

iPad: Or, why you have to look at the advertising - rinich
http://www.rinich.com/post/357307070/this-is-why-its-worth-learning-about-advertising

======
cabalamat
Is it me, or is computing not boring anymore?

I'll explain what I mean. From about 1995 to about 2007, the copmuter industry
was predictable. Microsoft dominated the desktop and the laptop. A user
interface in 1995 (e.g. Windows 95) looked and worked much the same as one in
2007 (e.g. Ubuntu 7.10). Sure, Microsoft had competitors, but Linux and Mac OS
were niche systems that seemed likely to continue to be so.

But now, we have new user interface paradigms, e.g. the gesture systems used
by the iPhone and iPad. We have new computing devices, particularly
smartphones. We have new killer applications -- telephony and TV and books are
all merging into computers, i.e. becoming a program you run on your computer.

It's even exciting on the programming language front, with new languages like
Clojure, Erlang, Haskell, F#, etc having the possiblity of breaking out into
the staid corporate computing world dominated by Java and C#.

Microsoft's dominance no longer seems assured. Apple or Google could easily
exceed their market capitalisation in a few years. And platforms are doing
deals with search engines: Firefox with Google, Ubuntu with Yahoo. Everything
seems up in the air, uncertain, exciting.

~~~
davidmathers
Yes, I think it's safe to say that the middle ages/dark ages of personal
computing are over.

------
alex_c
_shrug_

Let's see how well it actually does before we go on about how brilliant
Apple's marketing guys are.

Yes, the iPad has potential. It doesn't make sense to dismiss it offhand just
because some of us might not have a use for it.

No, not every single Apple product has changed the world, even though they're
all introduced as revolutionary. It doesn't make sense to accept their
marketing copy as gospel. Lots of companies pay lots of money for sentences
like that, it doesn't mean they're all successful.

Ultimately, the market will decide this one. Yes, it MIGHT change the world,
but it really is too early to tell one way or another.

~~~
rinich
Certainly marketing can lie. The "funnest iPod ever" didn't make the iPod
touch into a brilliant gaming console. (Casual gaming, maybe, come to think of
it, but that's beyond my knowledge. Anybody else know about this?) However,
it's good at indicating what somebody _wants_ you to think. Droid's ad wanted
you to think: "iPhone sucks, Droid rules." Apple's ad wants you to think:
"This thing was made by a wizard." Relevant to today's discussions because a
_lot_ of people seem to be wondering what Apple's thinking, when I think
Apple's been pretty obvious.

I actually wouldn't call this revolutionary. That's why we're not reacting
gleefully. It's evolutionary. It just happens to have evolved in a way that
gives it a potential radical significance.

Semirelated: Studying advertisements is a brilliant way to study history. It
lets you in on all society's biases and wants and needs and fears. Modern
advertisement is as insightful to the human condition as modern poetry, though
it goes at it a bit ass-backwards and rarely as tactfully.

~~~
benatkin
I disagree that it's just "potential" radical significance. I think the
advertising claims are quite verifiable by looking at the specs and comparing
with the iPhone's success, and thus it's a slam dunk. I think you made a
strong argument that those who say it's not going to be a big deal because it
lacks GPS and a camera aren't representative of the target audience.

~~~
rinich
Indeed! But all sorts of things can happen to stop it from becoming truly
radically huge. Certainly it'll sell well at first — so did the Kindle. I
wouldn't call the Kindle radical, though, even if it is pretty big (and a damn
good product at that). By "radical" I mean "so big every family has two". I
can imagine that happening, but I wouldn't take it as a given.

~~~
benatkin
Ah, I see. I didn't realize you were speaking proper English rather than
Internet English, and thus "radical" actually meant something far removed from
the ordinary. I've been spending too much time on twitter where "awesome"
often means "not bad".

------
angusgr
I gotta say, the tone of this almost turned me off. I got an impression of
mouth-foamy vehemence in some of those paragraphs, and it was a little off-
putting.

However, you're entirely right. It's going to be really interesting to see how
this pans out.

~~~
rinich
Right now my entire blog's in a very stream-of-consciousness mode. I'm writing
lots of long unedited things every day just to get it out in time for an
upcoming major revision.

