5 ms·

I have no idea why they are giving this article away for free (loaded it into Instapaper and won't see ads). Who wouldn't pay $3 for this via Stripe?

nicky0 12y ago
> Who wouldn't pay $3 for this via Stripe? A lot of people, I think. I'd guess less than 1% of those who would read it for free.
jacquesm 12y ago
I wouldn't pay $0.10 for it.
- felixbraun 12y ago
  You spend 60 minutes on something that isn't worth $0.10 for you?
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    No, I didn't spend time on it at all. Apple does not interest me.
    - puranjay 12y ago
      Which explains why you are here, commenting on an article about Apple's lead designer.
      - jacquesm 12y ago
        I structurally read most comment threads on HN, even on subjects that I don't care about to see what's going on in the world of software and hardware without having to go and work with each and every device and piece of software out there. Part of my job is to stay informed about lots of things that I don't have direct experience with, there is simply too much out there for any individual to experience directly. So I use HN as a time-saving device, the collective wisdom and time invested vastly exceeds my own and it's not rare at all to find that HN comment threads are more informative and correct than the articles themselves. FWIW if a subject does interest me I'll read the article too (obviously...), and plenty of times the HN comment threads make me change my mind about what I should be interested in. The effect of this is that I can state with some certainty why apple does not interest me without investing a chunk of cash and a large amount of time first. Of course that wasn't what you were after, you'd like me to admit that I'm secretly interested in apple after all. But there isn't a single apple product that I'd like to own or use (I have an ancient Imac here that's been off for more than a year now), I don't want to buy an 'experience', I only believe in being able to run whatever software I want on the hardware that I own. As soon as I need to jailbreak a device in order to be able to really use it you can safely count me out and OS/X is not such a large step up from Ubuntu that it makes me want to run a different OS on my desktop than on my servers. So as far as I'm concerned Apple is not (currently) interesting to me.
        bonaldi 12y ago
        None of that screed explains why you felt compelled to threadshit with "not worth 10¢ to me". You are able to "structurally read" to see what's going on without such comments, surely.
        jacquesm 12y ago
        Because the GGGP asked 'who wouldn't pay $3 for this'.
        bonaldi 12y ago
        I think it's implicit in the premise that only people who are interested in the topic would be prepared to pay anything to read something on it. The charitable interpretation of his question would be "who, of the people who find this topic interesting, would not be willing to pay $3 for it?". The question you are presumably structurally answering is "why wouldn't absolutely everybody in the whole world pay $3 for this?". In answering that, you were either being insulting to GGGP, or looking for a pretext to wedge in an "I don't care about this" comment. I suspect the latter.
        burnstek 12y ago
        Apple is a fascinating phenomenon. It rightly interests everyone; investors, economists, managers, consumers, and from the look of this thread, even those who it doesn't interest. :)
        jacquesm 12y ago
        > The charitable interpretation of his question would be and > I suspect the latter. Interesting to see how selective you are when using that charitable interpretation technique.
- Shivetya 12y ago
  This really comes off as a puff piece, likely the deluge of Apple puff pieces we will have to suffer through leading up to the watch going on sale.
arfliw 12y ago
I wouldn't just based on the title and a summary. Having read it I would have, but how could you know it was such high quality prior to reading it?
lazzlazzlazz 12y ago
I wouldn't pay a single cent, and I cannot conceive of why you don't understand that.
- bshimmin 12y ago
  I think his question makes more sense if you read it as "Of the people who are seriously willing to read an article of this length about Jonny Ive, who wouldn't pay $3 for this via Stripe?"
nhangen 12y ago
I had to stop reading because the article seemed to meander and fumble around too much before making a point. I'm not sure I'd pay anything to read this type of content in this format. As a collection of stories in a PDF, maybe, but not on a screen. I say this as a lukewarm Apple fan that believes Apple is losing its way in the post-Jobs era.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  Just curious, how do you believe that Apple is losing its way? There were plenty of Apple weird/"failed" products during Jobs time: iPod HiFi, Newton, 20th Anniversary Mac, exceptionally buggy versions of OSX until Snow Leopard etc. etc. EDIT: Apparently the Newton and the TAM weren't during Job's time! My mistake! Sorry! Time to go read Wikipedia.
  - nhangen 12y ago
    Largely due to the fact they they are a) playing it safe and b) mostly reactionary when it comes to new product designs/concepts. I have no qualms with the current product lineup, but I think that Apple, under Cook, has traded vision for certainty. I think that having more of Ive outside of cheeky launch videos would serve them well.
    - 72deluxe 12y ago
      Interesting, I had not thought of them playing it safe. But I suppose you are right about the "reactionary" part of it to some extent. But what about software? The new Yosemite look was widely hated on release, as was iOS7 changes. (I myself like Yosemite btw) Would you not see the Apple Watch as a risk? Or a risk in the wrong sort of way?
      - TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
        I think it's the wrong kind of risk - it's Apple explicitly trying to operate as an upmarket fashion brand, as opposed to Apple suggesting a fashion brand while appearing to operate as a technology company. Watch is like to trying to sell a gold-plated Mac Pro. Suddenly the gold becomes more important than the computing. All previous Jobs products majored in being useful. If you put an iPod inside a cardboard case with clunky switches instead of a click wheel, you'd still have a very practical music player. The clever design enhances usefulness that's already there. Same with the iPhone. It was the first phone to pull together the phone, map, browser, email, calendar, and other features with maximum user benefit. You could make a case for competing products doing one or two items on the list better, but not for any competitor making everything work together so well as a package. Usefulness again. The point of Watch Edition seems to be conspicuous display of expense, with useful computing thrown in as a free extra. That's a completely different product direction. If Watch has limited basic usability - if the battery life is too short, if it doesn't do something insanely wonderful and useful out of the box - I think success is not guaranteed.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
pmontra 12y ago
It's literally too long to read. I clicked on it out of curiosity, read the first lines, started scrolling faster and faster, didn't reach the end. But somebody will find it too short and overly interesting. Luckily we are all different :-)

