Is this just paraphrasing? He has nothing useful to say at all. Hike your pants back up to your armpits buddy and get back on the porch.
Nope, not paraphrasing, but agreeing with another subscriber (not Mr. Kay). Unfortunately, I neglected to "quote" the other subscriber before submitting my post; therefore, I can see why you (and perhaps others) were misled.
More importantly, the last time I checked, the Internet was still open. If Kays wanted to expand on these comments (given the criticism he's received from a lot of directions), he could easily have clarified his position and listed some specifics. He hasn't done so.
Criticism? From whom? Ignorant forum posters? Why bother.
And he's had 3 years and 1 day since the iPad first landed in customer's hands to voice what is good and bad about the iPad. If he had spoken up we might have a better tablet experience today so it strikes me odd that someone with so many highly specific ideas would now elude to something has having a myriad of problems but in 3 years time never detail what they are.
How do geniuses know he hasn't? Or hasn't given other interviews with more insight? A quick google provides this:
"I asked Kay, of course, whether he felt that Jobs had stolen the idea for the iPad. Kay quickly denied such a thought. He actually enjoys the success Jobs has with this product and said credit has been given to all parties involved.
“I have been given proper credit for my research and so have the other principal contributors to personal computing and Internetworking. We've all been given the major awards in our fields, honorary degrees from universities, elected as fellows to the major professional societies, etc,” Kay said. “I don't know of any who wanted to be popular like a rock star or actor, so it all worked out well. And for quite a few of us, the big rewards now come from when our ideas are actually used rather than watered down.”
...
But some of us may wonder, if the iPad really isn’t the Dynabook and the Dynabook has not materialized yet, why Kay has not tried to build the complete device himself.
I learned that Kay has a true dedication and focus on what he does and isn’t likely to deviate from that. “Scientists are not the same as entrepreneurs. My main interests are finding and inventing. None of my friends who started companies, like Adobe, ever did ‘finding and inventing’ again,” Kay said. “The processes are very different and interfere considerably. What we did instead is to spend 25 years finding out what is needed in a constructive computer environment to really help 90% of children learn difficult-to-learn powerful ideas, and we were finally successful.”
...
Kay’s solution? “An alternative way to do this would be to ‘sell objects, not apps’ and let the different objects all exist and be usable together in a kind of extended desktop publishing Hypercard document structure. This would allow very useful mashups to be done without any mashing,” Kay said. “For example, one of the drawing programs on the iPad is superb, but it doesn't integrate with the word processor program other than extremely awkwardly. Object-level integration was in the original PARC systems and was more like what we intended for how integration would be done.”
You guys want answers for questions the interviewer didn't ask and criticize Kay for not providing more on what was a simple passing remark. That some parts of the iPad UI sucks. For all you geniuses know he was referring to skewmorphic leather. More likely it was the inability to reuse best of breed UI components across workflows as illustrated above.
For him that's a significant flaw. And I could see how a HyperCard like system could result in a tablet that is very powerful if done really well. I just don't think that the "done really well part" is doable to the same level of refinement as the current, simpler paradigm.
One recent example of what happens when you overreach is the flaw with CoreData iCloud syncing. That may never work quite right since it is hugely difficult.
That said...a modernized HyperCard on iOS would be killer. The risks are low when its just an app on an OS rather the whole OS.
"I asked Kay, of course, whether he felt that Jobs had stolen the idea for the iPad. Kay quickly denied such a thought. He actually enjoys the success Jobs has with this product and said credit has been given to all parties involved.
“I have been given proper credit for my research and so have the other principal contributors to personal computing and Internetworking. We've all been given the major awards in our fields, honorary degrees from universities, elected as fellows to the major professional societies, etc,” Kay said. “I don't know of any who wanted to be popular like a rock star or actor, so it all worked out well. And for quite a few of us, the big rewards now come from when our ideas are actually used rather than watered down.”
...
But some of us may wonder, if the iPad really isn’t the Dynabook and the Dynabook has not materialized yet, why Kay has not tried to build the complete device himself.
