[kennyc]

Originally Posted by riemann42

Here is the problem: If applications must be approved by Apple, and only sold by apple, and this is accepted, then real innovation is stifled, which is bad for progress. The argument isn't that it isn't a useful device, a fun device, what have you. It is that it is an unhealthy device for society and progress in general.

Let's back up and make an analogy. We all hate DRM, don't we? Imagine if every aspect of your computer had DRM?

Imagine if all innovation had to be approved by a single organization. Want firefox on your iPad? Too bad, duplicate functionality. Want flash. Too bad, Mr. Job's thinks it's glitchy and tacky. Want to develop your own application. Sure, just pay $99 a year, and agree not to share it with anyone else, unless Mommy Apple approves.

"Allowing" Kindle and Kobo apps is seen as an example of Apple being magnanimous. That's like praising a Dictator for allowing citizens to criticize the government if the critique is on an approved list.

We all understand the short term business reason for the Walled Garden. The problem is that it ends up being paternalistic and stifles progress for society as a whole.

So yeah, I think the iPad is unsuitable for as all, in the same way that I think government censorship is unsuitable for as all, even those of us who like what the government is doing.

Edit: Full disclosure: I have an iPhone. I jailbreak it so I can develop for it. I looked at programing for Android. It is 1000 times easier and fault: divide by zero times cheaper.

And that is what holds it back.