when people use iPads they end up just using technology to consume things instead of making things. With a computer you can make things. You can code, you can make things and create things that have never before existed and do things that have never been done before.
I think closed devices are really a step backwards. I learnt programming (and a whole lot more, like mathematics and logic), when I picked up a computer as a kid and discovered Python and started hacking around. I could look around for tutorials, download code or try out code from books and nobody stopped me.
On a somewhat similar vein, I am also sad that desktops are slowly going away. I learnt so much more about computers (and how it is not magic) by building my own.
I think something needs to be said about systems that allow you to explore and hack around for the fun of it.
Maybe some people use their iPads for Facebook/Twitter/YouTube. I don't give a damn. They're the same boys/girls that were watching celebrity news and other useless TV shows 10 years ago, when you and I were watching "scientific/educational" shows on TV and hacking away with computers.
I'm getting sick of this "iPad is for consumption" thing. How are you going to "produce" something if you haven't learned anything yet? For me, iPad is a learning device. In the past year, I've read maybe 15 (technical) books on my iPad. I wanted to read them for the past 3 years, I had downloaded their ebooks and stashed them neatly in a 'To-Read' folder, but never get to do so on a Mac or PC because of their form factor.
In the past 2 weeks alone, I read 'JavaScript: The Good Parts' and first 5 chapters of 'Git Pro' (ePub, in iBooks), 70% of 'Head-First C' (PDF, in the fantastic ReaddleDocs[1] app) and 20 other technical/"intellectual" articles in Instapaper. Without iPad, I wouldn't have read them.
> I'm getting sick of this "iPad is for consumption" thing.
Something you miss is that the central directive for the iPad was a consumer experience. It's intended to be roughly equivalent to a TV. It's great that you choose to use it for Discovery Channel and the like, but you're probably not using it to write code. And that's fine; it's not meant for that. And that's the point: it's not meant for that.
The consumer experience extends beyond just watching TV, to things like managing and viewing photos, drawing, music, and interacting with others online. Here on HN it is easy to reduce "production" to coding. And it's true--the iPad is not a good platform for coding because the user does not have shell access, and Apple does not allow IDE apps in the App Store. However, the simplicity of the interface, the quality of the display, and the extreme mobility of the form factor, make it great for the more "consumer" type of production I mention above.
Incidentally the original Macintosh did not grant shell access to the user either, and for that reason was a favored web server platform of certain DOD programs. Those worried that Apple is closing off the possibility of programming should consider a longer view: with OS X, Apple introduced shell access to their OS, which is a certified Unix. Even with Mountain Lion, they are still introducing additional CLI functionality.
It's an Americanism, too. The last time I was playing tourist in Mexico, they talked about how amazing TVs were because they were basically used as free, national education.
The problem is, that if more and more people use these "consumption" devices, the choices becomes increasingly closed and restricted for the producers.
True, but you're (hopefully) taking that knowledge and putting it towards actually DOING something.
Consumption without purpose is pointless. Your case may be an exception, but unfortunately I think it's more of a rarity than it is a representation of the common use of the device.
Sometimes I catch myself thinking this way and need to remind myself of my own experience.
All one needs is a seed.
My seed was planted on a closed system: an Atari 2600. Specifically, one with a Spectravideo Compumate keyboard. http://www.atarimuseum.com/videogames/consoles/2600/compumat...
When I did as much as I could do on it, an Apple ][ clone was the next step.
When the iPad came out, I lamented the closed platform, forgetting that my Apple ][ was not where I started.
Something similar to my Spectravideo for iPad, is Codea http://twolivesleft.com/Codea/.
Instantly accessible, and instantly running your code. A perfect seed for a kid who might express an interest in programming.
Any kid who discovers a passion for programming has options to move onto any platform their desire takes them. The ubiquity of the iPad and other tablets might even promote the introduction to programming to anyone who is curious enough.
Also, would people would stop calling an iPad a consumption device. It can be used this way. Many people do. But then, many people use their PC for little more than web browsing and to watch Netflix. It's not the platform, it's what interest them. My laptop is gathering dust because of my iPad.
The naturally curious will naturally do more within existing constraints, and then break free of them.
>> "The naturally curious will naturally do more within existing constraints, and then break free of them."
The naturally curious will achieve more where there are less constraints. Making the iPad the default device for every kid out there is just making things worse for them in the end. I remember the startup screen of the C64: you could just type "load" and "run" if you wanted to play a game, but basically you could also write some stuff in basic and run it yourself. You could tinker all you want without having to install anything.
