...this talk of Libertarianism as a simplified, ideologically based political position, being attractive to "nerds" who are logical, gravitate toward principals, and have less understanding of "how people actually work" reminded me of this pithy little ditty:
According to the author of "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" (wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_dad_poor_dad) he describes how the public schools (as has been said in other comments) is designed to train "good workers," but those who excel in business have a different kind of smarts that schools don't measure (an understanding of people and opportunity, perhaps?). So his prediction for where different grade-earners end up in the economy:
"The A students end up working for the C students,
and the B students end up working for the government."
I see this applying in terms of the "logical, intelligent nerd who is good at systems" really excelling *as someone else's employee* (programmer, IT manager, etc.) but the boss is always that business person who isn't smart in the usual way, necessarily, yet has an understanding the nerds lack.
You mean a Palm that's crippled from running the couple thousand applications available for it?
No, no, that's the part you get to keep - writing all your own programs. I meant, a phone with an innovative multi-touch interface, visual voice mail, full iPod capability, and a gorgeous industrial design - you know, one that people besides guys upset they can't write their own programs will actually want to buy.
Oh, wait, you were being sarcastic, weren't you? How refreshing.
Thanks for the reply. While I'm no programmer, I would assume that 1) email, 2) web browsing, 3) other widgets (weather, stocks, etc.) and 4) on-board wifi (not to mention full video-iPod capability) would qualify in the mind of most consumers as a "smart phone," i.e. "can do more, fancy, internet-related things than a 'regular' cell phone." Smart Phone (in Apple's usage) = Marketing Speak.
This is not meant as a slam at all to those who like to program their own devices - only a suggestion that Jobs may, from what he learned from the iPod, be going for a broader market with different priorities than open programability. In TFrackingA, Jobs says: "You don't want your phone to be like a PC... These are more like iPods than they are like computers." (Emphasis mine.)
Okay, so just about every single response to this post ranked "5: Insightful" can be summarized as this: "I'm not going to buy the iPhone because Steve won't let me write my own programs!"
Sure, fine, great, whatever. Sorry you're disappointed, hope you find another solution that works for you. But after reading this same general attitude a couple dozen times, I am compelled to respond with an alternate perspective:
Contrary to Commander Taco's (much quoted) original assessment of the original, the iPod has indeed gone on to become the most popular MP3 player ever produced, to the point that its impact has risen to impacting the music retail business itself. (iTunes now sells more music than Amazon, etc. etc.) All this not only *without* many of the more sophisticated features many Slashdotters may have wished it had - but *because* it doesn't have those features!
I for one am glad to have an MP3 player with a simple interface, and innovative (click-wheel) navigation.
And while I have no intention of buying the current iPhone -...because it's out of my price range...because I hate Cingular's customer service (and have grown quite loyal to my new carrier because of theirs)...because I want something a little more rugged and less "precious," and...because I frankly don't need to read the New York Times Online on my phone....
I *will* be *quite* happy, in a year or so, when I can get a nice touch-screen driven, visual-voicemail equipped cell phone in my price range, perhaps called something like an "iPhone Nano" - whose technology was made possible by this initial market entry model!
Sheesh, call me flamebait if you want, but I don't get this tone of entitlement in some of these posts! Cingular (whom I HATE), had to re-jigger its infrastructure to make visual voicemail possible, not to mention committing to the iPhone sight unseen.
Frankly, if they demand Steve not let users upload ringtones for free because they'd rather make money selling them, I simply won't buy any ringtones, but I won't feel like Steve/Apple/Cingular is "ripping me off" for not providing me everything for free.
Sure, you buy the phone, you own the PHONE. Crack it open, get out your banana clips and soldering iron and do whatever you want to it. But if a "closed system" is what Steve/Apple/Cingular decide for whatever reason *including making money* is what they require to bring this tech to market, so be it.
Your palms, et al are still out there for you. Enjoy. And enjoy trying to motivate them to produce a comparable device like the iPhone. I'm sure it'll be any day now./rant
I'm appalled by the concept of the game, do respectfully disagree with ClassMyAss's statement that "according to the Bible, it is okay (some might even say it's one's duty) to kill nonbelievers if they won't convert," and I guess I must be a "moderate Christian" for ascribing to the teachings of, you know, Christ, as opposed to a particular political agenda, culture, or the "Left Behind" series of films.:P
"Do unto others," "Turn the other cheek," and "Love God, and love your neighbor as yourself," stand contrary to things like, for instance, the Crusades, the conflict in Northern Ireland, or standing around military funerals with placards saying God is punishing America for tolerating gays.
