3 ms·

1. I agree we lost the DRM war. But I think the reason no one fights it anymore is that most people only cared for convenience reasons. Netflix, Spotify, etc. h

1. I agree we lost the DRM war. But I think the reason no one fights it anymore is that most people only cared for convenience reasons. Netflix, Spotify, etc. have largely solved the convenience issue. So we could say most people were actually fighting a different (temporarily aligned) war and won. 2. On the contrary, it's remarkable that the majority of smartphones now run an operating system that provides both good security (compared to desktops) and openness, and not just the kernel: Developers can write highly privileged apps like MicroG and F-Droid using official APIs to manage the phone (what MicroG does talking to the Google servers is a separate issue). Users can choose to use these apps using the sideloading feature, which is officially supported. For even more access, several smartphone manufacturers offer an official way of "getting root" and replacing the ROM with a custom one. For me this was a rather unexpected and welcome development! Then there are several communities of Android ROMs and companies build all sorts of devices using the AOSP source code. There is actually an ecosystem of apps for writing code on Android. It's indeed small and little used. My guess is that it's due to a combination of factors: IDEs that require huge ressources, separation of work and private devices, something else? 2a. Of course web servers are in data centers. What's your point? It's still nice that they are using open source software. There's a point to be made however about the closed SaaS apps like Google Docs that have replaced open source apps like LibreOffice. I don't care much: people/companies can run whatever they want on their own computers to provide me with a service. What matters for services are 1) data privacy issues (I agree with you on that) and 2) data export options (the SaaS apps I use are generally satisfying on this front). 3. Firefox's market share is small but it's still a perfectly capable browser. And I'm still amazed the whole of Chromium can be built from open source for both desktop and mobile. Sure Chromium is not Chrome but it's not far and many people use it as main browser. There's probably some meat here for a discussion.

Octoth0rpe 4y ago
> On the contrary, it's remarkable that the majority of smartphones now run an operating system that provides both good security (compared to desktops) and openness The security is only as good as your security update availability, which is still a major problem for those 3b devices.
ghaff 4y ago
>Netflix, Spotify, etc. have largely solved the convenience issue. An analyst I know made an argument that Napster was so popular because it was so much more convenient than going to the record store--rather than because it was free. I didn't really accept the argument at the time but, as time goes on, I've at least partly changed my mind. Especially with music, assuming you have reasonably mainstream tastes, it really does make sense for a lot of people to just pay for a streaming service rather than download/rip and curate their own catalog. I have a big catalog but it's only somewhat organized and I don't use it much at this point. (The situation with video is somewhat more complicated because of the fragmentation.
raxxorraxor 4y ago
We don't have good smartphone OS. There is candy crush OS A and candy crush OS B. Otherwise the devices would be quite amazing. I don't think smartphones are safer than PCs at all. On which metric? Leaking personal and private information? Digital fraud? Sure, that isn't called malware on smartphones, there we call it just app. I compiled Android multiple times and kudos to those still sticking to it for new models and security patches. Of course it isn't just the OS developer that is guilty here. But overall the devices are trash, even those > 1000$.
amelius 4y ago
> Netflix, Spotify, etc. have largely solved the convenience issue. Huh? With content spread out over Netflix, HBO, Disney, etc., you need multiple subscriptions which you can't possibly call "convenient".
- alexvoda 4y ago
  Both did largely solve the convenience issue. Spotify is good enough for most people even if audio quality is mediocre and there is missing music. Most people do not care about obscure music or about audio quality. Netflix also solved the issue (it used to have most stuff people cared about) and then it got unsolved. Indeed, with all of the competing streaming services with their own exclusives, the situation is worse than ever. This is why movie piracy is on the rise. With all of the exclusives it no longer is convenient. People do not care which corp owns which franchise. They just want to press play and watch. The fact that the industry truly does not understand user convenience and managed to mess up movie and tv streaming after it was solved, is just sad.

Octoth0rpe 4y ago

> On the contrary, it's remarkable that the majority of smartphones now run an operating system that provides both good security (compared to desktops) and openness The security is only as good as your security update availability, which is still a major problem for those 3b devices.

ghaff 4y ago

>Netflix, Spotify, etc. have largely solved the convenience issue. An analyst I know made an argument that Napster was so popular because it was so much more convenient than going to the record store--rather than because it was free. I didn't really accept the argument at the time but, as time goes on, I've at least partly changed my mind. Especially with music, assuming you have reasonably mainstream tastes, it really does make sense for a lot of people to just pay for a streaming service rather than download/rip and curate their own catalog. I have a big catalog but it's only somewhat organized and I don't use it much at this point. (The situation with video is somewhat more complicated because of the fragmentation.

raxxorraxor 4y ago

We don't have good smartphone OS. There is candy crush OS A and candy crush OS B. Otherwise the devices would be quite amazing. I don't think smartphones are safer than PCs at all. On which metric? Leaking personal and private information? Digital fraud? Sure, that isn't called malware on smartphones, there we call it just app. I compiled Android multiple times and kudos to those still sticking to it for new models and security patches. Of course it isn't just the OS developer that is guilty here. But overall the devices are trash, even those > 1000$.

amelius 4y ago

> Netflix, Spotify, etc. have largely solved the convenience issue. Huh? With content spread out over Netflix, HBO, Disney, etc., you need multiple subscriptions which you can't possibly call "convenient".

alexvoda 4y ago
Both did largely solve the convenience issue. Spotify is good enough for most people even if audio quality is mediocre and there is missing music. Most people do not care about obscure music or about audio quality. Netflix also solved the issue (it used to have most stuff people cared about) and then it got unsolved. Indeed, with all of the competing streaming services with their own exclusives, the situation is worse than ever. This is why movie piracy is on the rise. With all of the exclusives it no longer is convenient. People do not care which corp owns which franchise. They just want to press play and watch. The fact that the industry truly does not understand user convenience and managed to mess up movie and tv streaming after it was solved, is just sad.