Upon reading this post again, it seems at the time I was thinking of questions with no real answers. So, what do you think?

The internet is becoming a place where those with small brains hang out. We are moving from complex interactions and into simple ones. Everything has to be short and quick and memorable.

Domains made for remembering and not really complicated, after all, who would want their users to have to think, or remember anything? People are moving to services, instead of hosting it themselves (tumblr comes to mind) who would want to have all that hassle of hosting their own website.

Applications are becoming easier to use. Interfaces are becoming stripped down and ‘user friendly’. I know, I must be going crazy to speak of this, who doesn’t like simple websites? No one has to think. Or focus.

Click. Youtube video. Click. Funny Comics. Click. Photoset. Click. New Phone.

I am getting grumpy, that much is obvious. But it just makes me think of Ian Malcolm’s speech in Jurassic Park:

The problem with scientific power you’ve used is it didn’t require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn’t earn the knowledge yourselves, so you don’t take the responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you knew what you had, you patented it, packages it, slapped in on a plastic lunch box, and now you want to sell it. script

Here we are asking our kids to dedicate early life to school. To understand the world. To understand complex situations and interactions. While technology is getting simpler and interacting digitally is getting easier – the hardest lesson to learn is that digital does not translate well to real life.

Its like we stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before us and use their hard work for our gain – without fully understanding the powers behind it. We get onto the internet with nativity and assume everyone is on our side because there website is easy and simple to use. Fun and funky companies get our emails, passwords and more.

Personal information is transported by clicking buttons with no fore-thought for its future use or meaning in our lives (the past is past, right?). How about using large sites to store data on, in a world that data is becoming most precious (as everything is heading towards digital in one way or the other). Or keeping large websites or companies to keep all your important data.

So with the internet getting more simple. Large sites, companies and corporations bringing people to be more full involved with their products. And increasing amount of people trusting and using these sites for amazing amounts of personal information – and not just personal information, but important and business information.

Are we just to trust that our data is protected? Are our short attention spans, and want of quick information or connections really helping us or hurting us?

I learned last week that the Apple ][+ was released with “schematics for the circuit boards” and that it “birthed a generation of hardware and software hackers who upended the world for the better” Corey Doctrow. How far they have fallen. I remember the uproar when the Mac Mini was released and it was stated that opening the case made the warranty void. The same is said for the iPhone. I cannot even change the battery in my MacBook Pro, this needs to be done with Certified Engineers.

It made me think of James May complaining about the Lego and Meccano kits being engineered for one item. In the past it was open scale build, there were many instructions in a packet of Meccano and one box of lego was open for you to build. Over time we cater to an audience that wants to buy something that is simple and can look awesome very quickly.

The greatest thing about our Lego for our boys is that it has ended up all together, the models that were once built from the kits have fallen into the collective random parts of our lego collection and all bits are now fodder for any model.

Obscure thinkings, but there is a point to it. In the past companies have let us use their products for what ever we could make or extract from them. Those who were willing to push the boundaries could and marvelous technological inventions have followed.

Nice Design, Subtle Downward Trend

Through nice Industrial Design Apple taken down all the warning signs and allowed them to grab a huge foothold in the personal computing market. If other companies follow in their path we can only fear what will come of those who come after us.

Through nice industrial design, excellent packing with a great eye for detail and witty marketing campaigns Apple have torn down any kind of resentment we may like to hold against them. They released the iPad to nothing more than hype to sell it :: As if there weren’t enough adjectives in the ad :: and it is taken with many people calling it a success before it is even released.

With their global market, and many many people who desire their products they have the right to choose what we program with, how we use what we have purchased and what is available to us. In all they are engineering a world that becomes dependent on their technologies. Yes it is what every big company wants, but there are anti-competitive laws against things like this.

Reminds me of:

When Microsoft released Windows 7 they release special E versions for Europe that did not have Internet Explorer installed :: Working to Fulfill our Legal Obligations in Europe for Windows 7. This was ruled Anti-Competitive in Europe, and Safari still comes pre-installed on OS X.

——-

Yes this follows on what seems to be an Anti-Apple rant of late. I cannot seem to make my thoughts at peace when thinking of Apple. I like the design of their products but it seems to be the most deceiving part of their products. Which lures you to it like the Siren Song – it has lured many a tech-geek and ‘average-joe’ a-like.

I have not participated in open source development (although I use open source languages for work all the time) and sure big corporations have been limiting us for years and years. But maybe this seems more malicious because they are talking big on being open when everything is closed up.

There is no freedom in their little world with their amazing products. Lock down and controlled for their own purposes. And I fear where the limits will get us. Sure, we’ll all be more Apple in style, but is that such a good price to pay for being limited in our outcomes.

Surely we won’t all fall prey to the Woman in a Red Dress?

Usually I am not one to complain about software companies and their fights for supremacy in each others markets. But I do feel the need to write about my thoughts on Apple, their decisions and modus operandi.

I grew up firmly in the camp of ‘Wanting a Mac’. For the past seven years I have plotted, schemed and devised paths for me to obtain a Mac, and when they all failed I used money to get one, and it has been nice to have around and use as a part-time machine.

Since I purchased it I have had problems with some standard PC features being locked out, especially when developing and backing up my data.

Closed Systems

In April 2010 Steve Jobs wrote this article :: Thoughts on Flash :: wherein he discusses the fact that the iPhone, iPad and iPod platforms are “open systems”.

Just because your product uses open standards does not mean that it is an open system.

Developers who own an Apple computer can download a specific suite of software to write programs. Those programs then have to pass Apple’s standards to be released to the world. Once these programs agree with the Apple Standards they can be made available to users. These users need to be running an Apple specific program to download the Apple released application, that can only run on an Apple made device.

No part of that process is open.

And on delivery of media, the propriety files are downloaded to a computer that can be displayed on a specific device. These files cannot be used on any other systems, thus meaning if a company chooses to release their own copyright into the world, it is releasing it to an isolated device and cannot be used on other systems.

That is not open.

Further still jailbreaking an iPhone will/can void your warranty Apple Says iPhone Jailbreaking is Illegal, so even on a device that you purchase and own is not yours – in the sense that you cannot do what you want to with your own personal device.

Not open.

It could be understood, as Mr. Jobs points out in the Thoughts on Flash missive, that this type of control is to ensure a solid platform:

We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform.

But in closing down the system, a system that is becoming more popular, is only serving to hinder progress. If everything has to be agreed to by Apple, it becomes a system that is limited by the Apple specs and technology and the minds of developers are limited by what they have to work with. This is not open. And this is in no way facilitating technological grown within their platform encouraged by other users.

Apple claim this to be open. I can not see any way in which is it open. A nice little isolated bubble of making money and pointing those who wish to make money through their system to use ONLY their products.

All the while they are doing this a large crowd is cheering the revolution they are bringing. I am just not quite sure they are our savior in the digital world. They, very well, may be our destruction.