I submitted this because I was a bit irked at how commentary here is
steadfastly ignoring what the iPad is and how it's going to be sold. I enjoy
critics as long as they understand what they're criticizing. Aaronsw's post
was enough to provoke me into submitting this.

If anybody thinks this isn't appropriate tone for HN, feel free to flag it! I
have no particular expectations for this submission.

~~~
csmeder
Your essay is great. It makes me feel less alone in this world. I didn't find
it full of vehemence.

`

It is okay to speak with force. At times force is needed to cut through layers
of of mental resistance. New ideas that we don't understand scare us. We fear
what we don't understand. The points you are trying to make are over the head
of most people. 99.9999999% don't get "it". If they did we would have more
companies that could compete with apple not just copy apple.

`

What do I mean by copy Apple? One example is the iPhone. If Apple never made
the iPhone. What would phones look like right now? We would have the the
Razor3 and it would allow us to download ring tones, not apps.

Heres some food for thought from Einstein:

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a
touch of genius --- and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction." -
Albert Einstein

"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful
servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten
the gift." - Albert Einstein

And the most important to this discussion:

"The significant problems we face can not be solved at the same level of
thinking we were at when we created them." - Albert Einstein

The iPad is not a solution to the question of: whats a better computer or
whats a better phone. Just as the iPhone wasn't a better Razor.

~~~
pyre
> _The iPad is not a solution to the question of: whats a better computer or
> whats a better phone. Just as the iPhone wasn't a better Razor._

The iPad is a consumer device in the truest sense of the word. It's a device
that was built to make it as easy as possible for the user to consume media
whether it's the Web, movies, music, photos, etc. Plain and simple.

Oh, and comparing the iPhone to the Razr is a bit of a strawman. There have
been plenty of PDA-phones in the past: WindowsMobile phones, Palm PDA-phones,
etc. They just never did provided a good enough interface to the user to
really take off. So yes. The iPhone was an _evolutionary_ leap instead of a
_revolutionary_ leap.

> _At times force is needed to cut through layers of of mental resistance. New
> ideas that we don't understand scare us. We fear what we don't understand._

At the end of the day, the iPad is a consumer electronic device not a solution
to world hunger. Please get some perspective. Writing a blog post praising the
iPad when everyone else is disappointed with it is not some sort of 'shining
moment' for journalism that will be recognized by generations to come as a
turning point when the tide of Apple-haters was stemmed, ushering in the new
Golden Era of Apple.

> _99.9999999% don't get "it"_

I'd say that 98% of people don't even know that Apple had a keynote today.

> _If they did we would have more companies that could compete with apple not
> just copy apple._

Most other companies are not in Apple's business. They are making hardware
with some software thrown on to push the hardware, or they are selling some
software for some hardware. Most companies don't have the attention to detail
that Apple does. Yea, sometimes they screw things up (sometimes _badly_ ), but
OS X doesn't have parts of OS7 hanging around in it the way that Windows Vista
still had some little-used apps with icons from the Windows 3.1 days. Most
other companies are just pushing their product out the door to turn a profit,
but Apple prides itself on projecting an image of quality they way that a
high-end car-maker does.

I also really don't like it when people get all uppity about 'copying.' "Who
copied who" is a tired game in the software/hardware industry. The real issue
is when someone copies something and claims it as their own, _not_ when
someone copies something. People adopting the techniques and methods of others
is how progress is made.

If you want to play that game, then Apple _copied_ the entire idea for the
gui/mouse interface from Xerox. Apple also _copied_ the functionality of Time
Machine from countless other utilities that were mostly relegated to the realm
of system admins (or 'power users' in the case of Linux/BSD + rsync/rdiff).
You might say 'but they copied it _better_.' But if you want to start talking
like that then you better suffix 'everyone copies Apple' with 'poorly' lest
you imply that 'copying' at all is a bad thing (and there should be a stigma
attached to it).

~~~
tel
_Oh, and comparing the iPhone to the Razr is a bit of a strawman._

The Razr, first time around, captured people's imaginations because it
suddenly offered the deep, unheard of cultural _need_ to have the world in
your pocket and have it be so small and sleek that you forget what that means.
The iPhone is very comparable, except when Apple did it they redefined
_world_.

 _I'd say that 98% of people don't even know that Apple had a keynote today._

But when the commercials come out, 75% of people will drool.

If you look at it from a cultural perspective, Apple is once again selling us
the future. It was already here, sure, but now it'll be at your doorstep,
charged, as soon as you like.

