Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes, it is setting a dangerous precedent. A general purpose computing device is now a "service" that you need to pay for. With that logic you can call anything a service. An OS is a service that lets you stream "unlimited" video to your display. Given the level of greed displayed by Apple, they're going to setup a tollbooth at every single spot they can. Maybe Intel can setup the ultimate tollbooth on their CPU by providing a "computing service" that lets you use their CPU for an "unlimited" amount of time. Tech is so depressing these days.. :(


Yes, OSes are a service. Do you expect the consumer to patch security bugs in the OS as they are discovered? Doesn't a steady, predictable, stream of regular "OS Updates" entrench the fact that OSes are indeed services?

Honestly, tech was depressing in those days when NHS was running on Windows XP. Oh wait; yes, you're right. "These" days are still around today :(

https://www.tripwire.com/state-of-security/healthcare/nhs-co...


A product like an OS can have an associated maintenance plan / service that you can pay for. Agreed.


It does not "set" any new precedent at all, nor is said precedent "dangerous" in any way.


I think it is. Sorry, I don't see anything else I can reply to in your comment.


Software has always, since it was first sold in the 1960s, been a licensed product/service. You never owned anything - you had a contract for a certain set of functionality and support, maybe upgrades.

Tolls like the above were how the mainframe started and are nothing new.

We had a historical anomaly with the PC being a hobby platform at its roots where everything felt so free. Legally it never was, that was a marketing fiction created by Apple, Microsoft, IBM and others.


What I'm getting at is the subversion of the control of the platform from the user to the vendor. Maybe it was due to the technical limitations of the time, or the sensibilities of geek-culture, but the vendor never controlled the device once they sold it to you. You didn't need to beg for permission to compile software on mainframes.


I think a lot of this is because of the hobbiest roots of the PC, it was never taken seriously as a commercial device at first, and had broad tinkering support from the early days. They never could really abandon that stance because of those who adopted new products.

Any attempt to do a sealed experience for average users was subpar in execution... except perhaps gaming consoles.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: