shaswat123/etnlp · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 412k
"I'm not really proud about what's in the App Store", and it's
combined with the emotion "Really, it's Apple's fault."

Another wrote:

I believe that they think their approval process helps users by
ensuring quality. In reality, bugs like ours get through all the
time and then it can take 4-8 weeks to get that bug fix approved,
leaving users to think that iPhone apps sometimes just don't work.
Worse for Apple, these apps work just fine on other platforms
that have immediate approval processes.

Actually I suppose Apple has a third misconception: that all the
complaints about App Store approvals are not a serious problem.
They must hear developers complaining. But partners and suppliers
are always complaining. It would be a bad sign if they weren't;
it would mean you were being too easy on them. Meanwhile the iPhone
is selling better than ever. So why do they need to fix anything?They get away with maltreating developers, in the short term, because
they make such great hardware. I just bought a new 27" iMac a
couple days ago. It's fabulous. The screen's too shiny, and the
disk is surprisingly loud, but it's so beautiful that you can't
make yourself care.So I bought it, but I bought it, for the first time, with misgivings.
I felt the way I'd feel buying something made in a country with a
bad human rights record. That was new. In the past when I bought
things from Apple it was an unalloyed pleasure. Oh boy! They make
such great stuff. This time it felt like a Faustian bargain. They
make such great stuff, but they're such assholes. Do I really want
to support this company?* * *Should Apple care what people like me think? What difference does
it make if they alienate a small minority of their users?There are a couple reasons they should care. One is that these
users are the people they want as employees. If your company seems
evil, the best programmers won't work for you. That hurt Microsoft
a lot starting in the 90s. Programmers started to feel sheepish
about working there. It seemed like selling out. When people from
Microsoft were talking to other programmers and they mentioned where
they worked, there were a lot of self-deprecating jokes about having
gone over to the dark side. But the real problem for Microsoft
wasn't the embarrassment of the people they hired. It was the
people they never got. And you know who got them? Google and
Apple. If Microsoft was the Empire, they were the Rebel Alliance.
And it's largely because they got more of the best people that
Google and Apple are doing so much better than Microsoft today.Why are programmers so fussy about their employers' morals? Partly
because they can afford to be. The best programmers can work
wherever they want. They don't have to work for a company they
have qualms about.But the other reason programmers are fussy, I think, is that evil
begets stupidity. An organization that wins by exercising power
starts to lose the ability to win by doing better work. And it's
not fun for a smart person to work in a place where the best ideas
aren't the ones that win. I think the reason Google embraced "Don't
be evil" so eagerly was not so much to impress the outside world
as to inoculate themselves against arrogance.
[1]That has worked for Google so far. They've become more
bureaucratic, but otherwise they seem to have held true to their
original principles. With Apple that seems less the case. When you
look at the famous
1984 ad
now, it's easier to imagine Apple as the
dictator on the screen than the woman with the hammer.
[2]
In fact, if you read the dictator's speech it sounds uncannily like a
prophecy of the App Store.

We have triumphed over the unprincipled dissemination of facts.We have created, for the first time in all history, a garden of
pure ideology, where each worker may bloom secure from the pests
of contradictory and confusing truths.

The other reason Apple should care what programmers think of them
is that when you sell a platform, developers make or break you. If
anyone should know this, Apple should. VisiCalc made the Apple II.And programmers build applications for the platforms they use. Most
applications—most startups, probably—grow out of personal projects.
Apple itself did. Apple made microcomputers because that's what
Steve Wozniak wanted for himself. He couldn't have afforded a
minicomputer.
[3]
Microsoft likewise started out making interpreters
for little microcomputers because
Bill Gates and Paul Allen were interested in using them. It's a
rare startup that doesn't build something the founders use.The main reason there are so many iPhone apps is that so many programmers
have iPhones. They may know, because they read it in an article,
that Blackberry has such and such market share. But in practice
it's as if RIM didn't exist. If they're going to build something,
they want to be able to use it themselves, and that means building
an iPhone app.So programmers continue to develop iPhone apps, even though Apple
continues to maltreat them. They're like someone stuck in an abusive
relationship. They're so attracted to the iPhone that they can't
leave. But they're looking for a way out. One wrote:

While I did enjoy developing for the iPhone, the control they
place on the App Store does not give me the drive to develop
applications as I would like. In fact I don't intend to make any
more iPhone applications unless absolutely necessary.
[4]

Can anything break this cycle? No device I've seen so far could.
Palm and RIM haven't a hope. The only credible contender is Android.
But Android is an orphan; Google doesn't really care about it, not
the way Apple cares about the iPhone. Apple cares about the iPhone
the way Google cares about search.* * *Is the future of handheld devices one locked down by Apple? It's
a worrying prospect. It would be a bummer to have another grim
monoculture like we had in the 1990s. In 1995, writing software
for end users was effectively identical with writing Windows

"I'm not really proud about what's in the App Store", and it's

combined with the emotion "Really, it's Apple's fault."

