OSX on the other hand isn't a jail. You can install whatever you want. It's a computer. In fact I prefer Apple's jail to Microsoft's jail and pay more because I get a better experience and have found no substitute. Can I customize the OS? Fuck no! But if I wanted to then I wouldn't buy Apple because I know what I'm getting into before I buy. As a developer there isn't anything I can do on another platform that I can't on OS X. In fact, because its based on BSD I get the best of the Unix world and Apple's world. And Apple's world, or jail as you call it, is beautiful, well designed, has better font rendering, it's fast, it makes the right assumptions about my use, and so one. So I can't hack the kernel. So what? I don't need or want to. That's kind of why I bought an Apple to begin with.

Philosophies about freedom, free software, or really any philosophies or beliefs do not apply here. That argument is just a red herring. The value of the machine is in its substitutes. My Macs don't have any substitutes. There's not a single PC out there that can match the quality, beauty, and experience of my Macs. But not everyone uses them like I do so I can understand if others don't believe they're valuable. But as far as Samsung goes, what they did was basically try to trick people into thinking that they'll get the Apple experience on a Samsung just because they look alike.

And just so everyone knows, at my job I work 8+ hours a day on a Windows7 PC. I've had an Android phone. I also have a Linux laptop. I love my Linux box but it still doesn't hold a candle to my MacBook Air. This isn't about fashion. It's about people finding a product so impressive that they truly love it. I own a lot of stuff but very few of my possessions are as valuable to me as my Macs. Call me a fanboy. I don't give a shit. That argument is a lame copout. People see people like me being truly impressed with something, they don't get it, then they write it off as fanboyism. It's just a meaningless argument meant to explain something people don't understand. A lot like how people ascribe religious significants to events they don't understand. No, that's not hyperbole. It's just like that.

As long as your credit card is on file with apple.

You might be surprised what happens to 'your' computer after an attempted purchase fails for any reason. You won't be able to update or install any software from the app-store anymore. This includes updates for and re-downloads of apps that you have 'bought'.

There's nothing stopping me from downloading and installing any app I want from whatever source I want on my Mac. Everyone all of the sudden thinks that the Mac App Store is the final nail in the iOSification coffin but it isn't. It's just a good idea for people totally unlike us and those people actually get a far better experience than any "free" system because of it. But again, no one is forced to go through the app store to download applications.

Honestly, I haven't even set Mountain Lion to let me download anything unrestricted. I set it to the medium setting where it'll give me a warning before installing non-app store apps and I like it that way. I like being reminded that what I'm about to install hasn't been vetted by Apple. That's fine with me. I just control+click it and run it the first time and I'm never bothered again. Sure, I could set it so I get no hassles but I like the feature.

When it comes down to it, I know what I'm getting into. I'm not so completely risk averse that I refuse to use something because some worst case scenario or edge case might happen at some point down the road to me.

Please clarify this. I don't feel more restricted with my MacBook Pro than I did with my old Lenovo-laptop. In what way was it a jail to you?

It may sound like a small point, but the feeling that I didn't own my iPhone is a big reason I prefer Android.

I am starting to get pretty tired of hearing that the products I use every day for professional work are toys, that I gave up my freedom to use them and worship Apple etc etc.

If something else comes along that's new and better, I'll use that.

He comments first about the laptops. About laptops before the Mac App Store even...

I know why you think that, but you're missing that there is a completely legitimate app distribution mechanism outside the AppStore.

You can install (and distribute) whatever apps you want for iOS devices, and users can download them from the web and install them on the device. And I'm not talking about jailbreaking.

Since the first day the iPhone has shipped, you've been able to download and install apps built with javascript from anywhere on the web.

These are full apps, written in Javascript and running on the machine. They have access to the iOS design components such as the navigation controller and tab bar UI, etc, can read touches and orientation and even your current location.

You can turn off the network- put the device in airport mode- and they still run. These aren't links to web apps running on the web, they are full apps.

Apple only curates what goes on in the App Store. Apps distributed outside the App Store are not curated. Apple built this platform for apps specifically so it wouldn't have to curate them.

Its just that once the App Store came out, everyone switched to writing native apps (And at the time, writing native apps are what people were clamoring for) that that native app distirbution model won out.

