Open vs Closed: A TechStuff Debate

learn what that means. What is an open system versus a closed system? What are the arguments for each model, and why is it that you can't easily say one is automatically better than the other. It's all a matter of perspective. So let's listen to this classic episode. So today we're going to have a goofy little debate about open systems versus closed systems. We just decided that we're

going to experiment with this. We've never done one of these before, and in fact, we decided on it about thirty seconds before we started recording, and so to determine who would represent which side, we did the most scientific thing we could think of. We flipped a coin. It's the quarter United States Quarter for those of you who think that matters. Uh. And it turns out that did it come from, um, you know what. I put it back in my pocket, So I don't know. But but

Mr Chris rigged. Mr Chris Philett will be representing the open system side and I shall be representing the closed system side. So I think that proves it wasn't rigged. Look at the kind of phone I'm using. So anyway, I think I think in order to really understand what we're talking about, first we have to establish what we mean by an open versus a closed system. So let me tell you what a closed system is. Closed systems quality people. That's what a closed system is. Closed system

is where you create a and infrastructure. Uh, an ecosystem, if you will, where you control as many of the factors as you possibly can, and you don't allow outside influences to change your system. So an example of a company that takes the closed system approach is Apple. That's not to say that Apple only does the closed off approach. If it did, then you would never be able to run any other kind of software or app on Apple products. You would only be able to run Apple created stuff.

But it's an example of a system because it's more closed than it is open. And there are various reasons for doing this, but we'll get into that in the debate. But that that's kind of what how I define a closed system. It's one where you're trying to control as much as possible and it's all coming from or as much of it as possible is coming from a single

source and the outside stuff is shut away. Yes, And and I think as we talk about this, our listeners will realize that there are a few absolute in this discussion. Very true, Okay. So open source information wants to be free, and the ore are computing devices should too. It's the only way to be uh, you know, free to be you and me? Um, okay, hippie. No. An open system is is something that is not made for corporate gain. It is out there for the public to use. Anybody

who wants to make a contribution to it. Can people can use it, uh if they want to, and there is it's it's there as offered as a public service. Um. And is therefore the people of the people, by the people, and you closed system punks should leave us alone because this is the way it really should be and trying to make a buck off that is wrong. So if you think of it, uh, an open system is sort of democratic and that anyone can really contribute to it

and and change it. And also we should point out before we really get into this debate, uh, that it is possible to have a a product probably that's for sale, either that's an open system or a closed system. Open and closed does not mean that one is free and one is is you charge for Yeah, I was, I did. Yeah,

that's a good point. I should have pointed out that sort of the quote unquote ideal when when a lot of people talk about open source, right, if you're going the ultimate open source, like the utopian version of open source, that's cool. That's cool, yeah, because there there really is a spectrum here. But we're gonna try and be like hardcore. So Malanie, explain why I think that closed systems are

superior to open systems. So with a closed system and with with with with everything coming from a single source. So in this case, let's say it's a company. A company is creating a product that is closed off, no other outside influence can can come into this product. It means that there's an expectation of quality cont role that you don't have with open systems. You actually contest everything,

make sure everything works properly on the hardware. So if we're talking about a computer, we know that the software will work on the computer because the software and hardware have been developed together from the ground up. It means that you don't have to worry about some weird incompatibility issue when you try and install a program onto this device, because again, everything is coming from the same source and was made to work together. Now this can go beyond

just a computer. Let's say that you have a computer and a smartphone and a tablet and they're all part of the same closed system. It means that you can expect a fairly uniform experience across these three platforms, and maybe even be able to port your experience from one

to the other. And what I mean by that is, let's say I'm watching a movie on my smartphone and then I decide, you know what, I really want to look at this on a bigger screen, and I tap it over to my tablet, and the tablet starts playing the movie exactly where I left off, and it all works seamlessly because it's all running on the same platform

