Steve Jobs was ?annoyed and depressed? over initial reaction to iPad launch

16781012

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 222
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post


    so ... uh ... an ICS app on a 10" screen will be able to have more - not just reformatted - design elements in its single view - buttons, graphics, whatever - than that app when running on a 4" screen? or not?



    Is there any need for the UI to be different on a 11 inch screen and a 30 inch screen?



    Think resizeable windows, multiple open programs, and then you will start to appreciate a bigger screen. But when the bigger screen acts just the same as a tiny 3.5 inch screen, the capabilities are not fully exploited.



    Hence my disappointment with using a cellphone OS. I really expected something with the capabilities of OSX and the simplicity of iOS, but instead, all we got was a bigger screen and an OS designed for a tiny screen.
  • Reply 182 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    To me, that is normal. Different computers have different sized screens.



    What is it about iOS which makes it necessary to always use a limited amount of form factors, and necessary for devs to rewrite software for different form factors?



    IOW, what is this "resolution independence" I hear so much about? Isn't that the way normal computers work? Why is it something new or unusual or special in any way?



    I think that this might factor into the multitasking discussion. If you can only have one window on the screen at a time, you cannot adjust the window to the optimal size. If only one window, background programs may as well be inoperative, because you cannot use them anyhow.



    IMO, the lack of multiple windows on current tablets is a big factor which argues against them being more than glorified toys.



    From my understanding, Android has always had resolution independence for the exact reasons Macrulez pointed out. Android was created to accommodate varying screen sizes from the get go. If you have ever used an iOS phone app on the iPad, you'd know there is a BIG difference. The app is usually a pixelated mess.



    As for using a different UI from phone to tablet, I like it because accommodating for more screen real estate makes it much easier (IMHO).
  • Reply 183 of 222
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post


    I encounter this daily, always have with Apple products, always will. Steve Jobs suffered small minds on a scale that would confound even the most able, intelligent observer here.



    It was a noble endeavor, being an Apple fan.



    But now, Apple is like, totally mainstream. It is of interest to Grandma, and is the first choice of the technophobe.



    Back when Apple was some kind of strange, niche brand, you'd daily encounter the ignorant masses questioning your "strange" choice, but not anymore. Now you are lauded as an everyman.



    Apple makes devices for the small minds now. Grandma, Uncle Pete, even your brain-damaged cousin can pick up an iPad and have fun with it.



    Instead of being some kind of geeky tech-head with a Mac, Apple fans can now show off how "Apple products are so easy, even a cave-man can do it."
  • Reply 184 of 222
    ikolikol Posts: 369member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    There are lots of opinions, but most of them are worthless.



    Are you a fortune cookie writer?
  • Reply 185 of 222
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Obviously, you are not representative of the market as a whole. Apple has clearly demonstrated that they know what they're doing.



    I agree with both statements.



    I do not represent the market as a whole - I am one of "The rest of us", somebody who "Think[s] Different" from the masses.



    Apple clearly knows what it is doing. It is giving up on making niche products for geeks. Instead, they are making lowest-common-denominator products for the mass market. They learned a lot with the iPod. They basically took over a market and dominated the hell out of it, giving the common kid (or perhaps, an overlap of most of the most common kids) pretty much everything they might want. They didn't include much for the niche guys - they instead concentrated on the great mass of common consumers.



    They know exactly what they are doing. And they are having GREAT success in making drop-dead simple devices for the mass market. AFAIK, they are doing better than anybody has ever done in consumer electronics.



    But I'm not representative of the market as a whole. The things I like/enjoy rarely become mainstream. I think different, and so I am disappointed that the iPad uses a cellphone OS.



    Hell, I didn't buy a CD player until maybe 1990 or so, when I got a great deal from a client who manufactured them, NAD. Back then, they didn't sound as good as vinyl, and they were much more limited in the selection of music compared with vinyl. But that didn't stop the common consumer from choosing CDs overwhelmingly.



    Not me. I valued quality sound and musical selection, but I gave in when they became ubiquitous.



    When limited-capability tablets become ubiquitous, I'll likely buy one. In the meantime, I'll wish that they could do what laptops can do.



