or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Computing pioneer Alan Kay calls Apple's iPad user interface 'poor'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Computing pioneer Alan Kay calls Apple's iPad user interface 'poor' - Page 4

post #121 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Could you actually read the article? His criticism is that they DIDN'T move past the original concepts of Xerox/PARC. The flaws that were in the original GUI are still there, plus some new ones.

And exactly which flaws have they not moved past?  Can you offer anything beyond merely parroting?

post #122 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I'll give you one...

I'd like to have 2 apps or 2 windows of the same app on the display at the same time so I could copy/paste or drag and drop between them...

Say, I'm on AI, replying to a post and I want to locate another post by the originator and copy it into my reply.

Yes, 2 windows are enough -- and the implementation need not be overly complex.

 

Sure, I wouldn't mind seeing something like that. iOS is still in it's infancy and a lot of changes and improvements are sure to come. If iOS 7 is as different as they say, then we'll already be seeing a different looking OS pretty soon, which is sure to come with changes and new features.

 

I still wouldn't call the iPad UI 'poor', because it didn't have a certain feature or two. Apple has to play a careful balancing act, because at the end of the day, everything has to be real simple to use.

post #123 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by alcstarheel View Post

Something a two year old can easily pick up and understand is definitely a failure in UI design¡
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXV-yaFmQNk
1wink.gif

I love that video...

You should have been there when we got a new kitten -- and it saw a picture of another kitten of the iPad 1smile.gif
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #124 of 181

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 2:29pm
post #125 of 181

It's funny that this story comes on the same day as a story about Apple totally revamping iOS for iOS7, and another one about how Jony Ive is changing the interface in a major way.

 

And I'm sure the same people who are criticizing Kay now (and defending the current OS) will jump on board with the upcoming changes, and say they are big necessary improvements, and they'll forget how much they ragged on Kay for suggesting changes are needed.

 

In my opinion, OS X has gotten too inflexible - in all the years I've been using Macs, I've never had to fight with the OS like I have to now, just to get the things done that I need to do.

post #126 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Could you actually read the article? His criticism is that they DIDN'T move past the original concepts of Xerox/PARC. The flaws that were in the original GUI are still there, plus some new ones.

(Applelunatic posted something similar already).


Edited by anantksundaram - 4/3/13 at 3:40pm
post #127 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

It's funny that this story comes on the same day as a story about Apple totally revamping iOS for iOS7, and another one about how Jony Ive is changing the interface in a major way.

 

And I'm sure the same people who are criticizing Kay now (and defending the current OS) will jump on board with the upcoming changes, and say they are big necessary improvements, and they'll forget how much they ragged on Kay for suggesting changes are needed.

 

In my opinion, OS X has gotten too inflexible - in all the years I've been using Macs, I've never had to fight with the OS like I have to now, just to get the things done that I need to do.

 

No one here is saying that the iOS UI can not and should not be improved.  You're just repeating a strawman argument.  That has little to do with the fact that one can disagree that the current UI is "poor".

post #128 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

What were those flaws? More importantly, what did Kay say those flaws were, and how do they cripple the iPad?

 

They have no clue.  They are simply parroting.

post #129 of 181

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 2:29pm
post #130 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


I agree with this... there are many ways individuals learn... We've all been exposed to "Learn by doing". Have you ever experienced "Learn by teaching"? By that I mean you are teaching something or explaining something and someone asks a question (or your subconscious poses the question) -- and you provide an answer... then you say to yourself -- "I didn't know I knew that!"

The same thing can happen with any creative activity like "authoring"... You must lean forward and participate as opposed to lean back and observe... both are necessary.

One of my grandsons is hooked on the game MineCraft -- and very good at it. He doesn't realize it, but he is doing 3D CAD and 3D Drafting (for which he has no training or interest). Think of the possibilities if he could interactively author the "games" as well as play them.
I kinda' agree with this too... the original iOS SDK had lots of flaws and security exposures -- so they closed it down. Also, I believe that Apple didn't know what it had -- and was reluctant to expose too much too soon -- in case it would prevent them from further development or exploitation -- and it could aid potential competitors.

