3 ms·

It’s commonly said that his inspiration was from wanting to improve a printer driver but couldn’t because it was proprietary. I feel like back in the day there

It’s commonly said that his inspiration was from wanting to improve a printer driver but couldn’t because it was proprietary. I feel like back in the day there would have been so many easy wins for modifications. Like how people used to root Android to add screenshot capability. These days modern software is so extremely sophisticated and refined that I can’t think of anything I could improve for say iOS. Still love foss, but the idea of “it’s open source, you can improve it yourself any time” has worn off for me.

ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
I think you might not be considering personal bugfixes (X interaction is great for the common denominator, annoying to me), long-term support (I want to use my device securely in 2045), or custom features (I want to be able to do X, but only 0.001% of people care so Apple doesn't). I use Android, so I can't be more specific. I have heard the unverified complaint that Apple sometimes slows down old devices as new ones are released, which would be impossible in FOSS. Apple is ultimately going to work in their own best interest. Their particular brand aligns that with the consumer fairly well, but there will be disconnects.
- Gigachad 3y ago
  I don't really understand this. You plan to single handedly replace the entire OS and security teams to maintain the OS on your phone for a decade? How will you update the kernel when the proprietary driver blobs stop being maintained?
  - kaashif 3y ago
    I imagine their ideal open source phone OS wouldn't include any proprietary driver blobs, but what do I know...
  - ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
    I expect more people than just me are interested in reducing tech turnover or using old tech in the hobbyist space, ie. not single handedly. And yeah, as the sibling says, if we're relying on proprietary drivers, we're not really FOSS- my fantasy world doesn't just apply to Apple. Yes, it would be very hard. But today it is impossible, so very hard is hardly a complaint you can make in comparison. Did my other two examples seem more reasonable?
  - xethos 3y ago
    Perhaps the more generous take is that, with FLOSS software, you don't have to go it alone. My Pinephone Pro will not be running security fixes I write myself. But entirely because of its open nature, it doesn't need to - it will continue to recieve updates for years and years. For once, the hardware of a cell phone is likely to die before the software.
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      If it gets the support of the right people who know how to write such security software and have an interest in maintaining it, sure. But that's the reason many open source initiatives fall short of proprietary. It's either based on the altruistic whims of a few particular talents, or some company is paying to have them maintain it. And we know the latter is fleeting. The caveat is that sometimes an initiative can be funded by charity or bounty to keep interest, but relying on generosity for 99.99% of projects is a fool's errand.
  - trealira 3y ago
    No. They want iOS to be open source, because they want to be able to modify a few bits of source code and use their modified OS for their personal use, and then keep pulling updates from upstream forever after that. Like a small fork.
colordrops 3y ago
People are still rooting Android and adding thousands of modifications to it.
- lproven 3y ago
  Android is not proprietary. https://source.android.com/ https://source.android.com/ That makes it rather easier...
  - Qwertious 3y ago
    You linked to AOSP, not Android. AOSP doesn't have things like the Google Play Store; the shipped image is substantially different and isn't necessarily open-source just because it contains open-source components - Windows contains BSD networking code but that doesn't make Windows open-source.
    - _ea1k 3y ago
      Sure, but the vast majority of those mods and alternative distributions are based on the sources that are available. It is a bit like a Linux distro running Steam. Yeah, there are proprietary bits, but the FOSS part naturally happens on the FOSS parts.
    - lproven 3y ago
      You know what the "A" in AOSP stands for, right? :-) All I'm saying is that there's a big difference in jailbreaking an OS when most of the source code of that OS is publicly available for study and experiment. Surely that is not a controversial statement?
- vinceguidry 3y ago
  You don't root OSes, you root devices. I learned that the hard way when I got a Samsung Z-Fold 4 and learned that the US version isn't rootable.
  - opan 3y ago
mikepurvis 3y ago
There are several OS level things I wish I could change/override on iPhone: ability to share screen during a video call, ability to control how certain Bluetooth devices pair automatically, ability to throttle apps that I know are abusing the CPU and costing me battery.
- akerr 3y ago
  You can share screen, Shortcuts supports Bluetooth automation triggers, turn off Background Apps or let the CPU race to sleep.
trelane 3y ago
It's "commonly said" because it's true. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt via https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201d-redux-a-testimonial-about-the-injustice-of-proprietary-firmware https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201...
sho_hn 3y ago
> These days modern software is so extremely sophisticated and refined that I can’t think of anything I could improve for say iOS. > Still love foss, but the idea of “it’s open source, you can improve it yourself any time” has worn off for me. If you look at major MacOS or iOS releases, you will often see new features being advertised that were copied from FOSS systems that experimented with them and proved them out often many years beforehand. That is to say: iOS might have the edge on QA, but if you want to have impact and shape the future of how people use computers, contributing in the community is still a good way to do this. And in fact, commercial development tends to rely on this talent pool for survival, as companies do a comparatively poor job in educating new talent. It's where you get people with "job experience" in doing certain things.
belorn 3y ago
When it comes to large sophisticated software the goal is not so much to improve it one self. Rather it is the knowledge that any anti-patterns will be removed by the community if it ever get added. Most of the time the community will not even need to remove anti-pattern from open source projects, since companies know that adding anti-pattern is just wasted developer time.

