--- On Mon, 8/17/09, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
> > So it is not so much about *easy* vs. *hard*, but who
> controls the
> > code running on the machine.
>
> If I felt like playing with Unix on this gadget, I could.
> It's one of the last things I'd like to do. But I could if I
> felt differently.
>
> But for about 99% of humanity, they just want a machine
> that's easy to use. For some unspecified, and probably
> smaller, portion of humanity, they want it to look and feel
> nice too. So you answered my question - this is mainly for
> geeks. Fine. To each hir own.
>
[WS:] This is true only to a point. If computers were, say, automobiles it would indeed matter little who holds patent rights to any individual part. After the purchase, the owner would fully control the machine and its uses as long as it is mechanically sound.
With computers, however, a simple change of code can deny you any use of the machine or even access to what you created on it in the past. Many applications do not allow you to access any data file, even though that you created, if your license expires. And it is quite feasible that they can lock your machine altogether with one of those constant "updates" if they decide that you need to buy a different one or that the content stored on it is "inappropriate" in their opinion. It is not much different that Orwellian big brother controlling your memory if not thoughts.
So it matters quite a bit who controls the code running on the machine, even though all what most people do with that code is limited to mundane tasks.
Wojtek