that's meant to work together. That is one of the big benefits of a closed system is that you have a uniformity in the experience and an expectation of things are just gonna work because it was all built together and meant to work together. Why are you taking away my choice? If I want to have a different video card than the one you stuck in my computer, I want to be able to remove it and stick a

different one in there, you know what. And it's and it's frustrating because any time I want to change a component on my computer or I want something a little different. Uh, you know, I have to deal with all the complications that you're closed off. Uh. System is is taking away and the problem is that, Uh, you're also restricting competition because in your closed system, there's only one way to go for a tablet, and there's one way to go for an MP three player, and there's one way to

go for a smartphone. There's one way to go for a computer. And I want I want choice. I want to be able to customize my my computing experience. I want to be able to buy something cheaper because competition is driving down the cost of these products. So I could go to your store and buy the one computer you've got, or I could go to this store over here and buy fifty different computers, and all of them are cheaper than yours, and some of them even outperform yours. Well,

so what do you say to that? Here's what I say to that. Sure, it might be cheaper. And even if you have a device, a particular individual device that performs better than one of my particular individual devices, if you are trying to have an experience that spans multiple devices, then you're going to start encountering things where the compatibility issues come into play, and you may have um things like software crashes because it's not designed to work together

seamlessly like a closed system is. So you might spend less money initially when you first purchase your vast array of choice here and you've got let you know, your ultimate price tag is lower than you would if you

have bought everything from my superior closed system store. But the amount of frustration you're going to have as that experience is unsatisfactory because the various pieces are not playing together properly is far going to outweigh the miniscule additional investment you would have to make if you had purchased

it all from me in the first place. And yeah, you're one individual device might behave better or perform better than why one individual device, but collectively the experience is much more satisfying on my end than it is on yours, because it's yours is piecemeal. And also, my system is designed to just work. Your system is designed to make me have to have a computer science degree if I want to figure out how to do the same thing

on one device as I'm doing on another device. Ha, superior, You say, yes, I don't think that word means what you think. Well, here, let me put it to you another way. Let's let's let's take a look at the way a closed system versus an open system attacks the

problem of malware because they have very different approaches. Right, So, if we're talking about the perfect closed system, ideally there's no malware because nothing from outside is being introduced into the system unless there's some you know, disgruntled employee that

I've bullied out of out of their sanity. We don't have to worry about malware entering into the closed system because everything is made by this one entity and it's all made to work together so you don't have to worry about some sort of virus perpetuating itself through your system.

Now that's different from the way open systems attack malware. Well, see the open systems, you could have other people, multiple people working on solutions to things like vulnerabilities in the operating system, and people who are working on uh anti malware software for your system. So the thing is, that's a small price to pay for the ability to hack into the system and change whatever you want to change

about the system. If you want to, UH, get into the operating system and see what makes it tick and learn more about what what programs and what functions are going on in the background. For example, you could be monitoring everything I do, but if you're in your closed system, I can't get into the background to see that. Then you know you could be doing this all without my knowledge. Um So with an open system, I I'm free to install any software I want to, or remove any software

I want to from my device. And I could even write my own because you know it's open and UH it gives me the opportunity to hack in and play with it and make it my own instead of make it what your vision is because what if your closed vision, you're closed off, walled off little garden isn't what I think of as being the best experience for me, because hey, everybody's an individual, right Well, first of all, we know what you want even when you don't see That's the

thing is, we know what you want. You don't know what you want, but we know what you want. You think you know what you want, but until you've actually bought into our our closed system, you really haven't haven't experienced it. And we're going to go back into the quality issue. Let's talk about the quality of and we're talking about computing systems here, let's talk about the quality

of the programs that you're running on your system. Again, with the closed system approach, those programs have been built for a very specific set of hardware, which does not change from what you know that if I buy my computer from this closed system and someone else buys their computer from the same closed system, those two computers are going to be identical in every meaningful way. So we know that the software is going to work equally well

