?

Log in

No account? Create an account

[icon] Apple 1984 - Patti
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.
View:Website (pattib.org).

Security:
Subject:Apple 1984
Time:10:53 am
Remember the Apple 1984 ad? The one that was all about big brother and talked about information purification directives and being secure from the pests of any contradictory thoughts?

Does anyone else find it profoundly ironic that Apple has turned into Big Brother?
comments: Leave a comment Previous Entry Share Next Entry


bellaballanda
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 05:51 pm (UTC)
1984 was a good year *grin*
(Reply) (Thread)


andrewhime
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 06:13 pm (UTC)
I just love that they're trying to make jailbreaking illegal. That is so Torx screwdriver.
(Reply) (Thread)

(Deleted comment)

whipartist
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 07:06 pm (UTC)
Imagine if there was an app approval process for the Mac.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


787style
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 07:30 pm (UTC)
Like there is for your XBOX? Or Playstation? Or Wii?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


whipartist
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 07:49 pm (UTC)
Or my Treo or my PC or...

Imagine where PCs would be if every app had to be approved by some capricious entity.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


gunga_galunga
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 07:56 pm (UTC)
It's more incompetence than anything. I think the quantity of apps has far exceeded their expectations and they cannot keep up, which has led to their struggling to understand content versus the app. As I pointed out in andrewhime's post on the same topic, Safari would get rejected because it can get to pr0n if it had been submitted by a 3rd party. They are wildly inconsistent in their entire process, both from denials due to technical issues and those due to content.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


whipartist
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 08:07 pm (UTC)
What bothers me is that the approval process exists at all. I think that I should be able to run whatever I want on my computing devices.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


brec
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 08:13 pm (UTC)
I agree but I can see how the support issue -- apps which damage the device's functionality -- could drive the decision about an approvals process.

Just a spontaneous idea -- maybe users could self-select via a signed waiver for freedom to run any app.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


gunga_galunga
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 09:00 pm (UTC)
Just a spontaneous idea -- maybe users could self-select via a signed waiver for freedom to run any app.

They can...they just have to jailbreak the phone.

If all apple did was check to make sure the app contained no malicious code, i would be completely fine with it. But, they reject based on all kinds of things, like not meeting their usability standards (as if the "flashlight" apps and fart apps have any usability whatsoever, yet those get approved). Part of the problem is what the accept and what they reject is wildly inconsistent. Some of the restrictions on the app functionality is really annoying too, like no background processes (yet Apple's apps can run in the background).
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


whipartist
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 09:06 pm (UTC)
And jailbreaking is arguably illegal.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


gunga_galunga
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 10:35 pm (UTC)
True enough. I guess one question is which is worse, devices that are completely closed and proprietary or devices that you can develop for, but there is an arduous process to get approval.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


freelikebeer
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-23 01:03 am (UTC)
I think Apple gets silly with the !claim! of closed and proprietary, but it's just a pay-no-attention-to-the-man-behind-the-curtain prank. We all know what the levers do.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


whipartist
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-23 01:12 am (UTC)
I'd prefer column C, please-- devices that are open.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


freelikebeer
Subject:More irony
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 08:14 pm (UTC)
They make the point in their EULA that it is THEIR intellectual property but, uhhh, it runs on an ARM processor [ARM doesn't actually make processors, they just license their IP to chip makers].
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


jellymillion
Link:(Link)
Time:2009-05-22 08:24 pm (UTC)
Apple were a very smart marketing company that I rather liked then and they're a fairly smart marketing company that I don't like very much now.
(Reply) (Thread)

[icon] Apple 1984 - Patti
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.
View:Website (pattib.org).