Jobs has lighted our way(gerger.co)
gerger.co
Jobs has lighted our way
http://gerger.co/yalimslodge/2011/08/25/jobs-has-lighted-our-way/
105 comments
> Jobs: "We have to let go of a few things here. We have to let go of the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose."
The phrase has proven to be spectacularly accurate, but it's important to parse the words correctly. They have proven that Apple can win on their own merits and not by fighting Microsoft for desktop supremacy.
In particular, the iPod, the iTunes Music Store, the iPhone and the iPad are where Apple "won" by creating new markets, and not -- arguably -- by stealing market share from Windows Mobile and Tablet products.
Apple won, and Microsoft didn't have to lose.
The phrase has proven to be spectacularly accurate, but it's important to parse the words correctly. They have proven that Apple can win on their own merits and not by fighting Microsoft for desktop supremacy.
In particular, the iPod, the iTunes Music Store, the iPhone and the iPad are where Apple "won" by creating new markets, and not -- arguably -- by stealing market share from Windows Mobile and Tablet products.
Apple won, and Microsoft didn't have to lose.
Microsoft lost to the web. And the ubiquity of the web is what made the iPhone and iPad viable.
So maybe Microsoft didn't have to lose, but they did, so I guess we'll never really know.
So maybe Microsoft didn't have to lose, but they did, so I guess we'll never really know.
In what sense has Microsoft lost?
Sure, they lost their lock-in, but everything else is pretty much the same.
Sure, they lost their lock-in, but everything else is pretty much the same.
That you can buy a non-Windows computer or device and still do most of the things anyone cares about doing on a computer is exactly what Microsoft didn't want to happen. Now they are competing on a level field, and not losing ground too fast, but their reign of total domination of personal computing is over.
In the sense that Microsoft is no longer paid that much attention to. There was a time when Microsoft was feared, hated, and begrudgingly respected. Now? They're like an aging uncle who was once a celebrity rock star but whose prime has long since past, even if he refuses to recognize it. Sure, you still hear his songs occasionally, but they're on oldies stations.
The purpose of a business is to make money, which I assure you Microsoft still does.
> "Microsoft lost to the web."
But not because Apple won anything. Nor would things be much different today, for Apple, if 99% of desktop PCs were still running IE. (If anything, problematic web standards would push more focus to the App Store.)
But not because Apple won anything. Nor would things be much different today, for Apple, if 99% of desktop PCs were still running IE. (If anything, problematic web standards would push more focus to the App Store.)
If IE had 99% market share today, it would presumably have been because Microsoft's plan to proprietize the web was a success. Dependence on ActiveX, VBScript, and whatnot would have made non-Windows web gadgets technically infeasible.
I don't know about infeasible. It would've looked a lot more like the cell phone market used to. That is, you could leverage the internet to positive effect, but only if you controlled the front-end and the back-end, ala RIM.
And Apple could and did do that; albeit their branded services weren't adopted very highly out of the gate as people had choices.
But the iPhone still could have happened.
And Apple could and did do that; albeit their branded services weren't adopted very highly out of the gate as people had choices.
But the iPhone still could have happened.
The vast majority of web users are Windows users. How has Microsoft lost?
Are you sure about that? Windows on mobile is less than a rounding error.
He's right -- the vast majority of web users are not mobile users.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
Indeed.
Personally I respect Bill Gates a lot more. He basically spends all his time working on his charity nowadays; he really couldn't care less about the future of his company. Jobs is good for Apple, but I think Gates is better for the world.
Personally I respect Bill Gates a lot more. He basically spends all his time working on his charity nowadays; he really couldn't care less about the future of his company. Jobs is good for Apple, but I think Gates is better for the world.
Steve Jobs is a Buddhist. Buddhists believe that charitable giving should be done anonymously. For all we know SJ could be giving a lot to charities and other worthy causes, but as a Buddhist he will keep this to himself.
Well there's a difference between giving money and running an organization. Using money intelligently is more important than just donating it.
oh well, that doesn't mean Bill Gates is doing it wrong.
i remember his talk at TED where he released mosquitoes in the audience. his goals are pretty clear, invite other people to care.
sorry, but it doesn't work like that if you keep it to yourself.
and i'm by no mean belittling buddhists or anything...
i remember his talk at TED where he released mosquitoes in the audience. his goals are pretty clear, invite other people to care.
sorry, but it doesn't work like that if you keep it to yourself.
and i'm by no mean belittling buddhists or anything...
Gates is spending his wealth and remaining time rebuilding the karma he destroyed during his decades in the business. I don't think Jobs has the same task ahead of him. Perhaps he does.
Wow, that has to be one of the most rediculous statements I have ever read in my life. What are Gates crimes? Screwing over some competitors? Is that really a big deal? It's not like he's Bernie Madoff. And I'll remind you that Foxconn's workers are jumping off of buildings to kill themselves after making Apple products all day, not Microsoft ones.
