The Accidental Tech Podcast

53: There`s Gonna Be Some Flapping

 

  They'll say they funny now that's a really good that's a really good ending sort of sending funny [TS]

  and you know it's sort of the beginning of the show. That's true. [TS]

  Time has no meaning in podcast Marco you are the master of time and space. [TS]

  Some follow up if you want to talk about Flappy Bird [TS]

  and get in an argument again I I would just like to say that I think most of the feedback sided with me that flappy [TS]

  bird is actually a good game not a great game [TS]

  but it was that it got most of its popularity at least initial popularity boost that got it into the top charts which [TS]

  then made social element really take over. [TS]

  I got a lot of its popularity simply because of its merits [TS]

  and even though it is not it is not what you know it's to me it's like a McDonald's hamburger of games not even without [TS]

  Michael when he's number and like it's like you know you shouldn't like it it's terrible. [TS]

  It's complete junk However it's good. That's that's McDonald's Wendy's is good. [TS]

  McDonald's is not good except breakfast. Breakfast is going well or whatever people eat with all that actually good. [TS]

  Is there anything there that you have to make the burgers or not but breakfast is good. [TS]

  I actually found it like a long car trips where I have to like stop at a rest area some were in the middle of nowhere [TS]

  to eat. [TS]

  I would if I have to pick between the major fast food chains [TS]

  and you're really somewhere in the middle of nowhere I would go with McDonald's because they're they've always been [TS]

  extremely good about quality control standards and so it's you know you're guaranteed to get the same crap everywhere. [TS]

  Whereas Wendy's I like Wendy's better in an ideal case [TS]

  but I've had a lot I like I've had a much wider range of Wendy's quality. [TS]

  Where do we stop on the way back from South Carolina that we started [TS]

  when we did that was in a fairly populated area I'm talking about like if you're stopping at the Pennsylvania Turnpike [TS]

  or something you know really you're really in the middle of nowhere and you're and you have like the Roy Rogers [TS]

  or the mic. Oh God I remember. Or like the T.C.B. Why you know you know this is this is our new. [TS]

  This isn't so John what do you think about the Flappy Bird follow up I think the feedback was it's hard to tell [TS]

  but are especially because of course I only see the replies that I had mentioned me [TS]

  or you know like people mentioning just you to say they agree with you. [TS]

  I wouldn't see those or whatever but I think the majority of the feedback was that they agree with you [TS]

  and that just goes to show that the majority of people are often wrong about things like that. [TS]

  As is often the case in this part Guess where I don't do any preparation like we sort of talk about things in the [TS]

  moment right [TS]

  and then after the podcast I think of like how you know how I could have approached to better explain things better [TS]

  or maybe just the next I want to summarize stuff whereas I do have some actual fault that it by the notes about this [TS]

  but like you I have a vague outline here of kind of what we said the last time [TS]

  and the heading ever is the two sides of success [TS]

  and we barely touched on one of the sides maybe we should talk about it more. [TS]

  The first side of success is like [TS]

  when you're very successful you get a lot of attacks from people who don't think you should be that successful don't [TS]

  think you deserve your success or just because you're very popular you get a backlash effect. [TS]

  We've all experienced this to one degree or another. It's scales. [TS]

  Fortunately with your success if you're massively successful [TS]

  and everybody knows what you are you're going to have a portion of the larger backlash [TS]

  and that would be mentioned at the very beginning the last show maybe [TS]

  and I tried to point out that like I didn't think it was a terrible game because it's not it's not terrible it's not [TS]

  completely incompetent it's not non-functional it's you know it has high praise. [TS]

  Right so what I'm saying my people are there and I don't think it's a terrible game no it's not a terrible game [TS]

  and yes you have to recognize that because it's so successful do you see this crazy backlash against the game the [TS]

  concept of the game people who enjoy the game and that is one of the sides of success [TS]

  and I don't think we spend enough time focusing. [TS]

  Now because I think a lot of the people saying I agree with Marco it's not a terrible game I don't think anybody said [TS]

  it was a terrible game. Nobody thought it was terrible. [TS]

  You know I said it was not a good game [TS]

  and it's like oh it's good versus mediocre versus you know I would call it a mediocre game I would not call it a good [TS]

  game but certainly not terrible right. [TS]

  And of course as many things about it that make it be successful in the marketplace [TS]

  and I'm drawing distinction that a lot of other people don't. [TS]

