Steamd

The Free Software Foundation seems to be at it again with their attacks on Apple and the iPhone. DefectiveByDesign.org, a campaign of the FSF, has posted what they call the iPhone Challenge. In a nutshell, they want people to print out a handy questionnaire (mirror), walk into an Apple store, and attempt to get someone at the Genius bar to answer all their questions. Apparently it’s some sort of IQ test for the geek impaired.

So, am I up to the iPhone Challenge? You bet! I’ve already addressed most of these questions in a previous post that covered the FSF’s 5 Reasons to Avoid the iPhone. I’ll go ahead and answer them again and further clarify my answer if necessary. So, at that, let’s begin:

Why do all developers have to submit their applications to Apple before they can be loaded onto an iPhone?

Because Apple want to ensure that applications being installed on the iPhone meet certain standards and avoid having malicious applications in the wild. There’s an advantage to having one place where applications and updates get deployed. Rather than having to run around and check for updates from a variety of sources, you can simply check for updates in one place. That to me is a huge timesaver and ensures that when developers update their applications I’m going to know about it. Granted, the launch of the App Store didn’t go as smoothly as folks have liked. The timeframe it takes to get applications approved and posted by Apple is ridiculous right now.

Keep this in mind too: this is just the beginning and we have no idea what the plans are for the iPhone’s future. When the iPhone first launched, no one had any idea whether they would allow for native apps or not. Less that one year later and Apple is allowing native applications, even ones based on open-source software. However, Apple clearly wants this to be within a controlled environment for the time being in an effort to keep the flood gates from spilling over. Personally I think this is a wise move. I used a Treo before I moved to an iPhone and I can tell you from experience that the majority of applications for it were total crap, and that’s on a so-called open platform that allows people to install any application from any source. I’ll gladly take a smaller choice of quality applications over hundreds to thousands of crap ones any day.

As to the reason for your question, although it’s required to submit an application to the App Store, open-source applications are freely accepted. The only thing that isn’t free for developers is the iPhone Developer Program, which for most people is $99 a year for access to the SDK, support, and the ability to submit any number of applications to the App Store. That may sound like a lot but considering the fact that Linux distributors like Novell and Redhat charge for support this really isn’t any different.

Now, back to the point about the freedom to offer open-source software, consider WordPress for the iPhone. WordPress itself is distributed under a GPL license and I would imagine that the iPhone app will follow the same tradition since the source-code itself is available. You say that iPhone users are not permitted by Apple to share or load modified versions of programs distributed through the App Store but what’s to stop a developer from downloading a copy of the WordPress app, modifying it, and submitting it to the App Store as a different WordPress app? I’m sure we’ll starting seeing variations of different open-source apps sooner or later. Apple isn’t holding any developers at gunpoint; it’s just the fact that no one has done this yet. Too early to bitch just yet.

Why does iTunes still contain so much DRM-laden music?

Yes, companies like Amazon, eMusic, Napster, Rhapsody, Play.com, CDBaby, 7digital, and more are selling music without DRM, but so does Apple in the form of iTunes Plus non-DRM ACC encoded files. Now, you could argue that because Jobs has a lot of pull that he could get them to release all of Disney’s films without DRM, but get real. Regardless of what anyone might think, Steve Jobs does not rule all at Disney or Apple. He is a CEO. He is beholden to the stock holder and the customer. He has to make both happy. The choice on what to do with Disney’s films does not lie entirely with Jobs. And who is to say that he hasn’t already suggested eliminating DRM from films? We have no idea what has transpired behind closed doors at Disney. And besides, Jobs and Disney are in the business of making money. That’s what business is…making money! What gives you the right to tell them what they can and can’t do with their property? If they end up removing DRM they’ll do it to satisfy the customer’s desire to convert and view the media as they see fit.

As far as music is concerned, Apple has no say so as to what they can and can’t do with the music they sell. Plus, it’s not the job of the RIAA to tell Apple or any other music seller what they can and can’t do. They are entirely beholden to the music labels and publishers. Even though Amazon and others are selling DRM free music, if Sony, Warner, or any other big music label tells Apple, “You can’t sell our music without DRM”, then they must obey. It used to be that the RIAA was there to protect the artist. Now they are nothing more than an organization that protects the big music labels. Many people point fingers at the RIAA but they’re only doing what the big labels tell them to do.