...
 

 

I think you are the first person in the thread to get his criticism.  

 

Kay gets that the multi-touch interface on the iPad is easier to learn.  His fear is that like speaking is easier to do than reading and writing that the iPad is a step backwards in terms of capability, especially in the context of symmetric authoring and consumption.

 

I think he's wrong about that and your example of minecraft is spot on.  Etoy's implementation may not pass muster for the app store but the Etoy concept certainly be implemented as an app in the same way that construction can be done in minecraft.  Even the limitations of no interpreters is bypassed in that context although apps like koder allows you to do HTML coding which indicates some loopholes. 

 

It's a shame that his view of the iPad is marred by the removal of Scratch from the App Store.  I wonder if a Scratch implementation that ran in Javascript (like Amber Smalltalk) would pass muster.  It wouldn't have a separate VM.

post #131 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

And this is what Kay was referring to with his comment about "symmetric authoring and consuming."

 

Yes, and as I pointed out, he's criticizing Apple because his own app won't work the way that he wishes it to. He's just upset that Apple has rules which doesn't allow iOS apps to download executable code.

 

This isn't the wild west, and we can't have a free for all, with everybody doing exactly what they want, otherwise we'd end up with horrible crap like Android. So, if anybody needs to go and download executable code directly to their devices from anywhere in the world, including from children in a classroom, or from gangsters in Russia, then go ahead and use Android, problem solved.

post #132 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Applelunatic View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

Could you actually read the article? His criticism is that they DIDN'T move past the original concepts of Xerox/PARC. The flaws that were in the original GUI are still there, plus some new ones.
And exactly which flaws have they not moved past?  Can you offer anything beyond merely parroting?

I suspect it may have something to do with the lack of (or presence of) a Finder and the underlying File System.

I don't know what the answer is – but neither having one, or not having one seems to work.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #133 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


I suspect it may have something to do with the lack of (or presence of) a Finder and the underlying File System.

I don't know what the answer is – but neither having one, or not having one seems to work.

 

Huh?  That makes no sense. So the flaws of the PARC GUI was no finder or an underlying file system?

post #134 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Stop hyperventilating. The issue is not his legacy or his past contributions -- no one has questioned that. It whether he makes any sense at all in his current critique.

 

No. Bad example.  1wink.gif   The Wright brothers actually researched, experimented, built, tested, flew, and commercialized the airplane.

Kay's relationship to computing is more like Leonardo's relationship to the airplane. Leonardo was an idea guy who conceptualized about flying and built mockups etc. Kay did the same with computing (but to a greater extent,) developing some really important concepts and ideas about computing in the early days.

 

Anyway my take on this is that people are being a bit harsh. I think Kay is just promoting his concepts and isn't really hating on iOS so much. If he wants to be constructive he should be more specific, otherwise it does just sound like sour grapes or whining.

 

Personally I don't like some things about iOS either and they mostly have to do with inconsistencies in the UI and a lack of clear UI guiding principals. This is partially because the multitouch UI is in it's infancy, partially because of the fast pace of development, and partially because of poor organization on the part of Apple. I assume now that Jony is on it, there's a better chance things will get and stay far more cogent as the GUI develops. A designer at his level is an absolute master of taking a complex mess like iOS, rethinking, simplifying, organizing, and then reforming it into a better solution. That's what iOS needs in many small ways and a few big ways. This isn't a bash, it's just the way things evolve. iOS is still miles ahead of everyone else.