I learned that Kay has a true dedication and focus on what he does and isn’t likely to deviate from that. “Scientists are not the same as entrepreneurs. My main interests are finding and inventing. None of my friends who started companies, like Adobe, ever did ‘finding and inventing’ again,” Kay said. “The processes are very different and interfere considerably. What we did instead is to spend 25 years finding out what is needed in a constructive computer environment to really help 90% of children learn difficult-to-learn powerful ideas, and we were finally successful.”
...
Kay’s solution? “An alternative way to do this would be to ‘sell objects, not apps’ and let the different objects all exist and be usable together in a kind of extended desktop publishing Hypercard document structure. This would allow very useful mashups to be done without any mashing,” Kay said. “For example, one of the drawing programs on the iPad is superb, but it doesn't integrate with the word processor program other than extremely awkwardly. Object-level integration was in the original PARC systems and was more like what we intended for how integration would be done.”
You guys want answers for questions the interviewer didn't ask and criticize Kay for not providing more on what was a simple passing remark. That some parts of the iPad UI sucks. For all you geniuses know he was referring to skewmorphic leather. More likely it was the inability to reuse best of breed UI components across workflows as illustrated above.
For him that's a significant flaw. And I could see how a HyperCard like system could result in a tablet that is very powerful if done really well. I just don't think that the "done really well part" is doable to the same level of refinement as the current, simpler paradigm.
One recent example of what happens when you overreach is the flaw with CoreData iCloud syncing. That may never work quite right since it is hugely difficult.
That said...a modernized HyperCard on iOS would be killer. The risks are low when its just an app on an OS rather the whole OS.
This is a really good post, and the Tom's hardware article is surprisingly good as well!
Kay’s solution? “An alternative way to do this would be to ‘sell objects, not apps’ and let the different objects all exist and be usable together in a kind of extended desktop publishing Hypercard document structure. This would allow very useful mashups to be done without any mashing,” Kay said. “For example, one of the drawing programs on the iPad is superb, but it doesn't integrate with the word processor program other than extremely awkwardly. Object-level integration was in the original PARC systems and was more like what we intended for how integration would be done.”
My solution to global transportation problems is flying electric cars with energy cells that last 100 years. Do I get to take the approach of waiting for someone else to build one and claim it was my idea? Everybody has visions and concepts about how things should be and people who come up with successful and detailed ones deserve some credit if they were unique but it doesn't mean that people who actually implement working solutions should feel bad because they made a set of compromises for practical reasons.
You guys want answers for questions the interviewer didn't ask and criticize Kay for not providing more on what was a simple passing remark. That some parts of the iPad UI sucks. For all you geniuses know he was referring to skewmorphic leather.
He described what he was talking about in the interview linked in the article. He wants some of the desktop OS paradigms to translate to a touch tablet, as most people did when the iPad launched and what Microsoft is currently demonstrating. You will also notice the original hardware for the dynabook has a physical keyboard - is that an example of the best human-computer interface when it requires learning a legacy input model?
I could see how a HyperCard like system could result in a tablet that is very powerful if done really well. I just don't think that the "done really well part" is doable to the same level of refinement as the current, simpler paradigm.
That said...a modernized HyperCard on iOS would be killer. The risks are low when its just an app on an OS rather the whole OS.
"Even before its cancellation, HyperCard's inventor saw the end coming. In an angst-filled 2002 interview, Bill Atkinson confessed to his Big Mistake. If only he had figured out that stacks could be linked through cyberspace, and not just installed on a particular desktop, things would have been different.
"I missed the mark with HyperCard," Atkinson lamented. "I grew up in a box-centric culture at Apple. If I'd grown up in a network-centric culture, like Sun, HyperCard might have been the first Web browser. My blind spot at Apple prevented me from making HyperCard the first Web browser."
"How did creator Bill Atkinson define HyperCard? "Simply put, HyperCard is a software erector set that lets non-programmers put together interactive information," he told the Computer Chronicles in 1987."
you can do it and if you wanted a system to integrate them all, you do it server-side and link the databases together. There's nothing stopping anyone from doing this. These apps can all be created on iOS with software Apple would have no problem with. Right now it uses programming but it's not a requirement. Expecting 800,000 native apps to somehow integrate together without a security model is disconnected from reality.
