7 ms·

It is an interesting observation to compare longevity times for current widely-used IT tech: Smartphones (since first iPhone) - 14 years. Laptops (since firs

It is an interesting observation to compare longevity times for current widely-used IT tech: Smartphones (since first iPhone) - 14 years. Laptops (since first Apple Powerbook) - 30 years. PCs (since first IBM PC) - 40 years. C programming language will be 50 years old next year. SQL will turn 50 in 2024

frosted-flakes 6y ago
The iPhone was definitely not the first smart phone.
- Zak 6y ago
  Nor was the Powerbook the first laptop nor the IBM PC the first PC. Those are all, however arguably responsible for popularizing the technologies in something resembling their current form.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - selfhoster11 6y ago
    I disagree. I am of the opinion that those form factors were inevitable, and would have come along anyway with or without Apple's offerings.
    - ghaff 6y ago
      How is that inconsistent with the parent statement? Even if the form factors were inevitable--e.g. someone would have decided that smartphones didn't need a physical keyboard--someone had to be first to popularize. (Not sure I agree on the laptop but the iPhone pretty clearly popularized the modern smartphone form factor.)
      - selfhoster11 6y ago
        To say they are "responsible" for something can be read as "allowed to take credit for". Being the first to popularize something is a business achievement, which is quite meaningless compared to the technical achievement of being the first to build something.
        Miraste 6y ago
        I can see this in the case of the PC and the laptop, but proto-smartphones were around for years before the iPhone and they were not developing in an iPhone-like direction. Every iPhone-like product that came after was the result of copying. I don't think it was inevitable at all.
        ghaff 6y ago
        One thing I do think is true is that Apple developed sufficient brand permission to be able to do things that were definitely outside of a lot of buyers' comfort zone and arguably needed some iteration to really nail. I'm still inclined to think someone would have jumped to a smartphone without a keyboard. But it's also true that the iPhone had plenty of critics early on and arguably didn't fully hit its stride until the 3GS.
        ghaff 6y ago
        Something that's a mainstream business success is far more interesting in general than progenitors that never really took off for whatever reasons. They're may still be important as technical achievements but the history books notice those who took things mainstream. James Watt didn't actually invent the steam engine. He just came up with an invention that made it a lot more efficient.
- Sargos 6y ago
  No, but it was the first wide spread smartphone and the first one most people used. This is the only practical starting point.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - theodric 6y ago
    Blackberry, Palm, and Windows Mobile phones were more widespread than you're giving them credit for, as were laptops considerably preceding Apple's PowerBook series.
cookiengineer 6y ago
The mindblowing part about these kind of numbers for me always is the sheer amount of smartphones out there. I mean, imagine a parallel world where those smartphones weren't designed to shove ads down your throat and where they could be used to be as productive as with a laptop, and where people could help to automate their lives on their own with it. That would be so amazing.
- pjc50 6y ago
  Smartphones are a huge productivity tool, that's why they took off in the first place. Especially Blackberry, which offered the magic technology of accessing your email and calendar from anywhere. The ads are not an obstacle to this, especially not on iPhone.
  - LASR 6y ago
    They are far more than that. For a large number of people, the smartphone is their first and only computing device. Enabling internet access is like rocket fuel for advancing socioeconomic conditions for those in developing nations. Entire generations have been lifted from poverty due to it.
    - usrusr 6y ago
      And "first and only computing device" pales to insignificance next to "first and only bank account" which they also are, in a way. That's huge.
    - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
      Its still a poor version of the internet when compared to a PC (laptop/Desktop).
    - selfhoster11 6y ago
      I don't know about you, but a consumption-only "first and only computing device" sounds incredibly dystopian. I get that they have a positive impact, but it feels like we could be doing better.
josephg 6y ago
> C programming language will be 50 years old next year. This principle implies the C programming language will outlive Rust, Go, Python, etc. I'm not sure how I feel about that. There's a good chance its right, but I'm uncomfortable imagining my grandchildren learning C's weird quirks. There's definitely codebases written in C today which will outlive me, like the Linux kernel. And most of those codebases will probably never migrate to a different language.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- thanhhaimai 6y ago
  I'm more worried my grandchildren will still be learning/using QWERTY than they have to learn C's weird quirks :). My opinion is that it's easier to get a group of tech people together and gradually replace C (like Android Rust development) than getting people to replace QWERTY or getting the US to move to Metrics system.
  - hattmall 6y ago
    what's wrong with qwerty?
    - drewzero1 6y ago
      Arguments could be made that it's inefficient or un-ergonomic, though I'm doubtful how much difference it makes on a modern keyboard. There's an oft-repeated story about the qwerty layout being designed to keep people from typing fast enough to jam typewriters. I can't speak to the legitimacy of the story, but I do collect typewriters and I can say for sure that there's a lot more pressure and key travel (and time!) required to slam a type bar into the ribbon than is needed to press a modern keyboard key. I learned Dvorak a decade ago and loved it unless someone else had to use my computer or I had to use a shared computer. I'm typing this on a qwerty keyboard and I'm okay with that now.
      - 6y ago
heavyset_go 6y ago
Laptops existed far before the Powerbook.
- rsynnott 6y ago
  It really depends on how you define laptop. There was this sort of thing in the 80s, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_T1100 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_T1100), of course. And there were a couple of laptop-shaped laptops from 1988 on, but they were either spectacularly compromised (the NEC Ultralite had a max of 2MB of storage, for instance) or spectacularly expensive or both. In terms of laptops that were shaped like laptops as we know them, and that were actually usable outside of very specialized applications, the Powerbook 100 and Thinkpad 700T could be reasonably claimed to be about the first.
  - thinkmassive 6y ago
    There’s also the TRS-80 Model 100, launched in 1983
selfhoster11 6y ago
> Laptops (since first Apple Powerbook) - 30 years. That kind of Apple revisionism is not correct. The NEC UltraLite predated Apple clamshells by 3 years (1988), and luggables with a battery configuration have been available as early as 1981 (Osborne 1 with an aftermarket 1 hour battery add-on).
- ghaff 6y ago
  The Grid Compass was probably the first true laptop in 1982. But it ran a proprietary operating system by default and costs about $8,000 in 1982 money. The Data General-One came out in 1984 and might be a better candidate. But neither of those were really mainstream.
  - thinkmassive 6y ago
    Don’t neglect the Model 100... “The TRS-80 Model 100 is a portable computer introduced in 1983. It is one of the first notebook-style computers, featuring a keyboard and liquid crystal display, in a battery-powered package roughly the size and shape of a notepad or large book.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_Model_100 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_Model_100
    - ghaff 6y ago
      It wasn't a laptop in the modern sense though.
      - thinkmassive 6y ago
        For any reason other than it doesn't fold in half?

