Doctorow: Why I won't buy an iPad

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/04/02/why-i-wont-buy-an-ipad-and-think-you-shouldnt-either.html

by fogus • 16 years ago

273 186 16 years ago

tptacek• 16 years ago

I did read this post, but as a warning to others, it says nothing that you didn't already know Doctorow would say about the iPad.

cgranade10• 16 years ago

If Doctrow sounds like a broken record, I can't hold it against him. These are points that need to be made repeatedly and loudly-- voices that oppose these kinds of closed platforms are sorely missing, by and large.

DeusExMachina• 16 years ago

I don't think that these voices are useful. I don't claim they are right or wrong, but I think they are useless.

If the iPad is such a bad platform, developers/publishers/users will understand it and abandon the ship.

But, for now, it does not matter how many times these concepts are reiterated. People already have decided wether to buy/develop for/publish on iPad or not. Very few will change their mind reading these pieces (or the opposite sided ones).

timr2• 16 years ago

Not really. It's a consumer electronics device, not a religion. If you don't like it because you can't (easily) open it up and change the battery, you don't have to buy it. Only geeks care that geeks don't like the iPad -- and from what I can tell, it doesn't bother Apple much, either. They're selling plenty of iPads to the other 99% of the world.

My grandfather used to complain that "cars these days" can't be repaired without taking them to the shop because of the "damned computers." He was wrong, too.

jws3• 16 years ago

He lays out nicely written screed, but omits any inconvenient evidence and fabricates data to bolster his position. The end result is just technodemagogy. Missed opportunity.

cgranade10• 16 years ago

That's a rather tall claim-- what evidence has he omitted here, or more to the point, what data did he make up?

pavs4• 16 years ago

Its like expecting anything other than praise for everything apple related from John Gruber of "Daring Fireball". I knew it just by looking at the title what Doctorow had to say.

stanleydrew8• 16 years ago

John Gruber has been pretty fair recently, at least on the Apple patents front.

tvon3• 16 years ago

That is far from reality. Gruber criticizes Apple in areas he feels they deserve it (App Store policies, and most recently their patent lawsuits).

You may not agree with where he criticizes and where he agrees, but he is far from doing nothing but praising Apple.

st3fan3• 16 years ago

"If you want to write code for a platform where the only thing that determines whether you're going to succeed with it is whether your audience loves it, the iPad isn't for you."

How is this different from writing an app for say the web? Or Linux?

What if your only audience is yourself. Or a very small group of people? Which is also perfectly possible for iPad/iPhone developers?

How does he define success? Financially? Making it available? Being able to open source it?

tannerburson4• 16 years ago

His point is the exact opposite of what you're saying. He's alluding to the fact that Apple's application review process has as much, or more, to do with your success than whether your users love the app or not. If Apple decides to reject you, or reject a needed update, or even just delay it for an extraordinary amount of time, you're out of business.

This is the exact opposite of a web app, or a linux app, or even a desktop OSX app. You write it, you distribute it, and it's on you to make it successful.

bmj2• 16 years ago

True, but if you don't think that model is fair, then don't write software for it. I agree that the AppStore model is flawed, and doesn't promote the sort of freedom that most developers (and users) are used to, but apparently many, many developers, and many, many users either think it is okay, or haven't thought about it at all. If enough developers wised up, then perhaps Apple would make changes to the model. I suspect, however, that we won't see that sort of groundswell anytime soon.

st3fan3• 16 years ago

You make an important point but he does not talk about the approval process. He talks about the audience.

neilc• 16 years ago

Apple's application review process has as much, or more, to do with your success than whether your users love the app or not.

That is absurd. There are 150,000+ apps on the App Store. Those have all passed Apple's review process, by definition. And yet only a very small percentage of those approved apps are popular/profitable. Building an app that people love is much harder, and much more important to your success, than simply passing the App Store review. If you stay within the fairly well-known guidelines, passing the App Store review is a very low bar to clear.

dpritchett3• 16 years ago

Doctorow is apparently philosophically opposed to:

* Devices he perceives as dumbed down

* DRM

* Old media

* Vendor lock-in

* App store models other than "bazaar"

Most of these have pros and cons; the iPad is not going to be everything to everyone but rather the result of a highly opinionated design process. If "it just works" and "tons of apps available for $10" fit your usage profile, so be it. There are plenty of cultural and usability benefits to a consistent experience even though it comes at the cost of some user control.

