Speaker 1: Brought to you by the reinvented two thousand twelve Camra.
Speaker 1: It's ready. Are you get in touch with technology with
Speaker 1: tex Stuff from hou stufferks dot com. This episode of
Speaker 1: tech Stuff is brought to you by Hover dot com.
Speaker 1: Hover is all about making domain registration and service simple.
Speaker 1: Rather than selling a ton of services, they focus on
Speaker 1: making it easy to register and manage domains and emails. However,
Speaker 1: has two new domain services, Premium Domains and Clunker trade Ins.
Speaker 1: If you have any Clunker domains registered with Hover now,
Speaker 1: you can trade them in. If you have domains you've
Speaker 1: registered or renewed it Hovered and you'd like to upgrade
Speaker 1: your domain, however, will take your old domains back. However,
Speaker 1: will credit you everything you've spent on your old clunker
Speaker 1: with Hover, the original registration fee and any renewal fees.
Speaker 1: Visit Hover today at Hover dot com slash tex stuff.
Speaker 1: If you need a standard domain, use offer code tex
Speaker 1: stuff and get ten percent off. If you want to
Speaker 1: trade in a clunker, just call the custom of our
Speaker 1: service number on their website or email. That's Hover dot
Speaker 1: com slash tech stuff. Hello, They're welcome to tech Stuff.
Speaker 1: My name is Chris Poulette and I am an editor
Speaker 1: at How Stuff Works, sitting across from me, debatedbly Is,
Speaker 1: as always a senior writer Jonathan st I had the
Speaker 1: story bit by bit from various people, and as generally
Speaker 1: happens in such cases, each time it was a different story.
Speaker 1: So today we're going to have a goofy little debate
Speaker 1: about open systems versus closed systems. We just decided that
Speaker 1: we're going to experiment with this. We've never done one
Speaker 1: of these before, and in fact, we decided on it
Speaker 1: about thirty seconds before we started recording, and so to
Speaker 1: determine who would represent which side, we did the most
Speaker 1: scientific thing we could think of. We flipped a coin.
Speaker 1: It's the quarter United States quarter for those of you
Speaker 1: who think that matters. Uh. And it turns out that
Speaker 1: mint did it come from? Um you know what? I
Speaker 1: put it back in my pocket, So I don't know.
Speaker 1: But but Mr Chris rigged. Mr Chris Philette will be
Speaker 1: representing the open system side and I shall be representing
Speaker 1: the closed system side. So I think that proves it
Speaker 1: wasn't rigged. Look at the kind of phone I'm using.
Speaker 1: So anyway, Uh, I think I think in order to
Speaker 1: really understand what we're talking about. First, we have to
Speaker 1: establish what we mean by an open versus a closed system.
Speaker 1: So let me tell you what a closed system is.
Speaker 1: Closed system is quality people. That's what a closed system is.
Speaker 1: Closed system is where you create a an infrastructure, uh
Speaker 1: an ecosystem, if you will, where you control as many
Speaker 1: of the factors as you possibly can, and you don't
Speaker 1: allow outside influences to change your system. So an example
Speaker 1: of a company that takes the closed system approach is Apple.
Speaker 1: That's not to say that Apple only does the closed
Speaker 1: off approach. If it did, then you would never be
Speaker 1: able to run any other kind of software or app
Speaker 1: on Apple products. You would only be able to run
Speaker 1: Apple created stuff. But it's an example of a system
Speaker 1: because it's more closed than it is open. And there
Speaker 1: are various reasons for doing this, but we'll get into
Speaker 1: that in the debate. But that that's kind of what
Speaker 1: how I define a closed system. It's one where you're
Speaker 1: trying to control as much as possible, and it's all
Speaker 1: coming from or as much of it as possible is
Speaker 1: coming from a single source, and the outside stuff is
Speaker 1: shut away. Yes, And and I think as we talk
Speaker 1: about this, our listeners will realize that there are few
Speaker 1: absolutes in this discussion. Very true. Okay, so open source
Speaker 1: information wants to be free, and the ore are computing
Speaker 1: devices should too. It's the only way to be, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, free to be you and me? Um okay
Speaker 1: yea hippy. No, an open system is is something that
Speaker 1: is not made for corporate gain. It is out there
Speaker 1: for the public to use. Anybody who wants to make
Speaker 1: a contribution to it. Can people can use it, uh
Speaker 1: if they want to. And there it's it's there as
Speaker 1: offered as a public service. Um. And is therefore the
Speaker 1: people of the people, by the people, and you closed
Speaker 1: system punks should leave us alone because this is the
Speaker 1: way it really should be and trying to make a
Speaker 1: buck off that is wrong. Yeah. So if you think
Speaker 1: of it, uh, an open system is sort of democratic
Speaker 1: and that anyone can really contribute to it and and
Speaker 1: change it. And also we should point out before we
Speaker 1: really get into this debate, uh, that it is possible
Speaker 1: to have a a product probably that's for sale, either
Speaker 1: that's an open system or a closed system. Open and
Speaker 1: closed does not mean that one is free and one
Speaker 1: is is you charge for Yeah, I was I I did. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a good point. I should have pointed out that
Speaker 1: sort of the quote unquote ideal version when when a
Speaker 1: lot of people talk about open source, right, if you're
Speaker 1: going the ultimate open source, like the utopian version of
Speaker 1: open source, when you're talking about that's cool, that's cool, Yeah,
Speaker 1: because there there really is a spectrum here. But we're
Speaker 1: gonna try and be like hardcore. So mal, let me
Speaker 1: explain why I think that closed systems are superior to
Speaker 1: open systems. So with a closed system and with with
Speaker 1: with with everything coming from a single source. So in
Speaker 1: this case, let's say it's a company. A company is
Speaker 1: creating a product that is closed off, no other outside
Speaker 1: influence can can come into this product. It means that
Speaker 1: there's an expectation of quality control that you don't have
Speaker 1: with open systems. You actually can test everything, make sure
Speaker 1: everything works properly on the hardware. So if we're talking
Speaker 1: about a computer, we know that the software will work
Speaker 1: on the computer because the software and hardware have been
Speaker 1: developed together from the ground up. It means that you
Speaker 1: don't have to worry about some weird incompatibility issue when
Speaker 1: you try and install a program onto this device, because
Speaker 1: again everything is coming from the same source and was
Speaker 1: made to work together. Now this can go beyond just
Speaker 1: a computer. Let's say that you have a computer and
Speaker 1: a smartphone and a tablet and they're all part of
Speaker 1: the same closed system. It means that you can expect
Speaker 1: a fairly uniform experience across these three platforms, and maybe
Speaker 1: even be able to port your experience from one to
Speaker 1: the other. And what I mean by that is, let's
Speaker 1: say I'm watching a movie on my smartphone and then
Speaker 1: I decide, you know what, I really want to look
Speaker 1: at this on a bigger screen, and I tap it
Speaker 1: over to my tablet, and the tablet starts playing the
Speaker 1: movie exactly where I left off, and it all works
Speaker 1: seamlessly because it's all running on the same platform that's
Speaker 1: meant to work together. That is one of the big
Speaker 1: benefits of a closed system is that you have a
Speaker 1: uniformity in the experience and an expectation of things are
Speaker 1: just gonna work because it was all built together and
Speaker 1: meant to work together. Why are you taking away my choice?
