But there are a lot of us that DO like it. The FACT is, the numbers speak for themselves.

The whole point of a Mobile device is for it to just the way we are productive in a mobile environment.

I've had a blackberrry, a Treo, tons of other devices.

And i've found myself spending to much time "tweaking" or getting the phone the way i wanted it, just so i could use it.

the iPhone comes this way right out of the box.

Hats off to the linux guy for doing that with his Box. That's awesome i love hearing stuff like that. but honestly i don't feel like spending alot of time on my phone? why? well... that's why i got a mobile smartphone. So i would not have to spend time on it. So i could do things quickly, and easily. Be more productive on the go. (we forget about this so easily)

This "Anthony" chap sounds like he's a really cool cat.

I like the GPL a bunch, and we all benefit from it, but I'll again point out that any license is by its very nature counter-freedom. They're just countering a different sort of freedom (and we can argue its an important license, but that still makes it a license).

I agree with you about the interest and niceness of the iPhone, and point out Apple achieves that kind of hardware, software, and services blend by being -- for good or for ill -- the way they are.

What I believe FSF is talking about is that the conditions for the AppStore is incompatible the distribution of GPL-licensed programs (or other similar copyleft licenses). This means that from the point of view of FSF, no free programs are allowed on iPhones.

Regardless of what ones own views of free vs. open source, I do see the point of both sides. Apple wants to control the platform, possible in their view for the benefit of the consumer. FSF wants open platforms, also in their view for the benefit of the customer. The possibility to choose another platform is not really that interesting for the discussion, since the iPhone hardware is really much nicer that other possible platforms hardware as is the base OS and applications.

And GPL isn't free, its a different set of restrictions. Maybe noble ones at their core, but still restrictions.

Personally, I agree with FSF in their complaints, but I have an iPhone anyway because it is so shiny and nice

And I believe that many Apple lovers feel the same way. That is why with every release of the IPhone or upgrade, there is a need to Jailbreak (gee, with a name like that, it isn't TOO restrictive, huh???) and unlock these phones.

Let's get real, the FSF has a point.

LOL! Oh man, Rene... that's rich.

(Ironically Some developers have complained that $99 isn't high enough, as too many people could afford it and flood the store with too many low-quality apps.)

Again, silly. And your analogy is false. This hood isn't locked shut, it's just tricky to open and has a proviso that says if you do open it, it will no longer be serviceable by the dealer, and if you then bring it to the dealer anyway, you're responsible if something you did -- or something the dealer does after what you did -- causes problems.

If we're adults, and we take responsibility for our own actions, how's that a problem? It lets non-mechanics (like me, I don't touch my car's maintenance) get all the service they want straight from the dealer, and it lets (presumably) power-tinkerers sneak in and do pretty much whatever they'd like with the core system (at their own risk, 'natch).

Sounds to me, again, like the FSF already has a lot of people locked up in an ideological straight jacket that's far worse for them. Apple's just a product, zealotry is a mindset.

Some companies, like Symbian, have seen a business model, leveraging open source developer communities and anticipated market share gains. That's great. Other companies have other business models. As a consumer, I value my freedom to choose which one suits me better in each circumstance, and value the diversity in approaches for creating a robust enough set of conditions that its unlikely for them all to fail, all at once.

And why would you get an OpenMoko? Wouldn't it be better to run down to RadioShack and roll your own from scratch?

Does anyone know if it is true that software developers have to pay a fee to Apple - even if the softare they provide is free to the end-user? If it's true (which I doubt) that would be a bit off...

You have the freedom to lock yourself in that sort of strait jacket, but FSF will do everything it can to convince you that is a bad way to treat yourself. Good for them!

A lot of folks have seen the light about this. Even the biggest companies. For example, Symbian has announced that they are going to put all of their software under a very liberal Open Source license. They are joined in this by Nokia, Sony, NTT Docomo, and a number of cellular carriers.

I'll get an OpenMoko, and have control.

I'm simply saying I think their review is a manipulative piece of FUD.

You want to blow your time and energy on the latest anything... be it Apple, Ubantu, BSD, or... even Microsoft... go head. Nobody should stop you, least of all people like Stallman and the FSF who have gone so far through the looking glass they've become the very thing they originally opposed - a restrictive ideology.

(And no, its a kid-friendly comment section. Again, the principle of opportunity cost means we always must sacrifice one thing for another -- in this case your ability to use crude and -- frankly -- lazy words for their ability to maintain their childlike sense of wonder just a few moments longer.)

The FSF is simply saying that they think the iPhone is a locked up piece of crap. I agree. I'll buy an Open Moko when they hit the store shelves.

You want to blow your money on Apple's latest iCrap...go ahead. Nobody's stopping you...not even Stallman and the FSF.