 

[and now after posting this I see someone else has posted a drawing by Leonardo further down in the discussion. sorry If I'm repeating stuff I have yet to read.]

post #135 of 181
I respect Kay, but as for the iPad not living up to HIS vision of portable computing and hurling criticisms of Steve Jobs' management style as the "cause"? C'mon. It's a free market: and Kay has had 20+ years to put a competing product out there. Don't hate, create.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #136 of 181

Dyna is not a unique name.  There use to be a manufacturer called, I believe, the Dyna Company, who use to make receiver, pre-amp. and amplifier kits for fm reception and the turntable.  I made each during the late 60s.  I don't know when it went out of business.  But Dyna not a unique creation.

post #137 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Stop hyperventilating. The issue is not his legacy or his past contributions -- no one has questioned that. It whether he makes any sense at all in his current critique.

 

No. Bad example.  1wink.gif   The Wright brothers actually researched......

Wrong person! 

post #138 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

The discourse today while passionate seems a lot more on point and topical. Far more mature conversation than usual. I can't quite put my finger on it but something seems different. 

 

As to Kay, I think any critique of his statements need more details as to what his specific criticism are in regards to the iPad. Perhaps another article give more specifics since Kay doesn't the type to just make vague criticisms. But if you think about it Apple also agrees that things can be improved or we would still be on iOS 1. There is always things that can be improved or changed for the better. I can't wait to see what iOS 7 offers. 

 

I don't think anyone posting in this thread doesn't think that iOS can use improvement in some area.  The problem is that too many people see disagreeing with calling iOS "poor" as saying that iOS or Apple are perfect.  They then go into long, fallacious arguments about how Kay is automatically right and no one could possibly be able disagree with him without being raging fanbois.

post #139 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I respect Kay, but as for the iPad not living up to HIS vision of portable computing and hurling criticisms of Steve Jobs' management style as the "cause"? C'mon. It's a free market: and Kay has had 20+ years to put a competing product out there. Don't hate, create.

 

I'll agree with that.

 

Looking at the posts, half of them sound like people who are either "currently in a romantic relationship with" Allan Kay or "just got dumped by him."

Really he has been incredibly influential and productive and is a pioneer, but he is more of an academic and an "idea guy" and he's definitely not above criticism, especially when he's making bold but vague critical statements himself. 

 

And to say "he invented OOP and overlapping windowing" (post #68) is really an overstatement (although again, he was a pioneer in the area.) It would be akin to saying "Woz invented the personal computer" or "Jobs invented the iPod."

These kind of assertions all smack of cultish idol worship.


Edited by DESuserIGN - 4/3/13 at 4:47pm
post #140 of 181

Wow that's weird.

 

Sorry about that.

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Wrong person! 

 

 I was quoting / meant to quote (?!)  jaragosta's post:

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


So, by that logic, the Wright Brothers should be criticizing Boeing for the design of the 787 or NASA for the design of the space shuttle.

After all, the Wright Brothers had a great idea and the current implementation is imperfect.

 

All I know is that there is no possibility that this was a user error! It must have been the software.  /s

post #141 of 181

To all the people defending Kay I think you should read this.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority#section_1

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #142 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

To all the people defending Kay I think you should read this.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority#section_1

 

And the one's attacking him can read this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_hominem

post #143 of 181
Even the title of this AppleInsider article misses Alan Kay's point entirely. To restate his point clearly: "iPad sucks because kids can't share their programs." Nothing to do with UI.

Kay strongly believes that kids should be able to write programs, and that writing programs is a way to become more intelligent, like Algebra, only more so. Algebra might or might not be handy everyday, but it teaches thinking.

Turns out that if kids can share programs, they learn a LOT faster. Look at http://scratch.mit.edu

But Apple's iOS security policies will not allow programming systems like Scratch, or Kay's "eToys," into the iOS App Store, because Scratch and eToys have as fundamental features the ability to share programs.

I know from personal communication that Kay and his assistants talked to high-level Apple officials, but their request was rejected. So, no Scratch, or eToys, on iOS. HUGE SIGH.
post #144 of 181

I assume you are one of the ones "in a relation ship . . . "

 

I'm on planet earth, not planet Kay.