Speaker 1: If I want to have a different video card than
Speaker 1: the one you stuck in my computer, I want to
Speaker 1: be able to remove it and stick a different one
Speaker 1: in there, you know what. And it's and it's frustrating
Speaker 1: because any time I want to change a component on
Speaker 1: my computer or I want something a little different, UH,
Speaker 1: you know, I have to deal with all the complications
Speaker 1: that you're closed off. UH system is is taking away
Speaker 1: And the problem is that, UH, you're also restricting competition
Speaker 1: because in your closed system, there's only one way to
Speaker 1: go for a tablet, and there's one way to go
Speaker 1: for an MP three player, and there's one way to
Speaker 1: go for a smartphone. There's one way to go for
Speaker 1: a computer. And I want I want choice. I want
Speaker 1: to be able to customize my my computing experience. I
Speaker 1: want to be able to buy something cheaper because competition
Speaker 1: is driving down the cost of these products. So I
Speaker 1: could go to your store and buy the one computer
Speaker 1: you've got, or I could go to this store over
Speaker 1: here and buy fifty different computers, and all of them
Speaker 1: are cheaper than yours, and some of them even outperform yours. Well,
Speaker 1: So what do you say to that? Here's what I
Speaker 1: say to that. Sure, it might be cheaper, and even
Speaker 1: if you have a device, a particular individual device that
Speaker 1: performs better than one of my particular individual devices. If
Speaker 1: you are trying to have an experience that spans multiple devices,
Speaker 1: then you're going to start encountering things where the compatibility
Speaker 1: issues come into play, and you may have things like
Speaker 1: software crashes because it's not designed to work together seamlessly
Speaker 1: like a closed system is. So you might spend less
Speaker 1: money initially when you first purchase your vast array of
Speaker 1: choice here and you've got let you know, your ultimate
Speaker 1: price tag is lower than you would if you have
Speaker 1: bought everything from my superior closed system store. But the
Speaker 1: amount of frustration you're going to have as that experience
Speaker 1: is unsatisfactory because the various pieces are not playing together
Speaker 1: properly is far going to outweigh the miniscule additional investment
Speaker 1: you would have to make if you had purchased it
Speaker 1: all from me in the first place. And yeah, you're
Speaker 1: one individual device might behave better or perform better than
Speaker 1: why one individual device, but collectively, the experience is much
Speaker 1: more satisfying on my end than it is on yours,
Speaker 1: because it's yours is piecemeal, and also my system is
Speaker 1: designed to just work. Your system is designed to make
Speaker 1: me have to have a computer science degree if I
Speaker 1: want to figure out how to do the same thing
Speaker 1: on one device as I'm doing on another device. Ha superior,
Speaker 1: You say, yes, I don't think that word means what
Speaker 1: you think. Well, here, let me put it to you
Speaker 1: another way. Let's let's let's take a look at the
Speaker 1: way a closed system versus an open system attacks the
Speaker 1: problem of malware, because they have very different approaches. Right, So,
Speaker 1: if we're talking about the perfect closed system, ideally there's
Speaker 1: no malware because nothing from outside is being introduced into
Speaker 1: the system unless there's some you know, disgruntled employee that
Speaker 1: I bullied out of out of their sanity. We don't
Speaker 1: have to worry about malware entering into the closed system
Speaker 1: because everything is made by this one entity and it's
Speaker 1: all made to work together, so you don't have to
Speaker 1: worry about some sort of virus perpetuating itself through your system.
Speaker 1: Now that's different from the way open systems attack malware. Well,
Speaker 1: see the open systems, you could have other people, multiple
Speaker 1: people working on solutions to things like vulnerabilities in the
Speaker 1: operating system, and people who are working on uh anti
Speaker 1: malware software for your system. So the thing is, that's
Speaker 1: a small price to pay for the ability to hack
Speaker 1: into the system and change whatever you want to change
Speaker 1: about the system. If you want to, uh, get into
Speaker 1: the operating system and see what makes it tick and
Speaker 1: learn more about what what programs and what functions are
Speaker 1: going on in the background. For example, you could be
Speaker 1: monitoring everything I do, but if you're in your closed system,
Speaker 1: I can't get into the background to see that. Then
Speaker 1: you know you could be doing this all without my knowledge.
