I actually asked a person who worked in Intel's storage research about this.
It boiled down to this: Intel Research made the X25, and pushed it over to Intel's product teams who basically just put them in boxes and shipped it. And people loved it.
Then Intel's product design teams tried to design a follow on controller and sucked entirely at it. So they got the research group to rev the x25 a few times, while they contracted with Marvell for controllers since they needed a SATA 6G controller for their own firmware.
At that time, they hadn't switched to Sandforce, but judging by the fact that Sandforce has been quite dominant even back then, I wouldn't be surprised if Intel did almost no firmware customization now.
I wouldn't have believed that Intel had sucked in SSD controller design had I not heard it from a Intel researcher (although they might have been biased given that the story make their peers look good) but looking back again, we're talking about the company that brought us Netburst and FBDIMMs.
apt-get is a easy way to kill my machine in my experience.
Apple's App Store has got the right idea. Carry the dependent libraries with the app that needs it. Storage is cheap, time is not. Better to not deal with dependency hell at all and just waste a hundred megs instead. All your configs are still in your home directory, in property lists. Better ordered than the old unix config files, not obscure like the registry, and easily convertible in-place into something that resembles JSON if you want to use a text editor, but also easily loadable into in-memory data structures if you want to programmatically manipulate them.
The vast majority of users don't want Linux on the desktop because it get them nothing they find useful. That's pretty close to dead in my opinion.
The common user don't understand how to use it. They won't understand the difference between Linux and a Linux distro. They don't have anybody to hand hold them through their tasks, and most of their software won't run on it without arcane bash incantations. Plus the community in general treats them like idiots.
But that's not even the real problem. What makes it dead in my eyes is actually people like myself.
I've ran Gentoo, YDL, Slackware, Debian, Ubuntu, amongst other smaller distros. I used to be a fan. Now I'm completely indifferent. I simply just don't care enough to pick Linux.
Why? Because as far as it has come, Linux holds itself back. No stable ABI's? Come on, every other OS can upgrade kernels without recompiling every driver. KDE/GNOME/Unity/etc infighting and all that is ugly to watch. The last straw was Ubuntu software updates on a dev machine years ago. Bog standard Dell Precision 370. Pentium4. Intel board. No extra accessories. It's the stereotypical P4 box. I clicked update on Ubuntu and Ubuntu made itself unbootable. (This wasn't a major update either, it was simply the typical package updates from the repos.) After fixing it manually, it did it again a month later. Then I transferred all my work to a Mac and that was that.
Since then, all my machines run OSX, OpenSolaris/OpenIndiana, WinXP, or FreeBSD. (in that priority) Shit just works... and more importantly, stays working.
If somebody told me that Linux has fixed all that in the past 4 years, that'd be nice. But it wouldn't convince me to go back and try it again. I feel I'd gain nothing from using Linux.
As for the people who buy a Mac to run Linux because the hardware is better supported, it's just a matter of time before they switch to OSX.
To their credit, when I used a Samsung Captivate, Touchwiz was way more responsive than ASOP on the same class of hardware. It still feels unnatural and laggy, but it was definitely an improvement over stock 2.1
The NS has at least 4 different hardware versions, where most of them don't even get all the features. (Google Wallet). Plus the hardware for the NS is crap. I hate how the on/off switch is opposite the volume buttons. It blasted my ears every time I want to go change the music if I don't hold it carefully.
The Galaxy Nexus is a mini-tablet; it's too big, and LTE burns batteries. Oh, and the GPU is already a generation or two behind the iPhone 4S.
Given that OpenSolaris is already deployed all over the place, it's the least adventurous of the options. I'm using snv_130 for my personal media server and it works fine for me. 6 drives: 2 on ICH, 4 on sil3124. Pentium Dual-Core Mobile 1.73 on a Mini-ITX board with dual-gigE.
If people are unhappy about the lack of a support community, there'a Illumos/OpenIndiana. Or just download the free Solaris 11 Express install DVD from Oracle's site for the latest and greatest.
I'm almost tempted to make a 2nd server entirely out of old drives with bad sectors and load it with data from optical media just to see how much life can ZFS get out of drives that should already be recycled for scrap metal.
