4 ms·

From the sales charts, it seems this is what the customers want, too. For some reason folks like to believe that Apple is somehow "fooling" customers into buyin

From the sales charts, it seems this is what the customers want, too. For some reason folks like to believe that Apple is somehow "fooling" customers into buying that experience. What if it's simply what non-developers want? Isn't that a simpler explanation?

jerf 14y ago
The objection is that this isn't mutually exclusive. You can provide all the niceties, and make it so that there are still ways in to the simplified UI so that a nine-year-old can set out on their own and learn things about how the machine works. The companies are using this paradigm shift as an excuse to lock us in a box, they are not locking us in a box because the tech or the experience is only available if they do so. They're eating the seed corn, but they don't really care since they won't feel the effect for 15 years or more. I personally don't care much either, unless they manage to fully legislate their locked boxes as the only option... which they are trying to do whenever we aren't looking, by the way, the most recent being with Microsoft locking out other OSes on their ARM boxes.
- tomkarlo 14y ago
  Yes, you can do both, but if consumers aren't demanding you do so, why do it? Ultimately it costs more to deliver that experience, so from a business perspective it doesn't make sense to do it if you're not losing a material number of product sales without it.
- orangecat 14y ago
  The companies are using this paradigm shift as an excuse to lock us in a box, they are not locking us in a box because the tech or the experience is only available if they do so. Yes. It's clear that Apple considers the relative openness of Macs a defect which they're only keeping around for backwards compatibility. unless they manage to fully legislate their locked boxes as the only option... which they are trying to do whenever we aren't looking Or even when we are. Apple has been quite open about their desire to destroy Android with IP lawsuits, which would leave no significant mobile platform where you can legally run software of your choice. And I won't be at all surprised if the next version of OS X removes root access and the ability to run unsigned apps. (Neither of which you actually need in order to develop software for the app store; your test apps can be signed with a machine-specific key). That said, I'm still getting the retina MBP as an upgrade from my 2006 model. AFAIK it still supports booting Linux if OS X becomes too user-hostile. It would be nice if every other PC manufacturer hadn't spent the last 5 years making their laptop displays worse, but oh well.
  - flyinRyan 14y ago
    >It's clear that Apple considers the relative openness of Macs a defect which they're only keeping around for backwards compatibility. This is not remotely clear. Do you really think Apple wants the App store to dry up because they are the only people left who can develop for it? The Apps make the app store and they know this.
    - jerf 14y ago
      False dilemma; that is not the other alternative. The other alternative is that only a certain set of people bother to purchase the license to create apps, mostly for professional reasons, and plenty of apps are still created. But not by curious teenagers who want to learn about how things work.
      - flyinRyan 14y ago
        How will anyone create apps if the openness of macs is removed and they turn into big iOS machines?

jerf 14y ago

The objection is that this isn't mutually exclusive. You can provide all the niceties, and make it so that there are still ways in to the simplified UI so that a nine-year-old can set out on their own and learn things about how the machine works. The companies are using this paradigm shift as an excuse to lock us in a box, they are not locking us in a box because the tech or the experience is only available if they do so. They're eating the seed corn, but they don't really care since they won't feel the effect for 15 years or more. I personally don't care much either, unless they manage to fully legislate their locked boxes as the only option... which they are trying to do whenever we aren't looking, by the way, the most recent being with Microsoft locking out other OSes on their ARM boxes.

tomkarlo 14y ago
Yes, you can do both, but if consumers aren't demanding you do so, why do it? Ultimately it costs more to deliver that experience, so from a business perspective it doesn't make sense to do it if you're not losing a material number of product sales without it.
orangecat 14y ago
The companies are using this paradigm shift as an excuse to lock us in a box, they are not locking us in a box because the tech or the experience is only available if they do so. Yes. It's clear that Apple considers the relative openness of Macs a defect which they're only keeping around for backwards compatibility. unless they manage to fully legislate their locked boxes as the only option... which they are trying to do whenever we aren't looking Or even when we are. Apple has been quite open about their desire to destroy Android with IP lawsuits, which would leave no significant mobile platform where you can legally run software of your choice. And I won't be at all surprised if the next version of OS X removes root access and the ability to run unsigned apps. (Neither of which you actually need in order to develop software for the app store; your test apps can be signed with a machine-specific key). That said, I'm still getting the retina MBP as an upgrade from my 2006 model. AFAIK it still supports booting Linux if OS X becomes too user-hostile. It would be nice if every other PC manufacturer hadn't spent the last 5 years making their laptop displays worse, but oh well.
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  >It's clear that Apple considers the relative openness of Macs a defect which they're only keeping around for backwards compatibility. This is not remotely clear. Do you really think Apple wants the App store to dry up because they are the only people left who can develop for it? The Apps make the app store and they know this.
  - jerf 14y ago
    False dilemma; that is not the other alternative. The other alternative is that only a certain set of people bother to purchase the license to create apps, mostly for professional reasons, and plenty of apps are still created. But not by curious teenagers who want to learn about how things work.
    - flyinRyan 14y ago
      How will anyone create apps if the openness of macs is removed and they turn into big iOS machines?