Speaker 1: Um So with an open system, I I'm free to
Speaker 1: install any software I want to or remove any software
Speaker 1: I want to from my device. And I could even
Speaker 1: write my own because you know it's open, and uh,
Speaker 1: it gives me the opportunity to to hack in and
Speaker 1: play with it and make it my own instead of
Speaker 1: make it what your vision is. Because what if your
Speaker 1: closed vision, you're closed off, walled off, little garden isn't
Speaker 1: what I think of as being the best experience for me,
Speaker 1: because hey, everybody's an individual, right Well. First of all,
Speaker 1: we know what you want, even when you don't see
Speaker 1: That's the thing is, we know what you want. You
Speaker 1: don't know what you want, but we know what you want.
Speaker 1: You think you know what you want, but until you've
Speaker 1: actually bought into our our closed system, you really haven't
Speaker 1: haven't experienced it, And we're going to go back into
Speaker 1: the quality issue. Let's talk about the quality of and
Speaker 1: we're talking about computing systems here. Let's talk about the
Speaker 1: quality of the programs that you're running on your system. Again,
Speaker 1: with the closed system approach, those programs have been built
Speaker 1: for a very specific set of hardware, which does not
Speaker 1: change from what you know that if I buy my
Speaker 1: computer from this closed system and someone else buys their
Speaker 1: computer from the same closed system, those two computers are
Speaker 1: going to be identical in every meaningful way, So we
Speaker 1: know that the software is going to work equally well
Speaker 1: on my system as it is on their system. Whereas
Speaker 1: if we both just go into a computer store and
Speaker 1: we each just buy a computer from various you know, manufacturers,
Speaker 1: there's no guarantee that the same kind of software is
Speaker 1: going to work just as well in my machine as
Speaker 1: it is on their machine, even if the two machines
Speaker 1: are running the same operating system, because we have difficulties
Speaker 1: introduced by things like device drivers and hardware differences. With
Speaker 1: the closed system, you've eliminated that you don't have to
Speaker 1: worry about that so much. So that means that the
Speaker 1: quality of the experience of the software. Put aside the
Speaker 1: quality of the software itself, but the experience of using
Speaker 1: it is going to be less frustrating. Uh the you know,
Speaker 1: you might say that there's a downside with the whole
Speaker 1: choice factor, but at the same time, you don't have
Speaker 1: to worry about it crashing all the time or just
Speaker 1: not behaving the proper way. I think. Sure, sometimes things happen,
Speaker 1: but on a much less frequent basis than on these
Speaker 1: these little open systems out there that that just well,
Speaker 1: I don't know, they they they just they just are
Speaker 1: like every anything goes well with the potential of with
Speaker 1: with open source software, you have to potential a limitless
Speaker 1: potential of applications that could be run for it. The
Speaker 1: more open you become, the greater the possibilities. Um. You know.
Speaker 1: So you can have your closed system and have things
Speaker 1: that run specifically on that hardware. But you know, programmers
Speaker 1: like their choices too, and they're gonna go where where
Speaker 1: the wealth of soft where it is, and that's when
Speaker 1: you attract more users, and vice versa and versa visa.
Speaker 1: And I disagree with that because users, most users don't
Speaker 1: want to be curators. And if you are a user
Speaker 1: of an open system, you have to be a curator
Speaker 1: because there's so much that you're talking about, so much
Speaker 1: variety and so much choice, that it's overwhelming to the
Speaker 1: average user. You sit down and you see like there's
Speaker 1: it's like walking into a library and you have no
Speaker 1: idea what book you want to read. You just know
Speaker 1: you want to read a book, and you walk into
Speaker 1: an enormous library and you have no idea where to go.
Speaker 1: It's too confusing. Whereas in a closed system, it's been
Speaker 1: curated for you. Your choices are limited, but at the
Speaker 1: same time, you don't have to worry about going through
Speaker 1: eight thousand different word processing programs in order to find
Speaker 1: one that suits your needs. There's really only one choice,
Speaker 1: and if it suits your needs, that's awesome. Jonathan, you ignorance.
Speaker 1: Ha ha oh Saturday night Life. I bet you they
Speaker 1: cut that. Um anyhow, uh well, see, there's one thing
Speaker 1: that that you're leaving out here, the market, because what
Speaker 1: happens here is the market helps people whittle down their choices.
Speaker 1: When you have something the the word processor of choice,
Speaker 1: the one that that more people are using than people understand,
Speaker 1: it's the best seller phenomenon it's like you look at
Speaker 1: the best seller lists and you and you say, you
Speaker 1: know what, these books are very popular. I bet you
Speaker 1: anything that if I if I read it, I'm you know,
Speaker 1: I will at least look at these first because I
Speaker 1: know lots of people like them, and that helps people
Speaker 1: make choices as far as software is concerned, and you know,
Speaker 1: there's always a new programmer coming online to develop new
Speaker 1: software and you can always help be the kingmaker for
Speaker 1: the next generation of software too. But not in the
Speaker 1: closed system where you know your choices are somewhat limited.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I'm trying to think of a best
Speaker 1: selling open source software example, and it's really hard. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, in a lot of cases, open source software
Speaker 1: can be free or donationware, and a donationware world, people
Speaker 1: pay what they what it's worth to them. And sure
Speaker 1: some people are going to pay a quarter, and there
Speaker 1: are also people who pay a hundred dollars for the
Speaker 1: same piece of software because it means more to them
Speaker 1: and it's important to them to donate to the community.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, not found that out? How did
Speaker 1: how did Minecraft? Just you know, it's it's a thing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but I still think that the closed system is the
Speaker 1: way to go. It's a sustainable business model. It means
Speaker 1: that you once you develop your your your line of devotees,
Speaker 1: you're good to go. I mean because you you've created
Speaker 1: that expectation of that quality of experience that you deliver
Speaker 1: upon consistently, and by doing that, you know that you know,
Speaker 1: as long as you maintain that level of quality, that
Speaker 1: you will have a customer base moving forward. Whereas with
Speaker 1: this open source roach, I don't see how you're gonna be,
Speaker 1: you know, really making a sustainable business out of that.