nicky0 12y ago

> Who wouldn't pay $3 for this via Stripe? A lot of people, I think. I'd guess less than 1% of those who would read it for free.

jacquesm 12y ago

I wouldn't pay $0.10 for it.

felixbraun 12y ago
You spend 60 minutes on something that isn't worth $0.10 for you?
- jacquesm 12y ago
  No, I didn't spend time on it at all. Apple does not interest me.
  - puranjay 12y ago
    Which explains why you are here, commenting on an article about Apple's lead designer.
    - jacquesm 12y ago
      I structurally read most comment threads on HN, even on subjects that I don't care about to see what's going on in the world of software and hardware without having to go and work with each and every device and piece of software out there. Part of my job is to stay informed about lots of things that I don't have direct experience with, there is simply too much out there for any individual to experience directly. So I use HN as a time-saving device, the collective wisdom and time invested vastly exceeds my own and it's not rare at all to find that HN comment threads are more informative and correct than the articles themselves. FWIW if a subject does interest me I'll read the article too (obviously...), and plenty of times the HN comment threads make me change my mind about what I should be interested in. The effect of this is that I can state with some certainty why apple does not interest me without investing a chunk of cash and a large amount of time first. Of course that wasn't what you were after, you'd like me to admit that I'm secretly interested in apple after all. But there isn't a single apple product that I'd like to own or use (I have an ancient Imac here that's been off for more than a year now), I don't want to buy an 'experience', I only believe in being able to run whatever software I want on the hardware that I own. As soon as I need to jailbreak a device in order to be able to really use it you can safely count me out and OS/X is not such a large step up from Ubuntu that it makes me want to run a different OS on my desktop than on my servers. So as far as I'm concerned Apple is not (currently) interesting to me.
      - bonaldi 12y ago
        None of that screed explains why you felt compelled to threadshit with "not worth 10¢ to me". You are able to "structurally read" to see what's going on without such comments, surely.
        jacquesm 12y ago
        Because the GGGP asked 'who wouldn't pay $3 for this'.
        bonaldi 12y ago
        I think it's implicit in the premise that only people who are interested in the topic would be prepared to pay anything to read something on it. The charitable interpretation of his question would be "who, of the people who find this topic interesting, would not be willing to pay $3 for it?". The question you are presumably structurally answering is "why wouldn't absolutely everybody in the whole world pay $3 for this?". In answering that, you were either being insulting to GGGP, or looking for a pretext to wedge in an "I don't care about this" comment. I suspect the latter.
        burnstek 12y ago
        Apple is a fascinating phenomenon. It rightly interests everyone; investors, economists, managers, consumers, and from the look of this thread, even those who it doesn't interest. :)
        jacquesm 12y ago
        > The charitable interpretation of his question would be and > I suspect the latter. Interesting to see how selective you are when using that charitable interpretation technique.
Shivetya 12y ago
This really comes off as a puff piece, likely the deluge of Apple puff pieces we will have to suffer through leading up to the watch going on sale.

