5 ms·
> defective by design, free (as in speech), respect the freedom of its users Is it just me, or has the free software community gotten so disciplined and precis
by lukifer 15y ago
> defective by design, free (as in speech), respect the freedom of its users
Is it just me, or has the free software community gotten so disciplined and precise with their talking points that it would make Karl Rove blush?
It comes down to this: different people want different things. Some people want Kramer's vision of building your own pizza, both for fun and to get exactly the pizza you want. Most people would rather have pizza driven to their house after a 1 minute phone call, and if they lose some freedom over the exact topping placement and the kind of crust used, they're quite fine with that.
Yeah, this was a really boneheaded platform decision, and I'll be very frustrated if Apple doesn't fix it. But you can't seriously tell me that open-source software doesn't sometimes make blunders or suffer from flawed usability. And the idea that I can theoretically crack open the source to my app (the Venn intersection of those with the time, ability, and willingness to do so are a speck, by the way) doesn't help me after the cache is already cleared while I'm sitting on the plane.
I don't care whether something is defective by design, or defective by lack of design: I care that it's defective, period.
The day that technology vendors start engaging in things like free speech suppression or non-consensual privacy invasion is the day I'm willing to think of computing as being a political issue. What we have here is nothing more than tech which you think sucks, and in this instance, you're very right. If it sucks enough, people will stop buying it, and/or the vendor will make it suck it less. But for god's sake, get off the the soapbox and go back to making things; everybody has exactly as much freedom as they want.
tl;dr: FOSS needs to get better at delivering pizzas instead of bitching about Domino's.
- dlss 15y ago> I don't care whether something is defective by design, or defective by lack of design: I care that it's defective, period. Interesting. As an engineer, I very much care about causes. Especially systematic ones. They allow me to better reason about the kinds of problems my system is likely to have, and to proactively mitigate them. I believe that sudoman's tl;dr is something like "If Domino's executives ate at Domino's, the pizza would taste better", which is to say that (as for most iOS APIs), Apple's own software almost certainly uses different APIs than what they force developer apps to use. Even if you don't find comments like that interesting, I do. Your comment however (and the other replies to sudoman) miss the point entirely, and instead of discussing why the Domino's executives don't eat Domino's pizza, you spend your time arguing the importance of executives.
- gbog 15y agoYep. This I don't care the reasons th ing feels a bit obscurantist to me.
- sthulbourn 15y ago> Apple's own software almost certainly uses different APIs than what they force developer apps to use. I think it's foolish to think that Apple uses private frameworks for their apps exclusively, when they could be using the public frameworks that other 3rd party apps use. It's more likely to be: Apple uses the public frameworks for the majority of their apps but use the private frameworks for controlling the underlying hardware and subsystems of the OS [stuff like communications which could cost the user money, SMS, phone calls].
- dlss 15y agoI don't understand why you didn't google before your comment. For the search "iPhone private api" we get: http://fajkowski.com/blog/2009/05/21/clicker-app-rejected-for-coverflow-private-api-use/ http://fajkowski.com/blog/2009/05/21/clicker-app-rejected-fo... https://github.com/kennytm/iphone-private-frameworks https://github.com/kennytm/iphone-private-frameworks http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2008/12/private-iphone-api-crackdown-in-progress.ars http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2008/12/private-iphone-api... http://www.tipb.com/2010/04/06/ibooks-private-apis/ http://www.tipb.com/2010/04/06/ibooks-private-apis/ http://www.tuaw.com/2009/12/15/apple-relents-and-is-now-allowing-uigetscreenimage-for-app-st/ http://www.tuaw.com/2009/12/15/apple-relents-and-is-now-allo... http://gigaom.com/apple/cut-the-drama-people-private-apis-the-app-store-you/ http://gigaom.com/apple/cut-the-drama-people-private-apis-th...
- rabenfrass 15y agoAnd I don't understand why you post random links about issues you are not familiar with, which is what you would need to digest them. Some APIs are not ready for developer use, end of story. Apple does right to forbid their use to avoid crashes on the next iOS upgrade. It's not some plot to gain advantage. CoverFlow clones were always welcome, page curl is already published (clones were welcome before that, I coded one btw), JSON parser already published, some other APIs have no place on developer space. Your complain should be: Apple doesn't open source their system.