[Opinion] On Stallman, the iPhone and false freedoms

stallman-crazy

NOTE: This is an opinion piece. Its objective is neither to impose nor to demonstrate anything, I simply want to express my point of view on the subject to the community.

Let's start by clarifying things:

I am a user of Fedora Linux for more than 5 years. and recently i changed my phone android for iPhone. If you want to know why I consider the iPhone to be a better option as a mobile device (even for a Linux user) than a phone with Google's OS (with fundamentals, tests and comparisons), I invite you to read this review I did, where I explain everything what could go through your head (or at least I try to do it):

From Android to iOS: Chronicle of an immigration experience

And if, like me, you are a Linux user who is thinking of acquiring an iDevice, here I leave you a very complete guide I did on how to manage your iDevice in Linux completely no need to use iTunes or other emulated / virtualized proprietary software. (Because friends don't let friends use iTunes):

How to manage / sync your iOS 7 device under Linux (natively)

Now yes: Since I switched from Android to iOS, to the majority of geeky users in online communities out there they did not care As much as I do not care to know what they had for breakfast yesterday.

The most geeks (and informed) though they supported the change with comments on social networks stating their point of view about why such is positive switching and others, others more they expressed fear to switch to Mac and Per people They made me the most nonsensical comment I've ever heard, something like:

Every Linux user who advocates free software should stay away from iOS and use Android

This reminded me of some comments they made in a previous post that I put here in From Linux (about programming) where some users were complaining because I used Sublime Text 3 for my screenshots (a text editor for programmers who falls into the "misfortune" of being closed source).

The debate got interesting, because after responding to some comments about "no, it's that in a blog about linux like this there should only be free software captures" and a thousand other stupid things, I even ended up getting into questions philosophical and / or political like this:

Manuel says:

Again, +1 to which elav replied and I add: I don't know what country you live in, or how old you are, but if there is something important that the 3 people who so far have "opposed" the sublime text are not taking into account is that this "debate" goes beyond the supposed "software freedom" or an ideology for a blog, REAL freedom falls on the freedom OF PEOPLE. And not because a software is free or not, I should lose my freedom to choose it. It's like coke. Everyone in the world knows it's bad, lousy. If you go to their FAQ page people are asking all the time “what is X chemical for? Is it true that it causes cancer? " And their answer is what you have to settle for, because being the "closed source" recipe there is no way to have reliable and real information on the new chemical compounds created to make the happy soda. However, what makes a person free, that a country is free, that a SOCIETY is free is not the fact of whether you know what ingredients your soft drink is made with or not ... Your real freedom will be truly curtailed for the day where you can't choose, on your own, that you want to have a coke (or do many other things) for something else. A “free software” philosophy that restricts human freedom is not really free, it's that simple.

To which one user responded with this "brilliant" comment:

Julio says:

Manuel.
You are totally wrong.
According to RIchard Stallman, that is not freedom.
Freedom is not being able to choose between a few imposed options, but it is having total control of your life.
In this case Sublime Text is not controlled by the user, Sublime controls you and that is unethical, therefore it should not be used.

With this I realize that most of the Linuxeros who call themselves "Defenders of free software" speak from their mouths. And I assure you that if Microsoft decides to launch Office for Linux tomorrow, the vast majority of Linuxers will install it on their Linux and in a longer time LIbreoffice will be forgotten. In short, the Linuxeros all they want is that a large amount of software is available for Linux, but zero interest if it is free or not.

Afterwards, I replied:

Manuel says:

@Julio: Here you touched on two important points. To start: You say "Stallman says"; My take here is: Why should I get my definition of freedom out of another man's mouth? Why should any of us do it? Then you talk about "Imposed Options" to begin taking your definition of freedom from the mouth of another man is in itself, an imposed option that you deliberately support because you agree with the ideology of this man, this in itself is a behavior contrary to what It is freedom, but you don't realize it. Then you talk about "Total control of your life" I feel that I have total control over my life because despite what men like stallman tell me I always decide FOR ME the software that I want or not to use (not based on what that they order me behind a mask of freedom) or based on a false philosophy about it, Freedom lies in being able to do precisely that, choose WHAT YOU WANT for yourself, for you and for your benefit, without someone order what's best or not for you, which stallman does.

Real freedom VS. fictitious freedoms

I bring this up because here is something very important in the last comment If I am free, why should I get my definition of freedom out of another man's mouth? Yesterday I was reading an article in Applesfera about iPhone freedom, where a very happy iPhone user tells us a horror (which for him is glory). It basically says:

The iPhone makes me more free because by making all the decisions for me, I have more time for everything, I do not worry about "my stuff" as it would happen in other OS and therefore, I am more free.

Listening to people like that (or like the one who says that android is better because "it's free") horrifies me. I don't want to come and impose a point of view or anything, but I would like to express that personally I believe that sometimes, communities lose the sense of freedom.

Being such a complex issue it is difficult to say that "freedom is X or Y", many times we tend to go with:

Do not give up control of your life or your way of thinking to anyone.

The problem is, if you buy an Apple product, (for example) you are giving it to Apple, and if you go around proclaiming the word of the FSF and using gNewSense GNU / Linux because they believe it is correct, you are giving it to them to Stallman. Paradoxical, right? it's stupid.

I think most of us should go by the simple:

Know that you are in full control of your actions and decisions at all times.

Gentlemen, freedom does not lie someone else to make our lives easier so that we have more "freedom" to do whatever we want nor does it lie in the fact that we have the "freedom" to know everything about everything to be sure of how every inch of the devices and software we use works.

Freedom lies in being able to take our own decisions, (like what phone do you want to buy and use or what OS do you want to put on your computer) by own personal conviction, not on the basis that X or Y company sell us an idea with good marketing or that crazy X or Y tells us if we are "supporting freedom or not" by doing this or that thing.

I agree that many what they need He's a leader, someone to turn to to follow, admire, listen ... However today I come to this blog to tell you that they don't need leadersWell, you have yourselves.

The moment you recognize that true freedom is listening to yourself plain and simple because you are recommending something to yourself, in that moment they will really be free.

Freedom on mobile

NOTE: Before starting this part of the article I would like to clarify: To any troll who comes to me with a comment like "using Android is the best for a user who believes in freedom since Stallman says that Apple is bad" I simply say once : If you really believed in radically Stallman-style "freedom," you wouldn't even use a fucking cell phone. HE DOES NOT USE THEM. As simple as that. I also want to clarify that what I am going to talk about here refers to basic comparisons of iOS and Android in a completely vanilla state (without installing anything extra or doing processes like jailbreak or rooting) of both operating systems.

The iPhone, more free?

I personally yes i consider to the iPhone a "freer" device than any Android. And it is that outside its scope "closed source" (which for soon is not so far from what is actually android as I will explain later), the iPhone (as I explain in my article linked at the beginning of this post) empowers the user.

All from the fact of giving you the option to send you the 60-page service contracts by e-mail, before you press accept to read them. really, comfortably from your computer, and give you an idea of ​​everything you are accessing (contrary to Google's "ninja tactics" with the fine print and the forced "I agree to join Google+" that keeps an eye on careless click with every step you give within its ecosystem), going through the fact that you can choose what kind of notifications sends you (or does not send you) an application or the fact be able to modify permissions of them (deactivating those that seem to you intrusive).

In addition to having functions like a do not track filter at the phone level that can be activated with a tap to avoid tracking within apps with advertising.

It also has a button to disable hidden processes of "nosy" apps (such as Facebook or Google Plus that in both operating systems have geolocation functions in the background that can be activated at will along with your data connectivity if it is required to know where you are at all times), the iPhone wherever you see it, allow that the user is in control of their environment with millimeter precision, all at your fingertips in one tap and explained so that even the most novice user can understand what each available function does.

On Android you can't (at least not without external things like apps or ROMs and root) do things like modify application permissions, have a do not track filter at the phone level and / or disable hidden OnDemand tracking processes in the background, (Since the most similar to the latter for just citing an example would be the option to disable background data traffic and that leaves the Play Store without working).

All of these things (plus other points I make in this article within my personal blog) harvest in me the question: Where is there more freedom? where the user can freely decide what he wants or does not want by controlling his device to the maximum (and thoroughly) without having to do anything more than a tap on the desired option (as in iOS) or in an android ecosystem where yes, that's fine, you can root, change the launcher put another ROM blah blah blah, but breaking a lot of locks ?.

In my opinion iOS it's a real freedom for the user where he controls with his decisions his interaction with the ecosystem of the phone to a high degree while android is more like a maximum security jail where they say "Ah look, from here you can escape passing through all these barriers that there are (they show you a map) but you must be an expert in escapism to achieve it."

And is that to really "free an android" a user must learn at least to:

  • Root
  • Unlock the Bootloader (a process that costs money and is difficult if you are tied to an operator)
  • Install another ROM

These 3 things without karma catching you (that is, without bricking your phone) Is that freedom? I do not think so. There is also the point that on iOS there is no longer a valid reason to have to do jailbreak for freedom, when every day more and more Android devices almost necessarily require a Rooting to be useful.

Why should this be so? It is not fair to android users. Let's go! it's based on a FREE fucking software project! Google, manufacturers and operators should offer a more real freedom to people and less focused for escapism experts (powerusers like several of us in these circles) within their devices.

Android, Free Software?

I'll end this article by citing a problem that bothers me a lot. One of the things that makes many Linux users go for an Android is because Google says: "Android is a Free Operating System based on Linux" and so Linux newbies who just installed a distro six months ago on their teams and heard some talk from Stallman already say: "We should use android because it supports freedom."

You could not be more wrong. Outside of Linux kernel (which is under one of the versions of the GPL, if I'm not mistaken the v2 that allows TiVoization and other things) all the other android system is under an Apache license (or something similar in other cases) and the use is promoted of these when developed for the OS

These licenses are licenses really free at the contract level (without copyleft) that basically do not bind or force the recipient of the code to do something forcibly with it (such as the GPL that requires among other things that derivative works are also free). This legally allows all software developed under these licenses to be used. for whateverLet's give an example:

Juan perez, programmer, write a prominent piece of software for Android and release it under one of these said types of license (lax, non-copyleft);

Now Google you can freely take that code, improve it and adapt it among other things to a development closed source without sharing your modifications and improvements to the community.

This "legal trap" (which is not that it is, is the freedom of the people imposed on the freedom of software and even I support her, but that does not mean that we should not be aware of what happens in reality) it is what allows the best parts of android to be hidden from the community because Google wants it (even without the community knowing), this It is the same with OS X and its relationship with BSD as an operating system.

By using a BSD kernel (released under BSD license obviously) Apple You are not required to share your enhancements to that kernel with the BSD developer community, but you do have all right of taking all the improvements that the community makes without giving anything in return and integrating them into their proprietary operating systems.

Personally (as I said) I believe that the software that carries these licenses (such as BSD, MIT, Apache and the like) is "true free software" (and not only me, this statement is considered an entire ideology worldwide), by being (just to begin with) free of all personal interests and ego of the programmers, advocating more for the freedom of its users than his own (and so it should be, because no free people, There is not FOSS, that's my opinion).

The problem it causes me in the case of Android is that there are some users who feel like "GNU Super fans" but do not even understand that this type of software truly free is in some way damaging to the advancement of free software that presents itself as the core ideology of Stallman or the FSF, since instead of forcibly promoting the growth of open source programs (as programs under copyleft licenses such as GPL forcing derivative works to be free as well) leaves open the possibility of closed developments based on community efforts for user freedom ... Doesn't that sound like Stallman likes it, does it?

Finishing ...

This brings me back to the central point of the article: If you are going to defend something, do it for own conviction, because you believe it is correct, not because someone else has sold you an idea ... But the most important thing: Get informed and form a criterion, do not believe everything they tell you, Find out.

Free yourself from the chains of OTHERS, Think for you. Just as the bible says (and I'm not religious or anything but I know that story) that a false prophet is going to come and say that he is the savior and blah blah blah, the false prophets of freedom are already here and the same is the the man in the photo above (Richard Stallman) one of them as is anyone who tells you that your definition of freedom It is incorrect because it's not what he (or someone he believes in) thinks. You will only find freedom within you, making your own decisions day by day, never stop thinking for yourself, based on your informed criteria and then you will be free ...

Good luck.


The content of the article adheres to our principles of editorial ethics. To report an error click here!.

282 comments, leave yours

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

*

*

  1. Responsible for the data: Miguel Ángel Gatón
  2. Purpose of the data: Control SPAM, comment management.
  3. Legitimation: Your consent
  4. Communication of the data: The data will not be communicated to third parties except by legal obligation.
  5. Data storage: Database hosted by Occentus Networks (EU)
  6. Rights: At any time you can limit, recover and delete your information.

  1.   elav said

    Uff, I think someone here has serious problems with Android ..

    Anyway, I think that a healthy debate can be generated with this article, but although you have the freedom to choose the device you want, I don't think that with iOS you are freer than with Android. In fact, if you want freedom in terms of Software, it seems to me that the most appropriate is FirefoxOS.

    Let's see what happens.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      I have always said that I have a lot of faith in firefoxOS and I agree with what you say (except on the point of Android-iOS freedoms, since I already expressed why I think that with an iOS device you are more free as a user than with an Android) . The problem is that firefoxOS does not come up in the article because it is a special case:

      When the iPhone came out, it was very expensive because it was the "first of its kind" in addition to being an Apple product, there was not much to compare it with, it set the standard under which other projects such as (to date) were governed. android. When Android came out, without any justification, it was very expensive! (At least the first terminals that arrived here in Mexico were) terrible specs, super outdated android (and even experimental I would say) and very expensive phones. Even having the iPhone to compare instead of copying the quality, it seems that they wanted to copy the logic at a low price: "If people pay so much for an iPhone they will do it for any smartphone." When FirefoxOS came out, it did so under the status of an experiment, with low-end phones and whatever you want, but there were two details:

      1) They worked / They work much more decent than an old android.
      2) They are cheap

      The problem with this is that it is difficult to define if these qualities are due to firefoxOS as a project alone or to the fact that today the markets have advanced so much that it is now easier to get an idea before launching a mobile operating system . It is difficult to say (without falling into speculation) If firefoxOS is cheap because it really is a platform that was born under the idea of ​​giving power to people or, if it really is because as now buying smartphones is something of the daily and the materials are cheaper (and it is that Marketing campaigns we see, we do not know realities).

      That is why the inclusion of firefoxOS in the article was not fair or necessary for me at the moment, (in addition to the fact that here in my country there are only low-end phones with that platform and it was not worth a direct comparison, in addition to that it was not right to buy them); But like you, I believe that FirefoxOS is the most free option at the software level of the 3, and also (personally) I believe that it has the most potential to actually be a people's platform. I do not know if there is something equivalent to rooting / jailbreak in firefoxOS (I have not used a terminal of those officially to know it on my own); But an interesting prediction I have is the following:

      While it took iOS to get to iOS 7 for users seriously to stop considering Jailbreak as something necessary (or at least the majority) and on Android there will always be the need for rooting, I DO NOT THINK that in firefoxOS we have a direct analog of any day, it won't be necessary ... (and if there already is, how strange), but personally I haven't even heard of it, nor do I think it will exist. That speaks volumes about how free users feel on a platform from the start, and firefoxOS is doing things right.

      1.    elav said

        Anyway, you have to take something into account. Yes, it is true that you HAVE all the right and freedom to choose the device you want to use, but that is NOT why you are free.

        I love iPods, and I mean the old non-touch versions. I think they are the best gadgets for listening to music on the market, but, despite having Private Software, Apple has no control over them, what if it happens with the iPhone and the latest Apple devices, is that they can take control your device.

        BEWARE, they can do the same on Android, and on any other System .. And that is why FFOS comes to play an important role, as it is "more open" than those mentioned above.

        With this I want to tell you, if you want to use an iPhone you do not have to apologize, or give explanations, use it, but I tell you that there are cheaper and much better alternatives in the Android world (as a device above all), being an example of them: HTC ONE, Moto G, Moto X, Samsung Galaxy S4, Nexus 5, etc ...

        Not to mention what lies ahead with Jolla, Ubuntu Phone, Sailfish ...

        1.    Xlash said

          “Anyway you have to take something into account. Yes, it is true that you HAVE all the right and freedom to choose the device you want to use, but that is NOT why you are free. »
          That's exactly what I meant in my previous comments, we finally agree on something xDDD.

          "BEWARE, they can do the same on Android, and on any other System .. And that is why FFOS comes to play an important role, as it is" more open "than those mentioned above."
          The problem that it is "more open" gives the possibility to manufacturers to have control over the device and therefore over the users. The idea would be for it to be free, that is, for the users to have control.

        2.    Manuel Escudero said

          You are wrong in your opinion about the fact that "being able to decide what you want does not make you free" because that is exactly what makes you free. However I will not discuss that because everyone thinks differently. Now, in my personal case, the iPhone I have was a gift from a friend who had to go and leave it to me, but personally, even though there are "cheaper" alternatives or whatever, thanks to this iPhone, now I don't consider buying any other device In the future, in fact I plan to upgrade to the iPhone 6 as soon as it comes out because I know that my purchasing power allows it, in this case it is irrelevant if there is something cheaper "or better" (because no matter how much you give it, for me it is What matters is privacy and none of the ANDROID terminals you mention have the layers of protection and the level of control that the iPhone offers in this section). The day I can modify the permissions of the applications in android (removing the ones that seem intrusive) or encrypt my device completely with a tap without rooting, flashing or anything, then I will start looking at android with different eyes (and only We would be completing a step, everything else that iOS does offer is missing) About FFos I have no words to add because it does not fall within the comparison of the article, as I explained in my previous answer.

          1.    Xlash said

            Deciding makes you free ... until you decide not to be. That's what Elav meant and that's what I told you in my comments.
            If you really care about privacy you shouldn't use an iPhone. It is preferable to buy an Android rotate it and put a good ROM on it.
            Indeed Manuel, if you do not root or flash you will not be able to do what you mention but there is the grace ... that you can do it, an iPhone does not allow you to do it, therefore who has control, the phone or you? I think you already know the answer.

          2.    iDiot said

            What if you can't buy freedom? I say what are you tied to in such a case?

            I interpret things somewhat differently from how you pose it ...

          3.    Manuel Escudero said

            Android, not even with the best ROM you can imagine, is more careful about privacy than the iPhone if we talk about commercial systems. Let's leave the Blackphone aside, since that limits a lot in favor of privacy. Besides, you are the type who can die tomorrow and I don't care, I don't know why I keep answering the same thing in different threads, if you always ask the same question and you will always have the same answer:

            No matter what you say, you will not change what I think or the fact that I can have an iPhone and have chosen it.

          4.    Manuel Escudero said

            @iDiot: Freedom is not bought, it is a thing of non-tangible conviction. If you feel free on android, then you are already you and you are happy and ready, that is what counts. If, on the other hand, you don't have money and you want freedom on a smartphone, your best shot is a FirefoxOS phone.

          5.    Alejandro said

            I agree with Elav, to which you say “You are wrong in your opinion about the fact that“ being able to decide what you want does not make you free ”because that is exactly what makes you free. However I will not discuss that because everyone thinks differently. »

            1. If you are not going to argue (aka. Give your justifications in the face of such a denial), why do you express it? One opinion, in this case denial over another, without justification is worthless.

            2. An opinion is a point of view of each one, at the moment in which YOU rate the opinion of another is where YOUR same opinions are meaningless.

            You speak of a lot of freedom but I see that you do not apply, typical flame post

          6.    Manuel Escudero said

            @Alejandro: I decided not to argue with @elav about whether I am right or wrong in my definition of freedom or whether he is because he is in Cuba and I am in Mexico. They have far fewer freedoms than me, they have always had them alibi. Two things can happen here: Either he doesn't know what freedom really is, or he appreciates it to a degree that I can't understand, because we are in COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WORLDS.

            You can't "compete" as you expect under such different conditions, it doesn't make sense.

          7.    Alejandro said

            @Manuel Escudero, that is to say that your justification is… the geographical difference? really is that your justification? and you put me in capital letters that they live in different "worlds"? What are you now a Martian in Mexico?

            my mother, I repeat myself: typical flame post. By the way, congratulations on your iPhone, which is what has been clear to all of us.

            @Elav, please don't lower the quality of the page.

          8.    O_Pixote_O said

            Look sincerely, I have been reading all your text but go down to see the comments and you have offended me. Have the holy balls to say that your definition of freedom, which of course is the only true one in the world and that of the rest is rubbish, it is the power to choose, it is a fallacy like a cathedral. So now I will be free to choose whether to shoot me in the face or in the ass?

            But it is not that that cheap definition has offended me, it offends me that you say that in Cuba there is less freedom than in a country where they govern through electoral fraud such as Mexico. Here in Spain for example, a third of the population is at risk of poverty and in Cuba, according to NGOs, it was going to be eradicated in 2014/15. Here in Spain they evict people from their house and if necessary they take the children out to hosts.

            Here we undergo reforms that lead us to the situation of when we were in the dictatorship by a party that governs an absolute majority with 48% of the votes.

            Well, I'm off topic. Say that you have more freedom with a mobile that belongs to a company that gives all the information it wants to a state and that they were developing a mechanism with which they could deactivate the camera or the recorder if it detected that the mobile was located for example in a demonstration, no, it is not freedom. You have said that you need to root the mobile to release it, excuse me? Here in Spain it is in the law that mobile phones have to be released or that they cannot be restricted in itself. To free them, they only have to ask for a code that they charge between 10 and 25 euros illegally. Look at this for example:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UWUFMPOFcc

            You confuse freedom with the option to choose and furthermore you discredit that people are free to choose the opinion of others. I can use the definition of freedom of a person and that does not mean that I am lazy or that I do not think for myself. In the same way that you say that, none of those who comment here could think like you since that would not be thinking for themselves.

            And that you know that I am with you in terms of using sublimetext that I also use. It could be that the company behind it respects its users much more than many other people, besides that the payment is optional and no scam since it is not an excessive price for a very good application.

