Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FSF Announces Hardware Endorsement Criteria

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the ideals-inside dept.

GNU is Not Unix 273

sveinungkv writes "The Free Software Foundation has announced criteria for the hardware endorsement program 'Respects Your Freedom.' From the announcement: 'The desire to own a computer or device and have full control over it, to know that you are not being spied on or tracked, to run any software you wish without asking permission, and to share with friends without worrying about Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) — these are the desires of millions of people who care about the future of technology and our society. (...) With our endorsement mark and the strong criteria that back it, we plan to bridge that gap and demonstrate to manufacturers that they stand to gain plenty by making hardware that respects people's freedom instead of curtailing it.' While it currently contains some requirements that many may find broader than what they personally need, the remaining criteria would make the FSF endorsement a useful tool when looking for devices that give the owner control over the device they have bought and paid for. The criteria are still open for feedback."

cancel ×

273 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Interestingly, windmills are also hardware (0, Flamebait)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910840)

What is cool about software and what makes it conducive to openness is the fact that anyone with a PC can write it, run it, and change it.

Hardware makers suffer no such weakness. The barrier to entry is the high cost of manufacturing, so there is really no significant benefit to release an unrestricted device. Something like the iPod has already proved this.

The FSF's role is complete. It should fade away quietly while people still think highly of the wackjob membership.

Disguised keyboard emulators (2, Interesting)

Toe, The (545098) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910846)

Just saw a semi-related post in the firehose: Scary USB marketing device [slashdot.org] .

So would a marketing gimmick/keyboard emulator which pretends to be a USB flash drive count as free hardware? :/

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33910940)

"Any product-related materials that mention the FSF endorsement must not also carry endorsements or badges related to proprietary software, such as "Works with Windows" or "Made for Mac" badges"

No big manufacturer is going to put up with that. This simply means the idea won't fly. Not that it had chance in the first place, but it was a good idea, with this - it goes into the ground. I don't like "Works for Windows" labels myself, but they are 1) required to inform the customer that the hardware will work with Windows 2) not going away. We could only hope that "Works with Free Software" is added to those.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (1)

Pentium100 (1240090) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911084)

That would be great, but it probably won't happen because while "Windows" and "Mac" refers to multiple versions of one OS (Windows now usually means XP/Vista/7 and Mac means whatever few latest MacOS versions there are), "Free software" refers to a lot of different operating systems.

Even "Linux" is not a single OS. The device might work with Ubuntu, but not with RedHat or Slackware or Mandriva and I don't think that the manufacturer will test all of the more popular distributions. Testing for multiple versions of multiple distributions would be too much, especially since only a few percent of end users use Linux.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (4, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911350)

Not really, this whole present bit is the direct result of manufacturers failing to implement things to the appropriate standard. And the reality is that some manufacturers are already moving in a direction which would allow them to get the endorsement.

But ultimately, there's the very real possibility of cost savings here, as if they're using freely available tools and using open standards, they don't have to worry about supporting a hundred different platforms, as the tools would be there to add the support.

I may have missed it, but I didn't see any requirements that a manufacturer support platform X, just that the tools and the other necessities be free software.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (0, Troll)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911276)

The problem here is that FSF doesn't understand "free" means. They are just as restrictive as anyone else based on that one restriction. They just see themselves as better than the others, when the reality is they are exactly the same, maybe worse.

Open and Free means without restrictions, and adding their own just means they miss the point.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (4, Informative)

CyprusBlue113 (1294000) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911314)

No, they are quite clear its about freedom of the *users*, not everyone.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (0, Troll)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911442)

SO, exactly how does restricting "Works With" badging help the user? How does that make users "more free" than now?

It doesn't, as far as I can tell. And you missed my point about claiming to be for "open and free" while adding restrictions is neither "open" nor "free".

If they were wanting to help users, they wouldn't care about anything other than making HARDWARE open and free of restrictions.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (1, Troll)

CyprusBlue113 (1294000) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911566)

Repeating yourself and getting louder doesn't make you more right, it just makes you look ignorant and annoying, and is a sad reflection on the state of discussion in the world.

Either way, once again, it's not about freedom for everyone, its about freedom for the *users*. Arguing this point using restrictions on parties other than the *users* is a tangent at best, and deception at worst.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911618)

And you missed my point about claiming to be for "open and free" while adding restrictions is neither "open" nor "free".

They are not restricting anything. They are informing you to become more free by setting up labels on certain types of hardware. Proprietary companies restrict by making you incapable of doing something. FSF simply informs and recommends. If you can't see the difference, then that is the problem.

If they were wanting to help users, they wouldn't care about anything other than making HARDWARE open and free of restrictions.

Uh, you just contradicted yourself. You know that FSF does not create hardware, right? Well, educating and hardware endorsement is the next best thing.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (2, Informative)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911398)

Not really, what they refer to as free is really freedom from restrictions. Meaning that they're focused on the end user being free to use the whatever as they please. Hardware manufacturers by both necessity and practice don't have that luxury. If they want their USB doodad to function, then it damn well better fit in the port, and it has to be able to function with the USB chip and if they want it to function there must be a driver, either generic or provided to make it work.

