For all the boxes, screws, locks and tethers they come with, computers, we agree, still offer plenty of freedom. Our choice may be limited on what Operating Systems they ship with, yet, we know there are thousands of third-party applications that we can choose to install on them. And these applications come from a variety of sources – big-name software organizations, Open Source repositories, a combination of both*, or just about anywhere on the Internet. And there’s contentment in the knowledge that anybody with sufficient programming skills can write, or can be asked to write software applications, and distribute them to anybody.
Back when Xbox came out, and sported a seemingly purposeless Ethernet port, my friend released a software for PCs called xboxgw that let two people play with each other over an Internet connection. This was before the days of Xbox Live. Thousands of people downloaded and installed his software and enjoyed the new avenues it opened. Why did he do it? Because he could. Because he wanted to. Because people demanded so.
The Revolution?
Things seem to be changing though. First with the iPhone, and now with the iPad, we are being ushered into an era, where the hardware, the OS, the applications, the development process, and the distribution channels are directly or indirectly controlled by a single entity. In other words, one observes (for the moment without necessarily wanting to change things):
- These devices are physically sealed. You can’t even look at, let alone replace any hardware parts, batteries etc.
- These devices only have a choice of a single OS from a single vendor – Apple.
- They do offer a choice of applications from different vendors, but there’s a single source - The App Store. You cannot install applications from other sources. You just cannot.
- All the applications need to be approved by Apple, which, sometimes, is a wait-intensive process.
- Apple may choose to reject your application for known or unknown reasons. If that happens, the app developer’s efforts go all in vain.
- Apple keeps 30% of the proceeds.
This is akin to Microsoft selling you a padlocked computer, with Windows pre-installed, allowing you to only install applications downloaded from their store, and charge you money if you ever wanted to develop for the platform. Can you imagine such a world? Would you like to live in one? (Actually, we are already living in one.)
Think about the all the applications you use on your PC. A fair chunk of them do come from Microsoft – MS Office, Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, etc. But, if you are a serious PC user, you probably have more than a handful of specialized applications that were neither built nor distributed by Microsoft. For example, Photoshop, Vuze, Picasa,Firefox, Skype, or for that matter iTunes. Now, imagine if these were controlled in some way by Microsoft! Imagine if Microsoft had a say in the look-n-feel and the content of these applications. Imagine if the developers of these applications had to ask for Microsoft’s permission every time they released new versions. I’m sure the iTunes developer would have hated it quite emphatically.
What’s probably not shocking is that Apple’s doing it, but, that Apple is trying to have an unprecedented level of control over the development process. This TechCrunch post made me a bit dizzy. Apple required the iPad developers to not only sign a 10 page NDA, but also asked them to physically tether the computers to an immobile object, as this Business Week post educates:
To ensure that it can’t be removed, the iPad must also remain tethered to a fixed object, said the people, who asked not to be named because their plans for the iPad have not been made public. Apple won’t send out an iPad until potential partners send photographic evidence that they’ve complied.
The Outcome
As much as I like Apple for its innovative products, the implications of the status quo are terrible. For one, Apple is actually prohibiting and in a way precluding (Forstalling?) the rest of the world from doing what they love to do – innovate.
As a result, your favorite software may never appear on these devices. Forget that an iPad version of Vuze will ever surface. Not free. Not paid. There’s no way Apple will let a file downloading parasite lay a leg on its content-spewing beast, which many media companies happily feed. Also, Apple has already made it amply clear that it won’t allow applications that duplicate functionality they author. So, don’t expect another browser, email client, music management software on these either. Last but not the least, give up any hopes that you’ll be able experiment with (develop, distribute, install) software as you wish on these devices.
Apple makes cool devices. I dig them. I own an iPhone # and two iPods. Consider me a fan. But, they are asking us to sacrifice too much (money excluded). I don’t consider Apple evil. As I understand, Apple believes that the best way to manage user-experience on their devices is to tightly control it. But, to me, a better way of doing things beckons.
I will buy Apple’s new cool-looking toaster, but only if they don’t force their bread down my throat.
Update: Another example of where all that control leads to.
* Apache Software Foundation is another example.
# I have sketchy plans on how to get rid of them, which, I’ll spell out in a future post.