    Quote:

    What's the evidence that your 'thoughts' are any more than the inane ramblings of a troll?



    I have no evidence. You'll need to make up your own mind on that subject.
  • Reply 186 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    Instead of being some kind of geeky tech-head with a Mac, Apple fans can now show off how "Apple products are so easy, even a cave-man can do it."



    If being niche is your thing, why don't you head off to Ubuntu land or some other strange Linux incarnation? Why continue to bore us all with your idea of what Apple should be?



    Frankly, it was being niche that got Apple into a world of trouble in the late 90s, and meant that it had to be rescued by NeXT and Jobs.



    Been there, done that. Thanks.
  • Reply 187 of 222
    iqatedoiqatedo Posts: 1,606member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    But I'm not representative of the market as a whole. The things I like/enjoy rarely become mainstream. I think different, and so I am disappointed that the iPad uses a cellphone OS.



    You do realise that the iPad and iPhone are running OS X, right? Perhaps you do, perhaps you don't, however, that probably doesn't matter, you'll just bully readers regardless with b.s.
  • Reply 188 of 222
    For those claiming that iOS is a phone OS and not a real OS...



    If you spend a little time, and do some research, you will find:



    Quote:

    The kernel in iOS is based on a variant of the same basic Mach kernel that is found in Mac OS X. On top of this kernel are the layers of services that are used to implement applications on the platform. Figure 1-1 shows a high-level overview of these layers.



    Figure 1-1 iOS technology layers







    iOS Technology Layers



    iOs Media Layer Details Sorry no picture





    and



    Quote:

    Media Layer



    The graphics and multimedia capabilities of Mac OS X set it apart from other operating systems. The core graphics technology enables advanced compositing operations with support for hardware-based rendering on supported graphics hardware. On top of this core technology are an array of other technologies that make it possible to draw 2D, 3D, and video-based content. The system also provides advanced audio systems for the generation, playback, and manipulation of multichannel audio.









    Mac OS X Technology Overview





    The images don't offer a direct comparison, because they were written by different people at different points in time.



    But you will find that:



    1) iOS and Mac OS X apps are structured/implemented much in the same way -- with allowances for hardware, the UI Layer and the desired UX



    2) any Mac OS X capabilities that make sense on the iDevices have been migrated to iOS.



    3) there are many OS X capabilities that have been migrated that are not currently used on iDevices.



    4) some Mac OS X capabilities have been reimplemented the "right way" for iOS then migrated back into the Mac OS X mothership



    5) some capabilities were implemented first in iOS, then migrated to Mac OS X





    What you have is a common structure and common implementation of capabilities on the two OS variants: Mac OS X and iOS.



    These two OS variants are continuing to evolve and continuing to become more alike.





    Then, there is this:



    Quote:

    The Low Level Virtual Machine (LLVM) is a compiler infrastructure, written in C++, which is designed for compile-time, link-time, run-time, and "idle-time" optimization of programs written in arbitrary programming languages. Originally implemented for C/C++, the language-agnostic design (and the success) of LLVM has since spawned a wide variety of front ends, including Objective-C, Fortran, Ada, Haskell, Java bytecode, Python, Ruby, ActionScript, GLSL, Clang, and others.



    Low Level Virtual Machine





    and



    Quote:

    Apple LLVM Compiler 2.0



    Apple LLVM is the next-generation compiler technology powering Xcode 4. Based on the vibrant open source LLVM.org project led by Apple engineers, the Apple LLVM compiler is modern thinking, tuned for iPhone, iPad, and the multi-core Mac.



    Apple LLVM Compiler 2.0





    With an ever diminishing number of exceptions, iOS apps already run on Mac OS X -- using the iPhone/iPad simulator. Currently, this requires a simple compile targeting: an iDevice or the Simulator.



    With the trending towards LLVM, I suspect that in the near future -- it won't require a compile for any specific Apple OS or device.





    Back to the current state of the art.