          9.    Manuel Escudero said

            @O_Pixote_O: Your comment mixes too many mixed up ideas, things that suddenly came to mind or I don't know, but it is important for me to answer it:

            A) You're right, maybe I went overboard saying that @elav's definition of freedom "is wrong", although I rectified it later when I realized the geographical difference. Regarding Mexico and Cuba, despite the fact that Mexico is governed by whoever you want, in Cuba they have much less freedom, (or if you want to see it that way, many more restrictions) I do not know how feasible it is, for example, to leave the country / return to go to a country like the United States (to give an example that seems to me to have barely been regulated recently) but it seems to me that only there is a friction.

            On the other hand, in Cuba they do not receive concerts by American bands (The one in Audioslave was the last, as it seems to me) and in itself, it is a country much more "closed to the world" by its leaders, they have less access to the Internet, and so on. In itself, we could say that that is why "it is less free than Mexico" because people have less capacity to "do whatever they want" WITHOUT AN ACCOUNTING TO ANYONE. Just a quick Google search for "Things that can't be done in Cuba" (and vice versa for Mexico) will give you an idea of ​​my point of view. (Here in Mexico you can basically do anything within the sake of Western legality, that is, you cannot kill someone for pleasure, but you can escape from jail and not be counted as a crime that adds years to you if they return to you. catch because here every citizen here has a "right to freedom", hahahahaha! so you can laugh for a while). So I could give several examples but I am not the best person for it.

            B) About this:

            "Say you have more freedom with a mobile that belongs to a company that gives all the information it wants to a state ..."

            ALL companies, from ALL countries, whatever branch you want (that keep information of some kind about their customers) They give "all the information they want to a state." Except for those that SERIOUSLY have "zero-knowledge" or that flatly have nothing interesting to contribute, there is no company in any country that, UNDER QUALIFIED NEEDS (that you are a "person of interest") Does not give you information about you to the state. This happens in all countries and in all companies, but only when you are considered a "major target" otherwise your pathetic life does not give a damn to the state.

            C) On the "mobile unlocking" in all countries you can ask the operator, but one thing is to root, another thing is to free it, another thing is to unlock the bootloader and another thing is to install a ROM. The fact that you pay 25 euros to Unlock it, (or that they sell it to you unlocked) does not mean that the phone comes rooted (or with the bootloader unlocked), you would still need to do these processes if you wanted to install another ROM on your released android. A released mobile is only a mobile that can be used with any operator and that also brings the possibility of unlocking the bootloader ("tied" mobiles do not have this option activated, and you have to pay to do the procedure at the hardware level if your operator I would not want to release it.)

            D) At no time outside of the line I retracted in the comment I made to @elav am I discrediting anyone who has expressed themselves here.

      2.    Elihu ariza said

        Well Manuel, first of all I really liked your article because you not only show your personal opinion without any fanaticism and I personally agree with what you say, freedom includes the actions and decisions we make personally, and well coming to the Firefox OS issue , I like more than Android itself (Mainly because I am a bit alternative and I like to go against the current), and in Firefox OS there are already tutorials on how to root the system (In fact I already did), but the root In Firefox OS, it is simply to change parameters to the system (such as putting music as a ringtone, among other nonsense), since in itself the system is not only very user-friendly, but is too accessible to configurations, but hey me the article seemed very interesting

        1.    Manuel Escudero said

          @Elihu: Thank you 😉

      3.    O_Pixote_O said

        Look sincerely, I have been reading all your text but go down to see the comments and you have offended me. Have the holy balls to say that your definition of freedom, which of course is the only true one in the world and that of the rest is rubbish, it is the power to choose, it is a fallacy like a cathedral. So now I will be free to choose whether to shoot me in the face or in the ass?

        But it is not that that cheap definition has offended me, it offends me that you say that in Cuba there is less freedom than in a country where they govern through electoral fraud such as Mexico. Here in Spain for example, a third of the population is at risk of poverty and in Cuba, according to NGOs, it was going to be eradicated in 2014/15. Here in Spain they evict people from their house and if necessary they take the children out to hosts.

        Here we undergo reforms that lead us to the situation of when we were in the dictatorship by a party that governs an absolute majority with 48% of the votes.

        Well, I'm off topic. Say that you have more freedom with a mobile that belongs to a company that gives all the information it wants to a state and that they were developing a mechanism with which they could deactivate the camera or the recorder if it detected that the mobile was located for example in a demonstration, no, it is not freedom. You have said that you need to root the mobile to release it, excuse me? Here in Spain it is in the law that mobile phones have to be released or that they cannot be restricted in itself. To free them, they only have to ask for a code that they charge between 10 and 25 euros illegally. Look at this for example:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UWUFMPOFcc

        You confuse freedom with the option to choose and furthermore you discredit that people are free to choose the opinion of others. I can use the definition of freedom of a person and that does not mean that I am lazy or that I do not think for myself. In the same way that you say that, none of those who comment here could think like you since that would not be thinking for themselves.

        And that you know that I am with you in terms of using sublimetext that I also use. It could be that the company behind it respects its users much more than many other people, besides that the payment is optional and no scam since it is not an excessive price for a very good application.

        1.    O_Pixote_O said

          sorry for having put it twice, I was going like the internet ass

  2.   Ignacio said

    Is there no way to filter the articles I receive in my feed by author? I don't want to have to come across ridiculous articles like this anymore and I wouldn't want to have to remove the entire site from Feedly. Thank you.

    1.    elav said

      Try putting in Feedly https://blog.desdelinux.net/author/

    2.    Alejandro said

      +1

  3.   alfredocg said

    Bravo! That is freedom, doing what you want regardless of the options and ideologies of others. Although in reality you should not give so much explanation, this way you end up giving some power to the opinion of others, having to justify each personal decision. Sometimes they forget that communities are made up of people and a community that limits, judges and punishes its members is not a community but a sect. Regards.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      I had to try to reduce the comments haha, that's why "so much back"

  4.   HaPK said

    This article goes deeper into one of the greatest paradoxes of free software, which is freedom; I already mentioned it in the article that I published right here a while ago.

    I believe that the only way to obtain true freedom using some technological device is that all the software that exists in the world is free (or everything is proprietary, but personally I do not like that idea). The fact that the two types of software exist makes the different freedoms restrict each other. Using only free software restricts my personal freedom of decision, but using proprietary software restricts my freedom to study, and sometimes use, the software in question ...

    Personally, I think it is now worth paying a little for the freedom of knowledge of the software as long as the piece of technology I am using works as it should, until the world realizes that the software must work in the best interests from the user, not just from a few companies.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      You enter an interesting point, what you express is known in psychology as the concept of "synthetic happiness vs natural happiness" and the same applies to socialism-capitalism as it applies to the issue of free-proprietary software:

      Natural happiness is what you get when you get what you want, always. Proprietary software products are specialists in this because by narrowing down the options, they generate more happiness. How is this? If you buy a mac, it is less likely that you wonder if it was the right decision in the long term (because there is no other) and you torment yourself with it (if we talk about the OS) But if you use linux, every day you have the risk of saying: Oh! look, Manjaro has this, Fedora has this! Ubuntu that! and the distro I'm in is not !! » and you decide to change. That, although it gives you more freedom, it gives you less happiness because it gives you less comfort. After a while, synthetic happiness comes, which is the one that comes from "doing the best of what you get" and that's when you start to rationalize things: "Ok, I'm on Fedora and maybe here I can't install the latest version of Photoshop CS6 , but at least I have GIMP, Krita etc ».

      The trick here is to mediate (by force) because you cannot give in to all your needs any more than you can give in all your comforts…. (Or at least that's how I see it) So I'm happy using Fedora Linux and my iPhone.

      1.    Sea_chello said

        What you say about the phenomenon that fewer options give more happiness is commented on in a TEDtalk that I think was shared by elav in an article.

        In any case, I think the definition of "freedom" is complicated. We could say "it's the ability to do what I want." For me two reflections arise from this definition.

        The first is: even if I am free to make several choices, that doesn't mean they are all correct in the name of my freedom. If someone wants to hit a child, they are "free" to do so, they can make that decision. However for me it will not be correct and I will try to prevent it. Taking this definition as absolute, then, I am not in favor of complete freedom. Moving it to the field at hand, I believe that free software applications are the ones that allow most people to use them. I will put MS Office and Libreoffice as an example (because I think the office suite is very important). Most people use MS Office and a lot of public administration and education as well. Licenses cost a significant amount of money that not everyone can afford. Instead everyone can use Libreoffice. There are compatibility problems between both formats (despite the enormous efforts of the guys at Libreoffice) that make using libreoffice limit me when I want to share documents (work, university). The real problem in this case is not that MS Office is closed, but that it uses a closed format and does not use a standard format. The issue is then that our actions, our decisions, have consequences beyond us. So we have freedom, but it carries a responsibility and therefore I am in favor of the use of freedom in a responsible way, which does not cut off the freedoms of others but encourages them to the greatest extent.

        A second reflection is: the freedom to make a decision depends on the information you have to make it. If we take this into account, is someone who makes a decision without all the information possible really free? I am obviously not talking about a technology expert when choosing an OS, since your decision will probably have a good foundation. I am thinking more of a newcomer to the computer and that most of the time they do not have alternatives or information about them (Windows, MS Office). Once you get used to it, it is difficult to change people. Although these people now "freely decide" to stay in what they wear, their decision is conditioned by this lack of initial alternatives. So, was that decision really free? With this reflection I only wanted to suggest that freedom may not be absolute and that it depends on other factors such as the information available (and the ability to understand it, of course).

        Summing up my opinion a bit, I think that anyone is free to use whatever they want, but these elections are open to criticism if they do not promote the freedom of the rest of the people (as each one fits the complaints, is another matter: D). And you always have to try to transmit and make understood (teach) the greatest amount of information and alternatives to maximize the real freedom of each person to make decisions.

        Finally, thanks for the article. Although I do not agree with your opinion, I think that the constructive debate of the ideological foundations of free software is important. At the end of the day we have to be able to argue our positions in a reasonable and logical way.

        1.    TecLibre said

          Clearly agree with you Sea_chello. To all causes accompanied by effect.
          On the other hand, the legal framework defines the freedoms that are effective in practice and must be respected for the sake of cohesion and social coexistence, we cannot pretend that by buying iOS7 in institutional teams and Admon. Public or high-cost equipment, a part of society must live on the solidarity of others, why then would we be talking about the refusal to help the sick or injured, which we all know is a crime.
          In other words, in short, the argument of greater operability, therefore greater productivity in the case of proprietary software or hardware, is almost non-existent, at least morally, especially because there is an alternative free of costs, this is especially serious in conscious governments and countries of them by technocrats deliberately bidding for laws.

          1.    TecLibre said

            FdE: Any cause is accompanied by an effect.
            ... this is especially serious in governments and countries aware of it that by technocrats ...

  5.   MacLinWin said

    Excellent article. Especially when you play the STALLMAN theme. Go really, I do not see freedom in his way of being and criticizing, I see him more as a dictator who calls to be a socialist but lives on what he hates (money) and has not contributed anything for a long time. I love using the iPhone, although when I had the Android (Samsung Galaxy 3) it was a problem because almost everything was blocked (what you mentioned above). I am blessed to work with all three operating systems (PC OS). I use more Debian and Mac OsX than Windows not because of the freedom and all that crazy stallman jerk off, but because I feel comfortable. It goes without saying that one should use what they feel comfortable with and not with what others impose.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      Stallman is a narcissistic madman with very severe delusions of power ... It is normal that he has the bipolarities that you mention haha.

      1.    Morpheus said

        It's a shame that what Stallman means is so seriously misconstrued. It seems that the "battle" of disinformation will always be won by the powerful (Apple, MS, Google)
        Stallman with delusions of power? Socialist Stallman? Socialism hates money? Does the creator of the concept of free software contribute nothing? The creator of the concept of free software is wrong in his own creation and everyone has the freedom inventing your own definition of free software? What does software freedom have to do with jumping off a bridge?
        There are people who believe they have the freedom to think, but if they are based on lies and misconceptions, what freedom are they talking about?
        So many questions…

        1.    Francisco Rangel said

          If Stallman's thing is madness, his madness shows me that friend Richard is very sane, at least that's what I think, I don't know anything ...

        2.    DanielC said

          Stallman with delusions of power? YES, especially with the promotion of forcing sharing. It should be invited to do so, not compelled.
          Stallman Socialist? He didn't say that, he said it reminds him of the typical socialist dictator.
          Does socialism hate money? Same. He said that there are people who say they hate something and they live on that ... like the Chinese hating damn capitalism.
          Does the creator of the free software concept contribute nothing? Not for years, he only lives from lecturing.
          Is the creator of the concept of free software wrong in their own creation and everyone has the freedom to invent their own definition of free software? You are not wrong with your creation, you are wrong with the concept on which that creation is based.

          Looks like you fell asleep in your own arms, Morpheus, and you misunderstood a lot of things MacLinWin said.

          1.    Staff said

            «YES, especially with the promotion of forcing sharing. It should be invited to do so, not compelled. "
            And, even if that were true, what power does it give you? The reality is that it does not invite or force sharing, what it demands is that abusive licenses or promonopoly laws do not remove the right to do so if you want.

            "Not for years, he only lives by lecturing." AND? Isn't that contributing? Where does it say that the contributions have to be in lines of code?

            "You are not wrong with your creation, you are wrong with the concept on which that creation is based." It would be good if you elaborated something more that answer.

          2.    Morpheus said

            Confusions and more terrible confusions:
            1-Freedom of choice = Free Software? The freedom to choose is not related to the RIGHT to know what the software I use does or the right to use it as I want, to share it, to modify it, to sell it (free is different from free)
            2-Capitalism = Money? Capitalism was born in the seventeenth century, many centuries (millennia?) After the "invention" of money. The Chinese, the Cubans, the Yankees, the Poles and the Argentines, we all love money, without distinction of race, religion or ideology.
            3-Socialism = Dictatorship? In my country we have suffered many dictatorships in our history and all of them were purely capitalist.
            4-Program = contribute? Stallman created the concept (FS), the license (GPL), the first OS project (GNU), the most used compiler (GCC), a widely used editor (EMACS), religion (SAN IGNUCIUS). If that is not contribute!
            5-Opinion = Force? I think that Stallman is right in some ideas and not in others (his satires do not work very well, there are many who have broken SARCASM detectors and think that it is really a religious issue!) But nobody forces me to think like that. I have the right to defend the ideas that I consider fair and the right to spread them, do not take that freedom away from me by treating me as a "religious fanatic" or a "sleepyhead." Enough of that bad treatment. I demand that they inform themselves, educate themselves, before issuing opinions of this type without knowing. Knowledge will make you really free. (That's why we want to know the code of our programs)

      2.    Xlash said

        But how wrong you are Manuel ... I see that you do not get what Stallman means. This man I do not want power at all, what he wants is for users to have it. Regarding the narcissist, I think it is out of context because it has nothing to do with his movement besides that he never has that attitude.

      3.    George said

        This is the only thing I do not understand about the post, why the criticism of Stellman?
        At what point do you feel harassed and compelled by him to do what he says?
        It is the head and visible face of a movement that has an ideal behavior like everything else and is in charge of saying how it should be but at no time did I hear that it forces you to do it or that you are going to go as punishment to an infinite loop for not doing it ( nerdy joke).
        It's like everything, you can't sit down and explain the infinite cases in which you can find yourself and when you can and when you can't.
        He directly decides not to use anything that is not free, but I don't think that people are feeling around to see what cell phone they have or check computers to see if they have any prohibitive software and if they do, throw them out.
        You also have to understand the message (Stellman's or anyone else), and if it's okay with you, apply it where you can, and when you can't.
        But this "narcissistic madman with very severe delusions of power" comment, it seems to me that your problem with him is another.
        Unless he goes out at night armed threatening people to format and install GNU / Linux and its list of accepted programs and not let anything else be installed and we have never found out.

        I clarify that I am not a fan of him, his way of seeing and acting seems good to me due to the fact that being the precursor of that he fulfills it to the letter but nothing more. Outside of that I think there are more interesting people to listen to.

  6.   Alfredo Levy said

    For me, when you talk about freedom, you have to see who and what you are talking about.
    I explain myself better:

    Each person in particular can do relatively what they want with regard to cell phones and computers. Use iOS or use Android, etc. You are free to choose and it is not good that no one points a finger at you for that.

    Regarding humanity, let's say, using free software in my opinion has great advantages:

    0 - encourages and sets the example of using free stuff (github for example is a big leap in creating and encouraging the use of free software). This point is very important because it spreads the philosophy of not appropriating things and these ideas, spreading them reach other places such as hardware (which has arrived a long time ago, politics and life in general).
    1 - boost innovation since reusing code that others made you can focus on your idea.
    2 - boosts security, potentially many can audit and validate the security of the software in question.
    3 - It gives you more options when choosing, if I have an old cell phone I can choose to use an old software maintained by a community (here there are two points flexibility and generation of communities outside of a particular company).
    4 - More customization, you could potentially edit the software you are using and customize it.
    5- Transparency, if you feel like it, you can see for yourself how a program is made.
    6 - It gives you control.
    etc ..

    I believe that the philosophy of free software is what allows and will allow anyone to express themselves, without limits and without distinctions.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      +1 to your comment.

    2.    Elihu ariza said

      I agree with that comment, there is no denying the great contributions of free software to computing (such as WordPress, Joomla, GitHub, Subversion, GCC, SourceForge Firefox, etc.), the problem is that there are stallmanian fans who force you to stop using the software that you feel comfortable with (open or not), and use the software that according to them is "Free", instead of inviting the average user (who honestly does not give a damn if the software they use is free or not) to use Free Software and show the benefits that THE SOFTWARE has, they talk about Stallman, well Stallman once said: “Freedom is not being able to choose between a few imposed options, but having control of your own life . Freedom is not choosing who will be your master, it is not having a master ", freedom is not having a master and I do not want to have Stallman as master

  7.   kaito said

    I do not agree with the whole part that iOS or iPhone are free, and I do not speak free at the software level, but at the end of the day they tie you in a certain way and like Android (which is neither more nor less free) their technologies impose on you, be it iCloud, Gmail, etc. In any case, it is useless to have an Android and end up or tied by contract to a teleoperator or worse, end up having certain software imposed by the teleoperator pre-installed and without the possibility of uninstalling it. In my LG contracted with Orange I had to juggle to root it and uninstall Orange TV, which in a low-end mobile is useless for me. It is not much different from what Microsoft does with IE.

    I have always seen it very hypocritical to opt for Android or Linux just to be free. I don't see people burning the PS3 to buy an Ouya (free console). I use Linux and Android because I like them better and because they are what I need. And I will surely switch to FirefoxOS this summer because I support the community and because I am a web programmer and want to develop applications for the system. But for the same reason I am not going to impose GIMP on any designer because we recognize that what you need is Photoshop. Now, someone who just wants to touch up the red of the eyes in photos to stick with GIMP, which is more than they need ^^

    Each one to his own and freely choosing what he needs and what he wants

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      @Katio There is a good air of reason in this comment 😉

  8.   Carlo said

    Linux is not for people who don't like to think, reason, or work.
    The same happens with android, who is afraid to become superuser or change the firmware room their phone is people with little knowledge of linux and they are very lazy to do it, = a lot of ignorant people in terms of knowledge of what they handle.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      I do not consider that a valid argument because neither you are more stupid because your information says that you are in Windows 7 aero nor I more intelligent because a tux appears where I leave this comment. It has nothing to do with "if the user is lazy, ready or not" there are things that are missing in android that are in iOS without further complications, period. You can still plant your coffee beans, roast and grind them to make an infusion in the morning, but whether you do this or use the instant to boil water, mix and go, that does not speak at all about who you are.

    2.    dwarf said

      Na na na na naaaaaaa, that's it, let's be honest that this comment exudes idiocy in a stream.

      See, Carlo, what I am about to say will sound quite "rude" but it is simple sincerity, don't take it to heart.

      To say that Linux is for thinking people like Android is the sovereign stupidity of the century, you cannot spit more rancidity because it is not possible, period. We could say that at least GNU / Linux if it has traces of a certain complication for the user and it is not because it is difficult, it is because when changing from one paradigm of use to another, the shock is strong and if you are not a person who works in environments technological, it will hit you, but that of "is not for lazy people", what bullshit ... tell me "Gentoo is not for lazy" and I applaud you, tell me what you said, and God I pissed of laughter in your face xD.

      But Android? Not for lazy? HAHAHAHAHA DOUBT WAIT! Android is the system par excellence in the market (I am not talking about quality, I am talking about market dominance), IT IS MADE FOR LOOSE, FOR MASSES, manufacturers or telephone companies they do not want to that you root your computer, you lose the guarantee and many benefits, rooting is not something intrinsic that is within the popular meta-knowledge of the users, it is a "nerd thing".

      I do not follow, that I expand too much, only analyze the silly sovereign that you just said, in defense of a fallacy xD

      1.    anvil said

        Nano's "nerd" spreading himself out, nano says (he bought me a windows computer but I put ubuntu autoinstall, "nerd thing") for me, that's the same as changing the firmware to a phone even easier. nano admin What are you? What's your job? By the way you write, you look like an unemployed gachupin who knows something about computers.
        Definitely Manuel has more intelligence to respond in that way, good for him, it has entertained me to read how he responds to the comments. but the way you answered nano, it makes me sad.
        P.S. I think 3 weeks are enough to realize that Carlos doesn't take it to heart, haha

  9.   Matias said

    Haha excuses and arguments, so scary to say: I bought an iPhone and I belong to a company ..
    Period, there it should be, you don't want to argue .. It's like those who use windows, and excuse themselves by saying the bad things about free software ..
    Let's say that with your action you do not support free software, but on the contrary, you do the same thing that companies do that install windows by default, ready, accept it ..
    What you would have to say: I like free software but I spend in private because I feel like it.
    I like linux but I pay for the office package. There are more options than android, and ios, let's remind the community, that they are free. Why don't you pay them?
    Am I free because I read a contract that tells me about the restrictions?
    You are free because you make a decision, but you should clarify that you are aware that by buying one of those, you do not support real free software. (If it is talking about free software that is not supporting at all) ..
    The truth is that yours is individual freedom, but it is not a decision that supports a community that seeks true freedom. It reminds me a bit of the concept of freedom in the US.
    Come on, no excuses ..