arfliw 12y ago

I wouldn't just based on the title and a summary. Having read it I would have, but how could you know it was such high quality prior to reading it?

lazzlazzlazz 12y ago

I wouldn't pay a single cent, and I cannot conceive of why you don't understand that.

bshimmin 12y ago
I think his question makes more sense if you read it as "Of the people who are seriously willing to read an article of this length about Jonny Ive, who wouldn't pay $3 for this via Stripe?"

nhangen 12y ago

I had to stop reading because the article seemed to meander and fumble around too much before making a point. I'm not sure I'd pay anything to read this type of content in this format. As a collection of stories in a PDF, maybe, but not on a screen. I say this as a lukewarm Apple fan that believes Apple is losing its way in the post-Jobs era.

72deluxe 12y ago
Just curious, how do you believe that Apple is losing its way? There were plenty of Apple weird/"failed" products during Jobs time: iPod HiFi, Newton, 20th Anniversary Mac, exceptionally buggy versions of OSX until Snow Leopard etc. etc. EDIT: Apparently the Newton and the TAM weren't during Job's time! My mistake! Sorry! Time to go read Wikipedia.
- nhangen 12y ago
  Largely due to the fact they they are a) playing it safe and b) mostly reactionary when it comes to new product designs/concepts. I have no qualms with the current product lineup, but I think that Apple, under Cook, has traded vision for certainty. I think that having more of Ive outside of cheeky launch videos would serve them well.
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    Interesting, I had not thought of them playing it safe. But I suppose you are right about the "reactionary" part of it to some extent. But what about software? The new Yosemite look was widely hated on release, as was iOS7 changes. (I myself like Yosemite btw) Would you not see the Apple Watch as a risk? Or a risk in the wrong sort of way?
    - TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
      I think it's the wrong kind of risk - it's Apple explicitly trying to operate as an upmarket fashion brand, as opposed to Apple suggesting a fashion brand while appearing to operate as a technology company. Watch is like to trying to sell a gold-plated Mac Pro. Suddenly the gold becomes more important than the computing. All previous Jobs products majored in being useful. If you put an iPod inside a cardboard case with clunky switches instead of a click wheel, you'd still have a very practical music player. The clever design enhances usefulness that's already there. Same with the iPhone. It was the first phone to pull together the phone, map, browser, email, calendar, and other features with maximum user benefit. You could make a case for competing products doing one or two items on the list better, but not for any competitor making everything work together so well as a package. Usefulness again. The point of Watch Edition seems to be conspicuous display of expense, with useful computing thrown in as a free extra. That's a completely different product direction. If Watch has limited basic usability - if the battery life is too short, if it doesn't do something insanely wonderful and useful out of the box - I think success is not guaranteed.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

pmontra 12y ago

It's literally too long to read. I clicked on it out of curiosity, read the first lines, started scrolling faster and faster, didn't reach the end. But somebody will find it too short and overly interesting. Luckily we are all different :-)