Apple, Safari, iPhones and the reek of Microsoft
Last week Apple decided to try its hand at bundling. Tying is just around the corner.
Apple already has a place on the desktops of many Windows users through iTunes. Like Microsoft before it, Apple figured this was a great Trojan Horse to start pushing its other software. Like Microsoft before it, Apple stepped over the line, as John Lilly, CEO of Mozilla, suggested:
What Apple is doing now with their Apple Software Update on Windows is wrong. It undermines the trust relationship great companies have with their customers, and that's bad -- not just for Apple, but for the security of the whole Web.
John then goes on to say he's not against Apple's use of iTunes to push the Safari browser. He's wrong. Larry Dignan suggests John's complaint stems from Mozilla trying to protect its lucrative search relationship with Google. He's wrong, too.
If a browser had anything to do with iTunes, this wouldn't be so egregiously bad. But it doesn't. No, Apple's move bears the imprint of a would-be monopolist that cares more about its market position than its customers. I'm guessing it has little to do with Safari and much to do with...the iPhone.
I'm a huge Apple fan. I have a few Macs, iPods, and iPhones. But I don't want my entire computing experience dominated by any one vendor, including one that I like and trust as much as I do Apple. For this reason I consciously choose to use a variety of different software applications on my Mac, much of them open source.
So, I don't use Safari and can't fathom any reason for a Windows user to adopt it. It's a great browser but...who cares? It doesn't provide any differentiation that Internet Explorer or Firefox don't already provide.
Except for its tie to the iPhone, of course. Safari is the application platform Apple uses for its iPhone. Why should Apple care about which browser you use? Because it cares about which phone you use. Apple won't sell a single license to Safari, but it's definitely hoping to sell you a boatload of iPhones.
All of which makes me highly disappointed in Apple's decision to force Safari on users through its iTunes update service. "Safari-gate" couldn't have happened with open source, as iTWire notes. It doesn't work in a transparent, trust-based relationship.
It only works when Apple starts to betray Microsoft-esque tendencies, tendencies which we should help to squash. Immediately. Before Apple begins to rely on its market position more than the quality of its products, in ways similar to how Microsoft has grown.
Apple makes incredible products. I bought the Macs because they're better. I love my iPhone for the same reason. I, and millions of others, don't need to be tricked into adopting Apple's software and hardware. We just need to be given a compelling reason to switch. Millions are doing just that, and not because of some sly software "update."
Matt Asay is general manager of the Americas and vice president of business development at Alfresco, and has nearly a decade of operational experience with commercial open source and regularly speaks and publishes on open-source business strategy. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
With Windows Update, optional updates are unchecked, opt-in.
With iTunes, the Safari download is pre-checked, opt-out.
But Apple's business model in short is like: "Make the best and control it"
While its somewhat important to hold control to keep it the best, controlling heavily actually undermines the potential of its own products.
Apple is not developer friendly . They just want to control everything. I need the buggy Windows when I have a Mac.... bcoz I need something that works almost everywhere. Apple's policies dont allow people to make a shift easily.
See the iPhone... its such a revolutionary device.... Such a device is going to change the way mobiles will be used in future... replacing almost everythiing in your pocket.... but not now... You may ask why not now?.... Its not technology limitations but Apple's policies. May be Microsoft will make a similar but buggy phone and then dominate the market.
If consumers (not just pundits and haters) obviously resent it, or if courts find it offensive...then Apple will simply change the dialogue box from the default offering to an optional offering.
Not a significant problem.
But HOW do I stop the Apple Updater (there, presumably, for iTunes?) from popping it up? Should I just remove the Apple updater and stick with the iTunes I have?