I wish that before Steve had left us, someone would have been able to ask him about the lack of a magical user experience for developers. While Apple has always made "closed" hardware, the Apple II and the early Macs were delightful toyboxes for swaths of young people: BASIC, Hypercard, ResEdit, etc. They (we) learned, tinkered, explored, taking the concept of a "bicycle for the mind" to a whole new level.
There's a lot to like about modern Mac and iPhone development: the tools and the documentation are arguably better than they've ever been, and the APIs have become absurdly powerful. But there's very little magic or UX to be found for the young and the new: even if you scrape together the $99 and brave the frustrating certificate process, it still takes a lot of overhead to make anything happen on the screen. (Recent improvements like ARC and storyboards help, but they're a band-aid.)
I think there remains a tremendous unfilled space in the computing world for usable "prosumer" programming, in the spirit of Hypercard. If the FSF types could pull their neckbeards out of their UNIX sphincters for five minutes, they'd see that the real barrier to truly free software is software that's trivial to learn how to edit or create [1]. And if Steve had seen this as a priority, I have no doubt that he could have made it happen.
[1] Obviously, not all software could be written this way; we'd still need engineers. But even web-enabled Hypercard-style apps would allow people to create a great deal of value for themselves and others, and give them the courage to venture deeper.
Steve did see it as a priority: Project Builder/Interface Builder were "prosumer", when launched. NeXT put a lot of effort into the developer tools, and not just for developers: the "Why the World Needs A New Computer" brochure had a whole spread devoted to Interface Builder, explaining how an end user could get most of the way towards creating their app, (with a mention of handing off to an engineer for the tricky parts, admittedly).
They definitely saw creating a magical user experience for developers as a priority. Good thing, too, as at one point WebObjects -- which had a GUI editor to create bindings for HTML in 1996! -- was all that was keeping them afloat.
(The NeXT dev environment is one of the things TBL credits for making him able to start the WWW, incidentally)
Apple, too, had its fair share of UX-work-for-Devs. MPW Worksheets were one of the first attempts in many years to think of a shell as more than just a line printer in a window. Dylan had a clever and elegant UI (when it wasn't crashing). Of course there was Hypercard, as you mentioned.
Unfortunately, it's really hard for such things to get traction with developers, I suspect more than a little because of a "I just need vi" mentality, which reminds me of the hoary "why would I want a toy mouse and pretty pictures when I have MS-DOS like a real man?" nonsense from the WiMP Wars. Some devs do seem convinced that there's no better way of programming a computer than for them to churn out text (apart from maybe getting your IDE to churn out text for you) and so traction is hard to get for "magical" experiences.
As for developing for non-developers, that remains a really difficult problem, because the challenge is not really in expressing your _solution_ to a problem so much as it is in being able to state the problem clearly. Tools can only help so much with that, mostly in giving expressive power to people who didn't realise they were suited to programming.
Even given all that, Apple continues to pour work into Automator, an under-appreciated app which is really bringing the power of basic scripting to people.
> I think there remains a tremendous unfilled space in the computing world for usable "prosumer" programming.
If you are so sure, why don't you start a company to fill that space?
Jobs' brilliance was in recognizing that the needs of both beginners and high-end users are actually quite convergent -- both want a simple beautiful no-nonsense device that just works -- and it's only the insecure "middle-class" who wants something more. He grew a company to prove just that point.
In my lifetime, home computers have moved from being tinker-boxes that blink a few lights to consumer-ready products that non-hackers can use. Jobs helped that transition, much like Henry Ford helped the car make the same kind of transition.
That wasn't a mistake either - read the chapters in folklore.org where he fought tooth and nail against having any expansion or ports in the original mac. The openness of the Apple II was mostly Woz.
As a kid growing up, the Commodore 64 was more than a tinker-box that blinked a few lights. And later, the Amiga won hands down over the Mac that we had in the house. I was definitely no hacker. I was an average kid wanting to get enjoyment out of a computer.
For me, the Commodore stepped up to offer what you describe as "consumer-ready". We bought and swapped heaps of software for C64 and Amiga over many years, as did millions around the world. We would play Summer Games as a family... mum, dad, sis.. we'd have a ball.
Even at high school, the BBC was king in my day.
When I got to Uni, I saw all these Macs everywhere, and apart from the crisper display suitable for word processing, they did not offer anything I would have called a step up my previous experience with computers.
It was around then, that I discovered the 486 PC. I saved up and bought one. Never looked back.
Just trying to balance the perspective here. Let's not get too carried away with the history of computers and what the Apple co-founder did for his company, ok?
The post I replied to was lamenting that products from the "new Apple" weren't good hacker toy boxes like the Apple II. I'm pointing out that the shift was intentional.
I don't think I exaggerated computer history either; Altair 8800 to iPhone is a big leap, and I'm not dead yet.