What the FSF is saying here is that if you want to distribute hardware that we've endorsed, then the end user needs to be able to do certain things. What you do internally with the hardware is up to you, but it must interface with free software

Beyond that there's some clauses that are just general if you want to associate with us, you must behave in a way which is of reasonable ethics. No spying for instance.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (0, Troll)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911516)

That is NOT what that RULE is saying. That rule is about BADGING (labels), and has NOTHING to do with open and free hardware. I'll quote it again, so you are clear. THIS has NOTHING to do with the HARDWARE and suitability to use by users.

"Any product-related materials that mention the FSF endorsement must not also carry endorsements or badges related to proprietary software, such as "Works with Windows" or "Made for Mac" badges"

It isn't about functionality, it is about badging.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911454)

It also won't fly if they can't even agree on the industry standard term DRM. While we geeks can think of it as Digital Restrictions Management all we want, the suits and lawyers will laugh us out of the room until we can be grown ups and use the terms correctly as used by the industry.

Re:Disguised keyboard emulators (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911686)

I agree. If it "Works with Windows", is "Made for Macs", and is "FSF Compatible" no sane manufacturer is not going to want to mention all three. Even with its current, rather limited, desktop appeal I still see lots of peripherals marked with a "Linux Compatible" symbol joining the "WwW" and "MfM" ones on the back. If your hardware works with a given system why *wouldn't* you tell people. You obviously put at least some effort into the cross compatibility and it certainly can't hurt sales.

How about the right to (2, Insightful)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910868)

How about the right to make money off of something that millions find valuable that you labored to create, without fear that someone else will make a copy of it and start selling it themselves?

Re:How about the right to (5, Insightful)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910956)

Stop pirating English. You didn't help to create it in any significant way, so why do you feel entitled to use it in communication? The idea that you alone labored to create a piece of software or work of art is just a fiction in your head. You are merely adding a few bricks on top of a gigantic skyscraper, but then you want to claim all floors above them as your property? Nice try.

Isn't that Communism? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911460)

By that logic, there is absolutely nothing one can claim as one's own product, right? Even bodily fluids have influences from other organisms, from other people (in response to pheromones), and of course there are your parents and all your ancestors to thank, as well as all of evolution before you.

Not that I'm criticizing what you're saying per se... just being clear that what you're really talking about here, if taken to its logical conclusion, is pure Communism. Right?

Re:How about the right to (1)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911722)

Stop pirating English. You didn't help to create it in any significant way, so why do you feel entitled to use it in communication?

Oh please.

You are merely adding a few bricks on top of a gigantic skyscraper, but then you want to claim all floors above them as your property?

If those few bricks make the structure actually work, then yes, I will claim it as my own. What? I can't profit off of it? Oh well, I'll just keep my ideas to myself. The same goes for the mundane piece of unoffensive art that hangs in the stairwell - no pay, then I'll have to do something else to pay the bills. Make a T-Shirt off of the art - I want a piece of the action because otherwise without my image you'd have no T-Shirt.

The idea that you alone labored to create a piece of software or work of art is just a fiction in your head.

True. BUT I also expect everyone of those individual contributors to be able to lay claim to their work and claim on how to make others work useful with their contributions.

Saying one is standing on the shoulders of others and therefore has no right to lay claim to their work is just an excuse to leach off of others hard work.

Claiming one's ideas as his own is almost as valuable as the money one can get. There's not many things that are as sickening than watching one's insight and work get absorbed into the collective. And seeing others get the recognition and rewards that come from claiming one's work is inspiring: whether it's seeing become a billionaire or going down in history as the person that made the breakthrough.

You make me sick.

Re:How about the right to (2, Insightful)

Monchanger (637670) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910976)

That right doesn't conflict with the right of a consumer to their property.

That's where innovation and brand come in. Just because you release your specs doesn't let a competitor compete with you until they've had time to get those specs into production and build a distribution network. By then it's too late for them to compete for market share.

There are a zillion cheap iPod knockoffs and other devices which do basically the same thing. Apple made a fortune on digital music players before anyone else and continue to sell theirs because they built a device consumers believe is superior to the generics.

The fear is actually a good thing- it keeps them innovating and staying at the cutting edge of development and not sitting on their asses.

Re:How about the right to (0, Flamebait)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911382)

I don't see this as flamebait. I agree with the point. You should have the freedom to produce proprietary software as well as Free software. You want flamebait....f*ck Stallman and the FSF's opinion on how I should live my life. Shame on them. Promote a good idea (Free Software) and touting the benefits is a good thing. Proclaiming that all proprietary software is bad and if you develop it you are an evil person is bullshit.

Re:How about the right to (1)

magarity (164372) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911492)

without fear that someone else will make a copy of it
 
This isn't a troll but a valid point about the 'and share with friends' bit. It's none of hardware's business to decide if one may or may not make a copy of a digital work but they don't need to call out copying to someone who didn't purchase or license it. That's a civil case between the user and the producer. Hardware needs to make no distinction on making copies - it's the user's decision whether the copies are to make spares for themselves or to pass on to someone else.