The iPad IS a consumption device. By design. It's certainly not made to produce anything, and even if it is possible, it's never the best tool for the purpose. It's just a massive trade-offs device.
Yes, we could tinker away with all the computers from the early 80s. We were lucky, this lower level of access was unavoidable.
But what about today? One never needs to type "load" and "run". Instead of discovery by the kid, a parent who thinks programming might be interesting for their kid is a prerequisite. And then they need to be able to do the research and install perhaps Python. And then what?
Playing around with Lua inside of Codea sent me right back to the immediate gratification of my Apple ][
In the end, does the platform matter? When I was a kid, I took apart the TV so I could see what was inside. Curious kids today will be similarly compelled to jailbreak their iPad.
I'd be curious to know how many programmers there are here who are programmers because of a push in the right direction by an adult, or simply because there were curious kids.
As I said, its a matter or design. The iPad is not made to enter information (except tiny bits), it is clearly a ''click/touch'' centric device. No keyboard by default says it all. You wont write a full novel on a iPad. You wont code something very long on it. And you wont even have the tools at hand to develop the apps that you use everyday. It is completely asymetric, and the barrier for curious kids to do something is huge. Whereas the same kids can just open a terminal on a Linux device and start experimenting away.
How about that: I wrote my first programs with pencil, on paper. I had no computer at home and very very limited access to computers at the university. Then I had to retype everything from my notes.
It's not JUST a matter of keyboard, while it's important. The visual cue you get from the ipad is a touchscreen. A computer, by design, makes the keyboard available at all times, and it's integrated to the nature of the computer. On the iPad, the keyboard becomes an option, not something necessary to do anything. The fact that you put the keyboard in the background says a lot about the positioning of the device. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, but what I'm saying is that it's clearly a consumer-centric device because of the design.
Then, the absence of any kind of tools to recreate the very same applications you are using on your iPad re-enforces that aspect. You actually have to SPEND money to develop for iPad, and you need a proper computer to do that. Net, it's not a device that is made for development (even if you wanted to), hence it's a consumption device only, by positioning.
when people use iPads they end up just using technology to consume things instead of making things. With a computer you can make things.
Absolutely true. A lot of people like to mock the position that the iPad is a 'device for consumption' whenever a new story comes out about someone creating a song or painting on his iPad.
Well, there's a reason why it's worthy of a news story. You don't see articles written whenever someone creates a song on his Mac or PC.
I love my iPad. It's a great consumption device. But its terrible for tinkering and creativity (and this limitation is by design).
Let me know when I can design flyers and brochures from it. Or write a program on it to do something useful that can be shared with others.
Well, there's a reason why it's worthy of a news story. You don't see articles written whenever someone creates a song on his Mac or PC.
That's a bit like saying, "you don't see articles written whenever someone creates a song on his piano or violin", back in the 50s or 60s. There was a time when computers weren't used to produce music, pictures, or movies.
Rather than lament the current state of new mobile platforms, why not celebrate these amazing new platforms? They're increasingly becoming creating rather than consuming platforms and, even if we will never easily create apps directly on them (which I don't believe is true), they're wonderful new distribution platforms.
Just because they're not like the Apple ][s or C64s of yore doesn't mean it's the end of the hacking world. A new generation is growing up programming apps (yes, on their desktop computers right now) for this new world and can easily share their creations with millions. From where I'm sitting, this looks like a pretty interesting step forward.
(And for designing flyers and brochures on an iPad, you're welcome to use Pages or any number of other drawing or painting apps found on the App Store.)
I do all of my wire framing and app planning work exclusively on iPad. With the iPad, I can actually create content while sardined in the subway. These "consumption-only" folks are just parroting Microsoft-sponsored drivel.
Your wire framing and app planning work don't fall in the category of creating things that have never before existed and never been done before. That was the quoted line from Russell Kirsch. The MS line parroting, that is just defensive fanboy bait. But whatever rocks your boat. In any case, it is what it is, a consumption device.
Had you gone with being able to edit html, javascript and css on it, or even code and compile java on the AIDE app... but no, it was an attack that you had to counter with an anedoctal. It's like textbook dumbing down consumer bs galore over there. But the guy in the article, he gets to be the parrot...
I didn't establish that creation is circunscript to writing software. Had I mentioned writing music or editing video, that would be outside the scope of what the poster established to be the field of interest for the usage of the device in the anedoctal. It still would not make any difference to the point it would have contradicted the presented quote in the article.
But thanks for the one liner and the down vote I see how what I did not say was probably confusing you.
