4 ms·

>What happened? I thought computers were supposed to be empowering? Computers are empowering.

jillesvangurp 4y ago
People are being people. Intentions, philosophy, morals, etc. are nice but ultimately people spend money on products they like. And the moralizing philosophers ultimately don't make or sell a lot of products that match their rhetoric that people actually want to buy. The products that wow people tend to be provided by companies that have their own values (e.g. shareholder value) that they worry about instead of some set of morals. So, Apple creates a beautiful phone and of course it's a closed source thing that they control because that's how they became Apple. And people buy it because it works really nice (apparently, I use Android myself). It's that simple. Something like the Pine phone is kind of crude in comparison. The people buying those tend to be very passionate about the perceived freedoms and flexibility they get with it. But it's not competing that well against the iphone ultimately because there just aren't that many people like that. Most people just want a phone that works. For the same reason, Linux is failing to dethrone Microsoft and Apple for almost three decades now. Don't get me wrong, I actually have a Linux laptop and love using it. But it's not for everyone. IMHO Linux is not very usable unless you know your way around on a command line. Which is a skill I happen to have. It just lacks a lot of the polish of other alternatives and when you encounter any problems (and you will), the solution just almost always involves some cli action. You can fix it; but only if you know how to. Most people buy products they believe they won't have to fix. Of course that's a promise that's easily broken as well. People pining for the days when all computer users were expert users are missing the point that they are now a tiny minority. That's what computer consumerization has meant. It empowered masses of non experts to use computers as well. Turning everyone into experts was never a goal.

People are being people. Intentions, philosophy, morals, etc. are nice but ultimately people spend money on products they like. And the moralizing philosophers ultimately don't make or sell a lot of products that match their rhetoric that people actually want to buy. The products that wow people tend to be provided by companies that have their own values (e.g. shareholder value) that they worry about instead of some set of morals. So, Apple creates a beautiful phone and of course it's a closed source thing that they control because that's how they became Apple. And people buy it because it works really nice (apparently, I use Android myself). It's that simple. Something like the Pine phone is kind of crude in comparison. The people buying those tend to be very passionate about the perceived freedoms and flexibility they get with it. But it's not competing that well against the iphone ultimately because there just aren't that many people like that. Most people just want a phone that works. For the same reason, Linux is failing to dethrone Microsoft and Apple for almost three decades now. Don't get me wrong, I actually have a Linux laptop and love using it. But it's not for everyone. IMHO Linux is not very usable unless you know your way around on a command line. Which is a skill I happen to have. It just lacks a lot of the polish of other alternatives and when you encounter any problems (and you will), the solution just almost always involves some cli action. You can fix it; but only if you know how to. Most people buy products they believe they won't have to fix. Of course that's a promise that's easily broken as well. People pining for the days when all computer users were expert users are missing the point that they are now a tiny minority. That's what computer consumerization has meant. It empowered masses of non experts to use computers as well. Turning everyone into experts was never a goal.