Who cares (-1, Flamebait)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910872)

With our endorsement mark and the strong criteria that back it, we plan to bridge that gap and demonstrate to manufacturers that they stand to gain plenty by making hardware that respects people's freedom instead of curtailing it.

Yeah, I'm real sure most manufacturers care about whether the F$F endorses their products. You might have a case if the basement-dwelling Linux market was more than a statistical anomaly.

Might be the only market left open to them. (2, Interesting)

Tekfactory (937086) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911064)

Wonks are always going about how the Cloud is going to kill the PC, and how Smartphones and Netbooks are replacing the traditional PC market.

If they are even close, which I doubt (were' just at the mainframe of the mainframe / PC cycle) then people who want more than a Smartphone or Netbook will need something.

Catering to the market of tinkerers left over after everyone else has moved to the "it just works" appliance crowd, they are exactly the kind of people who will want machines they control 100%.

Re:Might be the only market left open to them. (0, Flamebait)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911124)

Catering to the market of tinkerers left over after everyone else has moved to the "it just works" appliance crowd, they are exactly the kind of people who will want machines they control 100%.

I already covered that:

You might have a case if the basement-dwelling Linux market was more than a statistical anomaly.

Re:Who cares (5, Insightful)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911086)

... the F$F endorses ...

Err, "F$F"?

You mean you wish to emphasize, by a clever use of the dollar sign, the fact that you think the FSF is a multi-billion-dollar pit of money-grubbing, avarice-crazed wackos who worship wealth like it was a deity and who think that "profit" is a justification for any and all actions, up to and including slavery, mass slaughter, wholesale destruction of environment etc?

Now, I've heard the FSF being accused of being a bunch of pot-dazed, lazy hippies, but the "apex of corporate greed" is a rather new one on me. Does Armani even make Stallman-sized suits?

Could you elaborate?

Re:Who cares (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911206)

It's satire. You know, the way companies kowtow to other companies with big money, now the FSF wants to play in that league and assert influence with ... what exactly? It's also sort of a dig at the asine way people tend to spell "Microsoft" around these parts.

Godspeed FSF, but even after dropping the various loaded language sprinkled throughout the document and the vague and onerous provisions ("Cannot be confused with a similar product" -- hey geniuses, that's what the logo is for, so you can look for it in a product lineup) this project is going nowhere.

Re:Who cares (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911116)

Yeah, I'm real sure most manufacturers care about whether the F$F endorses their products. You might have a case if the basement-dwelling Linux market was more than a statistical anomaly.

?? Are you on crack?

Re:Who cares (0, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911160)

So you actually think any major hardware manufacturer gives a shit about an F$F endorsement? Seriously?!?

Re:Who cares (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911248)

Do you actually think any sane individual gives a shit about your sad ramblings? Seriously?!?

Re:Who cares (0, Offtopic)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911274)

If my "ramblings" are so sad and no sane individual would care about them, why do you get so enraged and bothered by them to make a post whining about it?

Re:Who cares (0, Offtopic)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911400)

You're a sad, sad troll :(

Re:Who cares (-1, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911448)

And you're even more sad for getting so worked up and bothered by my posts. Go outside and get a life if my posts bother you that much.

Re:Who cares (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911520)

;-;

Re:Who cares (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911734)

Then stop feeding him! You have a 5 digit ID, you should know better!

Re:Who cares (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911672)

I'm enraged? Well how about that, and here I thought I was just running down the clock on a Friday afternoon.

Re:Who cares (1)

Dracos (107777) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911256)

Exactly. No OEM is gong to chase this endorsement, and even if they do get it, they won't be putting in on their retail packaging.

FSF Endorsement??? No One Cares (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33910880)

Outside of the tiny group of Bearded Gnu Freaks, no one cares what the kooks at the FSF say or do.

 

Good news (5, Insightful)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910884)

IMHO, this is good news. Now more than ever before, we need people to understand the difference between open and locked-down hardware, and to help them make rational choices while shopping. To me, it is unthinkable that my personal computers should be remote-controlled by a third party, but the crowds are only beginning to wake up to the pain that proprietary platforms are causing them.

Re:Good news (1, Insightful)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910900)

Keep dreaming. Nobody will care about a FSF endorsement, most people have never even heard of them and I'm sure they don't have any kind of budget to really push this.

Re:Good news (5, Insightful)

mnrasul (1677458) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911012)

Keep dreaming. Nobody will care about a FSF endorsement, most people have never even heard of them and I'm sure they don't have any kind of budget to really push this.

worst case scenario - there is no change and status quo remains

ideal scenario - it works

If no one tries, there is definitely no change. so I am all for it.

Go Fuck Yourself (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911076)

What a fucking loser you are.

Re:Good news (0, Troll)

dacut (243842) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911326)

worst case scenario - there is no change and status quo remains

Not quite. Worst case scenario involves a cult-like user following who won't stop praddling on at parties about how cool and open their spiffy new phone/laptop is. Then we'll have to open FSF Friend Bars [theonion.com] , too.

Re:Good news (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911472)

Except geeks and IT professionals who tend to shockingly enough make recommendations that make their work easier. Ultimately you can buy what you like, but if you expect me to help out with it, particularly on a voluntary basis, you damn well better be buying something that I can work with.