on my system as it is on their system. Whereas if we both just go into a computer store and we each just buy a computer from various you know, manufacturers. There's no guarantee that the same kind of software is going to work just as well on my machine as it is on their machine, even if the two machines are running the same operating system, because we have difficulties

introduced by things like device drivers and hardware differences. With the closed system, you've eliminated that you don't have to worry about that so much. So that means that the quality of the experience of the software put aside the quality of the software itself, but the experience of using

it is going to be less frustrating. Uh the you know, you might say that there's a downside with the whole choice factor, but at the same time, you don't have to worry about it crashing all the time or just not behaving the proper way. I think. Sure sometimes things happen, but on a much less frequent basis than on these these little open systems out there that that just well, I don't know, they they they just they just are

like every anything goes. Guys. We have more to say about open versus closed systems in just a second, but before we get to that, let's take a quick break to thank our sponsor. With open source software, you have to pretend a limitless potential of applications that could be run for it. The more open you become, the greater the possibilities. Um. You know, so you you can have your closed system and have things that run specifically on

that hardware. But you know, programmers like their choices too, and they're gonna go where where the wealth of software is, and that's going to attract more users, and vice versa and verse visa and something. I disagree with that because users, most users don't want to be curators. And if you are a user of an open system, you have to be a curator because there's so much that you're talking about, so much variety and so much choice, that it's overwhelming

to the average user. You sit down and you see like there's it's like walking into a library and you have no idea what book you want to read. You just know you want to read a book, and you walk into an enormous library and you have no idea where to go. It's too confusing, Whereas in a closed system it's been curated for you. Your choices are limited, but at the same time you don't have to worry about going through eight thousand different word processing programs in

order to find one that suits your needs. There's really only one choice. And if it suits your needs, that's awesome. Jonathan, You ignorance ha ha ha oh Saturday Night Life. I bet you they cut that. Um anyhow uh well, see, there's one thing that that you're leaving out here, the market, because what happens here is the market helps people whittle down their choices. When you have something the the word processor of choice, the one that that more people are

using than people understand, it's the best seller phenomenon. It's like you, you you look at the best seller lists and you and you say, you know what, these books are very popular. I bet you anything that if I if I read it, I'm you know, I will at least look at these first because I know lots of people

like them, and that helps people make choices. As far as software is concerned, and you know, there's always a new programmer coming online to develop new software and you can always help be the kingmaker for the next generation of software too, But not in the closed system where you know your choices are somewhat limited. I don't know. I'm trying to think of a best selling open source

software example, and it's really hard. Well, you know, in a lot of cases open source software can be free or donationware, and a donationware world, people pay what they what it's worth to them. And sure some people are gonna pay a quarter, and there are also people who pay a hundred dollars for the same piece of software because it means more to them and it's important to them to donate to the community. I mean, you know, not found that out? How did how did minecraft? Just?

You know, it's it's a thing. Yeah, but I still think that the closed system is the way to go. It's a sustainable business model. It means that you once you develop your your your line of devotees, you're good to go. I mean because you've you've created that expectation of that quality of experience that you deliver upon consistently, and by doing that, you know that you know, as long as you maintain that level of quality, that you

will have a customer base moving forward. Whereas with this open source approach, I don't see how you're going to be, you know, really making a sustainable business out of that. And while the ideals are wonderful and fantastic and and and and and and happy and all that mess. Um, I just don't see it, you know, perpetuating itself after a certain amount, and you know, eventually a guy's got to eat well. And and that's why I think, uh,

that's why I think openness is sort of a bell curve. Yeah, because the one end you have the clothe the the completely closed off system with fewer fewer users, which you know, we should point out again there's not really that many that I can't think of any company that would be though I could point to that say absolutely, is this like even the systems that we think of as closed,

