A Word on Bashing Apple

October 29th, 2007 • 1 comment General

I can’t believe that this guy had the nerve to call this hair-brained conspiracy theory a valid counter weight to Daring Fireball’s rational analysis.

— Dan Hamilton, iPhone Bashing for Fun and Profit

I feel terrible about having to post a response on my blog, when it should be a comment on iGadget Blog.

I can’t say I’m completely surprised by the responses to my previous little post which links to a Mobile-review.com article. Nobody gets away with bashing Apple. Not even the middle man.

However, the reason I linked to such “drivel” is so I can read more responses like Dan’s. I’ll leave my share of experience with Apple to another post, but I’m not an Apple expert, and I would much rather read proper, not just emotional or sarcastic, responses to a conspiracy article.

I know for a fact that my readers are smart people, and they need no one to take them by the hand and show them the true path. They need no one to clarify that Mobile-review’s article, regardless of its validity, isn’t a response to a Daring Fireball article. I’m sure you all know where Daring Fireball ranks on my list.

Reading Between Apple’s Lines

October 26th, 2007 • 8 comments General

Apple is trying to recreate 1984. Only in 2007, technology is a fashion statement. Technology is trendy ebbs and flows. G33ks are cool now, and soon will be nicknamed “Applesites”.

What we’re seeing now is what Mac enthusiasts have been hoping to see for 20 years: more people deciding to buy a Mac.

John Gruber, Everything’s Coming Up Milhouse

I find it a little ironic how Apple makes most of its money. They’re originally a computer company; a mac company. Now Apple sells gadgets, while the Mac sells almost solely by association.

Ten years ago, Apple Kremlinologists read into PowerMac, iMac, eMac. Now they’re reading iPhone, iPod and iTunes. Curiously, the more we try to read Apple, the more diverse our conclusions are:

Apple has deliberately driven all contracted phones out of its stores, so now it offers only the hardware. This means that the goal (10 million units sold) will be achieved at any cost, even if the company’s partners, carriers in this particular case, will suffer.

— Eldar Murtazin, Apple iPhone – apocalypse today or business strategies

For once, I found an interesting view on Apple’s strategy, and it’s not John Gruber’s tea leaf reading.

Because A Language Is Irrelevant

October 16th, 2007 • 1 comment General

The purpose of a language is to communicate purpose. It is most commonly used among human beings, until proven otherwise.

I don’t talk to my computer. I don’t intend to until it can butter my morning bread, figure out my coffee mood, and give a better answer than 42.

Everytime I punch in code, I implicitly accept a settlement. I will meet computers half way and use a structured language to communicate my purpose, provided that my fellow human beings are still able to discern my purpose. The clearer the structured language I use, the better aftertaste it leaves.

I couldn’t care less about a computer’s feelings. For all I know, I can improve it to better understand my less structured, more natural language. However, I do care about my fellow human beings, and I’d rather spare their brain muscles.

Sometimes a linguist is better qualified to design a less structured, more natural language. Of course, sometimes, things become so screwed up, that the very same linguist is cursed at. Sometimes it helps knowing a language with a different grammar. But often, none of it matters, as long as you can communicate your purpose to a fellow human being first, and a computer second.

French used to be a dominant language. So was Arabic, and Russian. I speak English most of the time now, and it’s not because English is the trend nowadays, but because it carries my intent and purpose to a wider audience.

Language itself is a vehicle, a protocol, a mechanism. Language in itself is irrelevant.

P.S. Inspired by Matt’s post.

Here You’re Screwed

October 13th, 2007 • 2 comments General

I miss Kathy’s blogging. It taught us a lot, now didn’t it?

Facebooks Will Rise

October 11th, 2007 • General

It is in every company’s interest to lock in its customers. Lotus did. Microsoft did. Adobe did. AOL did. Facebook does.

Eventually, people figure out how to export and exchange proprietary formats. Sometimes they invent a whole new format, and internationally standardize it. Sometimes they create programs to convert proprietary formats to existing standards. Sometimes, they start from scratch, reluctantly, determinately.

I don’t live in The States, so I haven’t experienced AOL’s iron grip. I can relate, however, because each of the Middle East countries has a dominant service provider, usually that which owns the copper. Facebook, on the other hand, isn’t tied to a region anymore, so you’re free to experience its iron grip, not matter what your location is.

Facebook’s biggest competitor isn’t another site with the same features. It isn’t better software. It isn’t the desktop. It’s the “export” button; just like Facebook’s most important feature is the “import” button.

Think of the web, of the Internet itself, as water. Proprietary platforms based on the web are ice cubes. They can, for a time, suspend themselves above the web at large. But over time, they only ever melt into the water. And maybe they make it better when they do.

— Anil Dash, Blackbird, Rainman, Facebook and the Watery Web

Thanks Anil.