5 ms·

For 25+ years I'm not sure I've ever thought of the Mac market as primarily technophiles, so much as a crowd interested in the "pursuit aesthetic" and notably n

by aksss 5y ago

For 25+ years I'm not sure I've ever thought of the Mac market as primarily technophiles, so much as a crowd interested in the "pursuit aesthetic" and notably not interested in looking behind the technical curtain. The user group that was technical was a relatively late demographic. But Macs were always (well, since my memories in 90's) targeted towards this odd trifecta of the media production crowd (high-dollar professionals and aspiring high-dollar creators), academics, and grandparents (people with money who just wanted things to 'work'). Still seems that way to me, I guess. The closed nature of the hardware and the traditional lack of servicing to people who wanted to "break" things even on the software front was always a bit off-putting to technophiles until relatively recently (2013-2020ish?), but I might say there was a bit of a blind eye towards the faults in light of the awesome advantages. The fading appeal is likely just a more honest assessment of the platform/ecosystem in light of improving options (linux from the factory with working drivers, WSL). I mean, thank God for Apple driving quality in hardware and software. Maybe that's what you meant by technophiles - those with a love of what technology can be in its most refined and integrated sense, rather than the nerds who love to tear shit apart and improve it. Phones, on the other hand, are an everybody thing, but that broad appeal goes back even to the first iPhone at the turn of the century to my memory. Ever since Apple has had stores, I think the phone/ipad/accessory/gadget crowd has been an ever-present customer. Just my opinions, worth what you paid for 'em.

ehnto 5y ago
We may indeed have a slightly different definition of technophile, to me it's early adopters and "gadget" people. One of the first recipiets of a Mac was Stephen Fry for example, but I imagine he has less interest in code or hardware, just enthusiastic about what the device can do for the user. The early adopters of smartphones were people excited by what it could offer, I remember being distinctly dissapointed at what seemed like a closing ecosystem, opaque hardware and an end of an era in general computing. Things have progressed since then and so has my outlook mind you. Even as a software developer I would not consider myself a technophile and certainly not an early adopter. More a begrudingly up to date luddite. > Just my opinions, worth what you paid for 'em. Considering the cost of my internet in Australia that may actually be non-zero! But they were worthwile opinions, so I'll accept that cost.
- kergonath 5y ago
  > One of the first recipiets of a Mac was Stephen Fry for example, but I imagine he has less interest in code or hardware, just enthusiastic about what the device can do for the user. Douglas Adams was a fan as well [1]. He wrote sometimes in a Mac magazine whose name escapes me at the moment. He was an über-technophile. https://lowendmac.com/2016/douglas-adams-author-and-mac-user/ https://lowendmac.com/2016/douglas-adams-author-and-mac-user...
GhettoComputers 5y ago
They got into shrinking hardware and made great consumer gadgets that were not expandable with hardware but much better. The first iPhone had a headphone jack, it didn’t need a weird one like the Sony Erickson, I don’t think the palm had one. I had used a Mac in grade school with a mean teacher that died of cancer (they said thats why she was so mean, I don’t buy it), it played crappy math games, and Oregon trail, it looked weird since I was used to windows and my friend got a Mac laptop for school that was nice I think it was a G3 or something. No more locked down than any laptop of that era. The iPod didn’t have expandable storage, but nobody did and AA or AAA batteries sucked. The iPhone didn’t have battery or storage upgrades but it was a full Unix computer in your pocket.
- aksss 5y ago
  Remember the ipod not only didn't have expandable storage, they were still using a mechanical disk until at least second gen, I think. Just a shout out to the Frontier Labs NexIIe. Awesome little MP3 player that took compact flash storage and ran on a AA batteries back in the day. It was like 2001 or something. I had iPods as well, but loved that NexIIe. - used the same media I had in some of my earliest digital cameras. - could double as an external hard drive. - ran on batteries you could buy anywhere, including lithiums. - had an equalizer. - displayed ID3 tags. - had a blue on black backlit character LCD that wouldn't kill your night vision. - Smaller form factor than the ipod and lighter (it was mostly air and cheap plastics). It stood up to cold temps and wipeouts when out snowboarding. No special connectors - 3.5mm audio jack and usb. Here's a period review. The fact that it's described as being smaller than a "pack of smokes" really dates it I guess. <:D https://bjorn3d.com/2002/10/frontier-labs-nex-iie-mp3-player/ https://bjorn3d.com/2002/10/frontier-labs-nex-iie-mp3-player...
  - GhettoComputers 5y ago
    Steve Jones mentioned why he chose mechanical, it stored more songs, in 2002 you didn’t have many gigabytes. The iPod was the size of a deck of cards, it wasn’t much larger. You listed an MP3 player you needed to add storage to, when SD cards were 8mb or 16mb for the period. You could get 2GB flash on the iPod nano. I wouldn’t have liked the nex one, the battery life was probably worst, the iPods had good monochrome at the beginning, and the good ones they were fighting were the rio karma which also used HDD, battery, and the Archos were good too, and no different aside from the iPod needing iTunes.