like Apple and Nintendo aren't really that closed. Otherwise no third party developer would ever be able to create anything for their platforms. Right. And then at the other side, Um, I'm trying to think of somebody who is really completely open as far as open source, but as close as you can get. Yeah. And the thing is, as Jonathan pointed out earlier, um Lenox is free, and it's you know, the sources open, which is in the guts of the

operating system, are open for people to use. And there are distributions of Linux that are completely free for people to use, and there are others that. Uh. There is a purchase price because it is tailored to specific needs and usually has some support level of support built into that. So if you buy the software, then you can expect to have someone to call if you've got a problem. Yeah. Sometimes it's not the software itself that's that's got the

price tag, it's the support. So for example, Ubuntu is that way you can you can get a free version of a Buntu and install it on your computer. By the way, the debate part of this podcast is over in case you hadn't realized that we're now getting into the more informational side. Um. Yeah, the the and I think that went rather well them. But Aubuntu, you you can get that for free and install that on a

machine for free. Uh. But if you want to have professional level support, then you can pay a certain amount of money and then you will have access to um support staff, which could be anything from UM, my computer isn't behaving properly, what is the what is the source of this problem? How do I fix it too? I'm running an actual close network of machines in this one business, and I need to know how to set this up so that everything is secure that kind of it's it's

all levels of support. Uh. And and you know, there are definitely arguments both for and against the closed and open systems, as we were demonstrating earlier. And it's not that one system is inherently better or worse than the other. They're just different philosophies on how to provide um goods and services. Yeah, really they are the arguments we were making. I think, Um, you know, there were good arguments on

both sides. I think the it works better. There are arguments I've heard sort of like the ones the debate we just had that we're far more heated than that to get the when you're actually thinking about both sides and not taking a side, it it kind of works better because really there are some benefits with with clothes, you do have things that just work, um. But with open you do have a lot more choice and the ability to tinker more with it. And it's sort of

really I think depends on what you're looking for. So, which is why so many people use Windows, because it's sort of an open closed system. You know, Windows is Windows is sort of the middle ground. Uh, It's it's it leans closed, Yeah, it leans closed, but it has a lot of flexibility for people to build applications that run on Windows. So in that that sense, it's open in the in the way that you know, again, third party developers create the vast majority of software that runs

on Windows based PCs. You know, very a small percentage of the software that runs on Windows based PCs comes from Microsoft. There there's there are very important applications that are on a typical Windows based PC that are from Microsoft.

But you know, if you're like, if you're going to some video gamers house and you're looking at his rig then or her rig, I should say, because you know, I've met some lead female video gamers who could wipe the floor with me in any game I shows, which is very they're staring at you now as a matter of fact, Yeah, well I'll probably end up seeing some of them in ces uh, and they'll again I won't challenge them that I already know how I would turn

out anyway. So you but you go on, you look at the software on that person's uh computer, and you're gonna see that there's a ton of stuff on there that never came out of Microsoft. Uh. And same the same sort of thing applies to Apple it's not. There's not as much software as far as just you know, sheer numbers as you would find for a Windows based PC. But you know, even Apple, which we think of as a really like a walled garden or a closed system,

depends heavily on third party developers. If it didn't, the app store for the iPhone and iPad and and iPod Touch would be empty. You know, there would be very few apps that you could run because Apple only provides a few, um but you know, they they they lean very heavily on third party developers. Not at the same time, third party developers have to go through a very rigorous UH routine in order to submit an app and have

it featured in the App Store. And of course if it's not in the app store, technically you can't load it on an Apple device unless you've gone through the process of jail breaking it. But using it unaltered an unaltered Apple device, you can only load things that are through the the Apple's official app store, So in that sense it's closed off because if it's not approved, then

it doesn't go on. The same thing with Nintendo, you know, they would certify the games that would go on their systems and if it didn't get Nintendo certification, it didn't,

it didn't get made, didn't become available on the Nintendo. So, uh, that's a closed way of looking at and again that goes to that sort of quality control argument where the closed the company perpetuating this closed system could argue that this means that we only have applications of a certain quality that we know are going to run properly on