I also don't think you are in any position to be telling us why Bill Gates is giving his money away. Maybe he just wants to give it away because it makes him feel good. Every wednesday night my girlfriend spends 6 hours working with people with disabilities. When she comes home, she is beaming. Helping other people is the most rewarding of activites in its own right, try it some time.
I also don't think you are in any position to be telling us why Bill Gates is giving his money away. Maybe he just wants to give it away because it makes him feel good. Every wednesday night my girlfriend spends 6 hours working with people with disabilities. When she comes home, she is beaming. Helping other people is the most rewarding of activites in its own right, try it some time.
> What are Gates crimes? Screwing over some competitors?
Yup. Go read up what happened to Go Corporation. http://bit.ly/nsNkIY
"The lawsuit also claims that Microsoft stole Go technology, that the company threatened Intel, which had invested in Go, and that it used "incentives and threats" to coerce Compaq, Fujitsu, Toshiba and other computer makers not to use Go's operating system."
Yup. Go read up what happened to Go Corporation. http://bit.ly/nsNkIY
"The lawsuit also claims that Microsoft stole Go technology, that the company threatened Intel, which had invested in Go, and that it used "incentives and threats" to coerce Compaq, Fujitsu, Toshiba and other computer makers not to use Go's operating system."
Oh and by the way, Schulz, I never said "crime". I said bad karma. You can do a lot of damage to the world and to other people without ever committing a crime.
> What are Gates crimes? Screwing over some competitors? Is that really a big deal?
Yes, it is.
Yes, it is.
@MrSchultz
Many of the business practices Microsoft engaged in was illegal, so he illegally screwed over competitors. Not very ethical.
Also, for suicide statistics please google or use this friendly article (among many) - http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-and-dell-investigating-...
Many of the business practices Microsoft engaged in was illegal, so he illegally screwed over competitors. Not very ethical.
Also, for suicide statistics please google or use this friendly article (among many) - http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-and-dell-investigating-...
"he couldn't care less about the future of his company" is quite an overstatement. He is still the chairman of the board after all. Also, that company is what allows him to fund his charitable endeavors, so you bet he cares about it's future.
The point I tried to make is that Steve Jobs touched people lives in a way no other can, sometimes at a very personal level and his only instrument was technology. Previously, this privilege used to belong to writers, poets, politicians.
Flame-bait titles invariably leads to silly arguments about why ______ did more than _______. Both Gates and Jobs have done remarkable things from which many people benefited. We don't need to compare Gates or Jobs or give the impression that either one's success came at the failing of the other.
By generating such a comparison, you've distracted your audience from the content of your post which, by the way, I enjoyed and related to. Why poison an otherwise positive post by inviting flame wars?
By generating such a comparison, you've distracted your audience from the content of your post which, by the way, I enjoyed and related to. Why poison an otherwise positive post by inviting flame wars?
I am sorry that this is how it is perceived. That was not my intention at all. A title is meant to be catchy. I made the comparison to Gates and the rest because even though they all changed my life, they did not touch me at a personal level like Jobs. This is all. Flame war was not my intention and I don't think the comments played out that way.
What are you talking about? He made some of the best gadgets ever. Absolutely. But I think you've spent too much time watching Apple marketing material.
Steve Jobs touched people lives in a way no other can, sometimes at a very personal level
Can we please stop the Steve Jobs and Apple suck-up here on HN please? This is getting as embarrassing to read as it is getting sickening.
I realize the Sanfran wannebe hipster-crowd here like their shiny iGadgets and want to reaffirm their own worth by appraising the company which they have attached their identity to, but this is getting a little bit out of hand and quite frankly, rather silly.
Can we please stop the Steve Jobs and Apple suck-up here on HN please? This is getting as embarrassing to read as it is getting sickening.
I realize the Sanfran wannebe hipster-crowd here like their shiny iGadgets and want to reaffirm their own worth by appraising the company which they have attached their identity to, but this is getting a little bit out of hand and quite frankly, rather silly.
If you haven't already, would you mind reading about HN's approach to comments? http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
[deleted]
I love computers. I am a Computer Nerd. I think computers are an important technology, not just a fun one.
You, and others here, who dislike the sentiment that something like the iPad could profoundly change someone's life, seem like you want to keep the magic of computation to yourselves. You denigrate design for humans as "marketing" and you demand to categorize the iPad as just another in a long line of Von Neumann machines.
It's not. And the Mission hipsters taking photos of their MacBooks with digital SLRs make me want to vomit. This is not about them.
It's about an old man who was cut off from computation--something I think is immensely valuable--and now has access to it.
Computation is important. Access to computation is important. You're right that talking about some new bullshit gadget as a religious miracle is embarrassing. I get that.