There's no question that there are better systems, there is a question of it being possible to build them and that part is usually someone else's job and when they fall short of the ideal, the idealists criticise. Everyone should be free to air reasonable views but they aren't exempt from criticism.
We'd all like to use our iPads like we use our Macs but you can't until you introduce a scalable windowing system and take away the sandboxing and it doesn't work. There can be two modes like the way Windows 8 works but it works very poorly. I don't like that reality and I didn't like the iPad when it came out for that reason but I acknowledge that reality and the fact that (ignoring phones) the iPad in its current form is the single most popular personal computer in the world. In that regard, Alan Kay was right. If he wants to run eToys and split views, an x86 Windows 8 tablet is what he's after and if that's the right way to do things, Windows 8 tablets will rule the world in no time at all.
He described what he was talking about in the interview linked in the article. He wants some of the desktop OS paradigms to translate to a touch tablet, as most people did when the iPad launched and what Microsoft is currently demonstrating. You will also notice the original hardware for the dynabook has a physical keyboard - is that an example of the best human-computer interface when it requires learning a legacy input model?
For content creation until intelligent agents which were part of the concept yes. Even past that.
For symmetric content consumption and creation, yes.
His point is that learning a legacy input model has significant value because it provides a richer interaction model than just touch. This is why pen input has value as well. Content creation is aided with these input mechanism we have developed over time. Just like why artists use pencils, brushes, etc and not just finger painting in physical medium and styluses in the digital realm.
Likewise I can enter textual content far faster using a hardware keyboard than a touch keyboard AND it doesn't take any space from the display AND both keyboard and display is angled correctly. This is why many folks buy keyboard folios for their iPads.
"Even before its cancellation, HyperCard's inventor saw the end coming. In an angst-filled 2002 interview, Bill Atkinson confessed to his Big Mistake. If only he had figured out that stacks could be linked through cyberspace, and not just installed on a particular desktop, things would have been different.
"I missed the mark with HyperCard," Atkinson lamented. "I grew up in a box-centric culture at Apple. If I'd grown up in a network-centric culture, like Sun, HyperCard might have been the first Web browser. My blind spot at Apple prevented me from making HyperCard the first Web browser."
"How did creator Bill Atkinson define HyperCard? "Simply put, HyperCard is a software erector set that lets non-programmers put together interactive information," he told the Computer Chronicles in 1987."
you can do it and if you wanted a system to integrate them all, you do it server-side and link the databases together. There's nothing stopping anyone from doing this. These apps can all be created on iOS with software Apple would have no problem with. Right now it uses programming but it's not a requirement.
Web browser/HTML5 does not fit the description:
"Simply put, HyperCard is a software erector set that lets non-programmers put together interactive information"
Coding javascript, css and jquery is not currently easily done for the type of folks that used to generate cards with a little bit of hyperscript. Maybe Adobe Edge fits the bill but what you propose isn't it and you don't get it despite quoting the exact text.
The "Right now it uses programming" IS the failure. The "it's not a requirement" is the challenge. As is persisting the experience while in an offline mode. HTML5 does have offline persistence for web apps buy few use it at all and even fewer use it effectively. Google is going to address this shortfall but in my opinion on the Blink thread in a way that only really benefits Google.
Quote:
Expecting 800,000 native apps to somehow integrate together without a security model is disconnected from reality.
So is expecting web apps to not pose a security threat. In fact, web apps pose an even greater challenge than the type of composable objects Kay outlined because those object are vetted in the app store, local AND sandboxed. The app store screening helps maintain security more than your proposed webapp solution. Malicious objects should be rare. The same cannot be said for webapps not vetted by Apple.
Quote:
There's no question that there are better systems, there is a question of it being possible to build them and that part is usually someone else's job and when they fall short of the ideal, the idealists criticise. Everyone should be free to air reasonable views but they aren't exempt from criticism.