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      The truth is that yours is individual freedom, but it is not a decision that supports a community that seeks true freedom ...

      That is the real ideology behind the FSF: Freedom that supports a community that seeks true freedom. And I have no problem admitting my individual freedom and that I make use of it. What bothers me are users who call themselves "stallman and GNU fans" but have no idea about the concept you just mentioned above. My request is clear: You can support whatever it is (as I support more user freedoms) but you have to be informed, just as it seems that you have informed yourself correctly.

    2.    dwarf said

      Sorry, but that you buy an I-Whatever it does not say that you do not support free software, with what you say you are "pissing out of the pot."

      Leaving aside the fact that Manuel uses what comes out of the lining to use and that he talks about what he likes to talk about, I rescue this from your comment:

      Let's say that with your action you do not support free software, but on the contrary, you do the same thing that companies do that install windows by default, ready, accept it ..

      Sorry but your conception of contribute is, or limited or distorted, accept it ...

      Contributing goes beyond tearing your clothes for the SL, it goes beyond paying collaborations, contributing is in many more things. I don't know who you are or what you do, but for example Manuel if I know and I can attest that the boy contributes generating code and releasing it, tutorials and spreading the use of GNU / Linux, among the communities we frequent, he always speaks first ) of libraries and free jobs and that work should be released ... so Why buy an Iphone and tie the balls with Apple no longer supports the SL?

      Or is it that I better buy an Android and put Replicant on it? Fuck my consumer needs? I must be a martyr-hipster of the SL and eat a fat ass with the rest!

      Sorry, but I see you wrong with that.

  10.   Xlash said

    I'll just say one thing. You are free to choose to get into a cage and throw away the key but in the end you will cease to be free.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      It's a good point. And android (in my personal case) made me feel more like I had made that decision than iOS does.

      1.    Xlash said

        If you analyze it carefully, it is actually the same. Android and iOS exercise the same control over their users and therefore restrict. Whatever your choice, you will always end up in a cage.

        1.    diazepan said
          1.    Xlash said

            How nice you are Diazepan XD. I was referring to Google's android and the one that manufacturers distribute on their devices, not community android like Replicant.

        2.    Manuel Escudero said

          @Xlash: Yes, but as I already said: iOS is a less restrictive cell in my point of view, (of the 2 compared) and therefore, I prefer it to the android cage, that's my point. Everyone needs a fish tank, or they end up paralyzed. It is like the paradox of the fish that, being in a small fish tank, tells your child:

          "You can be whatever you want, without limits" (you see it from the viewer's perspective) and maybe it's funny, because the poor fish is in a FISH, locked up, "caged." The problem is, it is true, the fish tank is not what restricts them, they may well break it, but if they break it, what happens? (picture it in your head) fish squirm on the ground. PARALYSIS. That is the other side of freedom. I personally, for this and more, if I have to choose a cage, I choose iOS.

          1.    Xlash said

            I liked the story 😀 but you can also not choose a cage ... you will not die or be paralyzed because you are not inside one. No, the fish tank in this case does not restrict you, you restrict yourself and that is what really saddens me: S

          2.    Manuel Escudero said

            @XSlash: The paralysis is metaphorical. If you do not choose a cage, you will be paralyzed and a classic example is Linux: The user has so much freedom, so many options, that we simply do not take off on the desktop. If people want to install linux they have to make a lot of decisions that overwhelm them and take them away from our platform, preferring better to stay with options that do not ask them to choose anything like windows or mac, that is paralysis in this case.

          3.    diazepan said

            in case either of you want more information, read this article.
            https://blog.desdelinux.net/la-paradoja-falacia-de-la-eleccion/

          4.    Xlash said

            I know it's metaphorical, just follow your example: D. I do not see it that way, being paralyzed by not knowing what to choose has nothing to do with freedom of choice, you are still free to choose even if you have not chosen yet. The problem is that the easiest is always chosen ... but as we all know the easiest does not mean the best, in this case (speaking of OS) it is worse.

          5.    Xlash said

            Thanks Diazepan, I had already read it: D. But the thing is not going to be or not informed, it is going to see it from a different point of view and analyze it.

          6.    Manuel Escudero said

            @Xslash: "If freedom means anything, it will be above all the right to tell people what they do not want to hear" George Orwell - Prologue to rebellion on the farm

            I borrowed that from another comment. You keep commenting, that only strengthens the fact that we are both free 😉

            Greetings.

          7.    Jolt2bolt said

            Joer, you made me laugh a lot with this comment. In other words, you give me to understand that, the IOS cell is more comfortable and better, that is why I change prison? Interesting paradigm, someone who claims to be free because he can choose which prison to live in!: P

            The problem that I see you have is that you want to justify your choice by saying that you are freer because you could choose it, when it is not. If I am clear about something, it is that with freedom come responsibilities. And that is the dilemma of the elections, they are not easy. But nonetheless, the elections demonstrate the power of free software, which is where its point lies. It is not about whether it is easy. It is about that you have to acquire knowledge, awareness of your decisions and all this would overwhelm you only if you were used to being decided for you; and if that is so, there is only one word to define it "slavery and ignorance as a result of it". In other words, it comes from proprietary software for the most part that made you think about how an OS should be according to YOUR point of view. And that is the biggest problem when a Windows or MacOS user comes to linux. As Apple does or will do at the time with ITS concept that it should be a smartphone, it will do with your way of thinking, but that's fine; I only tell you this so that you are aware of it. That is why I am cool with the idea of ​​modular phones and I hope they will really do it in the future, because I am getting tired of the current and mediocre designs of smart phones. Without saying expensive….

            For this reason, Manuel, you cannot say that you are freer because you chose the only way, which was the easiest, but I take away the most important thing, freedom and the knowledge and awareness of it for a simple fact of not wanting to accept the responsibility for it. more difficult and correct choice leads.

            I like Linux for it, I cannot say that the system works badly because it is poorly designed, I can say that it is simply because I do not have enough knowledge of it yet to get what I want it to do. And that gives me responsibility and conscience, which makes me better and grow. That it is not easy, that sometimes it frustrates me, well. But nevertheless my greatest satisfactions have been when I have to make an effort and manage to understand what my system does and how to improve it, rather than the supposed happiness that it gives me that it works like that from the factory, which is not bad either.
            I do not mind the proprietary software because it is easy to use that is fine, what bothers me is the lack of customization and functionality alibi in the design because for most it is not necessary.
            A clear example of this is windows 8. Spectacular if you are a person who touches a pc for the first time, very VERY simple, but ... and the user who wanted the functionalities of windows 7 and its control, what? Are we disappearing from the face of the earth because it is not profitable for you to have these features? That is what pisses me off, no user should be taken for granted and that is what Linux does, more options and overwhelming as you say, but that is the detail, the freedom of none is alibi and that is cool!

      2.    BGBgus said

        No, the Android provided by the operator is not free. Android that contains proprietary applications is not free. Neither any GNU / Linux distribution with proprietary applications (like Steam) is free. Yes, making your terminal free again is complicated in Andorid, but there is no way to do it in iOS. There is no way to modify the iOS software, because iOS is proprietary. It will never be freer than nothing.

        1.    Xlash said

          There you've given. Unfortunately very few people see it.

          1.    Manuel Escudero said

            The problem is, no matter what you say, I can and I choose to have an iPhone, and that makes me free, if you see it that way or not, it is not relevant because you cannot do anything to change it, as I cannot either waste my time changing your way of thinking because it's not worth it, I don't know you and if you die tomorrow I don't care, you don't know me and if I die tomorrow you don't care, it's that simple.

          2.    Xlash said

            It makes you free the right to choose but as I told you, in the end you will stop being it.
            Don't get me wrong Manuel, I'm not trying to convince you that companies already do that by eating their customers' heads. What I try is to create awareness, to analyze things as they are and not as they make us see them.
            Indeed, you do not know me and I do not know you, but do you know something? I wouldn't care if you die. Do you know why? Because it would be a shame if a smart guy like you left without appreciating freedom like I do.

        2.    diazepan said

          It is not 100% free. Let's not exaggerate, that the vast majority of distros contain the common kernel with blobs.

  11.   Simon Oroño said

    I don't know iOS so I need some context; two questions:

    -What is the Jailbreak used for?
    -What has changed to affirm that there is no longer a valid reason to do it (the Jailbreak)?

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      The Jailbreak was used to obtain functions that were not included in the iPhone by default through applications that cannot enter the app store but that could be obtained through “black markets” (such as cydia) over time , JB just happened to be a way to install cracked applications (charged, but without paying) on ​​your device. Nowadays iOS integrates several functionalities that were only obtained through JB and the few that are discarded are not worth doing it, for example Bluetooth: iDevices only share via bluetooth with other iDevices (in terms of file transfer), iDevices with JB have apps that allow you to send and receive files from any device ... The roll is that with applications such as instashare or dukto installing malware on your device (because JB as well as rooting is achieved through xploits) to have happiness functionality is not worth it, also mobile apps are no longer expensive and you can use an iTunes prepaid card that you can buy on the corner to buy them without having to put a credit card to the App Store for example.

      1.    eliotime3000 said

        Debit cards are also valid to register in iTunes, but sometimes it is annoying to use that they mutilate certain functions such as Bluetooth.

        Anyway, I would opt for an iPod Touch so as not to have to throw away my money for an iPhone.

  12.   diazepan said

    Manué, do not get close to the stop, it will fill you with lime. Pandev is going to be furious for wanting to take away his troll blog post.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      LOL! xD Wasn't that nano? oh, you don't know anymore ... hahaha

      1.    dwarf said

        I'm not the troll, I'm the madman with superpowers and superiority complexes, please, more respect xD

    2.    pandev92 said

      lol, for me he can take the position, so they stop fucking me xD.

      1.    dwarf said

        I'm never gonna stop fucking you nigga, it's baby

  13.   gibran said

    I share Elav's opinion and add Ubuntu OS as an alternative. also check your analysis because in the http://blog.xenodesystems.com/2014/03/de-android-ios-cronica-de-una.html I managed to realize certain details.

    Let's see if I understand you, you changed from two low-end Android devices to a high-end IOS device whose cost undoubtedly exceeds the previous two (you don't talk about economy, which is an important factor), and based on that did you do your tests?

    It is as if you compare a Ferrari to count a bocho, it does not matter if it is the brightest Beetle, they are simply different segments. It seems to me that the analysis is conditioned and depends on which segment you focus on. I have a Galaxy tab 2 10 "and it is without a doubt better than the ipad mini and in cost it is comparable.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      The range in this case does not matter because the same problems that I talk about in the comparison exist in Android regardless of whether the phone has 256MB of RAM or 1GB.

      1.    gibran said

        We will see certain aspects that depend directly on the range and that you take in your article http://blog.xenodesystems.com/2014/03/de-android-ios-cronica-de-una.html. plus some notes that you don't consider.

        Feeling and Performance.

        I have a Razer i and although it is a single core, its performance-speed ratio, use value-exchange value, price-usability, are very good. My girlfriend has an iPhone 4s and she really liked how intuitive and visual Android is.

        Battery duration.

        I put the case of the Galaxy tab 2 10 ”because I use it and I verify that its battery lasts up to 4.5 days in standby, 2.5 days in light use and 1.8 days in normal mode.

        Security and Privacy

        I use a free and experimental application that is cryptonite and that is a simplified encfs (this is how it is generated in GNU / Linux ported on Android), great for encrypting folders (Note: it relies on the processor, not recommended for the low-end).

        https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=csh.cryptonite

        Ecosystem

        Quickoffice and kingsoft office in IOS are much more deficient than in Android so if you wanted to edit a MO document you had to pay for it, luckily IOS7 brings an office suit.

        OTHER POINTS TO CONSIDER

        Economy

        You don't talk about price, which is an important factor, not only in the devices but in the ecosystem of applications. Here is a comparison, if the RazerI is from last year but it fully fulfills its function and that it is much cheaper than the new iPhone.

        http://tienda.telcel.com/producto/297340/celular-telcel-motorola-xt890-razri-blanco/

        http://www.telcel.com/iphone4S/amigo.html

        Open Source

        Another point in favor of Android (and speaking of freedom) is that you can change the rom for a more free one, cases such as Cyanogen Mod, AOKP, ChaOS ROM, give us a sample of what can be done with the code, something that it will never be possible with IOS.

        In short, this shows that both Android and ios are young and very immature systems and both are used for certain things that the other does not, so the best choice is personal, let's not forget that there are more options: BB OS, TIZEN, Firefox OS, Salfish , UBUNTU PHONE.

        1.    Manuel Escudero said

          Yes, but everything you say goes into a more personal aspect and I repeat the article: The fact that you can do magic to do thousands of things on your android because you, voluntarily decided to learn how to do it, does not mean that you are more free (that is, if you have the ability to change a ROM or encrypt your operating system with X, Y and Z apps or whatever you want) because to begin with, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO LEARN to do all that. All the extra features in this section are already on iOS and the user has the freedom to access it with a tap. It is not the same that they put you in a prison with the instructions / tools on how to escape and you have to learn to make sense of that (android) than that they put you in a locked room and give you the key to go out and come in whenever you want (iOS).

          Regarding the performance, I personally do not consider that a Razr with single core and 1GB of RAM (because if I'm not mistaken those are the specs of your terminal) has better performance on a day-to-day basis than an iPhone 4s, but that is already question of how each one uses their telephone, I return to the same, it is partial, personal that point.

          The economy in my case does not apply for 2 things:

          The iPhone that I have is a gift from a friend who left it to me because he had to leave, I did not buy it, but I do plan to update it to the iPhone 6 when it comes out because my purchasing power allows it, (I return to the same thing, this It is a partial point, because if spending on one terminal or another does not affect me, then I will not consider that aspect as something relevant above all the others that are pressing for me).

          About open source, I already explained in the article how the supposed "open source" of android damages real free software. You talk about ROMs and all that I ask: Why is that an advantage? To begin with, users SHOULD NOT have to choose that to have more freedom or functionalities. Yes, on iOS I can't install "CyanogeniOS" (although I can jailbreak and so on) but the point is that I don't need it, as long as you have vitamins at home in the form of a pill and you can take them does not mean that you are going to do it and that someone who does not have them is therefore screwed, if to begin with, neither of them should need them if they eat well (I do not know if I explain myself ).

          1.    Jolt2bolt said

            Well there if you are wrong, knowledge gives you more freedom. Knowing how to do things makes you more free. No knowledge should be disregarded, companies or companies make that excuse to do things with the products that they should not do.
            Like the fact of not being able to modify your apple devices. Why shouldn't you know, for example? They tell you, why do you need to do it if that is things of a software engineer or an electronic engineer? But what if I know and I want to do it with a product that you certainly sold me but I acquired for a fair exchange, who are you to say no? That is my question. At least Android allows you to do it. Although the two systems for me are the same. I've been looking for a smartphone platform that offers me true freedom, but I haven't found it… yet. But I see with good eyes that of modular telephones, so I would be more free about what hardware my phone should have, not that someone decides for me or that I should have you for example.

            Although I would like to try Firefox OS, but I am hoping for some decent mid-range phone at least.

          2.    Alex said

            I am also waiting for a decent mobile with Firefox OS. The gueeksphone for € 220 doesn't really look bad: p

            http://shop.geeksphone.com/es/moviles/9-revolution.html

  14.   Josmell said

    Gee, this article is worth a lot, the truth is that you put together all the opinions that are said about free software. The truth is that each person understands freedom in a different way and that is why they use GNU / Linux. I have come across several people who defend free software and who encourage the use of such a system for X and Y reason, in particular, if the operating system (being GNU / Linux) fits my needs and what I am looking for then it is perfect for me.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      That's right, and as long as you are aware of your needs and convictions, others can go fucking, that's how simple @Josmell.

  15.   SnKisuke said

    the phalasia of free will fully applied to justify your purchase of an IOSdev, I do not think this is the blog where you need to expose the freedoms of IOS, and I believe that nowadays rooting an android dev is as easy as a double click without so many risks (AKA superoneclick) also the rooting allows you to change the OS if you want it, the apple devs do not.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      Yes, the point is that in the iDevices that type of procedures are not needed, (there is the jailbreak and whatever you want, but it is irrelevant, there are no reasons to do it) why in android you must need a rooting to eliminate apps trash or to move apps to SD? (just to mention a few sections) is illogical. The fact that you can do something because you are practically "pushed to" (like rooting the phone) is not that you are freer or not, simply to start you SHOULD NOT HAVE TO DO IT, it should be completely volitional.

      PS I didn't buy the iPhone that I have, it was given to me by a friend who had to leave.

      1.    Jolt2bolt said

        In the same way that you should not have an I-device for your I-device to work when using your bluetooth when it is a standard type of communication. You don't realize it's worse, I DON'T like Apple at all because literally if you want to enjoy YOUR I-experience in the right way YOU MUST HAVE their I-Devices and I mean ALL of them. As well as a special fucking cable to make it work!: P

        As my partner said above. What you are making me believe is that you feel bad, because you are using an iPhone and you have to justify half the world of people who love free software your choice is because you know that you have sold your freedom and you want to feel good, justifying your choice .

        1.    Manuel Escudero said

          @ Jolt2bolt I see that you have commented almost every comment on this sheet. If you have already read the article and what I explained in the comments, here there is nothing more to add or why answer you. At the end of the day, you can believe what you want (or not) and I still don't care how I don't care if it goes to you and what I think comes to you (or not) that is the magic of freedom, nothing more to add to nothing more than what you say.

          1.    Evasive said

            Hi, this is my first comment here (I think my last). If you want to buy an iPhone and live the "Apple experience" do it, you are free to do so, but please, do not justify your purchase by attacking someone who has done a lot (almost everything) for our freedoms as RMS.

            Perhaps for you he is unbalanced, but time is proving him right, the NSA thing is just an example with PRISM, something he had been saying for years. Not using a phone does not put you on the same plane "I'm just as free because RMS does not use a phone and with Android you are just as screwed." It is a fallacy. Congratulations, with the purchase of your iPhone you are helping to exploit a few more children in places like China or Taiwan and do not think that with a post like this you will leave it settled.

            I see too many excuses and you already know that saying "excuse not asked ..." This is a blog about GNU / Linux and Free Software, for fanboy propaganda there is already applesfera, etc, please, do not come to talk about freedom with an iPhone in hand, where is your code? yes, the one who does something for others.

            Free Software includes sacrifices, sometimes it is not easy, but do not come to laugh at others or confuse those who start. In the end, you will end up like Miguel de Icaza (or rather, you already have).

            I hope you enjoy the Store and thank you for helping Free Software by giving Apple the money. A string of fallacies, as Elav told you, a Moto G, Nexus with Cyanogen and you will tell me about that privacy nonsense that according to you Apple has better resolved than Android.

          2.    Chuck daniels said

            Following what Evasive comments, CyanogenMod. I don't know the truth where you find the difficulty in installing this: http://beta.download.cyanogenmod.org/install
            Download an application and run it on your pc and on the device. Yes, you would not have to do it to obtain infinite freedom and security ... go to FirefoxOS as elav has commented if your flag is security.
            You are defending iOS by criticizing Google Android when they are suited. I have used iOS for years, for some excellent things, yes, but I still can't find where it brings freedom over other operating systems beyond the free choice of the device itself. Your argument is that in other operating systems you have to install other applications, the good thing is that it allows you to install them, it is worth wondering if iOS allows this type of behavior with the restrictiveness of the App Store (I already told you that I have used it for many years, I don't know if it has taken a gigantic turn in this regard, but let me doubt it).
            And if you want to use an iPhone ahead, I think that individual freedom is almost above everything, but what I do not think is good is that to convince yourself morally of your choice you make a post stepping on other options.

          3.    Manuel Escudero said

            @Evasive: your comment is a waste of time… But here is my code:

            https://github.com/Jmlevick

            Nothing else to answer that question 😉

      2.    SnKisuke said

        When I wrote about rooting, I was referring to the fact that I change the OS not only to gain functionalities but because there I simply want it and Apple does not give you that possibility either with jailbreak or without it, it is IOS or IOS, in the world of android you can switch between different systems even on some computers you can install firefoxOS, ubuntu, etc.

        1.    Jolt2bolt said

          That's true, I rooted my android for the simple fact that I wanted to and could. Because as it was from the factory it served me as is. There is also the possibility that you say of using another os like firefox os or ubuntu, which Apple does not allow you on your Iphone. It is as if the car company forbade me to tune my vehicle or change the color because it does not suit their interests. 😀

  16.   Rouhs said

    It is interesting but confusing, I think it is worth differentiating the freedom of judgment that is something different from the freedom of software, and the freedom to do whatever you want with your free time.

    Second: being a Linux user is very different from being a person who follows the ideas of free software, it is like the difference between open source and free software, an explanation that is very clear in the book "Free software for a free society."

    Third: Android in its entirety is not free software if I am not wrong, the kernel, I mean, linux is in GPL but the Dalvik machine which is licensed in Apache, which is a free license but also allows proprietary licenses and proprietary code, for that reason reason everything that runs above them can be proprietary. If you are clear about this, you will know that at the mobile level the best option as a free operating system is firefox OS, which:

    For a linux user, the license of the program he uses is irrelevant, perhaps he is more interested in his freedom of discretion

    For a user with free software ideas, he always tends to use the software that is closest to the postulates of free software, he would choose Firefox OS over Android or IOS

    For a different user, this discussion is worth the egg because he does not think about software freedom, if a lot about freedom of judgment and suddenly he is more interested in the freedom of free time than his OS

    To conclude, I want to say that being a linux user is not the same as being a supporter of free software ideas, and that free is a word applied to so many fields of human development that the comparison among itself is confusing.

    So if I as a person have a clear idea of ​​what type of user I am, I can know what type of user the others are and not make the mistake of believing that every site that talks about Linux is made by a fervent admirer of free software ideas.

    Be clear about that and respect the decision of each person or if you do not respect it, because walking alone with the type of user you want is the best decision, so you do not feel uncomfortable or go through annoying

    1.    Staff said

      I subscribe to your words.

    2.    Manuel Escudero said

      @Rohus: Exactly.