But I guess there wouldn't me much demand for a cheek-turning, shaking-the-dust-off-your-sandals video game...:\
Mark (who finally signed up with Slashdot after years of reading, in order to weigh in on this)
Slashdot Mirror
...this talk of Libertarianism as a simplified, ideologically based political position, being attractive to "nerds" who are logical, gravitate toward principals, and have less understanding of "how people actually work" reminded me of this pithy little ditty: According to the author of "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" (wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_dad_poor_dad) he describes how the public schools (as has been said in other comments) is designed to train "good workers," but those who excel in business have a different kind of smarts that schools don't measure (an understanding of people and opportunity, perhaps?). So his prediction for where different grade-earners end up in the economy: "The A students end up working for the C students, and the B students end up working for the government." I see this applying in terms of the "logical, intelligent nerd who is good at systems" really excelling *as someone else's employee* (programmer, IT manager, etc.) but the boss is always that business person who isn't smart in the usual way, necessarily, yet has an understanding the nerds lack.
No, no, that's the part you get to keep - writing all your own programs. I meant, a phone with an innovative multi-touch interface, visual voice mail, full iPod capability, and a gorgeous industrial design - you know, one that people besides guys upset they can't write their own programs will actually want to buy.
Oh, wait, you were being sarcastic, weren't you? How refreshing.
Thanks for the reply. While I'm no programmer, I would assume that
1) email,
2) web browsing,
3) other widgets (weather, stocks, etc.) and
4) on-board wifi
(not to mention full video-iPod capability) would qualify in the mind of most consumers as a "smart phone," i.e. "can do more, fancy, internet-related things than a 'regular' cell phone." Smart Phone (in Apple's usage) = Marketing Speak.
This is not meant as a slam at all to those who like to program their own devices - only a suggestion that Jobs may, from what he learned from the iPod, be going for a broader market with different priorities than open programability. In TFrackingA, Jobs says: "You don't want your phone to be like a PC... These are more like iPods than they are like computers." (Emphasis mine.)
Okay, so just about every single response to this post ranked "5: Insightful" can be summarized as this: "I'm not going to buy the iPhone because Steve won't let me write my own programs!" Sure, fine, great, whatever. Sorry you're disappointed, hope you find another solution that works for you. But after reading this same general attitude a couple dozen times, I am compelled to respond with an alternate perspective: Contrary to Commander Taco's (much quoted) original assessment of the original, the iPod has indeed gone on to become the most popular MP3 player ever produced, to the point that its impact has risen to impacting the music retail business itself. (iTunes now sells more music than Amazon, etc. etc.) All this not only *without* many of the more sophisticated features many Slashdotters may have wished it had - but *because* it doesn't have those features! I for one am glad to have an MP3 player with a simple interface, and innovative (click-wheel) navigation. And while I have no intention of buying the current iPhone - ...because it's out of my price range ...because I hate Cingular's customer service (and have grown quite loyal to my new carrier because of theirs) ...because I want something a little more rugged and less "precious," and ...because I frankly don't need to read the New York Times Online on my phone....
I *will* be *quite* happy, in a year or so, when I can get a nice touch-screen driven, visual-voicemail equipped cell phone in my price range, perhaps called something like an "iPhone Nano" - whose technology was made possible by this initial market entry model!
Sheesh, call me flamebait if you want, but I don't get this tone of entitlement in some of these posts! Cingular (whom I HATE), had to re-jigger its infrastructure to make visual voicemail possible, not to mention committing to the iPhone sight unseen.
Frankly, if they demand Steve not let users upload ringtones for free because they'd rather make money selling them, I simply won't buy any ringtones, but I won't feel like Steve/Apple/Cingular is "ripping me off" for not providing me everything for free.
Sure, you buy the phone, you own the PHONE. Crack it open, get out your banana clips and soldering iron and do whatever you want to it. But if a "closed system" is what Steve/Apple/Cingular decide for whatever reason *including making money* is what they require to bring this tech to market, so be it.
Your palms, et al are still out there for you. Enjoy. And enjoy trying to motivate them to produce a comparable device like the iPhone. I'm sure it'll be any day now. /rant
I'm appalled by the concept of the game, do respectfully disagree with ClassMyAss's statement that "according to the Bible, it is okay (some might even say it's one's duty) to kill nonbelievers if they won't convert," and I guess I must be a "moderate Christian" for ascribing to the teachings of, you know, Christ, as opposed to a particular political agenda, culture, or the "Left Behind" series of films. :P
:\
"Do unto others," "Turn the other cheek," and "Love God, and love your neighbor as yourself," stand contrary to things like, for instance, the Crusades, the conflict in Northern Ireland, or standing around military funerals with placards saying God is punishing America for tolerating gays.
But I guess there wouldn't me much demand for a cheek-turning, shaking-the-dust-off-your-sandals video game...
Mark
(who finally signed up with Slashdot after years of reading, in order to weigh in on this)