
> Like, shouldn't he have had this already with some employee on the inside? How is this e-mail chain in any way evidence that Apple has not had internal debate or that no one has the guts to disagree with Steve Jobs?
- itistoday 16y ago
  I'm not claiming it's definitive evidence, I'm just saying it seems to suggest it. Apple has made a lot of really ethically questionable moves, and is being quite hypocritical in many cases. This is obvious to me, and others. So when someone on the outside brought this up, Steve Jobs responded in a way that almost seems like it's the first time he's having this debate. That's just my take on it. Or do you really think that many at Apple had this same or similar kind of debate with Jobs, and then he's willing to publicly have it again with Tate? His arguments are just too weak and unpolished for it, and it's surprising he's responding to Tate at all if he's already deliberated it internally and settled on his position.
  - bbatsell 16y ago
    I think the willingness of a famously reclusive CEO to engage in a debate at 1 AM on a Friday night with a random, verbally aggressive blogger with whom he has no familiarity is not indicative of an executive who shies away from internal debate.

krav 16y ago

Best part is Job's last comment: By the way, what have you done that’s so great? Do you create anything, or just criticize others work and belittle their motivations? Creating something of value is hard. It takes dedication, iteration, consistent work, focus, and sacrifice. And to do it again and again? Rare. Apple - regardless of motivation - has done that under Jobs. The sales show the result. I'd respect him, a doer, above a talker like Gawker any day.

jarek 16y ago
Without expressing an opinion about the value of Apple products, I would be careful about implying a causation between a product's sales and its value or "greatness".
- krav 16y ago
  Fair enough - I was going for an "unbiased" metric. Could have been market cap, stock price, etc. In a nutshell, my respect goes to the builders and hackers of the world, not the talkers.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - _delirium 16y ago
    Sounds like you're saying your respect goes to the businessmen and marketers of the world, if your primary criteria for greatness are sales, market cap, stock price, etc. Those might sometimes correlate with creativity and technical merit, but they certainly aren't directly measures of it (and often don't correlate). To put it differently: What has Jobs made in the past 10 years? I don't mean: what have employees over which he's had supervision as CEO made. What has Jobs made? Is he really a "builder and hacker"? My impression of the early days is that he wasn't even then: Woz was the builder and hacker; Jobs was the suit.
    - krav 16y ago
      The ceo of a company is responsible for success and failure. When I was in the Army, the success or failure of my squad rested with me - I was ultimately responsible. So, yes, in this case, the guy who took apple from the dumps to one of the biggest consumer devices companies in the world, he gets credit.

tmsh 16y ago

You can disagree with us, but our motives are pure. I think that's the main problem. It's not enough to simply have pure motives. Nobody actually understands the complete extent or realization of their motives, and whether or not they're truly 'pure'. Hence, the importance of listening. You can 'envision' all you want, but if you don't have good feedback loops, you're going to run into serious problems.

flyosity 16y ago
The motives may be complex but I'm guessing it comes down to Apple not wanting garbage clunking up their beautiful and "magical" device. Random runtime environments that Apple can't control? Hell no. Cross-platform apps that use the lowest common denominator of features and are slow? Nope, sorry. Apps that sit outside the walled garden that might be nefarious? Yeah, right. Jobs wants elegant and beautiful apps on his "revolutionary" device. If it's not one or both of those things, then he's probably not happy with it and doesn't want users to see it.
- tmsh 16y ago
  I didn't notice it until reading your response, but I suppose there's a pun on 'pure'. Pure environment, pure performance ('not wanting garbage clunking up their beautiful and "magical" device' as you mention), and also pure as in honest. But purity is not really a word you want to overload.... Fundamentally incoherent to conflate two ideas about purity. And really deeply problematic. Anyhoo, thx for your thoughts.

mkramlich 16y ago

I'm not happy with some of the things Apple has done in the iPhone realm but reading that email thread, I'd have to say Steve had a stronger and more mature case.

quizbiz 16y ago

I don't understand how sjobs manages this. I can't imagine how many emails he gets now that people are expecting responses. He must enjoy interacting directly with his consumers a great deal.