Speaker 1: And while the ideals are wonderful and fantastic and and
Speaker 1: and and and happy and all that mess um, I
Speaker 1: just don't see it, you know, perpetuating itself after a
Speaker 1: certain amount. You know, eventually a guy's got to eat well.
Speaker 1: And and that's why I think, uh, that's why I
Speaker 1: think openness is sort of a bell curve. Yeah, because
Speaker 1: the one end you have the clothe the the completely
Speaker 1: closed off system with fewer fewer users, which you know,
Speaker 1: we should point out again there's not really that many.
Speaker 1: I can't think of any company that would be that
Speaker 1: I could point to that say absolutely is this like
Speaker 1: even the systems that we think of as closed like
Speaker 1: Apple and Nintendo aren't really that closed. Otherwise no third
Speaker 1: party developer would ever be able to create anything for
Speaker 1: their platforms. Right. And then at the other side, UM,
Speaker 1: I'm trying to think of somebody who is really completely
Speaker 1: open as far as open source. But that's as close
Speaker 1: as you can get. Yeah. And the thing is, as
Speaker 1: Jonathan pointed out earlier, UM, Lennox is free and it's
Speaker 1: you know, the sources open, which is in the guts
Speaker 1: of the operating system are open for people to use.
Speaker 1: And there are distributions of Linux that are completely free
Speaker 1: for people to use, and there are others that. Uh.
Speaker 1: There is a purchase price because it is tailored two
Speaker 1: specific needs and usually has some support level of support
Speaker 1: built into that. So if you buy the software, then
Speaker 1: you can expect to have someone to call if you've
Speaker 1: got a problem. Yeah. Sometimes it's not the software itself
Speaker 1: that's that's got the price tag. It's the support. Yeah.
Speaker 1: So for example, Buntu is that way you can you
Speaker 1: can get a free version of a Buntu and install
Speaker 1: it on your computer. By the way, the debate part
Speaker 1: of this podcast is over In case you hadn't realized
Speaker 1: that We're now getting into the more informational side. Um. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the the and I think that went really well. The
Speaker 1: but Abuntu, you you can get that for free and
Speaker 1: install that on a machine for free. But if you
Speaker 1: want to have professional level support, then you can pay
Speaker 1: a certain amount of money and then you will have
Speaker 1: access to UM support staff, which could be anything from
Speaker 1: my computer isn't behaving properly, what is the what is
Speaker 1: the source of this problem? How do I fix it too?
Speaker 1: I'm running an actual closed network of machines in this
Speaker 1: one business, and I need to know how to set
Speaker 1: this up so that everything is secure that kind of
Speaker 1: it's it's all levels of support. Uh. And and you know,
Speaker 1: there are definitely arguments both for and against the closed
Speaker 1: and open systems, as we were demonstrating earlier. And it's
Speaker 1: not that one system is inherently better or worse than
Speaker 1: the other. They're just different philosophies on how to provide
Speaker 1: UM goods and services. Yeah. Really there the arguments we
Speaker 1: were making. I think, um, you know, there were good
Speaker 1: arguments on both sides. I think the it works better.
Speaker 1: There are arguments I've heard sort of like the ones
Speaker 1: the debate we just had that we're are more heated
Speaker 1: than that. You thin get the when you're actually thinking
Speaker 1: about both sides and not taking a side, it it
Speaker 1: kind of works better because really there are some benefits
Speaker 1: with with clothes, you do have things that just work, um,
Speaker 1: But with open you do have a lot more choice
Speaker 1: and the ability to tinker more with it. And it's
Speaker 1: sort of really, I think depends on what you're looking for.
Speaker 1: So this is why so many people use Windows because
Speaker 1: it's sort of an open closed system. Windows is Windows
Speaker 1: the sort of the middle ground. Uh, it's it's it
Speaker 1: leans closed. Yeah, it lands closed, but it has a
Speaker 1: lot of flexibility for people to build applications that run
Speaker 1: on Windows. So in that that sense, it's open in
Speaker 1: the in the way that you know, again, third party
Speaker 1: developers create the vast majority of software that runs on
Speaker 1: Windows based PCs. You know, very a small percentage of
Speaker 1: the software that runs on Windows based PCs comes from Microsoft.
Speaker 1: There there's there are very important applications that are on
Speaker 1: a typical Windows based PC that are from Microsoft. But
Speaker 1: you know, if you're like, if you're going to some
Speaker 1: video gamers house and you're looking at his rig and
Speaker 1: or her rig, I should say because you know, I've
Speaker 1: met some lead female video gamers who could wipe the
Speaker 1: floor with me in any game I've shows, which is
Speaker 1: very they're staring at you now as a matter of fact. Yeah,
Speaker 1: well I'll probably end up seeing some of them at
Speaker 1: c E s uh, and they'll again I won't challenge
Speaker 1: them that I already know how I would turn out anyway.
Speaker 1: So you but you go on, you look at the
Speaker 1: software on that person's computer, and you're gonna see that
Speaker 1: there's a ton of stuff on there that never came
Speaker 1: out of Microsoft. Uh. And same, the same sort of
Speaker 1: thing applies to Apple. It's not there. It's not as
Speaker 1: much software as far as just you know, sheer numbers
Speaker 1: as you would find for a Windows based PC. But
Speaker 1: you know, even Apple, which we think of as a
Speaker 1: really like a walled garden or a closed system, depends
Speaker 1: heavily on third party developers. If it didn't, the app
Speaker 1: store for the iPhone and iPad and and iPod touch
Speaker 1: would be empty. You know, there would be very few
Speaker 1: apps that you could run because Apple only provides a few. Um.