I never said he didn't "lead the team" that designed the Alto (which never went into production.) That is one of my points. All credit doesn't go just to the leader. Ideas are bigger than that. I think I gave him his props and when I said, "Kay did the same with computing (but to a greater extent,) developing some really important concepts and ideas about computing in the early days." This and calling him a "pioneer" isn't sufficient praise for your religion?  ;-)

 

Everyone like[s] to pretend that the Mac was a clone of the Alto. It wasn't. The Apple team took ideas an[d] even simple notions that were glimmered at PARC and ran with them. The original Mac GUI was miles ahead of the Alto and the OS X and iOS and all the Apple hardware now are lightyears ahead of both of them.

 

The world moves ahead.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

 

What planet are you from? Kay designed the Xerox Alto (the direct predecessor of the Mac), and Smalltalk -- an extremely influential, and still very widely used programming language, so he did NOT just philosophize.


Edited by DESuserIGN - 4/3/13 at 6:34pm
post #145 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

You don't know what you are talking about. I used the Alto, it was in common use as a smart terminal at Xerox PARC. It was superceded by the D-machines (the Xerox flavor of lisp machines [as opposed to the MIT flavor, made by Symbolics and LMI, after having been developed at the MIT AI lab]. The Xerox machines were WAY, WAY, WAY ahead of the Mac, which was a dumbed down device, to which the same criticism Kay is applying to the iPad now could (and was applied): it was a toaster, and not really Turing-complete, unless you were a very good programmer, so it was a device to CONSUME (code, not documents), and not to produce. This was due to Jef Raskin's philosophy that a computer should be an appliance, like a toaster, with one red button. This dream is embodied in the iPad (it actually has exactly one button), but this is not a programmer's dream, but a consumer goods maker's [Raskin himself was (and presumably still is) a master programmer, but his vision was different).
Oh please, another KDarling who's used and done everything. I've also played with an Alto. I want you to list (detailed, please) why you can claim the Alto is WAY WAY WAY ahead of the Mac.

Or should we just take your word, like Kay who says there are lots of faults with the iPad but doesn't list any.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #146 of 181

So I dont't know what I'm talking about because you were there?

So when I said the Alto never went into production, I lied?

 

"WAY, WAY, WAY ahead of the Mac." Of course, the hardware was. That's why I specifically spoke of the Mac GUI. The Mac GUI was optimized for for ease of use far beyond the Alto's. Why wouldn't it be? It was made to be sold and used by actual people. What did those D-machines run once they put them into production? $30-50k apiece? That might just be a reason they didn't exactly fly as personal computers. Was that the PARC vision for personal computers? That they cost many multiples of the average users annual salary and that only institutions could afford to buy them? That's the catch with those utopian visions.

 

You seem to be prisoner of your own notion of computing and what is should/must be, all at the expense of what real people actually want or need.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

 

You don't know what you are talking about. I used the Alto, it was in common use as a smart terminal at Xerox PARC. It was superceded by the D-machines (the Xerox flavor of lisp machines [as opposed to the MIT flavor, made by Symbolics and LMI, after having been developed at the MIT AI lab]. The Xerox machines were WAY, WAY, WAY ahead of the Mac, which was a dumbed down device, to which the same criticism Kay is applying to the iPad now could (and was applied): it was a toaster, and not really Turing-complete, unless you were a very good programmer, so it was a device to CONSUME (code, not documents), and not to produce. This was due to Jef Raskin's philosophy that a computer should be an appliance, like a toaster, with one red button. This dream is embodied in the iPad (it actually has exactly one button), but this is not a programmer's dream, but a consumer goods maker's [Raskin himself was (and presumably still is) a master programmer, but his vision was different).

post #147 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

I am afraid that YOU are the moron. Kay is a million times smarter than you have ever been or ever will be. The paper you give is from '72, when computers were (by coincidencce) roughly a million times slower than your phone.