~~~
pyre
> _it suddenly offered the deep, unheard of cultural need to have the world in
> your pocket and have it be so small and sleek that you forget what that
> means_

Maybe I missed those adverts, but the Razr was just a sleek design. Its claim
to fame was how small it was. It was still just a phone though. It didn't
offer 'the world in your pocket' unless you define 'the world' to mean 'a
phone line and my contacts book.'

~~~
swernli
For what it's worth, check out the wikipedia page on the RAZR, specifically
the section on Cultural Impact: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razr>. Key
quote: "The RAZR has been said to the 'iPod' of mobile phones. Being the
slimmest phone during its release in 2004, it easily stood out amongst other
phone models. IT has also been one of the most popular mobile phone models
since its first release, until being surpassed by the iPhone 3G in November
2008..."

However, it notes this popularity was never matched outside the USA.

------
philk
I really like some of the points of your blog post, namely:

\- Apple does marketing really well.

\- Apple does ridiculously awesome UIs

\- Complaining about the fact that it's not particularly technically
impressive is irrelevant, most people buy Apple products because of the magic
rather than tech specs.

However, thinking about it some more I can see a few problems for the iPad in
general:

\- Two of the previous 'magical things' Apple produced - namely the iPod and
iPhone, had a clear application to get people in the door. In the iPod case it
was n-thousand songs in your pocket, in the iPhone case it was 'look, it's an
iPod you can make calls with'. People were already sold on portable music
players and phones beforehand, Apple just took that need and made a much more
awesome device.

\- The iPad on the other hand does not have such a clear application. All of
the cool stuff like maps/music/games and things can already be done on the
iPhone (which most people will be carrying around anyway). The other side -
normal web surfing, applications, writing, graphics, etc. - is handled quite
nicely by Apple's laptops. I'm not sure why someone would buy an iPad instead
of an iPhone, and then, once they have an iPhone, I'm not sure what the iPad
offers that makes it worth the extra $500.

\- Apple have had beautiful, well marketed things in the past that haven't
conquered the universe (the G4 cube, for instance, which was lovely).
Marketing isn't always enough.

Still, I have to love Steve Jobs if only for his ability to (apparently)
congruently gush that as a tablet the iPad is much better than either phones
or laptops, both of which his company sells lots of.

~~~
rinich
That's my favorite part about Apple: When they introduce a product that makes
other products of theirs look obsolete. I used to love my laptop's multitouch
until I tried a Magic Mouse; now my scrolling all feel stodgy.

I agree that the iPod and iPhone were much easier sells. But I suspect that
the iPad will be seen as a superior product. I mean, the one thing Apple does
_not_ corner the market in is standard computing. OS X machines lose out to
the Windows market. If anything, this is an entry into that market, same as
netbooks were; if you look at this as a cheap, simplistic laptop that just
happens not to be a clamshell, then it makes more sense. People looking for a
good deal can buy this, and it handles basic computer-y things for them, and
it turns out that they don't need all the cruft modern computers bring with
them.

But actually in this case I've got some perspective, because last month my
mother began asking me about the tablet. She owns an iPhone but no laptop; she
likes my laptop but doesn't want to drop that much money for something she
won't use much. Her questions were things like: Can I watch a movie on one?
Can I check my email? Can I read books? For somebody who needs to do basic
computer things like email and Internet, but who doesn't need anything
specialized, there's nothing you need that the iPad can't do. (I'm curious as
to how many people in the US own laptops. I've never thought about it before.)

As for the G4 cube comparison (though that made me think for a second!), I
think there's one huge difference: The OS. This is easily the best operating
system ever made in terms of usability. There's almost no abstraction. No
mouse, no doubleclicking, no app folder, no dock, no task bar... you push a
button and it launches something, and that thing is usually designed so that
it makes perfect sense without instructions.

