Mozilla's position is illogical, but it doesn't really matter.
What does matter, and I would like to see, is a judge presenting to Microsoft's representatives an ARM powered tablet running Windows RT and an Intel Atom powered tablet running Windows 8 and asking why they are banning companies from doing their business on one of the platforms.
This will surely make the debate a lot more interesting and will probably result in the justice department looking at Apple and asking the same question. Tablets and smartphones are getting more and more powerful, they can handle an antivirus program by now. All this "security" talk is pretentiously companies arguing they need to make these devices more secure. One of the ways to do it and supposedly not needing an antivirus is to make it as much a closed platform as it can be.
Of course this path won't last long, not only because it's anti-competitive, but also because it's ineffective. Secure systems don't exist. Users better know this rather than ignorantly believe that their devices are secure.
Originally Posted by kabj06
You mean iOS? I expect Mac OS X to have the same walled garden as iOS though in about 4 years.
I expect the exact opposite. If justice works properly, of course.Edited by tpi2007 - 5/12/12 at 1:59am