His primary criticism is that Apple will not allow other interpreted languages on iOS. This is a valid criticism and we're not talking about folks here providing criticism or airing reasonable views but hateful and ignorant attacks about a "has been".
Quote:
We'd all like to use our iPads like we use our Macs but you can't until you introduce a scalable windowing system and take away the sandboxing and it doesn't work. There can be two modes like the way Windows 8 works but it works very poorly. I don't like that reality and I didn't like the iPad when it came out for that reason but I acknowledge that reality and the fact that (ignoring phones) the iPad in its current form is the single most popular personal computer in the world. In that regard, Alan Kay was right. If he wants to run eToys and split views, an x86 Windows 8 tablet is what he's after and if that's the right way to do things, Windows 8 tablets will rule the world in no time at all.
The fact is that you can largely use your iPad like you use your Mac if you add a keyboard and a way to hold your ipad screen in a viewable orientation.
Having multiple windows open on the same screen at the same time isn't a hard requirement given the way you can currently switch between apps with a keyboard: cmd-shift-tab to the next app and cmd-tab to switch back. Option+Left and Option_Right to navigate through the dock.
The classic example of the current shortfall in touch screen only mode and the desire for multiple apps on the screen is where writing a paper or creating a presentation and you want to cut and paste from the web browser or photo album or another document or presentation. This is really annoying to do with just the home button.
With the keyboard cmd-shift between the browser and Pages. Cut and paste in between.
Not quite as good as drag and drop but it's a 10" screen and on a 11" MBA you're using spaces a lot (and CTRL UP/DN/LEFT/RIGHT with Cut/Paste) as well because of real estate issues. Maybe CTRL-UP/DN would have been more natural than cmd-shift-tab since desktop and apps are the same thing in iOS.
So what you write is expressly untrue and your criticism of the keyboard on a dynabook is misguided.
The "Right now it uses programming" IS the failure. The "it's not a requirement" is the challenge. As is persisting the experience while in an offline mode. HTML5 does have offline persistence for web apps buy few use it at all and even fewer use it effectively.
That's not a failing of the iPad design though. If someone like Alan Kay wants to develop a way to build web-based products without programming, Apple isn't going to stop them doing it. The assertion Alan makes is that Apple could have designed iOS better and less restrictive. In theory anything can be designed better.
So is expecting web apps to not pose a security threat. In fact, web apps pose an even greater challenge than the type of composable objects Kay outlined because those object are vetted in the app store, local AND sandboxed. The app store screening helps maintain security more than your proposed webapp solution. Malicious objects should be rare. The same cannot be said for webapps not vetted by Apple.
Native code has higher permissions and access to low-level APIs that web content doesn't get access to. That's why people make plugins and why plugins tend to be the source of security vulnerabilities.
we're not talking about folks here providing criticism or airing reasonable views but hateful and ignorant attacks about a "has been".
That's partly down to how these articles are presented but there's another side that drives this. Whenever someone influential speaks negatively about Apple, be it a computer pioneer like Woz or Kay, or a high court judge, certain people latch onto the sound-bytes and use it as fuel for further hatred towards Apple. The suggestion is that these influential people are above criticism e.g without Woz you wouldn't have a Mac so really, when he says Jobs was reincarnated at Microsoft, that's above reproach.
Mostly I'd agree that it's crossing the line to attack their character but the statements they make have a basis in their character. If their original concepts come from a period of time when lots of outdated ideas influence them then it's because of their mindset that they try to impose those concepts on modern systems.
Having multiple windows open on the same screen at the same time isn't a hard requirement
Showing multiple windows isn't difficult but it's hard making it work nicely. Like I said earlier, you have to allow for what happens when you turn everything round and deal with the relative scale and placement of everything as well as enabling and disabling the multi-window state.
The classic example of the current shortfall in touch screen only mode and the desire for multiple apps on the screen is where writing a paper or creating a presentation and you want to cut and paste from the web browser or photo album or another document or presentation. This is really annoying to do with just the home button.
