I hear this argument all the time on Slashdot in discussing OSes, especially in contrast to open OSes.
(There are a lot of variants on this argument; this is just one example.)
Given the tone of comments like these, I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised that the site’s users tend to be more libertarian than most.
But what do you all think? Would computer users appreciate more “freedom”? Do they desire it? What would they do with it, if anything? Is the “walled garden” of the two big name commercial OSes stifling freedom? (I was going to write “or innovation” at the end of that last sentence, but that implies a rather different audience than the general computing public I wanted to address).
IOW, do most people want or need the freedom that comes with a, say, Linux?
Power users, and those looking for virtual freedom exist throughout life regardless of whether the medium has to do with computers or something else. They are however still in the minority.
The reason Windows is successful from a user stand point is because it works. Despite all the horror stories and problems people, Windows is amazing at what it does.
Now give Unix to people and the mass public wouldn’t figure it out in thirty years on a deserted island with unlimited energy and power.
Linux by extension favors the power user, but it’s a lot more mainstream these days and most ‘all in one’ devices like our smart phones and similar, are powered by some variation of Unix/Linux.
While they predicted our homes and our mobile devices would be a one stop shop with ease of use and convenience, it wouldn’t allow us to control them as we would like (Reference video game console versus video game on PC). The irony is that as we get more comfortable with these devices, mainstream users are wanting more control and freedom over them - which just so happens, Linux can provide.
Most of what you’ve read comes from the geek culture where I suppose power in that sense is more of a personality issue rather than a legitimate concern over the viability of an operating system’s flexibility.
Well, I’m a programmer, and I sure as hell don’t. And while I know a fair number of people who use Linux or Ubuntu or whathaveyou, most of them don’t actually do anything they couldn’t do on Apple or Microsoft products. I’d say the vast majority of them use these systems for virus avoidance, one or two do indeed tinker a bit, and the rest just like the idea that they could tinker if they wanted to.
I have no desire to “tinker” inside my computer, and have no idea what I could accomplish if I tried. But I don’t open my car hood either, so I might not be the best example.
I like to be able to mess about with hardware (read: replace when broken) so I shy away from laptops and all-in-one machines but otherwise heck no - I want my OS to dictate how my OS works and what it does.
If I were to get a smartphone I think I’d go for Apple. I like the idea of having it all set and taken care of for me. I have no desire to make my software fight with my hardware.
I should note, BTW, for the sake of fairness that a lot of what Slashdotters have in mind with “tinkering” is simply being able to run whatever program they want whenever they want, and to utilize all functions absolutely freely. All that, I admit, has broader (though I’m not sure how much broader) appeal. But many, from my reading, DO have full tinkering in mind.
I’m an average user. I’m windows literate enough to handle all the basic problems one might encounter and I’m not afraid to poke about a little when neccessary.I use my computer for everyday things like surfing the net, shopping, e-mail, and (basic) photo/ video/ and music production. I don’t game. That being said, I enjoy the “Walled Garden”. I’ve got a mac and it does its job admirably. It does not crash, I don’t have to constantly tinker with updates, tweaks and driver problems. It does not catch viruses, and the most basic of “set it and forget it” apps seems to do fine in keeping it that way. It interacts perfectly with my iphone, and I’ve found that pretty much anything I could want is found in an app somewhere. I prefer the simplicity of OSX and I don’t have to fiddle with things.
I have friends who are power users. They game. They do all sorts of strange and wonderful things on their machines that I don’t really understand. They also spend a rather ridiculous amount of time fiddling with settings, fixing bugs, troubleshooting the latest version of whatever they are playing with, and taking the machine apart and tooling around with the hardware. It’s a hobby. Just like the guys who fiddle with their cars or motorcycles all the time. Now they might indeed get better performance, be able to watch japanese movies, or play some sort of super game, but the rest of us just want wikipedia to work correctly.
I’m sure I’m not a typical anything, but one reason I have avoided using the Apple line is because it is such a closed system. It may no longer be true, but at one time this led to dramatically higher prices for the same functionality.
