5 ms·

Steve Jobs wants the computer to be the equivalent of a toaster... which I think is absolutely awesome for "normal folks". The computer is supposed to solve pr

Steve Jobs wants the computer to be the equivalent of a toaster... which I think is absolutely awesome for "normal folks". The computer is supposed to solve problems, not create them. That's why I'm bullish on the iPad. Some type of black swan event is likely to occur in personal computing. I don't know if the iPad is "the event" or just a major accelerant, but people are clearly waking up to the fact that they don't need all this complex shit. I'm not worried about guys like us. There will always be machines for us (powerful, complex, etc.). Why? Because if for some magical reason there wasn't all of a sudden, we're the type that would just make one.

andrewtj 17y ago
I don't think appliance computing institutes a disconnect between what hackers and non-hackers compute on. I actually think the opposite is true but that the tools aren't here just yet to support that conjecture.
- jasonlbaptiste 17y ago
  Very true. I'm sure there will be some power apps made for the iPad. It's definitely doable for us to work on the "watered down" machines, but I think the problem lies in the fact that "normals" have been working on the difficult machines. We can create what we want. The "normals" cannot. The "normals" need someone to champion them, kind of like a PC Messiah who will save them from the shitshow that is Windows and difficult computing.
- pg 17y ago
  All you really need is a scary "programmer mode" on the iPad that lets you be root. Does anyone have any guess as to whether Apple will allow that? Presumably if you could be root you'd be able to get around whatever horrible drm they're planning for iPad as paywall on the client. Does that mean they'd never allow it?
  - greendestiny 17y ago
    They've never allowed it on the iphone/ipod touch. Thats what jailbreaking gives you.
    - pg 17y ago
      Yeah, but it could be because they assume no one would want to do development on such small devices. Whereas it might actually be optimal to develop some iPad apps on the iPad. I should just ask the guys at Apple...
      - greendestiny 17y ago
        There might eventually be XCode for the iPad, but I doubt it'll come with root access. Apple doesn't want people developing apps that require root access to run, that would circumvent their entire model. Anyway I suspect the current iPad hardware would have a hard time compiling anything. No doubt if Apple did make XCode for the iPad it would require an Apple developer license to run. What they seem very keen to avoid is having a cheap compiler or virtual machine or interpreter on the platform that lets people download code and circumvent the App Store. I doubt that they are against people developing on the platform for its own sake.
      - grinich 17y ago
        I think the key would be whether Apple engineers would prefer to develop on iPad. That, or a shift in the way iPad/iPhone apps are developed.
      - netcan 17y ago
        Do you really think there is good reason to develop on handhelds or do you just think that solving this problem might be a good way of unexpectedly solving other problems?
  - jasonlbaptiste 17y ago
    I doubt they're going to allow it. Doesn't matter, since the device will probably be jailbroken rather fast and some dev tools are already out there as iPhone apps. I remember having terminal pre app store days on iPhone v1 when I jailbroke it. I think jailbreaking on the iPad is going to be a very interesting thing. Jailbreaking your phone was kind of a scary proposition because you'd lose your phone if it got bricked and not be able to get the $200-$300 subsidy on replacement,etc. With the iPad, the worst case is going and buying the equivalent of another computer at the same price.
Timothee 17y ago
There will always be machines for us If anything to be able to develop these or for these simple machines.
chrischen 17y ago
From what I'm getting, it seems the current and future generations of young people are adapting to computers, not shying away. Sure people who grew up before PCs may love this type of stuff (because it's more intuitive to them), but they'll eventually all pass away. Intuition is based on what we know and are used to, and the current generation is growing up on PCs. That's why I'm wary that dumbing down computer for "normal folks" is the future. If the iPad replaces traditional computers, it will only be because using a touchscreen and virtual keyboard is more practical than a mouse and a physical keyboard. Also as a tradeoff to simplifying the experience, the experience is also weakened. And as users become more savvy, they'll want to try out new stuff. These things may not be compatible with the iPad platform because of its closed nature. There are eventually going to be some scenarios where some cool new thing only works on open platforms like OS X or Windows (or linux). Also I'd like to add that one of most popular reasons I hear from friends who don't like mac is that it dumbs down the experience. That it's for people who don't know how to use computers (like their parents). I actually had this same faulty preconceived notion until I found out programmers usually preferred os x (and switched).
- dasil003 17y ago
  There are two kinds of people. Those who like to fiddle around with technology per se, and those who use it as a means to an end. Just because most of your friends are in the former category doesn't mean most young people are. Also as a tradeoff to simplifying the experience, the experience is also weakened. This is a classic geek fallacy. This is the reason smart phones were so godawfully unusable before the iPhone came out. Ask any designer—removing things can dramatically improve a user experience because it decreases the cognitive load. There are eventually going to be some scenarios where some cool new thing only works on open platforms like OS X or Windows (or linux). Definitely. I'm not quite ready to jump on the iPad world-domination bandwagon just yet. But keep in mind that many cool new things will only work on the iPad as well, and it remains to be seen how locked down the iPad will remain, so this isn't a definitive argument by a long shot.
  - chrischen 17y ago
    > There are two kinds of people. Those who like to fiddle around with technology per se, and those who use it as a means to an end. Just because most of your friends are in the former category doesn't mean most young people are. I'm not even talking about all my friends. (I'm not even a CS major.) I'm talking about pretty much all the people in my high school. And all the kids which the media portrays as technically savvier than their parents. So unless my high school was somehow unusually technically capable, I don't think I've been a victim to selection. But I do understand what you're saying. Obviously there will be people who will be more technically savvy than others, but the overall trend will be towards more new technology in our lives. What seems new and complicated now will just be pencils and erasers to the next generation. So while I do believe that technology will become more transparent (more natural), I don't think it should/will become dumbed down. > This is a classic geek fallacy. This is the reason smart phones were so godawfully unusable before the iPhone came out. Ask any designer—removing things can dramatically improve a user experience because it decreases the cognitive load. Yea I'm well aware of that. I don't think good design and power are mutually exclusive. But I was specifically referring to the general idea that simplifying things naturally results in less power. The trick is to simplify it without sacrificing power, in which you'll result with what we call design. But I think it's important to realize that simplifying without sacrificing any power is probably impossible. You'll undoubtedly lose some degree of power. Closing the app platform results in a simplified experience, but we can all agree it takes some power away from developers too. I probably shouldn't have used the word "experience." I meant experience to describe the capabilities of the system.
jamesbritt 17y ago
" ... but people are clearly waking up to the fact that they don't need all this complex shit." Telephones used to be complex, in that they needed many people to complete calls, then they got bone simple. But then they got complex in a different way. I don't think you can buy a phone today that just gives you a dial tone and basic DTMF buttons. Mobile phones are worse (so to speak). But as best can see there are increasing numbers of people using their mobile as their only phone. There's a market for feature-less devices (check out Reader's Digest for their ads for phones and such; basic behavior and a few Big Button options for the AARP crowd). But it seems there's a larger market for at least all sorts of complexity.

andrewtj 17y ago

I don't think appliance computing institutes a disconnect between what hackers and non-hackers compute on. I actually think the opposite is true but that the tools aren't here just yet to support that conjecture.

jasonlbaptiste 17y ago
Very true. I'm sure there will be some power apps made for the iPad. It's definitely doable for us to work on the "watered down" machines, but I think the problem lies in the fact that "normals" have been working on the difficult machines. We can create what we want. The "normals" cannot. The "normals" need someone to champion them, kind of like a PC Messiah who will save them from the shitshow that is Windows and difficult computing.
pg 17y ago
All you really need is a scary "programmer mode" on the iPad that lets you be root. Does anyone have any guess as to whether Apple will allow that? Presumably if you could be root you'd be able to get around whatever horrible drm they're planning for iPad as paywall on the client. Does that mean they'd never allow it?
- greendestiny 17y ago
  They've never allowed it on the iphone/ipod touch. Thats what jailbreaking gives you.
  - pg 17y ago
    Yeah, but it could be because they assume no one would want to do development on such small devices. Whereas it might actually be optimal to develop some iPad apps on the iPad. I should just ask the guys at Apple...
    - greendestiny 17y ago
      There might eventually be XCode for the iPad, but I doubt it'll come with root access. Apple doesn't want people developing apps that require root access to run, that would circumvent their entire model. Anyway I suspect the current iPad hardware would have a hard time compiling anything. No doubt if Apple did make XCode for the iPad it would require an Apple developer license to run. What they seem very keen to avoid is having a cheap compiler or virtual machine or interpreter on the platform that lets people download code and circumvent the App Store. I doubt that they are against people developing on the platform for its own sake.
    - grinich 17y ago
      I think the key would be whether Apple engineers would prefer to develop on iPad. That, or a shift in the way iPad/iPhone apps are developed.
    - netcan 17y ago
      Do you really think there is good reason to develop on handhelds or do you just think that solving this problem might be a good way of unexpectedly solving other problems?
- jasonlbaptiste 17y ago
  I doubt they're going to allow it. Doesn't matter, since the device will probably be jailbroken rather fast and some dev tools are already out there as iPhone apps. I remember having terminal pre app store days on iPhone v1 when I jailbroke it. I think jailbreaking on the iPad is going to be a very interesting thing. Jailbreaking your phone was kind of a scary proposition because you'd lose your phone if it got bricked and not be able to get the $200-$300 subsidy on replacement,etc. With the iPad, the worst case is going and buying the equivalent of another computer at the same price.