Of course there is a uniform "Android Phone Design" sanctioned by Google. There's three of them.
1) blackberry look alike. (Android 1.0 SDK and test devices like in that picture) 2) iphone look alike. (g2) 3) iphone look alike with sliding keyboard. (g1)
Requirements for #2 and #3 include a touch screen and 4 buttons on the front corresponding to back, home, preference, and search.
#1 was actually banned for a while. Remember the Kogan Agora? Only HTC has managed to bring back this form factor in the form of the facebook-focused android phone.
The way I see it is that Apple isn't claiming ownership of the technologies they combined, but rather they are taking offense to somebody copying them and not only failing to make it better, but making it a half-assed copy.
Take a WinMo6 Smartphone, WinMo PocketPC, PalmPilot, Newton 2000, Blackberry (traditional, not the Storm), WinPho7, webOS, iOS, and Android device.
Lay them out next to each other. Then arrange them into groups or spectrum based on how similar they are. What do you get?
If you've owned all these devices at some point in time, (and with the exception of the WinPho7 device, I have) you'll end up with the following:
1) pager slab devices (WinMo6 Smartphone, traditional Blackberry) The pre-iPhone Android protos would go in this category too. 2) stylus-based PDAs (Palm, Newton, PocketPC) 3) multitouch touchscreen devices (WinPho7, webOS, iOS, modern Android)
There's actually one more category between 2 and 3 which would be the transitional devices. Single-touch like resistive, but using capacitive screens. LG Prada, and a whole boatload of touchscreen feature phones fit in here.
Why do these categories matter? Because they fundamentally dictate the way that a person uses the device. Fanbois on both sides shout out "yeah but xyz copied ijk from insert-some-picture-here," but neglect that in most cases, the device screenshot they're showing is superficially related to some point they're actually failing to make.
In my opinion, Steve's problem is this: Apple established the multitouch touchscreen mobile device category by creating their own design, partly evolved from the Newton and partly brand new. Palm released their contender, webOS, by evolving from the PalmPilot and bringing in new ideas. And Google, started with a platform which was a copy of the Blackberry category, simply started making it into a copy of iOS instead of making a unique and innovative platform. For those who've seen a broad spectrum of mobile device history, it was clear that Android has no originality and on top of that, it's a half-assed copy. That is why Steve was angry. Had Google released something like webOS or WinPhone7, I doubt Steve would have been pissed. He'd probably be pretty pleased because both the webOS and WinPhone7 platforms take the multitouch mobile device concept and improve on it in some new way.
If anybody here gets the chance to pick up a WinPhone7 device and play with it, I highly recommend it. Even go out to an AT&T store just to try it. You will learn one of two things: 1) You'll find that it's unique and interesting. You'll have a certain appreciation for how different it feels compared to other devices of the category. Whether you actually like the device or not is unimportant. Hell, you might even hate it and think it's the ugliest thing ever. What is important is that despite being totally hosed in the market, that Microsoft took the time and effort to bring out something unique. 2) Or you'll be completely uninterested, thereby learning that you have no industrial design sense whatsoever.
"Optimize what?", you might ask. Well, do it like a proper programmer should. Decide what you think is important and optimize that first.
Let's say the point is to make a phone that "feels" faster.
iOS is designed to offload as much of the UI to the GPU as possible. Android lacks graphics acceleration in the UI. Maybe that'll get fixed in ICS, who knows. But, this is why the crappy old iOS devices and Windows Phone 7 devices still feel more responsive than most of the modern dual core Android devices.
So Samsung releases the GS2 with a 1.2Ghz A9 while Apple releases the iPhone 4S a 800Mhz A9. It's more important on Android to have a faster CPU. On the other hand, the iPhone 4S has over double the GPU power compared to the GS2. Because it's more important on iOS to have a faster GPU.