  17.   Charlie-Brown said

    Although I do not agree with some of your opinions, I DO agree on a basic point: Primary freedom is intrinsic to the individual, ergo, if the opinion of any person or group conditions our concept of freedom, we automatically stop being free. We can make better or worse informed decisions, with better or worse results, but if we do so based on our individual opinion, we are exercising our freedom, which also includes the freedom to make mistakes and err. If we let others determine our way of thinking, then we are ceasing to be free, even if those "others" are imbued with the best of intentions.

    Your article is very good, it is one of those that stimulates us to think ...

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      +1 to your comment @ Charlie-Brown.

  18.   I could be wrong said

    I believe that freedom is being able to choose, and in that choice I must be able to choose free software and proprietary software. If they impose one of the two models on me, they are restricting my freedom.

    The smart thing is to choose the software based on how its functionalities are adapted to your needs and not depending on the type of license. Free software is of no use to me if it does not functionally cover what I need from it.

    As for the supposed freedom that free software gives me ... theoretically yes, but how many of those who proclaim that freedom are really capable of looking and fiddling with the guts of the software? What if you are not capable of understanding and modifying that software? your whim, what is giving you that supposed freedom? What is the difference between Libreofficce and MS-Office for an average user that all they need, want and know how to do is write letters, view presentations and do four calculations on the spreadsheet? I believe that you will feel equally free with both and the only difference is that one will have it for free and another will have to pay for it.

    1.    Staff said

      "If they impose one of the two models on me, they are restricting my freedom."
      And who imposes one or the other model on you? Companies like Apple that at the hardware level force you to only install their OS, or Free Software that does not put any obstacle to deleting it and installing everything private you want?

      "And if you are not able to understand and modify this software as you wish, what is this supposed freedom giving you?"
      You can pay for someone else to do it, in the private sector you don't even have that option.
      If you are not able to carry all your things on your back and take them to another city, what does freedom of transit give you? Well, you can pay for someone else to do it.

      «... I think you will feel just as free ...» Feeling free and being free is very different. Users who migrated from XP to 7 no longer felt so free with their version of Office that does not run on win 7.

      1.    Manuel Escudero said

        He says it in a more "general" aspect because to begin with, Apple does not force you to do anything, you decide if you buy it or not, nobody puts a gun to your head to do it as you say about free software and the fact that they don't tell you whether or not you can install proprietary software. The problem is the people: The communities, the licenses, and the "Taliban" users of free software do "force you under your decision" to do what they expect you to do, it is not that you are forced to do it or not. nobody grabs you and says: "INSTALL GNEWSENSE DAMN!" But the pressure does exist, and sometimes, for newcomers, it can be quite shocking.

        1.    Staff said

          Here no one was talking about whether to buy or not, they talk about software which can only work on hardware, so we talk about assuming that you have or buy the equipment.
          And once you have purchased the equipment, you can no longer change the OS to an iPhone. That goes beyond any pressure.

          1.    Manuel Escudero said

            If you don't agree on that, you don't buy and that's it.

          2.    Staff said

            LOL What does that have to do with the freedom that free software talks about?
            If we go to those, my shoe has free software, because I buy it only if I want to.
            Seriously, if you are going to talk about free software, at least you have to read a little what the matter is about.

          3.    Morpheus said

            And you are going to force him not to buy it? You are taking away the freedom to buy an «iDiot» !!

          4.    Staff said

            @Morpheus.
            lol
            I'm saying that this has nothing to do with the purchase of hardware, he is empowered and entitled to buy whatever he wants, of course.
            But that is a very separate issue from Free Software, whose freedoms are only related to the code (How to share it (If you want), how to modify it (If you want) and how they must follow those freedoms in order to perpetuate themselves).
            Too bad he started talking in circles and went back to being able to buy or not.

          5.    Morpheus said

            Actually, Manuel answered: he is forcing you (Staff) not to buy an iLoqueSea just because you think it should be free. You have the freedom to buy it, but also the freedom to cry out for please ENOUGH OF THESE ITEMS THAT MISUSE FREEDOM OF CHOICE WITH FREE SOFTWARE!
            They are confusing new users by making the fat broth to those who really (and proven) MANIPULATE US FREEDOM and PRIVACY.
            Nobody remembers Snowden and the NSA?
            STALLMAN WAS RIGHT !! It is not about fanaticism or religion or politics or economic systems, it is about our RIGHTS. When are we going to understand it and MAKE IT UNDERSTAND?
            I consider this post harmful ("This post is considered harmful")

          6.    Morpheus said

            «My country is 'less' free because they forbid us to have slaves. What a malevolent country! I want to be free to buy as many slaves as I want! That is freedom! "
            «Nobody gives me the freedom to go to jail without having committed a crime, they manipulate my brain by telling me that outside of jail we are free: They are fanatics! I want to go to jail, don't take that freedom away from me !! "

          7.    dwarf said

            How much misrepresentation of ideas, can you stop beating around the bush? It is that they already put up examples of slavery.

            Is it so hard to understand what the hell is he trying to say? Gentlemen, freedom is abstract as only the same concept can allow. Manuel has a point, from stock the iPhone allows you to do many more things at the control level, you can control things much more easily and fluently. natively not the android, does that represent more freedom? Yes and no, it frees the user from having to go deeper into the system but it comes at a cost.

            Anyway the android is not a bread of God.

            Do you want to know what makes you laugh? All this paraphernalia that they mount to try to demonstrate a point of view and a philosophy based on the most volatile concept that exists: freedom ...

            Morpheus Enough of these articles? Stop commenting on them, do not feed them, more comments, more SEO, better positioning in google, more more and more ...

            Manuel, don't get caught up in arguing when you write an article, over the years I've learned that the community is full of pseudo-intellectuals and trolls, with the exception of people with whom it is worth arguing.

            Nothing personal, but sorry, too much shit in something so simple.

          8.    Staff said

            @elder brother.
            I don't know if you answered me.
            But you fall into a contradiction, by stating that freedom is an abstract concept and then you make it the basis of personal philosophies, when the abstract is precisely what is outside the subject, the study of OOP should make this clear.

            I have tried to make it clear that Free Software is about licenses and laws, things that are clear and inflexible, not philosophies or points of view.

            So I don't see why I shouldn't put aside the mediocre mentality of saying:
            "This is abstract, you don't have to understand it, you have to live it"
            That something is abstract does not mean that it cannot be understood.

            1.    dwarf said

              The question then is that the clarity of free software ends up in fact forcing to abide by conditions that you may not want to abide by, the case of the GPL with which "nothing based on this can be closed", brilliant but in that case, although I have nothing against that clause, it must be admitted that it is contradictory: "I protect your freedom by forbidding you to do something that does not do you good", a law is not a father, I go back and repeat, if there is Much abstract in all this, or at least quite subjective, what I see is not seen by others and vice versa.


          9.    diazepan said

            @staff Do you think that RMS when talking about freedom wants to restrict himself to the legal aspects and not talk about something more ethereal? If Open Source had arisen before Free Software, I would have agreed with you.

          10.    Staff said

            @Diazepam.
            I don't know what RMS has to do with this, I spoke for myself.
            «I have tried to ...»
            But anyway I answer you, RMS has said in effect, that the reason for the creation of the Free Software movement is precisely the intention that it be considered in the debate on human rights and copyright. History is full of people who have proposed changes in the laws without looking for ethereal things, as you call them. (Abolition of slavery, women's rights….).
            Those are my evidences and reasons to believe it (In addition to the fact that none of the 4 freedoms speak of anything else).
            If you or someone else comes to say otherwise, the burden of proof falls on you, because calling someone crazy, Taliban, power-hungry, ... without evidence, also has a name in the dictionary, slander.

          11.    Staff said

            @Elder brother
            We return to the same confusion, of not knowing what freedom is. Freedom is not infinite, unlimited, much less the same as the ability to do something.
            Right here, you can read an aberration of the caliber of:
            "If you WANT to do x things, you MUST do x things, only then will you be free"
            A thing like this has the same logic that if someone WANTS to abuse minors they MUST do it, because only then will they be free.
            With this I have to repeat it, freedom is not the same as having the ability to do something.
            You can kill someone but you do NOT have the freedom to do it (because he has the right to life), not having that freedom does not make you a slave or make you lose your freedoms (which are not unlimited).
            That is why it is said that freedom is an abstract concept (which is not the same as confusing or without explanation) because it is beyond the subject.
            For those of us who are not steeped in law, it tends to seem confusing at first, that's why I told you about the OOP, thinking that in known terms it would be more understandable, you as programmers know that an abstract class can be applied to an object (In this case It would be the subject) but it has nothing to do with it, it does not even need a caught implementation within the object, they are general, not specific, and their methods are not infinite or unlimited.

            If with that I am clear, now it is seen that freedom has nothing to do with the particular conceptualization of the universe of each person, although it is something of yours, it is not something you have in you, it is declared on the outside, it serves for everyone and It has its limitations, the main one, that you cannot take it away from others, no matter what you want to do and it bothers you that you cannot.

            The correct reading that should be given to that clause would be something like:
            "I protect your freedom, at the same time as that of others, do not believe yourself the center of the Nano universe" XD

        2.    Manuel Escudero said

          It has to do with the fact that you have the freedom to buy or not to buy as well as to believe that "I read or not read" and that is what I try to explain in the article, it is the "great" of freedom. If you want to live it through software, live it, if you want to live it through opinions, live it. Just be free.

  19.   Tesla said

    I did not know whether to comment on this post. For my part, I respect the author for the work done even though he may be for or against what is stated here.

    I think there are several points on which one always returns or on which the discussions always revolve and points that I am going to comment on. Always from my point of view.

    One is the interpretation of such an ambiguous word as freedom. The different types of freedom are often confused (which is also ambiguous). And we take to the tremendous something as simple as an operating system or, in this case, a mobile phone.

    Another is freedom of choice. I can choose between Android or iOS, among others. This choice does not make me more free, contrary to what many people think. It is simply one more control instrument, a simple smokescreen to hide what is really happening: companies creating demand, creating needs that did not exist years ago and trying to camouflage it under the word "progress." But of course, nobody is alarmed by that. Very few name the word freedom under that reality. Instead, we pour rivers of ink on whether using a certain product is better than another, believing that the mere fact of having found its functionality exempts us from all guilt. And that is the worst thing we can do, forget that they are simple products and that they do not represent anything by themselves.

    In relation to free software, which is what concerns us, many of us defend free software because it is simply the ability to take control of our PCs, not to depend on a company that only wants benefits. Also, in my case, I find it very beautiful that there are communities that dedicate their time to creating something altruistically without the need for a company behind to direct them (such as Debian, Linux Mint, ArchLinux, Manjaro, KaOS and many more). But do not forget that free software is nothing more than a tool, in my opinion, to create awareness and demonstrate that freedom, understood as the ability to take control of your life, is possible. It's good to have it and defend it, but let's not think that it is the summit of freedom, far from it.

    I'm sorry if my comment bothers anyone. But in the end you get tired of always seeing the same struggles that lead to nothing. Do you want to use iPhone, Windows or whatever? Go ahead ... But let's not try to see the three feet of the cat thinking that one option makes us freer than another, because they are always within the spectrum that they mark us. And whoever gets out of the herd is considered utopian.

    A greeting!

  20.   Arthur said

    Amigos:

    I have been a Linux user recently, I migrated like most of you from Windows ... we all know that despite everything Windows makes many things easier (probably because we get used to using it and its errors).

    These comments are seen by a user with some impulse to switch to Linux, I guarantee that he is scared by both "entanglement" of the little theme of freedoms and is likely to say "Lots of crazy people, lacking freedom.

    Let's stop worrying about the freedom or non-freedom of software, let's promote more the acceptance of free software, of the knowledge that there are many alternatives. Well-known office Windows users are not interested in the fine print part. The license is what matters the least to them, the main concern is whether it will serve them and the compatibility with the proprietary software they use.

    Anyway I migrated from Windows and I don't need it (Not even to play).

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      @Arturo has a pretty important point, but trolls skip these comments,: /

  21.   Josman said

    This is nothing more than a justification to the point of wanting to deceive yourself, but give it if you have the resources and personal freedom to choose one of these perfect devices, but do not come to rant against Stallman, users, philosophy or whatever, it is as if I belonged to X soccer team, and I bought a Y shirt if they criticize me then I have to put up with it.

  22.   BGBgus said

    I think you have confused freedom with the comfort of choosing jail. You are in your right, surely Apple likes it 😉

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      From android to iOS, android is more of a jail, although neither of them is saved. At least for me it is, and while I feel more free, no one can change this fact.

      1.    dwarf said

        No Manuel, you are wrong about something and it is that both are a prison, no matter how you look at them. Depending on what, which, say and tell, both will represent a prison in one way or another. It's that easy.

        1.    Manuel Escudero said

          I quote my comment: "although neither of us is saved" I am aware of it. I just think that in Android the user is "more closed" even though they proclaim so much freedom.

  23.   x11tete11x said

    As the owner of an ipad 2 and a galaxy, I think that beyond the things you claimed, you did not mention others that really, at least me, annoy me, among them:
    Itunes (I honestly read your xenode post but at the time libgpod left me almost a year without being able to connect an ipod touch 4 (if I forget to mention that I also have one of these))
    Without wifi, communication between devices is a birth, in one of my vacations when I still did not have the galaxy, there was no wifi, and I needed to transfer some files from one device to another, he left me paying, in the end I had to set up a hotspot with my notebook and use "Documents" to be able to transfer files. For these and many other bad experiences I hate how they implemented that

    the button «Share», the truth ... IOS has so few options to share ... that this button is practically to fart ... if there is something that surprised me about Android is the amount of options to share

    finally I believe in my humble opinion that the article rather evaluates the "freedom" in terms of the "comfort" and "usability" of the IDevices, obviously from their perspective, which for me is wrong, it is like saying that a car With a 6-speed gearbox and reverse it is more "free" than a car with a 3-speed gearbox and no reverse, due to the fact that in the 6 speeds you have a meticulous control of the speed and to reverse you do not have to go down to push it back, because you already have the reverse ...

    1.    x11tete11x said

      PS: I sense that a big sandstorm is coming xD

    2.    Manuel Escudero said

      Instashare has been allowing you to share between iDevices without Wi-Fi for a long time. And nowadays you don't need iTunes at all, I personally don't use it. Of the rest, everyone thinks what they want. Personally, a "bigger" share button does not seem like a feature capable of competing against everything else that I do care about on a device, but everyone has their needs.

  24.   Erick said

    very good article, the truth is already missing that someone like you put the points on the "I", many kisses there are people who think they are very "free" with x and y when in reality it is not, happy n_n

  25.   poor taku said

    I have to start by saying that I have known the wildebeest system for a year, the philosophy of free software (which was totally compatible with my own philosophy and therefore was annexed / adapted to my cause) and the good stallman (of which I do not I have located some objectionable point, nor reason to hate it), before that I was a guy with an ipod touch 4 and when he died go to a 5, and I do not use (nor will I use) a cell phone because the sound of the doorbell bothers me directly if I have to contact someone because I visit him or via email.
    In that distant era of the first ipod, I was impressed by how comfortable and powerful that device was, which opened a world of content in the form of a podcast, in addition to access to the web through the parks' wifi, which for three years was my only way to obtain said material.
    One day I decided to learn programming to make video games and with a team from ten years ago I tried it with windos xp after suffering, pain and a virus that took control of the internet, I screwed it off and tried something I had heard over there called linux mint, I find something similar to xp, which no longer gave me good vibes but there is if it could be programmed easily, a few distros later I stay with debian 6.
    Already focused on gnu, it is inevitable to know the corral called ios, starting with the concept of apps (a diminished program that is no more than a mere toy, full of ads, purchases and which does not have any control), the inability to personalize Either for aesthetics or comfort, the closedness of the platform, the deterioration in the operation due to "updates" and ended by the abysmal user contract that if you read it is scary and they warn you that they will do what comes out of their balls When they get out of hand and if you don't accept it, return the equipment to the store because you are not worthy of using it.
    On the side of android the panorama is not better, google already has me annoyed with its fucking way of carrying things (pivacity, gmail, youtube, g +, android itself), computers that you do not own. Anyway, how is the panorama, I will wait for the arrival of intel equipment, or one that I can install what sticks to me, just as simple as trying a new distribution.
    Regarding the licenses, the gpl is the only really free because it prevents you from being able to cut off the use and distribution to others, if you use the community created you must return and contribute with the community knowledge (which is how things are always done if you want Having a boss, owner, king, president is up to you), the developer has the freedom to choose or create the license he wants but by using a mit type, subsequent developments do not have to contribute anything, and there is where he breaks with the responsibility as a member of a community.
    Having a system that I can call the owner of, rather than a user or client, is the result of the work of an entire community and if I want the system to be maintained and evolve, you cannot go around promoting the use of tools contrary to such an ideal.
    what can you do? well yes, this is not a sect. What can you say shit about the system? Well, if you would like to take advantage of everything created for new programs or not (ios-android) only for your own benefit, because you have not understood what this is about.

  26.   Nillo said

    Android is an Open Source OS, IT IS NOT FREE SOFTWARE. And iOS is closed source and more restrictive than Android in certain respects.

  27.   Ñandekuera said

    «Free yourself from the chains OF OTHERS, Think for yourself. As in the bible it says ... »
    Yeah yeah
    you realize right?

    From Linux. Let's use iOS to be free.

    Thanks anyway guys.

    1.    elav said

      Psss .. Nothing to do with the post with DesdeLinux .. I simply approved the article because more interesting than the post (great from some points of view), are the comments that I knew, it was going to generate. 😛

      1.    Ñandekuera said

        Sure, nothing to see! I say it this way with sarcasm, but the truth is that advising the use of proprietary software goes against not only the slogan of the blog, but all the great work that you have been doing for so long. And taking into account that it is one of the most widely read there is, the damage that is done is unfortunately great.
        We all have references, we all build our ideas from those of others because we live in society, not isolated in our individualities.
        We can draw our own conclusions, but taking the valuable contribution of others to enrich them is the most normal thing, it is completely logical, otherwise we would always be starting from scratch. This is done in all aspects of our lives and no one loses their freedom for it.
        I did not like the post. And the truth is, do not get angry, but there are more posts you publish attacking the free software movement and its ideas than those who defend them.

        1.    dwarf said

          The price of having the doors open to a community full of people with thousands of ideas running through their heads. I personally am more of the practical way of seeing things from OpenSource than from the philosophical way of Free Software, I know what I do and I know the consequences of using a proprietary product, but I don't care because I want what it offers.

          Beyond that, well, bad that you did not like the article and that the other articles seem bad but hey, everything belongs to everyone.

      2.    SnKisuke said

        troll (?); P

    2.    diazepan said

      Neither truth nor knowledge liberate man but his critical thinking. The gurus perpetuate mental slavery. You change the shepherd but you are still a sheep.

      1.    eliotime3000 said

        My leader is Zaratrusta

      2.    Staff said

        Interestingly is what RMS essentially says:
        “Freedom is not being able to choose between a few imposed options, but being in control of your own life. Freedom is not choosing who will be your master, it is not having a master »
        But when he says it, he is imposing his ideas (Although his idea is that you don't even obey him XD).

        1.    Morpheus said

          Is that why these so-called "followers" of free software do not agree with free software, because Stallman tells them, the idea is "do not obey anyone." And these blind fanatics listen to him and are against his ideas.

        2.    diazepan said

          Curiously Zarathustra did not want to have a following, but if no one follows RMS he will feel that his cause is lost.

          1.    Staff said

            Yes, but Zaratrusta was a character in search of resolution of his own existential problems, especially transcendence.
            Today we know that of the billions (that Sagan hears that :)) that the universe has left, the human race will not exist for 10% of that time, and that in the blink of an eye that will be its existence, they will forget all heroes and leaders.
            Thus, for those of us who as RMS are not religious, transcendence is irrelevant.
            Sure, he does what he does out of selfishness, like everyone else, but when his goal is in favor of freedom and collective knowledge, as Nietzsche himself said:
            "That is selfishness of another quality"

          2.    diazepan said

            That depends on the unit of measurement you take to measure time, whether the second or the megayear, or the planck time.

            Another thing, are you referring to Kantian egoism? that is, any act resulting from a desire or inclination.

          3.    Staff said

            The measure is irrelevant, because I am talking in percentages, 10% of 1 year is the same as 10% of 365 days, 8760 days, 525600 minutes ... I could speak of space-time that deforms, expands and contracts, with gravity as a function of the mass of the bodies and it would be the same.

            I refer to selfishness as a logical, natural evolution (in a Darwinian sense) of instinct to have a place in a rational mind, such as that of the human.

            But let's not distort any more, the main problem of this class of articles is the confusion (which generates more confusion) when using freedom as a philosophical, subjective element and not as a legal and legal issue, where its definitions are clear, and They must be fully complied with by all, without being able to call them dogmas and their fanatical or radical spokesmen.

          4.    diazepan said

            Perhaps it would be better to talk about freedom in terms of dependencies (how dependent am I on X, how can I reduce that dependency and what risks and costs should I bear)

          5.    Staff said

            No, because then it becomes subjective again.
            This is talking about licenses and as such is a matter of law, legal and law, which influences the destiny of companies. Hence it must be treated as a matter of state.
            Of course, when it reaches the murky area of ​​politics, it can be given more nuances, but with the same purpose, to set a precedent and make it clear how these matters should be governed.

  28.   trisquelcolombia said

    And how do you know that Apple is in control of your computer with all those options it brings to "control" your device; It is closed code, you cannot know it, with all due respect but I seem to be listening to a bitter aunt in your post who tells me: «you think like this because these friends are influencing you», friend we all have ideas similar to other people and that does not mean A "leader" is simply an activist who thinks in a certain way, the effect of other people on our life is very strong, I am writing to you from Windows at this moment, why? Because how do I see the girls on webcam in skype if I have trisquel, how do I run matlab, atpdraw, the files that the teachers send me? I know that windows is exclusive, so if I am going to have a freedom option that is really 100% free, what is a half-free linux worth to me, that is not a true alternative, that of mobile phones I have thought about it a lot and none It's free, that's why I don't have a mobile, but I think you exaggerated with that of the leader, the leader is the one who does not want you to know the truth and live alienated, apple alienates the users.A half-free gnu / linux does not work we are all going to be contradictory with the ifeologies many times but the fact of thinking like another does not mean that you are not free.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      Your question is irrelevant, it is as if you are asking me:

      "How do you know that when you fall asleep you are not really dying and come back to life the next day?"

