[FoRK] What the hell just happened?
sdw at lig.net
Tue Apr 6 18:18:11 PDT 2010
On 4/6/10 5:45 PM, silky wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Andy Armstrong<andy at hexten.net> wrote:
>> On 7 Apr 2010, at 01:32, silky wrote:
>>> I think other companies should be looking at Apple and not thinking
>>> "wow, game changing device" but "wow, look how they've controlled a
>>> significant portion of consumers into doing what they want".
>> You say that like it's not interesting... :)
> Well, it's interesting for people interested in that sort of thing
> (like I imagine Jeff is), but I can't quite comprehend his desire to
> find a purpose for a device that, as I understand it, doesn't really
> have one.
> I mean, if I threw a colourful unidentifiable object at you, would you
> thank me and try and find its purpose, or would you be annoyed and go
> back to doing what you typically do? I'm not suggesting you should
You're kidding, right? Of course I'd try to find it's purpose, and I
wouldn't in the slightest feel bound by what I intuited was the intended
purpose. You're really not like that? How quaint.
Problem solver == tool user == technologist == gadgetophile ==
> have you head in the sand, but I don't need a *company* inventing
> markets for me, when I have perfectly fine ways of spending my time
> already. Come to me when there is actually something that I find
Bring me a rock? They solve problems they want solved and hope there is
a market. That is one of the more honest ways to go about product design.
> It seems to me a bit like looking for divine purpose in somethinig.
> Apple isn't God. They may do things wrong, and they certainly predict,
> you would expect, every type of response to their products and have
> appropriate plans.
They're doing plenty wrong with the OS/software, but they tend to get
the hardware right. I love it because it raises the bar on everyone
else. When we get a hackable Android version with similar hardware at a
cheaper price, I'll be pretty happy.
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Tom Higgins<tomhiggins at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > The soap opera of the iPaid is indicative of the lack of imagination
>> > of those who find it so compelling.
Imagination indicates a lack of imagination? Would you have questioned
the value of the Internet too? (I had to argue the value of many things
to various types over the years, including the Internet.)
> That's what is weird though; people seem to be actively applying their
> imagination to find uses for it. There are better things you can spend
> your imagination on; such as inventing products for yourself, or for
> the community, or relaxing, or enjoyment, or whatever. I don't see why
> consumers should be desperate to help a*corporation*. The reason,
> obviously, is because they'll be temporarily famous and have "helped"
> the magical and wonderdrous "Apple".
Or they want to get in on the next new probably-better experience ASAP.
And this corporation tries hard to help consumers so there's nothing
wrong with "helping" them back, even if they are being charged for it.
> If there were not the Internet to discuss these sorts of things over;
> if you could simply tell a few people, I doubt many people would care.
> This is where the Internet hurts society, IMHO, but of course, it's
> the nature of the game. If only evolution sorted them out :P
>> > -tom(just dropping in on the urging of another....as Office Bar Brady
>> > would say "Nothing to see here")higgins
> -- silky
More information about the FoRK