jaxtapose
A car is a luxury. Health is a right. Keep your examples apples to apples, thanks.
Actually. I want to explain why I was so vicious before. What made Wieser's ideas about computing so fantastic wasn't physical form factors. It was about a new age of computing where the way that people use computers would be significantly different to what we had then. It's taken more than 20 years for that to /start/ happening. The iPhone/iPad is the start of a Wieserian world because it bought the idea to people, not because they invented it.
The iPad really is an extension of the pad idea from Ubiquitous Computing. End of story. There's no counter argument. It's irrelevant who you've shown your ipad to, or how novel you think it is. You're wrong. End of story.
In fact, the iPhone and iPad are two great examples of what Wieser talked about so often in his work. The only core difference is that Wieser, the optimist he was, believed that devices should be like note pads in the office and not owned by a distinct person. Computers should transend the need for us to serve them, but instead they should serve us. Pads would be used like note pads are today, but with the power of computing facilitating our contextual needs.
But just because it's new to you, and your group of friends is irrelevant. The idea is old. Even from an implementation point of view.
The one thing that Apple can be congratulated for is bringing that idea into a marketable position. That's no small feat there, they deserve recognition. However, they didn't invent the idea. Just a marketable implementation.
He also thought that there should be more computers, everywhere, that pads/tabs/boards interlink with.
Imagine if each class had to have academic try outs? Now imagine that teachers got massive wages and bonuses for winning academic competitions? Now reflect on the number of deadshits in your classes that never, ever, would have passed an academic try out for anything.
That's right, it's a stupid comparison.
The only good thing is that most people would know they have a second or third rate education. Because they never met the cut to get into schools who used such a stupid system.
> turned out to be substantially better than anyone imagined
By anyone you mean analysts, right?
Not quite. Other nations have easier access to understanding how many people are unemployed due to unemployment benefits being so readily available. Look at Australia as an example. Anybody can qualify for benefits and it doesn't expire. On top of that they will pay for training and education.
> As an aside, all non-wage benefits that employees receive (like free dental plan or paid vacations) is eventually subtracted from their own pockets.
I think you missed the point of the article. Europe pays dramatically less, and receives dramatically more.
Europe spends "9 percent of GNP on medical" and receives nearly 100% coverage on all health insurance.
USA spends "between 15 to 16 percent of GNP on medical" and has 80% basic coverage and 60% dental insurance. On top of that 20% of the population have access to basic rights of first world nations like sick leave, and roughly 15% of the population has to use food stamps to get buy.
Your assertion of having to pay more to get more is flatly wrong.
If you're not using the right tools, for the right job, you're incompetent.
Good one.
What did you explore? Nothing, it's all documented, explored, exploited. Hell, it's a tourist attraction.
I felt that it was overly wanky and art-bloated and neglected basic principles of Information Architecture, Usability Heuristics, and Interaction Design.
Business is a bunch of cheap pricks who don't understand the value of doing things right.
How do you know if they are expensive or not?