8 ms·

This is incredible. Even though Apple seems hell-bent on repeating their iPad mistake on Vision Pro ("A baby computer because our users are morons and we have t

This is incredible. Even though Apple seems hell-bent on repeating their iPad mistake on Vision Pro ("A baby computer because our users are morons and we have to keep them safe from any theoretical harm. Also, any kind of software development outside of macOS is strictly forbidden"), there is a small tinker community that works on genuinely making iPadOS useful. Another example (also shared here recently) is this: https://www.lispm.net/apps/uhf-x11/ https://www.lispm.net/apps/uhf-x11/

figmert 1mo ago
Apple is like that because people are hellbent on giving Apple money despite them being so user hostile.
- amelius 1mo ago
  That's because of two reasons: - normal people are morons when it comes to computers - developers can extract money from those morons by using Apple's platform
- mschuster91 1mo ago
  Well, Windows is even worse when it comes to user hostility with constant security issues, advertising, AI, snooping, shit like the Global Device Identifier (GDID), shit like the ACPI Windows Platform Binary Table (WPBT) that allows your BIOS manufacturer (or someone with physical access...) to force Windows to silently execute stuff as root... And Linux to this day still mostly does not get energy efficiency right, partially because manufacturers only test their crap hardware and ACPI tables against Windows.
- Angostura 1mo ago
  I’ve never found them user hostile. They just sell appliances that do a thing. If you don’t want that thing don’t buy it. If you do want that thing, it dies it pretty well. I don’t have an iPad. My wife uses her, a lot.
  - amelius 1mo ago
    Car analogy time. Users would be angry if your car could only run on Apple fuel, and drive on Apple roads, and were speed-limited based on what Apple thinks is safe. The fact that we think this is normal for phones is crazy. And the longer we wait the more Apple fuel stations and Apple roads there will be, until there is no way back.
    - afavour 1mo ago
      Eh, I'm not convinced by the analogy. Phones don't run on fuel (and you can recharge a phone with any electricity supply), iPhones will run on more or less any phone network (which is as close as I can think for the road equivalent). The speed limit analogy I can sort of see if I squint and I think highlights the reason people buy Apple: they want simplicity in their life. They don't want to monitor the speed limit for every road they drive down, they just want to know that if they're driving they're doing so at the recommended speed and won't end up getting a ticket (or crash!) because of an unnecessary choice (speeding). Of course if we extend the analogy further: if it's a car then the automobile industry is dominated by just two car manufacturers and they both exercise a level of control over what you can and cannot do with the car. And people need cars, so they make a choice between two suboptimal choices. I was an Android enthusiast, bought a Nexus One the day it came out. Then a Nexus 4, then a 5. Did custom ROMs, the lot. Ended up switching to Apple for simplicity around messaging and FaceTime with family/friends. I haven't ever looked back, I can't say there's anything I miss. Except the notification system maybe.
      - figmert 1mo ago
        > Phones don't run on fuel (and you can recharge a phone with any electricity supply) That analogy would be the charging port. Until the EU forced them to use USB-C, they refused to let you use anything but their proprietary (inferior) connector.
        burnerthrow008 1mo ago
        > they refused to let you use anything but their proprietary (inferior) connector Ah, the mask comes off! The thing is, people who actually used lightning widely agree that it is better than USB-C. The tactile click is just miles better, to name just one example.
- Topfi 1mo ago
  I feel, like with the first Apple Watch generations, they will pivot with regard to the AVP, given people aren't exactly hellbent on buying those. Having had one for a few months of experimentation, opening the platform might be one way to go, especially with the recent leadership changes, but then again, maybe the specific form factor simply has no mainstream future given weight, size and social isolation. Would have kept mine, for what it's worth, if I could do dev work with Xcode, VSCode, etc. freely without needing to use a macbook alongside it, but am aware that I am a very unprofitable niche.
- speak_plainly 1mo ago
  It's not exactly hostility, it's a paralyzing fear about public perception of battery life, especially given the form factors they want to maintain.
stronglikedan 1mo ago
Apple has a huge audience for that - non-tech-savvy folks. I'd wager that's a much bigger audience than folks who have an inkling of how tech works. For example, when my family needs a new phone, I switch them from Android to Iphone. It may be limited, but what is available generally just works and is polished. My family tech support calls have diminished greatly.
cosmic_cheese 1mo ago
> Also, any kind of software development outside of macOS is strictly forbidden") This may have come to be an intentional moat, but I don't think it started as one. Remember that iOS and its derivatives are themselves OS X derivatives, and that there was little to no demand for OS X dev tools that ran on other platforms prior to iOS. It was originally more of a historical artifact of all of the tooling being deeply steeped in Apple's own tech stack. Back in the Rhapsody days there was a version of Cocoa, Project Builder (Xcode predecessor), etc that ran on Windows, but that got scrapped likely because at that point Apple was not the juggernaut that the iPhone turned it into and it was likely judged too expensive to maintain for dubious benefit.
- rafram 1mo ago
  It's just the "buy your mom an iPhone" [1] mentality. Apple machines are good, widely available, and start at a reasonable price point - developers should quit moaning and buy a Mac if they want to develop for iOS that badly. Not saying this is a correct point of view, but I do think it's widely held at Apple, and there's little impetus for them to build developer tools for other platforms because of it. [1]: https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/7/23342243/tim-cook-apple-rcs-imessage-android-iphone-compatibility https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/7/23342243/tim-cook-apple-rc...
- GeekyBear 1mo ago
  > It was originally more of a historical artifact of all of the tooling being deeply steeped in Apple's own tech stack. I would say that it is tied to an institutional memory of what can go wrong when your platform depends on third party development tools. Back in the classic Mac OS days, most developers used a compiler toolchain (Codewarrior) and application framework (PowerPlant) from a company called Metroworks. They were bought by Motorola and those products were discontinued leaving developers in a bind. After that, Apple decided that they needed to offer their own first party development tools.
dormento 1mo ago
Jesus that page chugs on a 9800x3d + rx9070xt

figmert 1mo ago

Apple is like that because people are hellbent on giving Apple money despite them being so user hostile.