There was a time when computers weren't used to produce music, pictures, or movies.
Yes, and we're at that state right now with tablets. Sure, we'll get there eventually but it won't happen by fooling ourselves into contentment by saying they are already great for producing creative work.
why not celebrate these amazing new platforms
I did say that I love my iPad. I've reached the point where I don't mind paying more for e-books that I can read on it than the dead-tree version that I have to lug around with me. I also use it extensively for mail, photos and browsing.
It may eventually become a tinkerer's device. It's not there yet though.
And for designing flyers and brochures on an iPad, you're welcome to use Pages or any number of other drawing or painting apps found on the App Store
They let me use my own fonts (possibly in other languages)? Or let me cut a photo and place it on a page?
The latter may not exist because no one has done it yet (ie, not a technical limitation). I'm pretty sure the former is a limitation of the platform rules that have been set.
Anyway, I don't really disagree with much of what you say. We will eventually reach a point where creating cool stuff on the iPad is the norm. But we're not there today.
That wasn't rhetoric. I actually want an app that can do these three things:
1) Let me work with custom fonts
2) Let me import images and cut them and place them
3) Export the whole thing as pdf
(Bonus points for handling svg and clip art)
I have not found one that does. I didn't try Pages - I assume it's a word processing app like Word and not a page layout/design/typesetting app like In-Design.
Have you tried it? Does it let me do these things?
I've often toyed with the idea of writing it myself. But I stop at point (1) because loading custom fonts that don't ship as part of the app bundle doesn't seem to be supported by iOS. (And also because I tend to procrastinate)
I don't know about svg's, but Pages can do all of this stuff. It's not just a word processor, but a very good age layout tool. You might want to check it out before dismissing the iPad so quickly.
> A new generation is growing up programming apps (yes, on their desktop computers right now) for this new world and can easily share their creations with millions.
For Android, yeah.
Thing is, I'm teaching "creative computer stuff" (which includes programming) to kids at a volunteer centre. One of the kids came to me and wanted to know if I could help them build an app for their iPod Touch.
Turns out the costs of writing iDevice apps is quite prohibitive to most teenagers.
First, the SDK+simulator is only available for Macs running Mac OS X 10.5.4+, not just any "desktop computer" will do. That is a problem because the "Young Researcher's Centre" runs on donated PCs, most of them old WinXP office machines that are perfectly serviceable for most of our purposes. We never get Macs though (well one time a really ancient one, I doubt one could develop apps on it).
If you do have a Mac, apparently you can get the SDK/emulator for free, I think (Apple's site said "free!" a lot but kept on directing me to some page where I had to pay. I gave up when I found out it couldn't be done on a PC, anyway).
But then comes the next problem. Your app just runs on the simulator. You need to join the "iOS Developer Program" in order to actually run it on a real iDevice, unless you jailbreak it, (which I'm not going to teach the kids mainly because I don't want to be responsible if they accidentally brick it).
The iOS Developer Program costs $99 per year.
Trust me, no kid is going through all that trouble just to have "something that looks like an app running in a bloody simulator", there has to be some tangible end-result.
From there (Wikipedia) "applications can be distributed in three ways: through the App Store, through enterprise deployment to a company's employees only, and on an "Ad-hoc" basis to up to 100 iPhones."
IMO it is ridiculous to teach children a valuable skill (programming) merely in order to immediately sell their services/work on some App Store market. They're children, they need to learn and play--of course if they want to try and sell their apps it can be a valuable experience but it should not be the only reason or the only way. The first point is that you write code for the sheer thrill of having that kind of control over your own devices.
I'm not sure how the "enterprise" method works, but I doubt we'd be eligible.
So finally you're left with paying $99 yearly in order to liberate 100 iPhones so you can write your own code for them. Whoop-tee-doo. And I'm probably forgetting about a whole bunch of ways Apple can get in your way as you try to actually go this route.
Suffice to say, after having figured this out, most kids realized their next phone was going to run Android.
I've seen an electronic music group perform with some iPads used as controllers and others making sound directly, including modifying the sound of a cello. One chap was using a thinkpad with a games controller to be different I suppose...
And I've just spent a week in Yorkshire including a visit to Salts Mill. Hockney has an exhibition of some of his iPad paintings (projections) and some of the paintings he did using a graphics tablet on Photoshop. I actually liked the tablet/photoshop paintings more (composed of thin lines building shapes and shadings) than the iPad ones.
But I think that a 'direct manipulation' interface will allow creation in variety of media. I'm waiting for a notebook sized tablet with stylus input for an electronic moleskine.
