or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Flaneur

While waiting for an answer, i'd offer that he was autocorrected from subcuticle.Anyway, an interesting line of thought. The commoditization of biosensing will be a very big deal.I'd hate to see Apple go into the car business, unless it involved some radical rethink of personal transportation. The Tesla is laudable in its power system, but still imperious and unsustainable, like all cars have become. Not human or nature scaled, in other words. Too complex and heavy.It's...
Thanks for the clarification. He's on a bit of thin ice, but like I say, it's way worth it, and I can't imagine how else he could steer us to a valuable new concept.This is in reference to chrismariott's post on Apple as a "supercompany," #47, on page two of the comments here. The general idea is that while the shortsighted are worried about Apple's imminent decline or doom, the company itself is mapping out 25-year plans with a coherence not seen before by any industrial...
Now here is the proper big picture view, which I have been struggling to formulate, but not nearly so well as you do here and especially in the linked article.I urge everyone to check out the link Chris Marriott provides, and the comments as well. I haven't read the rest of this thread, but I think we've been waiting for this perspective. It implicitly makes good use of DED's valuable work, and builds on it. Thanks, Chris.Edit: To clarify, it's a link to his blog,...
"Why is this the 30th anniversary . . . rant . . . rant . . . "People who are ignorant of history are not allowed to tell others to ignore history. A rule of life.Also, check your post history. I've noticed you have an unnatural fetish for the word "suck." Tacky trolling. I would withhold your pay.
And the ability to delete the unasked-for download taking up space in my 4s's memory that I never installed, and probably never will.
I don't deny that some of the tech industry is careless about the longevity, durability, sustained usability of their products.I do assert that one of Apple's goals is to make their devices as durable as is reasonable for an expensive consumer device, and to sustain them with the best possible software within the limitations of the device.My original iPad still works well after three years and thousands of hours, but is not eligible for iOS 6, wisely, since it is already...
If you're subscribing to Katherine Rampell's view, she of the NY Times, that Apple deliberately cripples their older devices with their software updates so that you'll buy a new device, then I won't have much to say to you. The idea is absurd on its face, was widely howled at when it was published (see for example Gruber on the subject), and I have to say only attractive to someone with the sort of simple mind as Ms. Rampell exhibits.You want to think like that, go ahead on.
Yes, Virginia, planned obsolesence is bad. It means things wear out too soon or are changed only to make them look new and the old look old. Naughty capitalism.Technical progress is good, and it is inevitable and predictable. Change not for the sake of change, but because things can be made better. Leads to natural, unavoidable obsolescence.
What Apple does is not planned obsolescence. You can't float that idea here. Go over to MacRumors if that's how you want to make noise.
Yeah, they do, but that's an abuse of the word, a watering down. It originally meant fake excitement generated by PR or advertising. We still need that word, more than ever, in fact.Using hype to mean genuine excitement pulls the teeth out of the word. Typical of these shallow times. Not speaking of you, of course, but of those who use words to make a living.
New Posts  All Forums: