
Apple's Dumbing Down of Computers a.k.a The End of Super-User Computers - dplgk
http://mattshaw.org/news/apples-dumbing-down-of-computers-a-k-a-the-end-of-super-user-computers/
======
ary
> So, while I don’t like Apple’s general direction, I do think that an iOS-
> like OS is great for consumer computers. I’m just not sure it’s great for
> the rest of us and everyone’s wallets when Apple is in control.

Let's get down to brass tacks. Nobody says you have to buy an Apple computer
(and the author of this post points out that he doesn't have one). We're done
here, right? Not quite.

Picking through the ranting what I think I see is someone who's upset about
Apple's success and what they're doing with their market inertia. It was
pretty much a given that if the App Store for iOS took off there would be an
App Store for OS X. If we were in a pirate movie right now we'd call that a
"parlay." Apple has done a lot of things right if your metric is strictly
financial success. Where people seem to be incredulous is that (although
highly subjective) Apple has also done a lot of things right when it comes to
user/consumer experience. Nerds are not the primary audience for Apple's
products. My parents, grandparents, and people who are more interested all
things non-technical are. An App Store on OS X (and the existing one of iOS)
is good for the two parties most important to Apple, normal users and Apple.

If you feel strongly about how this has shaken out then I challenge you to ask
yourself, "why?". There are tons of ready-made excuses along the lines of
"openness", "freedom", and "I don't like guys in turtle necks." None of them
really matter. The problem of how non-technical people find and install
computer software is decades old. As designers and developers we've largely
left that problem to platform developers, sales, and marketing people. Now
someone has come along and placed a viable solution into the mass market all
while creating the potential to make a tidy profit. We call this capitalism.

~~~
adamesque
This is a good quote to choose from the OP, because it gets at something I
think people fundamentally misunderstand about Apple: they make products that
_they_ want to use. The "consumer" they target in a "consumer computer" is
themselves!

So while their Mac offerings certainly vary in terms of size and performance,
they all must pass this test. The _worst_ Apple computer should still be one
that they would be happy to use. To write software, to make music, to make
spreadsheets, to enjoy movies.

This is why they've never compromised on keyboard size.

So to think that the Mac App Store is some sort of move towards draconian
control misses the entire point. It's not control they want, but a trusted
directory of Mac apps that don't crash or behave maliciously. Even a power
user shouldn't have to waste their time on bad software (unless they want to).

We should all value our time so highly.

------
YooLi
This sounds more alarmist to me. So what if the direction Apple chooses for
their computers is to make them (only?) usable by the common person? So what
if they charge you to develop for their computers? Then those who disagree or
want more from their machines will just buy something other than Apple. As an
Apple user it will be sad for me if they go that way, but I'm not losing any
sleep over it. I was a Linux user before I went Apple.

~~~
endgame
Sorry, but if anyone expects me to pay for the right to develop on my own
machine, they can buzz off. I'll just go back to GNU/Linux. I hope that others
will do the same and we see a brain drain of developers.

~~~
skalpelis
I doubt you'll have to pay to develop for Mac, the 99$ are for joining the
developer program that allows you to get your apps on the App Store (Mac or
iOS). Xcode, compilers and the possibility to run and sell your programs via
other means will still be free.

~~~
endgame
That's my point. It's free at the moment, but the fact that I can't compile
and run my own code on my iPod Touch or so without paying the $99 is
abhorrent. I don't know if a similar situation will take hold on the mac or
not.

------
InclinedPlane
Good. Computers need dumbing down. The number of times I've solved a
relatively common computer problem using what to ordinary computer users would
be "deep magic" is pretty high. And often times I wonder "how the hell do
ordinary users deal with this sort of thing?"

The answer is that they don't. They get frustrated, they reboot their machine,
and if that doesn't work they give up completely and reinstall from scratch or
_buy a new computer_. This is a horrific user experience and it needs to
change.