xenophanes 16y ago

> Yep, freedom from programs that steal your private data. Freedom from programs that trash your battery. Freedom from porn. Yep, freedom. The times they are a changin’, and some traditional PC folks feel like their world is slipping away. It is. What he's advocating for the app store may be a good thing, but it's certainly insane to call it freedom. Freedom is when you can do whatever you want. When you restrict stuff, for better or worse, that's less freedom. Taking away all meaning from the word "freedom" is a really bad idea. There is simply no such thing as freedom from the option to watch porn if one wants to watch it. That's like freedom from truancy, or freedom from marijuana, or freedom from leaving your jail cell, enforced by the police. Some will argue those are good things, but none should argue those are freedoms.

ellyagg 16y ago
Actually, I think it's fairly well known that there's a tension between two real concepts of 'freedom from' and 'freedom to'.
- xenophanes 16y ago
  Yes, it's well known that there is an ongoing attack on the liberal idea of freedom which seeks even to destroy basic terminology. They're the same kind of people who made the word "liberal" mean "socialist" or "interventionist" which is something of the opposite of its original and true meaning. But the fact is freedom has a simple and plain meaning, and it's a meaning we need to have a word for. If you want to say that police stopping you from using marijuana is good, whatever, just make up some other word for that because that's the opposite of freedom. Or if you think people have the right to "freedom from want" at the expense of others, it's nothing but a nasty and misleading rhetorical trick to call that freedom. It may or may not be good, but you're taking away people's freedom of choice when you force them to provide for the poor. Force is not freedom, it's force, end of story.
  - starkfist 16y ago
    What is the simple and plain meaning of freedom?

statictype 16y ago

How does the iPad prevent you from watching porn?

pohl 16y ago
He was referring to porn apps in the store.
- petercooper 16y ago
  Which makes his "freedom from porn" schtick a bit crazy. Freedom - just as long as you don't ever use Safari. He implies that once you become a parent, porn is a taboo. It isn't in my neck of the woods, and I'd much rather my daughter stumbled across some people banging on the TV in future than most of the bullshit violence that passes for "entertainment" nowadays. But, hey, I'm European.
  - jsz0 16y ago
    Apple can only control their own store. The Internet is beyond control. You can block Safari via parental controls though. The real issue is what Apple wants to sell in their store. You can't goto a brick and mortar store and buy the latest issue of Hustler. I don't think anyone would argue Apple should have to sell porno DVDs next to the iPods in their stores. Jobs is simply saying for anyone who doesn't like it there are other stores to shop at. Seems reasonable to me.
    - petercooper 16y ago
      Jobs is simply saying for anyone who doesn't like it there are other stores to shop at. It's more like an entire state prohibiting any stores whatsoever except Walmart and then dictating Walmart can't sell pornography. So, sure, if you don't like it, you can up sticks and go a long way away (or just use Safari to get stuff off the Web, like anyone sane does).
    - jasonlotito 16y ago
      "The Internet is beyond control." For now. Do you really think Apple isn't trying to find a way to control that as well? They are. Safari is a prime example of Apple's attempts to exert control. Apple's interest in "open" stops at their business interests. They are open because at the moment, they have to be.

petercooper 16y ago

Jobs claims that "magazine apps will be far better in the end because they're written native." Does he think magazines will natively code an app for every single issue of their magazine to make all the content features, animations, interactive elements, and fancy indexes work? Before you say "don't be crazy, the magazines will be creating specially formatted documents that their readers will load", why can't Adobe make a "Flash Player" app that can load "specially formatted documents" (i.e SWF files) too? Is it merely because SWFs often contain ActionScript fun rather than Jobs' preferred JavaScript fun?

