4 ms·
>Once more, a reminder that we - the hackers - should stop giving Apple our money. This is not the kind of computing environment we want to encourage. And hack
by batista 14y ago
>Once more, a reminder that we - the hackers - should stop giving Apple our money. This is not the kind of computing environment we want to encourage.
And hackerism is not the computing environment Apple wants to encourage. Besides the obvious benefit of more control = better stronghold of their market, Apple is also philosophically in favor of closed, well defined systems and minimal end user confusion, not pro open-ended, experimentation lands, "we give you the building blocks, you make it whatever you want".
And, as much as I like the notion of open systems and hacking, there should be room for the other side too, systems that are designed top-to-bottom and sold "as is".
I believe that history has proved that while it is possible to get quality UIs from open ended/open source style development projects, you get them with LESS consistency that you get them from an Apple-like process, and you also get more competing stuff/chaos/design by committee, unless you coordinate the whole process, from the kernel, to the end user apps.
Open source projects are mostly islands, so you don't get to have that long term vision / whole stack co-ordination.
To put it another way, an OS called OS X exists as ONE thing where one person had ultimate responsibility for what's included and in what shape to ship it. An OS called Linux does not: it only exists as disparate things collected and distributed together (a distro). The Gnome desktop environment, for example, is not produced for a specific OS: it's produced for whoever wants to use it, from various flavors of Linux, to FreeBSD, its apps even run on OS X.
>It's time for someone to re-edit Apple's 1984 commercial and swap the logos.
Why, did Apple ever changed course? The Mac was about a "computer for the rest of us" (ie simple users), and it remains the same now. Neither Mac, nor the 1984 ad was about tinkering. It was about empowering people with simple technology (a simple spreadsheet, a simple text editor, etc), not about empowering hackers to build things.
Actually, now, with the Unix underpinnings, the Mac is also a computer that lures tons of hackers (prevalent in any programming convention and most alpha hackers use a Mac, --even Linus, although he runs Linux on it), but the main market for Apple was an is the common user.
- miles 14y agoThe Mac was about a "computer for the rest of us" (ie simple users), and it remains the same now. Neither Mac, nor the 1984 ad was about tinkering. Perhaps you missed this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=No1MxAnHuJM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=No1MxAnHuJM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_Different http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_Different "Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. While some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do. - Apple Inc."
- batista 14y agoWell, you also missed that it was a marketing slogan, and from a single campaign at that. Whereas Apple's focus of making simple computers/software for common people to use was a constant in their corporate story.
- gnaffle 14y agohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCz_SiPD_X0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCz_SiPD_X0 This wasn't just a single marketing campaign. It was THE marketing campaign. They even played the Steve Jobs narrated version at the Celebrating Steve event. After reading the Steve Jobs biography, I'm pretty sure that he and the others at Apple truly believe that this campaign represents Apples values.
- batista 14y ago>This wasn't just a single marketing campaign. It was THE marketing campaign. Yeah, only it was only played once, decades ago, and nothing similar ever appeared in Apple ads since then.
- gnaffle 14y agoIt was only played once? Can you give a reference to that? The Think Different campaign was created in 1997 and ended in 2002, and I'm having a hard time believing they played that ad _once_.
- ktizo 14y agoIs worth remembering that usually the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are also actually crazy and it isn't always good when they succeed.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- gnaffle 14y agoIf anything, I think it's truly sad that, given all the great things Apple has made, their legacy seems to be that closed and proprietary is better. It's the IT equivalent of "greed is good". iOS would be just as integrated and nice if Apple released it as Open Source. But it would give people more choice, Apple would make make less money from it, and they would then be at a disadvantage compared to other companies that did control their entire ecosystem. The problem is that closed, proprietary systems tend to create monopolies, and while the initial products may be great, monopolies are seldom good for customers. The other mistake people make is thinking that closed or open is an either-or proposition. Apples nice iOS ecosystem wouldn't be destroyed overnight if they had a settings option marked "allow unsigned third party apps". Would that compromise their long term / whole stack vision? No.