

The iPad Luddites - lawn
http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2010/04/the_ipad_luddit.php

======
cageface
My problem with the iPad is that it's more closed than it needs to be. It's
fine to provide people with a simple, immediate, intuitive and trouble-free
interface to information. Not everybody needs to be or wants to be a content
creator. But why not allow people to install apps outside the App store if
they manually opt-in, as Android does? Why the absurd secrecy around the sdk
and developers agreements? Why the seemingly arbitrary rejection of apps that
in some way impinge on functionality Apple reserves for itself to implement?

The almost paranoid and unduly aggressive control Apple exerts over its
platform is worrisome, particularly for a company poised to dominate an
important emerging platform. This is why, as much as I respect Apple's
engineering and design prowess, I do not use its products. After two decades
of a suffocating Microsoft monopoly I'm not eager to spend the next two under
another.

~~~
andreyf
_But why not allow people to install apps outside the App store if they
manually opt-in, as Android does?_

Because people will install apps that don't work and then blame their
iP(ad|od|hone) for misbehaving. If they could figure out a good process for
it, I'm sure Apple would certify their developers before letting them develop
applications.

 _Why the absurd secrecy around the sdk and developers agreements?_

What absurd secrecy? AFAIK, the only threatening legalese was removed in 2008
[1]. I don't know for sure, but I imagine it was there left over from the
developers that knew about it before the SDK was announced.

 _Why the seemingly arbitrary rejection of apps that in some way impinge on
functionality Apple reserves for itself to implement?_

Because people _do_ get confused about things you might think are obvious. If
you give people two "dialer" apps, I guarantee you they'll sometimes launch
the wrong one. And again, frustration against apps is frustration against the
device.

1\. [http://www.telecoms.com/5294/apple-removes-secrecy-oath-
from...](http://www.telecoms.com/5294/apple-removes-secrecy-oath-from-iphone-
sdk/)

~~~
blhack
> _Because people will install apps that don't work and then blame their
> iP(ad|od|hone) for misbehaving._

Millions of people using OSX disagree with you.

~~~
electromagnetic
The people opting in to install non-store apps likely fully understand that
the apps may not work on their particular device.

Anyone remotely tech savvy is going to comprehend this fact, and you're likely
going to have to be somewhat tech savvy to be willing to hunt down sites
supplying non-store software.

I wholly agree, there are quite probably untold millions who are savvy enough
to comprehend the limitations of their devices.

------
barrkel
That Nick Carr, whose Luddite rantings on his blog eventually persuaded me to
unsubscribe, likes the iPad is good enough for me - he's convinced me it'll be
a dead end, sooner or later... :)

~~~
glhaynes
"In the long run, we're all dead." :)

------
lallysingh
I really don't see the apocalypse others are seeing here. It's probably
because I spent 1.5 years on a solaris box at home (from my normally mac
life), nicely insulated from the _fix_ of the mac way.

Yup, Apple's consumerizing computers. It's about time, really. I'm rejoicing:
I won't have to help fix people's iPads with network settings, app
install/uninstall/reinstall, rebooting, or anything else. It'll solve their
simple problems without unnecessary complexity.

And I won't buy one. It's that simple.

Instead, I think it's a wonderful time to hack. I _really_ don't understand
what the problem is. Gnome is actually pretty nice now (before OS X I was a
linuxer from ~1995 to 2001, coming back now it's pretty nice!). My Nokia N900
is a wonderful little linux-based phone, and it's the stock software stack on
the stock hardware!

I still mourn Sun, and will for a while. I'm looking at replacing my beloved
Ultra 40m2 with a stock supermicro mobo/case combination. Linux will fly on
it.

If I don't want that, I can build arduino kits up myself! If I want more power
I can pick up a high-powered arm dev board with a display controller, wifi,
ethernet, and plenty of storage and ram to hack! Otherwise I have a pc, with
an open OS!

In my book, us geeks have been hogging computer technology for too long. We
have everything we need, and it's time we stop making everyone else suffer for
our thoroughly-satisfied needs for openness.

