3 ms·

Can software that is open without bound remain simple (non-complex), logistically, politically, technically?

by joubert 17y ago

joezydeco 17y ago
How many years has Linux been trying? 10? More? And they're still not there. Android is probably the next best hope.
- joubert 17y ago
  People are already confused which Google technology to bank on for mobile: Android, or Chrome OS?
- potatolicious 17y ago
  Android's open-ness has already been a thorn in its side. Right now we're seeing the splintering of the Android platform thanks to meddling by individual hardware manufacturers - consumers are getting wildly different user experiences, some worse than others, depending on who they buy an Android phone from. This is disastrous for a platform trying to gain mindshare.
  - ericb 17y ago
    The thing to consider is who Android is meant to gain mindshare with. If it is manufacturers and service providers, the splintering isn't disastrous at all. It has achieved great market penetration because it is a ready-to-go affordable option. The customizability mainly serves to reassure skittish manufacturers who might choose differently if that wasn't a "feature."
    - tvon 17y ago
      Very true, and note that the the Nexus One page (http://www.google.com/phone http://www.google.com/phone) makes no mention of Android. If you look at the tech specs page you'll see it listed as "Android Mobile Technology Platform", that's some serious vendor-oriented naming. I think this is a very significant point that is often misunderstood. Android isn't something that competes with the iPhone OS, it's the platform you build that competitor on. I'm not sure that competitor exists. Not for lack of quality in devices, but for lack of the right approach. Google is saying "write apps for Android" when they need to be saying "write apps for the Nexus One (and the Nexus Two will be the same, but better)".
- Herring 17y ago
  As the author wrote it, he's also criticizing Windows, OSX, & anything that's not the iPad. See his finder example. Instead of focusing on people who want to run their own programs, he says they don't want to make easy OS'es. (it doesn't make sense to me either)
- jodrellblank 17y ago
  """There's another reality distortion field at work, though, and everyone that makes a living from the tech industry is within its tractor-beam. That RDF tells us that computers are awesome, they work great and only those too stupid to live can't work them""" Not everyone. It's more and more obvious to me that I only thrive in computing where I can control my environment. I do make a living from the tech industry, and I find myself in the same position as "normals" do when faced with "software for normals", and I hate it as much as "they" do. Error messages are meaningless to "them" but meaningful to me. So called 'friendly' error messages are also meaningless to "them" and worse they are meaningless to me as well. Hiding complexity isn't simplifying things. Arjan van de Ven said about the 5 second linux boot project "Don't settle for 'make boot faster'; it's the wrong question. [..] It's not about booting faster, it's about booting in 5 seconds". - http://lwn.net/Articles/299483/ http://lwn.net/Articles/299483/ Apple are saying "it's not about a nice GUI over the top of a complex system, it's about a simple system". They've thrown out everything they can get away with and then a bit more; which Linux distro's can't or wont do. Linux is 'simplified' by people who don't want or need it to be simple, Windows is 'simplified' by people hobbled by backwards compatibility, inertia and lack of focused obsessive direction.
  - joezydeco 17y ago
    "They've thrown out everything they can get away with and then a bit more; which Linux distro's can't or wont do." Bravo. I would hazard to guess ChromeOS is Google's stab at this. There's also Jolicloud and some others for netbooks, so maybe there's hope in that direction.
MrRage 17y ago
If a user is confused about all the choice they can just stick to the software Apple and a handful of popular vendors provide. It stays simple by the fact that they can just ignore all the other choices.
- DougBTX 17y ago
  See: Paradox of Choice. Ignoring something is also a choice. To actually make things simpler you've got to make it easier to choose. When you download a desktop app, you've got to trade off between, "is this app useful to me", and, "will this app break my computer". Since apps on the iPhone are sandboxed, and are garunteed to uninstall cleanly, you don't need to worry about the second question. Also have a look at what Microsoft are doing with permissions in .Net, they are slowly making it easier for Windows applications to be sandboxed. In a secure Linux enviroment, it is standard practice to give different apps their own users, with tailored permissions, eg the www user.

