3 ms·

Would you buy a laptop locked down like the iPad?

8 points by mithaler 17y ago

benologist 17y ago
Sure, if I had a kid and it was one of those toy ones with learning activities.
jeremymcanally 17y ago
Say this with me: iPad is not a laptop. Once people understand that it is a consumer device, an appliance like an iPod or a DVD player, that just happens to do a lot of extra stuff, we can start talking about what it can do and how people will use it.
- flogic 17y ago
  I disagree. I see no reason other than Apple's choice that the iPad shouldn't be on the same level as a laptop or desktop.
- mithaler 17y ago
  I think you missed the point. Yes, the iPad is not a desktop, and it's not expected to do the same things. What the post is positing is that Apple may release a laptop similarly locked down, and if they did, would it be an appliance like an iPod or DVD player?
derefr 17y ago
Yes—because obviously it would have an IDE and Compiler-suite app! Otherwise, how would you develop on it? ;) (And then all the free, unlicensed apps anyone likes could just be released as source, and compiled+run locally in test mode.)
- blasdel 17y ago
  Typed in out of a cheap newsprint magazine, even! Apple wants to kill the "power user" dead. Every one uses the system on the same clear, easily understood terms. A fraction of those users will be developers, but even they will use the device itself as users in the same way as everyone else, not as wizards. Some people see this as Harrison Bergeron, but I sure don't — the people they're 'handicapping' didn't know anything in the first place, they were pretenders.
astrodust 17y ago
The question is not "would you buy" but "would people buy" and the answer to that is undeniably YES. You can argue this is not a good thing, as Cory Doctorow has at least tried to, but the argument comes across as tired and pointless. It's the ramblings of an "old man" (measured in internet years of course) who, had he been born a hundred years ago, would probably have been railing against car companies for removing the hand-start crank. People don't want computers. They don't want notebooks. They don't want compilers or user serviceable parts. What they do want is Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and all the other things you can only do, for the most part, with computers and notebooks. The sooner some device delivers an alternative that's easier to use, more reliable, and less fuss in the long run, the sooner people will switch to that new thing.
- lazugod 17y ago
  I'd like to think that the future will not always be Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.
  - blasdel 17y ago
    Of course not, but the future will continue to be visited primarily using a web browser.
    - krainboltgreene 17y ago
      God I hope not. I hope some day I wont have to use HTML, CSS, Javascript, and a serverside language just to write an app. I'd like to just use one language and hit all platforms.
      - blasdel 17y ago
        You don't necessarily have to touch the markup directly, your app can essentially be pure JS (or compiled to pure JS) that paints it all into the DOM dynamically (see http://cappuccino.org/ http://cappuccino.org/) You don't need a server-side language if the app doesn't really need to communicate with your server. You can do everything client-side with LocalStorage (SQLite) and cached assets. If the page has the right metadata on it, "Add to Home Screen" saves the whole app locally. And there's no reason why the server, if it needs to exist, shouldn't be executing the same language (see http://nodejs.org/ http://nodejs.org/) The modern web is the platform. There are nice local platforms, but your "write once run anywhere" 'native' app isn't going to fit in on any platform that actually gets used.
muffins 17y ago
Stop writing these articles people. Please. I'm tried of writing the same response over and over.
chaostheory 17y ago
Years ago there was a time when I used to be a big MS Windows fanboy. It wasn't perfect, but it was the best combination of everything that worked right at the time... The frequent blue screens, freezes, and constant virus & trojan cleaning was getting old, but Windows was still doable overall. Then something MS did, totally pissed me off enough to start trying desktop alternatives: MS started to ensure that Windows could only be installed a certain number of times for a particular machine that had a specific set of components. So if you changed enough of your components for the same licensed machine, Windows might think it was a different computer which was a big no no. Given that you had to have a clean install of Windows every x number of months, I just got fed up. It was the tipping point. I then started going through various distros of Linux and eventually happily landing on OSX. For me, like the blue screens and the viruses, I see this as a possible beginning of enough frustration building to make me move on again. Hopefully this year's WDC (or next) will prove me wrong.
- MrRage 17y ago
  I've frequently upgraded and changed parts in my PCs over the past few years an only once has Windows refused to activate. It was fixed with a 15 minute phone call to Microsoft. I find it hard to believe this is a serious issue unless you're reinstalling or changing parts every week or something. Edit: And by upgrading parts I mean things as big as upgrading the CPU and/or motherboard.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - chaostheory 17y ago
    why should I have to call MS for permission to upgrade my PC? It's the principle. Besides it was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Crashes and freezing were fine when I was a kid, and Windows was primarily used for video games. Once I grew up and started using it for work, that was no longer acceptable.
    - pedalpete 17y ago
wrinklz 17y ago
1) Create a new user on your macbook. 2) Enable Parental Controls. 3) Allow Safari, iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie. 4) ... 5) Profit!
jsz0 17y ago
Maybe, depends on the details. I wouldn't be ideologically opposed to it. I just don't want to spend much time dealing with the nuts & bolts anymore. In my case I work with technology 8-10 hours per day for my job. The last thing I want to do is come home and micro-manage my own stuff. With most of these closed platforms what we really are talking about is a managed platform where a company takes responsibility for the end user experience. This is about the same as a company hiring an IT department to lock down their office desktops to improve security and increase workers productivity by creating a trouble free, consistent, environment for them to work in. There's nothing wrong with that. In the end, as the consumer, I get to make the choice what type of product I want. I think it's kind of a downer that someone would oppose my ability to make the choice to buy one of these managed platforms because they don't like them. I certainly wouldn't want to stop people from being able to dig into the nuts & bolts if that's what they want. If we can have some hybrid of both I'm all for it but it seems very difficult to strike a good balance.
gcb 17y ago
no. Same for a cell phone. No. Same for a car. No. Same for every crap. No. I would open an exception if there was some free service. I am considering the kindle because of the free wikipedia all the time.
prodigal_erik 17y ago
I descend from hundreds of generations of intelligent beings who conquered the world using tools they could understand and improve. I refuse to have some vendor demote me to a lesser species, no matter how shiny the beads are.
al_james 17y ago
Well, I intend to buy my mum a iPad and keyboard so I can prop the iPad up on her desk, and she can use it just like a normal desktop PC. She will be able to do all the things she does normally, but with many orders of magnitude less tech support calls to me! So yes, a iPad laptop would be even better.

8 points by mithaler 17y ago

Sure, if I had a kid and it was one of those toy ones with learning activities.

Say this with me: iPad is not a laptop. Once people understand that it is a consumer device, an appliance like an iPod or a DVD player, that just happens to do a lot of extra stuff, we can start talking about what it can do and how people will use it.

flogic 17y ago
I disagree. I see no reason other than Apple's choice that the iPad shouldn't be on the same level as a laptop or desktop.
mithaler 17y ago
I think you missed the point. Yes, the iPad is not a desktop, and it's not expected to do the same things. What the post is positing is that Apple may release a laptop similarly locked down, and if they did, would it be an appliance like an iPod or DVD player?

derefr 17y ago

Yes—because obviously it would have an IDE and Compiler-suite app! Otherwise, how would you develop on it? ;) (And then all the free, unlicensed apps anyone likes could just be released as source, and compiled+run locally in test mode.)

blasdel 17y ago
Typed in out of a cheap newsprint magazine, even! Apple wants to kill the "power user" dead. Every one uses the system on the same clear, easily understood terms. A fraction of those users will be developers, but even they will use the device itself as users in the same way as everyone else, not as wizards. Some people see this as Harrison Bergeron, but I sure don't — the people they're 'handicapping' didn't know anything in the first place, they were pretenders.

astrodust 17y ago

The question is not "would you buy" but "would people buy" and the answer to that is undeniably YES. You can argue this is not a good thing, as Cory Doctorow has at least tried to, but the argument comes across as tired and pointless. It's the ramblings of an "old man" (measured in internet years of course) who, had he been born a hundred years ago, would probably have been railing against car companies for removing the hand-start crank. People don't want computers. They don't want notebooks. They don't want compilers or user serviceable parts. What they do want is Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and all the other things you can only do, for the most part, with computers and notebooks. The sooner some device delivers an alternative that's easier to use, more reliable, and less fuss in the long run, the sooner people will switch to that new thing.