But you know what? Turing completeness is a miracle. Interactive computing is a religious miracle. The mouse is a religious miracle.
And this guy's dad being able to use a computer for the first time, after decades of being unable? Kind of a miracle in my book.
I'm sorry if that embarrasses you.
You, and others here, who dislike the sentiment that something like the iPad could profoundly change someone's life, seem like you want to keep the magic of computation to yourselves. You denigrate design for humans as "marketing" and you demand to categorize the iPad as just another in a long line of Von Neumann machines.
It's not. And the Mission hipsters taking photos of their MacBooks with digital SLRs make me want to vomit. This is not about them.
It's about an old man who was cut off from computation--something I think is immensely valuable--and now has access to it.
Computation is important. Access to computation is important. You're right that talking about some new bullshit gadget as a religious miracle is embarrassing. I get that.
But you know what? Turing completeness is a miracle. Interactive computing is a religious miracle. The mouse is a religious miracle.
And this guy's dad being able to use a computer for the first time, after decades of being unable? Kind of a miracle in my book.
I'm sorry if that embarrasses you.
"It's about an old man who was cut off from computation [snip] and now has access to it... And this guy's dad being able to use a computer for the first time, after decades of being unable"
You have to read a lot into the post to come up with that interpretation.
You have to read a lot into the post to come up with that interpretation.
Actually, this is the interpretation of the post.
We don't know why the father refused to interact with a computer before. There's no evidence in the blog post that he was "unable". That he decided to use an iPad doesn't mean that Steve Jobs gave him the miracle of computation.
If the father had been nearsighted but refused to wear glasses for many years, then saw his brother wearing a new style of frames and decided to finally get some himself, would we idolize the frame designer in this way?
If the father had been nearsighted but refused to wear glasses for many years, then saw his brother wearing a new style of frames and decided to finally get some himself, would we idolize the frame designer in this way?
Yes, Actually I would.
Thank you for your input. This is what the article was all about.
Agreed. I would expect that a community like HN would be a little bit more impervious to marketing, but I guess that is just further testament to the legend of Steve Jobs.
Thank you. But you won't get far here. The groupthink on HN is far too strong.
After posting this comment, I got a stern email from mister Paul Graham. You read that right. The cult of Apple is so strong here, that the site owner emails you when you talk against the brain-washed mantra: Apple is God.
Granted, I had a bit of tone as well, but still.
I'll take your advice and just leave it at that. That and refrain from commenting on any Apple-related threads in the future. There's obviously no point trying to bring the real world into HN Apple threads.
Granted, I had a bit of tone as well, but still.
I'll take your advice and just leave it at that. That and refrain from commenting on any Apple-related threads in the future. There's obviously no point trying to bring the real world into HN Apple threads.
The post mentions Gates by the way.
> Can't you recognize the achievements of one without belittling the other in your flamebait title?
Well... When you compare the achievements of both, Jobs' are bigger.
Well... When you compare the achievements of both, Jobs' are bigger.
Since people seem to disagree, let me list some:
- he (with Woz) invented the personal computer as we know it (a plastic box with a keyboard)
- he made the GUI available to mere mortals (he was the driver behind the Mac when Apple was committing itself to Lisa)
- he made Unix easy to use (NeXT)
- he invented viable commercial music downloads
- he invented the desirable smartphone
- he invented a computer my mom would love to use
He is the driving force behind Apple's during its most fertile periods - I am quite sure nothing leaves the lab without his approval.
What did Gates really invent?
- he (with Woz) invented the personal computer as we know it (a plastic box with a keyboard)
- he made the GUI available to mere mortals (he was the driver behind the Mac when Apple was committing itself to Lisa)
- he made Unix easy to use (NeXT)
- he invented viable commercial music downloads
- he invented the desirable smartphone
- he invented a computer my mom would love to use
He is the driving force behind Apple's during its most fertile periods - I am quite sure nothing leaves the lab without his approval.
What did Gates really invent?
he (with Woz) invented the personal computer
as we know it (a plastic box with a keyboard)
Before that Xerox Alto was introduced in 1973, and while never commercially produced -- get this, it had a GUI, a mouse, an object oriented OS and an Ethernet card.
And before that, the personal computers we know today were perfectly described in a book from 1949, called "Giant Brains, or Machines That Think", then later plans for building Simon were published: http://www.blinkenlights.com/classiccmp/berkeley/simonfaq.ht...
And between 1950 and 1977, the year Apple II came along, there were many other good products released.
he made the GUI available to mere mortals
So we are in disagreement.
he invented the desirable smartphone
What did Gates really invent?
> IBM's first personal computer, IBM 5100 was introduced in 1975, one year earlier
> Before that Xerox Alto was introduced in 1973
How much did the IBM 5100 cost? The Alto wasn't even sold. Can they really be considered "the personal computer as we know it"? If we go that route, any desk-sized single-user mini-computer would be "the first PC". That's not the case.
