Avalantern.com:
Out of Pages - About a month ago, Laurel Hechanova and I decided to start a little side project together. The problem we're attempting to solve...

Saulemander


iPad chat blog 
27 January 2010, 10:37pm

i have started a blog so we can all chat in the comments about apples new iPhone err...iPad

http://i.imgur.com/5vREa.png

  • views:
  • 901
  • comments:
  • 26
  • tags:
  • there are no tags associated with this post
  • related posts:
  • this post is one of a kind!

comments

THE Lowly Peon

[27 January 2010]

it's just like an iPod touch. except bigger. but there's just more space. I'm bummed.

also, I was hoping it would default to widescreen, not that silly vertical. vertical works for the iPhone/touch, but I was hoping for widescreen.

also, I guess this means they're keeping the iPhone UI the same? I was hoping iPhone 4.0 would be different (and also

that they'd release it today).

 

Saulemander

[28 January 2010]

i wasn't expecting them to release 4.0 today...maybe announce it and let us know some features...im stil hoping for a major overhaul...though that seems unlikely.

the default portrait orientation makes sense...this is a web/reader based product and right now must books and webpages are in portrait view...im talking blogs/ny times...etc...i know default ratio for webpages lends itself to landscape...but yea...

overall i am bummed, its a beefed up ipod touch

 

Benji!

[28 January 2010]

I think they realized that if they don't announce a tablet then their stock price would plummet. I just watched the keynote and honestly it didn't seem like Jobs was too into it.

Though, honestly, I think I'm more likely to buy that (with 3G) than an iPhone.

I can't wait for people to jailbreak this.

 

Benji!

[28 January 2010]

Using the App store was a colossal mistake. New take:

I'll pass.

 

Benji!

[28 January 2010]

Is Apple Evil?. They do seem to be heading in the wrong direction. From the promo video: "In many ways this defines our vision. Our sense of what's next."

But seriously, multitouch is the future of computing in general. It is so frustrating that Apple is the only one doing it right.

Also, that keyboard looks like a total pain to type on.

 

Benji!

[28 January 2010]

Seriously, Jobs looked bored during the keynote.

 

Saulemander

[28 January 2010]

yea so, ive had some time to think about it some more...and i'm sticking wiht my first reaction. apple's choice to supersize the iphone UI is lame and lazy i think. we have a huge amount of space and they want us to use it for one window at a time...it doesnt make sense.

i can see in the future this being a great device...but running the same UI as the iphone is a mistake. it was designed for a small screen and has evolved since then...it really needs a reboot on the iphone and to carry it over to the iPad is dumb...sigh

i havent watched the keynote..but its a bummer even jobs wasnt in to it...

for jobs to dis netbooks and say this will replace them is a lame statement too...i can do way more on a netbook than this thing...which is frustrating...argh, apple...

 

Saulemander

[29 January 2010]

benji i totally agree with that blog

 

THE Lowly Peon

[31 January 2010]

I'm actually extremely excited about this. for my lifestyle — constantly moving, basically — it is perfect. when I travel nowadays, I don't even take my laptop. it's too big, and too much to worry about. I rely on my iPhone for everything. in fact, I'd say I spend 80% of my computer time on my iPhone, especially now since I've been too busy to program as much as before.

i agree that the keyboard will be a problem. but I'm not planning on writing novels with it. (also, everyone complained about the iPhone keyboard, and I can now write on it almost as fast as I can talk. so I'm going to wait until I've used it a bit to decide.)

I hate flash and am glad that now three popular devices (assuming the ipad will sell at least a handful) don't use it. just like google not supporting ie 6, the world needs a big player to stop supporting flash.

I had a vision today. I'm in saigon, and planned on going to some cafe and catching up on my Internet stuff whole sipping espresso. I don't have my laptop, so I'm using only my iPhone. but what if I could have a 10" screen to do it on? it would still fit in my little man purse, so I wouldn't need to take anything else.

also, it may not have multitasking (yet), but that popover thing sounds neat.

basically, I'm freaking thrilled to get one. and despite its few shortcomings, it sounds like it's going to be exactly what I need.

 

THE Lowly Peon

[31 January 2010]

bentomas and saulemander : a response to al3x payne's blog.

the iPad is trying to change the way we see computing devices. this, just like the iPhone, is trying to be a simple to use product. and frankly, that's what I want. it seems incredibly low maintenance. the no multitasking is still a bummer, but I'm sure that'll change. but to say that apple is evil for making the iPad similarly accessible to the iPhone is silly. I've never had problems with (non-jailbroken) software on my iPhone. I feel confident that whatever I install on it is safe. the ipad is the same. yet some guy who came to our Vietnam office yesterday to "help me" installed something he assured me would work and it tore down the whole system.