Agreed on all points, except for the definition of "use". Sure, my mom can now send emails, visit websites, even make her own newsletters with clip art, and that's mindblowingly fantastic. But she can't build a dynamic website herself, or add a new feature to an existing program she uses. (iWeb and Automator are a good start, but not good enough.)
I'd like to think that someday, creating simple software will be something everyone will be able to do. Perhaps it's a situation similar to AI, where a generalized all-purpose solution is a pipe dream, but where narrow domain-specific solutions are more achievable; for example, platforms like ifttt.com or FormStack, which are highly usable to semi-techie prosumers. The future's still wide open, so we'll see what happens. :)
I don't know if the demand is there. Most first-world citizens don't create their own literature, music, art or furniture, even though the tools are readily available. I doubt mom and pop will start programming, because I doubt they want to.
I think there remains a tremendous unfilled space in the computing world for usable "prosumer" programming, in the spirit of Hypercard.
I would argue that such a thing already exists. If you want to do 'easy', low-hanging, easily-prototyped design and development, the kind of experience you had as a kid with Hypercard, you can still do it, and mostly for free: it's the web.
You can't be serious. Web application development is the antithesis of what the OP is talking about, it's a mess.
A hypercard-inspired tool for creating touch applications is going to be disruptive, and is going to happen. It's a glaring gap left open by Apple. In fact, this is the reason I am personally hesitant to start working on one, it's so glaring that I would be surprised if Apple hasn't been working on one that will be released when it's ready.
I couldn't agree more, and it's why I'm so enthusiastic about the web as the lingua fraca of computing. But as Steve might say: "Not good enough yet; make it again." To put it mildly, I think we can do way, way better.
"Mr. Jobs leaves behind a dominant Apple, fulfilling his original promise to save the company from the brink when he returned in 1997. Because of its enormous strength in both music sales and mobile devices, Apple has more power than at any time in its history, and it is using that power to make the computing experience of its users less free, more locked down and more tightly regulated than ever before. All of Apple’s iDevices — the iPod, iPhone and iPad — use operating systems that deny the user access to their workings. Users cannot install programs themselves; they are downloaded from Apple’s servers, which Apple controls …
… Today there is no tech company that looks more like the Big Brother from Apple’s iconic 1984 commercial than Apple itself, a testament to how quickly power can corrupt."
less free, more locked down and more tightly regulated than ever before.
What a contortion to characterize Apple's achievements with iOS this way. Compared to life before iPhones, we practically have superhero abilities at our fingertips, but yeah, Steve Jobs was mostly just taking our freedom. I can read any book or essay (including this thinly veiled anti-Apple screed) or hear just about any song ever recorded within seconds of it coming to mind, but Apple is "Big Brother". This guy is a clown.
It's a shame because some of his thoughts on Foxconn are interesting. I saw him in an interview and I'll admit that he made me think about the impact that my buying has. He's an engaging speaker.
But he really does a disservice to these arguments by going off on EFF-style rants. Its not in the same ballpark as the human rights concerns, which sure makes it look like he's just looking for a conveniently high profile target.
That was something that I needed to read. Yes, Steve was a genious, but we can't let death create a saint from him. With Apple's giant profit margins he could enforce better working conditions. I also don't like the closed ecosystem idea, but that is just my PoV and I understand why people support it to have a better overall usability.
He has a duty to his shareholders. The reason that the Chinese workers are willing to work in such terrible conditions is that it is a step up from where they were. China is modernizing, just as we did once.
Say for a second that Jobs was somehow able to double the wages given to the average worker in China (or increase conditions such that it was effectively a doubled salary). The result would be massive, widespread demand to work in those factories. Since supply and demand are not balanced either queues take over or gate keepers get paid off.
If that doesn't make you feel better at least the corporate taxes Apple pays might.
I'm not sure how unique Apple is in supply chain human rights issues, but I will say that it's appalling how little anyone seems to care about who we are literally killing to have nice things. I'm just as hypocritical and evil as everyone else, too, so please save your ad hominem responses.
I haven't looked into it extensively and I could be mistaken, but after the suicides at Foxconn, I remember reading an article about how the suicide rate at the factory was far lower than the suicide rate of the surrounding towns.
The conditions in Chinese factories are horrible to think about, but it's important to keep in mind those conditions are often better than the places the workers came from. Shutting down factories in China wouldn't do anything to improve the lives of poor Chinese.
And I've read that Foxconn is actually the most desirable employer compared to other factories.
"it's important to keep in mind those conditions are often better than the places the workers came from"
No offence, but I think this type of ignorance forms part of the denialism we use to avoid considering the moral issues. Mike Daisey has made the point that manufacturing has only really taken off in Shenzhen in the last 10 years, and that the horrific working conditions could be improved without a significant increase in product price as labor is such a tiny part of the overall cost.
