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

Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

questinglog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 47 posts

Re: Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

#31

Post by jbay808 »

bfuclusion wrote: post #12

From it's own definitions this article is patently false. Quote: "applying scientific knowledge for practical purposes" You're doing that when you try to reduce time to display from 1 second to 1000ms, when trying to chose algorithms that better match your users real usage of the site, to just plain moving a button a few pixels so people see it better. It doesn't have to be the new shiny to make an actual impact.

Is this very different from people who tune the design of springs in car door handles so they have a nice click when you open them? That's good engineering, but is it what you'd call tech? Or does it need to be done on a web app to be tech?

Re: Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

#32

Post by Doxin »

AlchemistCamp wrote: post #24
waheoo wrote: post #23

> But people don't talk about ancient inventions as "technology", outside of a historical context. When we call something technology, we generally mean something invented recently This is rediculous, the whole articles schtick is based on an inline redefining of the word its about. Well I guess the sky isn't blue anymore because the word blue doesn't mean blue anymore, it means red. I dunno about you all, but when I…

Do you refer to cars, microwaves, refrigerators or light bulbs as "tech"?

yes.

Re: Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

#34

Post by bfuclusion »

aashiq wrote: post #13
bfuclusion wrote: post #12

From it's own definitions this article is patently false. Quote: "applying scientific knowledge for practical purposes" You're doing that when you try to reduce time to display from 1 second to 1000ms, when trying to chose algorithms that better match your users real usage of the site, to just plain moving a button a few pixels so people see it better. It doesn't have to be the new shiny to make an actual impact.

I 100% agree with you, and to dismiss web apps in this way is to devalue making thinking easier for people. However, I'm also amused by the Freudian slip of 1 second to 1000 ms, which would of course be "tech" instead of tech.

Yeah, that one would indeed be "tech":). I meant 100ms of course.

Re: Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

#35

Post by bfuclusion »

TAForObvReasons wrote: post #17
aashiq wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I 100% agree with you, and to dismiss web apps in this way is to devalue making thinking easier for people. However, I'm also amused by the Freudian slip of 1 second to 1000 ms, which would of course be "tech" instead of tech.

WeWork is a "tech" company in the sense that the actual business is a thin tech veneer around an established business model (like Regus Group). A huge number of SaaS services are effectively a thin design layer around a database, a technology that has been established decades ago. I think that's the real thrust of the post.

I tried writing this three times, and I'm probably going to screw it up anyways but here's my take on business models and "tech": If the entirety of your approach is an existing model but "on the internet" and you don't spend any effort on what "on the internet" really means, then you might be in "tech". However if you take the time to carefully apply yourself to how the new environment changes your business model and your relationship with customers, and exercise sound technical and product focused expertise in so doing, then you're in tech. Efficiency, expanded markets, better experience, ease of use, etc are real tangible benefits, even if the whole product is just a shell around a 1970s COBOL database.

Re: Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

#36

Post by bfuclusion »

jbay808 wrote: post #31
bfuclusion wrote: post #12

From it's own definitions this article is patently false. Quote: "applying scientific knowledge for practical purposes" You're doing that when you try to reduce time to display from 1 second to 1000ms, when trying to chose algorithms that better match your users real usage of the site, to just plain moving a button a few pixels so people see it better. It doesn't have to be the new shiny to make an actual impact.

Is this very different from people who tune the design of springs in car door handles so they have a nice click when you open them? That's good engineering, but is it what you'd call tech? Or does it need to be done on a web app to be tech?

Absolutely that's tech. Metallurgy, force maps, 3d models, computer controlled machining, etc is in fact HIGH technology. To previous generations that's just plain magic, even if the user doesn't spend more than 1/10th of second thinking about it.

Re: Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

#37

Post by zippy5 »

AlchemistCamp wrote: post #29
adrianN wrote: post #25

In this thread: heated discussions that boil down to different definitions of the word "tech". Since "tech" is mostly a marketing term, this seems fairly pointless. For suitable definitions, a real-estate company is hot "tech". For other reasonable definitions anything that is is mass production is not "tech".

My intents were: 1) Share something I found profoundly encouraging for newcomers trying to make a dent with their technical skills 2) Explore how conflating two different (but overlapping) things we use the same word for makes it easy to mistakenly feel like it's "too late" to make a dent with technical skills. Given just how many people got upset after interpreting it along entirely different lines, this piece is cl…

I think what you’re really trying to describe is disruptive innovation. The way new technological development creates new market / business opportunities.

It’s not just about technology itself, but the relationship and timing between the technology’s capabilities and potential customers.

And you’re right, that technical skills will be invaluable to these businesses because in many cases, these technologies still have technical challenges to overcome before it’ll meet the customer needs, i.e. technical risk.

I think it’s great that you expressed your ideas, shipped it and then iterated on the clarity because many engineers with entrepreneurial ambitions will find your insights useful.

Re: Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

#38

Post by tdeck »

Aside: When I moved to SF for my first job in 2014 I thought I'd be working in "software". I was a bit surprised to learn that what I'm actually working in is "tech" (and that I'm something called a "techie" as well). It seemed to me that nobody really talked like this in college - you wouldn't say you majored in "tech", my fellow ACM members weren't "techies". Since we are almost always talking about software, the label seems a bit odd. I suspect it's the influence of finance that lumps all these industries together, but the work and environment is very different in HW vs SW.

Re: Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

#39

Post by SenHeng »

I thought this was going to be another blog about how Javascript isn't a real programming language and web apps are cancer.

It's not.

It's actually a very nice article about the BAFTA acceptance speech that John Carmack gave.

> I do hear sometimes from programmers who are kind of sad that they don't have the opportunity to write game engines from scratch like I did and have it matter or make an impact...

> here's where some perspective really helps - I can remember when I was a teenager, I thought I had missed the Golden Age of 8-bit Apple 2 gaming, that I was never going to be Richard Garriott...time went by, and I got to make my own marks in things after that. And, in that time, I also see so many opportunities that have come by.

> The 90s PC wave was great - I was happy to be there, and I'm glad I took a swing and knocked one out of the park with that. But since then, we've seen mobile games, and web games, and free-to-play games, the Steam revolution...and now virtual reality. And all of these are amazing!

> So, yeah, the opportunities that I had aren't there for people today - but there are new and better ones. And personally, I'm more excited about these than anything that's come before. So, thank you very much for this honor, but I'm just getting started.

> -John Carmack (BAFTA acceptance speech)

Re: Web apps aren't tech. They're “tech”

#40

Post by imtringued »

I think the author is reading way too much into the word "tech". Using general words to abbreviate specific concepts is pretty common in English. Gas usually refers to a specific fuel used in cars (gasoline) even though it is also referring to a much broader category that describes a state of matter and any material in that state. This leads to situations where words Autogas and gas refer to completely different things.

The word tech has a colloquial meaning which doesn't actually stand for technology in general. Tech actually stands for a very narrow form of technology namely information technology. In other languages you see the exact opposite. Instead of using a broad category to abbreviate a specific meaning the abbreviation is actually based around the meaning of the word itself. Information technology isn't "Techno" in German, it's "Informatik". In French it is "Informatique". In Italian its "Informatica".

This article is primarily a complaint about the English language than about "tech" itself.

Post reply on HN