I think it's important that we draw a clear point about what you're talking about when you say "open". I must confess that I thought you were talking about open as in F/OSS. You're clearly talking about "Maury Povitch" open ("You don't know me! I'll do what I want!"). My guess is that you're pro the former, if even you have not stated it yet. I think it's pretty obvious to all involved that phones be moron proof by default. Phones after all, for the vast majority of the populace, are simply an appliance (off-on, simple functionality).
This view of the phone as an appliance is not accurate any more. Whether or not the public realizes it, they're holding a computing device. In 5 years time, I expect one to be able to use their phone with an external monitor and keyboard and use it much like you would a Netbook today.
So where does that leave us? We're headed towards a highly portable and compact computing device, that is currently a transitory species (if you will). I think this is an exciting time for computing. This is a bold challenge! How do you provide something that is safe by default, simple to use, and doesn't encumber the tinkerers that have been proven to time and again generate wonderful arenas of opportunity, wealth and societal change?
Personally, I think a sort of middle solution is best. An opt-in for tinkering, perhaps. I think closing tinkering is just plain foolish. It's proven to be valuable and shouldn't be stopped.
I agree with most everything you say (open source is awesome, phones == next gen computers, and opt-in tinkering would be cool).
But that last point is what I'm worried about. Windows is opt-in now sorta, but it still gets malware. The Android appstore has already let financial related trojans into it.
So figuring out the balance is hard if you account for people willing to click "yes" to anything. I do in fact like the idea of an open system, but I want people to explain why I should also be required to be as defensive about my phone as I am with my Windows computer. (viruses, latest updates, dangerous applications).
Honestly, I'm not arguing that walled gardens are the best thing ever, I'm arguing that there are advantages that get ignored in the "OMG, it's my device" arguments. I want a nice middleground, and not another device that's totally open, and total a pain in the ass to manage and defend.
This view of the phone as an appliance is not accurate any more. Whether or not the public realizes it, they're holding a computing device. In 5 years time, I expect one to be able to use their phone with an external monitor and keyboard and use it much like you would a Netbook today.
So where does that leave us? We're headed towards a highly portable and compact computing device, that is currently a transitory species (if you will). I think this is an exciting time for computing. This is a bold challenge! How do you provide something that is safe by default, simple to use, and doesn't encumber the tinkerers that have been proven to time and again generate wonderful arenas of opportunity, wealth and societal change?
Personally, I think a sort of middle solution is best. An opt-in for tinkering, perhaps. I think closing tinkering is just plain foolish. It's proven to be valuable and shouldn't be stopped.