amelius 1mo ago
That's because of two reasons: - normal people are morons when it comes to computers - developers can extract money from those morons by using Apple's platform
mschuster91 1mo ago
Well, Windows is even worse when it comes to user hostility with constant security issues, advertising, AI, snooping, shit like the Global Device Identifier (GDID), shit like the ACPI Windows Platform Binary Table (WPBT) that allows your BIOS manufacturer (or someone with physical access...) to force Windows to silently execute stuff as root... And Linux to this day still mostly does not get energy efficiency right, partially because manufacturers only test their crap hardware and ACPI tables against Windows.
Angostura 1mo ago
I’ve never found them user hostile. They just sell appliances that do a thing. If you don’t want that thing don’t buy it. If you do want that thing, it dies it pretty well. I don’t have an iPad. My wife uses her, a lot.
- amelius 1mo ago
  Car analogy time. Users would be angry if your car could only run on Apple fuel, and drive on Apple roads, and were speed-limited based on what Apple thinks is safe. The fact that we think this is normal for phones is crazy. And the longer we wait the more Apple fuel stations and Apple roads there will be, until there is no way back.
  - afavour 1mo ago
    Eh, I'm not convinced by the analogy. Phones don't run on fuel (and you can recharge a phone with any electricity supply), iPhones will run on more or less any phone network (which is as close as I can think for the road equivalent). The speed limit analogy I can sort of see if I squint and I think highlights the reason people buy Apple: they want simplicity in their life. They don't want to monitor the speed limit for every road they drive down, they just want to know that if they're driving they're doing so at the recommended speed and won't end up getting a ticket (or crash!) because of an unnecessary choice (speeding). Of course if we extend the analogy further: if it's a car then the automobile industry is dominated by just two car manufacturers and they both exercise a level of control over what you can and cannot do with the car. And people need cars, so they make a choice between two suboptimal choices. I was an Android enthusiast, bought a Nexus One the day it came out. Then a Nexus 4, then a 5. Did custom ROMs, the lot. Ended up switching to Apple for simplicity around messaging and FaceTime with family/friends. I haven't ever looked back, I can't say there's anything I miss. Except the notification system maybe.
    - figmert 1mo ago
      > Phones don't run on fuel (and you can recharge a phone with any electricity supply) That analogy would be the charging port. Until the EU forced them to use USB-C, they refused to let you use anything but their proprietary (inferior) connector.
      - burnerthrow008 1mo ago
        > they refused to let you use anything but their proprietary (inferior) connector Ah, the mask comes off! The thing is, people who actually used lightning widely agree that it is better than USB-C. The tactile click is just miles better, to name just one example.
Topfi 1mo ago
I feel, like with the first Apple Watch generations, they will pivot with regard to the AVP, given people aren't exactly hellbent on buying those. Having had one for a few months of experimentation, opening the platform might be one way to go, especially with the recent leadership changes, but then again, maybe the specific form factor simply has no mainstream future given weight, size and social isolation. Would have kept mine, for what it's worth, if I could do dev work with Xcode, VSCode, etc. freely without needing to use a macbook alongside it, but am aware that I am a very unprofitable niche.
speak_plainly 1mo ago
It's not exactly hostility, it's a paralyzing fear about public perception of battery life, especially given the form factors they want to maintain.

stronglikedan 1mo ago

Apple has a huge audience for that - non-tech-savvy folks. I'd wager that's a much bigger audience than folks who have an inkling of how tech works. For example, when my family needs a new phone, I switch them from Android to Iphone. It may be limited, but what is available generally just works and is polished. My family tech support calls have diminished greatly.

cosmic_cheese 1mo ago

> Also, any kind of software development outside of macOS is strictly forbidden") This may have come to be an intentional moat, but I don't think it started as one. Remember that iOS and its derivatives are themselves OS X derivatives, and that there was little to no demand for OS X dev tools that ran on other platforms prior to iOS. It was originally more of a historical artifact of all of the tooling being deeply steeped in Apple's own tech stack. Back in the Rhapsody days there was a version of Cocoa, Project Builder (Xcode predecessor), etc that ran on Windows, but that got scrapped likely because at that point Apple was not the juggernaut that the iPhone turned it into and it was likely judged too expensive to maintain for dubious benefit.

rafram 1mo ago
It's just the "buy your mom an iPhone" [1] mentality. Apple machines are good, widely available, and start at a reasonable price point - developers should quit moaning and buy a Mac if they want to develop for iOS that badly. Not saying this is a correct point of view, but I do think it's widely held at Apple, and there's little impetus for them to build developer tools for other platforms because of it. [1]: https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/7/23342243/tim-cook-apple-rcs-imessage-android-iphone-compatibility https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/7/23342243/tim-cook-apple-rc...
GeekyBear 1mo ago
> It was originally more of a historical artifact of all of the tooling being deeply steeped in Apple's own tech stack. I would say that it is tied to an institutional memory of what can go wrong when your platform depends on third party development tools. Back in the classic Mac OS days, most developers used a compiler toolchain (Codewarrior) and application framework (PowerPlant) from a company called Metroworks. They were bought by Motorola and those products were discontinued leaving developers in a bind. After that, Apple decided that they needed to offer their own first party development tools.

dormento 1mo ago

Jesus that page chugs on a 9800x3d + rx9070xt