| |||||||||||||
generic vs closed platformsgeneric vs closed platformsPosted Jan 18, 2012 20:40 UTC (Wed) by fb (subscriber, #53265)In reply to: generic vs closed platforms by martinfick Parent article: LCA: Addressing the failure of open source
> So when you "buy" an Ipad, you really aren't buying it; you are renting it by paying a lump sum up front. In some cases your lease can be terminated at any moment without reimbursement of that lump sum. Sounds like a great deal huh? :)
Ok, so you tell that to your neighbor. He says: "my oh my, say Martin, I was planning to buy a tablet. You convinced me not to get the iPad. Which one should I buy? Which one won't leave me alone in the rain?
And then? What would you answer?
- I mean that Motorola Xoom was only a 'Google device' in the USA (UK also?). IIRC Everywhere else it had a locked bootloader.
Or just tell him not to buy any tablet, since (AFAIK) there really isn't one that fulfills FOSS liberties?
> I think the fact that most people don't really care if it is a good deal is very similar to the fact the most people don't care if they have massive consumer debt and are paying 20%APR on their credit cards...
Look I support FOSS as much as everyone else here.
Seriously, who do you think is making the most accurate risk assessment? You or the folks buying closed software?
How frequently does the nightmare stories that FOSS proponents like to bring forward actually happen w.r.t. proprietary software?
What is the actual likelihood that Amazon will delete books from my Kindles (I own 2)? I mean divide some estimate of all digital books Amazon has sold ('licensed' if you wish) by the number of Orwell novels that were deleted, and multiply that by some "guess-timate" of the likelihood that they will do this again.
(Log in to post comments)
generic vs closed platforms Posted Jan 18, 2012 21:29 UTC (Wed) by martinfick (subscriber, #4455) [Link]
> Ok, so you tell that to your neighbor. He says: "my oh my, say Martin, I was planning to buy a tablet. You convinced me not to get the iPad. Which one should I buy? Which one won't leave me alone in the rain?
Hey I wasn't trying to convince anyone not to buy an iPad, I was just trying to give you a more accurate way of describing the action of buying an iPad versus the action of buying an open source tablet. In one case you are renting, in the other you are buying. It's up to them if they appreciate the benefits of one over the other.
I suspect that if more people thought about using proprietary software as renting that fewer people would do it, but that doesn't mean that I am implying that those who still would rent are wrong. I own a house, I don't rent, renting makes sense for plenty of people.
You believe that buying an open source tablet is currently hard, it may be, but there are options, you just need to research them if you care. Sometimes it is hard to buy things and sometimes you are better off renting. I suspect that most people think that renting expensive tools is a good idea instead of buying them. But I also suspect that few people rent tools for any extended period of time outside of computers/software, perhaps because they don't really yet see that they are renting it?
> How frequently does the nightmare stories that FOSS proponents like to bring forward actually happen w.r.t. proprietary software?
I don't know about nightmare stories, but I know that I certainly encounter real problems which are specific to the fact that the software is not open source almost anytime I have to rely on proprietary software: I cannot easily fix a pet peeve, I cannot easily install it somewhere else, it becomes obsolete with no upgrade path, it annoys me with license agreements, it plasters marketing material all over itself, it cares more about the needs of the software maker then mine, it gathers more data about me, it costs more money (over and over and over again), it rarely is nicely integrated with other software on my computer/device. Of course, since I rarely rely on proprietary software, it would be hard for it to cause a nightmare story for me, that is the point no? I also didn't ever have any nightmare stories renting apartments in the past, but there were enough small problems that I currently prefer to own, but this doesn't mean that I usually begrudge those who rent (unless they are intolerant of my desire to own, or have habits which make it harder for me to do so).
I think this is much better analogue :-) Posted Jan 18, 2012 22:05 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] I suspect that if more people thought about using proprietary software as renting that fewer people would do it, but that doesn't mean that I am implying that those who still would rent are wrong. I own a house, I don't rent, renting makes sense for plenty of people. I like this analogue much better then slavery word thrown around. When you buy iPad or proprietary software then you don't own the device - you only own the right to use it... till the real owner (Apple, Microsoft, whatever) will decide that you no longer deserve such right. But it's really your choice: you can continue to pay the rent, buy new versions, constantly upgrade hardware for no good reason - or you can choose the software which you own and which you can continue to keep in working order even if original developers abandoned it. Now, sometimes it's perfectly fine to rent things. You don't own them, you know the real owner have the right to ask them back - but they work and you can live with that. And in many cases rent price is low enough - but you can always keep in mind that landlord can dicide to raise it and just throw you out. Thus sometimes it's obviously wrong choice. In particular I'm much less picky with creator's software (I can buy and use proprietary filer for videoeditor, for example), but I ubsolutely detest situation when I need to rent player, too. That's why I've stopped using MS Office long ago: I can not own it and consequently I can not be sure I own my own documents till I test them all in LibreOffice. And if I test them in LibreOffice then it's simpler to just use LibreOffice from the start. But other proprietary tools (like VTune) are perfectly Ok: if they'll become unavailable (because I decide to buy AMD-based system, for example) then I'll lose valuable tool, but all the things I've gotten till now from using it will be available to me.
I think this is much better analogue :-) Posted Jan 19, 2012 9:27 UTC (Thu) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link]
> I like this analogue much better then slavery word thrown around.