Speaker 1: But you know, they they they lean very heavily on
Speaker 1: third parbaty developers. Not at the same time, third parbaty,
Speaker 1: developers have to go through a very rigorous UH routine
Speaker 1: in order to submit an app and have it featured
Speaker 1: in the App Store, And of course if it's not
Speaker 1: in the App Store, technically you can't load it on
Speaker 1: an Apple device unless you've gone through the process of
Speaker 1: jail breaking it. But using it unaltered an unaltered Apple device,
Speaker 1: you can only load things that are through the the
Speaker 1: Apple's official App Store, So in that sense it's closed
Speaker 1: off because if it's not approved, then it doesn't go
Speaker 1: on the same thing with Nintendo. You know, they would
Speaker 1: certify the games that would go on their systems, and
Speaker 1: if it didn't get Nintendo certification, it didn't it didn't
Speaker 1: get made, didn't become available on the Nintendo. So uh,
Speaker 1: that's a closed way of looking at And again that
Speaker 1: goes to that sort of quality control argument where the
Speaker 1: closed the company perpetuating this closed system could argue that
Speaker 1: this means that we only have applications of a certain
Speaker 1: quality that we know are going to run properly on
Speaker 1: our hardware. They're not going to cause any problems with
Speaker 1: anything else running on our hardware, and they're going to
Speaker 1: deliver an experience that we you know, it reaches a
Speaker 1: certain level that we have come to expect with our
Speaker 1: our products. Um, whereas if you go with an open system,
Speaker 1: it's more like we want anyone to be able to
Speaker 1: potentially run anything on this system that's been designed for it,
Speaker 1: and we don't want to limit that at all. We
Speaker 1: don't want to put our biases against certain kinds of applications,
Speaker 1: are certain ways of creating stuff in play. We want
Speaker 1: it to be an open playground for everybody. Yeah. Yeah, well, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, for for Windows, you can argue, you can
Speaker 1: make the hardware argument, well, I can go and build
Speaker 1: my own system from the components that I can get
Speaker 1: in my my corner electronics store, and I can make
Speaker 1: my own system and install Windows on it, and it's
Speaker 1: gonna work. Of course, chances are that the there are
Speaker 1: drivers for the video card and there are drivers for
Speaker 1: all the devices that you're going to do it because
Speaker 1: you're running Windows on it, And you would also have
Speaker 1: to take considerations like, uh, which kind of motherboard are
Speaker 1: you using? Because only certain motherboards will support certain processors
Speaker 1: but not other processors. So yeah, you've got limitations on
Speaker 1: on you know, It's not like even building a PC
Speaker 1: from scratch is not totally open because some components are
Speaker 1: going to limit which other components you can actually put
Speaker 1: into your machine. In other words, not everything is compatible
Speaker 1: with everything else, which is uh for for people who
Speaker 1: are interested in dabbling with Lenox. That can be frustrating because, um,
Speaker 1: the drivers come around some some component manufacturers will write
Speaker 1: a driver for Lenox for their card or or device,
Speaker 1: but not all of them will, and so it relies
Speaker 1: on the community to put one in there. And for
Speaker 1: people who go, you know what, I really want to
Speaker 1: try one to or you know Lenox meant or you know,
Speaker 1: any of the others, and I want to try this out.
Speaker 1: So they put it the disk in there, they reboot
Speaker 1: their machines, and they'll find out that parts of their
Speaker 1: system don't don't quite work. Yeah, and the more the
Speaker 1: more frustrating for people who are just playing around. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the more obscure the elements are inside your machine, the
Speaker 1: less likely you're gonna find support just off the top
Speaker 1: of the bat. I mean, if it's something that's a
Speaker 1: really popular component, then you can it's a pretty safe
Speaker 1: bet that someone out there has created a driver for
Speaker 1: it for an open source operating system, just because you
Speaker 1: know law of averages. You've got a lot of people
Speaker 1: who are using the same kind of hardware, then there's
Speaker 1: a good chance someone has designed something so that that
Speaker 1: hardware will work properly with an open source operating system.
Speaker 1: But if you've got, you know, some cheap sound card
Speaker 1: that you found that it's made by someone that hardly
Speaker 1: anyone knows about, it may not have the support there
Speaker 1: in an open source operating system. But then you know,
Speaker 1: the same thing is true with if you if you
Speaker 1: upgrade a Windows based PC and you go to the
Speaker 1: newest form of Windows, often you will find that one
Speaker 1: of the big problems is that you'll lose um support
Speaker 1: for certain kinds of peripherals. The drivers will not update
Speaker 1: or they aren't compatible with the new operating system, and
Speaker 1: sometimes they gets patched, or sometimes the device manufacturers will
Speaker 1: release a new driver that works specifically with a new
Speaker 1: operating system. But you can get stuck that way too,
Speaker 1: so it's not like it's only with open source. In fact,
Speaker 1: that was one of the big problems that people were
Speaker 1: reporting with mac Os ten Lion, was that you know,
Speaker 1: if you upgraded that which is a closed system, you
Speaker 1: know what you're talking about a known quantity with Apple hardware.
Speaker 1: But if you upgraded, there were certain peripherals that they
Speaker 1: didn't have driver support anymore, and you know, or certain
Speaker 1: software that had no no longer had support, and it
Speaker 1: was software that was designed to run on the Mac
Speaker 1: operating system and yet could not run this newest version
Speaker 1: of the OS. UH. So it's not like it's a
Speaker 1: problem that's unique to open source. It can also happen
Speaker 1: in a closed system. UM. You know, the people who
Speaker 1: create closed systems would probably argue what happens less frequently,
Speaker 1: or that you might not have to wait as long.
Speaker 1: But that's you know, kind of splitting hairs. Yeah, that's um.
Speaker 1: That's another thing too for for operating systems that are
Speaker 1: designed by the community. UM, there's you know, it may
Speaker 1: be difficult to find a particular driver or piece of
Speaker 1: software simply because somebody may not necessarily be working on it.
Speaker 1: Depending on if there are vulnerabilities in the operating system
Speaker 1: the UH generally something like that is going to draw
Speaker 1: the attention of the community and will be fixed more quickly.