by aksss 5y ago

ehnto 5y ago

We may indeed have a slightly different definition of technophile, to me it's early adopters and "gadget" people. One of the first recipiets of a Mac was Stephen Fry for example, but I imagine he has less interest in code or hardware, just enthusiastic about what the device can do for the user. The early adopters of smartphones were people excited by what it could offer, I remember being distinctly dissapointed at what seemed like a closing ecosystem, opaque hardware and an end of an era in general computing. Things have progressed since then and so has my outlook mind you. Even as a software developer I would not consider myself a technophile and certainly not an early adopter. More a begrudingly up to date luddite. > Just my opinions, worth what you paid for 'em. Considering the cost of my internet in Australia that may actually be non-zero! But they were worthwile opinions, so I'll accept that cost.

kergonath 5y ago
> One of the first recipiets of a Mac was Stephen Fry for example, but I imagine he has less interest in code or hardware, just enthusiastic about what the device can do for the user. Douglas Adams was a fan as well [1]. He wrote sometimes in a Mac magazine whose name escapes me at the moment. He was an über-technophile. https://lowendmac.com/2016/douglas-adams-author-and-mac-user/ https://lowendmac.com/2016/douglas-adams-author-and-mac-user...

GhettoComputers 5y ago

They got into shrinking hardware and made great consumer gadgets that were not expandable with hardware but much better. The first iPhone had a headphone jack, it didn’t need a weird one like the Sony Erickson, I don’t think the palm had one. I had used a Mac in grade school with a mean teacher that died of cancer (they said thats why she was so mean, I don’t buy it), it played crappy math games, and Oregon trail, it looked weird since I was used to windows and my friend got a Mac laptop for school that was nice I think it was a G3 or something. No more locked down than any laptop of that era. The iPod didn’t have expandable storage, but nobody did and AA or AAA batteries sucked. The iPhone didn’t have battery or storage upgrades but it was a full Unix computer in your pocket.

aksss 5y ago
Remember the ipod not only didn't have expandable storage, they were still using a mechanical disk until at least second gen, I think. Just a shout out to the Frontier Labs NexIIe. Awesome little MP3 player that took compact flash storage and ran on a AA batteries back in the day. It was like 2001 or something. I had iPods as well, but loved that NexIIe. - used the same media I had in some of my earliest digital cameras. - could double as an external hard drive. - ran on batteries you could buy anywhere, including lithiums. - had an equalizer. - displayed ID3 tags. - had a blue on black backlit character LCD that wouldn't kill your night vision. - Smaller form factor than the ipod and lighter (it was mostly air and cheap plastics). It stood up to cold temps and wipeouts when out snowboarding. No special connectors - 3.5mm audio jack and usb. Here's a period review. The fact that it's described as being smaller than a "pack of smokes" really dates it I guess. <:D https://bjorn3d.com/2002/10/frontier-labs-nex-iie-mp3-player/ https://bjorn3d.com/2002/10/frontier-labs-nex-iie-mp3-player...
- GhettoComputers 5y ago
  Steve Jones mentioned why he chose mechanical, it stored more songs, in 2002 you didn’t have many gigabytes. The iPod was the size of a deck of cards, it wasn’t much larger. You listed an MP3 player you needed to add storage to, when SD cards were 8mb or 16mb for the period. You could get 2GB flash on the iPod nano. I wouldn’t have liked the nex one, the battery life was probably worst, the iPods had good monochrome at the beginning, and the good ones they were fighting were the rio karma which also used HDD, battery, and the Archos were good too, and no different aside from the iPod needing iTunes.