I think the angry drunk's car analogy makes sense: things are changing. and I like it. it's simpler now. and developing, while more "closed", is in many ways clearer.

I can't wait to get one of these things.

 

THE Lowly Peon

[31 January 2010]

on old world and new world computing, by stevenf (well worth reading):

The Old World

In the Old World, computers are general purpose, do-it-all machines. They can do hundreds of thousands of different things, sometimes all at the same time. We buy them for pennies, load them up to the gills with whatever we feel like, and then we pay for it with instability, performance degradation, viruses, and steep learning curves. Old World computers can do pretty much anything, but carry the burden of 30 years of rapid, unplanned change. Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X based computers all fall into this category.

The New World

In the New World, computers are task-centric. We are reading email, browsing the web, playing a game, but not all at once. Applications are sandboxed, then moats dug around the sandboxes, and then barbed wire placed around the moats. As a direct result, New World computers do not need virus scanners, their batteries last longer, and they rarely crash, but their users have lost a degree of freedom. New World computers have unprecedented ease of use, and benefit from decades of research into human-computer interaction. They are immediately understandable, fast, stable, and laser-focused on the 80% of the famous 80/20 rule.

 

THE Lowly Peon

[31 January 2010]

...and will someone please explain to me how everyone who hoped for netbook like device with a simplified OS and essentially just a browser is so disappointed? I can think of at least five people who wanted almost exactly this. and now everyone is bitching. I'm so confused as to why everyone is so bugged. what does simplified OS mean if not exactly this?

and as for al3x saying he's disturbed? I'm glad I'm not drunk at a dinner table with people who don't care. because I wouldn't stop opinionating on that.

 

Benji!

[01 February 2010]

I'm a little confused by your last comment. Here is what you said after it came out: "it's just like an iPod touch. except bigger. but there's just more space. I'm bummed." Why were you "bitching" (to use your word)?

My take on it, is that it seems like everyone is having trouble accepting the simplicity of what Apple actually released. That's what all the bitching is about. They expected the revolution they wanted to feel more like a revolution. But instead they got exactly what would make sense from Apple. Apple's first entry into the sub-laptop, more-than-a-smart-phone market is a super simple device with a streamlined user experience. It feels exactly like everything else Apple has already done. Which doesn't feel revolutionary.

Where the device actually is revolutionary (and this is next point of bitching) is that it is a personal computer that is just as closed as the iPhone. Everyone in the world thinks that for PCs to be competitive they have to be infinitely customizable so they can be anything to everyone. Apple just said, we don't care what everyone wants, we don't care what you want, anything you want to do we have to approve.

And while this works really well for most everyone, it doesn't work well for two groups of people (and this is why Alex and I are so disturbed). If more and more PCs go this route then the ability for people to fiddle and experiment their way around computers will disappear. You can't fiddle very easily with an iPhone or an iPad. You get the device, you can install apps, and you can write apps, but (and here's the rub) you can't at all fiddle with the installed apps or the device. They are as they come. To quote Mark Pilgrim (who write's some really great stuff. Seriously, subscribe to him) the iPad is an indication of what is to come, a "Tinkerer's Sunset".

So, the two groups of people that I mentioned are (certain) developers and people who believe in freedom of choice on their computer.

(Certain) Developers are hurt in that one of the fundamental joys of using a computer is gone. You can no longer do what you want with your computer. You can no longer look around, experiment, break things. The freedom of choice guys are hurt in the obvious way, they no longer have freedom of choice.

I just happen to belong to both groups.

The really disturbing part comes not from the iPad itself, but from the precedent this sets and what it might say about the future (and specifically Apple's future). I like Apple computers a lot. As far as I am concerned they produce the best hardware in the industry hands down. But if my MacBook Pro was like the iPad I wouldn't be able to do half the things I use my laptop for and I certainly wouldn't own it.

Of course I could always jailbreak. But a) that breaks your terms of service, so say goodbye to support and b) that is risky and you are dependent on Apple not breaking it.

That said, the iPad is without a doubt going to sell like hot cakes. If all you are using a computer is for browsing the internet, checking your email and occasionally writing a document in Microsoft Office, then why would you need a full laptop?

_I_ want one. Just like I want an iPhone. I'm sure I would absolutely love either of those devices. But I feel strongly enough about all that I have mentioned to have some serious reservations about owning either. (then couple that with me not thinking they are worth the upfront and monthly cost and my desire to simplify my life and I'm not going to be getting either.)