And, likewise when I'm giving recommendations about hardware, I'm considering how well supported it is in terms of the standards. While I've no particular objection to other people using Windows if need be, I do realize that a lot of people aren't going to need to upgrade their hardware just because MS has pulled support of their version of Windows.

I think you'll find that there's more interest in this than you'd expect. Particularly if it starts to be perceived as representing goods of higher quality.

Re:Good news (0, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911582)

I do realize that a lot of people aren't going to need to upgrade their hardware just because MS has pulled support of their version of Windows.

Yeah, because only getting 10+ years of support for a version of Windows is so unreasonable. I mean, I can still get patches and backports of all my apps and kernel changes to a 10 year old version of Debian, right? Oh wait...

Re:Good news (0, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910926)

Now more than ever before, we need people to understand the difference between open and locked-down hardware, and to help them make rational choices while shopping.

Translation: The "rational choice" is only the one that I approve of you making. People do understand the difference, they just overwhelming don't care.

To me, it is unthinkable that my personal computers should be remote-controlled by a third party

Then *gasp* don't buy that product. Wow, that was hard, right?

but the crowds are only beginning to wake up to the pain that proprietary platforms are causing them.

If by "the crowds" you mean a bunch of irrelevant whining by some nerds on a few tech sites, then yes, they truly are "waking up".

Re:Good news (3, Informative)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911042)

People do understand the difference, they just overwhelming don't care.

No they don't. By and large, people don't understand what "software" is, or how "data" is different from "executable code", much less the difference between open and proprietary solutions and the way it affects them as consumers and users. Go talk to just about anyone out of the field. They all carry around smartphones: general purpose computers with internet access, but they have NO idea how or why they work. At the very best, they've learned that they can download "apps" from a "store".

Re:Good news (1)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911090)

people don't understand...how "data" is different from "executable code"

What's the difference?

Re:Good news (1)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911604)

It's a spectrum, but there is a definite difference (in how your computer treats these files) between a correct elf binary with execution bit set and a plain text file. People who know the difference know not to download *.exe while looking for music, for example.

Re:Good news (0)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911112)

Except what your using as some sort of counterargument has fuck all to do with what I was responding to which was purely about locked down hardware (such as an iPhone) versus something that isn't locked down. People DO know that difference and they still choose iPhones, iPads and iPods because they don't care that the device is locked down in some manner.

Re:Good news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911070)

One of the most common opinions writers here have is the patronizing attitude that those who disagree with them are somehow dumber or less knowledgeable. Most often they have the facts and just disagree.

Re:Good news (1, Informative)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911144)

Exactly and the first response to my post is a perfect example of said snobs.

Re:Good news (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911552)

Citation please. How many people use Windows because they've come to believe that it's better than the alternatives. And how many use it because they've always used it and it's what they've learned on? It's an important thing to understand that most people that use Windows, Office and IE haven't tried the other options. They aren't expressing any sort of sincere informed preference, they just don't want change.

I temporarily switched my mother over to Linux for a bit because Vista wasn't dealing well with the network topology and it was going to be a bit before the replacement switch arrived. Admittedly that was my fault, but when she started using it, she found that OpenSUSE was quite snappy and did the web part of what she needs quite efficiently.

I've got the problem fixed and she's still using it. I'll probably switch her back, just because it's easier than trying to set up MS Office on Linux. Well, that and there still isn't any good unlimited online backup software available for Linux. Or at least not that I could find.

Re:Good news (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911646)

Then *gasp* don't buy that product. Wow, that was hard, right?

Precisely the action that this endorsement is designed to support. Helping to make it easier for people to decide what to buy and what to avoid, based on their personal preferences. If you don't care about how "free (as in speech)" the item you are buying is, you'll ignore the sticker and buy based on what you DO care about. If you do care (either way), you can either prefer or avoid products with that sticker, in accordance with your own preferences.

If this works, and I'm not saying it will, but if it does, it basically means that people who have a preference (either way) about locked-down products will use the FSF endorsement as a guide to the products they do want. Exactly like the way some people currently look for "Works with Windows", "Fair Trade", "Organic", "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval", or "Underwriters Lab" stickers on a product currently to help determine if the item they are purchasing meets their purchasing preferences.

Re:Good news (1)

immakiku (777365) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910958)

Are they waking up to it? Most vendors aren't blatantly obvious in doing these seeding things. It will take a real case for FSF or anybody to really be able to highlight the benefits of Free.

Additionally this is good news for smaller manufacturers who don't care or don't have the ability to add additional "services" to their products that shouldn't really be there to begin with. If this endorsement gains any momentum, that's yet another incentive to do business the simple, straightforward way.

Re:Good news (1)

davev2.0 (1873518) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911008)

The problem is that most people still won't care. In fact, many people see locked-down hardware, and software too, as an advantage

Re:Good news (1)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911118)

In fact, many people see locked-down hardware, and software too, as an advantage

Give us examples. Give us an example of a platform where the very fact that the owner is locked out is beneficial to the owner. It is true that some proprietary software may be seen as better on technical grounds, or even be cheaper to maintain, but name one instance where opening up the code and the hardware specs would be detrimental to the device's owner.