Which happens to be close to the last time that Kay was involved in computer design.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #148 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

 

You don't know what you are talking about. I used the Alto, it was in common use as a smart terminal at Xerox PARC. It was superceded by the D-machines (the Xerox flavor of lisp machines [as opposed to the MIT flavor, made by Symbolics and LMI, after having been developed at the MIT AI lab]. The Xerox machines were WAY, WAY, WAY ahead of the Mac, which was a dumbed down device, to which the same criticism Kay is applying to the iPad now could (and was applied): it was a toaster, and not really Turing-complete, unless you were a very good programmer, so it was a device to CONSUME (code, not documents), and not to produce. This was due to Jef Raskin's philosophy that a computer should be an appliance, like a toaster, with one red button. This dream is embodied in the iPad (it actually has exactly one button), but this is not a programmer's dream, but a consumer goods maker's [Raskin himself was (and presumably still is) a master programmer, but his vision was different).

 

I too used the Alto. "Played" may be more appropriate. But man, being a teenager at the time, I felt the closest ever to discovering religion, although I wouldn't agree that it was that far ahead of the Mac. (I also disagree that Alan Kay designed the Alto, but that's another discussion).  

 

Bottom line, comparison isn't fair. The Alto was a reference machine. Make no mistake, however, it was a mere prototype. Thought not commercialized, thousands were made. After all, there was nothing special about me as a teenager to have gotten my hands on one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post


Oh please, another KDarling who's used and done everything. I've also played with an Alto. I want you to list (detailed, please) why you can claim the Alto is WAY WAY WAY ahead of the Mac.

Or should we just take your word, like Kay who says there are lots of faults with the iPad but doesn't list any.

 

I repeat - why is everyone jumping on Kay for not providing a detailed list? Was he asked to provide one? Was he given a blank sheet of paper to write a thorough treatise? How much time was he given? Do you attack every interviewee for not providing complete answers within the 10 minutes given?

 

Arguing that because he didn't provide details then he must be wrong is not only an exemplar of false dichotomy, it is a sleight of hand disguising the fact that most here are not qualified to provide a cogent, learned opposing opinion. 

 

Alan Kay may well be proven wrong if a detailed debate was held with qualified peers (of his). He is certainly biased. But to attack his legacy, to continue claiming he has done nothing in recent decades and to keep claiming that his status is reduced because he didn't ship only shows that the caliber of people here is lower than previously estimated.

 

Finally, repeating myself, the notion of attacking Kay while fondling your Apple products is beyond absurd. Imagine, 5 years from now, there might be those who look at Cook and/or Ive as the men who made Apple, and think of Jobs as some jerk who abandoned his child, a drug addict and couldn't write a single line of code. How would you feel then?


Edited by stelligent - 4/3/13 at 6:46pm
post #149 of 181
It's incredible, no respect or understanding and say things like: "this guy sounds really butthurt". Sad. Read a little bit about Alan Kay and then see how stupid you feel for completely missing the point of what he is saying here.
Edited by mgsarch - 4/3/13 at 6:45pm
post #150 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

So I dont't know what I'm talking about because you were there?

So when I said the Alto never went into production, I lied?

 

"WAY, WAY, WAY ahead of the Mac." Of course, the hardware was. That's why I specifically spoke of the Mac GUI. The Mac GUI was optimized for for ease of use far beyond the Alto's. Why wouldn't it be? It was made to be sold and used by actual people. What did those D-machines run once they put them into production? $30-50k apiece? That might just be a reason they didn't exactly fly as personal computers. Was that the PARC vision for personal computers? That they cost many multiples of the average users annual salary and that only institutions could afford to buy them? That's the catch with those utopian visions.

 

You seem to be prisoner of your own notion of computing and what is should/must be, all at the expense of what real people actually want or need.

 

You are assuming that real people actually know what they want or need and that the greater good is to simply facilitate those wants and needs. Farmville for President, right? The people have spoken.