Speaker 1: Apple gets criticized from time to time when they find
Speaker 1: vulnerabilities in the operating system that could open the machine
Speaker 1: up to UH uh possible attack. UM you know, for
Speaker 1: not acting on it as quickly as Microsoft does with
Speaker 1: its patches. UM. You know. So there's there's a trade
Speaker 1: off there, UM, but there is I think there is
Speaker 1: some benefit in a way of being that more hybrid
Speaker 1: system because um, you know, that attracts the most users.
Speaker 1: I want some flexibility, but I want most mostly I
Speaker 1: want it to work. UM. So you get that sort
Speaker 1: of combo uh system. And that's really sort of what
Speaker 1: Android is really when you get down to it. Because
Speaker 1: Android works on a multitude of different phones, whereas iOS.
Speaker 1: Apple's iOS system works on Apple branded phones and those
Speaker 1: only UM and some of the others due to the
Speaker 1: the web os worked on the on the Palm phones,
Speaker 1: UM you know, those are those are closed systems. UM.
Speaker 1: Windows works on a on a variety of different phones.
Speaker 1: But the problem is for developers, and they find this
Speaker 1: with a variety of systems too, that um uh closed
Speaker 1: system is an easier target for them to hit. UM.
Speaker 1: One of the complaints I've heard from Android developers is that, uh,
Speaker 1: they have difficulty writing software that will work with all
Speaker 1: the different versions of the operating system they're out there,
Speaker 1: and all all these different phones with all the different
Speaker 1: hardware components, the thing being a part of the problem
Speaker 1: being the carriers, because they're not the ones not pushing
Speaker 1: out the operating system updates for the different phones. Some
Speaker 1: of the older updates are just lingering on. I'm not
Speaker 1: looking at you people who won't update my phone months
Speaker 1: after Jonathan's gotten his anyway, um anyhow, Yes, I'm beating
Speaker 1: the desk of my can because I'm angry with them.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I mean that's a it's a problem for
Speaker 1: developers a closed system. Hey, you know you have a
Speaker 1: specific range of components. You know what kind of processor
Speaker 1: in general is going to be in there. You have
Speaker 1: a pretty good idea what the operating system entails. You know,
Speaker 1: it's it's an easy target to hit. But the problem
Speaker 1: with in the Mac cases, fewer people are using it,
Speaker 1: so it's less it's a less desirable target hit because
Speaker 1: there are fewer dollars to be made by writing software
Speaker 1: for it. Trade off. Getting back to the idea of
Speaker 1: the clothes versus open and operate system updates, uh so,
Speaker 1: let's let's go ahead and we'll talk about Apple versus Google,
Speaker 1: because that's that's pretty easy. And even then again, Apple
Speaker 1: is not totally a close stem and Google. Google is
Speaker 1: certainly not totally an open system. But it's a different approach, right,
Speaker 1: Like you were saying, Uh, the iOS is only going
Speaker 1: to appear on iPhones, You're not going to find that
Speaker 1: another hardware. Um, it's because the iPhone was designed to
Speaker 1: do it. That That's the way Apple once it done,
Speaker 1: it's and that's how it's intended. So yeah, sticking with
Speaker 1: phones because that makes it it makes illustration, makes illustration.
Speaker 1: Uh So then on the Android side, Android can theoretically
Speaker 1: be added to Like a manufacturer can choose to partner
Speaker 1: with Google and create an Android phone. It's free, it's
Speaker 1: pretty system is free. They can they can just build.
Speaker 1: All you have to do is build hardware that is
Speaker 1: capable of supporting Android, and then they are allowed to
Speaker 1: have Android as the operating system for that smartphone. So
Speaker 1: two different approaches. Um. Now with Apple, when there's an
Speaker 1: OS update for iOS, Apple can push that out to
Speaker 1: all the different devices that can still support that iOS.
Speaker 1: But there's still going to be some that get left
Speaker 1: behind eventually, just because the physical limitations of hardware will
Speaker 1: be reached, you won't be able to go beyond this.
Speaker 1: So if you have a first generation iPhone, it's only
Speaker 1: going to run iOS up to a certain point, and
Speaker 1: after that you're never gonna get an update again, because
Speaker 1: you've reached the capacity of what that hardware is capable
Speaker 1: of achieving without having a completely unsatisfying experience using that iPhone. Well,
Speaker 1: they could just never make a newer one, except then
Speaker 1: everyone would have what they were going to buy and
Speaker 1: there wouldn't be any reason for them upgrade. So anyway,
Speaker 1: Uh but yeah, But but if you have a fairly
Speaker 1: recent like usually it's within for the last three generations,
Speaker 1: the latest one, the one right before that, and maybe
Speaker 1: the one before that, you typically are able to get
Speaker 1: the latest um software upgrade. You might eventually get left behind,
Speaker 1: like the three GS is probably getting pretty close to
Speaker 1: its upper limits right now. But uh, you know, meanwhile,
Speaker 1: when you go over to the Android side, you have
Speaker 1: all these different carriers and they're all having they all
Speaker 1: have handsets with different capabilities, and uh, you know, some
Speaker 1: of those handsets might be able to run the latest
Speaker 1: version of Android and some of them might not, you know,
Speaker 1: or if they were to run the latest version of Android,
Speaker 1: the handset might get really hot and the battery might
Speaker 1: drain really quickly, so you would have a very unhappy
Speaker 1: experience u seeing it, even if you had the lace version.
Speaker 1: You're like, well, I've got the lace version, but my
Speaker 1: phone lasts for two hours, then it's dead, and at
Speaker 1: the whole time it feels like it's gonna set my
Speaker 1: pants on fire. Um, make all the excuses you want,
Speaker 1: they still haven't pushed it out to my phone. Okay,
Speaker 1: Well for some people, like Chris setting your pants on fire,
Speaker 1: apparently it's a feature, not a bug. Um, but what
Speaker 1: kills there? You go, Okay, well we've all learned something
Speaker 1: new about christa. Um. So yeah, the the that is
Speaker 1: that is one of the downsides. Now again, like Chris
Speaker 1: was saying, you've got a lot more choice with the
Speaker 1: open system. So if you want a phone that has
Speaker 1: a certain processor in it or has a certain kind
Speaker 1: of camera in it, you've got a lot more choice
Speaker 1: than you would if you are on the other side.