> it had a GUI, a mouse, an object oriented OS and an Ethernet card
No, it hadn't (ethernet excepted). Smalltalk/80 (launched in, you guessed, 1980) was the first real product (one you could buy) and class-based OO was only introduced with Smalltalk/76. The Alto never went past R&D stage. Its descendants did (in the 80's).
> Making stuff available to mere mortals means making it a commodity.
No. It means making stuff with the right price/performance. Like I said before, the personal computer as we know it, did not exist before Woz added a keyboard and Jobs added a plastic case. Before the first Mac no ordinary person would be able to buy a GUI-capable computer. After it, every computer got a GUI (sometimes, grafted on top of a very rudimentary OS)
> If I could afford a cheap and usable personal computer (in my country in 1994), it's because of Microsoft, not Apple.
If you got your first computer in 1994, you already missed the most interesting part of the PC evolution. Bad for you - it was one hell of a party.
> Before that Xerox Alto was introduced in 1973
How much did the IBM 5100 cost? The Alto wasn't even sold. Can they really be considered "the personal computer as we know it"? If we go that route, any desk-sized single-user mini-computer would be "the first PC". That's not the case.
> it had a GUI, a mouse, an object oriented OS and an Ethernet card
No, it hadn't (ethernet excepted). Smalltalk/80 (launched in, you guessed, 1980) was the first real product (one you could buy) and class-based OO was only introduced with Smalltalk/76. The Alto never went past R&D stage. Its descendants did (in the 80's).
> Making stuff available to mere mortals means making it a commodity.
No. It means making stuff with the right price/performance. Like I said before, the personal computer as we know it, did not exist before Woz added a keyboard and Jobs added a plastic case. Before the first Mac no ordinary person would be able to buy a GUI-capable computer. After it, every computer got a GUI (sometimes, grafted on top of a very rudimentary OS)
> If I could afford a cheap and usable personal computer (in my country in 1994), it's because of Microsoft, not Apple.
If you got your first computer in 1994, you already missed the most interesting part of the PC evolution. Bad for you - it was one hell of a party.
Steve Jobs invented the myth that a founder invents and oversees everything his company does.
I disagree. While he doesn't seem to mind the credit and attention that he's getting, he didn't "invent" that concept.
Look at what he said in his 60 Minutes interview: “My model for business is The Beatles. They were four guys who kept each other’s negative tendencies in check. And the total was greater than the sum of the parts. Great things in business are not done by one person; they are done by a team of people.” He has always given credit to his team. I think it's the media that invented that myth.
Look at what he said in his 60 Minutes interview: “My model for business is The Beatles. They were four guys who kept each other’s negative tendencies in check. And the total was greater than the sum of the parts. Great things in business are not done by one person; they are done by a team of people.” He has always given credit to his team. I think it's the media that invented that myth.
I agree with the first one since you included Woz. But I have to say that each one of your points should be including several other people each, as I highly doubt he did each of those personally by himself. I for one feel that Woz invented the concept of the personal computer and Jobs invented the concept of selling the personal computer.
He was the driving force during Apple's best times, he does get credit from me for that. But to me, a small part of that is maybe Apple's board didn't find someone to properly replace him. Apple made a great deal of stupid choices between the eras of Steve Jobs. Now that he has resigned, it'll be interesting to see if Apple falls back to their usual "let's do something stupid since Steve isn't here!"
Ah yes, that failure Gates, I guess he'll have to go down in history as being one of the driving forces of one of the most successful companies in the history of the Earth. What a bummer.
He was the driving force during Apple's best times, he does get credit from me for that. But to me, a small part of that is maybe Apple's board didn't find someone to properly replace him. Apple made a great deal of stupid choices between the eras of Steve Jobs. Now that he has resigned, it'll be interesting to see if Apple falls back to their usual "let's do something stupid since Steve isn't here!"
Ah yes, that failure Gates, I guess he'll have to go down in history as being one of the driving forces of one of the most successful companies in the history of the Earth. What a bummer.
It's amazing how many times I hear this same story about the iPad. When Jobs first introduced it I was skeptical. After seeing how adults and children alike have taken to this device, it yet again proves that Jobs can see what others do not.
I too was skeptical, having seen Microsoft fail at selling a tablet so many times, but bought one anyway so that I could use it as a "development device". I was shocked to find that only weeks later I preferred using the iPad over my computers most of the time. If it wasn't for coding, Office or Photoshop--aka making things--I would be iPad full time.
Jobs really did what Gates couldn't with a tablet. Microsoft has been trying to sell tablets since Windows XP with absolutely no success. Jobs rightly showed that you can't cram a desktop OS into a tablet and call it a proper tablet. Their tablets never felt right because you always wished you had a mouse, keyboard and right click available to get anything done. With MS tablets, users felt like something was taken away. With the iPad, users felt like they had something added.