If Apple could convert their entire catalog to iTunes Plus and sell everything DRM free they would…but the big labels refuse to allow them to do it. And why would they do that? Simple. They want a bigger piece of the pie. They would rather get exclusive contracts through other vendors that are willing to pay them more for their content than allow Apple to continue to have such a big piece of the market. So this has much less to do with DRM and more to do with corporate greed. The music industry is changing and the big music labels don’t like it because it means that their cash cow is shrinking.

The iPhone 3G has GPS support. How can users be sure that the GPS cannot be used to track their position, without their permission?

There are many smart phones on the market that have built in GPS; Nokia, Palm, RIM, Motorola, just to name a few. Do you distrust them too? If you’re gonna beat on Apple you might as well beat on them too. And what about all the stand-alone GPS units out there by companies like Garmin, Magellan, and others? Do we put them on high alert as well? Come to think of it, you could triangulate a person’s general location just by using cell phone towers and wireless networks. So, we should be really paranoid now since none of this stuff is powered by open source free software, right?

The thing about a privacy agreement is that it’s a contract. Contracts are bound by law. If a company was to violate their own contract then they would be sued. I’m sure there are plenty of GPS experts that are able to test different GPS devices, including the iPhone, to see if they are being used in mischievous ways. But, as it stands, Apple hasn’t violated their privacy agreement and the iPhone doesn’t do anything with the GPS without first asking you. That’s good enough for me. Till I hear otherwise I have no reason not to trust Apple right now.

In ‘Thoughts on Music‘, Steve Jobs said, “it is useful to remember that all iPods play music that is free of any DRM and encoded in ‘open’ licensable formats such as MP3 and AAC”.

The main reason why Apple hasn’t started supporting the Ogg formats is simply because the majority of users out there simply don’t have any desire to use the format. Apple and other companies that sell devices capable of playing digital music file are mainly concerned with the majority. Since over 80% of their customers use format like MP3 and ACC that is what sells. Like it or not, MP3 is the format most companies support simply because it was the first. After that came other formats like Windows Media, AAC, and others that, although not entirely open, were pushed heavily by the big tech and media companies. As such, formats like MP3 and AAC continue to rule the roost. Yes, some media players and phone support Ogg, FLAC, and other ‘open’ formats, but until a music store starts selling Ogg encoded music and gains enough popularity, I doubt you’ll see many media players and phones that will support Ogg. 

Will Apple approve applications for the App Store that support these formats? That’s a good question. Personally, I don’t see any reason why they would block applications that allow for this. Heck, if you can write an application like FileMagnet that is capable of syncing files over a wireless connection to an iPhone, I don’t see any reason why you couldn’t do that with an Ogg player.

Why can the iPhone 3G only be activated by Apple and AT&T?

Apple is bound by contract to allow AT&T to be the exclusive provider of the iPhone for a period of two years. The reason why the iPhone isn’t available on other carriers is simply because those carriers didn’t want to play ball with Apple and allow them to retain full control over their phones. The same probably applies to other carriers around the world as well. The way Apple is handling the iPhone is unprecedented. No other cell phone maker has been able to retain as much control as Apple has. So in many ways Apple is helping the industry by breaking down barriers and getting customers to realize that the quality of the phone is just as important, if not more important, than the quality of the phone service.

As far as the right to unlock an iPhone, you can certainly buy one from AT&T without service…but it will cost you about an extra $200+ on top of the retail price. The reason is that, just like every other cell phone carrier, AT&T subsidizes the price of the iPhone with a two-year service agreement. As such AT&T will require you to pay more to offset this loss of revenue. Neat deal, huh! And, guess what…that’s how it is with just about every phone with ever other carrier. Cell phone carriers don’t talk about it much and don’t advertise it simply because it’s not a profitable way of doing business. So, don’t look to Apple to remedy this…look to the cell phone carriers. Bitch at them instead.

I have a few questions for the FSF:

Why just the iPhone? Why not pick on the Blackberry, Treo, or the Instinct?

These phones have just as many issues with proprietary software and hardware as the iPhone. And some of these, like the Instinct, won’t even allow you to install your own software anyways. My guess is that, just like Windows is to the desktop operating system market, the iPhone is the biggest target in the smart phone market. It’s the one getting the most attention and the most hype, thus the reason why the FSF choose to attack the hell out of it.

