The Route Of All Evil
Apple's iPad & The Threat To Net Neutrality
With the recent announcement
Apple would begin selling its runaway hit iPhone through Verizon
Wireless (likely prompting a stampede of customers away from
problem-plagued AT&T), Apple seems poised to completely dominate
the Internet in ways service providers have only dreamed about.
Having moved from desktop to laptop to netbook to iPhone (too
small) and, finally, to the iPad (just right), the average
consumer no longer accesses the Internet via desktop PC’s or,
for that matter, via Wi-Fi. The average net surfer these days is
connecting through mobile networks provided by cell phone
subscriber services. The Galaxy Tab makes a brave stand for
better portability in its trimmer package, but fumbles the ball
by pricing its 7-inch screen the same as iPad’s 9 glorious
inches. Neither device is particularly appealing to people
needing to do actual work as in both cases the virtual keyboard
covers most of the screen. Apple has released a Bluetooth
keyboard for its iPad that nicely and elegantly turns the iPad
into an effective netbook—a kind of knockout blow for the Tab
which, even with a nifty set of Bluetooth keys—would still be
too small for squint-free computing. I am, nevertheless, a big
fan of he Tab for one reason: its Google Chrome browser displays
my websites properly and it runs Flash. Apple’s MacIrritant
iPhone and iPad do not. iPhones, iPods and iPads are, hands
down, the hottest toys of this current generation, embraced by
millions approaching billions of consumers. But the devices’
fans seem unconcerned by the fact Apple’s marketing and
technology strategy poses a credible threat to our basic civil
rights, rights most i-Users simply hand over to Apple and its
mobile partners without a second thought.
Most people I know have their noses buried in their iPhones and
Droids and this concept—Net Neutrality—just bores them. They
dismiss it and me with a hand wave and continue plunking away on
their slave-toys. The apps are so cool, it doesn’t seem to
bother anyone I know that Apple is practicing censorship and
getting away with it. And, unless either government or the
private sector (competition such as the Galaxy Tab) force
Apple’s hand, the mobile computing giant will continue to lay
down the law of who’s in and who’s out of the mobile net.
Thank God for Samsung.
The first iPad challenger out the box is the Galaxy Tab, a
leaner, more compact version of the iPad. Its smaller size may
be a good or bad thing depending on who you are, but all I care
about is it runs Flash. Which means, when you surf the net on a
Galaxy Tab, you actually see the web, not a bunch of blank
screens as you do on an iPad. I am shocked and amazed no smart
marketing agency has exploited that major flaw in iPad, running
a series of humorous commercials featuring hapless iPad owners
attempting to surf the web on it and encountering blank screen
after blank screen. By
allowing Flash to run, the Galaxy Tab keeps the Internet, to
whatever extent, competitive and does not force everybody to
build or buy apps. How long that will last is anybody's guess,
but I'm hoping there will be a stampede toward devices like the
Galaxy Tab and away from the proprietary and ridiculous
blank-screen web surfing on the iPad. This will hopefully force
Apple, the 800-pound gorilla of mobile internet, to stop
endangering the entire future of communication by putting up
toll booths on both ends of the information superhighway. Of
course, Apple is so deeply entrenched, this may not be likely.
but I, or should I say "i," for one, will be skipping the iPad
until something comes out that doesn't bait-and-switch me on the
promise of mobile web surfing. iPad offers a quality mobile web
surfing experience only via apps from their store: YouTube app,
New York Times app, etc. Considering the fact that everything is
moving from the desktop and laptop to your back pocket, Apple
and Verizon and other carriers' little app store mess is a real
threat to the whole point of the Internet: that there are no big
guys or little guys, and that we are all connected. Thanks,
Samsung, for hurling the first stone.