If this market isn't for you, there's always an Eeebuntu box with your name on it.

cgranade10• 16 years ago

But there isn't an Eeebuntu box with multitouch input and other slick hardware features-- having open source software is a wonderful first step, but until non-Apple manufacturers start to realize that they really need to make damn good hardware in order to compete, we're stuck with a rather crappy situation.

Moreover, its a false dichotomy between vendor lock-in and a consistent user experience. What Google has shown with the HTC Dream and Nexus One handsets is that you can have something without a centralized approver deciding what apps are blessed for publication and which aren't, and yet still have a consistent user experience. Though individual carriers do in fact restrict apps to the Android Market, this is not inherent to the platform like with iPhone OS-- customers can and should complain about carriers that lock down Android handsets.

Also inexplicable is Apple's love of DRM. Time and time again, DRM has shown itself to be the bane of consumers. It doesn't make the iPad any better in any technical sense, and only serves to introduce anti-features to the platform.

In short, my opposition to the iPad is not due to a difference in opinion about design decisions so much as it is an unwillingness to participate in a platform where both developers and users are completely subservient to Apple's whims and where I don't truly own my own device.

dpritchett3• 16 years ago

Be glad that Apple is demonstrating the market potential for iPad-like devices.

How long now before Google partners their way into a Chromium/Android tablet that is to the iPad what the Nexus One is to the iPhone? I'd love to have that device, and in the meantime I'm also excited to borrow an iPad when I get a chance.

st3fan3• 16 years ago

Uhhh consistent user interface? Have you recently looked at apps on the android marketplace? You can find anything but consistent user interface. Some copy the iPhone, other have purple square buttons, others have grey Windows buttons. Some have some iPhone keyboard, others use the native keyboard. There is zero consistency in android app.

tannerburson4• 16 years ago

In fact, Apple's fear of the customer (which leads to their love of DRM) runs so deep that they avoid any built-in peripherals that might allow side-loading of content and applications. The only hardware interface to the device is completely proprietary and requires a license to access.

The device is conceived from the ground up with the idea that Apple must control all aspects of it's use. Any features that might lessen that control are thrown to the side.

I have a hard time watching the evolution of computing go from relatively open platform that sparked my interest as a young person, to locked down DRM restricted devices.

potatolicious2• 16 years ago

> "Also inexplicable is Apple's love of DRM"

Love of DRM? Hardly - Jobs was the one who wrote an open letter slamming the music industry for insisting the use of DRM. They also managed to completely remove DRM from the entirety of the iTunes Store (after Amazon did it first, to be fair).

As for the nonetheless strong presence of DRM on the device, there's nothing inexplicable about it: they don't own the content on the stores, and the people who do are unwilling to give up DRM. Kindle books are still entirely DRM'ed, and both devices support non-DRM formats for books you get from wherever. On this part one ought to blame the publishers, not the people who deliver the content - the moment publishers allow Apple/Amazon to drop DRM on e-books is the day it'll happen.

bensummers2• 16 years ago

Here are two other articles from Boing Boing, found by clicking on the big picture links at the top of this anti-iPad article:

"Apple's iPad is a touch of genius" http://www.boingboing.net/2010/03/31/a-first-look-at-ipad.ht...

"The Elements for iPad: Hands-on review" http://www.boingboing.net/2010/04/01/the-elements-for-ipa.ht...

I'm confused now. Is it good or is it evil?

dpritchett3• 16 years ago

It appears that Xeni Jardin finds it awesome while Cory Doctorow feels it promotes undesirable cultural and business practices.

wallflower• 16 years ago

Both penned by Xeni Jardin, Cory Doctorow's partner in Boing-Boing.

pavs4• 16 years ago

Why are you confused?

They are publishing opinions for and against ipad, how can that ever be a bad thing? If it was by the same author, on different posts with different opinions, I would understand.

bensummers2• 16 years ago

Of course I'm not confused. I was just pointing out it was mildly amusing that the publication highlighted links to an opposing viewpoint from one of the other producers of the very same site.

aresant• 16 years ago

Doctorow is completely missing the point of the iPad, IMO.