Rather than bitch, moan, whine, and complain about how the iPhone sucks, why doesn’t the FSF put their money where their mouth is and sponsor an open phone that’s worth buying? Sponsoring the OpenMoko was a mistake because it’s hardly worth any serious attention. [For those who have not seen the OpenMoko, read my blog post about it here] I seriously wouldn’t even bother trying to push that one as a worthy alternative to the iPhone or any other smart phone for that matter. Even when compared to other phones out there, the OpenMoko is crap. I about shit myself when I saw the price: $400! I paid $250 for my first iPhone. Why would I want to pay $400 for something that is severely inferior? And according to the OpenMoko wiki the only major carriers in the U.S. that provides service are AT&T and T-Mobile. Yeah, that’s a big choice there. Buying something like this and sacrificing so much quality and usability just for the sake of adhering to a misguided philosophy is just impractical for me, not to mention nuts.

There’s a reason why the iPhone, the Blackberry, and other smart phones have been so popular. It’s because they are well-designed and fit the needs of many consumers well. In the case of the iPhone, Apple touched on a nerve by creating something that is highly innovative. There is nothing like the iPhone out there, period. No one has created a touch screen interface that works as well as the iPhone. For other cell phone makers to compete, they really need to step up to the plate and create something extraordinary. Apple has raised the bar.

So I challenge the FSF:

Can you design an open phone that is as good or better than the iPhone?  

If so, let’s see it. What I want to see is something extraordinary in terms of both hardware and software. I want to see something that shows that even open source developers can have standards and principles in the design of their products. I want to see something that is so polished, so well-designed, that people won’t believe that it’s an open source phone. If you believe you can do this then put your money where your mouth is and show me. Until such time as you or any organization that supports free and open software can produce a phone that is as good as the iPhone, I’m afraid just about all of your criticism is moot.

Last week, someone over at the Free Software Foundation posted a blog entry called 5 reasons to avoid iPhone 3G. I’m all for free software and a big proponent of open source software. Hell, I help develop for MODx, which is open source. Although my Mac is my primary desktop, I have an OpenSuSE desktop server running that I use as my development environment. So, yeah, I understand the open source community quite a bit. So when I read this list of reasons to avoid the iPhone I found it laughable at best because the very reasons they claim are reasons to actually get it.

So, here’s my comments about what this guy has to say. Let’s start with reason #1:

1: 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.

Wait a minute…so what about all those free apps on the iTunes App Store? You mean that developers still have to pay Apple to distribute those apps? No sir, they don’t! Developers are only taxed on the apps they put price tags on. Even then Apple only gets a 30% cut. Now, you could say that that’s a rip off but, let’s face it, Apple is in the business of making money. And have you seen the apps on the App Store? Doesn’t look like Apple is playing the authority figure you claim it to be. If that was the case then I would estimate that at least two-thirds of the apps on there would have been rejected. As it stands though that is simply not the case. Apple nor anybody else in the iPhone community requires you or any other developer to put a price tag on an iPhone app. If you want to put an iPhone app on the App Store for free you’re more than welcome to do so. So your notion that Apple completely blocks free software is bullshit at best.

2: iPhone endorses and supports Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) technology.

Apple does NOT endorse and support DRM technology. It’s a well known fact that Steve Jobs is not all that fond of DRM systems. But, as you say, it’s been a year and half since BMI started allowing Apple to sell DRM free music:

With great hesitation, he allowed a handful of files to go DRM-free on iTunes, but kept in place the requirement that they be purchased using the proprietary, DRM-infected iTunes software. Since then, he has done absolutely nothing to act on those words.

It’s not Steve Jobs or Apple that’s the problem…it’s the big music and media houses that are the problem. Apple has no control over the decision to put DRM on the media they sell because they aren’t the ones controlling the publishing rights to the music and media. Only the music and media companies have those rights. If Apple could remove all DRM restrictions on the music and media they sell on iTunes tomorrow they would. Wanna know who you need to complain to? Complain to companies like Sony, BMG, Warner, Universal and others who are doing their best to maintain the status quo and keep the traditional business model of selling media by restricting what you can and can’t do with the media you buy. Don’t bitch at Apple, bitch at them!

The truth is that there are thousands of software, music, and media creators who want to share their work more freely.

Last I checked, there are tons of independent musicians, such as Jonathan Coulton, sharing and selling their work on iTunes. Same applies to media creators. The notion that Apple only cares about the big labels and doesn’t allow independent artist to distribute their work easily on iTunes is bullshit.