Sometimes' it shouldn't be about having bigger numbers. It should be about having the right gear for the right job. In both Samsung and Apple's case, they're putting the extra power where they should. (assuming the criteria was UI responsiveness)
As for why Apple only releases 1 phone a year, there's plenty of good reasons. Samsung's used to making a wide variety of stuff. Apple isn't. So releasing 1 phone a year makes it easier to manage factory tooling, since it takes months to ramp up a factory to produce a high quality product. Release 1 phone a year also means that it's easier to market and manage inventory. When working on one phone release a year, whatever you spend on QA and testing gets funneled. So you either get better quality or save on QA costs. So if it works for Apple, it works for Apple. There isn't a one true way to releasing products. This is their take.
Like I said before, Samsung's used to making a wide variety of stuff, so they're organized to pump out products sooner. Maybe they're good. Maybe they're not. My Nexus S hardware has some major usability fails, so I wished they took a little more time to think that one over. Should have taken the Samsung Captivate and reworked that instead.
As for the Galaxy Nexus.... personally, I think it's a crap phone. Choosing the TI OMAP 4 over the Exynos for a crappier GPU (it's the same as my Nexus S) AND sourcing the SoC from TI instead of using Samsung's own? Back to Pentile? What the heck were they thinking? Why would anybody buy this garbage when the SGS2 and iPhone 4S are both simply better?
The link says that while the Macintosh had been considered for cancellation, it doesn't say Jobs was trying to cancel it. It also doesn't say that Jobs forced Raskin out.
It's grouped differently (by app versus) and allows you to clear notifications from each group. (webOS)
The changes to the notification system also adds banners that show up when the notification comes in, like webOS does it.
Each of the most recently received notifications also appears on your lock screen. This persists until the next unlock, so you only see the notifications that happened since you last used your phone.
Essentially, what they did was take the Apple Push Notification backend, add the banners from webOS, add the drop down gesture from Android, utilize the grouping from webOS. Which is no surprise because Apple hired Rich Dellinger from Palm when HP acquired Palm.
I find it hilarious that Android fans say Apple copied Android's notifications wholesale, because the only thing that Apple copied from Android was the drop down gesture. Everything else is webOS-ish because the UI designer designed webOS' too.
(I got an iPhone4, Nexus S, and HP Touchpad on my desk.)
As somebody who tried a year ago to compile VLC for both my iPad and my Nexus S: Because getting stuff working, if and only if the sandbox will let you, is easier on the iPad/iPhone.
*sigh* It's not about the snazzy animations and perfect touchscreen. It's about the fact that it's a device that enables people to do "computery stuff" that without the fear they're going to screw it up.
In other words, the perception from people isn't that it sucks because it's locked down or crippled. It's that it's simple to use because... well.. there's less stuff to get in the way. Less stuff to comprehend, but just enough to do what you want. (Complexity can come later once people get accustomed to what's already there.)
You know what's brilliant about forcing people to use iTunes? It's forcing them to periodically do a full backup of all the data on their device. Why is this important? Because you and I know that the majority of people don't know how to back up their PCs. Heck, they wouldn't know what to do if we told them to back their stuff up. So if they need to use iTunes, they're doing themselves a favor without realizing it.
Why are backups important? Because this gets back to the low maintenance thing: When people arn't afraid of breaking something by playing with it, then they're free to explore and learn on their own instead of consulting their local IT guru. If they somehow manage to totally hose their iPad, they have a backup.
But with computers we can get all the upsides of more features with none of the downsides (at least in software), so it makes no sense.
Actually, that's not true. Features in software have a cost just like they have a cost in hardware. It's just harder to see since we're so used to consuming desktop-style resources.
Ever wonder why, despite having a multitasking kernel on iPhone from day one, Apple refused to provide background apps until iOS4?
The answer isn't just RAM, but also battery life and UI responsiveness.
Background apps would be huge wins in utility. But it has a cost in that with limited amounts of RAM and no swap, you can't run all that many apps. If you had apps running in the background and your foreground app runs out of memory, all your apps are hosed.
Furthermore, if you're making it so that you auto kill apps, then you're now having the CPU go off and do stuff like kill apps nicely (to prevent data corruption) and this means your app is less responsive.
If you have an app in the background doing stuff, it's also a higher power consumption. You might think, yeah, but it's just one measly app checking a feed over the net. But that net connection causes the radio to stay on.
I've mentioned in the past how awful I think my Nexus S is because of Android. And after reading a bunch of SDK docs for both iOS and Android, it's pretty clear to me that the Android team should have thought things through better.