Re:Good news (-1, Flamebait)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911176)

Give us examples.

iPhone, iPad, iPod.

Give us an example of a platform where the very fact that the owner is locked out is beneficial to the owner.

Way to twist the GP's words. That isn't what he said. The iPhone is a perfect example of what he actually said because the locked-down platform is seen by many of the users as an advantage of something more open like Android.

It is true that some proprietary software may be seen as better on technical grounds, or even be cheaper to maintain, but name one instance where opening up the code and the hardware specs would be detrimental to the device's owner.

Why should they have to? They never made such a ridiculous claim. Strawman much?

Re:Good news (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911270)

the locked-down platform is seen by many of the users as an advantage of something more open like Android.

I don't recall ever hearing an end user trumpet the fact that it is locked down as an advantage over Android. Most users, I suspect, wouldn't care if it was or was not open. That doesn't validate the lock down though.

You still didn't answer my question as to why you so vocally hate the FSF.

Re:Good news (1, Flamebait)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911406)

I don't recall ever hearing an end user trumpet the fact that it is locked down as an advantage over Android.

That's because they never use such loaded words to describe it, but it is essentially the lockdown that brings the benefits that the users like (vetted apps, platform consistency, etc).

You still didn't answer my question as to why you so vocally hate the FSF.

I don't hate the F$F. I just pity the followers of the cult.

Re:Good news (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911458)

vetted apps, platform consistency

Both of which have been show to be false, especially with the App Store.

I don't hate the F$F. I just pity the followers of the cult.

But your responses come off as so very angry.

Re:Good news (0, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911494)

Both of which have been show to be false, especially with the App Store.

That may be true, but the users still have that perception which is the entire point you seem to be missing.

But your responses come off as so very angry.

Boohoo. Do you need me to call the waahmbulance?

Re:Good news (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911538)

the users still have that perception which is the entire point you seem to be missing.

They have a perception of integration, not lock down.

Boohoo. Do you need me to call the waahmbulance?

No, but I suggest taking a chill pill.

Re:Good news (0, Flamebait)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911636)

They have a perception of integration, not lock down.

And the integration is due to the lockdown. As I already stated, the users don't use loaded terms like "locked down device" but the entire basis of the things they rave about the device is due to the lockdown.

No, but I suggest taking a chill pill.

I suggest you blow me.

Re:Good news (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911720)

And the integration is due to the lockdown

Err...

I suggest you blow me.

It's tragic that your blind, irrational hatred for the FSF has led you to troll a topic that would do well with varied, reasonable discussion instead of one-sided pro-lockdown trolling.

Re:Good news (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911418)

I don't recall ever hearing an end user trumpet the fact that it is locked down as an advantage over Android.

Huh, I hear it all the time.

Higher quality apps and reduced chance of malware are the most commonly touted advantages.

And before you start point out how Android has good quality apps, or Apple's vetting process doesn't prevent malware or something... fuck off, I don't care. You claimed people don't see an advantage in Apple's system. I'm only pointing out the common advantages people claim to see, and am not making any statements regarding the worthiness of those claims, nor do I have any interest in discussing it.

Re:Good news (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911496)

Higher quality apps and reduced chance of malware are the most commonly touted advantages.

If you read my response to Desler, that's been shown to be false. What if the WiFi router app had instead been malware? And don't go telling me there are no crap applications on the App Store.

And before you start point out how Android has good quality app

Don't own an Android device, so can't speak to it.

fuck off, I don't care

Obviously you do.

You claimed people don't see an advantage in Apple's system. I'm only pointing out the common advantages people claim to see, and am not making any statements regarding the worthiness of those claims, nor do I have any interest in discussing it.

People see the value in the App Store system, and the tight integration with iTunes. All of that could easily exist without the lock down forcing you to jailbreak.

But you keep harping on me for suggesting that even letting up a little on the lock down would be a good thing. You and Desler, do you have a vested interest in locked down platforms or something?

Re:Good news (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911572)

If you read my response to Desler, that's been shown to be false.

Wow, you completely ignored me and proceeded to argue this point, anyway. What the hell is wrong with you?

I spoke of "commonly touted advantages". I don't care if they're correct or not. People believe them, contrary to your claims.

Re:Good news (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911622)

I spoke of "commonly touted advantages". I don't care if they're correct or not.

Soooo, you're basically throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks? Oh and carefully ignoring counterpoints that have been shown to actually happen?

I get it. Is there a latin phrase for "arguing while ignoring valid counterpoints?"

There is no perception that lock down is good. There is a perception (valid, even) that Apple's experience is good. And it would be, even if you weren't forced through the iTunes Store. But go ahead, harp on me more for arguing in favor of the end user (even nowhere near to the ridiculous degree the FSF is.)

Re:Good news (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911732)

Soooo, you're basically throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks? Oh and carefully ignoring counterpoints that have been shown to actually happen?

Nooo... I'm arguing a point. You're ignoring that point because you're wrong, and attempting to change the subject. If it's not clear what that point is, allow me to reiterate, as you seem a little slow.

You said:

I don't recall ever hearing an end user trumpet the fact that it is locked down as an advantage over Android.

I said:

Higher quality apps and reduced chance of malware are the most commonly touted advantages.

Full stop. There is no argument past this, unless you have evidence that there are no users who claim those advantages exist. Of course, you can't make that claim because people *do* believe those advantages exist.

At this point, of course, you lost. But, alas, you can't seem to handle that. So you decided to, instead, change the argument to one of disputing the validity of those claims, rather than the existence of them. I, however, don't care to have that argument.

There is no perception that lock down is good.

Yes. There is. I've already pointed that out. You just can't admit you're wrong.

But go ahead, harp on me more for arguing in favor of the end user

Yes, you are truly Jesus, Luke Skywalker, the Buddha, Robin Hood, and Eric Stallman combined into one. You are a stalwart freedom fighter working for the common good. I bow before your shining nobility.

Re:Good news (1)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911684)

The iPhone is a perfect example of what he actually said because the locked-down platform is seen by many of the users as an advantage of something more open like Android.

Many iPhone users don't even know what "locked-down" means, so whatever advantage the masses see in iPhones, it's not the fact that they cannot control them or know what they do. This is not a strawman: you just have nothing else to say. "In fact, many people see locked-down hardware, and software too, as an advantage" Again, what is this advantage? Would it disappear if the platform was open?

Re:Good news (1)

NFN_NLN (633283) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911198)

The problem is that most people still won't care. In fact, many people see locked-down hardware, and software too, as an advantage

If that were true Android never would have taken off: "App developers more bullish on Android than iOS"

http://community.nasdaq.com/News/2010-09/app-developers-more-bullish-on-android-than-ios.aspx?storyid=37842 [nasdaq.com]

The users ultimately follow the apps. Just see how many exclusive titles Microsoft had to purchase in order to ensure XBOX's success. Only in this case the developers are driving the apps and they're choosing Android because its much more open.

Re:Good news (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911234)

If that were true Android never would have taken off:

Why? What he said isn't mutually exclusive to that. Notice how he didn't say "all people".

"App developers more bullish on Android than iOS"

Because App developers are representative of an average phone user?

Just see how many exclusive titles Microsoft had to purchase in order to ensure XBOX's success.

As opposed to how many titles Sony purchased to be exclusive to their console?

Re:Good news (1)

abigor (540274) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911250)

No, it's kind of dumb and no manufacturer will bother to pay attention. Nice try at fear-mongering, though.

Re:Good news (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911300)

Is it fear mongering when an entire market, particularly the mobile market, is moving in that direction? What makes you think they won't try to move that lock down up the stack?

Why? (1)

kurokame (1764228) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910920)

When someone uses a computer, it's not usually the hardware that spies on them. Won't this just give people false security? (If it does anything.)

Re:Why? (4, Informative)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910984)

I believe that the concept is that hardware can be made to prevent free software from loading, for instance, a chip to check for digital signatures to prove the code is "authorized", and that therefor the non-libre hardware can prevent you from running the software you want, forcing you to have to use software that isn't libre.

Incompatible endorsements (4, Insightful)

TruthSeeker (461299) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910936)

Because of the "incompatible endorsements" part, I doubt that hardware manufacturers will bother with it. Which is too bad.

Re:Incompatible endorsements (-1, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910952)

No, they won't bother with it because it's completely meaningless to the vast majority of their consumers. The people who would actually care about an F$F endorsement is a microscopic minority.

Re:Incompatible endorsements (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911172)

Why do you keep referring to them as the F$F.

Do you hate them for some reason? Can you explain it in a rational, sensible manner?

Re:Incompatible endorsements (-1, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911204)

I use it because it's funny to get people like you so bothered and enraged by it.

Re:Incompatible endorsements (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911258)

I was just asking a question. You seem to be the one that is slightly... unstable.

Re:Incompatible endorsements (0, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911468)

And you seem to have way too much time on your hand to care so much about my posts.

Re:Incompatible endorsements (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911502)

by Desler (1608317) writes: Alter Relationship on Friday October 15, @02:51PM (#33911204)

I use it because it's funny to get people like you so bothered and enraged by it.

Lame-ass troll. Go back to fark/digg/4chan.

Re:Incompatible endorsements (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911242)

F$F

What happened to you? Did the shirt you wanted for your dues get lost in the mail making you cry for hours?

Re:Incompatible endorsements (0, Troll)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911530)

No, it's because RM$ promised to let me butt fuck him and after I paid him he gypped me.

Leave it to the FSF to go to the outer edges (4, Insightful)

Julie188 (991243) | more than 3 years ago | (#33910944)

It is totally fair that if you want the FSF's endorsement you've got to open all the software on the product, and license any software patents. I love how the FSF always defines the outer edge completely in favor of the person that buys the product, rather than the one that creates it. I don't think the typical product creator will be interested in this because it seems like it will create a giant boiling vat of legal implications and who wants to sign up for that? But so what? Eventually a happy middle will be found.

