You named three open formats that don't require anything but coding to push back and forth. You named two programs that are open, but I've used Java: it's an ug

You named three open formats that don't require anything but coding to push back and forth. You named two programs that are open, but I've used Java: it's an ugly language. It results in really ugly programs. Universal programs, but ugly ones. I haven't used C# or Red Hat, but I've heard bad things about Red Hat. Apple does support open standards. Look at WebKit. What they don't support is releasing everything they make openly. Usually, the rule of thumb is as follows: if the product's quality would suffer from being open, they don't make it open. If it works completely open, they release it as such. The problem is that in a lot of cases, opening things means inviting opposing beliefs. And that means that you get a bunch of sub-optimal choices, and that results in a lot of noise and a lot of low-quality options. Apple prides themselves on having a very reliable brand name. They couldn't do that if they were as open as Microsoft, and they couldn't turn out such good programs. And as I said on this thread: Jobs is famous for having said that he'd rather make a high quality product than lower his standards and make more money. And he's making billions and churning out good things, so I'll trust that he knows what he's doing, and that part of what he's doing is closing things that ought to be closed.