Actually come to think of it, do you think of a tablet as a "computer"?
Tue May 31 2016 04:55:39 PM EDT from Ragnar Danneskjold @ UncensoredIt's the modern dumb terminal.
I actually like that description. Years ago, one of the people that owned the company I worked for said that in the not to distant future everything would be software as a service. Google Docs, that sort of thing. I am beginning to think he is correct. It might be a modern dumb terminal but it is getting to that point.
I'll say this, most tablets are more useful than the Chromebook.
Not surprising to hear this, since Apple makes a tablet.
A tablet, a phone, a chromebook, all are real computers. All have complete operating systems and can run arbitrary software.
I'd draw the line between "real" and "toy" computer somewhere near full access to a file explorer and unhindered multitasking. This probably involves a window manager. Maybe adding toolchain access in the mix.
Phones and tablets basically operate like a browser. You have multiple, independent tabs and only one of them really is in the foreground. Maybe splitscreen for two apps, if your device is posh and the OS permits it. But they do not have a "full OS", neither android nor ios. And the arbitrariness of the software depends, you basically get your apps from a store on mobile devices, sideloading is a thing of past Symbian times and for people that rooted their android. Still, it is basically fart apps, a dumbed down office and some pixelpushing stuff.
Maybe this is just and old paradigma, but people are used to spending lots of time with an explorer, "opening a file" (so that the program is triggered by mime type) instead of "opening an app" and then choosing what file to modify, if it is permitted at all. Sure, you can "share" a file via some ways on a tablet, but the whole workflow is different.
This is all nitpicking. What should be clear is that everyone has a different idea about what constitutes a "real computer." (Although most of what I'm reading here is just "It's a real computer if my favorite vendor makes one.")
What *ought* to be clear is that computing has a consistent history of "that's not a real computer" taking over the market.
No, this is not nitpicking and it is not about favorite vendors, we can move this discussion to techie talk, if that makes you feel less bias. It is about the limits of interaction, which are harsher on a phone or tablet (or in a browser, for that matter). But these limits are there, even if you put android on a full scale x64 desktop or your favorite supercomputer that is supported by the kernel.
Again, my criteria, as a list, so it is more obvious for others that you keep ignoring them. ;)
- Unhindered Multitasking (as many tasks as the user likes, no freezing if an app is moved to the background)
- Open files via an explorer vs open an app and let the app limit you wether you save a real file somewhere or export it to some cloud
- multiple windows (aka open apps), organized as you like vs one fullscreen app at a time, maybe two with splitscreen
People are used to this stuff since Windows3.1 became hot shit (or from the various other systems, Amiga Workbench, etc.). This is possible in gnu/linux, windows and osx. It is not possible in ios, android and windows mobile (at least not without additional modification). It has nothing to do with the hardware, most of the limits are imposed by the software.
And my comment about tablets had nothing to do with Apple. A Chromebook NEEDS to be connected to the network to be functional. That will change soon, but for now a Chromebook is a doorstop without internet access. And there's still plenty of places where a connection is difficult or impossible.
At least with either Android of iOS devices, they're more limited without the network, but they're still useful.
Take away the network and you restrict a computer's use to a very small number of practical use cases.
2016-06-01 14:19 from IGnatius T Foobar @uncnsrd
*Any* computer without a network connection is pretty much a doorstop
Take away the network and you restrict a computer's use to a very
small number of practical use cases.
Back to workload.
If I'm on an airplane without internet, I can write documents, edit photos, listen to music, read a book, etc.etc with a tablet or real computer.
Hell, I can even respond to emails and they will be sent when I reconnect.
No such option with a Chromebook.
Google docs has an offline mode if you use google docs.
2016-06-01 16:52 from zooer @uncnsrd
Google docs has an offline mode if you use google docs.
Ahh, you are correct. But nothing else syncs with the Google drive from what I can see, strictly Google Docs items - and (I'm sorry this seems silly) it doesn't do it by default.
Tablets are the future for much of the population - in the very long run, you won't need a "real" computer, for an increasing percentage of your tasks.
Tablets are *not* toys.
I know nothing about Chromebooks, that said.
Look at the popularity of OwnCloud. People *love* that thing, and it doesn't really do all that much.
LibreOffice has something like that too, but it's really just the existing application being rendered through a browser window. I can see advantages and disadvantages of doing it that way vs. writing an HTML-based renderer.
And I think Office 365 would have less uptake if Microsoft wasn't deliberately making Exchange so hard to install that it takes a small army of MCSE's and no fewer than six servers to support even the smallest organization.
If you're building a brand new company today, you're doing it in the cloud, to the extent feasible. You're going to use a Gmail-hosted domain for all your email, Exchange will be irrelevant because you have Google Calendar. You have Google Drive sharing as a poor-man's substitute for Sharepoint or whateverthefuck you used to use. I probably shouldn't say poor-man's because although I don't know much about Sharepoint, I never saw of it as much more of a glorified file server.
PagerDuty as the last-mile of your monitoring-and-alerting solution
Expensify or Concur for receipts
Even iDoneThis for timesheets - perhaps
You will use hosted Jira for *everything* - there's a whole development ecosystem here:
- hosted Elastic Bamboo for builds
- Jira for tasks and time sheets
- Confluence for your Wiki
- Bitbucket for your Git server
All 4 of the above are hosted, you are not installing anything on your own infrastructure.
We have *nothing* on our own physical infrastructure. We have a Wifi router. That's it. We used to have a little Linux box that was built to power flat panel display monitors that run stuff that makes us look cool. That has been decomissioned since the latest office move.
Of course, you still need Macbooks. It is not yet possible to do software development on an iPad.
Nor do we have anything deployed in a traditional "colocation" provider. Every box we run is on hardware that is provisioned with mouse clicks.
We have use hosted Newrelic for server monitoring.
there are a few legacy-ish things that I want to get rid of that are not "hosted", that are instead built out on EC2 deployments. There's an LDAP server that was a mistake, that will go away if I can ever find the time to make it disappear. There's an indispensable Splunk installation that is not "hosted" in the normal sense: we still manage its infrastructure by managing the EC2 box that hosts it.
Some of these things are more pricey than we would like. But there is at least one head that we do not have to employ that we would otherwise have to employ, and our infrastructure investment is more *predictable*, which may ultimately trump low cost.
We do not have any IT staff. None. Only developers. And it's starting to feel like a mid-size company.
I'm still changing the fucking LDAP passwords, that needs to stop.
The company I worked for ten years ago had google for your domain, we shared docs and I believe it was our domain's email but gmail handled it.
Jira (et al) is actually a pretty good example of what I was trying to point out. Atlassian offers the software as a service *or* as a set of applications you can install on your own server. Some customers are going to choose the maintenance-free, pay-forever model. Others are going to choose the some-maintenance, pay-once model. Kudos to Atlassian for giving customers the choice. I think that's the right way to go.
What "your own server" looks like has already changed, of course. The dusty box in the closet is already long gone.
Well, that happened... I write that big email, and then I found that that Bamboo Cloud is being EOL'd at the beginning of next year.
We can choose between the new product, Bitbucket Pipelines and a free perpetual Bamboo Server license. Umm, yay?
I don't know much about Sharepoint, I never saw of it as much more of a glorified file server.
Sharepoint has NO USEFUL PURPOSE. It is nothing more than a wiki that can only handle attachments, no text.
I've been through a couple of mergers now where everyone has a wiki, everyone prefers their wiki, but the direction is to move everything over to Sharepoint. Because Sharepoint. No particularly good reason. That kind of thinking is the only reason Sharepoint gets used at all.