Jobs really did what Gates couldn't with a tablet. Microsoft has been trying to sell tablets since Windows XP with absolutely no success. Jobs rightly showed that you can't cram a desktop OS into a tablet and call it a proper tablet. Their tablets never felt right because you always wished you had a mouse, keyboard and right click available to get anything done. With MS tablets, users felt like something was taken away. With the iPad, users felt like they had something added.
So what do you do on your iPad then except for surfing the web? I'm really curious as I don't see the point of an iPad right now.
That's definitely one of the main things, but there are others. I suspect everyone has their own mix, like on a smartphone. For me it's probably:
There really is no "point" to having an iPad. It obviously doesn't do anything that you can't do without one. But it's a LOT easier to pick up and use than a laptop and if you have one you'll find it becoming your go-to device for a lot of things.
35% web surfing
35% facetime chat with the wife
10% kindle app
10% random games and apps
10% watching shows and movies on the plane
There really is no "point" to having an iPad. It obviously doesn't do anything that you can't do without one. But it's a LOT easier to pick up and use than a laptop and if you have one you'll find it becoming your go-to device for a lot of things.
Thanks for that. Well basically, most of the time I'm using a laptop (I'm a happy user of a new MacBook Air) for coding, surfing the web and, well, doing office stuff and that's it. I guess an iPad would be too much of a toy for me, but I'm curious anyways what people do with an iPad.
It's been argued many times over but I now think we are just touching the surface of what a tablet can do. It will be eventually used for content creation. The most important thing is that people feel some kind of a natural connection to it. From there you build around it just as they did with the mouse.
Ideally, we all want people to be enthusiastic about technology and it's best that we accommodate them instead of forcing them to understand it as we do.
Ideally, we all want people to be enthusiastic about technology and it's best that we accommodate them instead of forcing them to understand it as we do.
I have a feeling that it can be used to design UI really effectively. Are there any apps taking a crack at this?
I can't give your path but I think we're at the very beginning. Apple's own apps have set the standard as well as Loren's Twitter app but that doesn't mean we are limited. It's up to us to define what's ahead.
As Einstein has said, imagination is more important than knowledge. From my experience, look at how kids use these things and pay attention to what what they need. They're more intelligent than we give them credit.
Computers are merely extensions of ourselves. The intent must be obvious so as not to confuse. If there is one thing I've learned from Jobs it is this.
EDIT: Look at the Elements app as well as the Al Gore (Push Pop Press) app. There are many holes left in this market where others can cause a disruption to what was the dominant presence on the PC.
As Einstein has said, imagination is more important than knowledge. From my experience, look at how kids use these things and pay attention to what what they need. They're more intelligent than we give them credit.
Computers are merely extensions of ourselves. The intent must be obvious so as not to confuse. If there is one thing I've learned from Jobs it is this.
EDIT: Look at the Elements app as well as the Al Gore (Push Pop Press) app. There are many holes left in this market where others can cause a disruption to what was the dominant presence on the PC.
As far as I am concerned the iPad is the ultimate general purpose media consumption device: web browsing, video, Kindle ebooks, games etc.
Exactly. The iPad is optimized for consumption. For production, however, the iPad is worth next to naught.
I guess it fits well with the rest of our society. Sigh.
I guess it fits well with the rest of our society. Sigh.
GarageBand: http://www.apple.com/ipad/from-the-app-store/garageband.html
IMS-20: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJSyPW4BFgo
nLog: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkjiSIPF-Ho
Not to mention iWork and a host of other apps.
Yes, the iPad is really good for consumption, but it's quite good at production as well. And it will get better with time.
IMS-20: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJSyPW4BFgo
nLog: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkjiSIPF-Ho
Not to mention iWork and a host of other apps.
Yes, the iPad is really good for consumption, but it's quite good at production as well. And it will get better with time.
And, on which platform do you think those apps were created? On an full Apple computer with Mac OSX, most likely.
Try to program on the iPad. (i) you need a proper keyboard, (ii) you need a proper dev environment, and (iii) interpreters are forbidden and you are not root anyway.
Try to do anything on the iPad. You need an App. And since you can't write one yourself (at least not on the iPad), you have do download one that passes through Apples moral filter (no sex but war is okay, so much for "peace and love").
It's not like you can't create with the iPad. But the thing is not a general purpose computer to begin with. It wasn't meant that way. Apple optimized ease of consumption, and for that they sacrificed everything that got in the way, including creation.
I'll slightly amend my phrasing: for production, compared to a general purpose computer, the iPad is worth next to naught. And Apple likely doesn't care, though it would be bad PR to admit it.
Now if Apple suddenly gave you the root password, that would be another story. My argument would be limited to the form factor, which isn't such a big issue (just put your iPad on a docking station).
