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

Only Apple

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 182 posts

Re: Only Apple

#61

Post by song »

> Apple has proceeded from being OK at walking and chewing gum to being good at it.

That may be so but honestly the last release of OS X that really worked for me was snow leopard. Just as a quick list of common well known issues with Mavericks that I have and I'm not the only one to have...

- Sometimes when I plug in my headphone, there's a bug and audio stops working instead of switching to the headphone. The only fix I found is to restart the computer.

- I'm using a macbook pro retina with 16GB of ram and mission control slows the system to a crawl whenever I want to use it. Expose just worked on a computer with 4 times less ram and vastly less powerful.

- Sometimes when I connect an external screen, the computer just crashes completely.

Honestly, I just wish Apple would start actually doing some QA and fix those issues... The machine itself is great and powerful but it's really a pain to have to deal with all the bugs. And I say that not as an apple hater (all of my computers are from them except my server).

Re: Only Apple

#62

Post by coldtea »

malandrew wrote: post #52

This is largely true, but it draws the playing field Apple wants you to see. There is a large part of the playing field that is omitted, cloud, the web and the Internet in general. And this playing field alone is as important as all the playing fields Apple is competent in combined. Apple is second to last in that respect. Google and Amazon both understand the web a whole heck of a lot better than Apple. Only Samsung…

>Google and Amazon both understand the web a whole heck of a lot better than Apple

I really doubt this. Google yes. Amazon no.

What has Amazon did that shows it "gets" the Cloud?

It has its one (and that's it) highly succesful store front (which is like a Google that only offered the search service). That's is, as far as the Cloud goes for Amazon.

As for AWS, the do get cloud infrastructure and services to developers. But that's not the Cloud (like CISCO is not the Internet), and it's a far cry from "getting" the Cloud itself, and being able to create cloud services people use.

Amazon can sell you the infrastructure to create Twitter, ot the new Gmail, or whatever yourself. But they don't really create those things themselves.

Re: Only Apple

#63

Post by caycep »

markdown wrote: post #17
sscalia wrote: post #7

I find it hard to argue with any of the points he makes. I'm sure someone here will, but I found myself doing the mental "gulp of air and raising a finger" then getting silenced again. I really wish Microsoft had pulled off Windows Phone; it arguably had a much better user experience than Android did (and still does) -- and interesting Nokia hardware. I simply don't believe Google has the best interests of anyone at…

> I simply don't believe Google has the best interests of anyone at heart except themselves and advertisers. You think Apple has your interests at heart? Or Microsoft? Like Google, they have your cash at heart. Not a thing more.

That being said, I think they've learned that getting your cash depends on you being satisfied, and their interests tend to align/dovetail with yours better than MS or Google. With MS/Google, you don't pay them, the advertisers or corporate buyers do and they don't care as much.

Re: Only Apple

#64

Post by caycep »

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #45
seiji wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To march out some old tropes: Apple makes money by delighting users so they will continue to buy products. Google makes money by tracking users, forcefully if necessary, and abusing their advertisers. Microsoft makes money out of legacy ties these days—they don't deserve to continue existing.

That comment is just ridiculously biased - you might have a good point, but it's hidden behind the opinion. For example, one could just as legitimately counter with "Apple makes money by developing a desirable brand and overcharging on hardware" but that wouldn't fit your spin, would it?

Everytime I configure a dell to something equivalent to the analogous Apple product, it comes out about even or about 10% more...and in a hideous plastic casing.

Re: Only Apple

#65

Post by coldtea »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #19

Gruber waves off the other players' devices or operating systems, but takes Apple's web services / cloud infrastructure as a given. Here in reality, Apple's web services are atrocious. Weirdly implemented, slow, and frequently unavailable backend services are not a healthy part of the triad that Gruber is proposing.

>Weirdly implemented, slow, and frequently unavailable backend services

Well, they do have the #1 app store, a syncing/backup service used by half a billion people, and the #1 music store in the world (per profit / people). Oh, and a huge music storage service.

I don't find iCloud or iTunes or the App Store slow myself. And I'm tens of thousands of miles from the US, and thousands of miles from a decent latency ISP.

They're "slow" and "frequently unavailable" compared to what? Is the experience of bying stuff from the Google Play store any better? Is the experience of buying music off of Amazon any better? (I'm not talking about Open vs Close, and other philosophical stuff -- I'm asking about what you claimed here, e.g that it's "slower").

Re: Only Apple

#66

Post by steele »

lol Only Gruber.

Google is closest to the goal and Satya Nadella's new-guard at Microsoft is taking risks to get there as well. Among them Apple is doing the least to play nicely across platforms. So customers with 1-2 hardware touchpoints in the Apple ecosystem have to rely on Apple's competitor software and services.

When I think of the line of Apple products, I definitely don't think 'seamless'.

Re: Only Apple

#67

Post by rudy750 »

malandrew wrote: post #52

This is largely true, but it draws the playing field Apple wants you to see. There is a large part of the playing field that is omitted, cloud, the web and the Internet in general. And this playing field alone is as important as all the playing fields Apple is competent in combined. Apple is second to last in that respect. Google and Amazon both understand the web a whole heck of a lot better than Apple. Only Samsung…

Very well said. I have been tinkering with famo.us and it is looking very promising

Re: Only Apple

#68

Post by thrownaway2424 »

function_seven wrote: post #58
thrownaway2424 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe he should just learn to write, then, because his statement is totally unqualified. "unique" "no one" and "anything" all appear in this statement. These are words with meanings. "That’s truly remarkable, and a unique Amazon advantage. No one else has anything like this." -- Gruber

The pumps at the local gas station also have such a button. Should he have mentioned those? A reasonable reader understands that "unique", "no one", and "anything" are referring to the market Amazon is selling the device in.

On your way to absurdism you skipped over a bunch of legitimate prior art in the consumer space, such as the OnStar roadside assistance system (press a button in your car, OnStar service rep starts talking through your radio), or even dialing zero on your phone.

Re: Only Apple

#69

Post by mturmon »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #44
seiji wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

credits Amazon with inventing a button that connects you to live customer service. oh my glob. Willfully misunderstand the world much? He's talking about consumer devices. How many devices in your home that aren't $10,000/month stock terminals have live under-5-second video support?

Maybe he should just learn to write, then, because his statement is totally unqualified. "unique" "no one" and "anything" all appear in this statement. These are words with meanings. "That’s truly remarkable, and a unique Amazon advantage. No one else has anything like this." -- Gruber

We can all play the game you're playing. It goes nowhere. Here's a statement from you, above:

"he just doesn't know anything about the industry he's writing on"

Your statement is using hyperbole for effect, but it is false if regarded in isolation as a logical proposition (which seems to be your angle). Gruber's Apple sources are gold and he's very well-connected to an influential Apple developer community. He does not "know nothing".

It's fine to critique him, but be smart about it. He is myopic (Apple, Yankees, Scotch, letterforms, etc. - it can be tiresome), he has a tendency to interpret all Apple happenings in the best light, and he's overly critical of Google.

His writing has a lot in common with sports commentary -- Apple is "his team", and he can be chauvinistic about them, but he's trying, in his own way, to understand the whole league.

Re: Only Apple

#70

Post by Todd »

Sorry to disagree with Gruber, but I don't think a set of devices made by one company is the future. It's always been Apple's play, in part because of the consistency of experience that it affords them, but it also let's them off the hook on the hard problems--device interop, working with varied OEMs, etc.

Whether open (Google) or closed (Microsoft), platforms that run on multiple OEM devices are the right way forward. I don't know about others, but I don't want to live in a world where my only option to control my house, car, and life is to go to an Apple store. At least Google and Microsoft give us some choices.

So far, there's been no mention here of the developer experience. Gruber only mentioned developers, but not the 'developer experience.' It's like it doesn't matter anymore. Apple is finally doing interesting things in the developer area with Swift. However, here, they're playing catch up with Microsoft and, to a lesser degree, Google. Their language at 1.0 is similar to Windows Phone 7--very late to the game. In addition, you're still left with much of the less than desirable developer toolset. Microsoft developed C# and Visual Studio more than 10 years ago now. They're way ahead here. They also open source much of their developer stack now (the new C# compiler, TypeScript, web stack, etc.). Gruber doesn't even mention this aspect. I guess it's not important to end users, but it does make a difference with the people building for their platforms, devices, and services.

I feel like we're living in a constant world of incompatible systems whose (nearly) sole purpose is to "own the market": VHS vs. Beta, GSM vs. CDMA, Canon vs. Nikon lenses, and so on. This world makes the Internet and the Web seem like a rare anomaly. Tesla's opening of the patent portfolio in an attempt to stave off incompatible fuel stations is apropos to this.

Post reply on HN