fsf-community-team
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [fsf-community-team] [HELP!] Apple iPad press work


From: Simon Bridge
Subject: Re: [fsf-community-team] [HELP!] Apple iPad press work
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:36:43 +1300

On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 01:38 -0500, Blaise Alleyne wrote:
> ----- Original message ----- 
> > What state is the hardware endorsement programme? As I'm not aware
> of 
> > 100% free software tablets. The Nokia N900 is essentially Debian by
> all 
> > reports, but has non-free components to make key aspects work. I'm
> not 
> > clear where Android standard in this regard. 
> 
> Android has many non-free components as well, but the remaining
> proprietary dependancies to run it are fewer (check out the Replicant
> Project). Maemo (the distribution that the N900 uses) has a community
> effort underway to make another distro, Mer, without most of the
> proprietary dependancies I think. Maemo/Mer is Debian under the hood,
> but there's a very finger-friendly touchscreen GUI layer. 
> 
> Nokia calls the N900 an Internet tablet, but as a small tablet, it's
> more in the iPhone category of products than the iPad. But, I think
> that Maemo/Mer could be useful if/when it can run on larger tablets
> (e.g. Lenovo's new IdeaPad U1, or something a little more accessible
> than an iPad...). 
> 
> Point is, I don't think we have any tablets that are 100% free, but
> there are some useful pieces coming together...

If we include BIOS in the assessments, there are few 100% free computers
at all. Same goes with our not 100% linux kernels.

There is a sort of dierarchy to how mugh we immediately care about
things like this. Mostly, this depends on how intrinsically modifiable
the thing is.

A non flashable bios or non-loadable firmware is pretty
indistinguishable from electronics and we don't insist that electronics
should be free.

Same goes for most media players.

We start to shift uncomfortably when artificial restrictions get
engineered in to impede modification or restrict normal social
intercourse.

Thus the objections to how closed the iPad is (like closed architecture
in nvidia video cards). These things need not be and life would be nicer
if they weren't.

The iPad is a general purpose computer emulating a restricted function
device - this seems offensive to technical people, viewing it as an
animal rights activist may view an Eagle with clipped wings tied to a
post. But our strongest line focusses on the use restrictions -
particularly with regard to DRM.

By focussing on Apple, as the current market leader, we may influence
the design decisions of the companies which follow. We have not managed
to get an open iPod, but we do see other media players supporting free
formats.







reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]