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

The Chair

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 186 posts

Re: The Chair

#51

Post by bad_user »

tesseract wrote: post #41
recoiledsnake wrote: post #12

>There’s a palpable sense among everyone from Apple I spoke to yesterday that this is the biggest and most important thing in the history of the industry. Seriously? Bigger and more important than the invention of the Internet and WWW? Well, I just wish the Post-PC devices wouldn't come with a 30% (or 43%) surcharge for all subscription content.

I fear the world got lucky in that the Internet inherited its openness from academia, and the PC inherited its openness from the early hobbyist microcomputer scene. As in many other industries, openness - except when necessary for a bare minimum of interoperability - has never really been the norm in consumer electronics. As computing moves beyond the PC, I think that (sadly) we are going to have to get used to propr…

Unfortunately for companies moving beyond the PC, the genie is out of the bottle already.

Phones have been historically locked down by carriers. Taking a look at the alternatives from just 5 years ago, the iPhone looks pretty damn open. And there is a reason for that, and why consumers didn't care.

Consumers are used to phones being locked, but consumers are also used to doing whatever they want with the computers they've bought. And funny thing - this wasn't always the case. IBM-compatible PCs that you could extend with ISA cards, assemble your own, coming bundled with MS-DOS / Windows - weren't the first PCs available. Even Apple came after Atari. And those home computers back in those day were pretty locked.

What changed the scene is the simple fact that software is so much bigger and more profitable than hardware; and there are many forces in the market that want hardware to be an unlocked and cheap complementary to software. You can see that playing right now with the battle between Android / WinMo 7 / iOS / Blackberry.

That's the biggest reason why Microsoft won in the 90's - not only over Apple, but also over IBM's OS/2 - they made no discrimination when it came to hardware, they ensured backwards-compatibility for third-party software at all costs, they kept the SDK free of charge. Compared to IBM's OS/2 ; Windows was a piece of shit ... but it ran fine on 286 processors and was compatible with everything you wanted.

My phone has at least ten times the horsepower of my first computer. I had no expectations out of my Nokia 3310; as I only expected it to make phone calls.

Bottom line - computing doesn't move beyond the PC, but towards the PC.

And Apple is increasingly becoming aggressive because they'd like to keep the grip they have right now, but they also realize that they cannot do it. Want to bet that they'll lose costumers to Android if for example Kindle for iOS is shut down?

Re: The Chair

#52

Post by phil »

alecperkins wrote: post #24
jerf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious competition with the iPhone took time to emerge, but it did. It's a temporary advantage, not a permanent one, as are all such advantages. Just as in the iPhone arena, Apple won't stand still but eventually it will not be able to singlehandedly defeat everybody on all fronts. But while they lead, they will rake in the bucks, and more power to them. I don't want them to be the only viable company out there and…

In some ways it doesn't even matter if they have competition or not, since Apple effectively defines the category and the expectations of the users. Even now, smart phones are generally playing catch-up to the iPhone. Yes, there is some innovation above and beyond Apple; Windows Phone 7 is surprisingly impressive, and the Web OS notification system is arguably superior. But, the comparison always comes back to the iP…

> defines the category and the expectations of the users

It's stunning how long that has been true. The modern desktop OS is patterned after the Macintosh, modern laptops all use the form factor introduced by the Powerbook 100s, and now all the best phones are made to look like an iPhone.

Re: The Chair

#53

Post by bonch »

jerf wrote: post #10
tumult wrote: post #2

The tech press needs to play up the competition to the iPad as much as possible, because drama drives clicks. But the reality is that Apple's iPad is so far ahead of everything else that it's almost out of sight. Have you used one of the 'iPad killers'? That is not competition. It's a joke. You can't even buy any of them, except for Samsung's Galaxy Tab. [And the Motorola Xoom, but only at retail Best Buy in America,…

Serious competition with the iPhone took time to emerge, but it did. It's a temporary advantage, not a permanent one, as are all such advantages. Just as in the iPhone arena, Apple won't stand still but eventually it will not be able to singlehandedly defeat everybody on all fronts. But while they lead, they will rake in the bucks, and more power to them. I don't want them to be the only viable company out there and…

The difference from smartphones is that carriers are pushing Android. It's a free OS they have total control over, unlike the Apple-controlled iOS. Tablets aren't phones and must stand on their own as legitimate appliance computers. Apple has proven before that it can win that kind of battle--the iPod has been the dominant MP3 player for almost a decade.

Re: The Chair

#54

Post by orangecat »

rbarooah wrote: post #44
blinkingled wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did I claim that? The existing apps do work so there is no lack of apps to start with and Honeycomb has been out for only few weeks - it won't be long before more tablet optimized apps appear.

Right - I said in my original comment that the situation would change over the year, but for now an average user would be silly to buy a Xoom and only have blown up phone apps and hope that stuff they like gets developed in future, when they can buy an iPad 2 and have great dedicated apps today .

for now an average user would be silly to buy a Xoom and only have blown up phone apps

"Blown up phone apps" are much better on Android than the pixel doubling that the iPad does for iPhone apps. Android apps aren't hardcoded for a specific resolution, so most of them work well on tablets even without being specifically designed to.