I didn't get why that was a big deal until I saw the streaming keynote and
actually looked at the applications. I'd bet that Youtube on an iPad is
simpler and funner than Youtube on a Macbook, because there're fewer steps to
going about doing anything. The simplicity of the OS allows for far more
elegant app design, to the point where I think people will notice and be sold
on that design alone.

------
jkincaid
You say that the entire world wants an iPad. I disagree. I think this will
appeal to a specific (but fairly common) kind of computer user. Namely, the
sort of person who really doesn't know what they're doing on a computer, and
only uses their PC for very basic tasks. This kind of person will be able to
replace their laptop (or even their desktop) with an iPad, and I think it will
be a fantastic solution for them.

The problem, though, is that this "magical screen" probably won't be very
efficient for getting work done. Which means most people won't be able to
replace their computers. And I think it's going to be hard to convince these
people that they need a so-called "middle device".

EDIT: I should also add that I think the appeal will be much broader once
publishers make digital books and textbooks that are actually superior to
their paper counterparts. But that might take years.

~~~
harpastum
"Namely, the sort of person who really doesn't know what they're doing on a
computer, and only uses their PC for very basic tasks."

From my personal experience of being "that computer guy" for countless
friends, relatives, and random people on the street, that statement accurately
describes over 90% of the home computer market (i.e. everything but
business/professional use).

~~~
pyre
Really? No one in that 90% does something like build a resume in
Word/OOWriter?

~~~
rinich
And you can't make a resume in iWork? I think that part of Apple's
announcement was more significant to a certain crowd than we're giving it
credit for.

~~~
adw
If you can hook up a printer, this does everything my sister (she's a social
worker) needs to do with a computer, cheaper and more reliably.

~~~
rinich
(That actually gets me thinking — do we know anything about the iPad's printer
compatibility? Did I miss some announcement about that?)

~~~
telemachos
I work at a school considering a laptop program. This was our first question,
and we couldn't find anything in specs that explicitly talked about this.

I have to assume that you will be able to print wirelessly, but there's that
tiny fear that somehow you can't as a protective feature for the ebooks. Silly
question, but can you print from a Kindle or a Nook?

~~~
rinich
I've never seen a way to do so from a Kindle. I'd imagine it would be risky
for them to offer that service: What's there to stop you from printing your
own book?

~~~
LogicHoleFlaw
The cost of paper and binding, for one. That's why physical books are so
rarely pirated when compared to digital media. Printing a few pages sounds
perfectly reasonable to me though.

------
RyanMcGreal
> Other companies are selling computers. Apple’s selling magic. Which one
> would you rather have?

I'd rather have a computer, which is why I don't like Apple products. However,
I understand why this puts me in the minority.

~~~
cabalamat
Last time I looked, Apple's market share of computers and laptops was a good
deal <50%

~~~
RyanMcGreal
Given that Apple is primarily in the business of selling magic devices rather
than computers, their share of the computer market isn't really relevant here.

~~~
marciovm123
Yep. Apple's share in the magic devices category is more like >95%.

Funny how hard it is for geeks to let go of thinking that the worth of a
product is defined by how many features it has!

------
greendestiny
I agree with the author of this article, and I get where Apple is coming from
with the iPad. I don't know what to say to the people who are disappointed
it's not an OSX tablet computer - I don't know why you thought it would be. I
don't think an OSX tablet would be a good thing either, but that's beside the
point, Apple could still do that if they wanted.

I think huge segment of peoples computing needs could be met by a device like
this. I think there is a whole segment of computing uses now that have left
the keyboard and screen formfactor behind. Rather than this device needing a
niche, I think it may end up that portable computers with keyboards are a
niche.

Having said all that, I was disappointed by the release. The bezel is ugly and
I'm not convinced that it's necessary for holding. The aspect ratio seems
wrong and ugly. The screen is much lower ppi than the ipod/iphone. Half an
inch seems too thick as well. All in all its not the sleek futuristic machine
it should be. Hopefully version 2 will fix some of these things.

~~~
rinich
That's how I feel, too. The bezel I'm uncertain about, the aspect ratio is
certainly different if nothing else. I'm curious how it'll feel when held.
Perhaps the radical screen change will prove to feel surprisingly natural.

