4 ms·

Keyboards were the first platform on a computer. You should instead think of “new platform” in the context of the mouse. It offered a significantly different u

Keyboards were the first platform on a computer. You should instead think of “new platform” in the context of the mouse. It offered a significantly different user experience. We just happened to call that platform “Graphical User Interface” it could have easily been called “the mouse platform” in its early days and made perfect sense. Its not ideal to call AirPods a platform, but lend the writer some poetic license, what they are describing doesn’t currently have a canonical phrase in the zeitgeist.

selfhoster11 6y ago
By that definition, you can call any paradigm-shifting invention a "platform" and drown all remaining meaning of the word in buzzword-speak. Let's just call it how it is - it's a new kind of peripheral, or a new interaction paradigm that unlocks new things. It's revolutionary, yes, but that doesn't make it a platform.
- yazaddaruvala 6y ago
  > By that definition, you can call any paradigm-shifting invention a "platform" I'd argue that, until proven otherwise, you probably should. > it's a new kind of peripheral, or a new interaction paradigm that unlocks new things. Look you're right! No doubt about that. The only problem with your mental model is that it is limiting, rather than expanding. Even if they are wrong to call it a "platform", using wording that evokes an "expanding mental model" has benefits. I'll give you an example of where your thinking might cause "limitation". Specifically the iPhone. In 2007 when touch screen was added to a phone, Apple could have left everything else about a phone the same i.e. "touch is just a new interaction paradigm". Basically a Palm Pilot without the AppStore or a Browser. However, they realized "touch isn't just a new interaction paradigm, its a whole new enabler/platform of <stuff not previously possible>, lets push to create that and see what happens." People might be very wrong that personalized-audio, as a new interaction paradigm, will lead to a new enabler/platform of <stuff not previously possible>. But just because it might be wrong or not lead any where, doest mean we should discourage it's pursuit.
  - yazaddaruvala 6y ago
    Said more succinctly, benevolent/inconsequential "lying" for society's or your own improvement can be a very useful modus-operandi. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LopI4YeC4I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LopI4YeC4I [1] https://www.npr.org/2021/03/12/976337203/useful-delusions-examines-how-beliefs-can-be-powerful-in-positive-and-negative-w https://www.npr.org/2021/03/12/976337203/useful-delusions-ex...

selfhoster11 6y ago

By that definition, you can call any paradigm-shifting invention a "platform" and drown all remaining meaning of the word in buzzword-speak. Let's just call it how it is - it's a new kind of peripheral, or a new interaction paradigm that unlocks new things. It's revolutionary, yes, but that doesn't make it a platform.

yazaddaruvala 6y ago
> By that definition, you can call any paradigm-shifting invention a "platform" I'd argue that, until proven otherwise, you probably should. > it's a new kind of peripheral, or a new interaction paradigm that unlocks new things. Look you're right! No doubt about that. The only problem with your mental model is that it is limiting, rather than expanding. Even if they are wrong to call it a "platform", using wording that evokes an "expanding mental model" has benefits. I'll give you an example of where your thinking might cause "limitation". Specifically the iPhone. In 2007 when touch screen was added to a phone, Apple could have left everything else about a phone the same i.e. "touch is just a new interaction paradigm". Basically a Palm Pilot without the AppStore or a Browser. However, they realized "touch isn't just a new interaction paradigm, its a whole new enabler/platform of <stuff not previously possible>, lets push to create that and see what happens." People might be very wrong that personalized-audio, as a new interaction paradigm, will lead to a new enabler/platform of <stuff not previously possible>. But just because it might be wrong or not lead any where, doest mean we should discourage it's pursuit.
- yazaddaruvala 6y ago
  Said more succinctly, benevolent/inconsequential "lying" for society's or your own improvement can be a very useful modus-operandi. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LopI4YeC4I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LopI4YeC4I [1] https://www.npr.org/2021/03/12/976337203/useful-delusions-examines-how-beliefs-can-be-powerful-in-positive-and-negative-w https://www.npr.org/2021/03/12/976337203/useful-delusions-ex...