------
roqetman
I think of the iPad as a kind of dumb terminal. An end-user device with
limited uses. I don't think it will bring an end to other devices. The primary
reason being that you have to create apps on something. Also, I see this as
something confined to the Apple universe - while it is a bright universe, and
sometimes blinds us to the other Microsoft/Linux etc. universes, it's neither
the largest, nor the only area for us developers to work and play in.

~~~
jacquesm
I think a big part of that frustration is to think of what this piece of
equipment could do in the hands of hackers if it were truly open.

Hopefully it won't be long before linux is available as a 'third party
option'.

------
SamAtt
I think this is the best line in the piece...

"Doctorow is not the only Geek God who's uncomfortable with Apple's
transformation of the good ole hacktastic PC into a sleek, slick, sterile
appliance."

Though it's an anathema to most here I think the majority of people want their
computer to act more like their stove and less like the highly hackable Apple
][. That's exactly where Apple is aiming to go with the iPad.

Honestly, I personally don't have a problem with that. One thing that's been
proven in recent weeks is that there will also be bushels of hackable Android
tablets out there so I say let the masses have their iPad and stop
complaining.

~~~
robotron
You're right, except discussing why one might not want an iPad is not
complaining. It's just expressing an opinion.

------
Tichy
Reading that I tried to think about what is the progress in the iPad, and
really couldn't think of much. Except that it is closed. Portable - done by
netbooks. Touchscreen - appearing in Notebooks by now, too, it's obvious that
they can make for a nice GUI. Also, closed computing environments have been
around before (gaming consoles). So what really is new about the iPad?

In any case, I don't see why I have to care about progress if that progress
doesn't care about me. Maybe because of the iPad I'll be back to becoming a
weird minority again? So what, as long as I'll have fun doing what I do.

~~~
ugh
“… they can make for a nice GUI”

That’s your progress, right there. You know, that’s enough sometimes.

~~~
Tichy
Yes, but Touchscreens weren't an invention of the iPad, or even the iPhone.

~~~
ugh
Isn’t that the point, though? You could buy touchscreen computers since the
early 2000s but there was nary any UI progress in sight. Touchscreen computers
used essentially mouse centric interfaces. Sometimes they might have gotten a
pity feature or two, but that was about it.

~~~
Tichy
Aren't touchscreens still essentially mouse centric? Pinch to zoom doesn't
make a revolution in my opinion. It is nice, sometimes, but not that much of a
biggie.

I am pretty sure that touchscreens before iPhone also had some specific UIs.

What's new is the form factor and the long battery runtime (which netbooks
already had to some extent, too). It still remains to be seen if the form
factor is even all that useful.

For example a touchscreen in a desktop PC might be nice to have, but probably
wouldn't be very ergonomic for long term working.

------
mooism2
What is the difference between an iPad and a Wii/Xbox/Playstation?

Locked down? Check.

Can't use with programs that haven't been blessed by the device manufacturer?
Check.

Can't develop your own programs for it unless you pay again? Check.

~~~
cageface
The difference is very simple. Nobody replaces a laptop with an Xbox. The
iPad, on the other hand, is a first-class citizen of the net and could easily
become somebody's primary interface. Consequently, it matters a lot more
exactly what kind of limitations the iPad imposes. The iPad has implications
for film, literature, music and communication that consoles just don't, which
is exactly why people find it both inspiring and troubling.

~~~
dschobel
I don't how long that will be true though. Xbox Live is integral to the Xbox
experience and now has a fb application and all sorts of social games (1 vs
100, etc).

Between that and the internet TVs which are accruing hype by the day, I think
the distinction is largely going to be moot.

Basically everything is just going to be a content portal with some ancillary
proprietary benefits (it has an app store, it plays xbox games, etc).

The only distinction will be the form-factor and screen size.

------
robotron
Maybe some people have a different definition of "progress". I would argue
that a dumbed-down device is geared more towards luddites.

~~~
amock
This is the way technology has always progressed. The first cars required
extensive knowledge to drive and were completely open to modification. Modern
cars don't even allow you to adjust the choke and the gas pedal isn't hooked
up to the engine directly. When you push on the gas the cars computer decides
how much gas to feed the engine. Modern cameras come in two different
varieties: cameras for normal people and professional cameras. Why would
computers be any different? I can't think of any technology that became
mainstream without there being a dumbed-down version for people to use. I
think by your definition most people are luddites. They aren't interested in
technology, they're just interested in the benefits it provides.

~~~
leviathant
You can still do plenty of tinkering with cars. In fact, one of the things
that I love about Hyundai is that last I looked, they provide their entire
tech/service manual free, online. I used this to swap out my thermostat, to
replace the fuel filter, to swap in a bigger sway bar, to take apart my
dashboard, all kinds of things I'd never really even thought of handling
myself, except that the information was there for me.