Uh... you do know that for many of us who've been interested in smartphones, we know of HTC as the Windows Mobile vendor? There was this whole slew of smartphones that people have conveniently forgotten, it's pretty darn amazing.
In other words, on Android the UI isn't as polished, the UI isn't intuitive, and the apps seem invasive? Pretty much my experience when trying out a Xoom.
For the common user, it's no wonder the iPad sells so well. Hell, I'd be more likely to recommend my HP Touchpad over the Xoom to my parents if they didn't already have iPads.
Eh? The Touchpad was overpriced? You do understand that profit margins are necessary to pay for engineers to make the next product, right? I mean, how else do you write paychecks?
Intel AHCI controllers have problems probing Intel SSDs (go figure)
I once talked with an engineer from an Intel research lab and found out they worked on SSDs. Apparently their highly acclaimed X25s were mostly developed by the research lab, and were to be transitioned over to product development teams. And apparently, Intel product development teams wern't as good. Hence why the Intel 510 uses a Marvell SSD controller.:P
After seeing the Pentium FPU bugs, the Netburst Architecture, FB-DIMMs, and Larrabee, I'm not surprised.
Slashdot Mirror
I actually asked a person who worked in Intel's storage research about this.
It boiled down to this: Intel Research made the X25, and pushed it over to Intel's product teams who basically just put them in boxes and shipped it. And people loved it.
Then Intel's product design teams tried to design a follow on controller and sucked entirely at it. So they got the research group to rev the x25 a few times, while they contracted with Marvell for controllers since they needed a SATA 6G controller for their own firmware.
At that time, they hadn't switched to Sandforce, but judging by the fact that Sandforce has been quite dominant even back then, I wouldn't be surprised if Intel did almost no firmware customization now.
I wouldn't have believed that Intel had sucked in SSD controller design had I not heard it from a Intel researcher (although they might have been biased given that the story make their peers look good) but looking back again, we're talking about the company that brought us Netburst and FBDIMMs.
apt-get is a easy way to kill my machine in my experience.
Apple's App Store has got the right idea. Carry the dependent libraries with the app that needs it. Storage is cheap, time is not. Better to not deal with dependency hell at all and just waste a hundred megs instead. All your configs are still in your home directory, in property lists. Better ordered than the old unix config files, not obscure like the registry, and easily convertible in-place into something that resembles JSON if you want to use a text editor, but also easily loadable into in-memory data structures if you want to programmatically manipulate them.
The vast majority of users don't want Linux on the desktop because it get them nothing they find useful. That's pretty close to dead in my opinion.
The common user don't understand how to use it. They won't understand the difference between Linux and a Linux distro. They don't have anybody to hand hold them through their tasks, and most of their software won't run on it without arcane bash incantations. Plus the community in general treats them like idiots.
But that's not even the real problem. What makes it dead in my eyes is actually people like myself.
I've ran Gentoo, YDL, Slackware, Debian, Ubuntu, amongst other smaller distros. I used to be a fan. Now I'm completely indifferent. I simply just don't care enough to pick Linux.
Why? Because as far as it has come, Linux holds itself back. No stable ABI's? Come on, every other OS can upgrade kernels without recompiling every driver. KDE/GNOME/Unity/etc infighting and all that is ugly to watch. The last straw was Ubuntu software updates on a dev machine years ago. Bog standard Dell Precision 370. Pentium4. Intel board. No extra accessories. It's the stereotypical P4 box.
I clicked update on Ubuntu and Ubuntu made itself unbootable. (This wasn't a major update either, it was simply the typical package updates from the repos.) After fixing it manually, it did it again a month later. Then I transferred all my work to a Mac and that was that.
Since then, all my machines run OSX, OpenSolaris/OpenIndiana, WinXP, or FreeBSD. (in that priority)
Shit just works... and more importantly, stays working.
If somebody told me that Linux has fixed all that in the past 4 years, that'd be nice. But it wouldn't convince me to go back and try it again.
I feel I'd gain nothing from using Linux.
As for the people who buy a Mac to run Linux because the hardware is better supported, it's just a matter of time before they switch to OSX.
