3 ms·

The problem with Apple is that they try and project some moral superiority while actually having a troubled record when it comes to moral actions. They claim to

The problem with Apple is that they try and project some moral superiority while actually having a troubled record when it comes to moral actions. They claim to be champions of open standards, open architectures, etc. And oftentimes, they do exceedingly well: The early adoption of USB, a beautiful working integrated Java platform, HTML5 and web standards are all examples where Apple championed openness and followed through. However, there is this other side: where Apple seizes a chunk of territory that they mark out as "ours to play with" and this is roped off and defended at all costs. When Google decided that cellphones needed an open option to keep carriers and developers honest, Apple reacted vociferously against this perceived incursion into their territory. And this is, I believe, what dhh is articulating unease about. Today Goliath Apple is fighting the good fight, taking down the monolithic clunky developer-terrorizing nonsense that is Flash in the name of open standards and on behalf of Davidesque HTML5. But tomorrow, there's no telling if Apple is suddenly going to decide that this is "their territory" and they are going to defend it against all incursions (open or not) at all costs. And that is worrying. Apple's moral standards seem arbitrary, adopted post-hoc to conveniently justify a pre-ordained course of action. And that makes everyone fearful of their next move.

ceejayoz 16y ago
> When Google decided that cellphones needed an open option to keep carriers and developers honest... Google hasn't kept the carriers honest, and I've yet to hear of an iOS app that quietly copies all your SMS messages off to some server in Russia.
- recoiledsnake 16y ago
  http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/15YearOld-Sneaks-iPhone-Tethering-App-Past-Apple-109491 http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/15YearOld-Sneaks-iPhone-T... If someone was able to sneak something like tethering, I don't think it's a far stretch for text messages.
  - ceejayoz 16y ago
    Tethering is possible because it doesn't require accessing any other app's data. SMSes are walled off. That does not appear to be the case with Android, which allows apps to send/read SMSes.
astrange 16y ago
> When Google decided that cellphones needed an open option to keep carriers and developers honest Not only is this not what happened (they made a cell phone OS to make money), I'm not even sure it makes sense. What do you mean "honest"?
- kenjackson 16y ago
  Google made cellphones to keep Apple from making web browsing a second-rate experience on the iPhone. Again, insider baseball here, but grumblings were that some at Apple really wanted to push the app store and begin to deemphasize web browsing. With Android Google has made it clear that everyone needs to support the web, and that there will be a substantial portion of users that are hitting the web with mobile devices. I think w/o Android we'd probably see slightly different positioning from Apple on the web with mobile devices. Of course, we won't know for sure now. Android is here and given its growth everyone has to support the web in a real way. And as long as you're browsing the web then Google wins -- if its with iPhones, EVOs, or HD7s.
  - othermaciej 16y ago
    Apple has always delivered an excellent web browsing experience on all of its general purpose computing devices. Probably the top selling point of the original iPhone, before the app store, was "browsing that doesn't suck". And incidentally Android's browser technology is largely based on WebKit, created by Apple. It simply does not compute to say that Google had to save mobile browsing from Apple.
    - kenjackson 16y ago
      From all appearances Apple never acted on these grumblings. And they started after the introduction of native apps. As I point out we don't really know how it would have played out with no Android. I do think that if talk to Google they do believe that over time the app store experience would be the one pushed by Apple and the web deemphasized to the extent they could. Remember Android is all cost center for Google. The only real benefit they derive from it is keeping people on the web. Which is one reason why the Android app store will not be as strong as Apples.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
jamesaguilar 16y ago
> When Google decided that cellphones needed an open option to keep carriers and developers honest, Apple reacted vociferously against this perceived incursion into their territory. I thought the reason they were upset was that Google was substantially "inspired" by design choices that Apple pioneered (or at least popularized). I don't think it's solely about defending the smartphone market.
- kylerove 16y ago
  For those who care to read about this interesting history, I can paraphrase it something like this: 1. Google buys Android and plans to make cell phone. First cell phone prototypes look/feel like then-current-day Blackberries (aka, key pads, small screens, no touch). 2. Apple makes iPhone. Touch-only. Changes world. 3. Google then remakes Android in mold of iPhone, copying its new touch-based metaphors and more. 4. Apple understandably does not take the imitator kindly. Enter present day.
kylerove 16y ago
Don't you think you're reading too much into the "opaque" intentions of Apple? Apple is fairly tight-lipped about what they do, so to assign words like "moral superiority" feels more like your feeling than some larger truth. Take flash. When the iPhone came out, Apple and Adobe had discussions. Apple said, show us what you have. My guess is that it was shitty, didn't respect new iOS touch-based metaphors, made for bad UX and poor battery life. Apple passed. Now according to other reports about Flash, Apple gave them chances, but Adobe COULD. NOT. DELIVER. So when the iPad came to fruition and it began to seriously dawn on Adobe management that they were being left behind, they had only one option: try to garner public sympathy for something that Apple had originally intended be an option: flash on iOS. Apple realized, early on, that Adobe didn't care enough to solve what Apple saw as a true problem. Adobe completely whiffed their chances. So here we are today. Is that "moral superiority" or true pragmatism in dealing with someone who can't or won't deal? This whole "slippery slope" things is pure FUD. Apple makes pragmatic decisions, not vengeful or hateful ones. Java for every other platform is maintained by Sun/Oracle. Apple has little need to spend precious engineering time maintaining a runtime that sees little use by end-users. Interested parties (Sun/Oracle) can certainly continue to maintain a runtime if needed and will probably have less overhead than Apple doing it.