I disagree. It's "fantastic" as a generic (midi) control panel (similar to the Lemur, for instance Touch OSC or Max/MSP). Of course, you could usually achieve the same thing with an old second-hand Behringer BCF-2000 (or BCR-2000). Bonus: You get motorized faders and real knobs that you can touch.
Well, I have 2 ipads and an iPhone which I use as a portable studio these days, jamming with my band .. and I use the iPads just like VST plugin hosts on my PC .. since I play keyboards in the band, its awesome! Plug in, fire up a few apps, and off we go .. a very, very versatile creativity machine. Beats the DAW by far!
Its simple: it just plain works. Pretty much, always. I plug in a MIDI keyboard and Controller, fire up a synth app, and off we go. Stable, sounds great (comparable by far with any PC plugin), and just plain works. I have two iPads and an iPhone in my studio rig now, plus a couple of Akai controllers (pads/keys/sliders/knobs), and as a portable action studio this configuration just rocks.
Plus, I don't have to have it sitting there, like I'm checking my email on stage. Hate that about laptop musicians, as if it is actually interesting to watch someone glow their face when I'm out at night and want to have fun, away from the office .. with the iPad form factor, at least, it lays flat and stays out of the way. And there is no QWERTY keyboard, so its not easy for someone to make the association "that guy must be writing an email onstage instead of making live music", and believe me that happens a lot with laptop musicians around my parts.
Because...magic. And fairy dust. And nobody who uses a laptop could possibly be cool.
It's not a great device for making music. It's an adequate device mostly used by hipsters (and I use that term offensively) to look cool, sort of like how "writers" hang out in coffee shops using Macbook Pros (or various other expensive laptops, like Vaios) to "write" the next American Novel.
as a musician, I disagree. The iPad makes for a great adaptable electronic instrument. The major feature of tablets is that they become the app you're running. This lets the designers of the various synths for the iPad experiment with interfaces like was never before possible. Check out some of the stuff that Jordan Rudess's Wizdom Music is putting out: http://www.wizdommusic.com/
Jordan Rudess isn't just anybody, he's one of the top keyboard players alive today. He's always experimented with alternative instrument interfaces and I think the fact that he's doing this on the iPad lends a lot to its credibility as a creative platform.
I bought the ipad on a total whim and have been repaid many times over by the enjoyment it continues to provide. I'm an old-school musician from the days when sounds were 'etched' on analog tape and I can tell you that as far as I'm concerned, it is a GREAT device for making music and one that is only going to get better as software evolves to exploit the full potential of its touch panel.
I also recently took it to Poland for a month and used it to compile a hundred pages of typed and handwritten notes and video footage--all the while using it to navigate my way around the unfamiliar terrain. I keep being surprised by my little sidekick's range of uses and flexibility...
I agree...and Garage Band is the equivalent of a very low-level Pro Tools, if you will, and best of all, it's free. I do wish there was an easier way to sync tempos on the program but it's good enough for a basic user.
The artist David Hockney loves iPads so much that he actually has had his suits modified to include a suitable pocket - here is a video of him using an iPad to draw in a cafe:
This was one of the strongest criticisms of the original iPad by Alan Kay to Steve Jobs iirc. After that criticism, we got Garage Band for iPad (which imo is so insanely awesome I bet it will take at least 2 years to appear on other devices at that level of quality). We also have iBooks author, Brushes, and such "creative" apps. Overall, I see more "create" type of apps coming up.
The hacking apps leave a lot to be desired, but also seem to be cropping up gradually. I'm sure soon enough we'll see some pretty powerful "make something new" kinds of tools on these devices (so sad that Scratch/BYOB can't happen on the iPad .. yet <<glaring at Apple>>). OTOH, the sun may burn out before the "take things apart" kind of tinkering happens with the full blessing of the device makers.
I think the touch input is simply much less practical for certain repetitive tasks than a mouse and keyboard, due to the ergonomics. For text editing, lifting your arms from the keyboard area of the screen, or from a Bluetooth keyboard, to scroll the page, select a tool, insert the cursor, select some content, etc. is much less efficient than reaching sideways for a mouse and scrolling its wheel or clicking its buttons, with only subtle movements needed to position the cursor while you rest your hand on the mouse. It is both tiring and tedious to perform certain tasks without a mouse, and until eyeball tracking is workable, you're still going to want a mouse and keyboard device accessible.
I don't really understand why people complain about this. iPads aren't tools for creating things. Do you get upset that your lamp doesn't allow you to create things? If you want a tablet that lets you hack it however you want then hop on Octopart, order the components you need, and start hacking away. But that's not the product Apple is selling, and it's not the product most people want to buy.
Also, nobody is stopping anybody from building desktop PCs. As long as people are willing to buy the components I'm sure somebody will be selling them.
Add a long piece of paper and suddenly you have a limited manual turing machine. Add some LEGO Mindstorms, and suddenly you have a limited automatic turing machine.
I don't really understand why people complain about this.
Because it's a largely artificial restriction imposed by Apple to further their business interests at the expense of users. As noted below, the iPad form factor would be great for a programming environment like Squeak, but Apple says no. Now that we're starting to get Android tablets that don't suck, I'm hoping that we'll see some tools like that.
If modern smartphones had existed when I was a kid, I'm 100% sure I would've been building (probably crappy) games and apps for them when I was 12.
The tools to create are more democratized, which is extremely powerful. Seeing high-quality apps in the app store, and knowing that I have all the tools to do the same, would've been the ultimate challenge for me.
I would've spent my high-school years studying existing apps, open-source, etc, and trying to emulate successful ones. I know this b/c I DID spend most of my childhood trying to figure this stuff out, but available resources were so primitive (mid- to late-80's). Most people didn't even have a computer, and there was little open source or good-quality software to look at for inspiration.
There will always be systems that can be explored & hacked as long as there is a community interested in doing so.
Desktops are not going to "go away" , things will simply evolve. We have the technology to create many types of computers now, not just a box with a keyboard & monitor.
Is that really true? They have python "apps" for the ipad, but that's not what i mean. I like tinkering, always have my parents tell stories about how when i was a child I'd take things apart instead of playing with toys. IMO that type of curiosity is what makes a "hacker". Regarding apple products part of the fun is jailbreaking the device and figuring out how it works, trying to break the security etc. this will teach you A LOT. Yes you can tinker with android devices but with something closed like the ipad I get a drive to figure out how it works and break it. Apple might not like it much when their devices are jailbroken/the cydia store but you don't see them suing people like geohot as sony does.
"...but you don't see them suing people like geohot as sony does."
Yes, yes you do. The ridiculous lawsuit that Apple is currently waging against Samsung is a prominent example. Frivolous waste of time. "Let's patent a rectangle. Wait, a black rectangle with rounded edges!" Good thing no one told any TV manufacturers about the no-rectangle patent! Silly.
Don't get me wrong, though. I work on Macs every day; love 'em. But I think the platform wars should be over by now; being able to use *any device or OS or application should be the focus, shouldn't it? (For my part, I'm enjoying the flexibility to create, code, whatever on open and expansive Android devices in addition to my Mac these days. And I'm grateful that OSX is now based on a BSD variant.)
In the US, at least, the legality of jailbreaking currently rests on a temporary DMCA exception that needs to be renewed every three years. Prospects for the renewal look good at the moment:
I picked up a deep love for using computers via a terminal with a 300 baud modem. Not that I don't agree with the sentiment, just saying there are a lot of paths.
You know, I've learned (and still am) a lot about computers and programming from books too. The paper books. Those horrible horrible things that allowed consumption only.
Also there are millions of people using desktops for consumption only.
So no, no discussion about this. False dichotomies are not something I am going to discuss.
Right, because the limitations of paper are largely an arbitrary software implementation detail.
(I do think it is arbitrary; It would cost Apple very little to offer some mechanism to turn off the safety of only running apps from the app store; the small impact of jailbreaks on the ecosystem suggests it wouldn't introduce many new problems)
Well, it's a relative thing. At the time it was built, it was probably one of the easiest platforms to create things on, other platforms at the time involving actual physical equipment and work.
Well, within the production end, there's a shift from "tinkering and having fun" to "this is something done by professionals, now shoo, kid". The necessary licensing fee to develop for iOS only reinforces this notion.
Absolutely. That was the bit that made me continue reading because I liked where the story was going, then it suddenly took a turn for the unexpectedly more awesome :)
when people use iPads they end up just using technology to consume things instead of making things. With a computer you can make things. You can code, you can make things and create things that have never before existed and do things that have never been done before.
I think closed devices are really a step backwards. I learnt programming (and a whole lot more, like mathematics and logic), when I picked up a computer as a kid and discovered Python and started hacking around. I could look around for tutorials, download code or try out code from books and nobody stopped me.
On a somewhat similar vein, I am also sad that desktops are slowly going away. I learnt so much more about computers (and how it is not magic) by building my own.
I think something needs to be said about systems that allow you to explore and hack around for the fun of it.