Timothee 17y ago

There will always be machines for us If anything to be able to develop these or for these simple machines.

chrischen 17y ago

From what I'm getting, it seems the current and future generations of young people are adapting to computers, not shying away. Sure people who grew up before PCs may love this type of stuff (because it's more intuitive to them), but they'll eventually all pass away. Intuition is based on what we know and are used to, and the current generation is growing up on PCs. That's why I'm wary that dumbing down computer for "normal folks" is the future. If the iPad replaces traditional computers, it will only be because using a touchscreen and virtual keyboard is more practical than a mouse and a physical keyboard. Also as a tradeoff to simplifying the experience, the experience is also weakened. And as users become more savvy, they'll want to try out new stuff. These things may not be compatible with the iPad platform because of its closed nature. There are eventually going to be some scenarios where some cool new thing only works on open platforms like OS X or Windows (or linux). Also I'd like to add that one of most popular reasons I hear from friends who don't like mac is that it dumbs down the experience. That it's for people who don't know how to use computers (like their parents). I actually had this same faulty preconceived notion until I found out programmers usually preferred os x (and switched).

dasil003 17y ago
There are two kinds of people. Those who like to fiddle around with technology per se, and those who use it as a means to an end. Just because most of your friends are in the former category doesn't mean most young people are. Also as a tradeoff to simplifying the experience, the experience is also weakened. This is a classic geek fallacy. This is the reason smart phones were so godawfully unusable before the iPhone came out. Ask any designer—removing things can dramatically improve a user experience because it decreases the cognitive load. There are eventually going to be some scenarios where some cool new thing only works on open platforms like OS X or Windows (or linux). Definitely. I'm not quite ready to jump on the iPad world-domination bandwagon just yet. But keep in mind that many cool new things will only work on the iPad as well, and it remains to be seen how locked down the iPad will remain, so this isn't a definitive argument by a long shot.
- chrischen 17y ago
  > There are two kinds of people. Those who like to fiddle around with technology per se, and those who use it as a means to an end. Just because most of your friends are in the former category doesn't mean most young people are. I'm not even talking about all my friends. (I'm not even a CS major.) I'm talking about pretty much all the people in my high school. And all the kids which the media portrays as technically savvier than their parents. So unless my high school was somehow unusually technically capable, I don't think I've been a victim to selection. But I do understand what you're saying. Obviously there will be people who will be more technically savvy than others, but the overall trend will be towards more new technology in our lives. What seems new and complicated now will just be pencils and erasers to the next generation. So while I do believe that technology will become more transparent (more natural), I don't think it should/will become dumbed down. > This is a classic geek fallacy. This is the reason smart phones were so godawfully unusable before the iPhone came out. Ask any designer—removing things can dramatically improve a user experience because it decreases the cognitive load. Yea I'm well aware of that. I don't think good design and power are mutually exclusive. But I was specifically referring to the general idea that simplifying things naturally results in less power. The trick is to simplify it without sacrificing power, in which you'll result with what we call design. But I think it's important to realize that simplifying without sacrificing any power is probably impossible. You'll undoubtedly lose some degree of power. Closing the app platform results in a simplified experience, but we can all agree it takes some power away from developers too. I probably shouldn't have used the word "experience." I meant experience to describe the capabilities of the system.

jamesbritt 17y ago

" ... but people are clearly waking up to the fact that they don't need all this complex shit." Telephones used to be complex, in that they needed many people to complete calls, then they got bone simple. But then they got complex in a different way. I don't think you can buy a phone today that just gives you a dial tone and basic DTMF buttons. Mobile phones are worse (so to speak). But as best can see there are increasing numbers of people using their mobile as their only phone. There's a market for feature-less devices (check out Reader's Digest for their ads for phones and such; basic behavior and a few Big Button options for the AARP crowd). But it seems there's a larger market for at least all sorts of complexity.