"5 reasons to avoid iPhone 3G", Recommends the FreeRunner.

kenneth marken k-marken at online.no
Sat Jul 12 07:02:43 CEST 2008


On Saturday 12 July 2008 06:00:48 Dylan Semler wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:56 PM, Kelvie Wong <kelvie at ieee.org> wrote:
> > On Friday, July 11, 2008 19:56:29 Marco Trevisan (Treviño) wrote:
> > > Nigel wrote:
> > > > http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/5-reasons-to-avoid-iphone-3g/
> > >
> > > Thanks for sharing this. Please, to reach more people digg it at:
> > > http://digg.com/linux_unix/5_reasons_to_avoid_iPhone_3G
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> >
> > Or, digg the original at:
> > http://digg.com/linux_unix/5_real_reasons_to_avoid_iPhone_3G
>
> I wouldn't want to promote that article too much.  It's written like it's
> complete FUD: it makes outrageous claims and doesn't cite any sources.  I
> myself have a hard time believing two of the five points:
>
> *  "iPhone completely blocks free software. Developers must pay a tax to
> Apple, who becomes the sole authority over what can and can't be on
> everyone's phones."  I can believe that Apple has authority over some
> central official repository of software, but do they really prevent people
> from distributing software independently?  If there is no way to get
> software on the iPhone without going through Apple, how does anyone test
> their applications before releasing them?  If there is a way to distribute
> software indepentent of Apple, do iPhones check the liscense of the app and
> "completely block free software"?
>

this may be informative:
http://www.linux.com/feature/131752

> *  "iPhone won't play patent- and DRM-free formats like Ogg Vorbis and
> Theora."  If you can install third-party apps, you can probably install
> third-party codecs and media players.
>

probably, but as apple acts as the guardian of the gates, they can say exactly 
what can and cant be allowed.

only other option is jailbreak, and i dont know how many wants to risk their 
warranty doing that.

> The tone of the article deminishes the credibilty of the auther and it's
> obvious he's trying to push his agenda.  I would argue that this article
> serves the author at the detriment of the free software movement.  It
> provides him a public avenue to vent about the iPhone while the lies and
> exaggerations alianate those who don't know or care about free software.  A
> well written article with actual analysis and citations that doesn't resort
> to slander or exaggeration would do much, much more for the free software
> movement; for an example, see [1] about Windows Vista.
>
> [1] http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

i say the tone is classical FSF...




More information about the community mailing list