61–70 of 144 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMHO I think that's wierd. I'd never consider using a computer in any of those places personally. I consider them all "downtime".
I think some of the point in this case is that the iPad is specifically not a computer.
Do you have a command line in your car to change the radio station? Do you expect to have the controls when being on a plane?
You want a device that let's you program? Buy a notebook. I hear the MacBook Airs are excellent.
Some of my friends are musicians and LOVE the iPad. Garageband on it blew their mind.
Does every computing device need to behave like a PC?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most comments in this thread strike me as being anti-"normal users". This is the elite, talking about how they can maintain their elite position.
That's not what the parent, or the article is saying. Don't turn this into some sort of class warfare for the sake of trolling. The ability of an OS or application to expose data in order to allow you to manipulate it as you see fit, does not preclude it being user-friendly and straighforward to use. That funcionality might very well be hidden away, but available if you're inclined to use it. The point that is being…
What the author of the article suggests would be not "anti-programmer" are necessarily "anti-user". Breaking everything down into composable components and forcing the user to compose even simple, everyday procedures before being able to use them? How terribly difficult and exclusive to techies only!
Similarly, he suggests that the only way for meaningful interaction to occur between programs is through the unfettered access to a filesystem - as users have demonstrated time and time again the past decade or so, they don't want that. They will pile heir music and photos and movies happily into one big dump so long as a much more proficient application handles the intricacies for them. They don't want a filesystem - it's a toy for people like us.
The ability of an OS to expose data for manipulation does not necessarily preclude it from being user friendly, but that's only true in a very ephemeral, theoretical way. The only ways we know how to expose said data, up till now, is entirely anti-user, and part of why the popularity of computers with the general population has not exploded until so late. For too long we've kept the keys to the kingdom, and you know what, fuck all of that noise.
And the claim that iOS (and other similarly restrictive OSes) have been developed primarily to protect the company's interest is patently absurd. The iPhone has been by far the best thing to happen to mainstream computer users in the past two decades. They have power at their fingertips that they can actually comprehend now, and use without navigating a tome of quickly outdated knowledge. This is the age of the device you don't have to take a class to use! The empowerment here is incredible, and people have been throwing gobs of money at Apple, Google, and everyone else who has realized this. The main reason these OSes are restrictive is because it guarantees usability and consistency in a way that completely open platforms do not (Gimp, anyone?).
This whole article, and resulting thread, really disappoints me. I'd have thought that what we've seen in the last 4-5 years would finally wake up the tech community and make them realize that computational resources are pointless unless it benefits the rest of humanity somehow, and chief among these is mainstream usability. But no, it looks like a large contingent of HN is happy to view users as stupid plebes - if only they knew the value of free OSes and would take the time to learn the command line!
Screw that train of thought, and damn the people who continue to reinforce the false assumption that technology need be complicated and obtuse. I'm sick and tired of looking at all the cool things we can do - things that are of real benefit to people - and having it locked away behind a glass wall of techno-wizardry when it does so much more good out in the hands of the masses.
It's not anti-Unix or anti-programmer...it's all about being anti-freedom. All these companies want to do is turn your computing experience into a locked down, controlled, monitored experience. They want to turn your limitless and powerful computer into a home appliance...like a blender or electric razer. No way to customize, no way to modify, no way to organize thoughts your way. No hacking or "jailbreaking" into yo…
One more thing-- no one forces anyone to use a particular technology (unless it's being forced to use Windows at work.) The tin foil hat crowd might have some grand fears, but it's groundless -- you only give up the privacy you choose to give up. Google has never knocked on my door forcing me to give up private information, although the US government does! I would be more worried about intrusive and over regulatory w…
Um... it's not really irony if you do it intentionally...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taking the top 100: http://www.alexa.com/topsites : YouTube, BBC, Xvideos, Xhamster, Pornhub, Youporn, Dailymotion, Netflix... It's always choppy over WiFi in London from experience as there's so much interference from the amount of WiFi networks around and contention from the overcrowding. (for ref, I borrowed an iPad for a week and played with it).
"It's always choppy over WiFi in London from experience as there's so much interference from the amount of WiFi networks around and contention from the overcrowding." Something that, magically, Manhattan, say, has managed to avoid. Oh, and your experience is "borrowing an iPad for a week".
Borrowing something for a week is a good way to find out if it suits, which it didn't. The person I borrowed it from was one of the people above who have discarded it. I gave it back as I discovered that it could be harmful.
Better than marketing-spiel and 10 mins playing with one in the Apple Store.
Full story at 11
How many people actually program on an iPad or iPhone? I mean in any real sense and not something simple like SSHing into a unix box to update a config file. None. That's not the purpose of it. Apple has never implied nor mentioned anything like that should be or could be done on that device. It's built to browse the web and use touch applications. I despise articles like these because they try to put products like t…
I think the title is misleading. The author hints at a much bigger issue (I'm not an iOS user so I can't say how valid his point is but it's not about 'programming' per se.
There are many applications that are GUI based and do good message passing. But they are on the desktop the iPad isn't that. It may share the same underpinnings as OSX but it is not a desktop bound OS, it is an appliance. He doesn't like the sandboxing but the sandboxing is also why it is secure.
It's not anti-Unix or anti-programmer...it's all about being anti-freedom. All these companies want to do is turn your computing experience into a locked down, controlled, monitored experience. They want to turn your limitless and powerful computer into a home appliance...like a blender or electric razer. No way to customize, no way to modify, no way to organize thoughts your way. No hacking or "jailbreaking" into yo…
change 'television' to 'computing experience' "When you're young, you look at computing experience and think, There's a conspiracy. The companies have conspired to dumb us down. But when you get a little older, you realize that's not true. The companies are in business to give people exactly what they want. That's a far more depressing thought. Conspiracy is optimistic! You can shoot the bastards! We can have a revol…
It's the same with the tv, newspapers. People get what they can get. People get what's in the market. People get what other people already got, because of a warm fuzzy feeling of familiarity and a need for identification with others. Any creator has a responsibility so that the users can be informed that things can be done in better ways and then they can choose better things. "We give people what they want" is often an easy excuse to ignore such responsibility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think some of the point in this case is that the iPad is specifically not a computer.
It is though. What is it if it's not a computer?
An interesting question. Is the iPad a computer?
Your average power-user (let's say programmers, Apple fanbois, Android users, and me) would say, "Umm hello? Obviously!" But your legions of average regular iPad users (grandmas, and your average college students) might not agree. But if you asked them what an iPad was, if it was a computer, they couldn't quite be able to tell you. "Umm, yes? But wait, it can't do so many other things."
This means, as a society, Apple has forced us to rethink the question: "What is a computer?" and "Is the iPad a computer by this definition?"
It's not anti-Unix or anti-programmer...it's all about being anti-freedom. All these companies want to do is turn your computing experience into a locked down, controlled, monitored experience. They want to turn your limitless and powerful computer into a home appliance...like a blender or electric razer. No way to customize, no way to modify, no way to organize thoughts your way. No hacking or "jailbreaking" into yo…
I think iOS is a little more locked down than it has to be to accomplish this, but there's no question it represents a decisive break with the past. The money made in the future in technology will depend on humanizing technology. Over time I expect the market will find a paradigm that serves both ends of the spectrum well.