pohl 16y ago
Where's the line between a document and an app, after all? It's usually the same as the line between code and data. Yes, this line has been crossed before, but the practice is not without downsides one might want to avoid, and so a Turing Complete format like Postscript was supplanted by a static representation of the same drawing model in the form of PDF documents. Word macro viruses may not have done the same to the Doc format, but I still think it should be considered an antipattern.
- petercooper 16y ago
  To provide another example that does work on the iPad, though, SVG files can contain code, such as this analog clock: http://anomaly.org/wade/projects/svgClocks/simple-analog.svg http://anomaly.org/wade/projects/svgClocks/simple-analog.svg
flyosity 16y ago
They can easily write an application that uses in-app purchases to allow the user to purchase (each week, or month) the next issue. What can the issue be? Well, that's simple, it can be HTML (5 if you want, or anything else) and then it can be displayed in a UIWebView within the application.
- petercooper 16y ago
  And what is the issue? Is it something that is being interpreted? If so, it had better be in JavaScript otherwise it would contravene 3.3.1. Anyway, if you look at most of the magazine apps that do this so far, they are far more elaborate than HTML and JavaScript creations.. Given there is scripting involved somewhere down the line, they must be using JavaScript or will ultimately violate 3.3.1.

jrockway 16y ago

After reading this article, I want to start a company that makes computing products to free users from the oppression of Jobs' proprietary software. The advertisement will be the face Steve Jobs reading this email on a huge monolith-like television screen. A woman will run up to it, and throw a hammer at Jobs' face, smashing the monolith into millions of pieces. This represents the freeing of the users and developers from the tyranny of Jobs. For some reason, though, I think I've seen this before... somewhere...

jballanc 16y ago
After reading this article, I want to start a company Do you really want to? or do you just want to pontificate on the internet using this as a coy rhetorical device? Because, you know, if you really wanted to...well, you might just be successful!
- jrockway 16y ago
  If you don't like pontification on the Internet with coy rhetorical devices, I'm somewhat confused as to why you read the comment sections of social news sites. And reply.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

weilawei 16y ago

Steve Jobs' response irks me because he equates (by association) "freedom from porn" with "freedom from programs that steal your private data" and "Freedom programs that trash your battery," "Yep, freedom," itself. "[...] their world is slipping away. It is." Freedom from porn? Steve pulls no punches--what does porn mean to us? Is it something evil, something that only subjugated people will perform in? Does it provide an legitimate outlet for a different sort of sexual fetish? Who uses whom? I don't know the answers, but I'm sure there are a multitude, many of them with a nugget of truth. I don't feel as if we need to be protected from ourselves. This is a statement--assuming that it was, in fact, reported in good faith--written by a man in a position of power which asserts a sort of moral judgement about our culture. Please, don't misunderstand: Mr. Jobs is entirely correct in his statement that, "Microsoft had (has) every right to enforce whatever rules for their platform they want. If people don’t like it, they can write for another platform, which some did. Or they can buy another platform, which some did." Indeed, Apple appears (from my non-lawyerly perspective) to be exercising the same supposed right without serious challenge in a court of law. I, myself, write on a MacBook. I enjoy using and working with the technology that Apple offers--but I'm not married to Jobs' vision. I wonder what the future holds, and Jobs' words don't paint a great picture for me. What does the world he and Apple envision for us look like?

seshagiric 16y ago

Steve Woz, Steve Jobs, Bill gates and even Richard Stallman - all have commented on that post :)

cageface 16y ago

It's unfortunate that this conversation wasn't initiated by someone more mature and articulate than Ryan Tate. There is a strong case to be made against Apple's current approach but Ryan didn't make it.