I think the huge (relatively) screen will make up for the ppi. As for half an
inch, I suspect that with something this big anything thinner might even seem
fragile. But we'll find out on launch, and whatever we hate Apple will fix and
sell to us again.

------
xcombinator
I agree with the article, but I understand the reaction here. HN is a group of
very smart people, and logical genius, that despise the power of emotions.

Human beings are not machines, and one of the most important things is how
they feel. Apple knows that,that is what marketing is all about and this means
for me that Ipad is going to be a success because:

1)When you rotate the screen, it feels responsible instantly.

2) When you touch, it feels responsible again because of the hardware
accelerated touch screen.

3) People could use it to write without making sounds(silence).

4) No cables, no strings, it just "feels right" like a physical notebook.

5) No ugly keyboard.

6) No limits in the orientation.

7) First serious computer you can rotate to read a book right, when you use a
laptop and rotate for changing the aspect ratio ugly keyboard gets on your
way.

I'm happy for the ipad, it means computer competitors that don't get it will
just copy it, like the iphone.

~~~
cabalamat
> _1)When you rotate the screen, it feels responsible instantly._

Not to nitpick, but ITYM responsive.

~~~
dozba
> Not to nitpick

That's exactly nitpicking.

------
philk
I think you're going a bit over the top by saying they've killed every photo
frame company on the planet. People aren't going to buy five iPads and put
them up around their house.

~~~
rinich
I was referring to the digital frames. Maybe I'm missing something (entirely
possible!) but I don't know what any other "display photos in a digital box"
hardware has to offer that this doesn't.

Upvoted, among other things, for making me imagine a waterfall of iPads
displaying upon them photographs of waterfalls. Unrelated imagery. Thanks!

~~~
jkincaid
Other "display photos in a digital box" hardware has a sub $100 pricetag,
which means you can leave them around your house doing nothing but display
photos without feeling guilty (or stupid).

~~~
rinich
Touche! So the digital photos won't disappear instantly. I'd bet, though, that
they'll take something of a hit from this, and certainly as this thing lowers
in prices they'll be hurt even further.

~~~
chrischen
The point of a digital photo frame is to display photos. The point of the iPad
is to do magical fun stuff. Displaying photos is just one thing it can do. I
don't think it's going to do anything to the digital frame industry. A
computer can also display photos, so whatever damage that has been done has
already been done.

~~~
rinich
I think it's going to come down to how consumers perceive the iPad. If they
see it as a simplified computer, then you're absolutely right. If, however,
they start treating it like a household appliance, one that simply cuts many
more specialized tools out of the picture, then I think digital photo frames
might be among the ones to do. When you can call up your photos in a slideshow
at any time on a machine that makes doing so feel intuitive, you might not
like the programmable frame.

But, as I said, I could be wrong. My own apathy for the product certainly
isn't anybody else's.

~~~
pyre
> _When you can call up your photos in a slideshow at any time on a machine
> that makes doing so feel intuitive, you might not like the programmable
> frame._

I thought that point of photo frames (digital or not) was to display your
photos, not to have an iPad sitting on the coffee table that has _all_ of your
photos on it ready to sift through. This is like saying that putting a photo
album on your coffee table makes photos in frames obsolete.

Unless you're claiming that people will buy iPads with iPad-holsters and set
them up on tables/shelves to constantly display a stream of their photos, then
you haven't proved that the digital photo frame is "on it's way out."

~~~
rinich
The problem is that I never really got picture frames. I think it's weird
having photos of people just randomly hanging around. Especially if it's a
small screen giving me a crappy cycling photo. I'd rather have a device upon
which all my family memories are stored.

But I'm the odd man out, I guess. I'd always thought digital photo frames were
dead anyway; from the opposition that line got here, I guess I'm wrong!
Apologies.

~~~
Psyonic
So basically you just wrote an article about how us nerds don't get "normal
people," and in the process committed the same sin by not getting what a
digital picture frame is for "normal people?" Funny

~~~
chrischen
I think he doesn't get photo frames in general, not just the digital ones.

> I'd rather have a device upon which all my family memories are stored.

This has been possible with computers for what, at least 15 years now? Whether
or not it's more intuitive on an iPad is subjective. But as far as having it
all stored digitally, a computer can already do that.

The thing the iPad revolutionizes about photos is that it allows you to walk
around with it around the house.

------
pavs
>"... because that sentence will sell several billion of these things."

Several billion? what are you smoking?

