Outlook.com
Oct 15, 2012
Tech tribalism leads to BAD computing decisions
* By _Ian Lewis_ (http://betanews.com/author/ianlewis/)
Computing, and I use the term in the widest sense, has always been tribal
to an extent. People have loyalties, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
This year, tribes are called "ecosystems", but whatever the current label,
looking around the Interweb it seems to me that tribalism is becoming more
prevalent and more aggressive. It’s as if everyone stood on soapboxes with
their fingers in their ears, shouting "LALALALALALALA", while at the same
time (a good trick, this) yelling through a megaphone that theirs is the only
way and anyone who doesn’t agree is just too stupid to be considered human.
Famously, way back in 1994, the writer and thinker Umberto Eco (The Name
of the Rose) compared computing loyalties to religions: Apple followers were
Catholics who believed that they would find salvation through following the
One True Path. Conversely, PC users, like Protestants, were obliged to
find their own way through the many paths open to them, and not all would be
saved. And (I guess) Linux users are the hairy prophets who come out of the
desert proclaiming, "It’s really easy. Honestly. And these days you only
have to scourge yourself with thorns once a week …"
Tribal Warfare
Divisions like this cannot be a good thing, and we can’t all be right. Why
don’t we begin by admitting that there is no best ecosystem. They all have
good points, and they all have weaknesses. It all depends on what you want
to do. Because nobody and nothing is the best at everything.
It used to be axiomatic that you looked at the problem (or need) first,
identified the software solution that best fitted what you had to do and
purchased whatever hardware you needed to run it on. Tribal loyalties turn that
procedure on its head. If you decide on the platform you’ll use before you
even know what’s available the danger is that in the end nobody is really
happy.
Multiculturalism Computes
A couple of examples: a little while ago I was involved in setting up a
small digital TV channel from scratch. The decision on equipping the edit
suites was entirely software (not ecosystem) driven. We needed editing
software
that was capable of fitting in with broadcast television stations and
facility houses, and which experienced freelance editors had also worked with.
The obvious choice was Avid; but we felt we’d rather look at more
cost-efficient alternatives.
Although I personally have worked with Adobe Premiere Pro on Windows for
some time, for the TV channel, we chose Apple Final Cut Pro, on Mac Pros --
because that was right for the problem we had at the time. Final Cut Pro is
a great piece of software, but then so is Premiere Pro. (They’re extremely
similar, partly because Final Cut was initially developed by one of the
guys who had previously written Premiere for Adobe.) Final Cut was the right
choice in that situation because there were simply more freelance editors
around who had experience using Final Cut Pro than Premiere Pro.
The office desktops, however, were Windows PCs, partly because it was
easier to support Microsoft's operating system. But mainly because Windows
software was what our employees were used to. In both cases the choice was
made
to provide the greatest compatibility with the surrounding environment.
(And, though I have used PCs and Windows since the 1980s, the experience of
trying this combination made me think very seriously about going for a Mac
Pro on my own next upgrade cycle. Except now it seems Apple has binned the
Mac Pro, and killed Final Cut…)
PC Pluralism
Another example. We started out running coolcucumber.tv, a principally
Internet TV channel, using Windows media video on a Windows Media Server. This
was because at the time we started (about three years ago) the picture
quality for a given bandwidth was demonstrably better on Windows video, than
on
anything else -- especially when combined with Windows streaming server.
The situation has changed since then, and the improved quality and
popularity of H.264/MPEG4 has made it the obvious choice for streaming video.
So we have replaced the Windows video with H.264/MPEG4 (re-encoded from the
original masters, of course), and moved to a Linux server, because that’s
what we need to give the widest accessibility to the video. (In particular,
with the software we’re using, streaming to iPads/iPhones only works from
a Linux server.)
These are (small-scale) corporate examples, but there’s no reason why you
shouldn’t do this for yourself. Next time you decide to upgrade your
desktop, laptop, or other device, you could take a little time to look at what
your habits and needs really are, and whether a different device might suit
you better.
Although we all have personal preferences, the most important thing is the
overall picture, rather than an unthinking "well, it obviously has to be
Mac, or Windows, or iPad or Android". In the end you might not change
anything, but at least you will have looked with open eyes and an open mind.
And finally… This year’s prize for flexibility of thought goes to the
person of my acquaintance who recently, and reluctantly, acquired something
that could run Microsoft Word to use alongside his 25-year old RISC OS Acorn
machine. He made the decision because he works with so many others who used
Word and needed the compatibility. Software-driven, see?
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
