I haven't been using any Palm for ages (or any other PDA - not a gadget guy, have an iPod Touch today just because I was given one for R&D), but back in 1999 I was the happy user of a then recently- launched Palm III. At that time, Palm was rocking the world with its innovation, remarkably for handwriting.
But the Palm was also great for its openness. There was a public and free SDK. I remember hacking together simple apps with J2ME, Waba, even Pocket Smalltalk. Didn't have to put up with the native SDK if you didn't like. No fees or gatekeepers. (Of course, no big app business either.) I only hope that the next generation of computing devices will remain enough open so developers have the freedom to pick languages, runtimes, frameworks etc.; and to have full access to the system when necessary (obviously, with the necessary security measures - sandboxing, jails, managed runtimes, digital signatures etc. - to let users control this access, and to teach developers to not be lazy and only step to low-level/dangerous stuff when _really_ necessary). I don't have a problem with centralized app stores, as long as they are reasonable (Apple's is certainly not in this category, for a number of reasons). Apple's advantage was (among others of course) being pioneer to offer such a well-rounded device, for both consumers and developers. They could only get away with draconian rules because they still don't have significant competition. But hopefully, they are going to face real competition from Android, JavaStore, Palm, Nokia Ovi... (everybody and their dog are creating app stores today, It's not unreasonable to expect _at least one_ of these to achieve significant success). All else being equal, developers will favor open platforms, that don't impose stupid restrictions and rules. Re-quoting Paul Graham, "In 1995, writing software for end users was effectively identical with writing Windows applications. Our horror at that prospect was the single biggest thing that drove us to start building web apps" - but let's remember further in the past; I was there, first as a student, since Windows 3.0. Windows started to succeed [before it was popular] exactly because it was more open and accessible, compared to alternatives like commercial *nix for PCs or IBM's OS/2 (had to pay for IBM's SDK etc.). It was even more open, in the odd way of being just a wrapper over MS/DOS, and highly compatible with it (16-bit code, no real memory protection, apps could downcall into DOS and do other nasty tricks...) so a whole previous generation of tools, languages, libraries, legacy code etc., could migrate more or less smoothly. In a very short time, the Windows development scene was exploding with choices for developers, there was just nothing remotely close to it - indeed it was much better then a few years down the road, after Windows matured a bit because in this timeframe Microsoft started to crush the competition (Borland, Symantec, Watcom...), so in the end, I agree that by 1995 things were looking much more... IBM-esque, the only real choice was VisualC++/MFC/OLE/ etc., and it was a breath of fresh air when alternatives like Web (and also Java) surfaced. A+ Osvaldo On Feb 4, 8:43 pm, Joshua Marinacci <[email protected]> wrote: > Lots of people have opined on Apple's iPad, many deriding it's closed nature > and lack of features. The thing is, those problems don't matter to most > people. The iPad isn't for you or me. It's for everyone else. I've spent the > last 20 years hoping we would have the technology to build such a device, > even though I knew it was a device I would not personally use. But that > doesn't matter. > > Make no mistake, the simplified and locked down iPhone OS (running on both > the iPhone and the iPad) *is* the future. Eventually at least 90% of people > will use an iPhone, Chrome Pad, netbook, or similar device as their primary > computing interface. Don't focus on the form factor. A netbook will simply an > iPad with a built in keyboard. The point is the simplified computing > experience that leaves a lot out. It does what 90% of people want to do and > without 90% of the headaches you get from a general purpose computing device. > > The iPad doesn't represent something that augments your laptop. For 90% of > people, this will *replace* their laptop. It's the end of carrying many > pounds of textbooks. It's the end of segfaults, finding files, navigating 20 > overlapping windows, dreading system upgrades, and network configuration. > It's the end of general purpose operating systems for the masses. > > Sure, Apple may *say* it's occupying a 3rd space between the phone and > laptop. And the iPad may *currently* be slaved to a master computer, but one > day it won't be. And I bet that day will come sooner than we expect. Apple > is just waiting for the right time to make the iPad go independent. > > The problem? So let me ask you this: What if Microsoft in 2000 had decided > that WindowsXP would only be available on a Microsoft PC, and the only apps, > videos, and ebooks you could install on it would be sold by a Microsoft > online store, and developers could only write apps in Visual Studio with > .NET, and certain APIs and features would be reserved only for Microsoft's > own apps, and certain kinds of apps will not be allowed at all. Would we > have accepted this? Certainly not. Yet Apple is doing the same thing, and > the world will love them for it. Because a simplified computing experience is > what 90% of people really want. > > In the long run, this is good. Apple is pushing forward the state of the art > and will force the industry to follow it. I don't begrudge Apple their > winnings. What they've done in the last 10 years is astonishing and we are > all better off for it. They have worked incredibly hard and earned their > success . But there's a downside. In their quest to put the user experience > first over all else they have created a locked down system where Apple > controls everything. We put up with this from the iPhone because it was > still more open than the typical feature phones that preceded it. But when we > see something that will replace the laptops we have today, and the nice open > general purpose computing environments we take for granted, then it starts to > be worrisome. > > The answer, however, is not to bitch on mailing lists and blogs. Most people > don't care about the 'openness' of their devices. It provides no tangible > benefit to they, so we shouldn't expect them to care. They simply want to get > stuff done with a minimum of fuss. And be snappy. Complaining about Apple's > lock-in or lamenting the lack of iPad features won't change anything. > There's only one thing that will make a difference: create a alternative that > is more open but still provides a good experience; starting with a viable > competitor to the iPhone. > > And that's exactly what I've decided to do: > > http://www.joshondesign.com/2010/02/03/leaving-sun-joining-palm/ > > - Josh -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