Speaker 1: Closestem You've got you know, with the closestem you essentially
Speaker 1: have the latest version of it, and usually the one
Speaker 1: directly before it, and maybe the one before that. And
Speaker 1: uh yeah, I mean you have all the people that
Speaker 1: have adopted and and Android numbers that we've that have
Speaker 1: been coming out as of about the time that we're
Speaker 1: recording this in very very late. Um, Android numbers are
Speaker 1: taking off. I mean they're far outstripping apples iPhone new
Speaker 1: customers even as fast as the iPhone sales. And I
Speaker 1: think there are two big reasons. But I'm sorry, go ahead,
Speaker 1: Well I was gonna say, is that, well, go ahead, Well,
Speaker 1: the two big reasons I see is one, there's way
Speaker 1: more choice. Yeah, right, so you've got like all these
Speaker 1: different options. And two there are a lot more lower
Speaker 1: cost options out there, Like with the iPhone you've got
Speaker 1: you know, you've got the latest version, which is going
Speaker 1: to be pretty expensive, and then the older version, which
Speaker 1: is slightly less expensive. But you're not gonna find any
Speaker 1: like bargain bin types off you're not gonna come across.
Speaker 1: I don't know if anyone who's ever offered like a
Speaker 1: free iPhone with a two year contract, but there have
Speaker 1: been Android phones, the older ones. Yeah, um, actually low
Speaker 1: cost I guess maybe not free. Um. Well, that the
Speaker 1: thing is that now that that Android is becoming the
Speaker 1: big target for developers in its class. Um, you know,
Speaker 1: there are all kinds of apps that are out there
Speaker 1: and available for it. Um. They're also all kinds of
Speaker 1: app stores that you can use to You don't have
Speaker 1: to go through just the Google Marketplace if you don't
Speaker 1: want to, although you do have to change a setting
Speaker 1: on your phone in order to be able to access them.
Speaker 1: That that's correct. Um. The thing is, though, the bigger
Speaker 1: the target, the more people the developers of all kinds,
Speaker 1: including malware developers, It attracts that um not you know,
Speaker 1: this has nothing to do with the quality of the
Speaker 1: operating system or the security measures inherent in the operating system.
Speaker 1: It's just a bigger target and therefore it's a um,
Speaker 1: a juicier place to strike for the person and even
Speaker 1: the legit people too. I mean, hey, I can I
Speaker 1: can sell my app in this app store and reach
Speaker 1: five thousand people. I can sell my app in this
Speaker 1: app store and reach five million people itself far more
Speaker 1: over here. The thing is, though, and also UH and
Speaker 1: I would argue that this is the case for any
Speaker 1: tech that has reached that kind of UH adoption rate,
Speaker 1: that it also inspires a lot of junk. I mean,
Speaker 1: we saw it with Attari when opened up the platform
Speaker 1: and allowed other people to write software for it. They
Speaker 1: were all kind of that's what caused the video game crept,
Speaker 1: which is where I was getting into the whole curation
Speaker 1: argument in the debate. If you are using an open system,
Speaker 1: then you're gonna have a lot more choice with when
Speaker 1: it comes to not just you know, options, but but
Speaker 1: apps that you can run. But that also means that
Speaker 1: with the good comes a lot of bad, not that
Speaker 1: the closed systems necessarily you know, it's not that Apple
Speaker 1: is free of bad apps. There are plenty of bad
Speaker 1: apps in the Apple App Store, So I don't mean
Speaker 1: to say that, but no, no, it because that there's
Speaker 1: not necessarily like there's no qualifier to create an app
Speaker 1: for Google, and you can submit to the Google Marketplace,
Speaker 1: or you can even host it somewhere else if you
Speaker 1: want to and not even go through the the process
Speaker 1: of submitting it to Google market and people can still
Speaker 1: find it and download it to their shorts or tablets,
Speaker 1: you know, mobile devices. Um, but yeah, that curation becomes
Speaker 1: a problem because then if you've got that much choice
Speaker 1: and there's no like, there's no one out there who's
Speaker 1: kind of curating this for you, it all falls on
Speaker 1: your shoulders. And uh, that can just get exhausting. I mean,
Speaker 1: I mean looking through just the list of applications, uh,
Speaker 1: just you know, going page by page. You sit there
Speaker 1: and think, well, I could look at the ones that
Speaker 1: are the most popular and use that as kind of
Speaker 1: a guide of curation. But it may very well be
Speaker 1: that the app that really meets my needs is eight
Speaker 1: pages down. And you know that gets kind of frustrating
Speaker 1: after a while. Um. Yeah, And it's it's It's funny
Speaker 1: too because one of the things that to some people
Speaker 1: have said against Lenox. I mean, I've I've used a
Speaker 1: couple of different flavors of Linux. I really like the
Speaker 1: operating system. I Um, I don't like that there are
Speaker 1: fewer people writing software for it, but I still I
Speaker 1: love the idea, and I like the operating system an
Speaker 1: awful lot um and the more I play with it,
Speaker 1: the more I've enjoyed using it. But the thing is,
Speaker 1: some people have said that the fact that it's free
Speaker 1: is a problem because it sort of encourages people to
Speaker 1: think that it's not actually worth anything. Right, it should
Speaker 1: have money. It gives it gives a It gives some
Speaker 1: people the feeling that, well, if it's free, it must
Speaker 1: not be very good. Because yeah, because you know, if
Speaker 1: it were good, I'd have to pay money for it,
Speaker 1: which is untrue. Which is funny because if you had
Speaker 1: to pay money for it, people will be trying to
Speaker 1: find a way around having to pay money for it.