You don't have to use the home button, there's 4-finger swipe. Exposé would be nice though e.g 4-finger up and then pick one of say 9 apps at a time. Even like the app switcher in OS X so 4-finger swiping left-right wouldn't move the screens but show a switcher view where previews cycle and it opens the one you let go on.
So what you write is expressly untrue and your criticism of the keyboard on a dynabook is misguided.
So, when you turn the tablet into landscape, how does that physical keyboard work out or are you not supposed to hold it that way? Given that it's in portrait, that means multiple apps have to fit side by side with only the smallest width. When you carry it, are you supposed to avoid accidental input? Kay even criticised the qwerty keyboard himself and yet he hardwires it into his design. The iPad can have any language or layout required, even a number pad.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Andersen
Is this just paraphrasing? He has nothing useful to say at all. Hike your pants back up to your armpits buddy and get back on the porch.
Nope, not paraphrasing, but agreeing with another subscriber (not Mr. Kay). Unfortunately, I neglected to "quote" the other subscriber before submitting my post; therefore, I can see why you (and perhaps others) were misled.
Criticism? From whom? Ignorant forum posters? Why bother.
How do geniuses know he hasn't? Or hasn't given other interviews with more insight? A quick google provides this:
http://m.tomshardware.com/news/alan-kay-steve-jobs-ipad-iphone,10209.html
"I asked Kay, of course, whether he felt that Jobs had stolen the idea for the iPad. Kay quickly denied such a thought. He actually enjoys the success Jobs has with this product and said credit has been given to all parties involved.
“I have been given proper credit for my research and so have the other principal contributors to personal computing and Internetworking. We've all been given the major awards in our fields, honorary degrees from universities, elected as fellows to the major professional societies, etc,” Kay said. “I don't know of any who wanted to be popular like a rock star or actor, so it all worked out well. And for quite a few of us, the big rewards now come from when our ideas are actually used rather than watered down.”
...
But some of us may wonder, if the iPad really isn’t the Dynabook and the Dynabook has not materialized yet, why Kay has not tried to build the complete device himself.
I learned that Kay has a true dedication and focus on what he does and isn’t likely to deviate from that. “Scientists are not the same as entrepreneurs. My main interests are finding and inventing. None of my friends who started companies, like Adobe, ever did ‘finding and inventing’ again,” Kay said. “The processes are very different and interfere considerably. What we did instead is to spend 25 years finding out what is needed in a constructive computer environment to really help 90% of children learn difficult-to-learn powerful ideas, and we were finally successful.”
...
Kay’s solution? “An alternative way to do this would be to ‘sell objects, not apps’ and let the different objects all exist and be usable together in a kind of extended desktop publishing Hypercard document structure. This would allow very useful mashups to be done without any mashing,” Kay said. “For example, one of the drawing programs on the iPad is superb, but it doesn't integrate with the word processor program other than extremely awkwardly. Object-level integration was in the original PARC systems and was more like what we intended for how integration would be done.”
You guys want answers for questions the interviewer didn't ask and criticize Kay for not providing more on what was a simple passing remark. That some parts of the iPad UI sucks. For all you geniuses know he was referring to skewmorphic leather. More likely it was the inability to reuse best of breed UI components across workflows as illustrated above.
For him that's a significant flaw. And I could see how a HyperCard like system could result in a tablet that is very powerful if done really well. I just don't think that the "done really well part" is doable to the same level of refinement as the current, simpler paradigm.
One recent example of what happens when you overreach is the flaw with CoreData iCloud syncing. That may never work quite right since it is hugely difficult.
That said...a modernized HyperCard on iOS would be killer. The risks are low when its just an app on an OS rather the whole OS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
How do geniuses know he hasn't? Or hasn't given other interviews with more insight? A quick google provides this:
http://m.tomshardware.com/news/alan-kay-steve-jobs-ipad-iphone,10209.html
"I asked Kay, of course, whether he felt that Jobs had stolen the idea for the iPad. Kay quickly denied such a thought. He actually enjoys the success Jobs has with this product and said credit has been given to all parties involved.