To their credit, when I used a Samsung Captivate, Touchwiz was way more responsive than ASOP on the same class of hardware.
It still feels unnatural and laggy, but it was definitely an improvement over stock 2.1
The Nexus line sucks.
The N1 is deprecated.
The NS has at least 4 different hardware versions, where most of them don't even get all the features. (Google Wallet). Plus the hardware for the NS is crap. I hate how the on/off switch is opposite the volume buttons. It blasted my ears every time I want to go change the music if I don't hold it carefully.
The Galaxy Nexus is a mini-tablet; it's too big, and LTE burns batteries. Oh, and the GPU is already a generation or two behind the iPhone 4S.
I think he's talking about Galaxy S phones having shitty GPS when he meant "AntennaGate"...
Given that OpenSolaris is already deployed all over the place, it's the least adventurous of the options.
I'm using snv_130 for my personal media server and it works fine for me.
6 drives: 2 on ICH, 4 on sil3124. Pentium Dual-Core Mobile 1.73 on a Mini-ITX board with dual-gigE.
If people are unhappy about the lack of a support community, there'a Illumos/OpenIndiana.
Or just download the free Solaris 11 Express install DVD from Oracle's site for the latest and greatest.
I'm almost tempted to make a 2nd server entirely out of old drives with bad sectors and load it with data from optical media just to see how much life can ZFS get out of drives that should already be recycled for scrap metal.
Of course there is a uniform "Android Phone Design" sanctioned by Google.
There's three of them.
1) blackberry look alike. (Android 1.0 SDK and test devices like in that picture)
2) iphone look alike. (g2)
3) iphone look alike with sliding keyboard. (g1)
Requirements for #2 and #3 include a touch screen and 4 buttons on the front corresponding to back, home, preference, and search.
#1 was actually banned for a while. Remember the Kogan Agora? Only HTC has managed to bring back this form factor in the form of the facebook-focused android phone.
From the picture, no. But that's like saying a tricycle and a Abrams Tank don't really look all that different, just evolved.
But it was different enough that Google had Kogan cancel the Agora because of potential compatibility issues.
The way I see it is that Apple isn't claiming ownership of the technologies they combined, but rather they are taking offense to somebody copying them and not only failing to make it better, but making it a half-assed copy.
Take a WinMo6 Smartphone, WinMo PocketPC, PalmPilot, Newton 2000, Blackberry (traditional, not the Storm), WinPho7, webOS, iOS, and Android device.
Lay them out next to each other. Then arrange them into groups or spectrum based on how similar they are.
What do you get?
If you've owned all these devices at some point in time, (and with the exception of the WinPho7 device, I have) you'll end up with the following:
1) pager slab devices (WinMo6 Smartphone, traditional Blackberry) The pre-iPhone Android protos would go in this category too.
2) stylus-based PDAs (Palm, Newton, PocketPC)
3) multitouch touchscreen devices (WinPho7, webOS, iOS, modern Android)
There's actually one more category between 2 and 3 which would be the transitional devices. Single-touch like resistive, but using capacitive screens. LG Prada, and a whole boatload of touchscreen feature phones fit in here.
Why do these categories matter? Because they fundamentally dictate the way that a person uses the device. Fanbois on both sides shout out "yeah but xyz copied ijk from insert-some-picture-here," but neglect that in most cases, the device screenshot they're showing is superficially related to some point they're actually failing to make.
In my opinion, Steve's problem is this: Apple established the multitouch touchscreen mobile device category by creating their own design, partly evolved from the Newton and partly brand new. Palm released their contender, webOS, by evolving from the PalmPilot and bringing in new ideas. And Google, started with a platform which was a copy of the Blackberry category, simply started making it into a copy of iOS instead of making a unique and innovative platform.
For those who've seen a broad spectrum of mobile device history, it was clear that Android has no originality and on top of that, it's a half-assed copy. That is why Steve was angry.
Had Google released something like webOS or WinPhone7, I doubt Steve would have been pissed. He'd probably be pretty pleased because both the webOS and WinPhone7 platforms take the multitouch mobile device concept and improve on it in some new way.