frosted-flakes 6y ago

The iPhone was definitely not the first smart phone.

Zak 6y ago
Nor was the Powerbook the first laptop nor the IBM PC the first PC. Those are all, however arguably responsible for popularizing the technologies in something resembling their current form.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- selfhoster11 6y ago
  I disagree. I am of the opinion that those form factors were inevitable, and would have come along anyway with or without Apple's offerings.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    How is that inconsistent with the parent statement? Even if the form factors were inevitable--e.g. someone would have decided that smartphones didn't need a physical keyboard--someone had to be first to popularize. (Not sure I agree on the laptop but the iPhone pretty clearly popularized the modern smartphone form factor.)
    - selfhoster11 6y ago
      To say they are "responsible" for something can be read as "allowed to take credit for". Being the first to popularize something is a business achievement, which is quite meaningless compared to the technical achievement of being the first to build something.
      - Miraste 6y ago
        I can see this in the case of the PC and the laptop, but proto-smartphones were around for years before the iPhone and they were not developing in an iPhone-like direction. Every iPhone-like product that came after was the result of copying. I don't think it was inevitable at all.
        ghaff 6y ago
        One thing I do think is true is that Apple developed sufficient brand permission to be able to do things that were definitely outside of a lot of buyers' comfort zone and arguably needed some iteration to really nail. I'm still inclined to think someone would have jumped to a smartphone without a keyboard. But it's also true that the iPhone had plenty of critics early on and arguably didn't fully hit its stride until the 3GS.
      - ghaff 6y ago
        Something that's a mainstream business success is far more interesting in general than progenitors that never really took off for whatever reasons. They're may still be important as technical achievements but the history books notice those who took things mainstream. James Watt didn't actually invent the steam engine. He just came up with an invention that made it a lot more efficient.
Sargos 6y ago
No, but it was the first wide spread smartphone and the first one most people used. This is the only practical starting point.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- theodric 6y ago
  Blackberry, Palm, and Windows Mobile phones were more widespread than you're giving them credit for, as were laptops considerably preceding Apple's PowerBook series.