It'd be interesting if Apple were bold enough to pursue Fair Labor Certification even if it meant pricing their products even higher, but I think Apple has the exact customer base that'd be willing to pay the Fair Labor premium.
I love this op-ed, I've harbored similar feelings since the rise of iTunes and haven't owned an apple product since its arrival. I have always readily admitted the superiority of Apple's design and user experience and I admire Jobs for everything he has accomplished but Apple has never, in my eyes, been a company truly deserving of celebration.
This article makes several valid points, but the overall 'hook' or theme doesn't really make sense. Steve Jobs was very nostalgic, greenlighting the original 'think different' campaign profiling historical figures, and more recently the iconic advertising featuring The Beatles, which apple worked so long to get into iTunes.
There are also valid points made about the manufacturing situation in China, but he did not explore any real counterargument. The factory jobs in China are not perfect, but do we know if those workers are fundamentally opposed to it? China tried to avoid this type of capitalistic society for a generation, and was not happy with the results. I think it is fair to critique the standards of the factories, but without providing an alternative solution to lifting a billion people into prosperity, I think it was kind of a low blow against Steve in the article given the timing.
it's not "nostalgia" in the sense of old/classic things, or at least that's what I get from his thesis. it's nostalgia in the sense of doing things because, gosh darn it, that's the way we've always done them.
his argument is that the Apple of "the crazy ones, the rebels, the troublemakers" would ignore what's profitable and what the rest of the industry does, and make wide-open systems, humanely -- because Steve would've seen what doesn't work about the current model, thrown it out, and done it his own way.
The Beatles and historical figures are (arguably) timeless classics which don't grow worse with age; walled gardens and overseas manufacturing are (arguably) relics of an era where Apple was struggling to gain a foothold in the industry, and that's what the author claims passes for nostalgia.
It was also a low blow given the fact that the author owns an iPad... so he's enjoying the fruits of what he describes as abusive labor practices. If you're going to be principled, be principled. An iPad isn't a necessity in any way.
Owning Apple hardware doesn't mean you have to be blind to the dark side of Apple. If anything, it just tells me the author is capable of analyzing the situation critically.
Daisey is more eloquently and sensitively restating the same arguments that Stallman wrote, drawing much flamage, earlier today: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3085417
I wish that the bio at the end, which promotes the author's Steve Jobs monologue ("scheduled to open at the Public Theater on Tuesday") hadn't been added. It lessens the power of some of the points he brings up, and makes his argument seem more like an advertisement.
In addition, the safety, health, and compensation of workers at suppliers' factories in Asia could have been explored more. The fact that workers' rights in China and elsewhere are so poor is one of those uncomfortable realities about global manufacturing that most consumers -- and fans of Apple and Steve Jobs -- would rather forget.
Daisey's website links to articles that provide a deeper look into the factories and their work conditions. He's a performer no doubt, and hopefully the short bio doesn't get in the way of his message or preclude anyone from seeing The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs. It was a passionate, thought-provoking show, and I recommend checking it out if given the opportunity.
I used to work in the news business. At every publication I've worked for, the editor asks the author for a short bio. It's almost never changed unless it's too long or too over-the-top.
The outpouring of emotion we've seen over the last few days is not due to nostalgia. It's because a person many people have admired and looked up to is gone.
Steve Jobs was a hero for a lot of people in technology, especially for entrepreneurs and it's ok to grieve when your heroes die.
Nobody is claiming Steve Jobs was perfect, he had flaws like any other a human being. But he was a damn good entrepreneur and for many people that's no small thing, it's what many of us are dedicating our lives to.
Most good things, taken to an extreme, become terrible in some ways. In this case, consumerism -- the United States, and increasingly the world, have taken consumerism to an extreme. Our culture has been systematically shifted by laws, advertising, taxes, and our own desires to drive us towards making and lusting after purchases.
We enjoy a high quality of life, and many amazing technologies, in part due to our rampant consumerism, but the side effects may not be worth it.
There's a lot to like about modern Mac and iPhone development: the tools and the documentation are arguably better than they've ever been, and the APIs have become absurdly powerful. But there's very little magic or UX to be found for the young and the new: even if you scrape together the $99 and brave the frustrating certificate process, it still takes a lot of overhead to make anything happen on the screen. (Recent improvements like ARC and storyboards help, but they're a band-aid.)
I think there remains a tremendous unfilled space in the computing world for usable "prosumer" programming, in the spirit of Hypercard. If the FSF types could pull their neckbeards out of their UNIX sphincters for five minutes, they'd see that the real barrier to truly free software is software that's trivial to learn how to edit or create [1]. And if Steve had seen this as a priority, I have no doubt that he could have made it happen.
[1] Obviously, not all software could be written this way; we'd still need engineers. But even web-enabled Hypercard-style apps would allow people to create a great deal of value for themselves and others, and give them the courage to venture deeper.