He spends nearly the entire article arguing against the iPad's ability to impact journalism / magazines which, I sincerely doubt, has anything to do with why most people are excited to get their hands on one . . .

malloreon• 16 years ago

Like Doctorow mentions, "the press has jumped all over the ipad...because journalists want a daddy figure who'll convince people to pay for content again."

So while we may know what the device represents, the media hasn't been spinning it that way. People think of it as a browser/app-like gaming device, many/most media articles I've seen mention implications for journalism/media consumption.

onedognight2• 16 years ago

The iPad is a console for the non-gamer. We are all used to lock-in when it comes to game systems. Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony don't let you make a game without their say so. Why is Apple getting a bad rap?

jerf• 16 years ago

You seem to be implying that these same people aren't upset at the console makers for the same reasons, and therefore they are hypocrites. But a sufficient number of them are upset at the console makers for the same reason, so your accusation fails.

You are, after all, posting this implicit accusation the same week that geekdom has been raging about the PS3 locking down even tighter!

When making a complaint, people are not obligated to run through every similar complaint they have, or face accusations of hypocrisy. In fact that would be downright tedious.

onedognight2• 16 years ago

My comment wasn't directed to this one article or its author, but to the situation in general where I see more people complaining now about the iPad's lock-in than I remember complaining when the XBox360 was released.

gloob• 16 years ago

Because there was never any hype about how the XBox was the future of computing. That's a non-negligible difference.

antidaily• 16 years ago

Why I won't: first-generation Apple stuff usually kinda sucks.

tortilla• 16 years ago

My first-gen iPhone still kicks ass (for me).

potatolicious2• 16 years ago

iPhone 3GS is the first really awesome iPhone, for me, and I had the iPhone 2G. Lack of 3G and the really godawfully slow UI (still faster than most Android phones today, sad really) made the 2G's experience a little less than stellar.

The 3GS is the first iPhone where I didn't get constant lags and skips in the UI.

frou_dh2• 16 years ago

I wouldn't class the hardware as entirely first-generation given the "big iPod Touch" aspect.

delano• 16 years ago

And I still have a 1st gen Macbook Pro that's been going strong since 2006.

CamperBob• 16 years ago

First-gen iPhone users were very well cared-for by Apple. I've never had a better early-adopter experience.

frou_dh2• 16 years ago

Lucky for people who have already accumulated tech knowledge, buying and using an iPad won't zap it out of their brains.

Though as a young person's first computer, I kind of see his point.

KirinDave4• 16 years ago

I'd like to put out a bet:

By April 1st 2011, Doctorow will have an iPad. He'll argue that it's more important to be on the cutting edge helping to shape the community rather than to sit back on the porch and complain like an old man. He'll probably like the device, and have a list of apps that he feels exemplify his vision of the device's potential.

I guess it shouldn't confuse me why people are so eager to comment on what or why the iPad is the best/worst thing ever. We're looking at an attempt to completely change the way folks use a computer here; we're looking at a whole new product. To say, “I can forsee this impugning freedom!” is to claim to have a crystal ball of epic proportions.

Given the incredible, measurable, financial success of IP that has shed DRM, I don't think the industry is entirely behind locking up things in the way Doctorow predicts.

nooneelse2• 16 years ago

Why think he will buy an iPad rather than any one of the number of more open pads already out or coming out soon?

JeremyBanks• 16 years ago

Because it will be better than them.

KirinDave4• 16 years ago

I suspect that the iPad will make major inroads into the market and thus be the most sensible platform for someone interested in protecting digital consumer rights to be on, so that they can effectively lobby it.

There are a lot of tablets on the market. For most of them, take the total sales of any 3 and it won't even equal the pre-order volume of the iPad. I do not think I am making any overly ambitious or unusual claims when I say that the iPad will make a fairly big dent in the tablet market for at least a year or two.

nollidge• 16 years ago

Has he done this in the past? Why do you suppose he'd do it in this case?

jm4• 16 years ago

There is nothing wrong with thinking one thing today and changing your mind later based on new information. He made good points and clearly thought about his arguments. I think he's mostly right. I have been on the fence about getting an iPad it for all the reasons in the article. But I can agree with those points and still feel like there are enough advantages that I'm willing to accept the disadvantages. Obviously, not everyone will feel that way.

People generally don't buy products because they're perfect. They buy them because the good things outweigh a few blemishes.

There is no doubt the iPad will be a better product a year from now. Some of the flaws might be fixed or will be out shined by new features. There's nothing wrong with finding enough good later that it changes your feelings from a year ago.

mortenjorck• 16 years ago

The way you improve your iPad isn't to figure out how it works and making it better. The way you improve the iPad is to buy iApps. Buying an iPad for your kids isn't a means of jump-starting the realization that the world is yours to take apart and reassemble; it's a way of telling your offspring that even changing the batteries is something you have to leave to the professionals.

Because there's no powerful, intuitive, and exhaustively-documented SDK built on a robust set of APIs?

Yes, the fact that it costs $100/year to do anything useful with it is a problem. But these characterizations of the iPad as a consumption-only device, when the platform it's built on has sparked a creative, entrepreneurial revolution on mobile devices, is complete nonsense.

lazugod• 16 years ago

The platform on which iPad apps are built—the Mac—is a great piece of technology, and is indeed revolutionary in its use in the creation of modern software and digital media. But that's not an argument for the iPad being a creative tool. It is not part of the process of utilizing its own SDK.

Until I can add features to an iPhone/iPad without shelling out for one of Apple's "real" computers, I will consider the iPad a consumption-only, and thus an unnecessary, device.

dfj225• 16 years ago

I agree with Doctorow's points only when looking at the iPad as a replacement for a personal computer. If you look at it like a consumer appliance (just like the iPod Touch, iPhone, Kindle, Nook, etc.) then the iPad isn't really any different in is approach than any other appliance.

The iPad doesn't strike me as a device for any sort of creative type (producing code, documents, photographs, etc). Instead, it is a device for media consumption, just like a television or set-top box. People who want to create things will buy a PC. Just like having a PC connected to a television is useful, having an iPad that syncs with a PC might be useful to some.

In short, the greatest danger here is letting people think of the iPad as a replacement for the personal computer. Hopefully the public at large will agree.

nexneo• 16 years ago

Kids are all right!

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/kids_are_all_right

colinplamondon• 16 years ago

I don't get the whining- jailbreak the damn thing!

It takes five minutes with a single click GUI front end. Are there really that many budding hackers who can't be bothered to google 'program on an ipad'?

sstrudeau2• 16 years ago

It is also illegal. If Apple didn't go to pains to prevent jailbreaking (and therefore make jailbreaking the device a violation of the DMCA) Doctorow's entire point would be moot, IMO.

ptomato2• 16 years ago

You know... in re: Apple and DRM, I think Apple has been stripping it away about as much as could be expected:

music: none on any of the music in their store anymore, now that they actually have the negotiating clout to get away with it

video: still there, but the TV/movie industry isn't yet in as bad a position as the music industry was, and if Apple tries to take away the DRM they will just leave. Note the absence of any other video store without DRM.

apps: yes, they do have DRM which is in fact entirely painless for users and the only reason you'd want to strip it off an app is to pirate it (which people do). As far as allowing non-appstore apps, a) there's jailbreaking which Apple hasn't made any significant effort to stop beyond the initial jailbreak which was via a Safari exploit that allowed arbitrary code execution, and b) one could certainly argue that the reason why they don't is to ensure that their platform continues to run well in as many cases as possible. see: the number of android apps that will quite possibly fuck up your OS in a number of ways.

doron• 16 years ago

does Steve Jobs have a controlling share of Pixar? if so, he can release all Pixar movies DRM free and lead the charge.

ptomato2• 16 years ago

No. Disney owns Pixar. Steve Jobs is the largest single shareholder of Disney but that's by no means a controlling interest.

istari• 16 years ago

The wide-framed automated loom is an outrage! It is the tool with which the factory owner will crush the artisan.

Have you seen working conditions in the factories? Soon all goods, not not just textiles, will be produced in such a manner. Workers will be treated as machine parts, replaceable and expendable, with all power in the hands of a few. This is what the automated loom will bring! Not just economic ruin but the enslavement of society!

And what of innovation? For 300 years every artisan learned every aspect of his craft, and in doing so contributed to its growth. How is innovation possible, with all production concentrated into a handful of corporations and run by a multitude of drones?

Down with the automated loom!

sabat• 16 years ago

I would rather buy a locked-down iPad -- well-executed -- than poorly executed attempts at science fiction (Doctorow's). Seriously, the world is not black-and-white, and Doctorow needs to learn that.

isleyaardvark2• 16 years ago

Doctorow's "think of the children" argument is absurd. How many kids are really going to have an iPad? Their parents might have one, but does anyone think that'll be the only computer in the house? Apple doesn't make commodity devices, they don't compete in the low-end, and they rarely drop prices. If I had an 8-year-old son, do you think I'd let him take a $500 anything to school?

Children who weren't as fortunate as Doctorow to have parents who could afford an Apple ][ will likely have a cheaper, open alternative. Commodity hardware that wasn't available in the good old days. Back when you had to be either lucky enough to attend a private school with a computer lab (Gates), or have an engineer father working at Lockheed (Woz), or any number of other examples.

hzzn• 16 years ago

I agree with the fundamental philosophy behind Doctorow's argument, but good grief:

  The model of interaction with the iPad is to be a "consumer," what
  William Gibson memorably described as "something the size of a baby
  hippo, the color of a week-old boiled potato, that lives by itself, in
  the dark, in a double-wide on the outskirts of Topeka. It's covered
  with eyes and it sweats constantly. The sweat runs into those eyes and
  makes them sting. It has no mouth... no genitals, and can only express
  its mute extremes of murderous rage and infantile desire by changing
  the channels on a universal remote."

I don't know if it's possible to be more shrill.

Take a close look at the game industry for a glimpse into a slightly more probable future. The consoles, dominant as they are, did not kill PC gaming. A significant and very profitable chunk of gaming occurs on personal computers. The indie gaming scene is arguably stronger now than it ever has been. There has been an explosion of inexpensive or free or open source game development tools, engines and libraries over the years. As a result, it has never been easier or cheaper to make games and share them with others than it is right now. That's good!

On the other hand, the corporate gatekeeping to the console publishing world makes the App Store look like GitHub. That's bad!

It is far more useful to address actual problems that computing appliances might pose than it is to paint apocalyptic sci-fi scenarios where we are transformed into creatures made up mostly of eyes.

nnutter• 16 years ago

I hate that people like Gruber keep making the analogy to automobiles.

Because the car manufacturers didn't try to lock down their system and took government intervention to prevent this? But if Apple does it, it's just "progress".

Batsu• 16 years ago

I normally stay out of Apple related discussions, because no matter how often people say the contrary, they reek of Fanboy. Tonight, I've just had my share to drink and want to give my peace.

Apple is releasing a new device. With this, they are continuing a quite recent trend of hand(ish) held devices that oppose what we generally think of when it comes to computers.

On one hand, we don't look at most phones and wonder why we can't hack them to pieces. On the other hand, Apple can't stop touting Computer Revolution XYZ as the most incredible thing the technologically inclined have ever laid eyes upon.

The problem is they don't market their items toward us. They tell us these incredible things about how it does XYZ and does it so well... then they air commercials about how you can find a restaurant, or get directions to a movie theater, or (for the love of God) check your e-mail as you talk to someone.

As complete and utter nerds, we grok this device as a leap in handheld, touch-it-till-it-loves-you computing. Apple tells us it is... then they turn around and tell the rest of the world they can read books and download new ones for $10.

duck• 16 years ago

Was I the only one that found the upside down picture of Jobs distracting? I had the hardest time even getting through the first couple paragraphs. I'm sure there is a study that will shed light on why that is... and now I have to find it.

hackermom• 16 years ago

Will there be an "Everyone: Why we shouldn't care for Doctorow trying to tell us what we want in personal computing, and what to do with our money." follow-up?

jwr• 16 years ago

Opposing closed platforms is done not by bickering about it but by building better ones.

Doctorow: Why I won't buy an iPad

Related Stories