Julie
www.opensourcesubnet.com

DoD and NASA? (2, Interesting)

Tekfactory (937086) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911146)

I'm just wondering if there are any traditional control freak agencies that would welcome such an endorsement?

The theory being they could access all the specs giving them more faith in the system itself.

Maybe the FSF needs to find a congresscritter who is scared of pre-hacked computers/servers/routers/switches with components made in China.

Typical (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911308)

Welcome to slashdot, where all honest effors to make the world a better place are automatically poo-pooed by those looking for attention. "Look at me! I'm different!"

Re:Leave it to the FSF to go to the outer edges (1)

cfriedt (1189527) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911610)

It's not just opening the source on a product, it's also ensuring that the product is not 'defective by design' (in Stallman's own words). I.e. the vendor should not restrict the ability of somebody to modify and reinstall new software on a device with an openly available build and install system. One particular aspect of 'defective by design' is the concept of e-fuses that literally burn the jtag circuits of mobile phones for production runs. Now, whether or not the end-user actually gets the chip documentation required to modify their software in a meaningful way, is another story alltogether.

Exceptions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33910990)

Why are there exceptions? I understand the practicality of what they are saying, but when you think about the future, an FPGA exception may be where the entire new concept of computing lives.

Does it run Linux? (-1, Offtopic)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911038)

Does it run Linux? ;)

Seriously, that must have been one the first choices they thought of, even if they probably thought of it as GNU/Linux.

No, I haven't read the article, yet. :)

Re:Does it run Linux? (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911114)

Sorry, but it will only run Gnu/Hurd. But they include a copy of Duke Nukem Forever.

Re:Does it run Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911252)

You're aware Duke Nukem Forever is now coming out, right?

where's the boundary? (1)

Speare (84249) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911154)

I guess I'm having a hard time to see where the boundary would lie, because of how easy it is to cross it. The Arduino, a general purpose microcontroller board, would seem to be about as open as they get: the whole firmware is open, the tools are open, they even give you files that would let you manipulate the hardware layout and have a factory produce your custom flavor. Does that get the Arduino a nod from the FSF? Okay, if so, what about Arduino-based devices which employ sensors and/or obfuscation on top of this great "free" platform? A locked-down spy device built upon open standards is possible on the web, on the desktop, and in your pocket. So the endorsement only goes for devices unmodified after inspection... which somewhat deflates any value in such an endorsement, in my mind.

Re:where's the boundary? (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911768)

I don't think Arudino-based devices would get a free pass just because they used an Arudino as one component. The sticker could appear on the Arudino, but not on the locked-down devices that people build from them.

In fact, I don't see this sticker appearing on vendor-locked (AT&T, Verizon, etc) Android-based phones. An unlocked Android phone might get an FSF sticker because you can do what you want with it, but the one Verizon sells you certainly shouldn't deserve that same labeling, unless Verizon included a rootkit CD and instructions with the phone, and continued to support phones once rootkitted.

how to deflect corepirate nazi attack on earth (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911214)

it's in there. some of it anyway. 'they' know that most of the people they kill don't have even one gadget to call anybody for help (not that any would appear). they just need to 'keep track' of US whiners in case (m)any of us attract too much attention distracting from love of 'god's' wars etc....

the corepirate nazi holycost (life, liberty etc...) is increasing by the minute.

ou call this 'weather'?

continue to add immeasurable amounts of MISinformation, rhetoric & fluff, & there you have IT? that's US? thou shalt not... oh forget it. fake weather (censored?), fake money, fake god(s), what's next? seeing as we (have been told that) came from monkeys, the only possible clue we would have to anything being out of order, we would get from the weather. that, & all the other monkeys tipping over/exploding around US.

the search continues (any search engine will do);
weather+manipulation

bush+cheney+wolfowitz+rumsfeld+wmd+oil+freemason+blair+obama+weather+authors

meanwhile (as it may take a while longer to finish wrecking this place); the corepirate nazi illuminati (remember, (we have been told) we came from monkeys, & 'they' believe they DIDN'T), continues to demand that we learn to live on less/nothing while they continue to consume/waste/destroy immeasurable amounts of stuff/life, & feast on nubile virgins while worshipping themselves (& evile in general (baal to be exact)). they're always hunting that patch of red on almost everyones' neck. if they cannot find yours (greed, fear ego etc...) then you can go starve. that's their (slippery/slimy) 'platform' now. see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

never a better time to consult with/trust in our creators. the lights are coming up rapidly all over now. see you there?

greed, fear & ego (in any order) are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of our dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children. not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one, & the terminal damage to our atmosphere/planet (see also: manufactured 'weather', hot etc...). see you on the other side of it? the lights are coming up all over now. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be your guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. we now have some choices. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on your brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

"The current rate of extinction is around 10 to 100 times the usual background level, and has been elevated above the background level since the Pleistocene. The current extinction rate is more rapid than in any other extinction event in earth history, and 50% of species could be extinct by the end of this century. While the role of humans is unclear in the longer-term extinction pattern, it is clear that factors such as deforestation, habitat destruction, hunting, the introduction of non-native species, pollution and climate change have reduced biodiversity profoundly.' (wiki)