By comparison, you're not supposed to change your iPad's battery by yourself.

~~~
roc
You can still do plenty of tinkering with _some_ cars. E.g. you're not
supposed to change the battery on the Prius yourself either.

Suffice to say, not all manufacturers are the same and not all products are
the same. And frankly, so long as the tinkerers are being serviced, I don't
see society as having lost anything yet, just because a single more
appliance-y product has hit the market.

And --specifically to the matter at hand-- particularly not when the
appliance-y product in question has a first-class, standards-compliant web
browser.

~~~
sstrudeau
Right, but if you were to change the battery in your Prius (and publish
instructions on how to do it) you might void your warranty but you're not
going to get sued under the DMCA. It seems insane to me that something that
could have dangerous side effects (changing a battery in a complex vehicle) is
less regulated than code.

------
wmf
Although Carr is talking about the iPad, I think a similar analysis could be
applied to Internet openness and the net neutrality debate. Is the old
architecture of the Net truly superior or does it just agree with our biases
and desires?

------
brisance
If it were possible to reach as far back as the introduction of the GUI, I'd
be willing to bet that the same thing was being said by people who were most
familiar with the CLI.

"What is this GUI thing? What good is it for? What can it do that can't be
accomplished by the CLI?"

And it would be wise to see how that played out. That there would be certain
situations where a CLI or a GUI and now a touch-based interface would be the
appropriate means to accomplish certain tasks.

------
pramit
My problem with iPad is the cult of Apple - why everything Apple does must be
good - bit.ly/cQxviX

------
stcredzero
_While progress may be spurred by the hobbyist, it does not share the
hobbyist's ethic._

Well said. The hobbyist also won't necessarily like the money making form of
it. Does that sound familiar?

~~~
zmmmmm
I think that statement illustrates his bias. He puts people objecting to
Apple's control into the basket of "hobbyist", impugning them at the same time
as implying that there are no business or professional reasons to dislike
closed platforms over open ones. In his view, the only uses for open systems
is so that people can fiddle in their spare time and make mischief, causing
ordinary folks pain and suffering.

It is a common and somewhat legitimate reaction, to say that geeks just want
computer systems to stay geeky so that they have more control and power.
However there is a very real _non-hobbyist_ problem with closed systems. I
don't think anybody would agree that it was great that Microsoft was able to
stymie the growth of the entire internet with their domination of the browser
market. And IE / Windows was relatively open, compared to iPhone OS and
Safari. The damage done by holding back the growth of the internet has hurt
consumers enormously, even though most of them don't know it and couldn't
articulate it if they did. Apple is essentially setting the stage for the same
thing to happen in the mobile space but far worse since they have quite
literally given themselves veto power over any application making it to
consumers.

~~~
orangecat
_It is a common and somewhat legitimate reaction, to say that geeks just want
computer systems to stay geeky so that they have more control and power._

That's a ridiculous strawman and I'm amazed that so many people believe it.
Most geeks would be thrilled if more people could perform basic computing
functions without constantly asking for help.

 _Apple is essentially setting the stage for the same thing to happen in the
mobile space but far worse since they have quite literally given themselves
veto power over any application making it to consumers._

Exactly this. Microsoft was only able to delay the rise of the web; with the
power to prohibit disfavored applications they very well might have stopped it
completely, or twisted it into a proprietary architecture deliberately
dependent on Windows. If Apple has Android shut down in the courts and is able
to form a cozy duopoly with Microsoft, we won't be seeing that sort of
innovation anymore and we won't even know what we've lost.

~~~
stcredzero
_If Apple has Android shut down in the courts and is able to form a cozy
duopoly with Microsoft, we won't be seeing that sort of innovation anymore and
we won't even know what we've lost._

I think this is overblown. If Apple gets too high-handed, some Chinese company
is going to come out with a cool new platform slick, cheap, and open enough to
support the next killer app.

------
balding_n_tired
Luddite? What does dislike of one or another decision on closed or open
development have to do with resistance to technology?

------
Tycho
And yet Apple freely distribute powerful devkits and a youtube video showed
the iPad being 'jailbroke' within a day of release.

Not so long ago people were talking about how the App Store had ushered in a
new age of bedroom programming. Some of this commentary is getting truly
grotesque - the Guardian had some muppet saying if the iPad catches on _'we
will have reached an Orwellian future through Huxleyan means, and have only
ourselves to blame.'_

