8 ms·

What's weird is that this has been a running argument for almost the entire existence of Apple. Here's the thing though -- Apple hasn't changed. They are simp

by arn 14y ago

What's weird is that this has been a running argument for almost the entire existence of Apple. Here's the thing though -- Apple hasn't changed. They are simply closer to their goals then ever. I'm not saying it's right. But computer as an appliance? That's the dream! In the 80s we would argue on Usenet that the WIMP interface was too simplistic, and that real computer users stuck to the command line only. Now, in 2012, we argue on Blogs that the iPad is too simple, and real computer users need a mouse, keyboard, and windowed interface. I'll leave this anecdote from 1981. over 30 years ago. To show how Apple is still Apple: http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Diagnostic_Port.txt&characters=Steve%20Wozniak&sortOrder=Sort%20by%20Date&detail=high&showcomments=1 http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&s... "Apple's other co-founder, Steve Jobs, didn't agree with Jef about many things, but they both felt the same way about hardware expandability: it was a bug instead of a feature. Steve was reportedly against having slots in the Apple II back in the days of yore, and felt even stronger about slots for the Mac. He decreed that the Macintosh would remain perpetually bereft of slots, enclosed in a tightly sealed case, with only the limited expandability of the two serial ports. "

mrich 14y ago
I remember these arguments, they always were a bit elitist. But even today I am doing a big part of my productive work on a command line. I wouldn't want to part with the GUI and mouse, sure. But given the choice between either a GUI or a command-line only Unix I will pick the Unix system any day just because it allows automating things easily. Automation and programmability is the thing that sets computers apart from dumb devices like TVs. Many of these things can be done with the help of a GUI nowadays. But most of them cannot be done efficiently without a command line.
ekianjo 14y ago
I think it is not so much "computer as an appliance" which is the issue but the fact that you can do less and less with your computing devices, or that they become, in the end, more convoluted to use because of the design choices made. Like, turning a desktop computer operating OS to a tablet-like OS is just plain stupid and is a loss of efficiency. Otherwise I agree with you, Apple has not changed a bit. Some people take longer to realize it, apparently.
- tjogin 14y ago
  You can't do less with an iPad than with an Apple II, you can do a great deal more. And you can also do a great deal more with an iPad if your previous experience with computers was mostly confusing. It depends on how you define "you". Broadly, the term "you" means "people". It doesn't mean "every person under the sun, especially programmers". If we correct for misinterpretations, I would say people in general can do more with simpler computing platforms that are more appliance-like than with their mostly confusing computer that more often acts in confusing manners, and that more often seems to be ridden with viruses and malware (whether it is or not), and also sports a number of features and buttons which if clicked the wrong way, can cause the computer to be broken (whether true or not). When people talk about what "you" can do, they are not talking about you, specifically.
  - ekianjo 14y ago
    Let's compare apples to apples (pun not intended) but it is fairly obvious you cannot do AS much on a tablet as on a desktop computer. You cannot do graphic design as well, you cannot do 3d modeling, photo editing, you cannot type office documents in the most efficient way, you cannot compress movies at reasonable speeds, you cannot develop for it (although I know this is technically possible it is far from being accessible to anyone compared to Desktop experience). It is not just about programmers. It's about people who want to do more than checking email, reading websites and running a few apps here and there for convenience. When parents want to edit HD videos of their kids taken with their camcorder they will not run to their iPad to do it, because it would be too damn sluggish for that. When you need to produce something or edit something and you do not want to do a dirty job you will sooner or later have to go back to sit in front of a laptop or desktop and use a mouse unless you like wasting your time, no matter what you computer knowledge is.
    - edanm 14y ago
      "When parents want to edit HD videos of their kids taken with their camcorder they will not run to their iPad to do it" That's the problem right there. I don't know many "parents" (== non-technical-people) who are able to edit HD Videos, at all, period. Most non-technical people I know have memorised how to do the few things they actually need from their computer, like check emails, compose documents, and use the software-de-jour of their workplace. But anything beyond that is massively more than they know how to do without running to a more technical user for help. The whole argument is, iPad makes it possible whereas before it wasn't possible, forget if it's fast or not.
pjmlp 14y ago
The issue is that many Apple fanboys never experienced the original Apple, the one with proprietary connectors and Mac OS specific APIs for video, 2D, 3D, networking .... When Apple tried to cater to the open source community using the UNIX underpinnings of Mac OS X, young generations thought Apple was always more open than Microsoft, when actually they were the opposite. Now that they are back on top with more profits than ever, they are as they always were.
- Tyrannosaurs 14y ago
  How is this an issue with Apple fanboys? They're not the one's complaining about Apple. Surely it's an issue with the people who tend to be Open Source advocates, complaining that Apple are no longer open? Not that it's really an issue at all, it's just different strokes for different folks. With computers doing as much as they do now it's seems highly unlikely that a single company will ever fulfil all our computing needs. Certainly having seen the Wintel domination of the 90s it really doesn't seem that desirable so really what's the problem?
  - pjmlp 14y ago
    > Surely it's an issue with the people who tend to be Open Source advocates, complaining that Apple are no longer open? The thing is that Apple was never open.
    - Tyrannosaurs 14y ago
      Exactly, but I don't think it's the fan boys who are complaining about it.
  - aidos 14y ago
    If you take 'Apple fanboys' to be the group who came to Apple in the early 2000s (I was amongst them) I think the parent is probably right. I fought the fights and put up with the greif for being the only developer with a Mac out of the 50 in the office. I lived on the bleeding edge - even paying for access to early unstable OS builds. I watched the OS get better and better with each release. It opened the doors to the world of Unix for me and I thought it was wonderful having all these amazing tools at my fingertips, thanks to Apple. I got the wrong end of the stick. This whole article feels bang on the money to me, and I'll bet the reason it's at the top of HN is that there are plenty of us in the same boat.
calinet6 14y ago
If anything the new MacBooks have more expandability than ever... I mean, TWO thunderbolt ports? People do realize that those are just external PCIe x2 ports right? That's more external bandwidth potential than any laptop has had, like, ever.