Try to program on the iPad. (i) you need a proper keyboard, (ii) you need a proper dev environment, and (iii) interpreters are forbidden and you are not root anyway.
Try to do anything on the iPad. You need an App. And since you can't write one yourself (at least not on the iPad), you have do download one that passes through Apples moral filter (no sex but war is okay, so much for "peace and love").
It's not like you can't create with the iPad. But the thing is not a general purpose computer to begin with. It wasn't meant that way. Apple optimized ease of consumption, and for that they sacrificed everything that got in the way, including creation.
I'll slightly amend my phrasing: for production, compared to a general purpose computer, the iPad is worth next to naught. And Apple likely doesn't care, though it would be bad PR to admit it.
Now if Apple suddenly gave you the root password, that would be another story. My argument would be limited to the form factor, which isn't such a big issue (just put your iPad on a docking station).
That's what I use it for - other people can be very creative with them, notable the artist David Hockney:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11666162
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11666162
I mentioned this in a comment above too but I feel like it can be used to design UI (like dragging and dropping components with gestures). Are there any apps that take a crack at this?
if a person can't produce something on an ipad that's a reflection of the user, not the device.
The iPad is a tool and toy you probably don't need, but if used to the max it'll probably enhance your life in some noticable way.
Every single morning, while sipping coffee and waiting for my omelette to finish cooking, I catch up on the latest news through Reeder, the first RSS reader I've actually enjoyed using. I also check my mail to see if there's anything important I need to respond to right away.
When I'm finished eating and catching up to the latest news, I grab my iPad and go upstairs for my exercize. While doing strenght training I use my iPad to quickly make a note of how many reps and how much I lifted. After I'm done with my strenght training, I take a run either outside or on my threadmill. If I take the run on the threadmill, I'll use the iPad for watching a video, either South Park or TED.
After I've showered, groomed, brushed my teeth and flossed, it's time to start working. When I work my iPad is always lying on the desk next to my laptop. I use it for:
* Displaying my ToDo-list (the Hit List)
* Displaying the email I'm working on.
* Displaying some relevant notes to the work I'm doing (Evernote).
* Displaying a PDF or website containing documentation to what I'm working on.
* As an extra screen (AirDisplay) for Photoshop tool pads and similar.
* VNC or SSH to another computer
* The occational check of HN, Twitter or Facebook.
* Calculator
* Calendar (Week Cal HD)
Yup, everything I've mentioned could be done on a normal laptop. However, it's incredibly useful to have an extra screen for displaying relevant information that'll never be obscured by application windows covering the information.
After I'm satisfied with my work for the day, I might hang out with my friends, perhaps take a picnic in the park. My iPad is always accessible in my manpurse. If a customer has an emergency problem, I can quickly and easily log into their server and fix the problem (Textastic/Prompt). If I get a brilliant idea, I'll note it down in Evernote and analyse it with the Business Model app. Maybe I want to think deeply about my business - I'll just open Dropbox and read through some business documents about future plans or surf on some of my competitor's sites through Mercury Browser.
When I'm back home I might do some more work or chill out with some games. Perhaps I'll open Rage HD and have one of the most immersive and physically exhausting gaming experiences possible through the Virtual Window control mode.
Right before I go to bed, I write in my diary (Day One) and finish my TODO-list for tomorrow.
Every single morning, while sipping coffee and waiting for my omelette to finish cooking, I catch up on the latest news through Reeder, the first RSS reader I've actually enjoyed using. I also check my mail to see if there's anything important I need to respond to right away.
When I'm finished eating and catching up to the latest news, I grab my iPad and go upstairs for my exercize. While doing strenght training I use my iPad to quickly make a note of how many reps and how much I lifted. After I'm done with my strenght training, I take a run either outside or on my threadmill. If I take the run on the threadmill, I'll use the iPad for watching a video, either South Park or TED.
After I've showered, groomed, brushed my teeth and flossed, it's time to start working. When I work my iPad is always lying on the desk next to my laptop. I use it for:
* Displaying my ToDo-list (the Hit List)
* Displaying the email I'm working on.
* Displaying some relevant notes to the work I'm doing (Evernote).
* Displaying a PDF or website containing documentation to what I'm working on.
* As an extra screen (AirDisplay) for Photoshop tool pads and similar.
* VNC or SSH to another computer
* The occational check of HN, Twitter or Facebook.
* Calculator
* Calendar (Week Cal HD)
Yup, everything I've mentioned could be done on a normal laptop. However, it's incredibly useful to have an extra screen for displaying relevant information that'll never be obscured by application windows covering the information.