~~~
rinich

        hyperbole /haɪp'ɜːʳbəli/
        Synonyms: exaggeration, hyperbola, overstatement
    
        If someone uses hyperbole, they say or write things 
        that make something sound much more impressive than 
        it really is.

~~~
pavs
Are you implying your audience are a bunch of idiots?

Seriously, that's not even a hyperbole. That's a really stupid statement, even
for a hyperbole.

~~~
rinich
I'll explain again. The point of hyperbole is to deliberately exaggerate
something for effect, in this case humorous. I could have tried to estimate
how much Apple will sell, but I don't care about estimation. My point is they
will sell a lot.

My audience is not a bunch of idiots. They got it. You're the only one out of
thousands of readers who's complained.

~~~
kyro
Not to make an issue out of something so trivial, but honestly, it didn't come
across as hyperbole. The general tone of the article is pretty direct and in-
your-face, so it looks more like an actual attempt at estimation rather than
humor, for consistency's sake.

~~~
rinich
Direct and in-your-face, perhaps, but this is also an article that says the
iPad is magic, and we all know it's not literally magic. I refuse to believe
we're that incapable of discerning not-so-subtleties.

~~~
krig
Don't worry. Most people can.

------
stcredzero
It's one thing to make great technology. It's another thing to market and sell
it. Apple can do both. Apple really gets it. But what is it exactly that they
get? Here it is, they can do 5 things very well:

    
    
        - Hardware
        - Software
        - Human Interface Design
        - Marketing
        - User/Developer Ecosystem
    

If they weren't able to do all 5 of these very well, it wouldn't matter how
great the devices are. Other companies do the hardware & the software. Some
are even pretty good at the marketing. Very few companies do all 5 of these
things as well as Apple does and make that a seamless whole.

Of these 5, _the last two_ are often the missing secret sauce. Of these 5,
_the last one_ is the most powerful. They realize this. Why do you think they
do everything that they do with the stores?

Open Source shows that you can have nothing but software and ecosystem.

------
zhyder
I'm underwhelmed not because the geek in me finds the technical specs lacking,
but because I don't see _anything innovative_. The hardware and software are
absolutely predictable (except for lacking a few features like a webcam and a
USB port): no brilliant UI solution to the problem of typing while holding the
tablet, no special screen tech to work well in reflective mode, no new
business model for news or books, nothing. It's the lowest common denominator
of all the rumors and anybody's guess at what a "big ipod touch" would look
like. It shouldn't have taken any CE/computing company, much less Apple, years
to design this.

~~~
telemachos
I'm sorry, but did you actually read the post you're commenting on?

You may not agree with all his arguments, but the post addresses the "no
innovation" claim head on (scan for Sgt. Pepper’s, if you can't find it).

~~~
zhyder
I read it, and found the 'Yes, but it’s never been done all at once' assertion
weak. The OP's general point is that the iPad is 'magic', which I correlate
with 'innovation'; I think many of us are bummed because we see neither. (If
it matters, I was giddy when the iPhone was announced; there was a lot of
innovation in that device.)

~~~
rinich
Yeah, I get what you mean. At first this was a real let-down event for me. I
was hoping, stupid and irrational as it would be, for Apple to unveil a
completely new OS, completely new functionality and technology, and instead
all they did was take their already-successful technology and reemploy it.

What excited me after I saw the keynote: Speed and apps. The fact that this
thing is blisteringly fast is exciting in and of itself. No load times for
anything? Pretty neat. And then they did some of the demo apps, the NY Times
one in particular, and basically showed off then and there how the newspaper
industry could save itself, and I was struck by the fact that given a screen
of this size and a processor of this speed (whatever that actual speed is),
you're capable of making a lot of very powerful things.

iPhone apps right now are some of the best programs ever made. In terms of
build and ease-of-use and aesthetic quality, there're some things there that
blow away and Windows/Mac app I've ever used. The fact that now developers
have even more room to make their content means to me that we're going to see
some applications that are cool to a degree that we've never seen before. If
hearing birdcalls on your phone is magical already, I want to see what those
same creative minds are capable of given ten inches of real estate.

So, not exciting on the surface, but the implications make me really giddy.
I'm sure when we get closer to launch date Apple will reveal ads that say all
that but more smoothly. I'm actually excited to see what the ads will be like.

------
jrockway
If HN ever wanted to make some money, I would be glad to pay to not have to
see articles like this one.

Seriously though, the article is pretty good -- I can _feel_ the stickiness of
the jizz on his keyboard.

~~~
rinich
Oh, jrockway. Here's to our upcoming 2-year anniversary of you being a fucker
and my calling you a fucker. You've been with me since the start!

I think it's all right for me to call Apple my favorite company. If we want to
be douchesnobs, they've earned their pedigree. More red dot design awards than
any other company in history, more black pencils, an impressive list of
advertising trophies, and business sales that shock and awe us all. As an
entrepreneurial advertising major who enjoys industrial design, I think it's
safe to say I've got a good excuse for liking Apple.

~~~
jrockway
Your article is pretty good, but it just gets annoying when every article on
HN is about how the iPad is going to solve world hunger with its super-shiny
screen. It wasn't you personally that I was reacting to, but rather the
onslaught of similarly-themed articles whenever Apple releases a new product.
(The jizz reference reflects well on your writing ability, but not so much on
Apple. The fact that your article exists proves the points your article makes.
Excellent. :)

 _As an entrepreneurial advertising major who enjoys industrial design, I
think it's safe to say I've got a good excuse Apple._

And I think it's safe to say, that as someone who makes a living from writing
software, that I am not going to like devices that restrict users from running
my software... even if it has a really pretty case. (I have eyes. I know
Apple's stuff is beautiful.)

FWIW, I was a long-time Apple fanboi, diligently lining up to buy whatever new
product they had the first day it was available. But then one night, I was
debugging some software, and some debugging functionality didn't work because
Apple specifically broke it to prevent someone from reverse-engineering
iTunes. (Google "PT_DENY_ATTACH".) I formatted my Powerbook that night,
switched to Linux, and never looked back.

Apple's not going to win me back with a nice screen or great marketing. When
they stop selling music and videos with Restrictions Management and when
anyone can run any code on any of their devices, Apple will be my favorite
company too. But I doubt that will ever happen.

~~~
rinich
Yep! We've gotten into a lot of these discussions before. (I hope you took my
comment lightheartedly, and not as a personal insult — it's more my way of
saying we'll agree to disagree here.)

Usually I'm not a fan of the slew of Apple articles. This time I thought it
warranted some, but even so it's very over-the-top. For whatever reason we've
all decided to hate the shiny thing with the terrible name. I thought it might
be fun to chip in with my opinion, which I'd written as a private blog entry a
bit earlier.

I'm satisfied with the compromise Apple and independent developers have
reached with the iPhone. If I can jailbreak at any time and get more freedom
for my machine, then I'm fine with ceding it for the time being. Maybe some
point in the future I'll turncoat and go after something more open, but I'm
moderately retarded as a programmer at the moment and I've been slow to
develop.

This is an aside, but, based on your last comment: Does Apple sell music with
DRM anymore? Now they sell their files as unlocked m4ps with an option to
convert to aac. That stopped me from downloading mp3 copies of all those
albums, so I was satisfied; is there a restriction still there that I somehow
missed?

~~~
jrockway
_(I hope you took my comment lightheartedly, and not as a personal insult —
it's more my way of saying we'll agree to disagree here.)_

Indeed I did :)

