Is Apple worse for open source software than Microsoft?

VertigoZA said:
Ummm... then don't buy the product. Am I missing something. When Apple physically forces you, on Pain of Death, with a gun to your head, to hand over your money to buy their product.. then yes, you will have point. You'll have a leg to stand on. Right now, you don't.
Click to expand...

No, you miss the point.

It's not about me buying the product. Hell, it's a nice product, if I could afford one, I'd buy one.

It's about restricting content to your own platform so that other platforms may not use or view that content.
 
icyrus said:
I still don't see what formats you were talking about?

Your complaint seems to be that Apple don't support iTunes on Linux? That is hardly endangering the freedoms of internet users.
Click to expand...

Face<-Palm.

I really don't think you've read anything I've said, have you?
 
Rinkhals said:
No, you miss the point.

It's not about me buying the product. Hell, it's a nice product, if I could afford one, I'd buy one.

It's about restricting content to your own platform so that other platforms may not use or view that content.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about managing their devices with iTunes or their content from the iTunes store?

Firstly, the formats used in their audio and video offerings are not their own, they are public, widely used formats. You may however have a problem with Apple's DRM implementation but is hardly Apple's call to make.

For example, Apple actively encouraged record labels to drop the DRM on their audio files and they eventually did. Consequently you can play your iTunes bought music on any compatible device.
 
If you are talking about general patents, as in patenting a better mousetrap, I would agree with you, the R & D needs to be protected.

Software patents are another matter. What R & D?

If the guy Kernihan & Ritchie (or whoever) had patented the 'while' command and Wall had patented 'foreach', we'd be all programming in machine code. (assuming that wouldn't have been patented, either)
 
The writer of this article is a...waitforit...STUPIDDUMTWATWHODOESNOTKNOWWHATHEISTALKINGABOUTORJUSTWANTSTOGETHITSORSOMETHING. I'm not even gonna say anything els because you've head everything before.
that's all
 
Well, the DRM is an issue, but it's not really that that I take exception to.

The problem is that Apple has the capacity to withhold content from us by using propriety formats. It's years since I last used a Mac, so I can't give you any specifics, but I'm sure that they are there.

If they aren't then, Apple certainly has the capacity to develop them.

If they are not doing so now, then, fine, but it's the direction that they are taking that worries me more than any actual impact they are having at the moment.

(Sorry if I was a little aggressive in my last post)
 
macboer said:
The writer of this article is a...waitforit...STUPIDDUMTWATWHODOESNOTKNOWWHATHEISTALKINGABOUTORJUSTWANTSTOGETHITSORSOMETHING. I'm not even gonna say anything els because you've head everything before.
that's all
Click to expand...

He head a lot :D
 
eltherza said:
Patents.

Lets bring it out into the open, the reason apple have such lead and strong position is that because, by law, no-one is allowed to research into anything they've done.

Unlocking the phone by moving your finger across the screen? Patent. Sorry, no unlocking like allowed by anyone else.
How the menu [or any object] bounces back after hitting the end. Patent. No special effects of anyone else.
Multitouch. Patent [still wondering how andriod phones got around this]
And the list goes on and on and on.

This is what the article should have focused on; patents. All apples ideas are good ones, but no-one is allowed to do the same. Sure, you have a right protect your ideas but it "kills innovation". I'm strongly against patents. Fair enough to protect 'ideas', but limit it to 2 years forcing you to continue innovating rather than just strangle holding the industry for something stupid like 50 years. And apple has alot of patents.

But, the same also applies to the competition. It's rumoured that HTC is going for plam - not for the assest, company, name - but mainly for the [very old] patents in hope to sue apple.

This is why apple is king. Really, what's changed on an iphone in the past 3 [or 4] years? Nothing at all - just upped the speced and added some extra functions. Innovation? Sure, like 5 years ago. Heck, look at the ipad. Absolutely no innovation there at all.
Click to expand...

Patents dont stop u from being innovative, just stops you from copying them!