our hardware. They're not going to cause any problems with anything else running on our hardware, and they're going to deliver an experience that we you know, it reaches a certain level that we have come to expect with our our products. Um, Whereas if you go with an open system, it's more like we want anyone to be able to potentially run anything on this system that's been designed for it,

and we don't want to limit that at all. We don't want to put our biases against certain kinds of applications, are certain ways of creating stuff in play. We want it to be an open playground for everybody. We have a little bit more to say about this whole concept of how do you present your systems? Do you go with the open model or the closed model? But before we jump into that last bit, let's take another quick

break to thank our sponsor. Well, uh, you know, for for Windows, you can argue, you can make the hardware argument, Well, I can go and build my own system from the components that I can get in my my corner electronics store, and I can make my own system and install Windows

on it, and it's gonna work. Uh. Of course, chances are that the there are drivers for the video card, and there are drivers for all the devices that you're going to do because you're running Windows on it, and and you would also have to take considerations like, uh, which kind of motherboard are you using? Because only certain motherboards will support certain processors but not other processors. So yeah,

you've got limitations on on. You know, It's not like even building a PC from scratch is not totally open because some components are going to limit which other components you can actually put into your machine. In other words, not everything is compatible with everything else, which is uh for for people who are interested in dabbling with Linux, that can be frustrating because, um, the drivers come around.

Some some component manufacturers will write a driver for Lenox for their card or or device, but not all of them will, and so it relies on the community to put one in there. And for people who go, you know what, I really want to try I want to or you know Linux meant or you know any of the others, and I want to try this out. So they put it the disk in there, they reboot their machines, and they'll find out that parts of their system don't

don't quite work. Yeah, and the more odds, the more frustrating for people who are just playing around with Yeah, the more obscure the elements are inside your machine, the less likely you're gonna find support. Just off the top

of the bat. I mean, if it's something that's a really popular component, then you can it's a pretty safe bet that someone out there has created a driver for it for an open source operating system, just because you know law of averages, you've got a lot of people who are using the same kind of hardware, then there's a good chance someone has designed something so that that hardware will work properly with an open source operating system.

But if you've got you know, some cheap sound card that you found that it is made by someone that hardly anyone knows about, it may not have the support there in an open source operating system. But then you know, the same thing is true with if you if you upgrade a Windows based PC and you go to the new form of Windows, often you will find that one of the big problems is that you'll lose um support

for certain kinds of peripherals. The drivers will not update, or they aren't compatible with the new operating system, and sometimes they gets patched, or sometimes the device manufacturers will release a new driver that works specifically with a new operating system. But you can't get stuck that way too, So it's not like it's only with open source. In fact, that was one of the big problems that people were reporting with Mac OS ten lion was that, you know,

if you upgraded that, which is a closed system. You know, you're talking about a known quantity with Apple hardware, but if you upgraded, there were certain peripherals that they didn't have driver support anymore, and you know, or certain software that had no no longer had support, and it was software that was designed to run on the Mac operating system and yet could not run this newest version of the OS. Uh So it's not like it's a problem that's unique to open source. It can all will happen

in a closed system. Um. You know, the people who create closed systems would probably argue what happens less frequently, or that you might not have to wait as long. But that's you know, splitting hairs. Yeah, that's um that's another thing too, for for operating systems that are designed by the community. UM, there's you know, it may be difficult to find a particular driver or piece of software simply because somebody may not necessarily be working on it,

depending on if there are vulnerabilities in the operating system there. Uh. Generally something like that is going to draw the attention of the community and will be fixed more quickly. Apple gets criticized from time to time when they find vulnerabilities in the operating system that could open the machine up to uh uh possible attack. Um, you know, for not acting on it as quickly as Microsoft does with its patches. Um. You know. So there's there's a trade off there, Um,