Another wrote:

I believe that they think their approval process helps users by

ensuring quality. In reality, bugs like ours get through all the

time and then it can take 4-8 weeks to get that bug fix approved,

leaving users to think that iPhone apps sometimes just don't work.

Worse for Apple, these apps work just fine on other platforms

that have immediate approval processes.

Actually I suppose Apple has a third misconception: that all the

complaints about App Store approvals are not a serious problem.

They must hear developers complaining. But partners and suppliers

are always complaining. It would be a bad sign if they weren't;

it would mean you were being too easy on them. Meanwhile the iPhone

is selling better than ever. So why do they need to fix anything?They get away with maltreating developers, in the short term, because

they make such great hardware. I just bought a new 27" iMac a

couple days ago. It's fabulous. The screen's too shiny, and the

disk is surprisingly loud, but it's so beautiful that you can't

make yourself care.So I bought it, but I bought it, for the first time, with misgivings.

I felt the way I'd feel buying something made in a country with a

bad human rights record. That was new. In the past when I bought

things from Apple it was an unalloyed pleasure. Oh boy! They make

such great stuff. This time it felt like a Faustian bargain. They

make such great stuff, but they're such assholes. Do I really want

to support this company?* * *Should Apple care what people like me think? What difference does

it make if they alienate a small minority of their users?There are a couple reasons they should care. One is that these

users are the people they want as employees. If your company seems

evil, the best programmers won't work for you. That hurt Microsoft

a lot starting in the 90s. Programmers started to feel sheepish

about working there. It seemed like selling out. When people from

Microsoft were talking to other programmers and they mentioned where

they worked, there were a lot of self-deprecating jokes about having

gone over to the dark side. But the real problem for Microsoft

wasn't the embarrassment of the people they hired. It was the

people they never got. And you know who got them? Google and

Apple. If Microsoft was the Empire, they were the Rebel Alliance.

And it's largely because they got more of the best people that

Google and Apple are doing so much better than Microsoft today.Why are programmers so fussy about their employers' morals? Partly

because they can afford to be. The best programmers can work

wherever they want. They don't have to work for a company they

have qualms about.But the other reason programmers are fussy, I think, is that evil

begets stupidity. An organization that wins by exercising power

starts to lose the ability to win by doing better work. And it's

not fun for a smart person to work in a place where the best ideas

aren't the ones that win. I think the reason Google embraced "Don't

be evil" so eagerly was not so much to impress the outside world

as to inoculate themselves against arrogance.

[1]That has worked for Google so far. They've become more

bureaucratic, but otherwise they seem to have held true to their

original principles. With Apple that seems less the case. When you

look at the famous

1984 ad

now, it's easier to imagine Apple as the

dictator on the screen than the woman with the hammer.

[2]

In fact, if you read the dictator's speech it sounds uncannily like a

prophecy of the App Store.

We have triumphed over the unprincipled dissemination of facts.We have created, for the first time in all history, a garden of

pure ideology, where each worker may bloom secure from the pests

of contradictory and confusing truths.

The other reason Apple should care what programmers think of them

is that when you sell a platform, developers make or break you. If

anyone should know this, Apple should. VisiCalc made the Apple II.And programmers build applications for the platforms they use. Most

applications—most startups, probably—grow out of personal projects.

Apple itself did. Apple made microcomputers because that's what

Steve Wozniak wanted for himself. He couldn't have afforded a

minicomputer.

[3]

Microsoft likewise started out making interpreters

for little microcomputers because

Bill Gates and Paul Allen were interested in using them. It's a

rare startup that doesn't build something the founders use.The main reason there are so many iPhone apps is that so many programmers

have iPhones. They may know, because they read it in an article,

that Blackberry has such and such market share. But in practice

it's as if RIM didn't exist. If they're going to build something,

they want to be able to use it themselves, and that means building

an iPhone app.So programmers continue to develop iPhone apps, even though Apple

continues to maltreat them. They're like someone stuck in an abusive

relationship. They're so attracted to the iPhone that they can't

leave. But they're looking for a way out. One wrote:

While I did enjoy developing for the iPhone, the control they

place on the App Store does not give me the drive to develop

applications as I would like. In fact I don't intend to make any

more iPhone applications unless absolutely necessary.

[4]

Can anything break this cycle? No device I've seen so far could.

Palm and RIM haven't a hope. The only credible contender is Android.

But Android is an orphan; Google doesn't really care about it, not

the way Apple cares about the iPhone. Apple cares about the iPhone

the way Google cares about search.* * *Is the future of handheld devices one locked down by Apple? It's

a worrying prospect. It would be a bummer to have another grim

monoculture like we had in the 1990s. In 1995, writing software

for end users was effectively identical with writing Windows