ToValueFunfetti 3y ago

I think you might not be considering personal bugfixes (X interaction is great for the common denominator, annoying to me), long-term support (I want to use my device securely in 2045), or custom features (I want to be able to do X, but only 0.001% of people care so Apple doesn't). I use Android, so I can't be more specific. I have heard the unverified complaint that Apple sometimes slows down old devices as new ones are released, which would be impossible in FOSS. Apple is ultimately going to work in their own best interest. Their particular brand aligns that with the consumer fairly well, but there will be disconnects.

Gigachad 3y ago
I don't really understand this. You plan to single handedly replace the entire OS and security teams to maintain the OS on your phone for a decade? How will you update the kernel when the proprietary driver blobs stop being maintained?
- kaashif 3y ago
  I imagine their ideal open source phone OS wouldn't include any proprietary driver blobs, but what do I know...
- ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
  I expect more people than just me are interested in reducing tech turnover or using old tech in the hobbyist space, ie. not single handedly. And yeah, as the sibling says, if we're relying on proprietary drivers, we're not really FOSS- my fantasy world doesn't just apply to Apple. Yes, it would be very hard. But today it is impossible, so very hard is hardly a complaint you can make in comparison. Did my other two examples seem more reasonable?
- xethos 3y ago
  Perhaps the more generous take is that, with FLOSS software, you don't have to go it alone. My Pinephone Pro will not be running security fixes I write myself. But entirely because of its open nature, it doesn't need to - it will continue to recieve updates for years and years. For once, the hardware of a cell phone is likely to die before the software.
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    If it gets the support of the right people who know how to write such security software and have an interest in maintaining it, sure. But that's the reason many open source initiatives fall short of proprietary. It's either based on the altruistic whims of a few particular talents, or some company is paying to have them maintain it. And we know the latter is fleeting. The caveat is that sometimes an initiative can be funded by charity or bounty to keep interest, but relying on generosity for 99.99% of projects is a fool's errand.
- trealira 3y ago
  No. They want iOS to be open source, because they want to be able to modify a few bits of source code and use their modified OS for their personal use, and then keep pulling updates from upstream forever after that. Like a small fork.

colordrops 3y ago

People are still rooting Android and adding thousands of modifications to it.

lproven 3y ago
Android is not proprietary. https://source.android.com/ https://source.android.com/ That makes it rather easier...
- Qwertious 3y ago
  You linked to AOSP, not Android. AOSP doesn't have things like the Google Play Store; the shipped image is substantially different and isn't necessarily open-source just because it contains open-source components - Windows contains BSD networking code but that doesn't make Windows open-source.
  - _ea1k 3y ago
    Sure, but the vast majority of those mods and alternative distributions are based on the sources that are available. It is a bit like a Linux distro running Steam. Yeah, there are proprietary bits, but the FOSS part naturally happens on the FOSS parts.
  - lproven 3y ago
    You know what the "A" in AOSP stands for, right? :-) All I'm saying is that there's a big difference in jailbreaking an OS when most of the source code of that OS is publicly available for study and experiment. Surely that is not a controversial statement?
vinceguidry 3y ago
You don't root OSes, you root devices. I learned that the hard way when I got a Samsung Z-Fold 4 and learned that the US version isn't rootable.
- opan 3y ago

mikepurvis 3y ago

There are several OS level things I wish I could change/override on iPhone: ability to share screen during a video call, ability to control how certain Bluetooth devices pair automatically, ability to throttle apps that I know are abusing the CPU and costing me battery.

akerr 3y ago
You can share screen, Shortcuts supports Bluetooth automation triggers, turn off Background Apps or let the CPU race to sleep.

trelane 3y ago

It's "commonly said" because it's true. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt via https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201d-redux-a-testimonial-about-the-injustice-of-proprietary-firmware https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201...

sho_hn 3y ago

> These days modern software is so extremely sophisticated and refined that I can’t think of anything I could improve for say iOS. > Still love foss, but the idea of “it’s open source, you can improve it yourself any time” has worn off for me. If you look at major MacOS or iOS releases, you will often see new features being advertised that were copied from FOSS systems that experimented with them and proved them out often many years beforehand. That is to say: iOS might have the edge on QA, but if you want to have impact and shape the future of how people use computers, contributing in the community is still a good way to do this. And in fact, commercial development tends to rely on this talent pool for survival, as companies do a comparatively poor job in educating new talent. It's where you get people with "job experience" in doing certain things.

belorn 3y ago

When it comes to large sophisticated software the goal is not so much to improve it one self. Rather it is the knowledge that any anti-patterns will be removed by the community if it ever get added. Most of the time the community will not even need to remove anti-pattern from open source projects, since companies know that adding anti-pattern is just wasted developer time.