but there is. I think there is some benefit in a way of being that more hybrid system because um, you know, that attracts the most users. I want some flexibility, but I want most mostly I want it to work. Um. So you get that sort of combo uh system. And that's really sort of what Android is really when you get down to it, because Android works on a multitude

of different phones, whereas iOS. Apple's iOS system works on Apple branded phones and those only UM and some of the others do to the the web os worked on the on the Palm phones. UM, you know those are those are closed systems. UM Windows works on a on a variety of different phones. But the problem is for developers, and they find this with a variety of systems too, that U um uh closed system is an easier target

for them to hit. UM. One of the complaints I've heard from Android developers is that, uh, they have difficulty writing software that will work with all the different versions of the operating system they're out there, and all all these different phones, with all these different hard hardware components. Something being a part of the problem being the carriers, because they're not the ones not pushing out the operating system updates for the different phones. Some of the older

updates are just lingering on. I'm not looking at you people who won't update my phone months after Jonathan's got his anyway, UM anyhow, Yes, I'm beating the desk of my candy because I'm angry with them. But yeah, I mean that's a it's a problem for developers a closed system. Hey, you know you have a specific range of components. You know what kind of processor in general is going to be in there. You have a pretty good idea what the operating system entails. You know, it's it's an easy

target to hit. But the problem with in the Mac cases, fewer people are using it, so it's less it's a less desirable target to hit because there are fewer dollars to be made by writing software for it to trade off. Getting back to the idea of the closed versus open and I'll bring system updates. Uh so let's let's go ahead and we'll talk about Apple versus Google, because that's that's pretty easy. And even then again, Apple is not totally a closed system and Google Google is certainly not

totally an open system. But it's a different approach. Right, Like you were saying, Uh, the iOS is only going to appear on iPhones, You're not going to find that another hardware. Um, it's because the iPhone was designed to do it. That that's the way Apple once it done. It's and that's how it's intended. So yeah, sticking with phones because that makes it it's it makes illustration, makes

talking easy illustration. Uh So, then on the Android side, Android can theoretically be added to like a manufacturer can choose to partner with Google and create an Android phone. It's free, it's pretty them. They can they can just build. All I have to do is build hardware that is capable of supporting Android, and then they are allowed to have Android as the operating system for that smartphone. So

two different approaches. Um Now with Apple, when there's an OS update for iOS, Apple can push that out to all the different devices that can still support that iOS. But there's still going to be some to get left behind eventually, just because the physical limitations of the hardware will be reached, you won't be able to go beyond this.

So if you have a first generation iPhone, it's only going to run iOS up to a certain point, and after that you're never gonna get an update again because you've reached the capacity of what that hardware is capable of achieving without having a completely unsatisfying experience using that iPhone. Well, they could just never make a newer one, except then everyone would have what they were going to buy, and

there wouldn't be any reason for them upgrade. So anyway, Uh but yeah, but but if you have a fairly recent like usually it's within for the last three generations, the latest one, the one right before that, and maybe the one before that, you typically are able to get the latest UM software upgrade. You might eventually get left behind, like the three GS is probably getting pretty close to

its upper limits right now. But uh, you know, meanwhile, when you go over to the Android side, you have all these different carriers and they're all having they all have handsets with different capabilities, and uh, you know, some of those handsets might be able to run the Lace version of Android, and some of them might not, you know, or if they were to run the last version of Android, the hands that might get really hot and the battery might drain really quickly, so you would have a very

unhappy experience you're seeing it, even if you had the Lace version, Like, well, I've got the Lace version, but my phone lasts for two hours, then it's dead, and at the whole time it feels like it's gonna set my pants on fire. UM, make all excuses you want, they still haven't pushed you out to my phone. Okay, well, for some people like Chris setting your pants on fire, apparently it's a feature, not a bug. Um, but what kills the bugs there? You go, okay, well, we've all

learned something new about christal Um. So yeah, the the that is that is one of the downsides. Now again, like Chris was saying, you've got a lot more choice with the open system. So if you want a phone that has a certain processor in it or has a certain kind of camera in it, you've got a lot more choice than you would if you are on the

other side of the closed system. Got you know, with the closest me essentially have the latest version of it, and usually the one directly before it, and maybe the one before that. And uh yeah, I mean you have all the people that have adopted and and Android numbers that we've that have been coming out as of about the time that we're recording this, in very very late um, android numbers are taking off. They're far outstripping apples, uh, iPhone new customers even as fast as the iPhone sales.

And I think there are two big reasons. But I'm sorry, go ahead, Well I was gonna say, is that. Well, go ahead. Well, the two big reasons I see is one there's way more choice, yeah right, so you've got like all these different options. And two there are a lot more lower cost options out there, Like with the iPhone you've got. You know, you've got the latest version which is going to be pretty expensive, and then the older version, which is slightly less expensive. But you're not

gonna find any like bargain bin type stuff. You're not gonna come across. I don't know if anyone who's ever offered like a free iPhone with a two year contract, but there have been Android phones that the older ones yeah, um, actually low cost I guess maybe not free. Um. Well, the thing is that now that that Android is becoming the big target for developers in its class, um, you know, there are all kinds of apps that are out there

and available for it. Um. There are also all kinds of app stores that you can use to You don't have to go through just the Google marketplace if you don't want to, although you do have to change a setting on your phone in order to be able to access them. That that's correct. Um. The thing is, though, the bigger the target, the more people the developers of

all kinds, including malware developers. It attracts that um not you know, this has nothing to do with the quality of the operating system or the security measures inherent in the operating system. It's just a bigger target and therefore it's a um a juicier place to strike for the person and in the legit people too. I mean, hey, I can I can sell my app in this app store and reach five thousand people. I can sell my app in this app store and reach five million people?

Yea itself far more over here. The thing is, though, it also UH and I would argue that this is the case for any tech that has reached that kind of UH adoption rate, that it also inspires a lot of junk. I mean we saw it with Atari when opened up the platform and allowed other people to write software for it, they were all kind of that's what caused the video game, correct, which is where I was

getting into the whole curation argument in the debate. If you are using an open system, then you're gonna have a lot more choice with when it comes to not just you know, options, but but apps that you can run. But that also means that with the good comes a lot of bad not that the closed systems necessarily you know, it's not that Apple is free of bad apps. There

are plenty of bad apps in the Apple app Store. Okay, so I don't mean to say that, but no, no, But because is that there's not necessarily like there's no qualifier to create an app for Google, and you can submit to the Google Marketplace, or you can even host it somewhere else if you want to, and not even go through the the process of submitting it to Google market and people can still find it and download it

to their shorts or tablets, you know, mobile devices. Um. But yeah, that curation becomes a problem because then if you've got that much choice and there's no like, there's no one out there who's kind of curating this for you, it all falls on your shoulders. And uh, that can just get exhausting. I mean, I mean looking through just the list of applications, uh just you know, going page

by page. You sit there and think, well, I could look at the ones that are the most popular and use that as kind of a guide of curation, but it may very well be that the app that really meets my needs is eight pages down. And you know that gets kind of frustrating after a while. Um yeah, and it's it's it's funny too, because one of the things that some people have said against Lenox. I mean, I've I've used a couple of different flavors of Linux.

I really like the operating system. I Um, I don't like that there are fewer people writing software for it, but I still I love the idea, and I like the operating system an awful lot um and the more I play with it, the more I've enjoyed using it. But the thing is, some people have said that the fact that it's free is a problem because it sort of encourages people to think that it's not actually worth anything. Right,

it should have money. It gives it gives a It gives some people the feeling that, well, if it's free, it must not be very good. Yeah, because you know, if it were good, I'd have to pay money for it, which is untrue. Which is funny because if you had to pay money for it, people will be trying to find a way around having to pay money for it. Now you're you're making my brain hurt. Here's the crazy Okay,

stereotypical computer user, stereotypical Internet savvy computer user. All Right, if something doesn't cost money, then it's not worth having. If it's If something costs money, it's worth having, but you shouldn't pay for it. Yeah, like you are a messed up person, typical computer user. You need to re examine your priorities. Yeah, yeah, well I think. And by the way, I was once like you, Well, I think, yeah, ideally to me anyway, And I think it does come

down to personal choice. I think ideally, Um, I do prefer a hybrid. I do want I don't want to have to. I like the idea of being able to hack into things and being able to make choices and fool around with stuff. But I wanted at the end, I wanted to be able to work. I don't want to spend all my time hacking with it. I was like, okay, I'm done now. I want to close the hood and play on it. And I can't. Kind of broke it.

And we both own devices that run Android, and we both own devices that run Apple operating systems, so we both own Windows computers. Yeah. So, I mean, it's it's not like it's not like we're saying this as fan boys of one system versus another, even though we played that in the debate. UM, I mean I I own an Android fund my wife has an i phone, and we are both very happy with our devices for very

different reasons. It meets exactly what she wants in a smartphone, but for me it would probably be it's a beautiful device and it has a great interface, but it probably would be more frustrating to me than my Android phone, which meets my needs. Whereas the Android phone, I know for a fact, would annoy and irritate my wife because she used to have one and she doesn't anymore and she never will again because she's very happy with her iPhone. So again, it's too just two different people and two

different uh, preferences for the operating system. It's it's not that one is inherently better or worse than the other. It's just that it suits mine you know, one suits my needs and one suit serves Yeah. Yeah, it's it's it all comes down to the stuff that matters to the individual. Um And in the end, I think it's it's uh. Most people sort of go for the mix of things. Well, I want this part to just work, but the rest of it, I want to be able to fool around with and I think that's another one

of the appeals of Windows. It's sort of that middle ground. Um, you know, like we like I said, we all own the various devices, and we all see the value and and the limitations of each system. Um. I think I think it really you know, if if, however you're going about it, if you're dedicated to making the best possible product or service that you that you possibly can, whether it's as a member of the community of the open source world, or if it's you know, a closed system,

I think that is what's most important. And to me, the whole open versus closed is just a general philosophy that guides your your development process. It's not something that you know, I should definitely be you know, uh endorsed or or or scorned. Well, it frustrates me listening to people talk about it and seeing comments online from people who are so devoted to one side or the other that they will scream and call names and use profanity

to definite side and going. But I mean, I see, I see arguments for both sides, and yeah, I think are valid points for both. Yeah. And it's it is a dangerous thing because once you get once you become a fan of a certain way of doing things, then uh, it almost feels like if someone else praises a different way of doing it that it's somehow an Yeah, it's an attack against what you like, which isn't necessarily the case. It's yeah, no, it's definitely not fair. But it does

happen all the time. I see it all the time where someone will praise one system and someone else takes that as Hey, you're saying that the system I like sucks, and no, that's not what I said. I just said that this system was also good. I didn't even mention your system. Please don't yell at me trolls. So if you want to know more about that, listen to our podcast on how trolls work East Jonathan Strickland in the operating system you like stinks? Right? Yeah? Okay, Well that

that's a good summary. This was fun. Well, guys, that wraps up that classic episode. It sure was nice hearing Chris's voice again, wasn't it. If you guys have any suggestions for future episodes of tech Stuff, whether it's a technology, a company, maybe there's a person I should cover, let me know. Send me an email. The address is tech Stuff at how stuff works dot com, or you can drop me a line on Facebook or Twitter. The handle for both Facebook and Twitter is tech Stuff h s W. Also,

don't forget to follow us on Instagram. I'd love to see you on there and I'll talk to you again really soon. For more on this and thousands of other topics, is it how stuff works dot com