I used to try every new app, every new service. I used to run Linux on my desktop. Doing those things was fun and challenging, but took time.

I have kids now. I value spending time with them over fiddling with the latest app or spending an hour tuning my kernel so I can run my window manager at max resolution. I use a Mac and it just does that for me now, albeit with far less customizability and fun, but that is the tradeoff I'm willing to make.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm saying your sample group has an age bias. :)

Also, if you really haven't updated in three years, that means that you're still running kernel 3.16, which has 81 known vulnerabilities[0], 12 of which are critical. That's the kind of stuff I don't really want to worry about anymore.

[0] https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-33/p...

So now? Linux and *bsd for paid work. Windows for the desktop. cygwin and mobaxterm ftw. All old is new again.

What operating system allows you to "not worry about" OS security updates, and how is it different from Linux?

In my experience, on Linux such installations are smooth for about a year and a half, and then start failing for cryptic reasons, even if you've done everything possible to pick a mainstream distro, ideal hardware, and keep the machine as vanilla as possible.

(And I say this as someone who's been using Linux since the 1990's.)

I also take care of my parents computer with ubuntu and i have done two major release upgrades and have experienced no errors.

The latest update introduced many problems, though

https://www.google.com/search?q=high+sierra+breaks&ie=utf-8&...

What you've said may have been true several years ago, but it isn't anymore.

You need to add value to others no matter what you do, that's the definition of "building"

Value is what is extracted from work.

"Buildings" are the expression of physical labor put into something OF value.

It's literally defined in our lexicon.

After trying a lot of apps I have found that a smart phone has only a few functions:

1. Talking and texting.

2. Taking pictures and video.

3. Maps and directions.

4. Music, movies, ebooks.

5. Brief interactions with services like Uber, Lyft, AirBnB, Los Angeles metro, etc.

6. Casual web browsing. (I want a bigger screen and a keyboard for anything in depth.)

7. edit: Casual gaming.

Looking at how most other people use phones I don't think I am alone.

These devices are limited and I don't think it took us long to exhaust their potential. There just isn't much else a phone can do well (and that locked down vendor fiefdoms will allow).

The PC era on the other hand gave us a long, wide, and deep trench of innovation that is still not exhausted. PCs are more open, more extensible, and have a much wider IO path to the human in the chair. The breadth of what a PC can do is incredible.

(The main problem with PCs is antiquated, insecure, bloated operating systems. Fix that and I think you'd see even more innovation.)

Of course I have been a mobile skeptic since the iPhone. I just saw the next incarnation of the feature phone. Since it was still locked down by carriers and vendors and since its bandwidth to the user is poor I knew it would not deliver lasting innovation.

It would be a lie though. Since it really would be a Turing complete phone, with lots of programs on it. That was true even of the old Symbian phones, and items from 3-6 go well beyond what they did.

Nonetheless, I think there is benefit to be gained by trading flexibility for reliability. One business difficulty/opportunity is how do you pick out services like Uber, AirBVnB etc. I suspect the solution is profitable, but user hostile: lock them into a vendor when they buy their phone.

In a way, it's a feature, not a bug. The security of mobile devices is created by the very same thing that limits their usefulness - by OS being vendor-controlled, fully sandboxed and locked down, so that users (via programs acting on their behalf) can't break it. I'm not sure if it is even possible to have a secure system that allows you to do anything interesting on it.

7. Games

I loathe using my phone for most things. Any opportunity I get it is hotspot + laptop.

The only upside is it's easy to track you with these devices by those who care about you the most: big $$ and big brother.

Paid.

Used it for years. Just works.

Integrates with my Hue lights.

All kinds of settings including one that refuses to turn off the alarm if I don't use the NFC code in the bathroom (you can use QR codes as well as plain barcodes as well, just hide them away from reach from your bed.

Keep is almost there with a combination of text and drawings. Missing: - links to other notes - checkboxes in between text (currently notes in Keep are either all checkboxes or no checkboxes) - tapping on tags should show all notes with that tag

OneNote is also almost there.

Samsung notes is also almost there.

Maybe what I wish most is some way to link from my calendar to Keep and back etc etc.

However, seeing how I still cannot even link to a mail in desktop Outlook I'm afraid this is only a dream.

In order to fix it Google should open up "Play Store" to other providers. You could then end up with equivalent of both high-end stores & corner shops, selling products of quality that matches their brand, rather than mishmash of everything.

If you think about it, Apple suffers from a similar problem. In their case they allow in only high quality, impeccable software and there's no place for corner shops. Still - "the app economy" is state-owned.

And that's just me, who tries to stay somewhat up to date with the ecosystem and generally understands tech. How my mother is going to discover which alarm clock app is useful, performant, and doesn't mine bitcoin or exfiltrate her photos to the cloud? I have no idea.

App market is now a market of couple dozens of apps that make up the most amount of revenue. For small developers, there is a too little chance to be seen at all.

Actually, the whole article makes sense. Nowadays, we all see that it's difficult for small startups to promote themselves. The privilege on major platforms is given to those who pay more(ex: Google). Even if one company gains enough traction and begins to become successful, another larger corporation buys it (in best case) or makes everything to not let small competitor get larger market share. That'a a very big problem that if not solved will result in a slower progress rate.

Objectively speaking there are numbers to prove we are not in the minority.

https://www.recode.net/2016/9/16/12933780/average-app-downlo...

Quick facts from that article:

- 50% of users download zero apps per month

- 13% of users account for more than 50% of the downloads

For all practical purposes, the early start up riches are now gone. And there is also a degree of low hanging fruit value, that gets taken early in the stage of any industry. First movers have had that advantage. After that you can have a lot of small companies providing value to small niche places, but the big money value is now taken.

Every once in a while you will have some nice idea that comes along and will get big, but those will exception rather being the rule.