    Here's how you migrate Mac OS X desktop apps to iOS iDevice apps;



    Quote:

    Migrating from Cocoa



    If you are a Cocoa developer, many of the frameworks available in iOS should already seem familiar to you. The basic technology stack in iOS is identical in many respects to the one in Mac OS X. Despite the similarities, however, the frameworks in iOS are not exactly the same as their Mac OS X counterparts. This chapter describes the differences you may encounter as you create iOS applications and explains how you can adjust to some of the more significant differences.



    Migrating from Cocoa









    Bringing it all together -- the final reel!





    Many think that the post-pc era involves migrating a lot of activities and capabilities from the desktop to mobile smart phones, tablets... and yet to be announced classes of devices.





    Apple is the only company that has an OS that runs on desktop-class machines and mobile smart-phone-class/tablet-class machines.





    Google/Rim/HP/Nokia et al have no viable desktop OS or repository of desktop apps to migrate from (or to)



    As such, these companies OSes: Android, QNX, WebOS, Nokia/Whatever are islands unto themselves.



    Where are the desktop OS APIs and Frameworks and desktop Word-Processing, Spread-Sheet, or whatever apps that can be migrated to an Android, QNX, WebOS tablet or smart phone???



    They simply don't exist!



    Do you believe that these companies are going to hire hundreds of engineers, spend the thousands of man-hours and millions of dollars to flesh out their limited smart phone OSes to where they are capable of running desktop-class apps on a tablet?



    Even if they do that where will they get the desktop apps?





    MicroSoft has a desktop OS and a repository of desktop apps. However they do not have an equivalent OS running on mobile smart-phone-class/tablet-class machines.



    While Windows phone 7 sounds like Windows 7, the similarity ends there.



    MS claims they are going to resolve this, sometime in late 2012 with Windows 8.



    But, AFAICT, there will be 2 different flavors of Windows 8 -- one for the desktop and one for mobile smart-phone-class/tablet-class machines.



    The desktop Windows 8 will be able to run both desktop-class apps and mobile smart-phone-class/tablet-class apps.



    The converse is not true. I doubt that you will see Word, Excel or PowerPoint running on a Windows 8 tablet -- rather you will see a Windows 8 tablet access these apps on a cloud server.





    By contrast, some of Apple's desktop apps have been modified slightly and now run entirely on the iPhone and iPad (with some minor differences). These apps include: Pages, Numbers, Keynote, iMovie...



  • Reply 189 of 222
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tinman0 View Post


    If being niche is your thing, why don't you head off to Ubuntu land or some other strange Linux incarnation? Why continue to bore us all with your idea of what Apple should be?



    Niche isn't "my thing". It just sometimes works out that way. I have far-ranging interests, and many times they overlap with the mainstream. Most often, they don't.



    I'm not really into playing with new OSs or exploring software for the sheer enjoyment of doing that. I used to be, back in the early 1990's, but not so much these days.





    Quote:

    Frankly, it was being niche that got Apple into a world of trouble in the late 90s, and meant that it had to be rescued by NeXT and Jobs.



    Been there, done that. Thanks.



    My point exactly. Apple learned from both that, and their iPod success. Apple is now as lowest-common-denominator as possible, and rapidly becoming more so.



    And that, in terms of a tablet computer, does not interest me. In fact, it doesn't interest me in terms of most tech. Even back in the day, I appreciated what Bang & Olufsen was doing, and I even bought one of their products (a turntable with a MSRP of $1,000.00), but the whole dumbed-down ecosystem was not of interest to me.



    Yeah - I think different. Not usually the same as the mass market. I usually find something that suits me more closely than the mass market choice.



    These days, I'm watching the tablet market with anticipation and curiosity, hoping that somebody releases something that I am tickled by. A ChromeBook-type tablet for cheap would do it. A mainstream OS tablet which is as capable as a regular laptop would do it too - so I am hoping Windows 8 will be good. Even a cheap limited-use, medium sized tablet would be OK - I'm thinking that if it were easy to rip out everything from a Kindle Fire and simply install ICS, I'd likely go for that.



    I've never been an early adopter, nor have I ever been a mainstream consumer.
  • Reply 190 of 222
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post


    You do realise that the iPad and iPhone are running OS X, right? Perhaps you do, perhaps you don't, however, that probably doesn't matter, you'll just bully readers regardless with b.s.