ceejayoz 16y ago

> When Google decided that cellphones needed an open option to keep carriers and developers honest... Google hasn't kept the carriers honest, and I've yet to hear of an iOS app that quietly copies all your SMS messages off to some server in Russia.

recoiledsnake 16y ago
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/15YearOld-Sneaks-iPhone-Tethering-App-Past-Apple-109491 http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/15YearOld-Sneaks-iPhone-T... If someone was able to sneak something like tethering, I don't think it's a far stretch for text messages.
- ceejayoz 16y ago
  Tethering is possible because it doesn't require accessing any other app's data. SMSes are walled off. That does not appear to be the case with Android, which allows apps to send/read SMSes.

astrange 16y ago

> When Google decided that cellphones needed an open option to keep carriers and developers honest Not only is this not what happened (they made a cell phone OS to make money), I'm not even sure it makes sense. What do you mean "honest"?

kenjackson 16y ago
Google made cellphones to keep Apple from making web browsing a second-rate experience on the iPhone. Again, insider baseball here, but grumblings were that some at Apple really wanted to push the app store and begin to deemphasize web browsing. With Android Google has made it clear that everyone needs to support the web, and that there will be a substantial portion of users that are hitting the web with mobile devices. I think w/o Android we'd probably see slightly different positioning from Apple on the web with mobile devices. Of course, we won't know for sure now. Android is here and given its growth everyone has to support the web in a real way. And as long as you're browsing the web then Google wins -- if its with iPhones, EVOs, or HD7s.
- othermaciej 16y ago
  Apple has always delivered an excellent web browsing experience on all of its general purpose computing devices. Probably the top selling point of the original iPhone, before the app store, was "browsing that doesn't suck". And incidentally Android's browser technology is largely based on WebKit, created by Apple. It simply does not compute to say that Google had to save mobile browsing from Apple.
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    From all appearances Apple never acted on these grumblings. And they started after the introduction of native apps. As I point out we don't really know how it would have played out with no Android. I do think that if talk to Google they do believe that over time the app store experience would be the one pushed by Apple and the web deemphasized to the extent they could. Remember Android is all cost center for Google. The only real benefit they derive from it is keeping people on the web. Which is one reason why the Android app store will not be as strong as Apples.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

jamesaguilar 16y ago

> When Google decided that cellphones needed an open option to keep carriers and developers honest, Apple reacted vociferously against this perceived incursion into their territory. I thought the reason they were upset was that Google was substantially "inspired" by design choices that Apple pioneered (or at least popularized). I don't think it's solely about defending the smartphone market.

kylerove 16y ago
For those who care to read about this interesting history, I can paraphrase it something like this: 1. Google buys Android and plans to make cell phone. First cell phone prototypes look/feel like then-current-day Blackberries (aka, key pads, small screens, no touch). 2. Apple makes iPhone. Touch-only. Changes world. 3. Google then remakes Android in mold of iPhone, copying its new touch-based metaphors and more. 4. Apple understandably does not take the imitator kindly. Enter present day.

kylerove 16y ago

Don't you think you're reading too much into the "opaque" intentions of Apple? Apple is fairly tight-lipped about what they do, so to assign words like "moral superiority" feels more like your feeling than some larger truth. Take flash. When the iPhone came out, Apple and Adobe had discussions. Apple said, show us what you have. My guess is that it was shitty, didn't respect new iOS touch-based metaphors, made for bad UX and poor battery life. Apple passed. Now according to other reports about Flash, Apple gave them chances, but Adobe COULD. NOT. DELIVER. So when the iPad came to fruition and it began to seriously dawn on Adobe management that they were being left behind, they had only one option: try to garner public sympathy for something that Apple had originally intended be an option: flash on iOS. Apple realized, early on, that Adobe didn't care enough to solve what Apple saw as a true problem. Adobe completely whiffed their chances. So here we are today. Is that "moral superiority" or true pragmatism in dealing with someone who can't or won't deal? This whole "slippery slope" things is pure FUD. Apple makes pragmatic decisions, not vengeful or hateful ones. Java for every other platform is maintained by Sun/Oracle. Apple has little need to spend precious engineering time maintaining a runtime that sees little use by end-users. Interested parties (Sun/Oracle) can certainly continue to maintain a runtime if needed and will probably have less overhead than Apple doing it.