iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer • Hacker News Board

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#131

Post by potatolicious » Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 8:40 PM UTC

loup-vaillant wrote: post #90

potatolicious wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it does. Or at least, it does in every way that we've yet to imagine. 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…

Could you tell us how the App Store exclusivity significantly enhance usability? Apple already controls the native API and the core apps, how can they need more? Do they really need to ban poor apps? Do they really need the censorship? Usability can't explain all the control. There are other reasons.

The control is there, but it's far from the primary or even a major driver, I would claim.

The control and banning of poor apps reflects something not only Apple is doing - see Google and their "banning" of content farms and ad farms.

Junk breaks discoverability, and discoverability is one of the more fundamentally important notions that users have started to get in the last few years.

A few years ago you'd get panicked calls from users who are afraid to click on anything, because the slightest misstep means an app crash, an OS crash, or just plain data loss. Now we've finally developed software that's intuitive enough and appeals enough to people's natural assumptions about software, that this is no longer the case. People are happy to tap away and discover new features of their devices and software, and that's great.

By allowing crapware and malware into the system, we degrade user trust, and we go back to the days where users are apprehensive about clicking on anything, for fear of losing their data, for fear of getting a virus, etc etc ad infinitum.

tl;dr: The "control" angle, for the most part (except some clauses such as App Store exclusivity) does enhance usability.

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#132

Post by andosa » Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 9:41 PM UTC

Apocryphon wrote: post #120

andosa wrote: post #58

I couldn't agree more. Some people say that iOS is not meant to be a programming device and that it is great for what it's meant to be, e.g. reading and watching content, but I disagree. Just a few examples. - The lack of user facing filesystem means I have to jump through wierd hoops when doing simple stuff like managing my pdfs. An example, I get a pdf and open it in iBooks. A few months further on, I want to read…

Could you achieve the same things on an Android tablet? On the Touchpad? On the Playbook? I'm not sure if that is an inherent issue with iOS, or rather functionality that mobile OS's in general have not yet bothered to implement, as tablets are still marketed towards common consumers, not power users.

Dont know about touchpad or playbook, but you definately can on Android.

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#133

Post by mas644 » Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 11:33 PM UTC

acabal wrote: post #28

mas644 wrote: post #8

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…

Maybe true, but the fact that iOS devices are selling so well shows that people actually want their computers to be as simple as appliances. I think that to many "regular" people (i.e. non-HN-reading types of people), the power in computers is when they provide a simple and idiot-proof way to automate many common day-to-day tasks. If given the choice, many people would rather go out for a picnic than sit down at a sh…

I've seen this point brought up. Making some easy (which I'm all for btw) does not mean it has to lock down aspects that average users are not meant to look at it (i.e. DRM). It's fine if they hide them, but when there are software and hardware mechanisms that prevent power users from manipulating the device - that is unnecessary. I should be able to replace the OS as well as install any app that I please on the device. They are actually taking EXTRA steps to prevent me from seeing the internals by using things like hardware level OS image hashes (i.e. tivoization).

Now people say, I just want to use my device and get work/play done. THat's fine, I'm all for it. However, having control benefits everybody. For example, if you want to tether your smartphone and use it as a wireless access point, writing the software to do this is trivial (and a power user can do it for you). However, smartphone companies don't want you doing that...unless you pay them more money for that feature. That's kind of unfair, the smartphone company is depending on PROPRIETARY LOCKIN rather than real competition. That's my problem with it. They want to control your experience and make you think you can't get a PREMIUM EXPERIENCE without paying them ludicrous amounts. I mean, all tethering does is update a few IP tables here and there -- I have to pay 10 bucks a month for that??

Yeah sure APple did a lot of great things as did Microsoft and Google for bringing computing to the masses. However, they all did it based on the open innovation of others (kernels, compilers, text editors, web servers, etc). They've used those wonderful open things to create a wonderful easy to use experience. At the same time, they've added ARTIFICIAL CONSTRAINTS to it (e.g. again tethering) to create PROPRIETARY LOCKIN and make you think your device has less capability than it really has. If these companies stay on these same paths and people maintain the same level of compliance...we'll get to a point where ALL computers are useless and innovation can't happen. Again, easiness and openness are not orthogonal.

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#134

Post by vacri » Sat, Sep 17, 2011, 1:48 AM UTC

zwaldowski wrote: post #130

vacri wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "anti-freedom" charges, the locking out of certain features, you get the same stuff on any platform. Just try to publish an app that abuses the Android logo in any Android market. Really? "Android isn't free because you can't 'abuse' the brand's logo"? That's the best counter-example you could come up with?

You mean besides the fact that you can't call your build of Android, Android without Google's permission? The fact that Google still hasn't released the sources to a 7-month-old "open source" OS? Yeah, Android is totally "open."

Would you like to have another try?

From what I glean from your comment, you equate Google's protection of it's name and the fact that one version of the OS hasn't been open-sourced to the iron-fisted grip of Apple and their control.

(by the way, if you want android source, here you go, courtesy of the folk who "don't open source their OS" http://source.android.com/source/downloading.html )

Control of branding is a stupid argument to base "is this free" on. Hell, even Debian, the freeest operating system ever, amicably forked firefox to iceweasel - the only difference being the name and artwork. Firefox is totally free for you to do anything with at all... except for the branding. It's to protect themselves from someone turning it into malware and distributing it under the official name. Branding is a stupid thing to claim as the be-all and end-all of whether something is 'free'.

Hell, even the BSD license that allows you to do anything with the code, sell it, free it up, throw it against the wall, even this extremely free licenses has branding requirements - Neither the name of the nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission..

And even then, Android does allow you to modify the logo. You can have the logo in a police uniform (see android police) or on a skateboard (see cyanogenmod). You just can't put a derogatory version on the android market. How very onerous - clearly those are stifling conditions for developers to work under!

Compare to Apple who won't even give permission to use the word 'free' with their products (as in, they won't help you if you run a competition to win a 'free' ipad).

As for "yeah, totally open" - it seems to me that there's a ton of people modding android code because they can, but on the Apple side of things, where is the opened source... at all?

Why have you set a much, much higher bar for openness for one product but not the other?

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#135

Post by vacri » Sat, Sep 17, 2011, 1:58 AM UTC

snprbob86 wrote: post #124

vacri wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the machine I built had a power supply failure, I had to go fucking replace it. I was free to use whatever power supply I wanted, but I wasn't free to use my damn computer for the four days I waited for my new component. vs When my iMac had a buzzing noise, they replaced it in the store in under an hour. So "sitting on my arse doing nothing, I had to wait four days for a replacement" versus "I physically took my…

Both repairs were free (err...gratis) warrantee replacements by the manufacturer. Of course I could have paid for a new component or repair at a local computer shop. > can still be doing a bad thing, even though they're full of good intentions. Totally agree. I just don't think they are doing a bad thing either. No one is forcing you to buy a locked down device. No one is forcing you to make a particular freedom trad…

But just be cognizant of the tradeoffs and their costs without making value judgements about those who make different tradeoffs, both as consumers and as producers.

I agree about the consumers bit - what's good for me may not be good for you - but don't agree about the producers. We should be able to raise constructive criticism if we see a producer as damaging - and I think the exhortation to 'leave them alone, they work hard' isn't right.

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#136

Post by vacri » Sat, Sep 17, 2011, 2:00 AM UTC

snprbob86 wrote: post #124

vacri wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the machine I built had a power supply failure, I had to go fucking replace it. I was free to use whatever power supply I wanted, but I wasn't free to use my damn computer for the four days I waited for my new component. vs When my iMac had a buzzing noise, they replaced it in the store in under an hour. So "sitting on my arse doing nothing, I had to wait four days for a replacement" versus "I physically took my…

Both repairs were free (err...gratis) warrantee replacements by the manufacturer. Of course I could have paid for a new component or repair at a local computer shop. > can still be doing a bad thing, even though they're full of good intentions. Totally agree. I just don't think they are doing a bad thing either. No one is forcing you to buy a locked down device. No one is forcing you to make a particular freedom trad…

Also: On the repair front, how long would you have been waiting for Apple to come to your office and replace the faulty part? :)

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#137

Post by dasil003 » Sat, Sep 17, 2011, 6:06 AM UTC

william42 wrote: post #127

dasil003 wrote: post #115

So only programmers deserve nice things? Look, I get the danger the app-storification of software, and honestly it scares me more than Microsoft ever did, just because it's so appealing from a consumer perspective. But barring the removal of direct distribution and the UNIX shell, I say more power to Apple in terms of re-inventing the consumer computing experience. What the author doesn't seem to understand is that g…

> we have to acknowledge that programmer devices are increasingly going to be distinct from the mass market devices. Actually, this creeps me out more than anything else, because where are we going to get new programmers? The prototypical childhood story of most of us is that of discovering a programming language on our computers and learning through experimentation. Will that be possible in an iPad world? Though thi…

Not too worried about this personally. You read a lot of articles decrying the state of programming for kids these days, but I think it's all nostalgia. Programming is more accessible than ever. The only problem is there's way more distraction now, but the number of young programmers seems to keep growing.

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#138

Post by loup-vaillant » Sat, Sep 17, 2011, 2:21 PM UTC

wonderzombie wrote: post #129

loup-vaillant wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do not say "this is just a tool", it never helps. Besides, computer happen to be different in kind : they can do anything you tell them to. This is as close to a genie in a bottle as you will ever get. It wouldn't feel right to deprive most people of this little genie, don't you think?

I think you overestimate people's desire (let alone aptitude) to wrestle with the genie in order to get their wishes. I assure you that a great many people are only able to use computers by memorizing a series of steps. They have no mental model for how it works. Given the options of "limitless but practically useless" versus "limited but quite useful practically," I'll opt for the second option. I'd rather have more…

Once upon a time, most people couldn't read. No one thought it would be useful to them, including those who could read.

I think programming is the same. Just teach it in school, and watch. How many people wouldn't wrestle with the genie if their grades depended on it? Not much more than those who can't read, I think. (Yes, I'm aware that changing the school system isn't isn't a piece of cake. But its easier than requiring everyone to do non-mandatory work.)

Also, don't use the word "practically" when you actually mean "in the short term". Investing in the future can be worthwhile, despite hyperbolic discounting.

Finally, you forgot the option "limitless and immediately useful". Really, there no reason at all why they should be mutually exclusive. If they are in our world, that's only because other interests are at work. (Open platforms and Free Software tend to be harder to monetize.)

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#139

Post by loup-vaillant » Sat, Sep 17, 2011, 2:33 PM UTC

potatolicious wrote: post #131

loup-vaillant wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you tell us how the App Store exclusivity significantly enhance usability? Apple already controls the native API and the core apps, how can they need more? Do they really need to ban poor apps? Do they really need the censorship? Usability can't explain all the control. There are other reasons.

The control is there, but it's far from the primary or even a major driver, I would claim. The control and banning of poor apps reflects something not only Apple is doing - see Google and their "banning" of content farms and ad farms. Junk breaks discoverability, and discoverability is one of the more fundamentally important notions that users have started to get in the last few years. A few years ago you'd get panic…

> (except some clauses such as App Store exclusivity)

To me, this exception is the most part. I wouldn't complain if they had relinquished it.

As for viruses, I am beginning to think that an OS that crashes is just unacceptable. (Which may rule out even OpenBSD, but I'll bite that bullet. http://www.vpri.org/ gives me hope).

Re: iOS is anti-Unix and anti-programmer

#140

Post by tjogin » Sat, Sep 17, 2011, 2:42 PM UTC

BoppreH wrote: post #77

natch wrote: post #50

I love composability as much as the author, but his opinion is, to put it kindly, not well informed. iOS has a myriad of mechanisms for sharing content within and between apps, bot from the same developer and from different developers, with and without prior agreement, and for composing workflows and experiences that are greater than the sum of the parts. Some of these mechanisms are new, and the possibilities have n…

You are missing the point. What the author wants is a composable toolbox. He knows it's possible, he can wield them proficiently, and the gains are numerous, but the system doesn't give him the means to do that. You can't pipe iPad apps. You can't filter emails from a file using a single line of Objective-C. Development environments don't have the practicality of typing text in a shell for instant execution. If I und…

The author wants to cool food and is disappointed with his toaster for doing a lousy job at it.