After I'm satisfied with my work for the day, I might hang out with my friends, perhaps take a picnic in the park. My iPad is always accessible in my manpurse. If a customer has an emergency problem, I can quickly and easily log into their server and fix the problem (Textastic/Prompt). If I get a brilliant idea, I'll note it down in Evernote and analyse it with the Business Model app. Maybe I want to think deeply about my business - I'll just open Dropbox and read through some business documents about future plans or surf on some of my competitor's sites through Mercury Browser.
When I'm back home I might do some more work or chill out with some games. Perhaps I'll open Rage HD and have one of the most immersive and physically exhausting gaming experiences possible through the Virtual Window control mode.
Right before I go to bed, I write in my diary (Day One) and finish my TODO-list for tomorrow.
Thanks a lot for sharing this, especially with the mention of apps and tools you use. I really should consider at least trying it out at some point.
> When Jobs first introduced it I was skeptical
We technologists are a jaded bunch; we underestimate the appeal that technology still holds to vast numbers of people outside of our narrow field. The potential for game-changing products like iPad is still there and is still huge.
Our second biggest weakness is that we, having been either nerds or the "good kids" in school, hold dear a belief that the world is (or should be) a "fair" place where "pretty" is ranked below "smart" and where everything is judged on its own merit. Most people, for better or worse, do not think like that -- most people don't have the time to evaluate products on their own merit and, moreover, they don't even trust those who do (the logic goes: if you have so much time on your hands so as to compare products on their own merit, you must be doing something wrong with your life and therefore I will not follow your advice).
We technologists are a jaded bunch; we underestimate the appeal that technology still holds to vast numbers of people outside of our narrow field. The potential for game-changing products like iPad is still there and is still huge.
Our second biggest weakness is that we, having been either nerds or the "good kids" in school, hold dear a belief that the world is (or should be) a "fair" place where "pretty" is ranked below "smart" and where everything is judged on its own merit. Most people, for better or worse, do not think like that -- most people don't have the time to evaluate products on their own merit and, moreover, they don't even trust those who do (the logic goes: if you have so much time on your hands so as to compare products on their own merit, you must be doing something wrong with your life and therefore I will not follow your advice).
My wife's parents, both in their eighties, were both delighted when they played with one of our iPads even though they had previously shown no interest at all in any kind of computing device.
Indeed. He not only envision thinks but executes incredibly well. Microsoft's attempts to create tablet computers in the pre-iPad world look pretty embarrassing from where we are today.
Agreed. Gates had been pushing the tablet concept for 10 years, and it went nowhere. In contrast, the iPad smashed its way onto the marketplace within months of release.
The only thing more astonishing than the iPad's success is that it comes off the heels of a dozen astonishing successes prior. The iPod was the first volley. The iTunes Store then revolutionised the entire freaking music industry. The iPhone then revolutionised the entire mobile marketplace.
And how the #$*! is Apple dominating the laptop computer segment? Why is Apple the only ones making a compelling notebook that doesn't have a product name ripped from pages of a lawnmower parts supply catalogue?!?
The only thing more astonishing than the iPad's success is that it comes off the heels of a dozen astonishing successes prior. The iPod was the first volley. The iTunes Store then revolutionised the entire freaking music industry. The iPhone then revolutionised the entire mobile marketplace.
And how the #$*! is Apple dominating the laptop computer segment? Why is Apple the only ones making a compelling notebook that doesn't have a product name ripped from pages of a lawnmower parts supply catalogue?!?
And how the #$! is Apple dominating the laptop computer segment?*
Marketing obviously. The 2011 MacBook Pro I'm using right now is by far the most terrible laptop I've ever owned. It doesn't boot from USB, it doesn't sleep properly, brightness is broken, the WiFi antenna's range sucks... never again. Fuck Apple's shitty laptops. I'm getting a ThinkPad next time.
Marketing obviously. The 2011 MacBook Pro I'm using right now is by far the most terrible laptop I've ever owned. It doesn't boot from USB, it doesn't sleep properly, brightness is broken, the WiFi antenna's range sucks... never again. Fuck Apple's shitty laptops. I'm getting a ThinkPad next time.
I am wondering the same. I actually wrote a blog about that as well, which outlines several way too obvious issues with laptops. :-) http://gerger.co/yalimslodge/2011/08/19/free-advice-to-the-r...
I realise we were never able to hold the Microsoft Courier, but I think they were on the right track there and had they executed (yes - I realise this is where Apple won) the landscape may look different today. RIP Courier, you passed before your time.
Oh I've forgotten about this completely. Thanks for reminding. Will read about it a little. :-)
From the couple of videos, that thing looked very confusing (cool though, but confusing). I would doubt that we'd hear stories like the one posted about the Courier.
Not to sound mean-spirited but I don't think Bill Gates needs a penny from your father. For the last decade his focus has been the eradication of malaria and other charitable works of the Gates Foundation that bares his name.