Very strongly seconded. Even some of the ways the word "freedom" is used in free software circles make me feel very uneasy.
generic vs closed platforms Posted Jan 19, 2012 5:46 UTC (Thu) by jmorris42 (subscriber, #2203) [Link]
> What is the actual likelihood that Amazon will delete books from my Kindles (I own 2)?
The odds they will suddenly delete your content? Probably low. But consider this: Every Plays for Sure track sold by Walmart, Yahoo! and Microsoft is now dead. Every Divx disc sold by Circuit City is deader than Circuit City.
The AZW format currently used by the Kindle will eventually be abandoned for ePub and someday Amazon will abandon support for the 'legacy' format in a future product line. Assuming they even continue making hardware long term in the first place. And when Amazon abandons AZW, just remember that it is illegal for anyone else to crack one open. Thee and me would know where to go to fix that, most folks won't.
And that is why investing in closed systems is usually a losing game. Unless you only care to use the content RIGHT NOW and couldn't care less that it has no future you should avoid DRM and other closed systems. So Netflix is ok, closed books aren't. I didn't buy a DVD until Mplayer gained support. No I didn't have a PC hooked to the TV at the time, but why buy into a sealed ecosystem?
Small correction Posted Jan 19, 2012 8:18 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Every Divx disc sold by Circuit City is deader than Circuit City. This is not true. Back then "content providers" still felt they have some obligations thus all Divx players were unlocked before Circuit City went out of business. Later entrants often have not bothered to offer anything similar: in the cases where they thought about the problem at all it was your resposibility to save your collection, not theirs. P.S. I've started buying DVDs after DVD Decrypter was released - think it happened before MPlayer added DVD support. I'm not picky: I dont' mind DRM as long as I have a way to circumvent it.
generic vs closed platforms Posted Jan 19, 2012 9:29 UTC (Thu) by fb (subscriber, #53265) [Link]
> And that is why investing in closed systems is usually a losing game. Unless you only care to use the content RIGHT NOW and couldn't care less that it has no future you should avoid DRM and other closed systems.
> Unless you only care to use the content RIGHT NOW and couldn't care less that it has no future you should avoid DRM and other closed systems.
You know whats the problem with your assessment? The only value proposition, risk and cost you are willing to factor in is the DRM.
On the example of books w/ DRM:
Right now the only way to get most books digitally is WITH DRM. So therein lies a risk, and the portability issue (between e-readers). But that is yet another factor in the equation of the value proposition between digital-books with DRM and paper books.
For one, the storage of paper books have costs. Paper books have no DRM-risk but are subject to other risks (mold, water, fire, one's kid ripping it off). Carrying books have costs (when moving to a new house, or when going on vacation).
Why don't you factor the risk of a paper book getting molded, lost or stolen when you assess the DRM risk?
Why don't you factor in the cost of storing books? The odds that I will have to give up my books because I simply can't store them anymore?
We are back to "rent v own" question... Posted Jan 19, 2012 10:19 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Why don't you factor the risk of a paper book getting molded, lost or stolen when you assess the DRM risk? I think rent/own analogue covers all these cases succinctly. If you own the book (be it physical or electronic one without DRM) then you and you alone are resposible for their future (if you can not afford to keep them or lose them dues to negligence then it's your problem - but on the flip side they can never be recalled or destroyed without your consent), if you rent it (and you can not buy DRMed book, you can only rent it) then you are limited in what you can do with it, but the losses are also covered by the real owner (you can usually readownload DRMed book on different device easily). The more I think the more I like the explanation of FOSS as when you use proprietary software you are living in a rented apartment, when you use FOSS you live in your own house: this simple analogue covers almost all the differences in one short sentence. Proprietary software is not slavery (because you can always decide to not use it, after all), but it sure does not feel like an ownership.
generic vs closed platforms Posted Jan 19, 2012 23:27 UTC (Thu) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
> Right now the only way to get most books digitally is WITH DRM
There are companies like 1DollarScan and Bookscan that will scan your physical books and give you digital copies. Or you can do it yourself, of course. Either way, it's legal and you won't have to deal with DRM.
generic vs closed platforms Posted Jan 20, 2012 0:21 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
there are also publishers (like Baen) that sell e-books without DRM.
however the 'big 6' publishers are all making the same mistakes with e-books that the big music publishers did several years ago. they haven't yet gotten to the point of suing their customers, but if they keep making the same stupid mistakes they should start doing so in a couple of years.
generic vs closed platforms Posted Jan 20, 2012 8:15 UTC (Fri) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link]
This isn't true.
The only way to *legally* get *certain* books, is with DRM. There is no lack of legal books sold without DRM, and there is no lack of illegal books without DRM.
generic vs closed platforms Posted Jan 20, 2012 12:24 UTC (Fri) by fb (subscriber, #53265) [Link] To my knowledge, most books are only available with DRM. Note that I am aware of Baen, and O'Reilly.There is a real lack of DRM-free books. There may be no lack of such for sci-fi or computing titles, but -to the best of my knowledge- most fiction (still under copyright) is only available with DRM. Trust me, for languages other than English the situation is even worse. How many books from the last 30 Nobel prize of literature winners are available DRM-free? (Heck, how many of the books written by the winners of any Nobel prize in the last 30 years are available DRM-free?) If you are US-minded, from the last 30 Pulitzer prize winners, how many books are available DRM-free?
|
|||||||||||||