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

Tablets

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 262 posts

Re: Tablets

#191

Post by mortenjorck »

Psyonic wrote: post #118
arethuza wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Video on the iPad is its killer app for - I don't check email with it, I do a fair amount of Web browsing and I have read a few books through Kindle on it - but with video (a ripped DVD, iPlayer or a movie rented from iTunes) it is simply wonderful. [NB I noticed the other evening that an iPlayer at the distance I normally cradle it is larger than our 50" plasma at whatever distance that is from where I sit - no wond…

That mono sound really sucks you in

Unless you use headphones.

Re: Tablets

#192

Post by emehrkay »

lukeschlather wrote: post #102
alanthonyc wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the fact that the iPad is itself a closed...errr, integrated...system counter your argument? I'm all for open standards, API's and community cooperation of course. I just don't think that Apple is necessarily the antithesis. The fundamental difference between Apple's position today to Microsoft's monoculture of the previous decade lies in their motivations. Apple wants to make great stuff. Microsoft wanted to…

Microsoft's control was superficial, and that's how they like it. They don't want to control what you put on your computer, they just want you to pay them the same reasonable price. Apple on the other hand clearly does care what you put on your iOS device, and in ways that go beyond a desire for good UX to a desire to control what is acceptable for society: http://www.ncregister.com/blog/apple-finds-christianity-offe…

I left a similar comment on Reddit about another topic, but doesn't Apple's contributions to open source make them vastly less evil than Microsoft?

Just look at webkit and how Apple's competitors build (are in the process of building) their entire foundations on top of that tech and Apple still contributes.

Re: Tablets

#193

Post by Xuzz »

statictype wrote: post #164
Xuzz wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd also be concerned that on Android that the user might have a device that doesn't allow off-Market installs, and then I'd have to use a distribution mechanism I don't prefer (maybe even an alternative market like Amazon was rumored to be creating). No platform is perfect.

Less of a concern. If Apple decides to go into the Medical gadgets field and updates their terms of service accordingly, you are basically hosed. There's no recourse. Not even an alternate 'off-Market install'.

Unless your customer's Android device happens to come from AT&T, where you have the exact same issue.

(This isn't to say I don't agree with you that they shouldn't be able to kick you off, but, you know what? No mobile platform is good in that respect.)

Re: Tablets

#194

Post by rbarooah »

DougBTX wrote: post #180
rbarooah wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this a bias? What value would it be to pay attention to all incorrect statements people have made over the years except to understand why they were wrong? People like fuller who had insight that seems to have lasted over time are interesting because we can learn something not just from the statements they made, but from how they thought that gave them insight.

Imagine you have a set of people over history, all thinking in different ways, all making statements about the future. There's a good chance that some of those statements will be true, just by chance. If you don't account for that, you will be biased towards people who just got lucky (the survivors).

I understand the selection principle, but do we realistically think that's what's happening? Are there really lots of people recording detailed, insightful, coherent, highly varied, but wrong theories of the future that we are rejecting? Why would I have to imagine it if it were really going on?

Re: Tablets

#195

Post by fan »

edw519 wrote: post #9

Developers have used the accelerometer in ways Apple could never have imagined. That sentence is one instance of this sentence: Developers have used in ways could never have imagined. What better argument for open standards, APIs, and community cooperation?

I think that can be applied to technologies that aren't open -- and it can be a property of the technology itself.

In fact, one entire category of technology that's overlooked right now is sensors. Besides sound (mic) and light (camera), accelerometers and magnetometers are already there. Some other detectors of "state" that make sense:

Pressure (think of being able to predict rain) Humidity/Temperature (think of an environment controller) Directional Microphone (4): Conferencing, noise cancellation, etc.

Re: Tablets

#196

Post by mitjak »

replicatorblog wrote: post #186
dejb wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't it concern you that Apple could shut you down at any stage? They could easily just decide that your app isn't suitable for their store. This would be especially true for industrial applications where there might be good reasons to want to step outside their TOS or guidelines.

When has Apple shut down apps in the store? There was the purge of bikini pic apps and the Google Voice issues, but I can't think of another example of good, useful apps being pulled out of the store capriciously.

Why isn't Google Voice a good example of a good useful app? I wouldn't mind GV at all. Neither would I mind Grooveshark, for instance.

Re: Tablets

#197

Post by extension »

zmmmmm wrote: post #134
alanthonyc wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the difference: You don't have to use any Apple device if you don't want to. That choice is yours. I spent many years working in places where you had to use Microsoft products. There was no choice. Microsoft didn't care what you put on your machine because all they care about is making money selling you stuff.

> I spent many years working in places where you had to use Microsoft products. There was no choice. That's ridiculous - you had choice - you could have chosen to work elsewhere. Can't get the same pay, conditions, etc? That's not the point. These days there are plenty of jobs where you'll have to use a Mac because Jobs has dictated that you can only do iOS development on a (recent) Mac.

Microsoft's entire empire was built on platform lock-in and network effects -- from business to business, to customers, and to the homes of their employees. It was a staggeringly successful strategy that everyone copied, Apple being the most prominant exception. They've always made products to please the consumer who bought it and nobody else. Cherry pick counter-examples all you like, but this is pretty much how it was.

Re: Tablets

#198

Post by CapitalistCartr »

steveklabnik wrote: post #129
iaskwhy wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just saying but who knows if in x years you also have to use Apple? You know, there was always an alternative for Microsoft products like there is for Apple ones but people actually vote on this with their wallet: if the vast majority chooses Apple you will be forced to use their products too. I'm sure of this because I would never think about working with Objective-C and here I am doing iOS apps because that's w…

> I'm just saying but who knows if in x years you also have to use Apple? Then that's when I'll start to take issue with them.

As Stalin supposedly said, "Once the avalanche has started, its too late for the pebbles to vote."

And Voltaire, "No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible."

Post reply on HN