Whilst the insight about using iOS as your daily driver and the downsides of its design are interesting, the idea that Linux users use Linux “for the challenge” is downright wrong. I use Linux because it makes my life easier (osx would quite possibly also work for me, but I can’t afford a mac) mainly because it is designed almost opposite to iOS.
I agree. The fundamental concept in this article is “people use iOS as a challenge”, which is wrong. There may be several reasons (convenience, cost, novelty) but “challenge” is hardly one of them. The second idea the author presents to compare this claim to is Linux, which again, is wrong. There are a lot of reasons people might use Linux (convenience, cost, novelty, ideology) but few people use it as a challenge. To be sure, I’d bet more people use Linux as a challenge than they do iOS, but that’s still far from a main reason let alone the main reason.
Here’s a better claim: iPad-only is the new dumb phone (after the invention of the smartphone). iPad-only is the new typewriter (after the invention of the PC). iPad-only is the new unplugged, the new Luddite, the new Amish. It’s people intentionally crippling their workflow in an attempt to improve their quality of life. It’s people who believe that simplicity is the key to productivity. “Doing it for a challenge” is the exact opposite of that. iPad-only is the rejection of challenge.
You are right. Other people use a free or open source OS because they care for the philosophical or the security advantages they have.
The assumption that people only use Linux as a challenge is wrong, and makes the author appear incredibly clueless and out of touch.
It’s so ridiculously wrong that, I’m not wasting my time with the rest of the article.
You won’t be missing anything.
I wouldn’t normally comment on people’s workflow simply because my workflow is based on the fact that I develop software that runs on Linux systems so it’s easier for me to run Linux as my main operating system. However, I’d like to mention that there are Linux applications like Pitivi or Darkroom that, while they might not be best-in-class apps, they are free and they also do a decent job. The author of this article mentions Scrivener but there’s also an open-source alternative called Scribus which seems to be a very decent tool.
Using Linux as the main operating system is a lot more fun than it was a decade ago. It’s obviously not the best operating system for everybody but there no longer is a huge difference in usability, performance and stability that I have experienced ten years ago when I switched to a Mac. Moving back to Linux a couple of months ago i did realise that I had to change my workflow and the apps I used, but it wasn’t such a drastic change and very rarely do I still get the feeling that I would have done more in less time on a Mac.
There are a lot of people working on improving the Linux user experience (saying “desktop” seems a bit odd as many people, myself included, only have laptops) and saying that you use Linux “for the challenge” seems wrong. Fundamentally changing your workflow will always require a learning curve. Let’s not mistake that for bad user experience.
The author of this article mentions Scrivener but there’s also an open-source alternative called Scribus which seems to be a very decent tool.
Scrivener is a word processor with a built-in organiser. Scribus is a desktop publisher (ala QuarkXPress, MS Publisher and InDesign).
I was under the impression that the features provided by Scrivener are also available in a module in Scribus (I believe it’s called Story Editor). If that’s not true, I stand corrected.
Scribus' Story Editor is a text editor that lets you set the fonts and paragraph styles etc. of the text in a text frame in the document. Example. Note that any formatting doesn’t get reflected in the editor itself. It’s very similar to InDesign’s feature of the same name.
The selling point of Scrivener over MS Word, AbiWord, LibreOffice Writer et al. is in addition to being a word processor it has a built-in organiser which can look like a skeuomorphic corkboard.
I think people are getting caught up with the desktop Linux remark - it’s a red herring, at least to me. The key takeaway is the interaction model of iOS. Whereas most desktops rely on some form of desktop metaphor revolving around files/documents, (or something close to it) iOS uses an application model revolving around services. “Normal people” increasingly interact with services above all else, so the experience makes sense there. It falls apart, however, when you need to work around a document instead of an application providing a service.
Totally agree. I’ve always been rather disappointed that Apple hasn’t put more work into creating a really useful app interaction paradigm for IOS.
Things like Audiobus for audio files hint at the possibilities…
A replying article, from someone else. I disagree with him, in the fact he thinks its just a matter of “getting used to it.” Again, it’s more the design of iOS being more optimal to do different things - services, not documents.
TL;DR: While trying to insult people who are happy with working on Linux, the author is completely unaware that his “occupation” would not even be considered serious work by most people on this planet (~ outside SF).
It seems more than a little ungenerous to claim that technical writer and fiction author aren’t considered actual jobs by most people.
Even if you’re only pointing at the technical writer half, that’s not an invention of the valley, technical writers have been around (and called that) since at least the 60s, in countless industries.
If anything, the valley is worse about acknowledging the importance of technical writing than most of the industry.