wsgeek 16y ago

Gentlemen, Steve is not being overly controlling... You are all looking at his "blocking" of Flash as a closed-minded policy. Consider this: Do Active-X controls run on the iPhone (or Android)? No -- they never have, and this is for technical AND business reasons. It would be fairly easy to support them -- just have WINE as part of OS X. The reason Apple doesn't do this is because they would be letting the fox into the henhouse and adding unnecessary bloat to a mobile device. Everyone seems to get this, which is why you don't hear complaints from all of the Java and Silverlight people about not being able to code for iPhones. To another point: Ask yourselves -- What is Adobe's business model? They make NO money on the Flash plugin. It's free. They make their money on tools. If I'm the Adobe CEO, I would strive to have every app in the world written in Flash. Now who is close-minded? And by the way, Adobe could solve this VERY easily by making their tools output in HTML5, etc. Why don't they want to do this? Because they feel that HTML5 might be slow to adopt features that they already have. Oh wait -- now the shoe is on the other foot! Adobe realizes that the innovation of their platform would be stifled by any lack of features in HTML5. So why don't they have their tools output Objective-C code which could then be compiled by Apple's tools? My understanding of section 3.3.1 is that this is allowed. Developer tools are the gateway to a platform. Microsoft knows this -- which is why they have some of the most mature tools around. When Microsoft adds a feature to their operating system, why do you as developers feel comfortable waiting for Flash, Java, etc to create an interface to that new feature? If I were a software company, I would embrace a platform and strive to be the best on it -- use every new feature to its fullest extent. Guys, this is what you get paid to do -- innovate, using whatever tools are necessary! It's about the end user experience. This is what makes an app sell. So what Steve is gambling on, and it's a bold yet well-considered move, is that the iPhone/iPad/iPod platform (hardware + OS) will always be slightly ahead of competitors. And the developers who agree will retrain themselves to take advantage of the platform. Development tool vendors will do the same. If Apple were to release a killer hardware feature on the iPhone (which is their business model to do so!), how long would it take for Flash to incorporate it into not only their player but also their development tools? Would they wait until Android implemented it too before doing the release? This harms Apple, it harms developers, and it harms consumers. Flash has a cross-platform, least-common-denominator approach to computing. This is a thing of the past! You might be saying to yourselves that Microsoft never blocked anything -- Flash, Java, RealPlayer, etc. Well, they have a different business model. They want people to consider Windows as the defacto OS platform, and they want to support an ecosystem of ISVs that fill in all the gaps. It's a very well-conceived plan, and it only works because they have a near monopoly on the desktop. If they did not, then their business model would not work. Imagine if you will a world where Linux itself was not free AND they charged for the development tools AND those were the only tools you can use to develop for the platform (as is DevStudio). As you can see, Linux's lack of market share would make this an untenable business model. Why do you think they charge money for their development tools? Eclipse, XCode, and dozens of others are free of charge (yes, I know there is a free version of DevStudio but it is missing some key features). They charge money because they CAN. Adobe charges money because they CAN. If Apple were to charge money for XCode, it would kill the platform. Think about this anytime you are bashing Apple for the high perceived cost of their computers relative to humdrum PCs -- you're getting software that was developed by companies that got the tools for free, and this means you will get better software. Flash developers, you are right to be up in arms over the omission of Flash as part of the iPhone OS. But you're directing your anger at the wrong party. First, I understand that you are loathe to have to learn a new toolset (which you feel is inferior to Flash) to get your apps out there. Years of experience that you have will help to bridge that gap! You are good developers and you will find a way. You should instead be asking yourselves, why are there no 3rd-party Flash development tools that compare to Adobe's? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash#Third-party_tools http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash#Third-party_tools Why is the .SWF format not entirely open? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.swf#Licensing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.swf#Licensing Adobe has great tools that create compelling apps -- there's no denying that. Microsoft has great tools that create compelling apps -- there's no deny that. And Apple has great tools too. Closed systems are a thing of the past (remember when Microsoft had "hidden" APIs that their apps used?). By being forced to expose the hidden APIs, it removed the need for cross-platform emulation/library layers. Yes, it's more work for you, but c'mon, you're good developers, the best at what you do. You will find a way.

lawn 16y ago

"By the way, what have you done that’s so great? Do you create anything, or just criticize others work and belittle their motivations?" I immediately thought about the movie Thank you for smoking where this guy said that the best way to win a discussion was to prove the opponent wrong. You didn't have to be right, as long as he was wrong.

FabriceTalbot 16y ago

This was simply an EPIC email exchange! The blogger made some really good points there. And Steve kept his cool remarcably well, until the end. It kind of makes you wish he hadn't pulled that "what have you done that's so great" card.