Using a computer for mundane tasks should be ... mundane. And I think the
mobile OS (iPhone/android) model fits that use case far better than the
existing free for all model of desktop computing.

But what does this mean for hackers and "super users"? Probably not much
actually. It probably means that we'll have to make some configuration changes
on our systems, or buy different models, or install our own OSes (oh noes!)

------
jimwise
I guess I don't get it. The Mac App store is... wait for it... a store. Just
like the physical brick and mortar Apple Store, it carries not the universe of
software available for the Mac, but a screened subset of that software that
Apple thinks best showcases the capabilities of their product line.

Complaining that the App Store will not carry all available MacOS Apps is
almost as silly as complaining that the Apple Store at your local mall does
not carry all available MacOS Apps. (`almost' because the shelf space of an
online store is, presumably, less limited.)

Now, if there were a move to make the App Store the only way to get (or even
the only way to buy) apps for the Mac, that would be different. But as far as
I can tell, there isn't.

~~~
prodigal_erik
> if there were a move to make the App Store the only way to get apps for the
> Mac

Why does everyone think this is unlikely rather than inevitable? We already
know not only that they can get away with it successfully, but their staff
doesn't even feel it's an unethical way to treat their customers or the
industry.

~~~
msbarnett
Because it would be an insanely irrational move that would destroy the
platform?

They were up on stage yesterday talking up the new AutoCAD port. The new
AutoCAD port which is utterly incompatible with the posted App Store rules.
The AutoCAD port that would in no way benefit from the exposure the App Store
would give it, and which doesn't need and would never accept the 30% sales
overhead for payment processing.

Locking the platform to the App Store would be a great way to kill Office,
MatLab, Photoshop, Lightroom, AutoCAD, Steam, and a bunch of other software
the platform _needs_ if they want to keep anyone using it. To assume that it
is inevitable that Apple will do it is to assume that Apple has a death-wish
for the Mac platform.

But if we're going to assume that, why not just assume they'd kill the
platform in the most straight-forward way possible: by discontinuing it.

~~~
hugh3
Not to mention the technical difficulties. How would they stop me from running
an application which I'd copied off a CD, or compiled myself, when I already
have control over my filesystem? I suppose they could figure out a way, but
it'd involve a lot of voodoo.

Besides, imagine the marketing pitch for _that_ version of OSX. "Upgrade to
our latest version! Most of your old software will stop working, and you'll
have to buy it again!" I don't think so.

They're going to make a lot of money with their app store -- they don't need
to destroy the rest of their platform to do it, though.

------
MoreMoschops
I have an engine that I can directly fiddle with, using one hand to rev the
engine whilst the other messes with the carbs. Most new cars (in developed
Western economies) come with a big cover over the engine, forbidding the user
to touch the internals. If you just want to drive within the lines, you get
the latter. If you want to fiddle and play and experiment, you get the former.
It's really not a problem for anyone.

~~~
leviathant
My car comes with a complete technical manual online
(<http://www.hmaservice.com/>) that I can access freely, so that if you want
to remove the four bolts that hold that plastic cover on, you can.

It sounds like you chose to stop learning about cars after manufacturers
stopped using carburetors.