If I can’t build it, I can’t fix it, and I can’t modify it. No computer I have ever used ever had a cover on it because it’s too hard to get inside. So that’s truly an open system.
Users who want to, and already know how to, tinker already can, regardless of the OS. There’s simply no need to reinvent the wheel constantly. The only obstacle is teaching yourself how to program / code.
The bigger issue and obstacles are DRM and occasionally lack of universal or documented standards.
As this thread is becoming more hardware-oriented: maybe I’m cynical, but it seems to me that Apple likes a vertically-integrated model, and thus does not want you to go to a third party for repair (although it is possible). Hence having proprietary connectors, expensive repairs out of warranty, and IIRC glued in hard drives and batteries, I believe for the “Air” line but I hear they might be doing it now for most their laptops. It’s certainly a model that works for them. Not for me though. I haven’t bought a new computer probably in 15 years. Every time I build a new one, I remember the swearing and how the last build was a pain in the ass. But I’m still saving 2-3x over a new Dell, and more than 4x over a Mac Pro. I also don’t need to buy a new monitor every time, when my old one is serviceable, and doesn’t need to become landfill.
I’m not really a super-hacker, but I know my way around a terminal and frequently do unusual things to the inner workings of my computer. Software-wise I really don’t know what they’re complaining about. OS X, Linux, and Windows can all be used relatively easily to do any number of things. They all have their quirks where some things are easier or harder to do, but that’s almost universally a problem of software availability and differences in library structure, not hard OS limitations (the sole exception maybe being command line issues with Windows, but you can somewhat fix that with MinGW/Cygwin).
Hardware-wise, yeah, Mac is very restrictive, and I criticize them for that. I don’t think it’s a humongous deal, though.
The internet, having started as the baby of nerds and geeks, is biased towards them. You’d get a much better representation hitting up a busy mall and doing random surveying - anyone who hangs out at Slashdot or would read a forum topic about OS design knows more about said software than the random person.
Most people will adapt to the platform they’re given. People complain about iOS not having direct file system access for use as a flash drive, other people adapted to apps like Dropbox instead.
Depends on whether you’re talking about the computer and operating system being a walled garden - which I think is right for everyone but those who like to tinker - or systems that wall in your data, too. Those worry me. Mac is the biggest offender, but I see other companies doing similar things. It should not be a struggle to move my stuff from one machine to another.
A computer is a tool and I don’t want to fight with my tools, there are bigger problems to deal with.
I view these objections as mostly from hobby users and akin to those who insist on tweaking and tuning their own automobiles - probably similar percentages.
There is both, some like the freedom some like the protection. I think however Apple goes too far and it is almost like they sell their hardware as a service instead of a product.
I find it odd to hear Macs dismissed as examples of a walled garden. Open the Terminal - it’s unix. It ships with awk and vi and sshd and Apache. They give you Xcode for free.
Exactly. All the wailing over “walled gardens” from some people in the tech community completely ignores the fact that even a lot of tech-savvy people have no desire to tinker. Gadgets should just work and that’s where Apple’s iOS or Nintendo’s video game consoles or Amazon’s Kindle shine.
ETA: But it does lead to the fun game where some people in the tech community will declare a platform with a walled garden “doomed” because it uses a walled garden. Cory Doctorow is particularly bad about this.
there are appliance operators and the rest of us. Apple likes appliance operators, they used to market themselves to the rest of us. Apple with the Apple II was very hardware and software friendly, if you wanted to tinker it was a good machine with lots of choices.
i like having choices for hardware and software. you buy what you need. you upgrade and repair incrementally as you need or can afford. you can extend useful machine lifetime with putting needed software with a machine to match its needs.
For most of us, it’s just a tool to do a job, we are not interested in what goes on inside, unless it stops working. Any more than most of us are interested in working on our cars. We leave it to someone else, if it’s necessary; most are too time poor these days to acquire the skills.