3 ms·

> 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 w

by 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.

brianpan 7y ago
But I think "real work" is a bad criticism. If the kind of work it can do is the problem with the iPad, then why is the iPhone so popular? The real "problem" with the iPad is the size. Laptop have been getting smaller and thinner (gigantic 17" laptops used to be a thing). iPhones have been getting bigger (more iPad-like or at least iPad mini-like), but it's probably close to big enough. It turns out Steve Jobs was wrong. The iPhone is not a too small version of an iPad, the iPad is an iPhone that's too big. That's not to say there's no room for it in the product lineup. It just happens to be more like the Mac Mini than the iMac.
- ohazi 7y ago
  > But I think "real work" is a bad criticism. For the third time, "real work" is not the actual criticism. It's inexact language used by a frustrated person, and you're taking it literally when you shouldn't be. > If the kind of work it can do is the problem with the iPad Nobody is saying this. The kind of work you can already do on an iPad is great. We're just frustrated because with a little bit of thought at the operating system level, the device would also be capable of doing a lot of other things well, without any sacrifice to the all of the existing apps and workflows that make the device popular.
  - jader201 7y ago
    > We're just frustrated because with a little bit of thought at the operating system level, the device would also be capable of doing a lot of other things well, without any sacrifice to the all of the existing apps and workflows that make the device popular. I wonder how true this really is? Removing the need for files or composability was a “feature” of the iPad from the beginning. To simplify things. For example, add in more native support for a real file system from the beginning, and many of the apps that were designed without a file system /composability in mind now is designed completely differently, and may no longer work as well/simply as the current users experience them today. I don’t pretend to have a crystal ball and know how things “might’ve been”, but I think saying that by supporting a native file system/composability, things would be “the same but better” may be a bit naive.
  - brianpan 7y ago
    You're saying that the iPad could do these additional Mac-like things with a few tweaks or additions. I'm saying the sweet spot is in the other direction. You want it to do more (essentially 'real work'). The device that's doing better is the one that's just like it, but is smaller and does less. That's why "real work" is a bad criticism. I put it in quotes, because yes, I read what you wrote and you're frustration. It sucks but I don't think the iPad is ever going to be that. It would be better for you, but it won't make the iPad a more popular product.

by ohazi 7y ago

brianpan 7y ago

But I think "real work" is a bad criticism. If the kind of work it can do is the problem with the iPad, then why is the iPhone so popular? The real "problem" with the iPad is the size. Laptop have been getting smaller and thinner (gigantic 17" laptops used to be a thing). iPhones have been getting bigger (more iPad-like or at least iPad mini-like), but it's probably close to big enough. It turns out Steve Jobs was wrong. The iPhone is not a too small version of an iPad, the iPad is an iPhone that's too big. That's not to say there's no room for it in the product lineup. It just happens to be more like the Mac Mini than the iMac.

ohazi 7y ago
> But I think "real work" is a bad criticism. For the third time, "real work" is not the actual criticism. It's inexact language used by a frustrated person, and you're taking it literally when you shouldn't be. > If the kind of work it can do is the problem with the iPad Nobody is saying this. The kind of work you can already do on an iPad is great. We're just frustrated because with a little bit of thought at the operating system level, the device would also be capable of doing a lot of other things well, without any sacrifice to the all of the existing apps and workflows that make the device popular.
- jader201 7y ago
  > We're just frustrated because with a little bit of thought at the operating system level, the device would also be capable of doing a lot of other things well, without any sacrifice to the all of the existing apps and workflows that make the device popular. I wonder how true this really is? Removing the need for files or composability was a “feature” of the iPad from the beginning. To simplify things. For example, add in more native support for a real file system from the beginning, and many of the apps that were designed without a file system /composability in mind now is designed completely differently, and may no longer work as well/simply as the current users experience them today. I don’t pretend to have a crystal ball and know how things “might’ve been”, but I think saying that by supporting a native file system/composability, things would be “the same but better” may be a bit naive.
- brianpan 7y ago
  You're saying that the iPad could do these additional Mac-like things with a few tweaks or additions. I'm saying the sweet spot is in the other direction. You want it to do more (essentially 'real work'). The device that's doing better is the one that's just like it, but is smaller and does less. That's why "real work" is a bad criticism. I put it in quotes, because yes, I read what you wrote and you're frustration. It sucks but I don't think the iPad is ever going to be that. It would be better for you, but it won't make the iPad a more popular product.