Speaker 1: Now you're you're making my brain hurt. Here's the crazy Okay,
Speaker 1: stereotypical computer user, stereotypical Internet savvy computer user. All right,
Speaker 1: if something doesn't cost money, then it's not worth having.
Speaker 1: If it's If something costs money, it's worth having, but
Speaker 1: you shouldn't pay for it. Yeah, like you are a
Speaker 1: messed up person. Typical computer user. You need to re
Speaker 1: examine your priorities. Yeah, yeah, well I think And by
Speaker 1: the way, I was once like you, well, I think yeah,
Speaker 1: ideally to me anyway, And I think it does come
Speaker 1: down to personal choice. I think ideally, Um, I do
Speaker 1: prefer a hybrid. I do want I don't want to
Speaker 1: have to. I like the idea of being able to
Speaker 1: hack into things and being able to make choices and
Speaker 1: fool around with stuff, but I want it at the end,
Speaker 1: I wanted to be able to work. I don't want
Speaker 1: to spend all my time hacking with it. I was like, Okay,
Speaker 1: I'm done now. I want to close the hood and
Speaker 1: play on it, and I can't. Kind it broke. And
Speaker 1: we both own devices that run Android, and we both
Speaker 1: own devices that run Apple operating systems, so we both
Speaker 1: own Windows computers. Yeah, so I mean, it's it's not
Speaker 1: like it's not like we're saying this as fanboys of
Speaker 1: one system versus another, even though we played that in
Speaker 1: the debate. Um, I mean I I own an Android phone.
Speaker 1: My wife has an iPhone, and we are both very
Speaker 1: happy with our devices for very different reasons. It meets
Speaker 1: exactly what she wants in a smartphone, but for me
Speaker 1: it would probably be it's a beautiful device and it
Speaker 1: has a great interface, but it probably would be more
Speaker 1: frustrating to me than my Android phone, which meets my needs.
Speaker 1: Whereas the Android phone, I know for a fact, would
Speaker 1: annoy and irritate my wife because she used to have
Speaker 1: one and she doesn't anymore and she never will again
Speaker 1: because she's very happy with her iPhone. So again, it's
Speaker 1: too just two different people and two different uh preferences
Speaker 1: for the operating system. It's it's not that one is
Speaker 1: inherently better or worse than the other. It's just that
Speaker 1: it suits mine you know, one suits my needs and
Speaker 1: one suits sers. Yeah. Yeah, it's it's it all comes
Speaker 1: down to the stuff that matters to the individual. Um.
Speaker 1: And in the end, I think it's it's uh, most
Speaker 1: people sort of go for the mix of things. Well,
Speaker 1: I want this part to just work, but the rest
Speaker 1: of it I want to be able to fool around with.
Speaker 1: And I think that's another one of the appeals of Windows.
Speaker 1: It's it's sort of that middle ground. Um. You know, like,
Speaker 1: like I said, we all own the various devices, and
Speaker 1: we all see the value and and the limitations of
Speaker 1: each system. Um. I think I think it really you know,
Speaker 1: if if, however you're going about it, if you're dedicated
Speaker 1: to making the best possible product or service that you
Speaker 1: that you possibly can, whether it's as a member of
Speaker 1: the community of the open source world, or if it's
Speaker 1: you know, a closed system, I think that is what's
Speaker 1: most important to me. The whole open versus closed is
Speaker 1: just a general philosophy that guides your your development process.
Speaker 1: It's not something that you know, I should definitely be
Speaker 1: you know, uh endorsed or or or scorned. Well, it
Speaker 1: frustrates me listening to people talk about it and seeing
Speaker 1: comments online from people who are so devoted to one
Speaker 1: side or the other that they will scream and call
Speaker 1: names and use profanity to definite side and going. But
Speaker 1: I mean, I see, I see arguments for both sides,
Speaker 1: and yeah, I think there are valid points for both ye.
Speaker 1: And it's it is a dangerous thing because once you
Speaker 1: get once you become a fan of a certain way
Speaker 1: of doing things, then it almost feels like if someone
Speaker 1: else praises a different way of doing it, that it's
Speaker 1: somehow an Yeah, it's an attack against what you like,
Speaker 1: which isn't necessarily the case. It's yeah, no, it's definitely
Speaker 1: not fair. But it does happen all the time. I
Speaker 1: see it all the time where someone will praise one
Speaker 1: system and someone else takes that as hey, you're saying
Speaker 1: that the system I like sucks, And no, that's not
Speaker 1: what I said. I just said that this system was
Speaker 1: also good. I didn't even mention your system. Please don't
Speaker 1: yell at me trolls. So if you want to know
Speaker 1: more about that, listen to our podcast on how trolls
Speaker 1: work East Jonathan Strickland in the operating system you like stinks? Right? Yeah, Okay, Well,
Speaker 1: that that's a good summary. This was fun. I don't
Speaker 1: know that will necessarily do any more debates, but this
Speaker 1: was we just decided, like I said off the top
Speaker 1: of the bat, yeah, maybe we'll do another one where
Speaker 1: we'll do a very specific debate and how to pick
Speaker 1: two different things that that clearly have a divider between them.
Speaker 1: In fact, we get a third person in here. We
Speaker 1: could do the Xbox versus PlayStation versus Nintendo throwdown, which
Speaker 1: would be a blast. We have one person just crying
Speaker 1: in the corner and say alright, so guys, if you
Speaker 1: have any suggestions for future debates or other podcast let's know,
Speaker 1: let's go on Facebook or Twitter. Are handled. There is
Speaker 1: tech stuff hs W and Chris and I will talk
Speaker 1: to you again really soon. This episode of tech Stuff
Speaker 1: is brought to you by Hover dot com. However his
Speaker 1: domain name registration and management. That's simple. Upgrade to a
Speaker 1: premium domain and trade in your old clunkers. Visit hub
Speaker 1: dot com. Slash tech Stuffs brought to you by the
Speaker 1: reinvented two thousand twelve camera. It's ready, are you