“I have been given proper credit for my research and so have the other principal contributors to personal computing and Internetworking. We've all been given the major awards in our fields, honorary degrees from universities, elected as fellows to the major professional societies, etc,” Kay said. “I don't know of any who wanted to be popular like a rock star or actor, so it all worked out well. And for quite a few of us, the big rewards now come from when our ideas are actually used rather than watered down.”
...
But some of us may wonder, if the iPad really isn’t the Dynabook and the Dynabook has not materialized yet, why Kay has not tried to build the complete device himself.
I learned that Kay has a true dedication and focus on what he does and isn’t likely to deviate from that. “Scientists are not the same as entrepreneurs. My main interests are finding and inventing. None of my friends who started companies, like Adobe, ever did ‘finding and inventing’ again,” Kay said. “The processes are very different and interfere considerably. What we did instead is to spend 25 years finding out what is needed in a constructive computer environment to really help 90% of children learn difficult-to-learn powerful ideas, and we were finally successful.”
...
Kay’s solution? “An alternative way to do this would be to ‘sell objects, not apps’ and let the different objects all exist and be usable together in a kind of extended desktop publishing Hypercard document structure. This would allow very useful mashups to be done without any mashing,” Kay said. “For example, one of the drawing programs on the iPad is superb, but it doesn't integrate with the word processor program other than extremely awkwardly. Object-level integration was in the original PARC systems and was more like what we intended for how integration would be done.”
You guys want answers for questions the interviewer didn't ask and criticize Kay for not providing more on what was a simple passing remark. That some parts of the iPad UI sucks. For all you geniuses know he was referring to skewmorphic leather. More likely it was the inability to reuse best of breed UI components across workflows as illustrated above.
For him that's a significant flaw. And I could see how a HyperCard like system could result in a tablet that is very powerful if done really well. I just don't think that the "done really well part" is doable to the same level of refinement as the current, simpler paradigm.
One recent example of what happens when you overreach is the flaw with CoreData iCloud syncing. That may never work quite right since it is hugely difficult.
That said...a modernized HyperCard on iOS would be killer. The risks are low when its just an app on an OS rather the whole OS.
This is a really good post, and the Tom's hardware article is surprisingly good as well!
My solution to global transportation problems is flying electric cars with energy cells that last 100 years. Do I get to take the approach of waiting for someone else to build one and claim it was my idea? Everybody has visions and concepts about how things should be and people who come up with successful and detailed ones deserve some credit if they were unique but it doesn't mean that people who actually implement working solutions should feel bad because they made a set of compromises for practical reasons.
He described what he was talking about in the interview linked in the article. He wants some of the desktop OS paradigms to translate to a touch tablet, as most people did when the iPad launched and what Microsoft is currently demonstrating. You will also notice the original hardware for the dynabook has a physical keyboard - is that an example of the best human-computer interface when it requires learning a legacy input model?
It has Hypercard:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/05/25-years-of-hypercard-the-missing-link-to-the-web/
"Even before its cancellation, HyperCard's inventor saw the end coming. In an angst-filled 2002 interview, Bill Atkinson confessed to his Big Mistake. If only he had figured out that stacks could be linked through cyberspace, and not just installed on a particular desktop, things would have been different.
"I missed the mark with HyperCard," Atkinson lamented. "I grew up in a box-centric culture at Apple. If I'd grown up in a network-centric culture, like Sun, HyperCard might have been the first Web browser. My blind spot at Apple prevented me from making HyperCard the first Web browser."
"How did creator Bill Atkinson define HyperCard? "Simply put, HyperCard is a software erector set that lets non-programmers put together interactive information," he told the Computer Chronicles in 1987."
You want to make a drawing program:
http://mudcu.be/sketchpad/
a game:
http://chrome.angrybirds.com
a Text Editor:
http://docs.google.com
you can do it and if you wanted a system to integrate them all, you do it server-side and link the databases together. There's nothing stopping anyone from doing this. These apps can all be created on iOS with software Apple would have no problem with. Right now it uses programming but it's not a requirement. Expecting 800,000 native apps to somehow integrate together without a security model is disconnected from reality.
There's no question that there are better systems, there is a question of it being possible to build them and that part is usually someone else's job and when they fall short of the ideal, the idealists criticise. Everyone should be free to air reasonable views but they aren't exempt from criticism.
We'd all like to use our iPads like we use our Macs but you can't until you introduce a scalable windowing system and take away the sandboxing and it doesn't work. There can be two modes like the way Windows 8 works but it works very poorly. I don't like that reality and I didn't like the iPad when it came out for that reason but I acknowledge that reality and the fact that (ignoring phones) the iPad in its current form is the single most popular personal computer in the world. In that regard, Alan Kay was right. If he wants to run eToys and split views, an x86 Windows 8 tablet is what he's after and if that's the right way to do things, Windows 8 tablets will rule the world in no time at all.
Quote:
He described what he was talking about in the interview linked in the article. He wants some of the desktop OS paradigms to translate to a touch tablet, as most people did when the iPad launched and what Microsoft is currently demonstrating. You will also notice the original hardware for the dynabook has a physical keyboard - is that an example of the best human-computer interface when it requires learning a legacy input model?
For content creation until intelligent agents which were part of the concept yes. Even past that.
For symmetric content consumption and creation, yes.
His point is that learning a legacy input model has significant value because it provides a richer interaction model than just touch. This is why pen input has value as well. Content creation is aided with these input mechanism we have developed over time. Just like why artists use pencils, brushes, etc and not just finger painting in physical medium and styluses in the digital realm.
Likewise I can enter textual content far faster using a hardware keyboard than a touch keyboard AND it doesn't take any space from the display AND both keyboard and display is angled correctly. This is why many folks buy keyboard folios for their iPads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
It has Hypercard:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/05/25-years-of-hypercard-the-missing-link-to-the-web/
"Even before its cancellation, HyperCard's inventor saw the end coming. In an angst-filled 2002 interview, Bill Atkinson confessed to his Big Mistake. If only he had figured out that stacks could be linked through cyberspace, and not just installed on a particular desktop, things would have been different.
"I missed the mark with HyperCard," Atkinson lamented. "I grew up in a box-centric culture at Apple. If I'd grown up in a network-centric culture, like Sun, HyperCard might have been the first Web browser. My blind spot at Apple prevented me from making HyperCard the first Web browser."
"How did creator Bill Atkinson define HyperCard? "Simply put, HyperCard is a software erector set that lets non-programmers put together interactive information," he told the Computer Chronicles in 1987."
You want to make a drawing program:
http://mudcu.be/sketchpad/
a game:
http://chrome.angrybirds.com
a Text Editor:
http://docs.google.com
you can do it and if you wanted a system to integrate them all, you do it server-side and link the databases together. There's nothing stopping anyone from doing this. These apps can all be created on iOS with software Apple would have no problem with. Right now it uses programming but it's not a requirement.
Web browser/HTML5 does not fit the description:
"Simply put, HyperCard is a software erector set that lets non-programmers put together interactive information"
Coding javascript, css and jquery is not currently easily done for the type of folks that used to generate cards with a little bit of hyperscript. Maybe Adobe Edge fits the bill but what you propose isn't it and you don't get it despite quoting the exact text.
The "Right now it uses programming" IS the failure. The "it's not a requirement" is the challenge. As is persisting the experience while in an offline mode. HTML5 does have offline persistence for web apps buy few use it at all and even fewer use it effectively. Google is going to address this shortfall but in my opinion on the Blink thread in a way that only really benefits Google.
Quote:
Expecting 800,000 native apps to somehow integrate together without a security model is disconnected from reality.
So is expecting web apps to not pose a security threat. In fact, web apps pose an even greater challenge than the type of composable objects Kay outlined because those object are vetted in the app store, local AND sandboxed. The app store screening helps maintain security more than your proposed webapp solution. Malicious objects should be rare. The same cannot be said for webapps not vetted by Apple.