    I realize that they use some of the same code.



    And you realize that is irrelevant, given that OSX apps cannot run on an iPad.
  • Reply 191 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    That $3000 machine you just bought from Apple? Steve says you might as well throw it into the rubbish bin, it was all a ruse. All you need to do is get an iPad



    Steve Jobs would never, ever, ever say that. Rubbish bin? Steve, being the California progressive hippie that he was, would ask you to take that $3000 machine you just bough from Apple and return it to the Apple Store for recycling. Please, if you're going to make shit up about Apple, do it with verisimilitude. Thank you for your attention.
  • Reply 192 of 222
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    IOW, what is this "resolution independence" I hear so much about? Isn't that the way normal computers work? Why is it something new or unusual or special in any way?



    What it means is that a unit object is the same physical size on all screens it is shown on, regardless of resolution. At least that's one use for it. That software shows the same objects the same size on iPhone 4 and previous screens of half the resolution is a demonstration of this idea. Without RI, objects would be displayed at half the size. In other uses, you can scale up objects without decreasing the visual quality. Think someone with a visual or motor control impairment, or to use a device from farther away.



    Mac OS X has this capability, but it was only a developer curiosity because it isn't officially supported, at least not yet.
  • Reply 193 of 222
    iqatedoiqatedo Posts: 1,606member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    I realize that they use some of the same code.



    And you realize that is irrelevant, given that OSX apps cannot run on an iPad.



    I do not think that you had any idea or you would, or should, have been circumspect.



    I run Word on my Mac under OS X. It isn't the Word that is run under Windows but I still call it Word. I run Pages under OS X and iOS. They aren't exactly the same but have the same feel. The same for Keynote and Numbers. They both run iTunes, an App store and cloud services. Safari and Mail too.



    Pick holes in the necessary differences if you want, your argument was still b.s.
  • Reply 194 of 222
    iqatedoiqatedo Posts: 1,606member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    For those claiming that iOS is a phone OS and not a real OS...



    By contrast, some of Apple's desktop apps have been modified slightly and now run entirely on the iPhone and iPad (with some minor differences). These apps include: Pages, Numbers, Keynote, iMovie...




    Dick - thanks for that, very interesting.



    All the best.
  • Reply 195 of 222
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    Apple is no longer focused on the rest of us. Their focus is on the great mass of unsophisticated, naive consumers, "the common man...grandparents, children, aunts and uncles who have no idea how" to use complex (or even semi-dumbed-down) tech..



    So you mean the 'common', 'dumbed down', doctors and artists? Or musicians, airline pilots and politicians? Perhaps you mean Chief executives or teachers? Small businesses? Sales forces? Older folk? Kids? And everyone else...in between. ie "The rest of us"



    Quote:

    I have little use for a dumbed down tablet,



    Of course you don't. Because you are so fucking special.
  • Reply 196 of 222
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by piot View Post


    So you mean the 'common', 'dumbed down', doctors and artists? Or musicians, airline pilots and politicians? Perhaps you mean Chief executives or teachers? Small businesses? Sales forces? Older folk? Kids? And everyone else...in between. ie "The rest of us"



    And even the less fortunate who have difficulty making themselves understood:











    What is Proloquo2Go?
  • Reply 197 of 222
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 198 of 222
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by piot View Post


    So you mean the 'common', 'dumbed down', doctors and artists? Or musicians, airline pilots and politicians? Perhaps you mean Chief executives or teachers? Small businesses? Sales forces? Older folk? Kids? And everyone else...in between. ie "The rest of us"








    If "The rest of us" has always referred to "All of them", then I suppose the phrase is meaningless. But it never meant that.



    And BTW, "dumbed down" did not refer to users. You knew that, however.
  • Reply 199 of 222




    Some, here, construed this to mean "Never use anything bigger than your brain".





  • Reply 200 of 222
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    Some, here, construed this to mean "Never use anything bigger than your brain".



    Then how do the phandroids get away with using a 4.3" phone?
Sign In or Register to comment.