Very misleading title but nice anecdote anyway. I also found the same kind of thing with my Grandmother, although shes 80 now, her ability to use or want to use computers is very low but she had a go on my iPad and managed to pick it up quite quickly.
It is not misleading at all. On a personal level, this is what Steve Jobs is to me. I could not care less about anything else he accomplished.
I am grateful to Bill Gates because for his dream of computer in every home I am typing this on a cheap laptop from a third world country. If Steve Jobs vision of state of the art and stylish but pricey devices ruled I would not be in this position.
What I'm wondering is, why did your father refused to use computers? That's way beyond a mere lack of interest. So, could you give us his stated reasons, and your speculations regarding his real reasons?
Excellent comment/question. I thought about going into the details of the refusal in the post but it was making the piece way too long. Also the reasons deteriorated the post from its original purpose.
Let me try an analogy here. I hope I do not miss the point because of cultural differences: I think he comes from a time where using typewriters at an office was perceived as the job of a female secretary. :-). A computer looks much like a typewriter from an outsider perceptive (a keyboard and monitor to look at instead of paper).
Let me try an analogy here. I hope I do not miss the point because of cultural differences: I think he comes from a time where using typewriters at an office was perceived as the job of a female secretary. :-). A computer looks much like a typewriter from an outsider perceptive (a keyboard and monitor to look at instead of paper).
I call linkbait. Someone should change the title of this link.
This is absurd. A title is meant to be catchy. At the end of the story you learn what it is Steve Jobs did but gates could not.
I'd rather learn that in the headline, thus knowing whether it's worth my while to read the whole story.
I understand your concern. But this is not how stories work in general. There is always the risk of wasting time when you read a little story, watch a movie etc...I apologize if the story wasn't worth your while. I tried my best to put it as elegantly as I can.
News stories work this way, putting the important information at the top. Other styles of writing (e.g. fiction) needn't.
Fiction is designed to catch your attention at the beginning, and make you want to read to the end. News is designed so that you can stop reading at any point, or just read the headline, and have got the basic gist of what's going on.
The attention-grabbing, mysterious headline on a "news" site, however, is a lousy trick in the memetic marketplace, tunneling its way into the host's brain to advantage itself at the cost of the reader.
Fiction is designed to catch your attention at the beginning, and make you want to read to the end. News is designed so that you can stop reading at any point, or just read the headline, and have got the basic gist of what's going on.
The attention-grabbing, mysterious headline on a "news" site, however, is a lousy trick in the memetic marketplace, tunneling its way into the host's brain to advantage itself at the cost of the reader.
This blog post isn't a news story.
I feel envious for the guy who lives as if it's 1975 and never touches a computer. Must be nice.
That's a rather nostalgic way of looking at life. :-). You are right it is nice in some aspects. However there are disadvantages. The biggest one is that you feel out of place and lonely. The rules of social engagement change. For example, my father is not allowed to smoke in restaurant anymore which he thinks is an abomination.
I am guessing your father will not be using search, maps, youtube or gmail on his new iPad?
No, unfortunately he has not used anything else so far. Listening to music and looking at beautiful paintings are the only ways he uses the iPad.
What a great way to use a computer. I'm truly fascinated by the way technology-averse people actually use technology. I had a hippie roommate that I'd constantly catch just listening to ambient music and spinning around the world on Google Earth on his laptop. A pretty enlightening contrast to my usual non-work mix of social networking and news blurb reading.
:-). Amazing.
Some of us may deny but this is the reality
I don't think Bill Gates ever tried to sell toys. Calling an iPad a computer is an insult to Alan Turing.
If you comparing somebody with Jobs then also you are admiring him.
Yes, he just needed Gates' cash infusion to accomplish it.
I find it hilarious when people think Apple "won" and Microsoft "lost". Microsoft "won" twice.
I find it hilarious when people think Apple "won" and Microsoft "lost". Microsoft "won" twice.
It was part of a lawsuit settlement so Microsoft wasn't doing Apple any favors. Microsoft wanted the lawsuit to go away.
That's not even remotely accurate.
Read this http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-202143.html
From the article:
Both Apple and Microsoft executives denied that the Microsoft investment represents a path to converging the companies' operating systems. However, they said they had agreed to work out a settlement to a long-standing dispute over whether Microsoft's Windows operating system infringes on any of Apple's patents.
From the article:
Both Apple and Microsoft executives denied that the Microsoft investment represents a path to converging the companies' operating systems. However, they said they had agreed to work out a settlement to a long-standing dispute over whether Microsoft's Windows operating system infringes on any of Apple's patents.
Yes, that does NOT state Microsoft just wanted the lawsuit to go away.
Didn't Microsoft sell their stake in aapl rather early?
Microsoft still owns a huge chunk. They are getting massively paid by Google and Apple while the media goes around claiming they are dead.
Jobs: "We have to let go of a few things here. We have to let go of the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose."