6 ms·

Article summary: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health,

by hinting 15y ago

Article summary: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

iamdave 15y ago
This. It seems the writer here is wearing blinders; it's fine if you're not a proponent of Apple Inc. that's 100% your prerogative, but if you're going to cherrypick which points stick and which don't so that the only thing that's left are the ones that directly support whatever point, well sorry.
tintin 15y ago
You are giving the wrong summary. A better summary would be: Napster gave us wine, Apple created a nice looking bottle for it. But without bottle there would still be wine.
accoinstereo 15y ago
But all those innovations were inevitable! So, you know, the Romans surely don't deserve any credit.
patrickaljord 15y ago
I agree though that Google has more impact than Apple. Every student, every high schooler or college student, professor, scientist etc around the world use Google to get access to knowledge, learn and get their job done. I live in Peru where every student use google to get knowledge, I haven't seen anyone with an idevice anywhere here. I think the service Google has done to humanity by making information accessible to all and that easily is hard to match by any company today on earth. Apple makes pretty devices, and accelerated the smartphone revolution (which was already en marche with blackberry as the article say), but on the whole, Google reached and helped (and keep doing so today) much more people than Apple ever has. Not to mention the billions of dollars Google give to publishers from India to Peru helping them make a living, not to mention Android, youtube, blogger etc. So yes, Google has changed the world much more than Apple in my opinion and experience here and everywhere I've been.
- raganwald 15y ago
  You write as if Google invented web search. They made it dramatically better. But was it so much better that it changed the world? I am certain it was so much better that they killed off their competition, but somehow I don't think they were so much better that students in Peru wouldn't be using Web Search if Google hadn't come along.
  - patrickaljord 15y ago
    Yes, Web Search was pretty useless before Google, I was there so I can remember (and I guess you probably were there too).
- nirvana 15y ago
  Every one of those people using Google are doing so on a system running a graphical user interface that Apple invented. In fact, it was Apple that invented the personal computer. Full stop.
  - tintin 15y ago
    You never heard about Xerox did you?
    - schmittz 15y ago
      Although, important to note that while Xerox invented GUIs, they were about to trash the project before Apple stepped in and nurtured it. Speculation about what would have happened if they didn't do this is mostly meaningless, but disregarding the promulgation and popularization of GUIs in lieu of crediting only their original inventor is totally unfair.
      - nirvana 15y ago
        Actually, Xerox invented some important technologies, such as the mouse and the idea of a windowed interface, but this was not the GUI. That was invented by Apple. The xerox interface was more akin to emacs multi-document mode, there was no desktop metaphor, no file/folders organization, no trash can, the menubar was a very different conceptualization, etc.
lotharbot 15y ago
The point is that none of what Apple brought about in the last decade was "significant" in the same way that sanitation, ..., public health are. They primarily brought combinations of things we were already doing in slick and usable packages. They produced a bunch of great products, no doubt, but I cringe whenever someone calls an iThing "revolutionary".
- nirvana 15y ago
  The GUI is a revolution from the command line. The personal computer is a revolution from the mini-computer and the mainframe. Apple invented both of those. The touch interface is revolutionary, compared to plastic buttons, and Apple invented that. I find it amazing that people can claim, with a straight face that Apple "combined things were were already doing in slick and usable packages" about things that did not exist before Apple invented them. Its like you hate Apple so much you have to rewrite history to make them less significant. There was no personal computer before the Apple I and Apple II. There were no GUIs before the Lisa. There was not touch UI before the iPhone. AT worst you could point to the crappy windows tablets of 2003 and say that the "iPad didn't invent the tablet market", but that's the same as saying google didn't invent the search engine... which, while true, completely ignores that page rank is a genuine innovation.
  - kubrickslair 15y ago
    Parent and grandparent, take some deep breadths and relax. Please don't quibble. Then watch this rather insightful video titled 'Everything is a Remix' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq5D43qAsVg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq5D43qAsVg And pardon me, for coming off as arrogant, but I hate to see trivial fights here when you are missing the bigger picture.
  - mayanksinghal 15y ago
    GUI: No. [3] Touch: No. [1][2] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch#History [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchscreen#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchscreen#History [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface#Initial_developments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_i...
mayanksinghal 15y ago
I actually agree to the part where it says that Apple has not been the different change-maker. A very large part of the world population is still unaffected by Apple Products. MS for that instance has a much larger impact on the world of personal computing. Apple did produce some incredibly cool gadgets, but that was about it. iPods and iTunes was probably insanely popular in US (and Europe), just like iPhones and iPads are today - but Microsoft has definitely penetrated at much larger depth and positively (and in some ways, negatively) affected a lot of them. And yes, I know the article is about last 10 years - but even in these 10 years Windows XP was (and in a large population, it still is) THE operating system to have; Office (2003 and 2007) are still used in every damn office. Aesthetics - yes, Apple products has a huge impact and also to the build quality expectations from hand held devices. But it failed miserably in providing a solution that could be used by masses (It actually focused on a niche clientele, like the ones here). Nokia on the other hand provided devices to the masses - affordable and with insanely awesome build quality. They were not popular in US, but in Asia - buying a non-Nokia phone was considered stupid at one time. And I am not a MS Fanboi; I am a Google Fanboi. Google is a verb now - Gmail is analogous to mail for most of my friends; youtube is the place we go to listen to music. Maps to get directions, Picasa for uploading pictures and Docs for collaborating on content. I am typing this from using Chromium browser and I had downloaded some libraries from Google Code to use in my Course Project. So the Roman analogy goes for Google, not Apple.
- mayanksinghal 15y ago
  [Any particular reason for downvote(s)?]
  - kubrickslair 15y ago
    Someone here correctly commented how this post showed Reddit level discussion and team based upmanship. You cannot trace the level of influence in a one-dimensional number line, of any two successful people or companies. Who has had more influence, Facebook, Twitter or even Friendster? pg or avc? Such questions are stupid, just like Erdos-Bacon numbers. They are good for friendly banter, but don't have any real meaning. I replied to nirvana about how the word inventing does not mean anything. And yet he and you kept on debating on minutiae. Many techie people from India look up to MS and Google as opposed to say Apple or Amazon, partly because their influence is more apparent, so I understand your affinity for them. But attributing invention or success to something which can be attributed to random events and network effects, is a bit off by standards here. I did not down vote anyone, just making a general comment. Things are never so black and white, grab a good book, read some scientific (non-CS) papers, you will probably have a broader perspective. I would recommend starting with the massive bibliography at the back of The Black Swan (Taleb).
butterfi 15y ago
Right on. Comparing Apple to Google is not very interesting to someone who has watched Apple's entire historical arc, not just the past 5 years.
georgemcbay 15y ago
"Article summary: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?" Wow, I think your comment is a perfect illustration of one of the author's points and the reason he had to speak up in the face of people going too far in extolling Apple's virtues. Apple makes fantastic products, but to compare any of them or even the aggregate of them (and I'm including the Apple II and the original Mac in this, both of which I think are actually bigger game changers than anything 1997+) to any single thing in the list you just rattled off is insanity. Apple has changed the world of industrial design, sure, and they make wonderful products, but none of that is a real sweeping history-altering game changer. Let's recognize the great 10 year run they've been on, but let's not get crazy about it.
- pederb72 15y ago
  You should watch Life of Brian some time: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079470/quotes http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079470/quotes
aw3c2 15y ago
Because some people might not know the movie and/or get the reference, it is from The Life of Brian, a hilarious comedy from Monty Python. The scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso

by hinting 15y ago

Article summary: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

iamdave 15y ago

This. It seems the writer here is wearing blinders; it's fine if you're not a proponent of Apple Inc. that's 100% your prerogative, but if you're going to cherrypick which points stick and which don't so that the only thing that's left are the ones that directly support whatever point, well sorry.

tintin 15y ago

You are giving the wrong summary. A better summary would be: Napster gave us wine, Apple created a nice looking bottle for it. But without bottle there would still be wine.

accoinstereo 15y ago

But all those innovations were inevitable! So, you know, the Romans surely don't deserve any credit.

patrickaljord 15y ago

I agree though that Google has more impact than Apple. Every student, every high schooler or college student, professor, scientist etc around the world use Google to get access to knowledge, learn and get their job done. I live in Peru where every student use google to get knowledge, I haven't seen anyone with an idevice anywhere here. I think the service Google has done to humanity by making information accessible to all and that easily is hard to match by any company today on earth. Apple makes pretty devices, and accelerated the smartphone revolution (which was already en marche with blackberry as the article say), but on the whole, Google reached and helped (and keep doing so today) much more people than Apple ever has. Not to mention the billions of dollars Google give to publishers from India to Peru helping them make a living, not to mention Android, youtube, blogger etc. So yes, Google has changed the world much more than Apple in my opinion and experience here and everywhere I've been.

raganwald 15y ago
You write as if Google invented web search. They made it dramatically better. But was it so much better that it changed the world? I am certain it was so much better that they killed off their competition, but somehow I don't think they were so much better that students in Peru wouldn't be using Web Search if Google hadn't come along.
- patrickaljord 15y ago
  Yes, Web Search was pretty useless before Google, I was there so I can remember (and I guess you probably were there too).
nirvana 15y ago
Every one of those people using Google are doing so on a system running a graphical user interface that Apple invented. In fact, it was Apple that invented the personal computer. Full stop.
- tintin 15y ago
  You never heard about Xerox did you?
  - schmittz 15y ago
    Although, important to note that while Xerox invented GUIs, they were about to trash the project before Apple stepped in and nurtured it. Speculation about what would have happened if they didn't do this is mostly meaningless, but disregarding the promulgation and popularization of GUIs in lieu of crediting only their original inventor is totally unfair.
    - nirvana 15y ago
      Actually, Xerox invented some important technologies, such as the mouse and the idea of a windowed interface, but this was not the GUI. That was invented by Apple. The xerox interface was more akin to emacs multi-document mode, there was no desktop metaphor, no file/folders organization, no trash can, the menubar was a very different conceptualization, etc.

lotharbot 15y ago

The point is that none of what Apple brought about in the last decade was "significant" in the same way that sanitation, ..., public health are. They primarily brought combinations of things we were already doing in slick and usable packages. They produced a bunch of great products, no doubt, but I cringe whenever someone calls an iThing "revolutionary".

nirvana 15y ago
The GUI is a revolution from the command line. The personal computer is a revolution from the mini-computer and the mainframe. Apple invented both of those. The touch interface is revolutionary, compared to plastic buttons, and Apple invented that. I find it amazing that people can claim, with a straight face that Apple "combined things were were already doing in slick and usable packages" about things that did not exist before Apple invented them. Its like you hate Apple so much you have to rewrite history to make them less significant. There was no personal computer before the Apple I and Apple II. There were no GUIs before the Lisa. There was not touch UI before the iPhone. AT worst you could point to the crappy windows tablets of 2003 and say that the "iPad didn't invent the tablet market", but that's the same as saying google didn't invent the search engine... which, while true, completely ignores that page rank is a genuine innovation.
- kubrickslair 15y ago
  Parent and grandparent, take some deep breadths and relax. Please don't quibble. Then watch this rather insightful video titled 'Everything is a Remix' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq5D43qAsVg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq5D43qAsVg And pardon me, for coming off as arrogant, but I hate to see trivial fights here when you are missing the bigger picture.
- mayanksinghal 15y ago
  GUI: No. [3] Touch: No. [1][2] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch#History [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchscreen#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchscreen#History [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface#Initial_developments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_i...

mayanksinghal 15y ago

I actually agree to the part where it says that Apple has not been the different change-maker. A very large part of the world population is still unaffected by Apple Products. MS for that instance has a much larger impact on the world of personal computing. Apple did produce some incredibly cool gadgets, but that was about it. iPods and iTunes was probably insanely popular in US (and Europe), just like iPhones and iPads are today - but Microsoft has definitely penetrated at much larger depth and positively (and in some ways, negatively) affected a lot of them. And yes, I know the article is about last 10 years - but even in these 10 years Windows XP was (and in a large population, it still is) THE operating system to have; Office (2003 and 2007) are still used in every damn office. Aesthetics - yes, Apple products has a huge impact and also to the build quality expectations from hand held devices. But it failed miserably in providing a solution that could be used by masses (It actually focused on a niche clientele, like the ones here). Nokia on the other hand provided devices to the masses - affordable and with insanely awesome build quality. They were not popular in US, but in Asia - buying a non-Nokia phone was considered stupid at one time. And I am not a MS Fanboi; I am a Google Fanboi. Google is a verb now - Gmail is analogous to mail for most of my friends; youtube is the place we go to listen to music. Maps to get directions, Picasa for uploading pictures and Docs for collaborating on content. I am typing this from using Chromium browser and I had downloaded some libraries from Google Code to use in my Course Project. So the Roman analogy goes for Google, not Apple.

mayanksinghal 15y ago
[Any particular reason for downvote(s)?]
- kubrickslair 15y ago
  Someone here correctly commented how this post showed Reddit level discussion and team based upmanship. You cannot trace the level of influence in a one-dimensional number line, of any two successful people or companies. Who has had more influence, Facebook, Twitter or even Friendster? pg or avc? Such questions are stupid, just like Erdos-Bacon numbers. They are good for friendly banter, but don't have any real meaning. I replied to nirvana about how the word inventing does not mean anything. And yet he and you kept on debating on minutiae. Many techie people from India look up to MS and Google as opposed to say Apple or Amazon, partly because their influence is more apparent, so I understand your affinity for them. But attributing invention or success to something which can be attributed to random events and network effects, is a bit off by standards here. I did not down vote anyone, just making a general comment. Things are never so black and white, grab a good book, read some scientific (non-CS) papers, you will probably have a broader perspective. I would recommend starting with the massive bibliography at the back of The Black Swan (Taleb).

butterfi 15y ago

Right on. Comparing Apple to Google is not very interesting to someone who has watched Apple's entire historical arc, not just the past 5 years.

georgemcbay 15y ago

"Article summary: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?" Wow, I think your comment is a perfect illustration of one of the author's points and the reason he had to speak up in the face of people going too far in extolling Apple's virtues. Apple makes fantastic products, but to compare any of them or even the aggregate of them (and I'm including the Apple II and the original Mac in this, both of which I think are actually bigger game changers than anything 1997+) to any single thing in the list you just rattled off is insanity. Apple has changed the world of industrial design, sure, and they make wonderful products, but none of that is a real sweeping history-altering game changer. Let's recognize the great 10 year run they've been on, but let's not get crazy about it.

pederb72 15y ago
You should watch Life of Brian some time: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079470/quotes http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079470/quotes

aw3c2 15y ago

Because some people might not know the movie and/or get the reference, it is from The Life of Brian, a hilarious comedy from Monty Python. The scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso