Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The difference between Apple and everyone else

blog.zachwaugh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 75 posts

Re: The difference between Apple and everyone else

#41

Post by White_N_Nerdy »

ary wrote: post #15

As these types of epiphanies pop up on the web over time I wish someone would just come out and say it. Apple, as an organization, approaches problems in a way that just about every other company is too chickenshit to try. When Jobs returned and launched the Think Different campaign it wasn't for the masses, it was for Apple . It's difficult to articulate this properly because most people don't even have a good under…

Oh gawd. Drink the kool-aid much?

That remote is horrible compared to what you can get for Windows Media Center. Have you even tried a Gyration air-remote?

Re: The difference between Apple and everyone else

#43

Post by DougBTX »

zachwaugh wrote: post #33
blueben wrote: post #12

What's really amazing is that people seem to believe that Google designed products that were actually manufactured and designed by Sony and Logitech.

Well, I never said that Google was responsible for the design of the remotes or hardware in the post, that's clearly on Sony and Logitech. But Google did design the interface that requires a keyboard and mouse to operate, so they have some of the blame. You can bet that in the unlikely event Apple had a product where other companies designed the hardware for their software, they'd have some pretty detailed specs to m…

I guess when it comes down to it, Google makes its money by search. For search on TVs to work, they need to get people typing search keywords. Hence keyboards.

Re: The difference between Apple and everyone else

#44

Post by Pewpewarrows »

mikeryan wrote: post #13
amastilovic wrote: post #6

So if you want to search for something on TV, which GoogleTV is supposed to enable you to do, how would you do that using Apple's three-button remote? I have an idea about a prayer and Steve Jobs, but wouldn't elaborate on it. I think the blog post doesn't have a point at all, since it compares apples to pears.

Actually the article is missing a larger point. Most users probably don't want to be searching on their TV. Maybe a larger cognitive disconnect of Google's Device is that their answer to the problem isn't the right one. At some point Google really needed to try to figure out whether search was the feature that people really needed. I'd say content discovery is still a huge gaping hole as more IP Delivered video gets…

Except that Search _is_ the answer to what we need on a TV right now. Whenever I fire mine up right now, I either want to go to a specific channel, find if a particular program is playing right now, browse a category of programs, or access my existing digital library. Existing remotes, including Apple's minimalistic design, are worthless for doing this. It might look sleek and thin, but it's probably the worst user experience for getting to what I want right now. I don't want to have to press arrow keys a hundred times over through menu after menu after menu to get to the show that I want to watch.

GoogleTV's remotes let me do that. A few button presses and I'm instantly where I want to be. While Apple's product design strategy is elegance over any and all costs, with Google I can get shit done. And that's all I care about at the end of the day, not how pretty my remote looks when I'm using it.

Re: The difference between Apple and everyone else

#45

Post by [deleted] »

oh_no_my_eyes wrote: post #19
amastilovic wrote: post #6

So if you want to search for something on TV, which GoogleTV is supposed to enable you to do, how would you do that using Apple's three-button remote? I have an idea about a prayer and Steve Jobs, but wouldn't elaborate on it. I think the blog post doesn't have a point at all, since it compares apples to pears.

the mac people seem to be saying the solution to this problem is to buy an iphone or ipad. that is a really, really lousy answer. despite the fact that to use one of those devices would be really cool, it means I have to buy a totally separate device for the device I just bought. At least the remote comes with the TV! Even if it sucks its fully functional. How do you actually search from that remote? Can you? That vi…

[deleted]

Re: The difference between Apple and everyone else

#48

Post by stanleydrew »

zachwaugh wrote: post #30
mikeryan wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually the article is missing a larger point. Most users probably don't want to be searching on their TV. Maybe a larger cognitive disconnect of Google's Device is that their answer to the problem isn't the right one. At some point Google really needed to try to figure out whether search was the feature that people really needed. I'd say content discovery is still a huge gaping hole as more IP Delivered video gets…

I agree, and that is my point actually, the remotes were just an example. But the remotes reflect how they approached the whole problem. Google went with the assumption search was necessary, and had to find a way to fit it in. Apple thought about the entire experience, and realized people don't want to search on their TV and left it out.

This is kind of ridiculous. I do want to be searching on my TV. That's why I have a computer hooked up to it with a wireless keyboard and mouse. Just because Apple designed a product that fits your needs doesn't mean that it fits everyone's.

Statements like "Apple thought about the entire experience, and realized people don't want to search on their TV and left it out" are offensively condescending and give Apple too much credit. Building any product requires making assumptions. So far Apple has happened to be right with many of theirs, and for that they deserve a ton of credit. But the fact of the matter is that the Apple TV obviously doesn't meet very many people's needs, otherwise it would have sold better.

I think Google deserves some credit for trying a different approach, based on different assumptions. Proclaiming it DOA because the remotes look complicated is more than a little short-sighted.

"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." This can go the other way too you know, and might turn out to be just as ridiculous: "No hulu.com. Clunky remote. Lame."

Re: The difference between Apple and everyone else

#50

Post by jwhitlark »

YooLi wrote: post #5
recoiledsnake wrote: post #2

Apple TV is meant to be a media browsing and consumption device, whereas Google TV includes Chrome(with Flash). You can use an Android phone to control Google TV anyway. I would love to see Apple solving the problem with typing using a remote(especially things like URLs) without using resorting to an iPhone or iPod Touch.

"I would love to see Apple solving the problem with typing using a remote(especially things like URLs)..." They already solved it; you aren't supposed to be typing URLs while laying on your couch watching TV.

Yes. "You aren't supposes to..." seems to be the subtext with apple. You get a great experience when you buy everything from them and color within the lines. That doesn't make it THE way to run a superior company, but it is A way to do so.
Post reply on HN