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

231–240 of 262 posts

Re: Tablets

#231

Post by napierzaza »

lukeschlather wrote: post #206
gamble wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Oh, how a decade of stagnation can change perceptions...

It has nothing to do with Microsoft's stagnation. I've lived the past decade, and I'd rather be forced to use a mildly overpriced platform where I can run any code I want than a [wm]ildly overpriced platform where the code I can use is dictated by people who have a political agenda, and flat out refuse to let me run what code I want on the property I've ostensibly purchased.

Microsoft killed off all sorts of competitors using their sales channel with suppliers and other pressure tactics. You don't know what you're missing because it never happened.

I wish people would stop saying that Bill Gates has always been a nice guy because he's retired and giving away his money.

Don't fool yourself into thinking that MS is more open, they don't have much of a mobile OS for you to compare with iOS anyways.

Re: Tablets

#232

Post by Retric »

johnthedebs wrote: post #213
Chris_Newton wrote: post #154

> Many if not most of the special-purpose objects around us are going to be replaced by apps running on tablets. I respectfully disagree. The trend for specialised vs. generalised devices seems to go in cycles over a period of a few years, in a similar way to the classic thick vs. thin client cycle. Consider games consoles vs. gaming on PCs, the iPod vs. mobile phones with media storage, etc. Neither extreme is ever…

I think you make a good argument, but miss the mark on one important point. The specialization/generalization you're talking about seems to apply to apps, not the devices themselves. Devices like the iPhone and iPad replace a lot of things; the examples of glasses really wasn't a strong one. Consider this list of things being replaced: phone, mp3 player, GPS, maps, compass, books, wrist watch, stop watch, alarm, phot…

An iPod makes a terrible compass, wrist watch, photo album, notepad, calculator and or camera. The advantage is a bad X is better than no X. So, while most people may end up using their cell phone as a stopwatch, people that need a good stopwatch will still buy it.

Re: Tablets

#233

Post by recoiledsnake »

berntb wrote: post #208
lukeschlather wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with Microsoft's stagnation. I've lived the past decade, and I'd rather be forced to use a mildly overpriced platform where I can run any code I want than a [wm]ildly overpriced platform where the code I can use is dictated by people who have a political agenda, and flat out refuse to let me run what code I want on the property I've ostensibly purchased.

Don't use any phone based architecture to run code, then. They were tightly controlled before Apple. Compare a Mac with windows, instead.

Err. what's wrong with comparing iOS and Android?

Re: Tablets

#234

Post by recoiledsnake »

napierzaza wrote: post #231
lukeschlather wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with Microsoft's stagnation. I've lived the past decade, and I'd rather be forced to use a mildly overpriced platform where I can run any code I want than a [wm]ildly overpriced platform where the code I can use is dictated by people who have a political agenda, and flat out refuse to let me run what code I want on the property I've ostensibly purchased.

Microsoft killed off all sorts of competitors using their sales channel with suppliers and other pressure tactics. You don't know what you're missing because it never happened. I wish people would stop saying that Bill Gates has always been a nice guy because he's retired and giving away his money. Don't fool yourself into thinking that MS is more open, they don't have much of a mobile OS for you to compare with iOS…

So you mean if OS X won instead of Windows, there would be more competitors, right? Nope, there would be even less, because Apple makes it's own hardware, it would have killed off a lot of hardware companies, AMD, ATI being big examples.

And Apple is going to kill off so many hardware companies because if it wins like Windows, it's going to be the sole arbitrator of who gets to build hardware for it.

All MS wanted was for you to pay the Windows tax. Apple wants to control the hardware as well. Eg. Windows Phone 7 is a OS that various OEMs can run on different devices. iOS is basically just firmware for Apple's devices.

Re: Tablets

#235

Post by extension »

encoderer wrote: post #229
extension wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with altruism, it's about selling directly to the person using the product vs selling to someone who forces other people to use the product. Even if the seller is acting primarily out of self interest, users are going to end up much happier buying something because they like it , and not because forces out of their control have conspired to make it their only viable option. EDIT: here, straight f…

Apple wouldn't be in existence without the billions it made volume selling to schools. From grammar school to graduate school I was forced to use an Apple/Mac. Your comment, while mostly fiction IMO, does have a nice storyline.

Were you forced to buy one because your school had one? Was the school forced to buy them so they could interoperate with some other system?

Re: Tablets

#236

Post by recoiledsnake »

emehrkay wrote: post #192
lukeschlather wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't understand why people point to Webkit as a big Apple contribution. Basically Apple took KHTML, which is under the GPL and built Webkit out of it. It is basically forced by the license to release the source. Your point would have more validity if KHTML was BSD licensed and Apple released the source out of the good of their heart or if they built Webkit from scratch and then open sourced it. Apple basically saved a lot of effort by using KHTML and would have been sued if they didn't release the source.

Re: Tablets

#237

Post by recoiledsnake »

sunbash wrote: post #177
dnsworks wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, Apple's shareholders are out there saying "I'm so glad we're making great stuff". Apple wants to make money, no matter how much fandom we bestow upon Apple for having a great design aesthetic, Apple is a corporation whose aim is to make money. Apple is a golden boy because they aren't Microsoft, and if we keep comparing the two, we never give Apple an honest shake.

I agree - Apple is a business, and it strives to make money - should it not??? The fact that they have realized that great user experience (which MS is also now making a priority-office 2007-10 is a perfect example)is a form of added value that consumers will pay heavily for is simply a testament to Apple's leadership (NOT just jobs!). Having an unbelievably talented marketing team doesn't hurt either. My question is…

Also disturbing is the fact that Apple is sitting on a pile of $50 billion in cash while the actual Foxconn workers in China who make iPhones have very bad working conditions and pay. Cmon Apple, a few dollars go a long way in China.

Re: Tablets

#239

Post by gamble »

recoiledsnake wrote: post #234
napierzaza wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft killed off all sorts of competitors using their sales channel with suppliers and other pressure tactics. You don't know what you're missing because it never happened. I wish people would stop saying that Bill Gates has always been a nice guy because he's retired and giving away his money. Don't fool yourself into thinking that MS is more open, they don't have much of a mobile OS for you to compare with iOS…

So you mean if OS X won instead of Windows, there would be more competitors, right? Nope, there would be even less, because Apple makes it's own hardware, it would have killed off a lot of hardware companies, AMD, ATI being big examples. And Apple is going to kill off so many hardware companies because if it wins like Windows, it's going to be the sole arbitrator of who gets to build hardware for it. All MS wanted wa…

BS. MS cared very, very much about what software you ran. Remember Netscape? Borland? Microsoft J++? They put pressure on OEMs not to ship Netscape that make anything Apple's done with iOS pale in comparison.

It may be hard to appreciate today, but in the 90's you couldn't start a software company without a ready answer for how you were going to survive if MS decided they had to kill your product to protect the Windows monopoly.

Re: Tablets

#240

Post by moontear »

Was Paul trying to coin the word "tablet" for these kind of devices? I don't know how this is anything new, I have read of the iPad "tablet" or "tablet computer" many times.
Post reply on HN