The problem with Apple
Apple is a computer company that has been around for as long as I've been a computer nerd. I had a secret crush on the Apple IIc, but with a price tag of around $1,300 for just the computer and disk drive, was a bit too expensive for my 13 year old self, and so I opted for the equally functional, albeit less aesthetically pleasing, Commodore 64 system that cost less than half and had better sound capabilities. Since then, Apple's focus has been building up a brand image to convince people to pay more for their product.
Setting aside technical and aesthetic merits, the problem with Apple is that once you've made the commitment to use Apple products, you give up more than your money. Any apps and software you buy and invest time into learning how to use will only run on the Apple platform, locking you out of the option of choosing a different platform in the future unless you are willing to go through the time and expense of replacing all of your programs and apps. Furthermore, you place yourself on Apple's treadmill of their upgrade cycle. Apple makes its money by selling its expensive products. If they want, they can disable features of a current product or cripple it with an "Update" to encourage you to upgrade to the next thing, which will be of their choosing. What's good for you as a consumer is irrelevant.
All of this wouldn't be so bad if Apple kept up on the leading edge, but given that their customers are locked in, they eventually become complacent knowing full well that their customers aren't likely to go to another platform, even when it's significantly better.
While companies like Microsoft have been made out to be the "Bad guys" and Apple has been made out to be the "Hero" who will save us all, in actual fact Apple has done things that have made the Microsoft's transgressions seem petty in comparison. They've gotten away with it because they don't dominate the market. They do conspire to dominate their own market, end-to-end, taking away consumer choice, and in the markets where they are starting to dominate, we're starting to see some legal action being taken against them.
To summarize, once you've bought into Apple, you're in their walled garden, you have turned over your decision-making process on what to buy and when to buy it to them, which will leave them wealthier and you with fewer options. I don't believe any company should be allowed that level of control.
Microsoft
Some of the issues with Apple apply to Microsoft, though they're not nearly as bad. This is because they're not necessarily interested in pushing you to buy new hardware. They built their fortune on getting their operating system onto every PC sold (except for Mac's), and they did this by making their operating system license reasonably priced to the vendors, and making everything open, allowing anyone to develop hardware to work for their operating system. In this way, they're less evil than Apple in that you get to decide when it's time to update your hardware.
One of the benefits of running with Microsoft products is that corporations and small businesses use Microsoft, and corporations are usually run by frugal-minded people if the business is to remain successful. Sticking with the same thing as corporations is a good strategy; as we've seen, demand from the corporate world will dictate what Microsoft will do.
The times are changing, and so is Microsoft. These days, they're more interested in getting their customers onto a subscription-based service for their OS and software. This type of service takes away your ability to decide what to buy and when; what used to be an investment suddenly becomes an ongoing expense. To use the popular car analogy, this would take you from the opportunity of "Owning" a car to "Leasing" a car, even though Microsoft might argue that you don't own the Windows on your PC, you just have a license to "Use" it. Once again, it's taking away options from the consumer for the greater profit of the company.
Android
Android, the OS that's based on open source code, would seem to be the thing that will save us. Like Windows, it's hardware-agnostic, but unlike Windows, it's based on the Apache 2.0 open source license. This means that anyone can develop for that operating system and keep it up to date, and no one company can pull the plug on it to force you to upgrade.
Unfortunately, many Android tablets come pre-loaded with utilities and applications that are not open source. Some manufacturers embed these applications in the OS, so that you can not get rid of them. Some of these apps are subscription-based services, so you get "Nagged" to pay for this subscription from time to time. Generally, this is more of an issue in lower priced tablets, as manufacturers offset the smaller profit margin with commissions made from subscribers to those services.
This isn't so bad, as there's nothing to obligate you to those subscription services, and some of them might actually be worthwhile. There are also "Unofficial" methods to remove this sort of thing.
Linux
Linux based operating systems are the most important pieces of software for your financial and computing freedom. There are plenty of distributions to choose from.
Imagine this: You decide which operating system to install based on your needs. You install that on a computer you own, and then you decide which applications to install. Some, like Ubuntu, come with applications that most people would use, like a word processor, spreadsheet, and a web browser like Firefox or Chrome. After that, you get to decide what applications to install, and what to pay for. It's not so much about getting things like the operating system for free, it has more to do with providing you with complete control over your computing experience.
Those interested in video games can download and install Steam, where they can buy the games they like. A person who needs to do professional video editing can buy Lightworks for Linux. There are even high quality Enterprise distributions that cost money, though the free offerings like Ubuntu and Mint are very well polished and of excellent quality.
Open source provides us all with the ability to determine what matters to each of us, and that is why open source matters. If everything works and you're not ready to upgrade, why should you? Many people frustrated with the changes in Microsoft Word have found stability in the tried-and-true LibreOffice Writer. On the other hand, if you want to live on the bleeding edge of technology, why should you wait for a corporation to decide when you get to play with it? Most of the latest developments today in computer technology are happening in the open source world.
Open source matters to me, and that's why I continue to support it and encourage others to use it. While I don't begrudge Apple, Microsoft, and the tablet makers for wanting to earn a profit, I am thankful for the freedom and choice that open source offers. If you're ready for something new, why not give it a try?