"I think the bottom line is, what kind of a world do you want to leave for your children," Andrew Smith, a professor in the Arizona State University School of Life Sciences, said in a telephone interview. "How impoverished we would be if we lost 25 percent of the world's mammals," said Smith, one of more than 100 co-authors of the report. "Within our lifetime hundreds of species could be lost as a result of our own actions, a frightening sign of what is happening to the ecosystems where they live," added Julia Marton-Lefevre, IUCN director general. "We must now set clear targets for the future to reverse this trend to ensure that our enduring legacy is not to wipe out many of our closest relatives."--

"The wealth of the universe is for me. Every thing is explicable and practical for me .... I am defeated all the time; yet to victory I am born." --emerson

no need to confuse 'religion' with being a spiritual being. our soul purpose here is to care for one another. failing that, we're simply passing through (excess baggage) being distracted/consumed by the guaranteed to fail illusionary trappings of man'kind'. & recently (about 10,000 years ago) it was determined that hoarding & excess by a few, resulted in negative consequences for all.

consult with/trust in your creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

all the manuals say we're not to kill each other, & we're mandated to care for/about one another, before any other notion will succeed. one does not need to agree whois 'in charge' to grasp the possibility that there may be some assistance available to us, including from each other. there's also the question of frequent extreme 'distractions' preventing us from following the simple 'directions' we were given, along with everything we needed to accomplish our task. see you there?

boeing, boeing, gone.

Incompatible Endorsements? (4, Insightful)

Millennium (2451) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911216)

OK, so apparently the idea behind the "Works with Windows" and "Made for Mac," and similar being incompatible is that a user might think that the hardware requires these pieces of proprietary software. However, wouldn't the FSF's endorsement itself be sufficient clarification that this isn't the case? This seems more a matter of ego-stroking, much in the same way that they insist on the "GNU/Linux" name as another condition of endorsement when there is, in all likelihood, precisely one person on the planet who cares about the difference.

I'd admonish the FSF that injecting petty politics into what should be a technology-based endorsement doesn't do anybody any favors, but frankly, I'm not sure I have to. These two requirements alone will ensure that nobody ever applies for this thing.

Re:Incompatible Endorsements? (3, Interesting)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911706)

I agree. While I like this movement overall, I don't think they should be shooting for this kind of exclusivity.

"Works with Windows" and "Made for Mac" are marketing stickers. In fact, they are exactly the same kind of marketing sticker the FSF wants to use.

It's the hardware inside the box that should count for the FSF endorsement, not the labels on the box. If I can hack the hardware and do what I want with it, why in hell would I care that the manufacturers have entered marketing agreements with Microsoft or Apple?

Run any software? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33911444)

to run any software you wish without asking permission

You're free to run your cracked copy of Windows 7 Ultimate or OS X you illegally downloaded? And play all your cracked games you illegally downloaded?

share with friends without worrying about Digital Restrictions Management

Where "friends" are 10,000 random IP addresses, and what you're sharing is some else's movie.

What about the freedom to not have to run some half-assed GNU operating system on your hardware?

What is true freedom (4, Insightful)

SiliconEntity (448450) | more than 3 years ago | (#33911688)

I know people have trouble accepting it, but I want to offer once again the philosophical principle that true freedom implies the right and ability to commit yourself and to constrain your future actions. This principle should be very acceptable to the FSF, because it is the basis for their argument that the GPL is more free than BSD style licenses. Superficially, the BSD is more free, because it let's you do whatever you want. But the FSF argues that the GPL is actually freer, because it let's you do whatever you want only as long as you let others do whatever they want with the result. Imposing this limitation on freedom, paradoxically, increases freedom.

And really, this should not seem paradoxical, because we see the same principle all the time in everyday life. Every time someone signs a contract, he commits to performing certain actions and thereby limits his own freedom. The same thing happens when two lovers promise to be faithful. The point is that the essence of true freedom requires the ability to voluntarily limit your own freedom.

This is where the FSF, along with much of the network community, has gotten off on the wrong foot with some of these hardware technologies, in particular Trusted Computing. These technologies allow you to make credible commitments to limit your own freedom. You can promise to run only certain software to handle certain data, and failure to honor your promise can be detected.

It should be clear that, as with contract, marriage, and other areas where we make binding commitments, as long as these kinds of promises are voluntary, allowing them actually enhances freedom. Yet the FSf doesn't see it that way. They are so angry and upset at the notion that people may make promises only to run certain code that they are doing all they can to make such promises impossible to make credibly.

I can understand the concerns that these technologies could be made mandatory. That would obviously be an unacceptable infringement on freedom. But we don't eliminate marriage just because some people are unfairly forced into marriage in certain cultures. We don't eliminate contract just because some are coercive. We fight the unjust arrangements while recognizing the value of a system which allows people to make binding commitments.

The same approach should be applied to Trusted Computing. We should support voluntary adoption of the technology, while vigorously opposing efforts to make it mandatory.

Unfortunately I don't see much prospect of the FSF changing its position on this issue; Stallman is not notoriously amenable to reasonable persuasion. But I hope the larger community can start to look at these matters with open eyes, and not feel obligated to follow the FSF in lockstep.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>