lazugod 17y ago
I'd like to think that the future will not always be Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.
- blasdel 17y ago
  Of course not, but the future will continue to be visited primarily using a web browser.
  - krainboltgreene 17y ago
    God I hope not. I hope some day I wont have to use HTML, CSS, Javascript, and a serverside language just to write an app. I'd like to just use one language and hit all platforms.
    - blasdel 17y ago
      You don't necessarily have to touch the markup directly, your app can essentially be pure JS (or compiled to pure JS) that paints it all into the DOM dynamically (see http://cappuccino.org/ http://cappuccino.org/) You don't need a server-side language if the app doesn't really need to communicate with your server. You can do everything client-side with LocalStorage (SQLite) and cached assets. If the page has the right metadata on it, "Add to Home Screen" saves the whole app locally. And there's no reason why the server, if it needs to exist, shouldn't be executing the same language (see http://nodejs.org/ http://nodejs.org/) The modern web is the platform. There are nice local platforms, but your "write once run anywhere" 'native' app isn't going to fit in on any platform that actually gets used.

muffins 17y ago

Stop writing these articles people. Please. I'm tried of writing the same response over and over.

chaostheory 17y ago

Years ago there was a time when I used to be a big MS Windows fanboy. It wasn't perfect, but it was the best combination of everything that worked right at the time... The frequent blue screens, freezes, and constant virus & trojan cleaning was getting old, but Windows was still doable overall. Then something MS did, totally pissed me off enough to start trying desktop alternatives: MS started to ensure that Windows could only be installed a certain number of times for a particular machine that had a specific set of components. So if you changed enough of your components for the same licensed machine, Windows might think it was a different computer which was a big no no. Given that you had to have a clean install of Windows every x number of months, I just got fed up. It was the tipping point. I then started going through various distros of Linux and eventually happily landing on OSX. For me, like the blue screens and the viruses, I see this as a possible beginning of enough frustration building to make me move on again. Hopefully this year's WDC (or next) will prove me wrong.

MrRage 17y ago
I've frequently upgraded and changed parts in my PCs over the past few years an only once has Windows refused to activate. It was fixed with a 15 minute phone call to Microsoft. I find it hard to believe this is a serious issue unless you're reinstalling or changing parts every week or something. Edit: And by upgrading parts I mean things as big as upgrading the CPU and/or motherboard.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- chaostheory 17y ago
  why should I have to call MS for permission to upgrade my PC? It's the principle. Besides it was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Crashes and freezing were fine when I was a kid, and Windows was primarily used for video games. Once I grew up and started using it for work, that was no longer acceptable.
  - pedalpete 17y ago

wrinklz 17y ago

1) Create a new user on your macbook. 2) Enable Parental Controls. 3) Allow Safari, iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie. 4) ... 5) Profit!

jsz0 17y ago

Maybe, depends on the details. I wouldn't be ideologically opposed to it. I just don't want to spend much time dealing with the nuts & bolts anymore. In my case I work with technology 8-10 hours per day for my job. The last thing I want to do is come home and micro-manage my own stuff. With most of these closed platforms what we really are talking about is a managed platform where a company takes responsibility for the end user experience. This is about the same as a company hiring an IT department to lock down their office desktops to improve security and increase workers productivity by creating a trouble free, consistent, environment for them to work in. There's nothing wrong with that. In the end, as the consumer, I get to make the choice what type of product I want. I think it's kind of a downer that someone would oppose my ability to make the choice to buy one of these managed platforms because they don't like them. I certainly wouldn't want to stop people from being able to dig into the nuts & bolts if that's what they want. If we can have some hybrid of both I'm all for it but it seems very difficult to strike a good balance.

gcb 17y ago

no. Same for a cell phone. No. Same for a car. No. Same for every crap. No. I would open an exception if there was some free service. I am considering the kindle because of the free wikipedia all the time.

prodigal_erik 17y ago

I descend from hundreds of generations of intelligent beings who conquered the world using tools they could understand and improve. I refuse to have some vendor demote me to a lesser species, no matter how shiny the beads are.

al_james 17y ago

Well, I intend to buy my mum a iPad and keyboard so I can prop the iPad up on her desk, and she can use it just like a normal desktop PC. She will be able to do all the things she does normally, but with many orders of magnitude less tech support calls to me! So yes, a iPad laptop would be even better.