Re: The Chair

#55

Post by bonch »

jrockway wrote: post #39
rbarooah wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're seriously trying to claim that blown up android phone apps, many of which don't even rescale properly, are competition to the dedicated iPad designs? Have you looked at iPad apps lately? Even if you don't include iMove and GarageBand that were just announced, how about OmniGraffle, Sketchbook, Inkpad, the Korg Apps, Reeder, Osmos, iWork, etc.

A more interesting benchmark would be "time spent in each app". Sure, there are eight trillion apps for the iPad. But I bet most people spend 95% of their time in the browser (or an ebook reader), and the other 5% of their time in the email app. Guess what, you can do that with a 386 laptop from 1995. Apple's success comes from convincing people, through marketing, that they want to do that on an iPad and not on some…

"Guess what, you can do that with a 386 laptop from 1995. Apple's success comes from convincing people, through marketing, that they want to do that on an iPad and not on something else."

Ah, the old meme that people are just brainwashed by marketing into being happy with their Apple products, complete with made-up "95%" statistics.

Re: The Chair

#56

Post by yuhong »

nopinsight wrote: post #46

> But there are other things any competitor could copy, easily, but seemingly don’t even understand that they should, because such things aren’t technical. Take that chair. The on-stage demos of the iPad aren’t conducted at a table or a lectern. They’re conducted sitting in an armchair. That conveys something about the feel of the iPad before its screen is even turned on. Comfortable, emotional, simple, elegant. How…

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2118742

Re: The Chair

#57

Post by tesseract »

bad_user wrote: post #51
tesseract wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fear the world got lucky in that the Internet inherited its openness from academia, and the PC inherited its openness from the early hobbyist microcomputer scene. As in many other industries, openness - except when necessary for a bare minimum of interoperability - has never really been the norm in consumer electronics. As computing moves beyond the PC, I think that (sadly) we are going to have to get used to propr…

Unfortunately for companies moving beyond the PC, the genie is out of the bottle already. Phones have been historically locked down by carriers. Taking a look at the alternatives from just 5 years ago, the iPhone looks pretty damn open. And there is a reason for that, and why consumers didn't care. Consumers are used to phones being locked, but consumers are also used to doing whatever they want with the computers th…

I truly hope you're right.

(Nitpick: I'm aware IBM compatibles weren't the first PCs available. Before them came, among others, the Apple II and the Commodore - both of which came with full schematics in the back of the manual. That's openness if you ask me.)

Re: The Chair

#58

Post by bonch »

wvenable wrote: post #45
tumult wrote: post #2

The tech press needs to play up the competition to the iPad as much as possible, because drama drives clicks. But the reality is that Apple's iPad is so far ahead of everything else that it's almost out of sight. Have you used one of the 'iPad killers'? That is not competition. It's a joke. You can't even buy any of them, except for Samsung's Galaxy Tab. [And the Motorola Xoom, but only at retail Best Buy in America,…

> Few people are buying those things. That's not really true. While Apple has a huge lead, they've already begun to lose marketshare (95% down to 75% last quarter). With more and more competition coming soon, I don't think that Apple will be able to hold on. One only has to look at the success of Android phones -- which literally didn't exist at all when the original iPhone was released -- to see that such a lead is…

Where are you getting your marketshare figures?

It's no surprise that Android phones have numbers. They're on multiple carriers compared to just one (now two). Tablets don't have carriers backing them like that--they must stand on their own.

Apple fought off "iPod killers" for 10 years, so they've proven they know how to keep a lead. I think there's a lot of wishful thinking from some people wanting Apple to fall. For some reason, Apple's constant success antagonizes them.

Re: The Chair

#59

Post by yuhong »

nopinsight wrote: post #46

> But there are other things any competitor could copy, easily, but seemingly don’t even understand that they should, because such things aren’t technical. Take that chair. The on-stage demos of the iPad aren’t conducted at a table or a lectern. They’re conducted sitting in an armchair. That conveys something about the feel of the iPad before its screen is even turned on. Comfortable, emotional, simple, elegant. How…

This reminds me of HP which has both consumer and enterprise products under it's umbella, particularly since the acquisition of Palm.

Re: The Chair

#60

Post by bad_user »

tesseract wrote: post #57
bad_user wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately for companies moving beyond the PC, the genie is out of the bottle already. Phones have been historically locked down by carriers. Taking a look at the alternatives from just 5 years ago, the iPhone looks pretty damn open. And there is a reason for that, and why consumers didn't care. Consumers are used to phones being locked, but consumers are also used to doing whatever they want with the computers th…

I truly hope you're right. (Nitpick: I'm aware IBM compatibles weren't the first PCs available. Before them came, among others, the Apple II and the Commodore - both of which came with full schematics in the back of the manual. That's openness if you ask me.)

Well, if I'm not right ; then at least they'll get bitch-slapped by the EU as soon as they gain any significant marketshare.

I mean, they could convince frickin' Microsoft to make IExplorer / Windows Media Player optional ... which makes no sense whatsoever :)

Post reply on HN