6 ms·

In the MMO genre, this divide is called "themepark vs sandbox". A game like World of Warcraft is a themepark - you're given a lot of direction in terms of wher

In the MMO genre, this divide is called "themepark vs sandbox". A game like World of Warcraft is a themepark - you're given a lot of direction in terms of where you're supposed to go and what you're supposed to do. EVE Online is a sandbox - you do whatever you want and you get fewer roadsigns that say "go this way" or "beating this means you win". Current computers are sandboxes - you can do with them whatever you want, run arbitrary code, create your own workflow, and operate without rules. The iPad is a themepark - it has specific programs that do specific things, and then it's got little roped off paths between them. For many users (the proverbial Mom), a well-developed theme park is more attractive, because all they really wanted to do anyhow is ride the roller-coaster or the Ferris wheel. People like the average Hacker News reader (or even the average reddit or digg reader) can't stand the roped off paths, but for Mom, those laid out sidewalks are a relief.

dtegart 17y ago
This is a similar path to what has happened with cars. Most people used to know how to maintain their own car. Now you barely have to know how to pop the hood.
- DannoHung 17y ago
  Actually, that's pretty much because cars got computers. No one person knows how to completely fix a computer.
  - dtegart 17y ago
    That's a good point, but cars are also much more reliable now so you don't have to know how to fix them. The same could be said for operating systems and computers in general.
- pyre 17y ago
  The point is that you still can pop the hood and make modifications. (Though a lot of manufacturers have tried to prevent some of this with locked-down computers under the hood)
stcredzero 17y ago
There's no reason why Apple can't sell "sandbox" versions of this kit. The hardware would be 99% the same. The markup and the resulting margins would be very tasty to Apple. EDIT: They'd still be selling the "Theme Park" version to the other 95% of us.
- ZachPruckowski 17y ago
  You can spend $99/yearly and become an iPhone developer. Then you can put whatever you want on your iPhone (I assume iPad development will be similar). Ad-hoc distribution allows for like 500 "testers", and you could always just share source files with other developers and recompile them. EDIT: thanks for the correction on yearly vs. one-time.
  - plinkplonk 17y ago
    " It could be $99/yearly." It is.
  - hrabago 17y ago
    Only if the SDK supports it. I can't, for instance, put widgets on the lock screen to see how many unread emails I have. Or have the locked device light up due to an event that my background process detected.
    - cpr 17y ago
      You probably can, if it's just for yourself. The jailbreaking world has reverse engineered a lot of these internals, like replacing SpringBoard, etc.
- coliveira 17y ago
  I think the reason is user experience. Future computers will be "theme parks", because non-geeks don't understand the proper limitations of hardware. For example, 99% of annoyances of computer users is that they install too much software for the resources of the machine they have. Then the computer starts suddenly working slower and slower -- and they don't know why. This happens with Macs and Windows. In a machine like the iPad Apple can control what software will run and make sure that it is adequate to the resources of the machine. Also, from what I see, they limit the possibility of concurrent running programs to interfere with the user experience.
ghshephard 17y ago
As I read through this (really excellent analysis), it makes me realize, even more, that PGs (and many others) thesis that it isn't so much the _idea_ that matters, but the execution. The concept of a "User friend interface that creates a themepark for the users" didn't occur to Apple first - But, amazingly enough - Microsoft. The idea of turning a computer into a themepark was basically the foundation for Microsoft BOB - From Wikipedia: "The user interface was designed to simplify the navigational experience for novice computer users." Apple certainly seems to be executing on that vision in a entirely different manner than Microsoft did.

dtegart 17y ago

This is a similar path to what has happened with cars. Most people used to know how to maintain their own car. Now you barely have to know how to pop the hood.

DannoHung 17y ago
Actually, that's pretty much because cars got computers. No one person knows how to completely fix a computer.
- dtegart 17y ago
  That's a good point, but cars are also much more reliable now so you don't have to know how to fix them. The same could be said for operating systems and computers in general.
pyre 17y ago
The point is that you still can pop the hood and make modifications. (Though a lot of manufacturers have tried to prevent some of this with locked-down computers under the hood)

stcredzero 17y ago

There's no reason why Apple can't sell "sandbox" versions of this kit. The hardware would be 99% the same. The markup and the resulting margins would be very tasty to Apple. EDIT: They'd still be selling the "Theme Park" version to the other 95% of us.

ZachPruckowski 17y ago
You can spend $99/yearly and become an iPhone developer. Then you can put whatever you want on your iPhone (I assume iPad development will be similar). Ad-hoc distribution allows for like 500 "testers", and you could always just share source files with other developers and recompile them. EDIT: thanks for the correction on yearly vs. one-time.
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  " It could be $99/yearly." It is.
- hrabago 17y ago
  Only if the SDK supports it. I can't, for instance, put widgets on the lock screen to see how many unread emails I have. Or have the locked device light up due to an event that my background process detected.
  - cpr 17y ago
    You probably can, if it's just for yourself. The jailbreaking world has reverse engineered a lot of these internals, like replacing SpringBoard, etc.
coliveira 17y ago
I think the reason is user experience. Future computers will be "theme parks", because non-geeks don't understand the proper limitations of hardware. For example, 99% of annoyances of computer users is that they install too much software for the resources of the machine they have. Then the computer starts suddenly working slower and slower -- and they don't know why. This happens with Macs and Windows. In a machine like the iPad Apple can control what software will run and make sure that it is adequate to the resources of the machine. Also, from what I see, they limit the possibility of concurrent running programs to interfere with the user experience.

ghshephard 17y ago

As I read through this (really excellent analysis), it makes me realize, even more, that PGs (and many others) thesis that it isn't so much the _idea_ that matters, but the execution. The concept of a "User friend interface that creates a themepark for the users" didn't occur to Apple first - But, amazingly enough - Microsoft. The idea of turning a computer into a themepark was basically the foundation for Microsoft BOB - From Wikipedia: "The user interface was designed to simplify the navigational experience for novice computer users." Apple certainly seems to be executing on that vision in a entirely different manner than Microsoft did.