The point still stands though - some people like to hear that the computer
they're buying "just works," and other people like to know a little more about
what goes on under the hood, so that they have a better idea of whether or not
they're getting shafted by their, uh, mechanic.

~~~
MoreMoschops
"It sounds like you chose to stop learning about cars after manufacturers
stopped using carburetors."

Read what I said again. You'll find that actually all you can infer is that I
have a car with carbs; there's no information there on how much I know about
anything else.

------
qwzybug
For some reason it always astonishes me how incredibly reactionary geeks are.
We're supposed to be the neophiles.

Listen: for the first time in history, ordinary people are actually _using
computers_ , every day, in their real lives, and we're kicking and screaming
as hard as we can against the systems that have made that the case.

The future is different from the past. The coders who are empowering
creativity on iOS (and similar devices) aren't the ones whining about how hard
it is. Get over your ridiculous nostalgia, stop bitching, and write BASIC for
the 21st century.

------
stevenwei
This fear mongering is getting completely absurd:

    
    
      > Apple doesn’t want you use your computer to control an 
      > Arduino, write custom printer drivers, run a game server  
      > or control your house lights.
    

Are you serious? How does creating an App Store (that is only suited for
certain types of consumer-oriented software) imply that Apple doesn't want you
to do any of these things? What?

    
    
      > Your computer will also cost a lot more because you’re a
      > professional. So Apple can bump up the profit margin that 
      > it once lost because of the commodification of fast computers.
    

Yeah, cause Apple is really interested in bumping up its profit margin on the
1% of Mac users that write Mac software, instead of the 99% of Mac users that
consume it.

    
    
      > So now, as a developer, if you want to sell your software 
      > it better be in the AppStore. If not, Mom will never find 
      > it and Mom wouldn’t trust it if she did.
    

How is that any different from the _current_ situation? As a Mac developer if
you want to sell software right now, you have to handle _everything_ yourself.

A Mac App Store (which is entirely optional to participate in) gives you
increased visibility, a massive audience, and takes care of the pesky payment
details for you. Is that worth a 30% cut to most developers? We'll see. (I
suspect the answer is going to be yes.)

------
preek
Sorry man, but that's just a random collection of FUD there. The AppStore
won't be the only way to install apps on the Mac, it will be - as you
correctly pointed out - the most convenient for the average user.

Concering your argument on fragmentation and different devices. My
grandfather, now 75 years old, just started using the Internet thanks to the
iPad. You can read about it here: <http://blog.dispatched.ch/2010/07/18/my-
grandfathers-ipad/>

And you know what? He loves it so much, that he got himself a 16Mbit
connection after three months. To make something like that happen, that's a
major feat. He's on the net regularly now, sending mails, checking news - and
couldn't be happier about his machine.

I won't use the iPad as my primary computer, of course - but a lot of people
just can't operate a developers OS. And they shouldn't have to.

As for the price tag - that argument is as lame as it is old. Start comparing
other high-end vendors and models and you'll have your epiphany. For starters
search for competition on the Macbook Air 11" or at the other end of the
spectrum the iMac 27". Then come back and write another blog post.

One last thing: your comments system is broken. I got cookies and JS enabled,
but still get this:
<http://dispatched.ch/bilder/Broken_Blog-20101021-235606.jpg>

------
brown9-2
"Please do not go elsewhere for software"

Just to be clear, no one at Apple is actually saying this, are they?

The irony of this article's title is how many hackers and programmers swear by
their Macbooks.

------
tienshiao
I just don't feel that the AppStore is all that different from package
managers on Linux.

If you need something, you run Synaptic/yum/aptitude/whatever. Sometimes, you
can't find what you're looking for and you go elsewhere.

Can you imagine Ubuntu without Synaptic? Dell selling Ubuntu like that?

Did people complain about the "Dumbing Down of Linux" when package managers
showed up?

~~~
hristov
I don't know about that. Anybody can package any software they want in a file
that will be read and installed by the package manager. If you want to have
something installed on Ubuntu, just package it in a proper .deb file and you
can distribute that file any way you want. Once your user/customer gets a hold
of the .deb file, all they need to do is double click it and your software
gets installed by the package manager. There is no review process, there are
no rejections, nobody takes a cut of your fees.

~~~
jwhitlark
And the user can add 3rd party repositories.

~~~
ceejayoz
My third-party Mac repository is Google.

~~~
danieldk
Why use Google if one can be lazy and use MacPorts ;)?

------
nopal
Time will tell, and until that point, this is just a rant without any
evidence.

------
mkempner
It all sort of reminds me of Amusing Ourselves to Death where we keep giving
up freedom for the sake of entertainment. Where is Neil Postman when you need
him?

