Kaelri

It feels like all the roads have disappeared and we’re stuck in our houses.

I wouldn’t quite call myself an Android “enthusiast.” I just bought my first Android phone – in fact, my first smartphone, period – about a week ago. And even this mesmerized time-traveler from the Days Before iPhone can see that it’s not perfect. But I think it has a lot going for it, and makes a strong competitor to iOS and webOS.

So for the sake of a healthy mobile ecosystem, can we all agree not resort to ridiculous straw-man arguments?

Continue reading »

“Why don’t you use a Mac?” is a question that I’m asked with alarming frequency. I try not to let myself get sucked into answering too freely, because, much like politics and religion, Apple is a subject which leads inevitably to pitched battles, hurt feelings, and the hurling of unsolicited Freudian diagnoses. But when I read something like this from a writer whom I like, respect and (mostly) agree with, I feel like I shouldn’t waste the opportunity.

Justin Lowery:

A quick look at most of the Android theming forums will show you exactly why Apple locks things down the way they do. To quote someone from a long time ago — “No one every lost money underestimating the intelligence or taste of the American people.”

Nearly all the Android modifications and themes make the phone less stable, more buggy, and in most cases, a downright hideous sight to behold. The same could be said of Jailbroken iPhones. The people really haven’t got a clue what they’re doing. Why should Apple (or Google for that matter) give license to a bunch of clueless 12 year old amateurs, while removing it from a carefully constructed team of world-class designers and developers? It makes no sense.

Apple has a lot of qualities that should be as admired, and emulated, as they are. Consistency. Simplicity. Perfectionism. Taste. Attention to detail. And an uncompromising dedication to user experience. (I think Justin is right about Microsoft’s relative apathy toward their users, although I don’t think the same is true of Google.¹) If you like the Mac OS, its particular working paradigm, then you’re in luck, because no one makes that paradigm work as well as Apple – or look as good doing it. It is a perfected art.

What should not be admired, much less emulated, is the idea that people do not own their products.

The idea of “giving license” to the amateurs – that this license is Apple’s to give – is insane. What business is it of Apple’s if I want to make a skin for iOS, even an ugly one? They don’t have to put it in their store. If I want to put OS X on my Dell desktop, they don’t have to sell it. And I’m not “removing license” from their world-class designers by doing so. They do not lose the ability to design and produce Macs and iPads to their exact specifications, nor do consumers lose the option of buying them and using them in their original configurations. The walled garden remains unblemished, for those who wish to live there. But what do they gain from rejecting potential users and eschewing the kind of competition and diversity that spurs innovation? Why it’s necessary to exclude, and not simply curate, is beyond me.

To be clear, this is not an argument that Apple should make its OSes free, open or redistributable. (I think it’d be great if they did, but of course they’re not obligated, legally or morally, to give up the rights to their proprietary creations.) But I’m not talking about anything that they have to make, or sell, or support. I’m talking about something that simply exists: the mere occurrence of people using Apple’s products in a way that they don’t happen to like. And the idea that restricting such action can be described as “freedom”.

It’s one thing to void the warranty on a jailbroken iPhone: of course Apple cannot, and should not, be responsible for cleaning up after their users’ messes, any more than Hyundai is liable for a drunk driver. But neither should they be responsible for protecting people from themselves. The attitude implied by that quote – you’re not smart enough, you don’t have enough taste, to be allowed full ownership of your belongings – is frankly insulting. If this kind of cynical, patronizing paternalism is unacceptable when it comes from our governments, so should it be from our private corporations.

So my answer to that first question is (in part) this: I do not wish to be required, now or in the future, to submit my lifestyle and my workflow to Steve Jobs for his approval or rejection. I choose a platform that lets me decide for myself how I live and work best.

1. In fact, I believe Google and Apple have one very important trait in common: they both make things that they want to use. Almost every beloved Google service began life as someone’s personal pet project. The Gmail team, the Chrome team, even (no, especially) the Wave team: these guys are incredibly excited about their products, and they don’t make them for anyone but themselves. Google’s problem isn’t a lack of passion. It’s a lack of direction. They have neither a plan, nor a planner. ↩