[Klug-general] So, this new iPhone

[Karl Lattimer]

To begin, I think you missed the point of innovation with your last  
comment so I removed it.


> When Mac OS X Leopard was released my housemate (worship in the  
> house of
> apple) was all wonderfully bouncy about all these amazing "new"
> features, which I had been using on my machine for the last few years.
> New eh?

When did leopard come out? I must have missed that, Tiger is out but  
leopard is available to developers only.

Dashboard is new, or at least a working one is, Apple invented this  
in 1986 but held it back from completion because it didn't work as  
well as it could have.
Expose was new in panther
Spotlight was new, beagle was an infant but functional but still  
spotlight got there first
The Dock was new in Puma but was never given the attention it deserved
CoreImage
CoreAudio

Not to mention iLife, your machine hasn't done any of this for the  
last few years. Quite simply put!

>
> I am not disputing the fact that the iPhone will become a success, its
> an apple product, apple are very good at this. However, before the  
> world
> comes up with the "ooh yay this is the greatest phone ever" I  
> wanted to
> put forth why I think we need to be not so hasty in this conclusion.

I think you sound like a person who goes witch hunting and accusing  
people of turning you into a newt.

>
> And while we are on the subject of innovation. Tell me, just how far
> have we come in the last 40 years? How has the computer changed?

Cell is the largest change to computing in 65 years, sure the bombe  
was cool, but it could only do asymmetric arithmetic for computing  
the incorrect result of two vector solvable comparisons. Thankfully  
Eniac came around and changed that allowing real programming of a  
universal machine. I think the innovation during the information  
revolution stands for itself, this is no reason to start nit picking  
at apple yet again.

Now that Cell is becoming available synergistic processing which in  
fact is only one step down from quantum on a scale of truly awesome  
data processing architectures will consume the world with its  
almighty AI

>
> Has it? I mean really? Ok it might be faster, the graphics might be  
> more
> pretty. But ultimately, you are still sat there in a mantra of 1
> environment.

You're either a golf ball short of a game or you missed a few  
paradigm changes. We had things like, e-mail, internet, graphical  
user interfaces and not to mention multi-tasking multi-user  
environments.

>
> One Keyboard, One Mouse, One Monitor, One Computer, One task, One  
> user.

See above

multitasking is the ability for a kernel to decide what it should be  
spending its time on, there can be lots of programs running each  
getting their slice of the pie, many users can interface with one  
computer via networks, the computer itself is only a machine for  
running the nonsense. I've for instance seen one computer setup with  
two monitors, two keyboards, two mice and two users, how is this  
possible? Well X can separate input devices per display. Isn't that  
wonderful, not to mention VNC, Citrix, terminal services, ssh,  
telnet, telenet (hah dialup shell, i remember that hehehe). The list  
goes on and on.

If you keep making statements which are so utterly stupid I will have  
to patronise you some more.

>
> We still look at computers the same way, we still use them for the  
> same
> things really. Nothing has changed.

iLife, one example of good software which makes you use a computer as  
an advantage not a way of choring through getting stuff done.


> And when you look at programming languages, and the brain damage they
> have in them these days, you realise that algol68 isn't that bad after
> all.

C# is fantastic, Java was brilliant and inspired, python is a hackers  
dream, the fact is these things have changed and got better

> I want to see something really revolutionary, something amazing. I  
> just
> am not seeing it.

I'm glad you said it, I think you really need to wake up and ride the  
current dawning of the information age, rather than reminiscing about  
the information revolution. The war is over, Kennedy is dead, the  
iPhone is here!


>
>> BTW, this time i posted because i'd like to see it as the last word,
>> and for posterity of the archive ;) and I still think it was people
>> like you who killed jesus, after all that wii will bring peace to the
>> middle east so we're all OK.
>
> Ah, so you have to have the last word. Goody.

To be honest, I was holding back saying "Will somebody put their cock  
in her mouth and shut her up" but I thought taste and decency should  
prevent me from doing so.

> Did we kill jesus? Dunno, Personally I am a pagan, so that probably
> means I already get a black mark.

Wheyhey, a lost religion with 0 surviving written proof that it even  
was a religion, completely wiped out by the romans, amalgamated into  
lost culture and fairy tales by word of mouth and devoured by  
manipulated christian beliefs. lol, well done you might as well call  
yourself a moonwatcher.

By the way, I'm not a christian, I don't buy into any belief system,  
I make my own mind up. Its far more interesting to read Arthur C  
Clark and Asimov than the freakin bible!

> I do however suggest that before you jump on the OOOH ITS APPLE IT  
> MUST
> BE GOOD! think first. Work out if it really is as good as it makes  
> out,
> and for the love of god and all that is holy, recognise that it might
> not be perfect!

I watched the keynote, had me convinced. I can't wait to try one, I  
mean it could have just been another phone, or it could have been  
like the 770, in fact its much more and I like the design, and the OS  
so why not. What I suggest you do is try and see the good in these  
peoples work, it will influence another generation of user interface  
designers, it will inspire better work from competitors, it is  
therefore a revolution in phone design.

>
> PS You coming to the pub on friday?

Not likely, I'm thumping my head against a wall asking WHY, WHY WHY  
are people so fucking dumb. and to be honest I think your answers to  
the purity test would have formed a better counter argument than what  
you wrote.


k,