Free speech is a precious commodity,
yet most people I know—young and old—don’t understand it and
don’t fully appreciate it. Further, they don’t seem to
understand what happens to us as a society once that speech is
taken away. Blocking sites, slowing sites down, stripping sites
of content—these are things China does. Russia does. Deciding
what is and what is not appropriate or suitable is fascism. The
rules of the Internet road have been vague at best, but I
believe providers should have the right to open or close the
door, but not to decide what comes through it. Connect to the
Internet or don’t. Apple’s strategy is mostly about making the
Internet pay, something content providers have strived to do for
years. By making a deliberately crappy browser, the iPhone
experience is greatly enhanced by the user Apps. Yes, you can go
to the New York Times website, but you’ll enjoy the read more on
your iPad with the NYT app. Most of these apps, including those
for the Android operating system, provide a far better
experience for the mobile devices than traditional web surfing.
This is mainly due to the limitations in screen size on these
devices and the fact we have to use our big, fat fingers to
navigate the websites. Traditional web links tend to seem
microscopic on teeny-weeny web pages as displayed on mobile
phones. The apps, on the other hand, are custom-designed for the
phone (or tablet) interface.
The added benefit of these Apps (squint less) is certainly worth
the small premium they charge, but that choice should be ours to
make. Surfing the web on Apple’s idiotic mobile browser brings
up a host of sites with big black holes in them where Flash
content would normally go. It is irritating and frustrating,
this very site coming up in jigsaw pieces. Am I a bad coder?
Probably, but that’s not the point. The point is, I am convinced
Apple deliberately provides a fairly crappy web experience on
their devices in order to convince you to head to the App store
and look for the PraiseNet App, for which they (Apple) will
receive some small fee. Even if we provide that App to you for
“free,” please understand Apple charges the provider a fee for
each and every download, whether you the end user pay for the
app or not.
This is smart for business, but it is dangerous to our most
critical civil rights. Apple should show us the whole Internet
or not at all. AT&T and now Verizon, along with Sprint, have all
implemented varying versions of a fee structure for web content
providers. The more the content provider pays, the higher the
priority their site receives and the faster their site will
load. Which means the guy with the most bucks speaks the
loudest. The entire point of the Internet is that there is no
big or small guys. Your website speaks just as loudly as MSN or
even Google. The web is a level playing field, a place open to
free speech and an open society. But It’s been polluted, not
only by porn and spam, but by an utter disintegration of our
privacy as we, well you people, continue to stupidly publish
lists of names, addresses, phone numbers, birthdates, favorite
colors, and other personal info to social networking sites and
even online “back-ups” of your phone’s address book. My name,
address, birthday, phone and other personal info is all over the
net because of friends and business associates who use online
back-ups and/or social networking. Without my permission,
they’ve loaded my info somewhere, trusting some website or
network’s privacy policy, without stopping to consider that site
could go out of business or, as we see all the time, be hacked
into. Every single time you load personal information—yours or
someone else’s—onto a server somewhere—including (I can’t
believe people actually do this) these “free online backups” of
your hard drive or cell phone data—you are literally handing
over your privacy and the privacy of anyone whose name and
information you’ve stored. This idiocy—people just typing
personal info into the wind like this—is so pervasive, my
suspicion is our privacy rights are now all but meaningless as,
I promise you, there is a server out there with your name on it.
Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ sudden departure for medical leave kind of
rattled the cages in the Apple continuum last week, but there
seems nothing but horizon ahead for the i-devices. The closed,
controlled environment of the app is quickly challenging the
open environment of the web, as even laptops and desktops are
getting into the App swing. Business loves it because, finally,
there’s a way to get paid for producing web content. End users
love it because Apps are optimized to provide a superior
experience than web browsing. So who loses? You do. I do.
Because, while it may not yet seem so, all the hammering of tool
booths along the web will ultimately determine what you can and
cannot do or say, and all of your thoughtless typing of
names—yours and your friends and family—into the Internet
mushroom cloud will, I promise you, come back to haunt you as
you realize that stuff is nowhere near as safe as content
providers promise you it is. All of which is something literally none of my friends even
think about as they clack away on their handhelds, indifferent
to the very freedom and rights they are handing over, gleefully,
ignorantly and stupidly.
And, yes, there's an app for that.
Christopher J. Priest
23 January 2011
editor@praisenet.org
TOP OF PAGE
