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

It's the “hardware”, stupid

haebom.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 124 posts

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#71

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

embedding-shape wrote: post #32
goalieca wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Jobs first announced the iPhone, he really sold the idea that it was running a real web browser like on a desktop. Up to that point, there was a special mobile internet that really sucked.

I remember WAP, GPRS and the newly invented 2G all too well :) But seems my memory wasn't perfect regarding a browser being on the iPhone initially or not, thanks for the correction.

I miss WAP browsing. By necessity, it stripped out all the "advanced" design bullshit that made web pages suck. Just a couple links and buttons is fast and reliable.

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#72

Post by supportengineer »

starky wrote: post #5

The article buries the lede on the only point that matters with these "AI" hardware devices. They need to solve a problem their customers have, and all the devices these companies have released so far don't do anything that a smartphone can't easily do.

An "AI Hardware" device that needs a network connection, and makes API calls to the mother ship, in order to accomplish anything, is not interesting. It's a Raspberry Pi.

On the other hand, a device that could work offline is interesting. One that could work in a zombie apocalypse is even more interesting. Especially if it was solar powered and contained the knowledge needed to rebuild society.

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#73

Post by ThrowawayB7 »

bee_rider wrote: post #30
proee wrote: post #22

I would love to know if Ives was truly foundation to the iPhone, or if he was more given the overall idea and polished it with the final look/feel (which is also important). Who was the exact individual that had the vision for glass multi-touch screens and sick gesture like effects (scroll). Perhaps the team just sat around a table and came up with the vision. Or maybe it was Jobs, but clearly there were some good vi…

Did iOS actually invent the idea of scrolling with a gesture? I could have sworn it already existed at the time. Like panning over a map on a GPS… The momentum on iOS is nicely tuned though.

The breakthrough aspect of the iPhone was enabling gestures and a very usable UI without having to use a stylus. This is despite the much lower precision of the capacitive touchscreen tech available in that era.

Other smartphones and PDAs back then used more precise resistive touchscreens that required an annoying pressure stylus because it was a way to get more usability out of the very small screens that devices were limited to.

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#74

Post by jimbokun »

proee wrote: post #22

I would love to know if Ives was truly foundation to the iPhone, or if he was more given the overall idea and polished it with the final look/feel (which is also important). Who was the exact individual that had the vision for glass multi-touch screens and sick gesture like effects (scroll). Perhaps the team just sat around a table and came up with the vision. Or maybe it was Jobs, but clearly there were some good vi…

Jobs and Ive were at the core of all the product design.

There were multiple articles about Jobs spending most of his day with Jony looking at prototypes Jony's team had devised and giving critiques and feedback. Then they would iterate on what Jobs said.

Of course the engineering team had to figure out how to make Jobs suggestions real within the physical and technological constraints they were working with.

> I think the proof of Ive's excellence will come out of this next OpenAI project.

I think Ive's lack of high profile success since Jobs passed away shows Jobs true talent. He was a taste savant. A genius for figuring out what people would like and building a team capable of building those things at scale.

Ive could take Jobs ideas and come up with a concrete design for making them real. But he doesn't have that instinct for figuring out what kinds of products people want in the first place.

I would love to know what Jobs would have done with AI to make it into something people want to use, instead of being terrified it's just going to put them out of work.

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#75

Post by dzdt »

supportengineer wrote: post #72
starky wrote: post #5

The article buries the lede on the only point that matters with these "AI" hardware devices. They need to solve a problem their customers have, and all the devices these companies have released so far don't do anything that a smartphone can't easily do.

An "AI Hardware" device that needs a network connection, and makes API calls to the mother ship, in order to accomplish anything, is not interesting . It's a Raspberry Pi. On the other hand, a device that could work offline is interesting. One that could work in a zombie apocalypse is even more interesting. Especially if it was solar powered and contained the knowledge needed to rebuild society.

I don't think that passes the toothbrush test. I don't need to survive a zombie apocalypse every morning.

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#76

Post by jimbokun »

mrandish wrote: post #54
proee wrote: post #22

I would love to know if Ives was truly foundation to the iPhone, or if he was more given the overall idea and polished it with the final look/feel (which is also important). Who was the exact individual that had the vision for glass multi-touch screens and sick gesture like effects (scroll). Perhaps the team just sat around a table and came up with the vision. Or maybe it was Jobs, but clearly there were some good vi…

> Who was the exact individual that had the vision for glass multi-touch screens and sick gesture like effects (scroll). Like almost all new products later thought of as 'visionary' innovations, the first iPhone built on pre-existing ideas but integrated them particularly well and added some excellent new refinements. It's easy to forget that the prior five years had been a crucible of in-market experimentation betwe…

> It advanced the "premium pocket phone" bar up to a new level but I didn't see it as unusually visionary.

Have you ever encountered a product you saw as "unusually visionary"?

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#77

Post by embedding-shape »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #71
embedding-shape wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember WAP, GPRS and the newly invented 2G all too well :) But seems my memory wasn't perfect regarding a browser being on the iPhone initially or not, thanks for the correction.

I miss WAP browsing. By necessity, it stripped out all the "advanced" design bullshit that made web pages suck. Just a couple links and buttons is fast and reliable.

Yeah, me to in a way, browsing pages where every link is centered, shit quality porn ads everywhere and deep down in the pages you could finally find that .jar link to the cracked game you were out after. Trying to remember any of the WAP websites I frequented at the time, but seem to recall any by name or address...

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#78

Post by mrandish »

gmm1990 wrote: post #27
proee wrote: post #22

I would love to know if Ives was truly foundation to the iPhone, or if he was more given the overall idea and polished it with the final look/feel (which is also important). Who was the exact individual that had the vision for glass multi-touch screens and sick gesture like effects (scroll). Perhaps the team just sat around a table and came up with the vision. Or maybe it was Jobs, but clearly there were some good vi…

I think he could have been instrumental to the iphone (not saying he was or wasn't) and whatever he tries next is a complete flop. The ability to be successful is contextual, and great artists can produce mediocre art.

> The ability to be successful is contextual

Excellent point. I think most great creative work is due to a uniquely 'right' combination of people, problem, experience and environment being together at an opportune moment.

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#79

Post by jimbokun »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #8

> No matter how beautiful its design, it's meaningless without the software to back it up. Word. I worked as a software developer, for hardware companies, most of my career. Most of the upper management came from hardware, and consistently treated software as an afterthought. That may change, this time. Different breed of top managers.

Apple's success is largely a function of being a hardware company that put software first.

Re: It's the “hardware”, stupid

#80

Post by galaxyLogic »

> iPhone wasn't successful because of its beautiful design

Relatively speaking I think that gave it an edge which helped make it successful.

I don't think Apple products in general have the best most usable designs, but they do have the most beautiful, most stylish most sophisticated-looking designs. People want that because a device like phone is part of their identity.

Post reply on HN