This analogy is perfect: The iPad is the iPrius. I own a Prius. I love my Prius. But that is because I don't want to have to think about the internals of my car and I have no qualms about going to a Toyota dealership to get it serviced. But I am a computer person and I want to think about the internals of what I am using and I want to be able to fix my computer anyway I see fit.

Basically, new world computing sucks big sexual intercourse* time if you are in love with old world computing. And I spend 12 hours a day being in love with old world computing.

Anyway, the real point of my long response is to hopefully shed some light on (at least my interpretation) of why Alex is so disturbed. Because as a fellow developer and someone who loves their ability to learn and discover things about their computer, I think you should be disturbed, too.

And also to respond to the quote you chose for the link you posted, I have never once doubted the amazingness of the iPhone. As far as I can tell (and take this with a grain of salt, I have never owned a smartphone) it is without a doubt the best smartphone on the market. I would no doubt find the iPhone completely awesome. But unlike Steven (and I was disappointed back when he did give in) thus far I have been able to last more than a month with my crappy phone that doesn't really do anything. And I'm staying that way. Because Walden was my favorite book in high school. And because Edward Abby was my favorite author in college. And not because I don't love the iPhone. I do. I love everything Apple does because I think everything Apple does is amazing. I mean, I think it is pretty telling that most of the links that Gruber has posted about the iPad are to people that I am already subscribed to in my RSS reader. I love reading about what Apple does. ... So you don't have to convince me of the iPhone's greatness.

Oh and one more thing. Apple is evil because all it cares about is money. Make no mistake about that: It is all about money. And money is evil. So, most companies are evil. But no I don't think the iPad is evil (that was extreme) and I apparently I didn't make it clear when I posted the link. I just think Apple is heading more towards evil than good with the iPad. And if Apple continues down this path of locking their products up more and more, I think that is pretty orthogonal to doing good. And what is the opposite of good? Evil. As an example of a company that at least balances out their evil with good, I'd offer Google. While Google has their search algorithm locked up tight (so they can dominate the search market and make billions) more and more these days they are releasing their source code out to the world so people can do what they want. Freedom is never evil. Apple is moving away from freedom with every new product they release.

 

Benji!

[01 February 2010]

Now more than ever it is clear that the place to develop is for the web. It is the last refuge of open.

 

Benji!

[01 February 2010]

The thing I find interesting about this, and especially the "iPads, "Hackers" and the Death of Computing" is that people are pitting Steven and Alex against each other. But Alex and Steven are in agreement! They both see the new world coming and are both sad about it. Steven uses the "we" pronoun multiple times in his article while referring to old world computing.

I also don't understand why The Angry Drunk is so angry. The world is changing and some people are sad about it and he feels the need to a) yell at them? and b) tell them they shouldn't be upset? Screw you, The Angry Drunk.

And these people weren't writing angry rants or thoughtless pieces about how "Apple is closed! wah!" They were writing thoughtful pieces on what the iPad could mean for the computing industry and for Apple in particular. Yeah, some serious inane wailing.

Wow, I really don't like this The Angry Drunk guy.

He compares what is happening to cars and says, "See! Things will be different but everyone can still do what they want to!" But they can't. For example:



Over time, though, the nature of the automotive industry changed. Automobiles became more and more complicated and “closed.” Pundits bemoaned the death of the shade-tree mechanic. And yet, tinkerer’s still exist. Communities of enthusiasts who share their knowledge and love of the IC engine still exist. The world didn’t end, it merely changed.



Which is true. But working on old engines because the new ones are all too technical is not comparable to not having full control over your computer NOT because it is too complicated but BECAUSE the people who make the best hardware in the world don't want you to have that control.

No one thinks people are going to stop programming. And no one is saying the world is going to end. Exactly what they are saying is that the world is changing and this is sad for programmers.

The car analogy really isn't perfect because working on a car is really a hardware task. And in order to do hardware you need lots of fancy and really expensive tools. But software is easy. All you need is a free text editor and some documentation. And you don't always need the latter. So, with cars the constraint makes sense. There is a large real, physical barrier to entry. You actually can mess around with your Prius. You just have to have to tools to do so. But with what Apple is doing, the constraint is completely arbitrary.

The car analogy falls apart even more because with things like software, you get security updates and feature updates. But with cars it has always been that you get the car and then any changes that are made to it are only possible by you. But with computers Apple is constantly updating their operating system and apps. So, there is a very real reason not to break your terms of service and jailbreak.

Now, I understand that this car business isn't meant to be taken literally. But I feel like it is helpful to not only look at the ways in which the analogy works, but also in the ways in which it doesn't.

I also understand that this is Apple's business and Apple's product and they can do whatever they want. I'm not trying to say that Apple should be doing something different with the iPad. Like I said, it looks like the iPad is an absolutely great device for what they are targeting it for. And Steven isn't saying this either. Alex might be saying it a little bit, but I think it is more wishful thinking.

Everyone has different needs when it comes to computers. Simplicity and stability are very valuable traits. But so are free and open. Everything is a balance. I don't understand why you and The Angry Drunk are so upset about what Alex has to say.

 

Benji!

[01 February 2010]

Reading back through Steven's articles, I wouldn't actually say that he is sad about "new world computing". While he makes it clear that he is a member of the group of people that thrive with "old world computing" it seems like he is actually quite excited about new world computing for other people. Which makes sense. For example my future mother in law finds Macs confusing and doesn't like them. But I think an iPad would be both less confusing for her than both a Mac and a PC with Windows on it.

One question that just occurred to me about the iPad is how easy it would be to use it without another computer. I mean the iPhone is pretty dependent (for backing things up and syncing) on iTunes on another computer. You can't hook your iPhone up to a hard drive to do a time machine backup. Until that time the iPad is really meant as a companion device.

 

Saulemander

[01 February 2010]

what about netflix? if this is an media input device will i be able to log on and stream content from netflix?

 

Saulemander

[01 February 2010]

sorry....media consumption

 

Benji!

[01 February 2010]

I realize I have already said way too much on this topic and that at this point I am just diluting what I am trying to say, but I keep realizing more and more what I am trying to say and what I think about the whole issue. And I just read John Gruber's piece titled "And Oranges" that he just linked to.

(it is pieces like that one that demonstrate why I like John so much. While he is cocky and a huge Apple fan, he really is quite thoughtful)

That exchange between him and Mark Pilgrim had quite the effect on me (almost four years ago! holy cow) when it originally took place. And it is about this essential issue: how do you choose the tools you use.

How much interface niceness am I willing to give up for openness? Thus far, seeing as how I am still on OS X and using a MacBook, the answer is apparently not much.

But the more Apple locks up (even if it is design perfection) the more I am going to push against it. I don't like patents. I don't like secrets. I don't like rules. I believe in a very communistic approach to development: I will never keep the things I develop all to myself. If anyone wants it, I would be happy to give it to them. I feel this way because it is precisely the projects that do this that make it fun for me to use my computer. PHP, MySQL, CouchDB, Sqlite, Apache, Vim, Node, V8, Ruby, Python, Inkscape, JQuery. I use computers a lot because I like to program and design. I don't use computers a lot for any other reason. If I didn't program/design I would only use computers as a communication tool. And judging by how much I do that, it wouldn't be a lot.

So, openness and freedom are the single most important part of what make computers enjoyable for me. Period.

And that is why the iPad depresses me. And depressed me the second I watched the keynote. My favorite industrial/interface designers (Apple Inc.) are moving away from what is most important to me about computers.

I'm not saying that what they are doing is bad or awful. Or that it won't be fun to use. I just feel like Apple is taking steps that I don't feel in needs to take in the name of ease of use and design. Furthermore (and this is subjective) I think it is taking those steps not in that name, but actually to make more money. And that I can't forgive that.

 

Benji!

[01 February 2010]

You won't be able to until Netflix switches to H.264 for video streaming (it currently uses Silverlite) which it will never do because it needs to DRM its streaming.

Stupid DRM.

 

Saulemander

[01 February 2010]

this iPad will be a good product, but it could be so much better. i do not feel apple is pushing the boundaries with this device. they have settled...i'm jsut disappointed that the tablet they have created is not pushing us further (besides killing off flash)...it's taken what has worked for them and just using it again. they could have created such a great product that truly defined the tablet era, much like the iphone defined the smart phone. but what they came up with so far is a tablet that just makes it easier. not saying this is a bad thing. most people are saying this great for non tech people (our mothers) but it's not revolutionary. i feel like apple got lazy and decided they rather make more money than push technology.

 

Saulemander

[01 February 2010]

i guess my major questions is "why not apple?" and if it were simply because apple wants more money...then that sucks and they have become much more like MS, and now instead of rooting for apple to change and push the computer world i guess we can look for someone else

 

Benji!

[02 February 2010]

Surprise, surprise, I'm back for more! Another article arguing agains a "Tinkerer's Sunset". I agree with a lot of what he says. But I also agree with saulemander, It could still be open and be simple. It could still have an App store and be able to install other apps.

Why Apple?

 

Saulemander

[02 February 2010]

the main problem i have with apple's iPhone UI is that it's too simple. not knowing how many apps fit on one page...i only imagine more than the iphone...it seems to be that it's going to be a female dog* to find any particular app...you say use search...i say it will still take just as many taps as a menu system would...they missed an opportunity here to create something great