I've always wondered where this argument comes from with respect to the Mac. Macs are running an open source Unix-based operating system with a fancy GUI on top. There are no restrictions on user freedom or utility; it's up to the developers of the world to put out software for it, and many do.
Well, just from my own recent experience:
- Friends with multiplayer games from third parties (such as Blizzard) generally have to use a Windows partition to use the games.
- Macs are unable to operate the standard GIS mapping software; professionally I've had consultants unable to perform mapping functions because they use Macs. Given the scientific nature of mapping tools, and the long-term popularity of Macs within that consumer base (as opposed to the very recent emergence of Macs into the consumer mainstream, driven by precisely the approach I'm describing - everyone's now committed to iPhones and iPads, so when they go for a computer they choose one designed specifically for compatibility with those devices), I'd be surprised if this was a decision of the developers.
- A similar issue appears to exist with downloads from ftp sites, which on Windows machines is a straight file transfer from a Windows Explorer window. I only know about this one from a recent report from someone using a Mac, so I'm not sure if Macs are genuinely incompatible with the Windows Explorer interface or whether it was a user issue, but it would fit with what I know of Apple's proprietary approach.
On iOS, there are certainly more restrictions, the primary purpose of which is to add an additional security layer. Not once have I said "I really wish I could do such & such with my iPhone/iPad, but Apple doesn't allow it."
In terms of user freedom, I mean freedom to choose alternative products without penalty. If I had an iPod and Sony, say, put out a superior music player, from what I gather I'd lose functionality if my computer was a Mac while a Windows machine will equally happily function with both an iPod and a Walkman. Simply, I don't want to be tied to a given brand for everything - if I want a camera I prefer to buy Nikon. Music players - Sony. Computer - whatever works with the majority of my devices. etc. etc.
While I understand iPods no longer require music in Apple-patented format, and can now use MP3s, they do still require iTunes as the software to upload - most MP3 players can use iTunes, Media Player, or a variety of other music management software types. Granted there's probably not much to choose between the two these days - when I started using MP3 players Media Player had a format I vastly preferred to iTunes, but sadly recent incarnations of Media Player seem to be devoted to making more closely-resemble the old iTunes I remember, which mostly seems amount to reducing accessibility - such useful former Media Player defaults as creating automated playlists by rating or date of acquisition were never in iTunes that I found, and have now gone from MP. Though this has been fixed, one recent version of Media Player replicated a big issue I'd had with iTunes, which was the difficulty it had attributing artists to individual songs from 'Various Artists' compilations.