      Just for the first line, I won't bother to read the rest of your comment.

  29.   jep said

    I liked the article, it's good to ramble.

    It seems necessary to me to separate 2 concepts that are totally different for me.
    Freed (philosophical): I am not going to define this, but I quite agree with what the article says.
    free software: a concept introduced by RMS, it focuses more on having control over what actions the software we use does, knowing exactly what it is doing, not allowing it to do things we do not want and having the power to modify it to our liking. I do not think that this can be called freedom, it is rather to obtain a power (or faculty) over the software, it is not something that can be demanded right off the bat as a right to say that without this a person is not free .

    One thing has nothing to do with the other, in fact, if I am not interested in knowing what the software I use does, but where I live, proprietary software is prohibited, I am losing freedom. That is undeniable.

    Personally I love the idea of ​​free software even though I don't see that 100% purity can be achieved, I have been using GNU / Linux for more than 15 years (with some proprietary packages), I use android despite being aware of that cannot be considered Free.

    Hopefully Firefox OS is the promised (mobile) land.

  30.   frameworks said

    That's like saying that windows gives you more freedom than linux, because it lets you configure the firewall with "Little Buttons", and you don't need to have to use that "SUDO" and weird stuff.

    "Open source", that's the difference

    (((Users can study, modify and improve its design by making its source code available.))).

    whether on a cell phone, on a laptop, on a desktop pc or a tablet, "freedom" is not given (given) to you by an Operating System, or an application, freedom is given by your knowledge (understanding) of the things you do.

  31.   Staff said

    First 3 recommendations:
    1. Go through the dictionary and see what freedom and right are.
    2. Go to the UN page and see what are the rights and freedoms in the universal declaration of human rights.
    3. Stop by the FSF and see which are the only 4 freedoms that Free Software deals with.

    With this we avoid:
    - To think that freedom is to do what we want; Freedom is not unlimited, it requires strict laws, because your freedom ends where others begin.
    - Invent freedoms, or confuse them with things like free will.
    - Errors such as confusing freedom of choice as something related to Free Software.

    And above all, you avoid fallacies like this:

    «The problem is, if you buy an Apple product, (for example) you are giving it to Apple, and if you go around proclaiming the word of the FSF and using gNewSense GNU / Linux because they believe it is correct, you are yielding to Stallman. Paradoxical, right? it's stupid. "

    Apple infringes on your property rights by controlling a device for which you already paid.
    Proclaiming (as you call it) the word of the FSF, does not threaten any freedom, because you can continue using YOUR device AS YOU WANT.
    Or, by "giving it to Stallman" you will no longer be able to sell it in a country with a US embargo?
    Or, by proclaiming human rights, are you giving up your freedom to the UN?

    Or like this:

    "If you are going to defend something, do it out of your own conviction, because you believe it is correct, not because someone else has sold you an idea ... But the most important thing: Find out and form a criterion, don't believe everything they tell you, Find out."

    How is one to inform oneself if it is not reading / listening to others? How are you going to form a criterion if the only opinions you listen to are the ones you develop?
    At the end of the day we always buy ideas, just as you have done with the idea that the iPhone is "more free", or as you want to do with your own ideas:
    «Manuel Escudero: Entrepreneur. I seek to change the world through code, design, photography and / or any activity that involves exploiting my ability to do things that I enjoy. »

    Human rights are not a whim of someone, you are not buying the idea of ​​a person, or worse still, a company; They have continued in debate for centuries, and information technology began to have an impact on all aspects of our lives just over 20 years ago, it is important to consider in this debate the implications of that impact, that is what the FSF proposes, which nobody puts a gun to your head so you don't use proprietary software.

    1.    DanielC said

      You're taking things out of context.
      When Manuel Escudero speaks of his own conviction, he refers to not being guided because "so and so says that ..." and doing it blindly without further ado, without refuting, without contrasting, etc.
      I'm sick of seeing people everywhere saying that this or that browser is the best, why? because yes, and they come out with the repetition of the same slogan that the browser uses that they say is the best. Few say real reasons, not marketing or popularity issues.
      And in the case of this article it is the same, as there are those who say Android is free, because Google says it (or that Ubuntu spies, because Stallman says it), and iPhone is not free because (besides that it is the damn Apple) manages the device for which you paid… ..if we are strict, no device that has an OS will be free because they are managing it for you, but that is another story.

      1.    Staff said

        I tell you the same as Manuel Escudero.
        Start by reading and understanding what freedom is.
        Then read carefully when I speak of conviction and criteria, because to form either of the two you have to carry out an exercise of discernment which is only possible by listening to multiple voices. In the end, when you defend your own criteria, it will still be, totally or in part, an idea (s) that you bought.
        But if you ask people to inform themselves, the first thing would be to lead by example, and at least find out, at least, the meaning of the terms you mention, such as freedom.

        When you understand the concept, and you apply it to software, you understand that free software does not take away any freedom to manage the device for you, and yet if it protects freedom because it handles it for you, but as you want, if you don't like it as it handles it by default, you are fully empowered to change it or pay someone to change it to your liking.

        1.    Manuel Escudero said

          "If freedom means anything, it will be above all the right to tell people what they do not want to hear" George Orwell - Prologue to rebellion on the farm.

          I borrowed that from another comment. Your comments only strengthen my own definition of staff freedom, let's continue with the debate 😉

          1.    Staff said

            If you had read rebellion on the farm, you would know very well that it refers to freedom of the press and freedom of expression, and that it has nothing to do with Free Software.

            That you have your own and particular definition (Conceptualization, I would say) seems very good to me, but that you come and confuse it with the official definitions, it is absurd, to begin with because your definition has no value outside the walls of your skull, no has any sustenance.
            You live in a world governed by human laws, and that you are happy "feeling free" (Blessed ignorance) does not change reality.

            Anyone can change the meaning of words to live in a fantasy that suits their possibilities, taking it as dogmas.
            It is the principle of religions, but ultimately not all religions can be right.

            By the way, which debate? to my answers your most elaborate argument is:
            "If you don't agree on that, don't buy and that's it."
            And to top it off, they didn't even talk about shopping.

          2.    Manuel Escudero said

            @Staff: Not even I could have illustrated it better, basically you can keep saying a thousand things, I can keep saying a thousand things but the difference between you and me is that for a long time I only read the first line of every comment that you put and the truth I could not give more equal what you think or stop thinking because for me you are only an insignificant user in a Linux blog, (and I can be something similar to you) at the end of the day it does not matter 😉 I do not see why continue with the discussion of your points that whatever you do, whatever you say about me or my way of thinking, I will never accept. I have chosen an iPhone, how good that you did not.

            End.

          3.    Staff said

            LOL, and at the end without arguments comes the insult in disguise.

            If you are not willing to debate for my sake, but do not send confusing messages such as asking me to "continue the debate", or that you read only the first line, when you had to read everything to know that "You couldn't illustrate it better", or that you don't care what others say, when the mere fact of writing the article indicates otherwise, as well as appreciating comments (with which you agree).
            Because I can only give you the reading that everything you say has a high factor of, what psychologists call, self-reaffirmation.
            Greetings.

    2.    Ñandekuera said

      Thank you Staff for synthesizing and writing what gave me confidence ...

    3.    Manuel Escudero said

      @Staff: Good. What you say 😉

  32.   rawBasic said

    Uff .. ..I just read your whole post .. ..but I don't have time to read all the comments (it will be later) ..

    Beyond that you touch on a somewhat delicate topic, referring to the fact that it can soon become a flame ... I mainly rescue this from your post, because I share it widely:

    "However, today I come to this blog to tell you that you don't need leaders, you have yourselves."

    Thanks for squeezing this idea out .. 😉

    1.    DanielC said

      It makes me laugh when I watch motivational talks where they say the same thing on YouTube, and people come out commenting that they want that guy for president or that more leaders like him are needed for X country to get out of the hole. xD

  33.   DanielC said

    I have already seen this flame in the Polish in my beloved Mexico. And with another, curiously, who thinks he is messiah.

    Do not touch Stallman / Android because instead of arguing with other things to debate they only attack the intelligence of the writer to try to discredit it.

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      And by the way, there are times that by locking ourselves in the "universe" of free software, we lose these points of view that several veteran windowsers have (as in the case of a blogger named Chillinfart criticizing the pathetic support from Microsoft at the enterprise level in Peru).

  34.   Javier said

    Sure, your iOS is so free that:
    - It doesn't have a file explorer to view your folders and there's no way to do it without jailbreaking.
    - You cannot use it as a pendrive
    - To create a free account in AppStore you are forced to enter your credit card details (before it was not like that) even if you do not use it.
    - It does not let you share apps, images, music or anything via Bluetooth. Bluetooth is only for connecting to headphones.
    - You cannot change the desktop icons and interfaces like Android does with launchers and without the need for Root.
    - You cannot connect an SD card to it.
    - If your battery is already dying, you cannot change it.
    - You cannot connect the simple and standard USB connector because it forces you to use the connector that only Apple manufactures.
    - You cannot watch videos in other format because the player only plays videos converted to MP4 using iTunes.
    - You can't use Flash Player (even if it's Flash garbage, but sometimes it's necessary for certain things).
    - You cannot choose the default web browser. If you install another web browser like Chrome, Dolphin, Opera. Your iPhone will continue to open the links with Safari.
    - You can't download Firefox because I don't know what Apple has against the free apps that Firefox banned some time ago from the AppStore, something similar happened with VLC Player.
    - You cannot install apps from other sources, everything must be done through the AppStore. On Android it is as simple as downloading the APK from alternative stores and then running it.
    - For iOS app developers, uploading an App is complex because Apple imposes a lot of restrictions and conditions that your App must meet in order to be accepted. It is a very military process. These things don't happen on Android.
    - The default mail app for iOS only lets you sync with a few popular mail services, such as Gmail, Yahoo Mail, Outlook. The default email app for Android lets you configure with any email provider and configure many more things.
    - If you upload an app that tries to replace a default iOS functionality, Apple unexpectedly deletes it. Just as it happened with the case of an App similar to Siri (I don't remember its name).

    … And well, I can spend all day explaining more Anti-features of iOS that Android does not have, but I don't want to continue wasting my time.

    1.    elav said

      WTF? Doesn't iOS / iPhone allow me to do all this? Go to hell Apple .. From what I must say, dear Manuel Escudero, what do you smoke that you don't share? 😀

      1.    x11tete11x said

        aghhhhhhhhh the default browser is the massssssssss tediosaa, god, they want to put you on safari through the cu ... fuck! ..

    2.    Ñandekuera said

      Hahaha
      I once grabbed a phone and since I couldn't find the «back» button, I returned it ...

    3.    x11tete11x said

      another one that you lack that particularly bothers me a lot, most of the IOS apps that seek to use the device as a pendrive or store something, make use of a built-in or embedded browser, where FROM there you have to download things because Apple's whim you can't download anything from your iDevice… I use it for university (practical work notes, most of it in PDF, I already learned to "live" with that, but it seems stupid to me that under the tremendous hardware it has and the solidity of IOS you can't do something as stupid as downloading a PDF ...)

    4.    Manuel Escudero said

      @elav, @ x11tete11x: If you had really read the two articles on my blog that I link in this one, (the one about synchronization especially) and also had an iPhone with iOS 7.x, you would realize that 90% of what says @Javier is completely false. So I leave it to you.

      1.    Manuel Escudero said

        @Javier, in steps:

        (All this without Jailbreak)

        - File and folder explorer: Documents by Readdle.

        - Like pendrive? Of course it can: http://ubuntuone.com/2gpEcnJ1HU854nYmmsGyCs

        - App store without credit card: You can create an appleID without a card from iTunes or the device, the button is half hidden but there is one that says "skip" when they ask for it, I don't have any linked.

        - Bluetooth? Right, it only works to transfer between iDevices or use accessories, that's what instashare and dukto are for.

        - Launchers? those are stupid, it is not possible in FFOS because it is a reverend nonsense, I do not consider that "a fault"

        - SD? Android KitKat is eradicating them, now they only serve to transfer files from the PC to the device. My iPhone has 64GB for the same.

        - The battery lasts more than 33 hours in rough use, I don't think I will need to change it soon.

        - The European Union has already fixed the USB connector, now even Apple will be standardized

        - Oplayer and VLC play audio and video in ALL formats like Linux.

        - In android you cannot use flash player either, it no longer exists for this platform

        - On my device the links are opened with Chrome, generally because I navigate using chrome.

        - firefox? I use chrome

        - Why would you want to install apps from other sources? You only risk your device (and yes you can, through iTunes)

        - Uploading an app to the appstore or playstore goes through the same process, (I am a developer) only that in android it costs 25 dollars the acceptance fee and in iOS 90.

        - You don't have to use the default app for mail, but it hasn't caused me any problems.

        - I do not know about the apps that they delete because they supply functions, you may be right, or you may lie I have no information about it.

        1.    pandev92 said

          Did you come to sell us iPhones? to as?

          1.    Manuel Escudero said

            I do not come to sell anything, I am simply replying to a comment that brings wrong information as well as you or anyone can refute my article if they believe that what I say is wrong.

          2.    Ñandekuera said

            Hello Escudero, how much the arrogance course?

        2.    Diego said

          Honestly, your answers are embarrassing.
          1- If you consider that launchers are stupid, you are calling us stupid to all of us who prefer to customize our devices in a different way than the one offered by the manufacturer. Your concept of freedom is clearer to me and, let me tell you, it's a shit.
          2- It was the European Union that standardized the issue of connectors, not an Apple initiative, so it continues to be a problem: that only runs for Europe. For the rest, Apple did not solve the problem, but began to market an adapter compatible with its devices, that is, more $$$
          3- If I want to install applications from external sources I do not have the obligation to explain my reasons. I may feel like it, period. Anyway, I trust almost any source more than Apple.

        3.    Javier said

          Manuel, I'll answer you again to what you answered above.

          - Sure, you have to search and download an external application to access the file system. An ordinary user does not have to know that. It should come by default already installed. According to your giving yourself the work of looking for and installing something is not freedom.

          - About the screenshot that you gave me of your iPhone as a pendrive. I tell you that this is not a pendrive, it is not Mass Storage. You are only accessing the file system through the MTP protocol thanks to the fact that your Linux distro comes with a driver and a package to access MTP. I assure you that if you connect your iPhone to a Windows computer (where most of the people are), you will see that you cannot access that "pendrive" that you say, it will only recognize it as a camera device and you will only be able to access the photos and videos you have recorded but not to the file system. And do you know why? because Windows doesn't come with a driver to access MTP like some Linux distros do. Therefore your comment that your iPhone is a mass storage flash drive is incorrect.

          - Again we come to the same, a common user does not have to know that in iTunes there is a trick to skip the step of having to enter your credit card information. (what freedom!).

          - What an outrage that you have to resort to third-party applications to do something so basic that any cheap mobile phone can do it. It seems that Apple has a hatred of the word "share."

          - For you it will be silly, but there are many users who like to customize the style of our mobile. On the other hand, on iPhone you have to settle for the same old style, those gray scales so ugly and washed out. The truth is, your answer is very subjective, even if you don't like launchers, but here we are comparing whether a mobile has such a feature or not, regardless of whether you like it or not.

          - The issue of SD in Kitkat is a big lie, that is a myth that is haunting the internet. I tell you that I have a Galaxy S4 with Kitkat, and I have zero problems with the SD, I have many applications that access and write data to the SD without problems.

          - The issue of the drums I do not discuss it. Because that is a problem that happens with almost all smartphones in general. When they are new, of course, the battery lasts a long time, but it allows about 2 months and the battery life is less and less. I believe that today there should be better technological advances in terms of smartphone batteries.

          - Hopefully this standardization of the European Union is carried out. and if so. Well, you have to buy the latest iPhone to have the new connector.

          - Well, now there is VLC for iOS, but in order to transfer multimedia content to folders and organize them, you have to use third-party applications to do that.

          - On Android if you can use Flash Player. only they no longer keep releasing new updates.

          - Of course the links open in chrome if you are viewing them from Chrome. But I mean to select a default browser. This means that if you are in an external application that needs to load something from the browser (as well as a link within a game) Safari automatically opens without asking you which browser you want to open it with.

          - Chrome? well those are your tastes, if you want, keep using your proprietary spy browser. But here we are comparing whether or not Firefox is on such an operating system. And millions of people in the world use Firefox, and that it is not on iOS is very serious.

          - Are you telling me that if I install apps from other sources, I risk my device? In other words, for you the apps on the AppStore are all safe? You don't even have access to the source code of the apps, they are all compiled and with restrictions. So for example in the case of Android, would installing something from F-Droid be safer than something from Google Play? being that in F-Droid I have 100% free apps with their source code and compiled by F-Droid themselves to ensure that the app offered is the same as the source code, while in Google Play everything is compiled, full of intrusive apps with advertising, proprietary, etc.
          Then you tell me that you can install apps from other sources from iTunes, well it's true. But you have to do everything by means of synchronization, that is, what you have on your PC is a mirror of what you have on your iPhone, if you accidentally delete an app from the iTunes library, it will also be deleted on the iPhone ( what freedom!).

          - Apart from the advantage of being cheaper (25 USD) on Google Play, they are much less strict than Apple. At Apple, you have to pray that they accept your app, and if not, all your work on the app went to hell.

          - In the Mail application, well those are your tastes. But a large percentage of people use the default mail app. And if we compare it between iOS and Android. Android's far surpasses it in features, apart from synchronizing with any SMTP, IMAP, POP3 service.

          - The thing about the apps that supply functions and are deleted, is totally true. Google and you will see that there are many cases.

          Well I answer all this based on experience because I was also an iPhone user (3gs and 4s) and the truth was that I ended up getting bored with the closedness of the platform and little freedom. That is why I switched to Android, then Cyanogenmod, and discovered a new world full of possibilities.

          Not to bother. But I don't know if you did this post for trolling or attention. But here almost 98% agree that Android is much freer than iOS.

          1.    Manuel Escudero said

            @Javier: I will not continue answering you because you are simply very uninformed, I do not come to teach anyone about anything or sell products, you are not worth my time and I insist, you are wrong, but how can I let you know with your hard head.

            About Cyanogen, yes, but in my article I do not talk about anything other than Android vanilla, (and iOS vanilla). Don't bother answering, you just make yourself irrelevant to me: /

      2.    elav said

        Man, my amazement is mainly due to how little I know about iOS. The few iPhones that I have had in my hands have only served me to play, so whether I have read your articles or not, I would have been just as amazed. 😛

  35.   German said

    I think you are very wrong, and that you know it, you are not free to use ios and you know it, but because you try to convince so many people of what you think if you know that you are right ... It sounds to me that you have a "dirty" conscience .

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      ok 😉

  36.   Diego said

    Hey.
    I am glad that you are comfortable with your new device and that you want to recommend it with arguments, although I personally would not buy Apple products on principle or price.
    However, I think you are flatly mistaken about freedoms. I did not read all the comments, I imagine they have said the same thing as me before, but it does not matter.
    In the first place, it is impossible to know the degree of freedom that the user of an iPhone device has from what we all know: closed code. Although in Android the main applications and even part of the OS are also, as you yourself mentioned, THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY of changing ROMs, and only in this there is already greater freedom.
    Second, the freedom that Stallman proclaims (yes, often radically) is not without foundation. "I am free to give up all my rights," you might say. But to what extent is this freedom?
    Third, "freedom" does not exist in reality, since it is a contradictory concept, and no matter how hard we seek it, it will always be in vain. However, I would rather own my devices as much as possible than not at all.
    Greetings.

  37.   Nebuchadnezzar said

    This type of post is… how to say… for gossip magazines.
    Eradicate garbage like this and dedicate the space to tutorials, there are many of us who do not know about systems and we would like to know more about it, for example, installing and configuring an FTP server or how to select the modules to compile in a custom kernel or etc.
    These opinion pieces add nothing but poison and promote the fanboys who do so much damage

  38.   Diego said

    What a pity! I have been following the blog for a long time, but I find these kinds of articles and those about "distributionitis" extremely unnecessary. No way to filter by author? I would like to read about linux, and not about the new version of the umpteenth derivative of Ubuntu or cheap moral philosophy classes taught by the entrepreneurial photographer this ...

    1.    chejomolina said

      I totally agree with you but I give him the "freedom" to express himself hahaha

  39.   eliotime3000 said

    I am using a Lagdroid smartphone because they have simply given it to me, and although I have rooted and flashed my Galaxy Mini to work with CM 10.1.X, unfortunately I did not have enough hardware to let me update it as others do. more modern smartphones.

    What I would like is to be able to flash my phone with FFOS so that I can really get the most out of my phone, since I've gotten bored with Lagdroid (not even Replicant meets my experimentation needs due to its poor hardware support).

    I am using GNU / Linux because its versatility is really tangible and plausible, not like Windows (although you can see that I am commenting from Windows Vista, I actually have a Dual-boot that has helped me a lot). Also, I am testing the official ports of free applications for Windows and seeing how faithful they are to their GNU / Linux equivalents.

    Anyway, GNU / Linux is really wonderful. You just need to get rid of the thousands of arguments that others tell you (or save them for later). #I said.

    1.    Toyerd24 said

      Do you think that in the future the Mini (I have the ACE), by the way that the poor mobile has given a lot of battle with its barely 800 MHz of CPU, could it be possible to carry Firefox OS? Greetings Elio.

  40.   Martin said

    That of the specific permissions per app (firewall type) I think I have seen it in a certain android rom, which validates your thesis of how closed android is. I think the most correct thing would be to say that android is as closed as the manufacturer and the owner so decides. I see this particular detail as something in which apple takes the lead at the moment, as in other aspects it seems to us that android has it. Roughly I do not think that apple is more open for the simple reason that you do not have the choice, unlike android, with risks, depending on the manufacturer; As well as you decide that from iOS7 there is no great advantage in jailbreaking in the same way my purchase decision is about whether the terminal is hackable in android. For you it is a disadvantage to have to root to have it in a way and yet it took me 2 years to convince a friend to do it in his nexus, what I am going to, there is everything in the vineyard of the Lord and I see that your defense of freedom in iOS sometimes goes down the path of taste, in my humble opinion, anyway, you have given us a great article of reflection, greetings.