Quote:
There's no question that there are better systems, there is a question of it being possible to build them and that part is usually someone else's job and when they fall short of the ideal, the idealists criticise. Everyone should be free to air reasonable views but they aren't exempt from criticism.
His primary criticism is that Apple will not allow other interpreted languages on iOS. This is a valid criticism and we're not talking about folks here providing criticism or airing reasonable views but hateful and ignorant attacks about a "has been".
Quote:
We'd all like to use our iPads like we use our Macs but you can't until you introduce a scalable windowing system and take away the sandboxing and it doesn't work. There can be two modes like the way Windows 8 works but it works very poorly. I don't like that reality and I didn't like the iPad when it came out for that reason but I acknowledge that reality and the fact that (ignoring phones) the iPad in its current form is the single most popular personal computer in the world. In that regard, Alan Kay was right. If he wants to run eToys and split views, an x86 Windows 8 tablet is what he's after and if that's the right way to do things, Windows 8 tablets will rule the world in no time at all.
The fact is that you can largely use your iPad like you use your Mac if you add a keyboard and a way to hold your ipad screen in a viewable orientation.
Having multiple windows open on the same screen at the same time isn't a hard requirement given the way you can currently switch between apps with a keyboard: cmd-shift-tab to the next app and cmd-tab to switch back. Option+Left and Option_Right to navigate through the dock.
The classic example of the current shortfall in touch screen only mode and the desire for multiple apps on the screen is where writing a paper or creating a presentation and you want to cut and paste from the web browser or photo album or another document or presentation. This is really annoying to do with just the home button.
With the keyboard cmd-shift between the browser and Pages. Cut and paste in between.
Not quite as good as drag and drop but it's a 10" screen and on a 11" MBA you're using spaces a lot (and CTRL UP/DN/LEFT/RIGHT with Cut/Paste) as well because of real estate issues. Maybe CTRL-UP/DN would have been more natural than cmd-shift-tab since desktop and apps are the same thing in iOS.
So what you write is expressly untrue and your criticism of the keyboard on a dynabook is misguided.
That's not a failing of the iPad design though. If someone like Alan Kay wants to develop a way to build web-based products without programming, Apple isn't going to stop them doing it. The assertion Alan makes is that Apple could have designed iOS better and less restrictive. In theory anything can be designed better.
Native code has higher permissions and access to low-level APIs that web content doesn't get access to. That's why people make plugins and why plugins tend to be the source of security vulnerabilities.
That's partly down to how these articles are presented but there's another side that drives this. Whenever someone influential speaks negatively about Apple, be it a computer pioneer like Woz or Kay, or a high court judge, certain people latch onto the sound-bytes and use it as fuel for further hatred towards Apple. The suggestion is that these influential people are above criticism e.g without Woz you wouldn't have a Mac so really, when he says Jobs was reincarnated at Microsoft, that's above reproach.
Mostly I'd agree that it's crossing the line to attack their character but the statements they make have a basis in their character. If their original concepts come from a period of time when lots of outdated ideas influence them then it's because of their mindset that they try to impose those concepts on modern systems.
Showing multiple windows isn't difficult but it's hard making it work nicely. Like I said earlier, you have to allow for what happens when you turn everything round and deal with the relative scale and placement of everything as well as enabling and disabling the multi-window state.
You don't have to use the home button, there's 4-finger swipe. Exposé would be nice though e.g 4-finger up and then pick one of say 9 apps at a time. Even like the app switcher in OS X so 4-finger swiping left-right wouldn't move the screens but show a switcher view where previews cycle and it opens the one you let go on.
So, when you turn the tablet into landscape, how does that physical keyboard work out or are you not supposed to hold it that way? Given that it's in portrait, that means multiple apps have to fit side by side with only the smallest width. When you carry it, are you supposed to avoid accidental input? Kay even criticised the qwerty keyboard himself and yet he hardwires it into his design. The iPad can have any language or layout required, even a number pad.
Multiple pages arguing over Kay is past his prime...? What, that he stopped being relevant 15 years ago wasn't enough proof?