If anybody here gets the chance to pick up a WinPhone7 device and play with it, I highly recommend it.
Even go out to an AT&T store just to try it. You will learn one of two things:
1) You'll find that it's unique and interesting. You'll have a certain appreciation for how different it feels compared to other devices of the category. Whether you actually like the device or not is unimportant. Hell, you might even hate it and think it's the ugliest thing ever. What is important is that despite being totally hosed in the market, that Microsoft took the time and effort to bring out something unique.
2) Or you'll be completely uninterested, thereby learning that you have no industrial design sense whatsoever.
It's actually pretty simple. Optimize.
"Optimize what?", you might ask.
Well, do it like a proper programmer should. Decide what you think is important and optimize that first.
Let's say the point is to make a phone that "feels" faster.
iOS is designed to offload as much of the UI to the GPU as possible.
Android lacks graphics acceleration in the UI. Maybe that'll get fixed in ICS, who knows.
But, this is why the crappy old iOS devices and Windows Phone 7 devices still feel more responsive than most of the modern dual core Android devices.
So Samsung releases the GS2 with a 1.2Ghz A9 while Apple releases the iPhone 4S a 800Mhz A9. It's more important on Android to have a faster CPU.
On the other hand, the iPhone 4S has over double the GPU power compared to the GS2. Because it's more important on iOS to have a faster GPU.
Sometimes' it shouldn't be about having bigger numbers.
It should be about having the right gear for the right job.
In both Samsung and Apple's case, they're putting the extra power where they should. (assuming the criteria was UI responsiveness)
As for why Apple only releases 1 phone a year, there's plenty of good reasons. Samsung's used to making a wide variety of stuff. Apple isn't. So releasing 1 phone a year makes it easier to manage factory tooling, since it takes months to ramp up a factory to produce a high quality product.
Release 1 phone a year also means that it's easier to market and manage inventory.
When working on one phone release a year, whatever you spend on QA and testing gets funneled. So you either get better quality or save on QA costs.
So if it works for Apple, it works for Apple. There isn't a one true way to releasing products. This is their take.
Like I said before, Samsung's used to making a wide variety of stuff, so they're organized to pump out products sooner. Maybe they're good. Maybe they're not. My Nexus S hardware has some major usability fails, so I wished they took a little more time to think that one over. Should have taken the Samsung Captivate and reworked that instead.
As for the Galaxy Nexus.... personally, I think it's a crap phone. Choosing the TI OMAP 4 over the Exynos for a crappier GPU (it's the same as my Nexus S) AND sourcing the SoC from TI instead of using Samsung's own? Back to Pentile? What the heck were they thinking? Why would anybody buy this garbage when the SGS2 and iPhone 4S are both simply better?
Uh... that's not what your link says at all.
The link says that while the Macintosh had been considered for cancellation, it doesn't say Jobs was trying to cancel it.
It also doesn't say that Jobs forced Raskin out.
Reading first hand accounts at http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=The_Father_of_The_Macintosh.txt ,
Jef left because he was becoming alienated because he wanted the Mac to NOT have a mouse, be dependent on meta keys, and use an dead end processor.
It's grouped differently (by app versus) and allows you to clear notifications from each group. (webOS)
The changes to the notification system also adds banners that show up when the notification comes in, like webOS does it.
Each of the most recently received notifications also appears on your lock screen. This persists until the next unlock, so you only see the notifications that happened since you last used your phone.
Essentially, what they did was take the Apple Push Notification backend, add the banners from webOS, add the drop down gesture from Android, utilize the grouping from webOS. Which is no surprise because Apple hired Rich Dellinger from Palm when HP acquired Palm.
I find it hilarious that Android fans say Apple copied Android's notifications wholesale, because the only thing that Apple copied from Android was the drop down gesture. Everything else is webOS-ish because the UI designer designed webOS' too.
(I got an iPhone4, Nexus S, and HP Touchpad on my desk.)
Hmm, I was aware of the LLNL port, but didn't know about KQ.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=zfs_linux_coming&num=1
While digging deeper, it seems KQ has been bought out and their work stopped:
http://punetech.com/solid-state-storage-company-stec-acquires-punes-kq-infotech/
http://www.osnews.com/comments/24853?view=threaded&sort=&threshold=0
Okay, so the closest thing I can find is this:
http://www.olcf.ornl.gov/wp-content/events/lug2011/4-13-2011/1130-1200_Brian_Benhlendorf_LUG11_ZFS_on_Linux_for_Lustre.pdf
It actually sounds to me more that Sun worked on porting Lustre to integrate ZFS as a backend, not that Sun worked on porting ZFS to Linux?
Agreed.
I still think Hynix and Elpida are awful names.
Sun was hired to do the block layer port.
Really? (seriously curious) Got any more info on that?
As somebody who tried a year ago to compile VLC for both my iPad and my Nexus S:
Because getting stuff working, if and only if the sandbox will let you, is easier on the iPad/iPhone.
*sigh* It's not about the snazzy animations and perfect touchscreen. It's about the fact that it's a device that enables people to do "computery stuff" that without the fear they're going to screw it up.
In other words, the perception from people isn't that it sucks because it's locked down or crippled. It's that it's simple to use because... well.. there's less stuff to get in the way. Less stuff to comprehend, but just enough to do what you want. (Complexity can come later once people get accustomed to what's already there.)
You know what's brilliant about forcing people to use iTunes? It's forcing them to periodically do a full backup of all the data on their device. Why is this important? Because you and I know that the majority of people don't know how to back up their PCs. Heck, they wouldn't know what to do if we told them to back their stuff up.
So if they need to use iTunes, they're doing themselves a favor without realizing it.
Why are backups important? Because this gets back to the low maintenance thing: When people arn't afraid of breaking something by playing with it, then they're free to explore and learn on their own instead of consulting their local IT guru. If they somehow manage to totally hose their iPad, they have a backup.
But with computers we can get all the upsides of more features with none of the downsides (at least in software), so it makes no sense.
Actually, that's not true. Features in software have a cost just like they have a cost in hardware. It's just harder to see since we're so used to consuming desktop-style resources.
Ever wonder why, despite having a multitasking kernel on iPhone from day one, Apple refused to provide background apps until iOS4?
The answer isn't just RAM, but also battery life and UI responsiveness.
Background apps would be huge wins in utility. But it has a cost in that with limited amounts of RAM and no swap, you can't run all that many apps. If you had apps running in the background and your foreground app runs out of memory, all your apps are hosed.
Furthermore, if you're making it so that you auto kill apps, then you're now having the CPU go off and do stuff like kill apps nicely (to prevent data corruption) and this means your app is less responsive.
If you have an app in the background doing stuff, it's also a higher power consumption. You might think, yeah, but it's just one measly app checking a feed over the net. But that net connection causes the radio to stay on.
I've mentioned in the past how awful I think my Nexus S is because of Android. And after reading a bunch of SDK docs for both iOS and Android, it's pretty clear to me that the Android team should have thought things through better.
Uh... you do know that for many of us who've been interested in smartphones, we know of HTC as the Windows Mobile vendor?
There was this whole slew of smartphones that people have conveniently forgotten, it's pretty darn amazing.
In other words, on Android the UI isn't as polished, the UI isn't intuitive, and the apps seem invasive? Pretty much my experience when trying out a Xoom.
For the common user, it's no wonder the iPad sells so well.
Hell, I'd be more likely to recommend my HP Touchpad over the Xoom to my parents if they didn't already have iPads.
Eh? The Touchpad was overpriced? You do understand that profit margins are necessary to pay for engineers to make the next product, right? I mean, how else do you write paychecks?
Because text messages cost money, so I know some people who have incoming texts blocked on their accounts by choice.
Intel AHCI controllers have problems probing Intel SSDs (go figure)
I once talked with an engineer from an Intel research lab and found out they worked on SSDs. :P
Apparently their highly acclaimed X25s were mostly developed by the research lab, and were to be transitioned over to product development teams.
And apparently, Intel product development teams wern't as good. Hence why the Intel 510 uses a Marvell SSD controller.
After seeing the Pentium FPU bugs, the Netburst Architecture, FB-DIMMs, and Larrabee, I'm not surprised.
Props to their research groups though!