  41.   dannlinx said

    "If freedom means anything, it will be above all the right to tell people what they do not want to hear" George Orwell - Prologue to rebellion on the farm

    A controversial subject to no more power; freedom is an unknown term even to those who fight for it.
    But your approach is a great precedent, to open-mindedness.
    In my case I congratulate you, for writing and expressing your freedom; indifferent to the theme in question. The rest are trifles.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      Excellent Orwell's reference 😉

  42.   chejomolina said

    another item to assemble flame meh ~: v
    In the first place, it already discards the opinions of some in advance, everyone has the freedom to express their opinion as they want, whether this opinion is grounded or not.
    It is possible on an iPhone by choice to install some other OS instead of iOS because I think it does not give you that freedom, although Android has a lot of restrictions, it seems to me that the best positioned in the sense of freedom would be FirefoxOS.
    However, and despite the above, I agree on some points, part of true freedom is being able to choose what you want to use, whatever it is or if it meets certain criteria +1 to that. Very much in agreement also with the point of the BSD, Apache, MTI licenses that guarantee a more free software after all they give you the option of being able to close the code that you better and that is freedom.
    In conclusion according to your opinion in a 50/50 we just do not impose our opinions and all good

    1.    eliotime3000 said

      The forum is made to avoid unnecessary flames and prevent them from harassing you with their paradigms.

      And by the way, I must say the following:

      It is because of the fanboys that reggaetón has degraded to levels that are already unrecognizable. It also made ordinary people more afraid than confident to get into programming and other branches.

      In other words, fanboys often cause this and other disasters (so much so that they can destroy religions).

  43.   Isa said

    I've been following this site for a couple of years, and laziness has always been stronger when I want to share a comment, but not today. Among the comments there is one that most caught the attention of the user «carlo»
    Linux is not for people who don't like to think, reason, or work.
    the same thing happens with android, who is afraid of becoming superuser or changing the firmware room their phone is people with little knowledge of linux and they are very lazy to do so, = a lot of people ignorant about the knowledge of what they handle. »
    We will ignore the first part of your comment because more than one distribution is looking for precisely these users. Now, professor, are you saying that a scientist who is lazy to change the rom on his phone is ignorant? Is a mathematician without Linux knowledge too? A doctor does not judge you as ignorant because you do not know what the medicines you take are made of.

    Now, returning to the topic of the article, I will put my opinion with an example. We have neighbor A and neighbor B, they both live next door to each other. A is a professor of literature and B is a manager of some establishment. They both have exactly the same salary and almost the same expenses. Neighbor A uses all Apple, iDevices, iCloud, iTunes, etc. Neighbor B uses a smartphone with Salfish (or the most free mobile operating that they can think of) and on computers, Debian, with the luck of having them fully working with free drivers, rips his music from original CDs, does not use the cloud and transfer everything with the USB cable. Tomorrow the government uses its terror authority and finds the photos of neighbor A on the beach, committing the audacity not to use sunscreen (he has red skin). Guess what happens then? Nothing, absolutely nothing.

    If tomorrow my salary allows me, I will use all of Apple, why? I am pleased to do it, they have a beautiful design and that's it. I don't have to move it a lot and I can use the time it would take to change ROMs living with my family, or planting a tree. I will use a cover that hides the logo, the objective is not to show off, and that's it. This is all stupid. True, computer science will be my secondary profession, and? Maybe some programmers are concerned about the issue of licenses so as not to give away their code, but come on, most of those who read my comment all believe they are hackers because they use the terminal from time to time.

  44.   Isa said

    Heck, I had already written a whole letter, until I reloaded the page and the happy comment seemed to have been published, well ... does anyone know if using Maxthon in private mode affects the publication of comments?

    As it was, they are ridiculous all fighting over this. If I feel like it (and my situation allows it) tomorrow I buy everything from Apple and even use iCloud, and I buy in iTunes knowing that I cannot inherit any song. Now, if my neighbor doesn't use the cloud, he uses Salfish on a Nexus and Debian with all the drivers free, what? Neither he nor I have a better quality of life, nor are we humanly better. Nor does it mean that I am ignorant for preferring to spend the time it would take to install the ROM with my family, or planting a tree. It is as if the doctor judged you as ignorant for not knowing what the medicines are made of, or the architect for not knowing by heart the plans of the building where you work. Don't be ridiculous

    1.    Isa said

      Sorry if comments are repeated, what a shame

      1.    Manuel Escudero said

        @Isa: See? Staff is one of those that I tell you in my previous response to your comments. You question their ideas a little and the universe moves ... It's weird, but normal, believe it. In fact, as soon as you leave this comment, the safest thing is that he will continue commenting, waiting for me to confront him, emphasizing a thousand things waiting for him to "enter the debate" but that will not happen, because I have not even read comments from guys like this. I recommend you do the same, locate them, and if you see their names out there, just read the first line of their comment, see where things are going, laugh a lot and ignore them.

        Never stop expressing yourself.

    2.    Manuel Escudero said

      @Isa: I agree with everything you say, the problem is that there are few people who, like you, form a criterion. Others are lazy to think and that's why these flames are derived, because many people "serve false masters" in search of answers, taking the burden of having to think and decide for them. And when you touch "the master" (Stallman and his ideals in this case) they startle, because you question the very thing that gives them a reason for being, a motive. It's natural…

    3.    Staff said

      Interesting analogies. Of course, nobody would brand you as ignorant for not knowing what medicines are made of, come on, that's why we invented specialization, each one to his own.
      But that is a separate issue, by law medicines must show their ingredients (even if there are few that interest them) to avoid plagiarism of formulas, or that an abusive pharmacist sells you placebos or things that more than help make you sick.
      The same for the architect, you do not have to know the plan, but by law the architect must show and record the plans to ensure that it complies with the regulations of the law in terms of civil protection, and thus guarantee your safety when being inside the building .

      That is what Free Software is about, licenses, laws, law and regulations, not subjective concepts about what freedom is based on prejudices and ignorance.

      1.    Isa said

        Hello, Staff. I like Manuel's advice, it is very useful on many occasions, but for today we will omit it because, well, we are already inspired, right? Qualifying as ignorant did not say it for you, of course. I mentioned it by a specific user who commented here, and sadly it is a very widespread idea. Just like you there must be many users who do not categorize as ignorant those who are not dedicated to computing.

        Now when it comes to sharing ingredients, we understand that life is in danger in these areas. The building can fall, the medicine can kill you. But the iPhone software won't kill you, and neither will Internet Explorer. The point is for the end user, who Stallman also addresses when talking and talking about freedom. How does using Firefox over Safari benefit a user who only visits the New York Times site? It does not raise your quality of life, nor does it "improve your spirit."

        As I understand your opinion, the software should be open to guarantee user safety or avoid the theft of code from another developer. I don't want to discuss the security of eg closed browsers against their open counterparts or material theft, because it is not worth it.

        In some of your comments I read something about the user paying for an iPhone, but Apple still has dominance over the device. The truth is that, the user is free to crash his iPhone on the pavement, but he would no longer have the right to demand the guarantee of this. A device can also "break" if you damage the software, and you are vulnerable to this if you download outside the official store. Also, allowing installation from other sources makes piracy easier. More than one user has opted for Android because on this platform they can install everything for free. So by transforming this into everyday life, one does not become freer if he steals. HIGHLIGHT: I don't want to say that all Android users plan to steal apps, I only deepen a characteristic of "freedom" that so many defend.

        1.    Staff said

          Well, not everything has to be deadly to require legislation, canned juices do not kill anyone (As far as I know) but they still require showing their ingredients.

          It is also worth clarifying that the end user is not only the worker, the architect, the owner of the pharmaceutical company, the NASA engineers, the president of North Korea, all are end users, and for some it represents a minor or major risk entering the New York Times site.

          Out there they wield arguments such as:
          "Apple doesn't care about the love emails you send to your girlfriend"
          But the reality is that Apple has access and checks the emails of its users. This is the case in which it was verified how they deleted emails with specific text.
          Similarly, there are official documents that corroborate that the NSA has full access to any iPhone.

          Many of us can be apathetic to this, because we are in our comfort zone, but no one guarantees that the situation will not change.
          In Ukraine, cell phones and social media were used to track and intimidate protesters. Of course, there will be someone who says that they are only unruly and they deserve it but in the end they are human and we never know when a family member or loved one is a riot and can disappear as many disappeared in that conflict.
          Software was a tool for oppression and murder, maybe, maybe, (I'm not guessing) if they had had cell phones with Free OSs and used decentralized social networks that would not have happened.

          1.    Isa said

            Sorry if I've been in a cave lately, but doesn't Coca-Cola make all of its ingredients public? As far as it is. Do not go being another urban legend that one takes for reality ...

            However, I do not understand why it is in "lesser or greater danger" to enter the NY Times site. I would like you to tell me a little more about it.

            Regarding whether companies don't care, that's not important. I know they have access, I do not doubt it, but it is not relevant to me (Microsoft is the last uncovered in this regard). The only case that I can think of of someone who really needs to hide their communications from the government are, precisely, the protesters. In any case, no electronic means is totally reliable. I think I remember recently there was a rumor of a backdoor in the Linux kernel. I don't know if it's true, but what I do assure you is that if the United States government (because that's where all the movies are set: P) wants to catch you ... better don't use electronic devices.

          2.    Manuel Escudero said

            @Isa: The formula for Coca-Cola is not really available, nor is it patented. Nor is Tesla Motors technology for the new rocket propulsion technology they have created, which allows them to return to the launch point after the deployment of whatever they have sent into space. Neither of the 2 things will ever be patented or released to the public in any way because you run more risk so keeping the real information secret with a slicing method (various parties involved know different parts of the formula / procedure and do not know each other yes). There are many things that have in no way been released beyond the very internal of the companies / organizations where they have been created.

        2.    Staff said

          Indeed, the coca-cola thing is a very effective urban legend for advertising, anyone who wants to patent a formula must present it, that easy.
          This is a good example of how the incorrect information that we hear on this or that side modifies our perception of reality, in other words how people are manipulated into believing that something is safe or unsafe, as appropriate.
          The important thing is that whoever tells you that X software is safe or not, supports it in terms of verifiable things.

          If you enter any site from Safari, it is because you are on an Apple OS, (they do not even develop safari for Windows) and it is known that they are products with access by some instances of the US government, then perhaps there is no risk for you , but for an «Enemy» of the USA yes, from things as basic as knowing your ip or mac, to knowing your exact location, conversations, contacts and agendas.
          The point is that it is legislated for everyone and not just for the carefree.

          That it is not relevant to you does not mean that it is not relevant to anyone. In fact, those who say that it is not relevant to them handle a certain double discourse, because if they see no problem in monitoring their communications because they have nothing to hide, they should also be satisfied and happy that cameras and microphones are installed in their bathrooms (It sounds very exaggerated, but it is feasible, to begin with because the phones already have a camera, microphone and we take them to the bathroom), or that the police enter your house daily with dogs to sniff your drawers, just because you don't have weapons or drugs to hide.

          We live in our comfort zone and we think that it will never happen to us, but there are already countries in which people's right to privacy is violated in these ways, that is why it is important that laws are created at a global level that regulate that sorts of things before it happens to us or anyone else.

          I also agree with you that no device is infallible, but it is not a reason for defeatist thoughts, surely people of color were also told, "you're not going to change anything," "if you don't like it, go live in a cave." but history shows that things are changed (Little by little).

          1.    Isa said

            The Coca Cola thing is not something I can discuss. From teachers I have known that, but they are still idiots, so I will not take it into account. I can only assure you that more than one product is not obliged to share its "ingredients".

            Being an enemy of the US is pretty easy, I understand. But hey, if your conversations reveal that you do not plan to plant a bomb, then more to the defense, right? The worried have something to hide, and entering the relativity of right and wrong, if you have something to hide, your intentions can be good, or they can be bad. It is hard for me to imagine what are the good reasons to hide from the government, and I say it taking into account the country in which I was born (tacos and guacamole). I would even let them have cameras at home (not in the bathroom!). I wouldn't mind knowing what food to prepare today. Anyway, I think you have fallen into a point too dramatic as in "Eagle Eye." Or even compare them to look at your web history to the slavery of Africans. As long as the government does not take away your freedom, nothing is being violated.

            PS: If the data forwarding to the government is done using my data plan, then it would bother me (humor).

        3.    Staff said

          By law they must present them for patents, if they do not present them they are not granted, and they are not protected by the same law, if someone else manages to manufacture the same product they can patent it and take all the profits, or else, get into another type of problems if they are found not to make their products up to the standards.

          I accompanied you on the journey to the extreme of «risks», to see as if there have been cases in which people have died or disappeared while using computers as a tool for this, but I think it is worth clarifying that when talking about security and risks in the field of computing, it is not about the physical integrity of the person, but about what software engineering marks us, things like: Confidentiality and data integrity, authentications, availability ...
          With that in mind and seeing how software has become part of our lives, the ideology of free software arises, to include the above in the human rights debate and give it a valid legal framework.

          It is a matter of knowing that you have a right to privacy, and although someone does not care, no one has to spy on others. (From opening your letters to reading your WhatsApp messages).
          That you have the right to the presumption of innocence, and even if someone does not care, they should not treat you as a terrorist or potential terrorist without evidence, since they have something that makes you suspect that they are dangerous to others, so that a firm judge the order to have their house searched, their phones tapped and whatever they want, just like it always has been.

          So, using software that respects your rights is not to have a better quality of life or to be humanly better (Although surely in the long run it will help you achieve it, but that is another issue) but because it is a matter of rights humans.
          If someone is not interested or that, or does not even know what it is about, it is their opinion and as such it is respectable, as you say, no one should call you ignorant for that, but what is not valid is that based on that apathy, who does not want to be called ignorant, call those who care ridiculous.

          1.    Isa said

            With the first thing you affirm yourself, there is no obligation to commercialize, unless you want a patent so that nobody sells your product, but anyway, that is already more complicated. If the difference between closed / open / free software does not affect security and risks, but only in the field of computing, because from there it loses relevance, because as you say something important such as physical integrity is not at risk. Things like "data integrity and confidentiality, authentications, availability" are just an attempt to give depth to a simple idea: they don't want their messages to be read. Software has become part of our lives not because we are now robots or anything like that, people just enjoy wasting time on Twitter / Facebook all day. It's not that deep. I admit, I have not traveled very long distances, but the few times I have done it and it is worth using a plane, I assure you, I did not bother because they analyzed our luggage. Because it was not only with us, rather with all the passengers. You say that using free software respects your rights, therefore it is implicit that using proprietary software does not, but, then, does the airport violate your rights? I will ignore you saying that, even in the long run, using free software helps you to be a better human being.

            I don't worry about being called ignorant. I'm sure I know a lot more about Linux than the arrogant one I mentioned in my first comment. Sure I know more than him, but the point is, that by using Linux and pretending to be a follower of Stallman and his ideals, now you feel your knowledge as superior. And that, Staff, is called ridiculous, because it is a simple, pretentious and baseless idea. Just as we are all free to use PRIVATIVE software, you are free, of course, to worry that your privacy is taken to the highest point, but you cannot say that by wanting so much "security" you are freer than us. And therefore, if your idea seems simple and without arguments, I am free to consider you ridiculous (not so ignorant, because as we already said, for that we humans invented the specialty), both you are free to consider also if my idea it seems so to you.

          2.    Isa said

            "Rto / libre NOS * affects security and risks". Sorry

        4.    Staff said

          I repeat, it does not lose relevance because it can escalate to the extreme of deaths and missing persons. And although it does not escalate to that much, the economic losses and of any other nature that cause the security failures of the systems is the subject of news every day.
          The terms that I mention are not to give depth to anything, but to understand them you have to read a little about software engineering. It is a very broad subject and treated seriously by many people.
          If it is not relevant for you, well it is your opinion, there are for those who do, to the extent that complete books are written about it and even legislation for that.

          I never said that because we were robots, but that that it is only because of Facebook is not something real. The work of many people is done by computer, laboratory analysis, communications, in the car.

          With the airport, in effect, privacy is violated, the authority admits it and they seek the least invasive measures, but if you refuse the inspection, the authority should not force you, they simply do not let you board the plane, but it is because they reserve the right of admission, and using private planes like yours is not any freedom you have.
          It is very different that without consulting you someone goes to YOUR house or computer to check, than someone asks you to let him check you to enter HIS house.

          I don't know where you get that I think my knowledge is superior. From my first comment I told you that no one should do less to another who does not know something about a subject in which he is not trained.
          But in the same way, no one should make less of someone who has an opinion on a subject that I study, just because the concepts they handle are not understood, or they do not seem important.
          It's as if I go to a math blog and say "4 actually represents 3 units, and I call them ridiculous because they give a lot of importance to a digit, if for a bad sum no one dies."

          And we come back to the same thing, if we confuse freedom of choice with the freedom promoted by Free Software, we start badly and get nowhere, they are pears and apples.
          If you consider that Free Software is pretentious and baseless, then good.
          The point is that the person who represents her is a Harvard graduate, with recognitions on several continents, has more credentials than you and I combined, and it is not just him, there are many respected people both in the world of computer science and in politics that have the same idea, there are cities and entire countries that little by little modify laws to adjust them to those principles. All this is real data and objective fundamentals. Thus, my reasoning, logic and even Ockham's razor, tells me that I better pay attention to those people (No nonsensical fanaticism).

          Indeed you can believe what you want, my intention is not to change anyone's ideas.
          But if someone captures those ideas of his in a mass media and tries to base them with slander, lies and opinions without evidence, I try to leave another vision of things with the sole purpose of avoiding misinformation.

  45.   Sergio Benitez said

    In my humble opinion, it is fine if you settle down better in the end, for that there is a variety of systems, each one we can choose what we want, I do not adapt to ios, the truth is that it is very complicated for me that is why I am with android, you have to have your reasons not to use adroid as well as me not to use ios

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      +1 to this comment, @Sergio 😉

  46.   Max said

    If we want to get very, very deep. Freedom does not exist, since society, the media and everything that surrounds you, molded us. Making something like you is because a series of "events" shaped your personality. It is a humble comment. 😀

  47.   MIKE said

    Excellent Article Manuel Escudero

    It gives a lot to think about!

    I'm new to the world of programming, when I program I realize ALL the things that can be done !! Being free or not there is always a control over the user.

    Thousands of people around the world use systems and do not realize what goes on behind the interface. Everything is as the information is used «(For better or for worse)» ...

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      @MIKE: Yep! For better or for worse, that's the point of everything… But anyway, it's good that you took the time to read the article, see you in other comments 😉

  48.   Rutilio Carrastrapio said

    Dear Manuel:

    I have read the article very carefully and I think that the information you share is enough for me to think that the concepts of freedom that you equate are different. We may disagree with Richard Stallman on his radical stance, but I think his ideas are not just an unsubstantiated hippie pose, but a thorough analysis of reality. In my opinion, Stallman's freedom refers to the transfer of rights that you grant to a programmer / company with whom you sign a service provision agreement; And the first idea comes in: Apple sends you a very complete document to your email to accept your license. What happens to the Hardware purchased if you reject the license? I didn't search much, but I couldn't find any video where someone clicks Don't accept. If you exercise that freedom, please share it.

    Now, you mention that the freedom of the user is found in the licenses that "leave open the possibility of closed developments based on community efforts for the freedom of the user." I do not understand how the user is benefited by having closed environments. This sounds very similar to the Microsoft fallacy: their software is more secure because it is not known. If someone decides everything for you, I don't understand why it improves your experience.

    Third. I think that the ego question of developers grows even more when they feed on code that they do not share. It's a way of saying it's mine and nobody else's, and play with it but as I give it to you. If we see it from the business side, of course it is the most convenient, because you can appropriate the work of many people, sell it and fill your pockets without any moral irritation; And of course the license gives you that freedom, but by closing the code you do not give back to the community, but to yourself and this again I do not see how the user experience improves. Thinking that controlling everything because the experience thought by the developer is the best sounds superb to me.

    Finally, Apple letting you configure your applications and block certain things does not necessarily speak of freedom, because ultimately those applications and those blocks will never allow you to block Apple's tracking. I think that comparing Android terminals vs iPhone to seek freedom is like comparing Franco vs Mussolini to seek democracy.

    regards

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      @Rutilio: I respect your opinion, and if you've already read the article, I don't even have to answer your comment to reaffirm that we think differently. I just want to add: What Apple crawl? is what I'm going for ... People who immerse themselves in ideologies like Stallman's tend to talk about things that DO NOT HAPPEN. Apple does not track your terminal. When you buy it, you decide if you want (or do not want) to send "usage information" which refers to the error logs themselves as if the application that crashed used geolocation had your geographic location. That is the closest thing to "apple tracking" and you decide if you want to send these logs or not, and it is explained to you that depending on the case they can carry your location. Something similar happens in an android, but it is not clear if you activated Google tracking or not, until you enter your preferences and realize it (most of the time, by accepting something "random" you end up activating it) and that is a very big difference in methodologies ... HOWEVER this does not mean that Google or Apple are tracking you, because you are fully aware of it (well, not entirely on android) and in any case you can disable these functions. In any case, if someone tracks your mobile, it is the operator, the technology companies (and I'm sorry if I say it like this because judging by how you write, I don't think you deserve this definition):

      What will your pathetic life matter to them?

  49.   Izenzo said

    From Android to iOS…. my mother: /

    To begin with, and make it fair, you should have tried a high-end Android Smartphone or similar to the iPhone, and then you could already see advantages and disadvantages.

    I have not seen the iOS Apps, among other things because I have not the slightest interest in Apple or its ecosystem, I do not want absurd ties and above paying dearly, but Android Apps are good, there are bad ones and there are regular ones , but it is not something that has caught my attention excessively.

    But everyone does what they want, we'll see what you think when the news wears off and you start to see the negative side of Apple, its ecosystem and its products.

  50.   mitcoes said

    You are FREE to use MS WOS, IOS or OSX, but this is from LINUX and none of the above is Android, it is LINUX, the others are not.