You can't not have software patents. Imagine you spend your whole life developing a system, you sell it and some oke reverse engineers and copies and gives it away for free... Is that fair? This is why software patents exists. You need to be able to patent good code and good ideas.
 
Last edited:
surfs-up said:
What a crud article. Things are done for a reason - Apple has valid reasons for their approach - and it is this approach, that has led me to have utmost faith in their products.
No sir, nothing you say will change my opinion with Apple - I have spent 20 years with Microsoft and PC's, and only in the past 4 years, have I realized that there is something way, way way better. Apple, and OSX.
Click to expand...

What is OSX based on? There's a huge chunk of BSD code in the Mac OS X kernel! It's bizarre that Apple is happy to benefit from code based on the open BSD license but sees it fit to stifle innovation from either the Open Source or Free Software community that developed BSD.
 
ejbengine said:
What is OSX based on? There's a huge chunk of BSD code in the Mac OS X kernel! It's bizarre that Apple is happy to benefit from code based on the open BSD license but sees it fit to stifle innovation from either the Open Source or Free Software community that developed BSD.
Click to expand...

How is Apple stifling innovation from the OSS community? Have you looked into Apple's contributions to Open Source?
 
phiber said:
Patents dont stop u from being innovative, just stops you from copying them!
Click to expand...

Of course they do.

IE. ACME Company are the people that invent the touchscreen. They patent that fact and use it in their ACME Calculator. John Smith Super Corp comes along and invents a touch screen computer. ACME Company sues John Smith Super Corp for patent infringement. Innovation is stifled.
 
phiber said:
You can't not have software patents. Imagine you spend your whole life developing a system, you sell it and some oke reverse engineers and copies and gives it away for free... Is that fair? This is why software patents exists. You need to be able to patent good code and good ideas.
Click to expand...

Should we have maths patents as well?
 
ejbengine said:
What is OSX based on? There's a huge chunk of BSD code in the Mac OS X kernel! It's bizarre that Apple is happy to benefit from code based on the open BSD license but sees it fit to stifle innovation from either the Open Source or Free Software community that developed BSD.
Click to expand...
The kernel, XNU is still open source.
 
phiber said:
Patents dont stop u from being innovative, just stops you from copying them!

You can't not have software patents. Imagine you spend your whole life developing a system, you sell it and some oke reverse engineers and copies and gives it away for free... Is that fair? This is why software patents exists. You need to be able to patent good code and good ideas.
Click to expand...

But look at my example:
You want to create a new touch screen OS for a phone. Step one... you need a touch screen and thats patent by someone... You cant even start.

Another [unrealistic] example. You want to make a game where you shoot aliens. Oh wait, DirectX... and oh wait, mouse signals input is also patent... cant use the mouse... oh and the way 32bit sound is compressed is also patent so you'd ganna have to do a raw format for that... lets not forget that the apple aso patent the way visual object move about the screen is a flow bounce dynamic is also copyright, so much for the aliens movement. Hey, and look Object orientated UI elements and how they react to user input [ie. Clicking on an image] also belongs to microsoft. Carp, no menus then. Is that really helping innovation? I dont think so, if anything, it's delaying my progress - stopping me creating an awesome (revolutionary) alien shooter because a mouse click belongs to apple [or ms, or palm or who ever].

Sound silly? Well, that's the level patents are getting to in the cellphone world. "touching and holding down on an icon causes an event to be sent" - you cant not touch hold any more, you'll be sued. Turning off the display and limiting touch when you are talking on a call... get sued there too...

But, I think this conversation isn't for this topic.
 
w1z4rd said:
Of course they do.

IE. ACME Company are the people that invent the touchscreen. They patent that fact and use it in their ACME Calculator. John Smith Super Corp comes along and invents a touch screen computer. ACME Company sues John Smith Super Corp for patent infringement. Innovation is stifled.
Click to expand...

Pay them to use it! Its business!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X