 

O'Reilly told us to stop throwing sheep and I felt inclined to listen.

post #151 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

 

No. Bad example.  1wink.gif   The Wright brothers actually researched, experimented, built, tested, flew, and commercialized the airplane.

 

 

How many planes did the Wright brothers build and sell?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

Kay's relationship to computing is more like Leonardo's relationship to the airplane. Leonardo was an idea guy who conceptualized about flying and built mockups etc. Kay did the same with computing (but to a greater extent,) developing some really important concepts and ideas about computing in the early days.

 

 

No. Bad example. Kay did more than conceptualize. There is significant space and life between conceptualization and mass production. It is not an either or proposition.

post #152 of 181
You just make yourself look out of date and irrelevant if all you can do is disparage other people's ideas. If yours are so great, why don't you go make something yourself instead of spouting this garbage?
post #153 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Which happens to be close to the last time that Kay was involved in computer design.

That's absolutely untrue. Why do you continue to say stuff that has no basis in fact?

post #154 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Wow.  Lots of vitriol of AI's enemy du jour.

 

How many of you who've criticized Kay know who he is?

 

I know Kay and he's a has been who once was at the top of his game and now is out of the loop so completely he is spouting nonsense. He looks at an iPad and its simplicity confuses him. Where's the command line? How do I boot it up? It doesn't let me defrag the memory. 

 

He feels the iPad lacks the capacity to enable "symmetric authoring and consuming." What the hell does that mean...? He can't program it in Basic or Cobol???

 

Life goes on. A person no longer has to open the box and flip DIP-switches or move jumper wires. 

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #155 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

I repeat - why is everyone jumping on Kay for not providing a detailed list? Was he asked to provide one? Was he given a blank sheet of paper to write a thorough treatise? How much time was he given? Do you attack every interviewee for not providing complete answers within the 10 minutes given?
Actually I do attack people for making broad generalizations that lack details. See below....
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

2. If I do, will you go out and buy an Alto? There is a huge literature on the subject, go google it.
Burden of proof. Do you know what it means? If you make a claim you're the one who has to prove it, it's not up to us to. Asking me to "Google it" is basically saying you can't back up your statements.

Which also fits with Alan Kay saying the UI of the iPad is "poor". If he's going to make such a broad and harsh statement in an interview he knows will be published then he should have followed it up with some examples.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #156 of 181

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 2:28pm
post #157 of 181

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 2:28pm
post #158 of 181
We've seen this in so many "former" creatives. Once they become irrelevant, they naysay the current direction of technology. I echo some previous comments; the marketplace has a pretty good way of saying "yes" or "no" to products. Perhaps if he understood the correct way of using "myriad" in a sentence, he would be able to articulate his vision--which he failed to make a case for in the marketplace--in a clear and compelling manner.
post #159 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


Cute, but I think any honest person could identify a great many such abuses here this list (in a quick skim I see more than a dozen that apply to this thread):
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Here's just one for starters:

Because Apple makes more money than Alan Kay, Kay's ideas are without merit
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_accomplishment

Your argument supporting Kay also falls into the Appeal to Accomplishment fallacy. Your argument is that since he has accomplished so much that he must know what he's talking about.

In reality, critical thinking requires you to evaluate his ideas on their own merits. But since he hasn't provided any ideas (just a statement that the iOS UI is bad), it's impossible to do so.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #160 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Your argument supporting Kay also falls into the Appeal to Accomplishment fallacy. Your argument is that since he has accomplished so much that he must know what he's talking about.

In reality, critical thinking requires you to evaluate his ideas on their own merits. But since he hasn't provided any ideas (just a statement that the iOS UI is bad), it's impossible to do so.

Giving limited answers in a limited interview makes Kay wrong and worthy of the dump herein? With that attitude, you must be on Twitter all day criticizing people for a lack of details in 140-ch long utterances.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Computing pioneer Alan Kay calls Apple's iPad user interface 'poor'
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Computing pioneer Alan Kay calls Apple's iPad user interface 'poor'