[FoRK] What the hell just happened?

Stephen Williams sdw at lig.net
Tue Apr 6 19:04:37 PDT 2010


On 4/6/10 6:50 PM, silky wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Stephen Williams<sdw at lig.net>  wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>    
>> Yes, with your initial expectation set by reputation.  Apple's reputation is
>> sky high in most measurement vectors.  They will need a lot of missteps to
>> lower that much.  Contrast that with Microsoft: It is almost universally
>> said that their products aren't really usable until 3.0, and more than half
>> of those tend to fail.  Even after huge revenue streams from users who
>> blindly buy in and those pulled in by product tying.
>>      
> Just because someone is bad doesn't mean someone else is good. It
> doesn't follow that becase I don't like the iPad that I'd love a
> surface tablet pc.
>    

You are completely misunderstanding: Apple's reputation is good because 
they have had a string of recent successes with well-polished products.  
Microsoft's is, net, bad because of many reasons, including the fact 
that new products are often unpolished and/or less than they should be.  
People will tend to assume that Apple has thought out a new product 
while they will be skeptical of a new Microsoft product.

I have no idea how you arrived at those two sentences from what I said.
>
>    
>>>> Problem solver == tool user == technologist == gadgetophile ==
>>>> transparadigmophile.
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> Well, I'm a problem solver, but I'm not a technologist or gadgetophile
>>> or the last thing. Is that illegal by your statement? If so, well, bad
>>> luck.
>>>        
>> Not illegal, just self-limiting.  Not being a technologist means drastically
>> limiting the tools you can bring to the job.  That will tend to limit you to
>> jobs that don't require tools, i.e. it will limit your reach.
>>      
> What rubbish. Anyone who isn't like some set of rules you layout is
> limiting their reach? I could equally argue that because I don't waste
> time on gadgets I learn more and hence improve my reach. Either
> argument here is completely personal and totally useless for the other
> person. I can't believe you would actually sometihng so clearly
> ridiculous and wrong, so I'll leave it there.
>    

Perhaps.  Perhaps not.  Depends on what you and I mean by technologist, 
gadgets, and "learning more".  There is too much to learn, so there are 
plenty of levels of knowledge that don't require too many tools to 
obtain.  Although, at some point in the future or past, it is or will be 
tough to learn competitively without taking advantage of all the tools, 
gadgets, and paradigms available, even if the resulting work doesn't 
need them.  The iPad is, potentially, such a tool.  I'd like a number of 
things fixed about it (much higher resolution, price, storage for 
instance), but a thin, durable Internet terminal / book reader with a 10 
hour battery that does color and video and can have Internet access 
anywhere?  Sounds like a fundamental learning tool to me.

> [...]
>
>    
>> sdw
>>      
>    
sdw



More information about the FoRK mailing list