Can software that is open without bound remain simple (non-complex), logistically, politically, technically?

by joubert 17y ago

Can software that is open without bound remain simple (non-complex), logistically, politically, technically?

joezydeco 17y ago

How many years has Linux been trying? 10? More? And they're still not there. Android is probably the next best hope.

joubert 17y ago
People are already confused which Google technology to bank on for mobile: Android, or Chrome OS?
potatolicious 17y ago
Android's open-ness has already been a thorn in its side. Right now we're seeing the splintering of the Android platform thanks to meddling by individual hardware manufacturers - consumers are getting wildly different user experiences, some worse than others, depending on who they buy an Android phone from. This is disastrous for a platform trying to gain mindshare.
- ericb 17y ago
  The thing to consider is who Android is meant to gain mindshare with. If it is manufacturers and service providers, the splintering isn't disastrous at all. It has achieved great market penetration because it is a ready-to-go affordable option. The customizability mainly serves to reassure skittish manufacturers who might choose differently if that wasn't a "feature."
  - tvon 17y ago
    Very true, and note that the the Nexus One page (http://www.google.com/phone http://www.google.com/phone) makes no mention of Android. If you look at the tech specs page you'll see it listed as "Android Mobile Technology Platform", that's some serious vendor-oriented naming. I think this is a very significant point that is often misunderstood. Android isn't something that competes with the iPhone OS, it's the platform you build that competitor on. I'm not sure that competitor exists. Not for lack of quality in devices, but for lack of the right approach. Google is saying "write apps for Android" when they need to be saying "write apps for the Nexus One (and the Nexus Two will be the same, but better)".
Herring 17y ago
As the author wrote it, he's also criticizing Windows, OSX, & anything that's not the iPad. See his finder example. Instead of focusing on people who want to run their own programs, he says they don't want to make easy OS'es. (it doesn't make sense to me either)
jodrellblank 17y ago
"""There's another reality distortion field at work, though, and everyone that makes a living from the tech industry is within its tractor-beam. That RDF tells us that computers are awesome, they work great and only those too stupid to live can't work them""" Not everyone. It's more and more obvious to me that I only thrive in computing where I can control my environment. I do make a living from the tech industry, and I find myself in the same position as "normals" do when faced with "software for normals", and I hate it as much as "they" do. Error messages are meaningless to "them" but meaningful to me. So called 'friendly' error messages are also meaningless to "them" and worse they are meaningless to me as well. Hiding complexity isn't simplifying things. Arjan van de Ven said about the 5 second linux boot project "Don't settle for 'make boot faster'; it's the wrong question. [..] It's not about booting faster, it's about booting in 5 seconds". - http://lwn.net/Articles/299483/ http://lwn.net/Articles/299483/ Apple are saying "it's not about a nice GUI over the top of a complex system, it's about a simple system". They've thrown out everything they can get away with and then a bit more; which Linux distro's can't or wont do. Linux is 'simplified' by people who don't want or need it to be simple, Windows is 'simplified' by people hobbled by backwards compatibility, inertia and lack of focused obsessive direction.
- joezydeco 17y ago
  "They've thrown out everything they can get away with and then a bit more; which Linux distro's can't or wont do." Bravo. I would hazard to guess ChromeOS is Google's stab at this. There's also Jolicloud and some others for netbooks, so maybe there's hope in that direction.

MrRage 17y ago

If a user is confused about all the choice they can just stick to the software Apple and a handful of popular vendors provide. It stays simple by the fact that they can just ignore all the other choices.

DougBTX 17y ago
See: Paradox of Choice. Ignoring something is also a choice. To actually make things simpler you've got to make it easier to choose. When you download a desktop app, you've got to trade off between, "is this app useful to me", and, "will this app break my computer". Since apps on the iPhone are sandboxed, and are garunteed to uninstall cleanly, you don't need to worry about the second question. Also have a look at what Microsoft are doing with permissions in .Net, they are slowly making it easier for Windows applications to be sandboxed. In a secure Linux enviroment, it is standard practice to give different apps their own users, with tailored permissions, eg the www user.