cookiengineer 6y ago

The mindblowing part about these kind of numbers for me always is the sheer amount of smartphones out there. I mean, imagine a parallel world where those smartphones weren't designed to shove ads down your throat and where they could be used to be as productive as with a laptop, and where people could help to automate their lives on their own with it. That would be so amazing.

pjc50 6y ago
Smartphones are a huge productivity tool, that's why they took off in the first place. Especially Blackberry, which offered the magic technology of accessing your email and calendar from anywhere. The ads are not an obstacle to this, especially not on iPhone.
- LASR 6y ago
  They are far more than that. For a large number of people, the smartphone is their first and only computing device. Enabling internet access is like rocket fuel for advancing socioeconomic conditions for those in developing nations. Entire generations have been lifted from poverty due to it.
  - usrusr 6y ago
    And "first and only computing device" pales to insignificance next to "first and only bank account" which they also are, in a way. That's huge.
  - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
    Its still a poor version of the internet when compared to a PC (laptop/Desktop).
  - selfhoster11 6y ago
    I don't know about you, but a consumption-only "first and only computing device" sounds incredibly dystopian. I get that they have a positive impact, but it feels like we could be doing better.

josephg 6y ago

> C programming language will be 50 years old next year. This principle implies the C programming language will outlive Rust, Go, Python, etc. I'm not sure how I feel about that. There's a good chance its right, but I'm uncomfortable imagining my grandchildren learning C's weird quirks. There's definitely codebases written in C today which will outlive me, like the Linux kernel. And most of those codebases will probably never migrate to a different language.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
thanhhaimai 6y ago
I'm more worried my grandchildren will still be learning/using QWERTY than they have to learn C's weird quirks :). My opinion is that it's easier to get a group of tech people together and gradually replace C (like Android Rust development) than getting people to replace QWERTY or getting the US to move to Metrics system.
- hattmall 6y ago
  what's wrong with qwerty?
  - drewzero1 6y ago
    Arguments could be made that it's inefficient or un-ergonomic, though I'm doubtful how much difference it makes on a modern keyboard. There's an oft-repeated story about the qwerty layout being designed to keep people from typing fast enough to jam typewriters. I can't speak to the legitimacy of the story, but I do collect typewriters and I can say for sure that there's a lot more pressure and key travel (and time!) required to slam a type bar into the ribbon than is needed to press a modern keyboard key. I learned Dvorak a decade ago and loved it unless someone else had to use my computer or I had to use a shared computer. I'm typing this on a qwerty keyboard and I'm okay with that now.
    - 6y ago

heavyset_go 6y ago

Laptops existed far before the Powerbook.

rsynnott 6y ago
It really depends on how you define laptop. There was this sort of thing in the 80s, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_T1100 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_T1100), of course. And there were a couple of laptop-shaped laptops from 1988 on, but they were either spectacularly compromised (the NEC Ultralite had a max of 2MB of storage, for instance) or spectacularly expensive or both. In terms of laptops that were shaped like laptops as we know them, and that were actually usable outside of very specialized applications, the Powerbook 100 and Thinkpad 700T could be reasonably claimed to be about the first.
- thinkmassive 6y ago
  There’s also the TRS-80 Model 100, launched in 1983

selfhoster11 6y ago

> Laptops (since first Apple Powerbook) - 30 years. That kind of Apple revisionism is not correct. The NEC UltraLite predated Apple clamshells by 3 years (1988), and luggables with a battery configuration have been available as early as 1981 (Osborne 1 with an aftermarket 1 hour battery add-on).

ghaff 6y ago
The Grid Compass was probably the first true laptop in 1982. But it ran a proprietary operating system by default and costs about $8,000 in 1982 money. The Data General-One came out in 1984 and might be a better candidate. But neither of those were really mainstream.
- thinkmassive 6y ago
  Don’t neglect the Model 100... “The TRS-80 Model 100 is a portable computer introduced in 1983. It is one of the first notebook-style computers, featuring a keyboard and liquid crystal display, in a battery-powered package roughly the size and shape of a notepad or large book.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_Model_100 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_Model_100
  - ghaff 6y ago
    It wasn't a laptop in the modern sense though.
    - thinkmassive 6y ago
      For any reason other than it doesn't fold in half?