Can you point out the clauses and phrases which lead you to that conclusion? I'm not trying to be obstinate; I don't come to that same conclusion and I'm curious about your interpretations.
Hi Tim,
I don't thinkg you are obstinate. I stated something. You want more information. I agree it's fair. Let's go see a bit and then i'll explain you why i think what i think:
1. General.
(a) The software (including Boot ROM code and other embedded software), documentation, interfaces,
content,
fonts and any data that came with your iOS Device ("Original iOS Software"), as may be
updated or replaced by feature enhancements, software updates or system restore software provided by
Apple ("iOS Software Updates"), whether in read only memory, on any other media or in any other form
(the Original iOS Software and iOS Software Updates are collectively referred to as the “iOS Software")
are licensed, not sold, to you by Apple Inc. ("Apple") for use only under the terms of this License. Apple
and its licensors retain ownership of the iOS Software itself and reserve all rights not expressly granted
to you....
- It's true many others have the same take on this. However Apple has been pursuing this area with unprecedented aggressivity.
e. This License
does not grant you any rights to use Apple proprietary interfaces and other
intellectual property in the design, development, manufacture, licensing or distribution of third party
devices and accessories, or third party software applications, for use with iOS Devices
- This doesn't exist in Android for example. You simply do whatever you like. And that's why you have such a variety of things you can do on it.
(c) You may not, and you agree not to or enable others to, copy (except as expressly permitted by this
License), decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, attempt to derive the source code of, decrypt,
modify, or create derivative works of the iOS Software or any services provided by the iOS Software or
any part thereof (except as and only to the extent any foregoing restriction is prohibited by applicable
law or by licensing terms governing use of open-source components that may be included with the iOS
Software).
- Again, this is case of striking difference between open and close ecosystems. I agree you'll tell me WP is the same after you read this. However A) Android is not and B) Microsoft since Mobile 6.5 has always been very very flexible in regards to this. Apple is famous for being very very selfish and greedy and protective in these areas.
3. Transfer. You may not rent, lease, lend, sell, redistribute, or sublicense the iOS Software. You may,
however, make a one-time permanent transfer of all of your license rights to the iOS Software to another
party in connection with the transfer of ownership of your iOS Device, provided that: (a) the transfer must
include your iOS Device and all of the iOS Software, including all its component parts, original media,
printed materials and this License; (b) you do not retain any copies of the iOS Software, full or partial,
including copies stored on a computer or other storage device; and (c) the party receiving the iOS
Software reads and agrees to accept the terms and conditions of this License.
The section above looks perfectly in line with all major software producers, EXCEPT section B is at times not seen in other products.
These are just a few. We have to consider not only the striking difference between OPEN and CLOSED OS (And whatever stays in the middle, like WP in my opinion) but also the way Apple has built a reputation as very selfish aggressive company in protecting its own devices.
This adds up to what i said before. It's a very closed system that doesn't allow for the level of flexibility users like me require and doesn't offer the level of "perceived liberty of choice" people like me want in their device.
Bear in mind that is not just my interpretation. It's how Apple is considered and perceived by a vast variety of users in Europe and Asia. The fact such limitations come at a higher price in our markets just worsens the opinion on the product. This is a generic outlook. My personal stance is also that i follow any company allowing me free to create or customize my device without affecting my privacy (too much). Android used to be this. Since Google "evolved" its strategy compelling users to join G+ i got the same reaction and distanced myself from their platform. It's gradual..but it's happening.
So summing up, my opinion on Apple is not only due to the fact they have certain legal limitations open systems don't have (and some closed ones take more flexibly), but also in the way they attack users to keep their ecosystem protected. It's a concept i don't share. That is why i claimed "They are never yours". Something you can't customize, change, modify and has so many limitations can't be yours. iOS and Windows represent a good example in this. I buy a copy of Windows 8 and then can do so much stuff on it (despite MSFT limitations on paper) that the system becomes mine. On iOS you can't. Android allows you to do whatever you want, Linux goes a step further. This also reflects in their mobile platforms.
Hope this explains better.