But the javascript app platform is still there on the device and completely un-regulated by apple.

It's also still supported by Apple, and each year at WWDC they have a couple sessions talking about it.

I know it fits some people's ideology better to believe that Apple will only let you run apps approved by Apple on your device, but it simply isn't true.

Further, if you want native apps of arbitrary origin, you can join the developer program and run whatever native apps you want.

But Apple has always allowed this other distribution mechanism. These apps can't spread malware and so there is no need to regulate them. Since native apps can, they need to be curated, hence the AppStore.

It is disingenuous for people to pretend like Apple only wants you to buy apps from the AppStore-- because the javascript app platform has existed since a year before the AppStore and they continue to maintain it.

That said, I wasn't aware that the two environments could be considered equivalent. Can you call the camera API from javascript? Write a music player?

It would be one thing (though still unfortunate) if the App store monopoly were used only for quality control, but instances where politics were at play really left a bad taste in my mouth. Grooveshark, Google Voice, and Opera mobile come to mind as projects that if I am remembering correctly were blocked or delayed for political reasons. They all require a native environment that's richer than HTML apps can provide, to my knowledge.

Wow. I had no idea. I found a detailed HOWTO http://matt.might.net/articles/how-to-native-iphone-ipad-app...

If you want to run these native apps outside of the simulator, you need to pay $99/year, though..

I don't want to be a jerk or offend "alberich", but I strongly disagree with him.

edit: besides, things don't look much better nowdays, eh?

I have node, redis, mysql, couchdb, mongodb, autoconf/automake/cmake, ffmpeg, erlang, git, hg, gnuplot, groovy, memchaced, lua, lynx, lib* (a million of them), nmap, rabbitmq, phantomjs, postgresql, siege, httpd, squid, spidermonkey, coffee-script, mit-scheme,pcre, lkgconfig, mosh, HTTPie, python, ruby, cairo, pango, x11 installed on my OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion (among other tools that I've forgot or don't use regularly). And I'm not even a "pro" user - just a regular developer.

But your requirements clearly differs from mine. Because you don't find them "useful". It's okay, not all of us use the same tools. But I'm sure the majority of developers use the aforementioned tools, and care less about kernel programming or other things that can't be done on a MacBook as efficiently as on ThinkPads (although Torvalds uses an Air).

It's like buying a hardcover book and complaining that you couldn't get it to be any other book. They're not selling iOS devices as hobbyist machines for tinkerers. You buy an iPhone to be an iPhone, an iPad to be an iPad. That's not a bad thing, it's an attribute of the product you bought as much as its price and processor.

Sure they do. I can run both Linux and Windows without virtualization, and Apple even supports the latter officially through the Boot Camp-application.

Zirro: that is good to know. I wish it was the same with the IPad. Owning your hardware, in the sense that you can install alternative stuff on it, is very important for me.

pooriaazimi: the point was about the power to install anything, including a different OS. If it is like Zirro said, it is sure a big improvement on the desktop/laptop category. Sadly the IPad doesn't offer you the freedom for using anything that is not from Apple. I don't care much about it, because the IPad isn't mine anyways. I just wouldn't buy it if I had to choose (Android's devices look much more open).

ps. I'm sorry if I offended some people, it was not my intention. cheers :)

What's your point, exactly?

Even tech-savvy people buy iOS devices knowing that they are restricted in this way, and reap the benefits.

with my Ibook I couldn't install other OS on working conditions because Apple wouldn't just open the specs, so there wasn't really other OSs to install. It is also not really an option to install other OSs on the IPad. And it costs a lot of money, that makes a big diference. You pay to be locked in to Apple.

Then when Samsung comes around and offers almost the same features, people start to worry that their overly priced stuff will not be so special anymore, and act like Samsung's products are just a poorly made ripoff.

It was years ago so I don't recall the details but it was definitely possible and not terribly difficult.

If you want a challenge, try installing Arch on an 12" PowerBook G4. I spent three days one winter break in college getting that on there.

The only time in the Mac's history that Apple wasn't working to make sure it could run Unix was 1984-1987ish before they released their flavor of Unix.