5 ms·

Everyone in this thread getting offended by casual use of the term "real work" is missing the point. The iPad can obviously be used for "real work" -- but the p

by ohazi 7y ago

Everyone in this thread getting offended by casual use of the term "real work" is missing the point. The iPad can obviously be used for "real work" -- but the point of this argument is not to criticize people and the work that they do, it's to criticize the limitations of the iPad's operating system. Computer power users like composability, interoperability, "unix philosophy" / "do one thing well" -- whatever you want to call it -- because it's a powerful tool. RodgerTheGreat summed it up really well: > On a desktop, any user can invent new workflows. On an ipad, a user can only buy them wholesale. Users are at the mercy of the degree of forethought the app developers put into their designs. Power users are frustrated because we like the iPad hardware and want to be able to use it, but Apple seems to have latched onto the idea that good tablet design requires them to sacrifice this idea. I and many others don't believe this is necessarily a requirement. Yes, the form factor is different, and you need to be careful with input methods, but good composability should still be possible, and could even be better than on a PC -- but Apple doesn't seem interested in actually trying. That's the criticism.

mstolpm 7y ago
The criticism is that the iPad isn't better than a PC? Neither is a hammer or a saw ... but both are used professionally every minute. The iPad is a tool. Would someone argue that a hammer is flawed because it only can be used in some ways, some professions and for some tasks? A laptop is a tool, a PC is a tool, a mainframe is a tool, a calculator is a tool and a saw is a tool. So what? Of course, a PC might be a better tool for your workflow, your work, your results. But that might be different for someone else. Work with the tools that fits your needs best! Why do we need to criticize one tool because it is not equal or better to another? Gruber is right in regards of discoverability and consistency of (multitasking) gestures on iPadOS. There is room for improvement. The lack of "professional" iPad software should be directed more towards the developers than Apple - why needs some iPad app to be crippled in comparison to its Mac counterpart? Valid concerns. But calling the iPad a failure because it doesn't fit to your work, your workflow and your processes? Because it isn't the ultimate general purpose tool? I know authors still using a typewriter. I know some that use iPads because of the "single app interface" and less distraction. I know others using laptops (and complaining about distraction). All are doing "real" work (as many other professions mentioned in this thread) and all have their preferred way of working. If a developer/power user is happy with his Mac/Win/Linux setup, why does s/he need to criticize the iPad for NOT being the right tool? Or are these folks just unhappy with their setups and desperately hoping Apple will give them a better (-toy-) tool for less bucks? Or is it just en vogue to bash Apple?
- biztos 7y ago
  I really like my iPad but I find it sometimes maddening that the closest I can get to using it for software development is with a character terminal, yet it's actually faster than my MacBook. I have found it really great for one type of serious work: writing. (With an external keyboard of course, which I think is fair.). And I think there are some places where it really ought to be the better tool for professionals: * Editing photos (pretty good already but not pro-level) * Audio workflows (can't judge but seems good?) * Video workflows (maddeningly weak at this point) * Storyboarding (again can't judge) I get that Apple doesn't consider this a tool for making software, and I sort of wish I could get by with just writing and editing the occasional photo, and I realize that I could of course write whatever I want in Xcode if I had time. But as a UNIX guy, having returned to the Apple ecosystem after it became a UNIX ecosystem, the inaccessibility of the UNIX sitting under iPadOS still rubs me the wrong way.
- ohazi 7y ago
  > But calling the iPad a failure because [...] You're making exactly the mistake I described. You're getting hung up on how the criticism was lobbed, when it wasn't meant to be taken literally. Obviously it's not actually a failure: it's made billions of dollars for Apple. > The lack of "professional" iPad software should be directed more towards the developers than Apple - why needs some iPad app to be crippled in comparison to its Mac counterpart? The problem isn't the software, because the goal isn't to have one or two magically complex IDEs that can do everything, the goal is to allow useful ways to shovel intermediate data around in between apps. That has to happen at the operating system level, and so the criticism needs to be directed at Apple. > Why do we need to criticize one tool because it is not equal or better to another? Because it fucking could be better, and it's maddening that it isn't! That is a totally valid reason to criticize something! If you want to use a woodworking tool analogy, it's like a tablesaw with a crosscut sled welded to the table. Sometimes I want to make a rip cut. I could buy a new table with a welded-on rip fence and spend an hour retooling every time I want to switch tasks... But interchangeable fixtures are useful, and I'm allowed to be upset when other people stubbornly refuse to acknowledge this. If the issue persists and remains unacknowledged even after a decade of criticism, you should expect that people are going to start using hyperbole out of sheer frustration. But that's "frustrated person language" -- you still shouldn't get hung up on the literal phrases.
chrisseaton 7y ago
> The iPad can obviously be used for "real work" So why say it can't? Why put down what other people as not being 'real work' because they have different requirements to you? I pointed it out because it's nasty, belittling, unnecessary, and as you've said, not even true. Why not reach for a kinder phrase like 'can't be used for more complex content creation workflows' instead of this toxic language.
cgrealy 7y ago
>> Computer power users like composability, interoperability, "unix philosophy" / "do one thing well" -- whatever you want to call it -- because it's a powerful tool. Which equates to a fraction of computer use globally. I'd be willing to bet large amounts of money, most people who use a computer couldn't even tell you what composability is. They just don't care. You're frustrated because the iPad is not a replacement for a laptop. Er, yeah? So what? That's not what it's designed for. You're complaining that a Tesla Model 3 is crap off road. FTR, I have an iPad and I wouldn't even consider doing my day job on it. Could it be redesigned to fit my workflow? Of course, but then it would be worse for the things I actually use it for.
- agumonkey 7y ago
  I agree, even among programmers, not everybody is a poweruser. Some will want a prebuild IDE with streamlined single workflow. Others will assemble git / procfs / binutils / sqlite / hexdump / younameit to hack through a task in wild ways. But I very rarely see this around.

by ohazi 7y ago

mstolpm 7y ago

The criticism is that the iPad isn't better than a PC? Neither is a hammer or a saw ... but both are used professionally every minute. The iPad is a tool. Would someone argue that a hammer is flawed because it only can be used in some ways, some professions and for some tasks? A laptop is a tool, a PC is a tool, a mainframe is a tool, a calculator is a tool and a saw is a tool. So what? Of course, a PC might be a better tool for your workflow, your work, your results. But that might be different for someone else. Work with the tools that fits your needs best! Why do we need to criticize one tool because it is not equal or better to another? Gruber is right in regards of discoverability and consistency of (multitasking) gestures on iPadOS. There is room for improvement. The lack of "professional" iPad software should be directed more towards the developers than Apple - why needs some iPad app to be crippled in comparison to its Mac counterpart? Valid concerns. But calling the iPad a failure because it doesn't fit to your work, your workflow and your processes? Because it isn't the ultimate general purpose tool? I know authors still using a typewriter. I know some that use iPads because of the "single app interface" and less distraction. I know others using laptops (and complaining about distraction). All are doing "real" work (as many other professions mentioned in this thread) and all have their preferred way of working. If a developer/power user is happy with his Mac/Win/Linux setup, why does s/he need to criticize the iPad for NOT being the right tool? Or are these folks just unhappy with their setups and desperately hoping Apple will give them a better (-toy-) tool for less bucks? Or is it just en vogue to bash Apple?

biztos 7y ago
I really like my iPad but I find it sometimes maddening that the closest I can get to using it for software development is with a character terminal, yet it's actually faster than my MacBook. I have found it really great for one type of serious work: writing. (With an external keyboard of course, which I think is fair.). And I think there are some places where it really ought to be the better tool for professionals: * Editing photos (pretty good already but not pro-level) * Audio workflows (can't judge but seems good?) * Video workflows (maddeningly weak at this point) * Storyboarding (again can't judge) I get that Apple doesn't consider this a tool for making software, and I sort of wish I could get by with just writing and editing the occasional photo, and I realize that I could of course write whatever I want in Xcode if I had time. But as a UNIX guy, having returned to the Apple ecosystem after it became a UNIX ecosystem, the inaccessibility of the UNIX sitting under iPadOS still rubs me the wrong way.
ohazi 7y ago
> But calling the iPad a failure because [...] You're making exactly the mistake I described. You're getting hung up on how the criticism was lobbed, when it wasn't meant to be taken literally. Obviously it's not actually a failure: it's made billions of dollars for Apple. > The lack of "professional" iPad software should be directed more towards the developers than Apple - why needs some iPad app to be crippled in comparison to its Mac counterpart? The problem isn't the software, because the goal isn't to have one or two magically complex IDEs that can do everything, the goal is to allow useful ways to shovel intermediate data around in between apps. That has to happen at the operating system level, and so the criticism needs to be directed at Apple. > Why do we need to criticize one tool because it is not equal or better to another? Because it fucking could be better, and it's maddening that it isn't! That is a totally valid reason to criticize something! If you want to use a woodworking tool analogy, it's like a tablesaw with a crosscut sled welded to the table. Sometimes I want to make a rip cut. I could buy a new table with a welded-on rip fence and spend an hour retooling every time I want to switch tasks... But interchangeable fixtures are useful, and I'm allowed to be upset when other people stubbornly refuse to acknowledge this. If the issue persists and remains unacknowledged even after a decade of criticism, you should expect that people are going to start using hyperbole out of sheer frustration. But that's "frustrated person language" -- you still shouldn't get hung up on the literal phrases.

chrisseaton 7y ago

> The iPad can obviously be used for "real work" So why say it can't? Why put down what other people as not being 'real work' because they have different requirements to you? I pointed it out because it's nasty, belittling, unnecessary, and as you've said, not even true. Why not reach for a kinder phrase like 'can't be used for more complex content creation workflows' instead of this toxic language.

cgrealy 7y ago

>> Computer power users like composability, interoperability, "unix philosophy" / "do one thing well" -- whatever you want to call it -- because it's a powerful tool. Which equates to a fraction of computer use globally. I'd be willing to bet large amounts of money, most people who use a computer couldn't even tell you what composability is. They just don't care. You're frustrated because the iPad is not a replacement for a laptop. Er, yeah? So what? That's not what it's designed for. You're complaining that a Tesla Model 3 is crap off road. FTR, I have an iPad and I wouldn't even consider doing my day job on it. Could it be redesigned to fit my workflow? Of course, but then it would be worse for the things I actually use it for.

agumonkey 7y ago
I agree, even among programmers, not everybody is a poweruser. Some will want a prebuild IDE with streamlined single workflow. Others will assemble git / procfs / binutils / sqlite / hexdump / younameit to hack through a task in wild ways. But I very rarely see this around.