I get a lot of my music and media in plenty of different ways. iTunes is just one source. I get stuff from Amazon, podcasts, CDBaby, and other sites. Apple doesn’t pigeon-hole you. You do have a choice.

Plus, there are tons of developers offering free software to use on the Mac. It seems for every good paid app there’s an equally good free app as well. Not all of them are open source but, still, if it’s free how can you complain?

3: iPhone exposes your whereabouts and provides ways for others to track you without your knowledge.

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit! Have you even used an iPhone? Every app that accesses the GPS API is required to ask you for permission to use your current location. Even then, the coordinates are only used for that given app and aren’t transmitted for the world to see. The only way people can see where you are is if you allow for it. Loopt is a good example of this and, even with Loopt, you have to specifically give friends permission to see you before they can do anything. Based on that, if the iPhone is exposing your whereabouts it’s because you allowed it to, not because it just does it on its own.

4: iPhone won’t play patent- and DRM-free formats like Ogg Vorbis and Theora.

Ok, so you’re partially correct…but only partially. Yes, it’s true that no iPhone or iPod will play Ogg Vorbis or Theora files natively. And, yes, it’s true that both MP3 and AAC are patented technologies. But, unlike MP3, no licenses or payments are required to be able to stream or distribute content in AAC format. However, to create AAC files does require a license since it is a proprietary format. Interestingly though it isn’t owned by a single company since it was developed by multiple organizations in an effort to develop a more standardize file format.

Neither MP3 or AAC are DRM formats in and of themselves. DRM can be added on to these formats, sure, but they’re not DRM formats natively. Apple and other companies add on DRM to these formats because they are required to do so by the media companies.

Apple and other organizations would likely embrace open formats like Ogg Vorbis if they truly felt that it would be cheaper and more beneficial than what they are predominantly using now. However, as it stands, that’s simply not the case. So what you say is only half right.

5: iPhone is not the only option. There are better alternatives on the horizon that respect your freedom, don’t spy on you, play free media formats, and let you use free software — like the FreeRunner.

Yes, the iPhone is not the only option. There are other smart phones out there that have capabilities similar to the iPhone. And, honestly, if there was a phone better than the iPhone I would certainly buy it. Right now though, today, there is no equivalent of the iPhone anywhere.

Fortunately, we will soon be able to have all the convenience of a mobile computer that also makes phone calls without selling our freedom to Apple, Microsoft, BlackBerry, or anyone else. The Neo FreeRunner is a promising free-software phone, being developed in cooperation with the same worldwide community responsible for the GNU/Linux operating system.

Great but, really, is that the best the open source community can do? I’ll give them credit for coming up with a completely open solution. However, I’m far from being impressed with the design of the FreeRunner. It’s not inspiring and the software looks like shit, but that’s just my opinion.

About the only phones that could remotely compete with the iPhone are phones powered by Google Android. However, I hate to break it to you but even Google Android is not as open as people thought. Also, exactly how good Google Android powered phones will be remains to be seen. I wouldn’t be counting my chickens just yet.

iPhones can now also only be activated in stores — despite the fact that in the U.S., the Register of Copyrights ruled that consumers have the right to unlock their phones and switch to a different carrier.

Yes, you’re right, consumers have the right to unlock their phones and use them with other carriers and they are more than welcome to do so if they choose…but at a price. Although customers can reserve the right to unlock their phones, carriers can reserve the right to charge a fee to allow you out of your one or two year contract. Plus, most carriers subsidize the price of the phone so in order to get an iPhone (or any other phone for that matter) that is unlockable without a contract, be prepared to pay a lot more for it. This isn’t Apple’s doing though. This is the cell phone industry. AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, they all do this. If Apple could sell iPhones to every carrier without some bogus stipulations in their contracts they would. That day may come but right now Apple is tied to AT&T for contractual reasons.

I will say this though: If the FreeRunner or a Google Android phone were to beat out the iPhone on design, features, usability, and integration into my lifestyle I will gladly give up my iPhone for any one of these phones. My phone is a part of my everyday life. As an information worker, it’s absolutely necessary that I remain in touch with everyone I work with. As such, the iPhone give me that and much more. For any other phone to trump it will be difficult.

Personally, I don’t really care if the iPhone is completely open or not. I just care about good, solid product design that integrates into my life well. For now, the iPhone is my smart phone of choice, and not because Apple has tricked me with some David Copperfield illusion either. No sir, it’s because Apple created a good product that is well designed. If another phone does it for you then, great, buy it. Otherwise, shut up!