"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:

> *  "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