
OK, not really. I can’t be too mean to Cory. I’ve got too much respect for him. He’s plucky, and the world needs pluck. In fact, I’m basically writing this to him, in public, because he’s so sharp it pains me when I disagree with him so vehemently.
But when I read his post, “Why I won’t buy an iPad (and think you shouldn’t, either)“, my head swells with sadness and I leak confusion from every orifice.
I don’t like DRM. I think it’s a fool’s game.
I don’t prefer a closed ecosystem for applications without a way to unwall the garden
I don’t like that it’s illegal to install a different operating system on an iPad.
These are legal issues. They are issues that should be fixed by legislation and by judges. Donate to the EFF, because they put the pressure in the right places. It’s money well spent.
But you know what won’t change these things? Refusing to buy an iPad, the stage for some of the most exciting software of the last decade. Nor will using Linux on a Lenovo laptop. It definitely won’t help to sneer at everyone who is excited about the iPad, warts and all, and explain to us that we’re dupes. And it is a sneer. It’s talking down to hundreds of thousands of people who probably already know your position by heart. You may not read it like that, Cory, but I’m telling you that’s how it comes off.
Computers becoming appliances. Is this so bad? Computers that do amazing, new things that also happen to be extremely reliable? Is it worth pushing all of that innovation and engineering excellence aside because it’s more comfortable to hold onto an idealised vision of a future that never came to pass? The market gave open source 15 years to do a proper consumer desktop operating system.
Who brought Linux to the mainstream? Google. Giant, corporate, rule-bending, corruptible Google. The for-profit megacorp it’s OK for open-source visionaries to work for, because at least they’re not Microsoft or Apple. The Google that has a “virtual monopoly over literature“. The company that sells the Nexus One still has tons of restrictions on apps that can be sold in their market – the only market that a majority of users will ever see. That’s better than Apple’s completely closed market, but let’s not pretend that Google won’t break out the lawyers when hackers step out of line .
I’m glad the Apple ] [+ came with schematics for the circuit boards. I’m glad it encouraged a generation of kids to tinker and explore. I’m also glad that I don’t live in the fucking ’70s and have to type in programs from a magazine anymore.
There is absolutely nothing about the iPad that portends the end of innovation, tinkering, programming, design. If that were the case, there wouldn’t be 150,000 applications on the App Store right this second. So what if you can’t make iPad programs on an iPad. I don’t complain I can’t make new dishwashers with my dishwasher.
The old guard has The Fear. They see the iPad and the excitement it has engendered and realise that they’ve made themselves inessential – or at least invisible. They’ve realised that it’s possible to make a computer that doesn’t break, doesn’t stop working, doesn’t need constant tinkering. Unlike a car, it’s possible to design a computer that is bulletproof. It just turns out that one of the ways to make that work is to lock it down. That sucks, but it certainly appears to be a better solution than design by committee gave us for the last couple of decades.
It all just kills me. It literally makes me sick to my stomach. I am sitting here looking at my computer screen and looking over at your post and just wanting to take it apart line by line but what’s the point? I agree with so much of what we all seem to think about culture, copyright and freedoms to tinker. But I don’t want to use shitty computers with shitty operating systems, just like I don’t want to drive cars that come with their own schematics. Instead I want to drive beautifully engineered machines that scream with precision fury. And if they break, I want to take them to a shop and have them fixed. You keep the 3D printer, I’ll take AAA.


















David low
Sunday, April 4, 2010 at 8:34 AMI sit here writing this comment on my iPod touch, which I can’t help thinking is the ipad mk1. From the moment I knew of it’s existance I knew the ipad was the device that I had been looking for. I had been contemplating a netbook, but after buying one for my daughter, it didn’t really float my boat. The ipad however, does what this iPod touch does but in a more practical way. I never take my touch outside of the wifi range of home so I don’t need the 3g model of the ipad. I think it is like an overgrown iPod touch but that is what is perfect about it. If it does well what my iPod touch does then the touch will never be touched again. It’s the form factor that is perfect and the ease if use. My wife is going to love it and she is the least tech person I know. These are the people that are going to buy it, those that are not concerned about hacking, or creating videos but doing the basic tasks of web surfing and email, while watching the occassional movie. Well done Apple.
miles
Sunday, April 4, 2010 at 8:49 PMwow, that rally fighter is cool eh?
i have always wanted to build a car
though i could get a seven kit for the same price and i wouldn’t have to go to arizona
you have made up my mind… i am going to save my first 700 bucks towards it right now!
Bobby
Sunday, April 4, 2010 at 10:06 PMAnother defense of the iPad that fails to counter the criticisms of the product and of Apple and also fails to point out anything that this useless device has to offer over other form factors and other tablet computers that run Windows/Android, etc.
The simple fact is that the iPad is in no man’s land. It’s not portable enough to justify the lack of power, and it’s not powerful or practical enough to justify its non-portable size. It’s not much more portable than a laptop or tablet PC and less portable than a netbook.
And to defend Apple’s consumer-hating luddite attitude to technology by claiming the issues are legal ones is just plain ignorant. Apple chooses to lock down its hardware and place artificial limits on what software can run on it.
Apple make shiny, dumbed-down products aimed at the mainstream consumer who doesn’t care about the quality or freedom of technology. While there is nothing wrong with that, it’s sad that Apple get credited as if they are creating great products, when in fact many of their products are simply inferior to the competion but marketed better. There are at least half a dozen tablets on the market that are essentially identical and/or better than the iPad, yet Apple gets all the positive press and kudos.
Dale
Monday, April 5, 2010 at 1:38 AM“The avalanche has started, too late for pebbles to vote.” unk
I think there’s room in the world for Cory and the iPad. Cory is probably right in the big-picture long-term view. iPad has its virtues for right now.
John Hartman
Tuesday, April 6, 2010 at 7:54 AMMy main problem with the iPad is it doesn’t seem to solve any practical purpose. There’s nothing it can do which a netbook or laptop can’t do, but it does them a lot worse (No multitasking, no flash, etc). I still can’t think of a situation where an iPad would be preferable to one of those, unless you plan to read a lot of books on it. Still, it is far more expensive than it is worth.