    That you feel more free in IOS, go ahead, in Android, as you write, YOU CAN ESCAPE from PRISON even if it costs more. Even the FSF has its own REPLICANT version that is installable on various models.

    On your IOS device - CAN'T INSTALL ANYTHING ELSE -

    I suppose that there will be prisoners who feel freer inside than outside of jail by having more free time than if they work in two minimum wage jobs but being right in their particular cases, I do not think that in a forum on civil liberties they will allow them to write an article on that you are freer in lacquer.

    In the linux world we are so free that we even allow LIBERTICIDAS to write in our forums

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      Good, long live freedom! 😉

  51.   Carlos said

    At this point the truth seems absurd to me this type of discussion since everything is related to everything, you cannot aspire to a pure freedom in the computer world if we do not live it, we all work to eat, pay bills, consume or buy in international chains, at some point we are going to consume closed formula medicines, even our freedom of the hardware we use is diminished by what manufacturers can offer us or even perhaps with android or ios we are tied to data plans and companies that impose monopolies 🙂. I don't think it is impossible but now it is very difficult.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      +1 to this comment.

  52.   Pedro said

    This debate should be approached taking into account the 4 premises of free software, which are the ones that define the basis of the movement of free software based on gnu / linux. According to that, IOS is not free, plain and simple. And it goes against the 4 premises, very simple. Android complies with some premises, totally or partially. So on a scale of freedom based on the 4 premises, it complies better than ios.
    There are some things that make me very noisy ...
    says the author of the post:
    "Why should I get my definition of freedom out of another man's mouth?"
    well, here is a clear prejudice to Stallman's opinion. Since the definition of Freedom (and all the words in the universe) we have taken from other people who have written them in dictionaries or similar. Unless someone invents a new word and defines it, we speak based on what we inherit from society, we have an inherited culture. Therefore, the definitions we use have been given to us by other men and women. We may like them or not, we can surely choose.
    But here it is clear that stallman bothers him, a clear prejudice, otherwise he should not accept any definition of Freedom, since it has been given by other men. A lot of people agree to define freedom according to the 4 premises, they can disagree, and it's perfect.
    says the author of the post:
    «I personally do consider the iPhone a“ freer ”device than any Android. And it is that outside its scope “closed source” »
    Here is a clear contradiction, come on. How can something be considered "closed source" or closed source with any freedom? It's simple, let's not break our heads. Let us always, always remember the 4 premises.
    says the author of the post: that the iphone "empowers the user." Let's go back to the 4 premises. The iphone crashes against 4 o'clock.
    I believe that only free software can guarantee greater technological equality, since it allows all of us to access it without having to pay and to distribute, copy and improve it. Nothing, none of that can be done with apple or microsoft. As simple as that.
    Regards,
    Peter.

  53.   Pedro said

    This debate should be approached taking into account the 4 premises of free software, which are the ones that define the basis of the movement of free software based on gnu / linux. According to that, IOS is not free, plain and simple. And it goes against the 4 premises, very simple.
    Android complies with some premises, totally or partially. So on a scale of freedom based on the 4 premises, it complies better than ios.
    There are some things that make me very noisy ...
    says the author of the post:
    "Why should I get my definition of freedom out of another man's mouth?"
    well, here is a clear prejudice to Stallman's opinion. Since the definition of Freedom (and all the words in the universe) we have taken from other people who have written them in dictionaries or similar. Unless someone invents a new word and defines it, we speak based on what we inherit from society, we have an inherited culture. Therefore, the definitions we use have been given to us by other men and women. We may like them or not, we can surely choose.
    But here it is clear that stallman bothers him, a clear prejudice, otherwise he should not accept any definition of Freedom, since it has been given by other men. A lot of people agree to define freedom according to the 4 premises, they can disagree, and it's perfect.
    says the author of the post:
    «I personally do consider the iPhone a“ freer ”device than any Android. And it is that outside its scope “closed source” »
    Here is a clear contradiction, come on. How can something be considered "closed source" or closed source with any freedom? It's simple, let's not break our heads. Let us always, always remember the 4 premises.
    says the author of the post: that the iphone "empowers the user." Let's go back to the 4 premises. The iphone crashes against 4 o'clock.
    I believe that only free software can guarantee greater technological equality, since it allows all of us to access it without having to pay and to distribute, copy and improve it. Nothing, none of that can be done with apple or microsoft. As simple as that.
    Regards,
    Peter.

  54.   chupy35 said

    Defending the indefensible

  55.   Pedro said

    A few more things about this post ...
    the author maintains:
    speaking of Control ...
    "Using gNewSense GNU / Linux because they think it's right, you're handing it over to Stallman"
    Can you effectively show us what the actual process is by which using gnewsense one would hand over control to Stallman? If he cannot, he is speaking from ignorance or from prejudice, trying to make Stallman and Apple seem the same to further his argument. And they are not the same at all.
    In the next paragraph he says "crazy" to Stallman without naming him, but it is clear who he is referring to.
    And the photo in the post is intentionally posted to make him look crazy. Stallman has given hundreds of lectures, why didn't he choose one where he was sitting speaking normally?
    We all have prejudices, the issue is to recognize and avoid them so as not to give an opinion from prejudice, which will always lead us astray.
    Regards,
    Peter.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      On if I can clarify this:

      "Using gNewSense GNU / Linux because they think it's correct, you're handing it over to Stallman"

      Clear. It refers to the hypothetical meaning of the phrase, as well as when the most radical within free software say that if "I use sublime text 3 then the editor controls me"

      Neither of the 2 phrases can be interpreted literally, because when buying an Apple or apple product it rules over your life nor when using gNewSense Stallman does it literally (or the FSF then) since the same if I use either of the two and tomorrow I try to kill Tim Cook or Stallman because "I decided to do so" neither of the 2 "forces" really has power over me to order me to do otherwise. It refers to ideological control. The important thing here is that you follow the ideologies you want, do what you want and use the system YOU WANT but out of your own conviction, is what I am trying to say. What does this refer to? Well, if you like iPhone, and you can buy iPhone and WANT to buy iPhone, you MUST buy iPhone, regardless of whether your computer uses gnewSense or not. If you like gNewSense, you can install gNewSense and you WANT to install gNewSense on your Mac, then you MUST install gNewSense on your Mac. And why you MUST do these things? BECAUSE YOU WANT TO DO THEM. The fact that you have gNewSense on your PC and you follow a philosophy should not take control of you and prevent you from buying an iPhone because no matter what you believe or not, YOU ARE THE OWNER OF YOUR DECISIONS. The same if you want to install gNewSense to the Mac. Screw Apple and its warranty! you want to do it and that's why you MUST do it. As simple as that.

      1.    Pedro said

        Manuel, you say: "If you have gNewSense on your PC and follow a philosophy, it should not take control of you and prevent you from buying an iPhone"
        Here I think we have to take into account something called Coherence. IF someone follows a certain ideology or philosophy, it is not that it takes control over us, because we have chosen it. And based on our choice we must be consistent. Someone is incoherent when they say they love animals, and then they go out and hit them. One can follow the 4 premises of free software and buy an iphone, of course. But his speech is losing coherence. His person.
        Regards,
        Peter.

        1.    Manuel Escudero said

          You should not be a slave to your own philosophies for "consistency" is idiotic. But if you don't make sense of something else, then I don't have to argue with you, it's your way of seeing the world and now, I'm not interested in changing that.

          1.    Pedro said

            Manuel, it's not about being a slave. No one is a slave to anything for following a certain ideology or philosophy. All people have a vision of the world, a set of ideas that they follow and are not slaves for that. I think you apply the term slavery very ambiguously. Consistency in life is not synonymous with slavery.
            Regards,
            Peter.

          2.    Manuel Escudero said

            Greetings 😉

          3.    diazepan said

            Manuel is right. To be coherent is to tie the behavior to a single ideal, a single moral, a single point of view.

            1.    Pedro said

              Diazepan, «Manuel is right. To be coherent is to tie the behavior to a single ideal, a single moral, a single point of view. "
              Diazepan, that is your definition of coherence and I respect it, but it is not the only one. I think consistency does not mean being tied down or being a slave. In any case, people are free to say: I love animals and then blow them up. This is called incoherence or double talk. And I'm not saying that we should all be 100% consistent, because that doesn't exist. But we can try to be as coherent as possible taking into account how conditioned we are by our environment, by society.
              Regards,
              Peter.


          4.    Manuel Escudero said

            @diazepan: I don't think so, I'll quote something I replied to another comment to illustrate my point:

            I quote ...

            You enter an interesting point, what you express is known in psychology as the concept of "synthetic happiness vs natural happiness" and the same applies to socialism-capitalism as it applies to the subject of free-proprietary software:

            Natural happiness is what you get when you get what you want, always. Proprietary software products are specialists in this because by narrowing down the options, they generate more happiness. How is this? If you buy a mac, it is less likely that you wonder if it was the right decision in the long term (because there is no other) and you torment yourself with it (if we talk about the OS) But if you use linux, every day you have the risk of saying: "Oh! look, Manjaro has this, Fedora has this! Ubuntu that! and the distro I'm in isn't !! " and you decide to change. That, although it gives you more freedom, it gives you less happiness because it gives you less comfort. After a while, synthetic happiness arrives, which is that which arises from "making the best of what you get" and that's when you start to rationalize things: "Ok, I'm on Fedora and maybe here I can't install the latest version of Photoshop CS6 , but at least I have GIMP, Krita etc ”.

            The trick here is to mediate (by force) because you cannot give in to all your needs any more than you can give in all your comforts…. (Or at least that's how I see it) So I'm happy using Fedora Linux and my iPhone.

            The point is, if you choose to follow a philosophy like free software, you don't have to live tied to "rationalization" or synthetic happiness. If this were the case, then Devs would not create (for example) plugins for krita or gimp to marry the philosophy of "use what you have". Marrying a philosophy at that level "for consistency" also paralyzes things. That's why I think it's stupid.

      2.    Pedro said

        You say Manuel "if you like the iPhone, and you can buy an iPhone and you WANT to buy an iPhone, you MUST buy an iPhone, regardless of whether your computer uses gnewSense or not"
        You forget one detail: money. If you don't have money, the precious freedom in the trash can. So let's agree that freedom is always conditional. All our decisions are always conditioned by external factors. I insist, let's go back to the 4 premises of free software. They are the great guides so that we can advance in free software and technological equality of people. And we must always try to be consistent with what we think, that is what makes us freer and better people.
        Regards,
        Peter.

        1.    Manuel Escudero said

          I quote my comment: »and you can buy an iPhone» It doesn't affect me at all to buy an iPhone tomorrow, I can do it. If you can't, then maybe you shouldn't. You have to have priorities.

          1.    Pedro said

            Manuel, the logic of your justification is: if you can't buy something, then maybe you shouldn't. If you apply that logic to the world's poor, you will see how you leave them starving. Apply that logic to a program like MSOffice. Someone who works with him. Let's say you can't buy it. Should I stop working? I think it's not like this. Knowing with you, there are priorities, but justify that I cannot buy something because I should not, by priorities, I do not see it well. In this society, without money, our much acclaimed freedom is very limited. And Linux with its 4 premises encourages greater freedom in our lives.
            Regards,
            Peter.

        2.    Manuel Escudero said

          No. If you don't have money you don't have to be a jerk and buy tech gadgets instead of food, it's that simple. priority.

          Greetings, Pedro.

          1.    Pedro said

            Whoever insults is that he has run out of arguments.
            "Natural happiness is what you get when you get what you want, always."
            This is impossible, because no one can always, always get what they want. And even if you did get it, it doesn't guarantee happiness, because we see every day that getting what you want doesn't always automatically bring happiness. It is a rather simplistic conception of happiness: I am happy when I have what I want. A 5 year old would say that.
            Regards,
            Peter.

          2.    Manuel Escudero said

            @Pedro: Okay. What you say 😉

  56.   Dystopic Vegan said

    freedom, a millenary theme that will never reach an absolute and true definition because it is a construction from the individual to the general.

    I'm just saying that freedom ends when someone else's begins, one's freedom ends when it affects others, in this sense, Iphone and other brands restrict the freedoms of workers, exploit children, limit the user and even the developer.

    I recently had the experience that at work they wanted to give a downloadable and easily installable ringtone, but iPhone was very complicated (almost impossible to publish it in the store) To install a ringtone it must necessarily be played from iTunes, in others it is even just downloading the file from the cell phone and assign.

    I am only saying that people believe they are free, they judge the ways of seeing the freedom of others, but in the end freedom is built by each one but always looking to respect that of others and only shows with examples how you can live in another way.

    A society that talks about freedom but entertains itself with animals imprisoned in zoos, cirus, with endless wars for borders, etc. .. Is it really a society guided by the search for universal freedom? I believe that it is a society guided by egotism .. my freedom only my freedom.

    I leave two images that seem good to me:

    http://ur1.ca/gw39n

    http://ur1.ca/gw39o

    1.    diazepan said
    2.    Manuel Escudero said

      @ Dystopian Vegan: I am not in PRO or circuses or zoos. Just as I am AGAINST someone who encourages you to eat meat if you do not want to because his selfish mind tells him that "you are wrong" for being Vegan (or vice versa, if you are like that)

  57.   Alex said

    My next mobile will be Firefox OS. Without a doubt the only one that I consider really free, and capable of safeguarding your privacy from companies like Apple and Google. On the other hand, while I stay with cyanogenmod much earlier than with the iphone.

  58.   Javier said

    Manuel, I'll answer you again to what you answered above.

    - Sure, you have to search and download an external application to access the file system. An ordinary user does not have to know that. It should come by default already installed. According to your giving yourself the work of looking for and installing something is not freedom.

    - About the screenshot that you gave me of your iPhone as a pendrive. I tell you that this is not a pendrive, it is not Mass Storage. You are only accessing the file system through the MTP protocol thanks to the fact that your Linux distro comes with a driver and a package to access MTP. I assure you that if you connect your iPhone to a Windows computer (where most of the people are), you will see that you cannot access that "pendrive" that you say, it will only recognize it as a camera device and you will only be able to access the photos and videos you have recorded but not to the file system. And do you know why? because Windows doesn't come with a driver to access MTP like some Linux distros do. Therefore your comment that your iPhone is a mass storage flash drive is incorrect.

    - Again we come to the same, a common user does not have to know that in iTunes there is a trick to skip the step of having to enter your credit card information. (what freedom!).

    - What an outrage that you have to resort to third-party applications to do something so basic that any cheap mobile phone can do it. It seems that Apple has a hatred of the word "share."

    - For you it will be silly, but there are many users who like to customize the style of our mobile. On the other hand, on iPhone you have to settle for the same old style, those gray scales so ugly and washed out. The truth is, your answer is very subjective, even if you don't like launchers, but here we are comparing whether a mobile has such a feature or not, regardless of whether you like it or not.

    - The issue of SD in Kitkat is a big lie, that is a myth that is haunting the internet. I tell you that I have a Galaxy S4 with Kitkat, and I have zero problems with the SD, I have many applications that access and write data to the SD without problems.

    - The issue of the drums I do not discuss it. Because that is a problem that happens with almost all smartphones in general. When they are new, of course, the battery lasts a long time, but it allows about 2 months and the battery life is less and less. I believe that today there should be better technological advances in terms of smartphone batteries.

    - Hopefully this standardization of the European Union is carried out. and if so. Well, you have to buy the latest iPhone to have the new connector.

    - Well, now there is VLC for iOS, but in order to transfer multimedia content to folders and organize them, you have to use third-party applications to do that.

    - On Android if you can use Flash Player. only they no longer keep releasing new updates.

    - Of course the links open in chrome if you are viewing them from Chrome. But I mean to select a default browser. This means that if you are in an external application that needs to load something from the browser (as well as a link within a game) Safari automatically opens without asking you which browser you want to open it with.

    - Chrome? well those are your tastes, if you want, keep using your proprietary spy browser. But here we are comparing whether or not Firefox is on such an operating system. And millions of people in the world use Firefox, and that it is not on iOS is very serious.

    - Are you telling me that if I install apps from other sources, I risk my device? In other words, for you the apps on the AppStore are all safe? You don't even have access to the source code of the apps, they are all compiled and with restrictions. So for example in the case of Android, would installing something from F-Droid be safer than something from Google Play? being that in F-Droid I have 100% free apps with their source code and compiled by F-Droid themselves to ensure that the app offered is the same as the source code, while in Google Play everything is compiled, full of intrusive apps with advertising, proprietary, etc.
    Then you tell me that you can install apps from other sources from iTunes, well it's true. But you have to do everything by means of synchronization, that is, what you have on your PC is a mirror of what you have on your iPhone, if you accidentally delete an app from the iTunes library, it will also be deleted on the iPhone ( what freedom!).

    - Apart from the advantage of being cheaper (25 USD) on Google Play, they are much less strict than Apple. At Apple, you have to pray that they accept your app, and if not, all your work on the app went to hell.

    - In the Mail application, well those are your tastes. But a large percentage of people use the default mail app. And if we compare it between iOS and Android. Android's far surpasses it in features, apart from synchronizing with any SMTP, IMAP, POP3 service.

    - The thing about the apps that supply functions and are deleted, is totally true. Google and you will see that there are many cases.

    Well I answer all this based on experience because I was also an iPhone user (3gs and 4s) and the truth was that I ended up getting bored with the closedness of the platform and little freedom. That is why I switched to Android, then Cyanogenmod, and discovered a new world full of possibilities.

    Not to bother. But I don't know if you did this post for trolling or attention. But here almost 98% agree that Android is much more free than iOS ..

  59.   Evasive said

    Hello again Manuel, you say that:

    @Evasive: your comment is a waste of time… But here is my code:

    https://github.com/Jmlevick

    Ok, if it seems like a waste of time, it says a lot about respect for users. I just asked you where I was, now I know and I'll take my time (which is not worth it for you). I will give you some advice from when you are years old, do not belittle anyone like that since you never know who you are talking to…. (You could take some surprises like the ones I have taken).

    So I leave the conversation and the website without flames or trivialities and calm that the answer will not go in a contact form 😉 Ahh, as I said, now I also don't care about your answer, the turn has already passed.

    greetings

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      Hmmm… ok 🙂

  60.   Rafael said

    Freedom is the most important human right there is, and it has a price! Not everyone is willing to pay. Of course, you decide if you want to be free or not, or if you pay the price of freedom or not (like being able to choose an iBad - iPod, iPhone, iMac, etc ... - or not), it is your decision and you have to live with it, but that is not why you have to insult and try to discredit people who are willing to pay the price and fight for that freedom. Richar Stallman defends our freedom in digital matters and there is nothing we should reproach him for.

  61.   Hello said

    No comments, the only thing that I wonder what you are doing here hanging a post like this, who cares if you changed your operating system or cell phone this blog is about gnu / linux and software, if you do not support the cause why you are here I do not understand I insist that no one cares about your opinions about why you switched, be happy, no one will care. Everyone will continue to use free software and you with your proprietary software, create a post that serves the community if not what are you doing HERE xD

  62.   Xiep said

    I would like to add some reflections, which I consider appropriate, to the author's analysis.

    Choice does not always presuppose freedom. Deciding what color I want to buy a t-shirt, what I'm going to have for dinner today or using iOS, can be free, yes, but, of course, it is not the fundamental thing in free acts.

    Freedom is translated into an act of emancipation, of autonomy, rather than a mere choice. These actions carry a latent pulse with the forces that subordinate us. The deeds for liberation, throughout history, tend to be painful, extremely complicated, and often bloody. It's not very flattering, really, but conflicts with authority require courage and commitment. It is certainly not something comfortable and quiet. There is nothing less willing to change than the established power, and it will use all its resources (friendly, unfriendly and repressive) to avoid a transformation against its interests.

    From struggles for civil rights to battles for dignity, justice, and equity, all movements have made their assumptions on the idea of ​​freedom as an expression of emancipation and self-management. A lesbian, for example, does not choose to "be", she is. It is a reality that becomes a way of life. His fight against patriarchy and persecution is a fight for the freedom of "being."

    I think that the author of the article remains a very superficial layer of the notion of freedom and that he confuses it with comfort and particular interests. Nobody can deny the technical excellence of many proprietary programs, but take the choice of a user with certain inclinations (usefulness, impossibility of carrying out the professional and work task with free programs or a certain taste) to the field where Free Software discussing the sovereignty of the individual with closed and exclusive programs seems to me, for now, a frivolity. The objective of Free Software is not so much to allow the choice and decision between some possibilities, as to mediate and build the terrain where these «appear». This terrain, of course, is not that of iOS and not Android.

    A seasoned, expert and restless user may prefer the options offered by these platforms and can choose them, it would be missing more. But the fact is that this has not so much to do with freedom as with meeting specific needs.

    Regards,

    1.    Pedro said

      Xiep, your opinion is excellent.
      Regards,
      Peter.

  63.   let's use linux said

    «You will only find freedom within you, making your own decisions day by day, never stop thinking for yourself, based on your informed criteria and then you will be free ...»
    Saying this to a slave ("you will only find freedom within yourself") is almost a joke ... freedom is based on our relationship with others, it is necessarily a relationship of power. But hey, that's my opinion.
    Anyway, very interesting article.
    I welcome the opportunity to discuss political issues (such as what is freedom) and not always technical issues.
    A hug! Paul.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      @Pablo (usemoslinux): I differ in that ideology, that of "telling that to a slave ..." Because that is precisely what makes a slave free. Take the most idiotic example you can imagine: Movies like Django or 12 Years of a Slave. If a slave believes that he can be free, THAT HE CAN TAKE CONTROL, then he can free himself, start taking actions that lead him to freedom.

      In a more "realistic" example (if you want to see it like this) If this mindset, this statement that I made is not what sets us free:

      "You will only find freedom within yourself, making your own decisions day by day, never stop thinking for yourself, based on your informed criteria and then you will be free ..."

      So countries like Mexico (where I live) or anyone for the purposes of this matter, would never have had their independence ... In all cases, (or in most cases) they began with the simple fact that a man decided that people could be free to decide what he wanted or did not want in his country, and ultimately, that was translated into a movement.

      Good day.