 _Does Apple sell music with DRM anymore?_

As far as I know, _many_ songs are non-DRM'd, but not all of them. But really,
DRM didn't work out for the music industry, and it is gradually going away.
It's videos/software/books that I am worried about now. For example, I would
love to be able to buy TV episodes instead of pirating them. But they won't
play on any computers I own, so I can't. DRM goes away, the content industry
gets my cash. (But it's not good for Apple if I can watch the videos on non-
Apple hardware, so I can't.)

~~~
rinich
_As far as I know, many songs are non-DRM'd, but not all of them._

Hm. I thought that their big announcement last year was that they'd converted
the entire store to DRM-free, but I could be mistaken.

 _It's videos/software/books that I am worried about now._

Yeah, I agree about this one. Right now, I try and treat each thing on a case-
by-case basis. I never buy digital video, but I'll buy my games off Steam and
I buy the occasional Kindle book because Valve and Amazon have done such a job
of winning my trust. (Even when Amazon messes up, like with the 1984 thing,
they're very good at realizing they were dumb and sounding convincing in their
apology.) I also feel like books and games are so easily pirated that if
something bad happens, I can get myself a copy anyway.

Now, video _rental_ is something different. I'm completely fine with the idea
of paying for temporary access if I'm watching a TV show or a movie. DRM
doesn't matter if it'll be gone a few hours from now anyway.

------
scotty79
> They figure the only people who won’t want an iPad are people who don’t like
> magic.

Now I understand why I don't want one. I don't like magic in my reality. I
prefer tech.

~~~
ghoerz
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." \-
Arthur C. Clarke

~~~
scotty79
"Any technology that is distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently
advanced" so Steve, round up your engineers and send them back to drawing
boards because everybody (apart from apple marketing) can still see the
difference.

------
barnaby
Reading this article raised the bullshit alarm BIG TIME.

Yes Apple will make these things sell, using empty buzzwords that makes geeks
cringe. But the author didn't have to be a dick about it.

The Howard Zinn story was more important than this.

~~~
rinich
Isn't that what sucks about HN's rise and fall story display? I completely
agree with you. But if people read this and like it, the only way they can
spread it to other people is to vote it, potentially past other stories.

But you missed my point. They're _not_ empty buzzwords. Looking at the tablet
in terms of dimensions and RAM and DPI is like looking at a film in terms of
how many reels it takes to project it in a theater. Yeah, there's something
going on there that's worth a discussion, but to assume that the point of the
movie is to make a long film strip is a little silly.

"Magic" is not an empty buzzword. "DPI" is. I don't care about DPI. I care
about I can push a button here and it'll give me a blank screen and I can DRAW
on it. Just like magic. Or I can watch baseball and TOUCH it and make things
happen on the screen.

There's a lot of technology going on there, but the technology isn't the
point. The magic is the point.

------
carsonbaker
For a readable font, paste this into your address bar:

    
    
      javascript:(function w(){document.body.style.fontFamily='Georgia';})()

~~~
rinich
Not a fan of Calluna? I'm partial to it.

It'll make you happy to know I'm switching to a no-holds-barred
Helvetica/Cufón combination shortly. Everybody wins!

EDIT: Just for you guys, Georgia's the default font again.

~~~
carsonbaker
The Calluna would be alright, I suppose. However, I think a lot of users have
your second preference, Didot, installed which is unsuitable for body copy.

~~~
rinich
Whoops! I completely forgot I'd put Didot in there for a day.

------
zppx
> 'I will give you this magical thing that can do anything' Well, it will not
> open to applications at the same time.

~~~
rinich
No, it can't, but it really doesn't matter that it can't. Most applications
save your place in them, so the only cost of switching is that you have to
wait a second for it to relaunch. If you've got a powerful enough processor,
then relaunching applications is simply like switching. And because we've got
a single-process tablet, there's no slowdown over time, no gucking up as
things run dry.

I'd like Apple to figure out a policy that lets Pandora stream in the
background, or Last.FM. Those are the only two I care about. Using push
notifications for IM works perfectly for me: I see the messages as they
happen, which is all I care about.

------
z8000
Hyperbole is the best thing ever!

This made me laugh: "and so the only thing you need to make a beautiful
program is a beautiful graphic designer"

~~~
rinich
In every field of art, you see the biggest innovations when the technical
barriers to doing things are taken away. Make film equipment cheaper and a lot
of brilliant people without much money hit the scene. Make synthesizers
cheaper and you have the 80s.

Something very similar is happening here. If I have an idea for a great
hardware product, now I have the option of using this existing hardware, which
is beautiful and has a beautiful method of interacting. Certain of the UI
specs have already been handled for me. So there's less of a gap between my
having an idea and my launching it than there was, say, five years ago.

I'm hoping for further similar breakthroughs. It would be nice if making a
program was simply a matter of sketching out the user interface and seeing it
realized.

