Really? How can one not realize you have no control over them other than through your wallet? It is naive to think differently...

Of course there is a reason...those in power will only seek to maintain or maximize that power. Why should they care about you if you're already paying for something, you've already voted! If you don't like it, see my sentence above... vote by wallet or shut up.

I find it hilarious that people choose to complain over something they can actually control. If you don't like it, then stop using your iPhone. If you like your iPhone (and applications) enough then quit your bit$hin and stop thinking you should have a say in the closed platform because you don't and never will...

Exactly! He was not fired because of some crazy woman and her true OR false allegations. He was fired for stealing money from his company. Heck, if one of us peons did it we'd probably have formal charges brought up versus a nice slap on the wrist and a retirement to a second tier CEO position.

If I were an Alien and had the choice over the Ark and and a spacecraft. I'd definitely choose the stale air of a spacecraft over the smelly horse, elephant and other assorted creature excrement filled air on the ark. Not to mention the cool freeze dried food!

If we don't take action now we'll end up with "public Internet utility" companies just like we have "public Gas and Electricity" companies. In reality they receive federal funds to keep them operating but they answer only to their stockholders and not the people. If they answered to the people...wait for it...wait for it...we'd be communists? (For those of you that think that, go look up the definition.) Nope, we wouldn't be, we'd actually have a democracy where everyone has an equal voice. Unfortunately we operate in a plutocracy (the US). My voice doesn't count as much as the board members of "insert utility company here." In order to get around this issue, the US Government along with State Governments should create a totally separate network infrastructure. We could actually catch up to most other countries, create jobs, rid ourselves of the aging copper base, and actually have a network clearly subject to the government and to the people. Then we could have a public regulatory agency lease lines to private operators to do what they want to do with their own little network on the greater public network. As it stands now we have a hodgepodge of backbone providers (funded by the US government not for the people but for the good of the lobbyists) that allow us peasants to use their network as they see fit (think telcos, cellphones, you name any communication device here...). How about that idea Slashdot? Ideally it'd be nice if the board/regulatory agency that would oversee the Internet 3, were made up of local citizens from each state with strict term limits and strict operating parameters, because I'm not a fan of ye olde Uncle Sam running it with his lobbyist sons and daughters.

So the only music we can own is distributed on CD? Or is that not true either? What music can we own if not some of the "digital crap" being shoveled?

They did? So all label music is DRM free now? Hrm...so now it's the resellers/distributors putting DRM on tracks?

Why should one have to pay to "upgrade" music they already own. In essence, they're trying to get us used to "renting" items and no longer "owning" them like we did before... I should be able to upgrade the track without a fee if I've already "bought" it.

I thought this depended on the label?

I've never been to WWDC. It's on my "todo list." It'd be great to talk to some of their developers but the cynic in me has to point out that most company workers "tow the line." On a similar note, I'm actually very impressed with Steve Jobs late night e-mail conversation with a gawker reporter. Although I might not agree with the censorship part, I am absolutely in awe that Steve would enter into such a conversation, and give such candid responses.

Webkit is LGPL. Good point. You also mention other open source projects Apple has supported. And I guess it would be silly not to mention the ones listed on their sources page. I think Adobe has something similar...

On the music front, it is important to remember they publish some of their music without DRM, but I believe they still have quite a lot of it that is not only tied to their service, but to their device ecosystem.

Please realize I'm not necessarily "bashing" the companies. They're doing what a lot of companies continue to do because we, "the market," let them... I will mention that I am personally pissed at Apple because their popularity is in large part due to the counterculture of "geeks" who pined for something different, yet useful, elegant and dare I say "easy."

Again, you bring up good points, but I still think both companies are seriously abusing the "FOSS" movement for the sake of marketing themselves as being "more open" when neither are truly open. Tricking users into thinking you're "better than the less open people" is tantamount to selling people "fresh air;" both are vaporous and in the end, quite useless, as we're all part of the same ecosystem.

Hrm...facebook? Really?

And Google, in some ways, constantly dances on the precipice.

Have you not read the recent findings by Lady Ada et al???

Open Hardware Making Tons of Money What about open software companies that are still doing well?

Also, please narrow your definition of 'everything.' We only want open specifications (and/or open code). I don't have to give you a "double-click executable."

No one is forcing you to buy their product. Why does it matter if they lock others out? As long as they don't have a monopoly like the company you cited...who cares...

I find it very disheartening that both companies are going to great lengths to show just how "OPEN" they are, when neither of them are even close to being "open" or really staunch supporters of all things "open." Both companies have jockeyed, in open and/or behind closed doors, to make standards their bi*ches and now they complain because their "industry standards" are being threatened.

This in turn has caused people to complain loudly about "freedom!!!" I want my freedom? I ask, freedom from what? You're now encountering what Stallman et al have been talking about for ages! You're only free as far as a company's whims says you are... Ohh, now I'm supposed to feel sad for those that hooked their toolset to Adobe? or to Apple for that matter? Why not focus on developing truly standards compliant applications with Open tools and let the companies come to us for a change rather than us bowing to them for the next release? We are all masters of our own domains, now "buck up" and act like it.

I would have read the article if Tom Cruise were mentioned...

From the Article:

The banks welcomed the ruling. Merrill spokesman Bill Halldin called it a "milestone in regaining control over the distribution of our proprietary research and preserving the value of our investment ideas for our clients."

Hrm... so if I were to publish my proprietary information online, our say, outside of my house, then people read it and used it before I could make money from it I can sue them for losses? Wow! what a novel idea banks!

I've got a better one, why don't you lock the content away behind a login and share it with it client until you believe it be of insufficient value, then release it? Brilliant!

People are people, so why does it really matter if they have one set of facilities versus another? If they're are good at what they do, and get along with the gender spectrum, does it really matter in the end? If it is a matter of perspective on problems and what various minds bring to the "table of innovation," how does one account for the rest of the gender spectrum and what they have to offer versus just the two polar sides of it?