by arn 14y ago

mrich 14y ago

I remember these arguments, they always were a bit elitist. But even today I am doing a big part of my productive work on a command line. I wouldn't want to part with the GUI and mouse, sure. But given the choice between either a GUI or a command-line only Unix I will pick the Unix system any day just because it allows automating things easily. Automation and programmability is the thing that sets computers apart from dumb devices like TVs. Many of these things can be done with the help of a GUI nowadays. But most of them cannot be done efficiently without a command line.

ekianjo 14y ago

I think it is not so much "computer as an appliance" which is the issue but the fact that you can do less and less with your computing devices, or that they become, in the end, more convoluted to use because of the design choices made. Like, turning a desktop computer operating OS to a tablet-like OS is just plain stupid and is a loss of efficiency. Otherwise I agree with you, Apple has not changed a bit. Some people take longer to realize it, apparently.

tjogin 14y ago
You can't do less with an iPad than with an Apple II, you can do a great deal more. And you can also do a great deal more with an iPad if your previous experience with computers was mostly confusing. It depends on how you define "you". Broadly, the term "you" means "people". It doesn't mean "every person under the sun, especially programmers". If we correct for misinterpretations, I would say people in general can do more with simpler computing platforms that are more appliance-like than with their mostly confusing computer that more often acts in confusing manners, and that more often seems to be ridden with viruses and malware (whether it is or not), and also sports a number of features and buttons which if clicked the wrong way, can cause the computer to be broken (whether true or not). When people talk about what "you" can do, they are not talking about you, specifically.
- ekianjo 14y ago
  Let's compare apples to apples (pun not intended) but it is fairly obvious you cannot do AS much on a tablet as on a desktop computer. You cannot do graphic design as well, you cannot do 3d modeling, photo editing, you cannot type office documents in the most efficient way, you cannot compress movies at reasonable speeds, you cannot develop for it (although I know this is technically possible it is far from being accessible to anyone compared to Desktop experience). It is not just about programmers. It's about people who want to do more than checking email, reading websites and running a few apps here and there for convenience. When parents want to edit HD videos of their kids taken with their camcorder they will not run to their iPad to do it, because it would be too damn sluggish for that. When you need to produce something or edit something and you do not want to do a dirty job you will sooner or later have to go back to sit in front of a laptop or desktop and use a mouse unless you like wasting your time, no matter what you computer knowledge is.
  - edanm 14y ago
    "When parents want to edit HD videos of their kids taken with their camcorder they will not run to their iPad to do it" That's the problem right there. I don't know many "parents" (== non-technical-people) who are able to edit HD Videos, at all, period. Most non-technical people I know have memorised how to do the few things they actually need from their computer, like check emails, compose documents, and use the software-de-jour of their workplace. But anything beyond that is massively more than they know how to do without running to a more technical user for help. The whole argument is, iPad makes it possible whereas before it wasn't possible, forget if it's fast or not.

pjmlp 14y ago

The issue is that many Apple fanboys never experienced the original Apple, the one with proprietary connectors and Mac OS specific APIs for video, 2D, 3D, networking .... When Apple tried to cater to the open source community using the UNIX underpinnings of Mac OS X, young generations thought Apple was always more open than Microsoft, when actually they were the opposite. Now that they are back on top with more profits than ever, they are as they always were.

Tyrannosaurs 14y ago
How is this an issue with Apple fanboys? They're not the one's complaining about Apple. Surely it's an issue with the people who tend to be Open Source advocates, complaining that Apple are no longer open? Not that it's really an issue at all, it's just different strokes for different folks. With computers doing as much as they do now it's seems highly unlikely that a single company will ever fulfil all our computing needs. Certainly having seen the Wintel domination of the 90s it really doesn't seem that desirable so really what's the problem?
- pjmlp 14y ago
  > Surely it's an issue with the people who tend to be Open Source advocates, complaining that Apple are no longer open? The thing is that Apple was never open.
  - Tyrannosaurs 14y ago
    Exactly, but I don't think it's the fan boys who are complaining about it.
- aidos 14y ago
  If you take 'Apple fanboys' to be the group who came to Apple in the early 2000s (I was amongst them) I think the parent is probably right. I fought the fights and put up with the greif for being the only developer with a Mac out of the 50 in the office. I lived on the bleeding edge - even paying for access to early unstable OS builds. I watched the OS get better and better with each release. It opened the doors to the world of Unix for me and I thought it was wonderful having all these amazing tools at my fingertips, thanks to Apple. I got the wrong end of the stick. This whole article feels bang on the money to me, and I'll bet the reason it's at the top of HN is that there are plenty of us in the same boat.

calinet6 14y ago

If anything the new MacBooks have more expandability than ever... I mean, TWO thunderbolt ports? People do realize that those are just external PCIe x2 ports right? That's more external bandwidth potential than any laptop has had, like, ever.