Locked in but locked out

Walls are often constructed for good reasons, they make the maintenance of an enviroment easier and keep unwanted vistors out. Over the years Apple appealed to those who "think differently", such as the creative industries. Apple provided them with tools which they could not get on other platforms. As Apple has become more main stream it has gradually closed the environment building walls around the Apple eco-system. The argument has been made that there are many advantages to the walled garden. All the services are engineered to work perfectly with each other creating a system which delivers to the user an effortless experience. But like much which is described as perfect it leaves you, often, feeling curiously unsatisfied. For many years I lived in Apple's walled garden. Apple undeniably create beautifully engineered products with very carefully integrated software. The move to a sandbox model, where developers must submit their software to an approval system for the desktop, may create tightly integrated software but reduce choice.

Locking the platform so tightly denies the human urge to tinker and improve a system to your liking. It moves the computer towards becoming a household device. A device which allows you to interact only with other devices made by this one company.

Walls inhibit the ebb and flow of social communication.
The top down approach of Apple attempts to define the user experience in all its many varied forms. The internet has altered from an individualistic experience to a social experience. Connecting people all over the world. A sand boxed walled experience prevents the sharing of everything from ideas to files. Nature has shown that ecosystems that become overly specialised are more susceptible to failure. Linux provides an open platform that prevents the user from being locked in but locked out from the world.