      1.    x11tete11x said

        Mr. Plato and his Allegory of the Cave disagree: v

        1.    Manuel Escudero said

          @ x11tete11x: What does that comment refer to? I was referring to the fact that I do not agree with what @usemoslinux (Pablo) said:

          I quote:

          Saying this to a slave ("you will only find freedom within yourself") is almost a joke ... freedom is based on our relationship with others, it is necessarily a relationship of power. But hey, that's my opinion.

          End of quote

          PS I already answered your question about fedora on Google+

    2.    Pedro said

      excellent this! "Freedom is based on our relationship with others, it is necessarily a relationship of power."
      And indeed, it is a mistake to tell a slave that freedom is found within him.
      Regards,
      Peter.

  64.   away said

    Honestly, before thinking that your way of defining freedom is "your freedom", you should inform yourself a little about your "original" conception of freedom. You did not invent it, a little history would not hurt you, you simply follow the dominant ideology of postmodern freedom.

    Now, about IPhone vs Android, it turns out that IPhone has, beyond your subjective belief, an extremely elitist philosophy, which is in the antipodes of free software and free culture. I can only tell you briefly that freedom supports freedom and makes it grow, if your freedom remains only in your own freedom that is not freedom, but the egoism of a single subject.

  65.   beofox said

    linux blog removed from rss because the author was fumes, when he bought a chinese or samsung android that he did not like.
    Written from a pc with guindous

  66.   ahdezzz said

    I think opinion pieces should only be posted on the forum. Hopefully consider it.

  67.   Mauricio said

    Congratulations on your entry, it was necessary for someone to put their feet on the ground.
    As I told you in G + Manuel, I have an S3 mini and an ipad retina, and the truth is that I am happy with both, iOS offers me things that Android will never be able to, but Android also has its benefits that iOS does not; as always there will be many who will call you ereje, traitor, crazy etc, but the reality is that they do not know what they are talking about, I went through those stages with linux user, now after about 10 years of use, I can say that I already opened my eyes and understand that:
    a) The freedom that they talk so much about does not matter, the average end user is only interested in making everything work, it does not matter as, for example, if MS launched office linux, many would buy them because it fulfills what users want.
    b) There is no perfect system, call it linux, windows or mac, they all have their own, some more than others, and if we talk about unreal things like Mr. Stallman's freedom, then the perfect world should have all systems in just one, something that will never happen.
    c) Linux is a work, osio and learning tool, and I say a tool because it is installed on a pc, an inanimate object that does not understand or listen to me like another person, so, in my opinion (and this will surely bring hate accumulated) freedoms are not real, if someone wants to be 100% free they will never achieve it, since they continue to live on planet earth, with the same "cages" as the rest of the rest, so, for me Linux is a tool that allows me to do the job the way I like it and with certain benefits and sacrifices.

    And as advice, no longer answer trolls or people like those who do not know the differences between Cuba and Mexico (yes, I read everything haha) you only waste your time and because you got into dangerous waters, obviously they will tell you what you are going to die if you post apple stuff here.

    Enjoy your iPhone and go ahead, if that pleases you, there is nothing wrong with it.

    1.    Staff said

      Well, I don't call anyone heretic, traitor, crazy, talibal, fanatic, or anything, so surely I know what I'm talking about hab

      A) What most people think is not necessarily correct. Proposing something like that is called the ad populum fallacy.

      B) True, there is no perfect system, but the freedoms of Free Software are real, and nothing is more wrong than assuming that following them will lead to a single system, proof of this is the world of distros out there. And in the privative a great monopoly.

      C) The term Free Software does not refer to the freedom of the software, but to the freedom of the user, people can be free, although in effect, freedom is not unlimited. That is why Free Software only deals with the freedom of how to do your computing and not with freedom of expression, or to work, or other things.

      1.    Mauricio said

        A) I am not proposing anything, it is a reality, and it is not that most think about it, it acts based on it.

        B) The distribution disaster? That's what you mean, then, I understand that you support the fact that a thousand and one versions of Ubuntu are created, just because it accommodates your desktop in X way, or that many do not like Gnome Shell and that is why they created other 2 environments that only make matters worse. This is called fragmentation and that in any system is negative beyond belief.

        C) Only those of us who handle code could really be interested in this "freedom".

        1.    Staff said

          A) I think you did not understand me, I am also convinced that many people do not care and that they act accordingly. What I'm saying is that maybe that is not the right thing to do, so it is important to see other points of view.

          B) Well, I don't like it but it doesn't bother me that there are a thousand distros either, at the end of the day I only use the ones I like and count them on the fingers of one hand. But I think that was not the point, but that the Free software model would not generate a single system.

          C) Anyone who does not program can ask or hire someone to modify the code for him, if it is the case, it is convenient that they have the same freedoms.

    2.    Pedro said

      Mauricio, with your position: «many who will tell you (H) ereje, traitor, crazy etc, but the reality is that they do not know what they are talking about» it is likely that you think you are the king of the universe and that you have the «only one» revealed truth on the subject. We all have a lot to learn from each other, even if we think they are wrong. Nobody, nobody has the only truth, because reality and truth are a collective construction, nobody can stop and say: I have the truth, the rest do not know anything. Or yes, you can, but you will not be right or wiser for it.
      Regards,
      Peter.

      1.    Mauricio said

        I don't think I'm the King of the universe, I just go through those "believer" stages and I have good reason to talk about it. And you're right, no one has the only truth, so it is important to learn from others, but only when they have a good foundation or experience.

        1.    Manuel Escudero said

          @Mauricio: Users like @Staff and @Pedro are only looking for confrontation, "fight-win", keep spending words on a blog. It's not worth even going to the trouble of answering them. A basic example: In some of your answers after "talking" a bit with them, use a word "high-sounding" or something that seems insult to them and this will be the answer:

          Example @Staff:
          https://ubuntuone.com/2fAxbxIPEaYCxdxu177Io2

          Example @Pedro:
          http://ubuntuone.com/3B99UKRo6eByCcHyiRIivW

          This is one of the many tests that I do to detect a blog troll VS someone with whom you can argue something correctly after a row of more than 3 comments with a general response. Users like these 2 will only change their position at every possible moment in order to continue in confrontation with you (taking the opposite) or explaining their positions with very fickle arguments in order to go on and on and on. You can't converse with these people, it's not worth your time. My advice is that you do like me and when you identify them, if they continue to comment, only read the first line of their comments, (to know what the thing is about) laugh a lot and ignore them, this because according to my theory, you still accept their "Superiority", "reason" or "greater mastery of the subject", they will manage to contradict you and continue with the discussion loop, it does not make sense. In fact, if you compare the comments that both have made throughout the post, their writing technique is very similar, almost as if they were "the same person." Assuming it's not someone under some proxy or something, then you'll just realize that we are dealing with people who have the same mental condition ...

          These types of people, in my opinion, do not deserve your answers or your attention. Just do what I tell you or if you consider it relevant, give them 1-line responses after reading the first line of their comment, they will believe that you have read and answered and will continue to write scrolls to try to confront you or make you look bad (among other things) let them spend their time typing hahahahahahaha 😉

          Greetings and +1 to your comment, Thank you.

          PS Let's see if they answer this comment with "If you hadn't read it wouldn't affect you enough to take captures" or some similar nonsense LOL! (very likely) or maybe they use this PD against me, I don't know hahahahaha, I already know all the tricks. Let's see if they surprise us.

  68.   Pedro said

    My reflection: When we see someone admit a mistake we do not see someone incapable who made a mistake, we see someone who grew, who improved.
    Reading many comments, I think it has been proven that Apple and its IOS is not more free than Android. Although some insist, either by trolling or by simple denial.
    There is an easily verifiable reality: Apple and its IOS do not comply at all with the 4 premises that guide and base free software.

    Free software is a revolution in itself against the prevailing model in the world of proprietary software. And every revolution that does not have self-criticism ends up stagnating and going backwards.
    That is why I believe that the debate has been important, although we must also recognize that there are people who are confused and who confuse others, either on purpose or inadvertently.

    And admitting that we were wrong is the best step to grow, do you know someone who is never wrong? We can only learn and grow by making mistakes. And when the tests are so strong on this topic, it's easy to check for errors.
    Regards,
    Peter.

  69.   Toyerd24 said

    That way you think that freedom goes hand in hand with the availability of the mobile without any inconvenience or setbacks as is the case (in a small minority) of devices that use the Google operating system, if so, I share your opinion .
    Regarding the third in contention, the Windows Phone what opinion do we share on the site? Regards.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      I don't know, I wrote about Android and iOS.

  70.   Wako said

    kOmO t atRebEz to dEsiR ezAs kOsaZ jajajajajja Excellent article, I see that the comments of Linux fanatic zombies have already rained down: \ that if you do not do what they do or think the same as them, you are already wrong, you are a complete heretic and you deserve to die to stones. How different are they from apple, microsoft or google fan boys? The linux ones are the same or more scary.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      That's the way things are @Wako hahahahaha I just amuse myself a lot to see all those people "writhing" for simple words in a blog, what nonsense. They should accept plurality and if something doesn't suit them, then don't even read it! Right from the start they are giving me the minutes of their lives that it took them to read the post and also comment "and continue in the debate" xD

  71.   ohlife1 said

    I do not share your opinion but I respect it, I think that ios is good for people who do not have time to fiddle, people who want me to be mobile. Regarding freedom there are different points of view, for me ios is not free since you cannot change the launcher, but it is only the opinion of a geek xD.
    I found the article interesting but only one point unlocking the bootloader is COMPLETELY FREE, because you use something like a "bug" without actually being one, and you can do it by the manufacturer's means or without them.
    I still can't use an iPhone, they make me nervous xD

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      @ ohlife1:

      About the bootloader:

      No. A phone tied to the tariff plan of an operator (that does not come released) does not have the option of unlocking the software bootloader "exploiting a bug" (that is rather for rooting, and that can be done, it from the bootloader is something else). As you will see for example on the Sony page for the Xperia, Sony provides the method to unlock the bootloader:

      http://unlockbootloader.sonymobile.com/instructions

      But if your operator does not let you, then the option "Bootloader unlock allowed" will be "No" and then the only way to unlock it will be at the hardware / software level by paying money for it with a process like this:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kC4Xjl8qOCk

      Greetings.

  72.   vidagnu said

    Manuel, excellent article, I agree with you that being free means being able to make our decisions without anyone or anything forcing us to do otherwise.

    In the real world you should know that you have to live with both worlds, open source and closed, we cannot get a job pretending only to use Open Source, it is the fact of being able to take the best of both worlds and apply it in our daily tasks what makes us better professionals.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      @vidagnu: +1 to your comment.

  73.   Andrelo said

    Hello I come to comment to show that I am using W8 Bye Bitches

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      LOL! Goodbye, bitches! xD »

  74.   Gerardo said

    Excellent !!! Very interesting, only a minimal grammar correction friend is not "in base" but with base, greetings and a very good post.

  75.   isaias said

    How much is the profit margin that they will give you for this advertising garbage, come on man, the pro Apple marketing is leagues away

  76.   msx said

    Clap clap, Android SUCKS everywhere, if I had known that I was opening the doors of my personal hell when I bought my Galaxy 4 without a doubt I would have seriously considered for the same value to acquire an iPhone 😛

    As you say, any Andorid smartphone or tablet makes sense for a relatively advanced user AFTER ROOTING IT, before it is simply an unusable slop focused on the average user who is satisfied with what they are given and believes that that is it.

    In fact after the last custom ROM that I installed with JB 4.3 I decided never to touch the phone again or throw any other images on it no matter how many new advantages (WOW!) KitKat 4.4 may bring - I don't even remember when was the last time I visited xda -developers ...

    Now, personally, I think there is a MUCH BETTER OPTION than iPhone, Android shit and any other gilada that comes up with maybe the exception of Tizen: Jolla.
    In the technical part: terminal and native SSH console, Wayland video server, Qt framework, low-lever access to the entire device with your root password, SailfishOS (successor to Maemo and MeeGo), systemd, Btrfs… Wow, what else! ??
    On the privacy side: servers hosted ONLY IN FINLAND guarantee UNPRECEDENTED protection of communications and personal information, especially in today's world where we are captives of ISPs, TELCOs and in many cases governments themselves.

  77.   remsbyte said

    Hello

    I support Manuel Escudero for the following reasons.

    I have a Samsung Galaxy Note 2 N7100 and an Iphone 3g.

    On the iPhone it is only used to make calls, telegram is not installed, or whatsapp or any game, because it does not have support.

    In the Samsung Galaxy Note 2 the Korean updated to android 4.3 and I cannot connect to Wifi, because I must be with the mobile next to the router so that it connects, if I take off a meter I have no signal and it does not connect, due to This I bought a new wifi antenna and installed it to the note 2 and I still do not connect to the internet. I'm waiting for Samsung to launch the Android 4.4.2 version for my note 2, to see if I can connect via Wi-Fi without being next to the router to be able to connect, I have tried that in more than 50 different places and that is the fucking android freedom, because I'm tied to Samsung with its mistakes and I pay the blame for that.

    I can connect with the iphone 3g to wifi even without having support.

    The point is that as Elav says, neither HTC, Nexus, Nokia, Samsung, Blackberry, etc give you freedom, because I have used most brands on Android and I am tired, they remove the support and have to root, I am Power user and I've been on Gnu / linux since 1997 so I hope they don't talk trash about whether Android is freer than iOS, because that's not true.

    To install games or applications on Android it tells me that they have to have access to my contacts, Camera, microphone, calls, my accounts, storage, my location (GPS) etc. That is not freedom and if those who have android do not believe me, install Evernote and read those who ask for mandatory permissions, in order to install it and then they tell me, Google sells information to the NSA, Apple sells information to the NSA and all the companies, in short we are not free, not even Mr. Stallman, because he does not use a cell phone and even if he wants to use it, he cannot, because he does not trust any company. They all keep records. Who does not want to be spied on using a public phone. Ahh and I live in the best country in the world, the one that has everything the most expensive, the most expensive electricity in the world, the most expensive internet, the most expensive toll in the world, there are laws here, but almost no one obeys them, that country It is called Dominican Republic, it is the same as android, it has rules and I break them because I can, for example I installed the note 2 ubuntu phone and I eliminated it running but Samsung punishes, you can brick your smartphone for being rooting and it is not recommended to do so.

  78.   Delorian said

    Manuel…. You and everyone in this world are using someone else's stuff, so if you attack someone to justify your opinion or the ideas you use and / or defend by citing Stallman you should pay attention to what you say ... since you are using a language that you did not invent, in an environment or subject that you did not initiate or create, since you were born you have received information and the only thing you do throughout your life is only to repeat said information over and over again with a few variables born from the information that you have already received, so something like Why should I get my definition of freedom out of the mouth of another man? it is totally out of the game and it is something very irresponsible. (The history of the remix).

    At no time in this life do you have freedom, as long as the situation does not matter, you are subject to rules, laws, situations, actions and other things including chance, this is the point at which it is necessary to clarify that an opinion does not determine the truth, You can think that the law of gravity does not exist but if you jump from a building it will hit the ground and this is called the truth and of course the fact that an object impacts with a certain force does not imply that everyone does it in the same way , there are very few true things and a person's perception of something, in this case methods, philosophies, buying and technology, are only conveniences, preferences or choices and even at most they are perceptions but not freedoms. So in particular, if there is something like freedom, it is still unattainable for this species (especially for people who use android or IOS XP, nha little joke) and therefore there is no such thing as total control of your actions and deductions in every moment. By the way, freedom is not free will, choice or opportunity to choose, just as Equity is not the same as justice and much more.

    And this is the time for a date: "I may or may not agree with you and the genius or stupid things that come out of your mouth but I would give my life for your right to be able to say them." Quote from someone who died and who was doing great things for you since before you were born Manuel and they were used and are used by many people in the world just so that you can give your opinion in a blog about linux, so you don't use the words of someone else to take sides (According to you) but if you use many things from which you benefit without even giving the benefit of the doubt or moment to explain why they defend those words and their convenience or defects to someone who quotes Stallman at the point of practically wanting to exclude it. Small detail right? But sometimes it is not easy for a person with whom you talk to be able to express himself in the way he needs, people have many drawbacks, right?

    This part already entering into mobile matter, everything is convenience, if you like it and you find it useful in the working method of a System or a fantastic object, however, the subject of freedom cannot be touched so easily and in the way to say iphone is more free. Well in the world there are a huge number of people who can not give themselves the "freedom" to buy an iPhone, so more free ... where is it ?. In fact, free software is only a slogan because exactly the same thing happens since you have to access it, perhaps the only free on this planet are things like wind, oxygen and photons, so the situation returns; everything regarding Operating Systems, Cybernetics, Philosophies, methods and more are only conveniences, perhaps for someone a terminal with android may be more "free" because he has the knowledge to remove it and install replicant and if he wants it in another way then easy to modify replicate at will, or without going so far a person with knowledge of android finds it easier to access things that you do not use or even have not managed to access, and exactly the same happens with IOS. So the situation does not have much to do with freedom itself, true or false freedom, if not; which is the most comfortable and affordable FOR YOU.

    Point at which then we must talk about comfort, preference, affordability. Remembering clearly that even the information is a privilege but not an obligation and each person is comfortable with certain things, therefore access is a very important point and that… gracefully it is not touched on something that often has the word Freedom.

    In short, to end with a simple conclusion: Everything is convenience and perception, it is very irresponsible to say "better" and more for banalities since this does not incite something useful but rather alienation from people that can reach other points that may be offensive, technology, like many other things in life, does not matter by themselves, the means by which this object is accessed also matters and your interaction with it depends entirely on it. In the end (especially for me) you can use what you want and say what you want, if this allows you well-being, happiness and perhaps seeking the well-being and happiness of those around you and even those around you better, you just have to accepting diversity, respecting the choices of others and trying to alienate, exclude or harm as few (valuable) people as possible, if my choice of objects is very much along these lines. I share several points with your publication Manuel and others ... well, I can see that not at all.

    Greetings and affections.

    1.    Manuel Escudero said

      At no point are you "lashing out" at someone in the article.

  79.   dante2614 said

    woh, holy praise for the iphone. ! .. heh heh heh ...
    Sorry I couldn't help it, heh heh.

    Being serious, and giving my point of view, the topic of this post is very good, I have to admit it, some things you comment are good, or have foundation, I say that based on what I have read from other forums related to the mobile systems you deal with in this topic.

    I have to give the reason that the iphone system is more powerful, so to speak, than android, it is as if we were comparing a mac with a pc with windows or linux.

    What you make known the most is the behavior of the iphon system before an android, it is well known that most apple systems are more focused on the user not having to be worried about making so many movements to do a task or a configuration, accompanied by the other companies, and that is good, that the device thinks for you in some cases. but hey that's not the point.

    I am an android user, and I have tended it for about two and a half years, but with respect to what you show on this topic, you give a lot to understand and it is not to attack, it is only an opinion, that you are a fan of the iphone and that's good, everyone decides what to be a fan of. I particularly like Android more since for me it is more comfortable, I have tried iPhone but the truth does not attract my attention, esepto the design that they launched from the iPhone 5 (only the design clarified).

    As I mentioned, you imply that you like iPhone more for the manipulation of applications that is simpler and faster than in Android. Other things you mention that most of the newbies who start in Linux buy an android because most of them read topics related to that android is free, maybe yes, but also think about the costs of the equipment, not everyone has the Opportunity to acquire an iPhone, and I had to see that those who do have an iPhone can not exploit to the maximum all the functionalities that said iPhone offers.

    well this is just a simple opinion and personal point of view, based on what I have experienced. I do not intend to bother anyone with this, I am not against any company or system, they are all good as long as they are used for what they were designed.

    greetings to all…. 😀

  80.   Radixs said

    After two months of this article I am going to answer something that I take my opinion regarding so much stupid comment that I read in favor of and against what you call freedom.

    From my point of view they are all right and wrong, because:

    1. There is something called freedom of speech and you can think and write whatever you want
    2. Everyone has the freedom to criticize in pursuit of something productive and not
    3. Each one of you has defends what I believed to be correct until death, that makes you free to defend your opinions whether or not they are right, but who really is? It is impossible to know
    4. If you don't want to be 100% free, don't use technological dispositions, behind the software there is the hardware (is this free? Think about it) or do they tell me that those who defend the definition of "free" use free hardware?
    5. They have money to buy phones, computers, etc. What they earn from their work, whatever the nature. Does your company share with other companies how it does things, work processes, etc?

    Welcome to the real world, they defend something called freedom and it does not exist as such, we are all slaves of money, capitalism and consumerism.

    Dear people, if you want to be 100% free, live by yourself based on your effort, don't use technology, don't watch television, don't listen to music, don't use public transportation, don't read a book.

    How am I free? I don't have the answer, but the definition of freedom does not apply in today's world we live in!

  81.   Gabriel said

    good ! I am a linux and Mac OS X user and the Truth I congratulate you on the change!

    I love Linux and I am one of the few users who started using Linux connective ... XD But I consider that APPLE with the iOS system achieved something that Google is taking time to do. . .

    As an iOS 7 User I recognize that Apple's Privacy policies hit me where the Sun XD doesn't give me but that we are going to do its terminals are EXCELLENT, their APPS are designed for each type of terminal and For those who Complain about Freedom in relation to APPLE Restrictions I tell you that that is why the Jailbreak exists….

    I do not feel deprived of freedom when using iOS 7 or Mac products ... it is more I think that freedom is in using what makes us feel good and use it with freedom ... In my case with jailbreak I have more than freedom

    Good info THANKS !!!

  82.   Teck said

    Currently it is very difficult to find a 100% free operating system, they obviously exist but we are limited in the use of certain add-ons that are often necessary but are proprietary (codecs and others). Freedom in software is being able to modify and study its operation, which happens with a large part of the Android system but not with IOS.

  83.   Roberto said

    Apple killed your brain. Please if you are going to defend Apple use words like stability, security, fashion.
    You cannot defend the indefensible and use the word "freedom." You don't even have the freedom to upload a song without using itunes or playing it through bluetooht.
    Old is a pity your post.

  84.   morles said

    I'm sorry to say it but while everyone is wasting their time in the philosophical rambling of whether they are free or not they really are not, they never have been and they never will be ...