  Between the quality of something like it is a good game a bad game or whatever [TS]

  and how successful it is in the market sort of like the is the McDonald's hamburger good hamburger [TS]

  or bad hammer versus how many McDonald's hamburgers are sold every year that type of distinction although I draw that [TS]

  line much more harshly than most people do because most people will say that their favorite movie is the best movie [TS]

  and I would never say that about my favorite movie [TS]

  or you know I can separate those two more than most people like to separate them. [TS]

  What is this movie at the hall the pod cast. [TS]

  I would say Marco what is best in life and you would say What are you talking about [TS]

  and what the second side of success is over I mean if you could just guess at least we're consistent. [TS]

  So I reach out to have a serious conversation here. [TS]

  Up this is not that long but do you think there's going to be some flapping So there's going to be some flapping [TS]

  and some birds Second Sight of success is the idea is the opposite side of the coin of like everyone attacking the [TS]

  thing is successful and that is people deciding that the successful thing is a success based on its merits [TS]

  and trick about that is choosing the merits that you think seem fair [TS]

  or admirable So that means diminishing the role of chance in this and minimizing or diminishing less attractive merits. [TS]

  So for example if you think it's admirable to be a successful game because of the code it's in the game itself because [TS]

  because of what's on the screen and how it works you elevate those elements [TS]

  and if you think it's not admirable to be successful because of a genius marketing campaign. [TS]

  Or like a very well made television ad or something or whatever you decide is sort of less fair or less you know. [TS]

  If you're deciding what your merits are most of us kind of agree like the game itself of the code that ships is good [TS]

  and the game is successful that is fair and there's Adam BOWEN We should all look up to [TS]

  but if something isn't successful because they take the other end of the spectrum someone you know paid to get a bunch [TS]

  of fake reviews we all agree that's not admirable. [TS]

  What if they had a really good ad campaign and they wrote the ad copy themselves and they made the art [TS]

  and they didn't want to. What if they had a really good strategy for viral marketing or whatever we decide. [TS]

  Well those aren't creepy or anything but they're not as admirable as the game. [TS]

  So as being in the game itself when I'm talking about like success based on the merit a lot most people [TS]

  when they see a big success will decide that the thing is successful based on whatever they think are the most [TS]

  admirable aspects of that success [TS]

  and I think that was I was taking a last podcast was that the merits of the game itself [TS]

  and that's the thing that I find I would find an admirable reason for success is like what's in the code what's in the [TS]

  binary that ships the people and all the other stuff I consider less less directly connected to success [TS]

  and in terms of like is the game good versus the marketing campaign good versus you know that the popularity of our [TS]

  When discussing that a lot. [TS]

  I mention in the show that there are plenty of other games that have similar attributes [TS]

  and as we were talking about was [TS]

  when Mark was saying the attributes of the game to its excessive playing those attributes were probably necessary for [TS]

  the success because of it's a terrible game on going to want to play anything [TS]

  but they're not sufficient because lots of other games have those same attributes and they're not successes. [TS]

  So you're saying that they were necessary [TS]

  but not sufficient implicitly one of trying to get here is implicitly we're discussing that all of us kind of agreed [TS]

  implicitly what things we're talking about we weren't talking about the ad campaign [TS]

  and we weren't talking about you know any other aspects of the. [TS]

  Again we were talking about essentially what's in the binary like the app itself [TS]

  and we did need to establish up front because I think like we're on the same page in terms of [TS]

  when you're talking about the game that's what we mean [TS]

  and I don't think that that's necessarily a valid viewpoint from all perspectives because if you were in the [TS]

  advertising business for example if you read Ad Age and I like our you know big into the advertising world. [TS]

  Of course you would consider the ad campaign part of the success of that you know the things like that so important [TS]

  fact it's more important in the binary that you created I was going to stab us in the like we are there are some things [TS]

  that we don't state that are definitely informing what it is that we're talking about so much so that we didn't even [TS]

  need to call them out last time and most people who are responding that's all that need to call them out [TS]

  but I think it's worth thinking about other perspectives on this. [TS]

  And anyway so they said that about you know their aftermath star having these characteristics of course people came out [TS]

  of the woodwork and said show me these tens of thousands of games that have these other characteristics [TS]

  and that's kind of a sucker's bet because a you know how many games are there in the App Store one hundred thousand two [TS]

  hundred fifty thousand are any more know how many games there are [TS]

  but no one has played them all so it's pretty much impossible to exhaust a very fine woman [TS]

  and it is some sort of statistical sampling of games to try to find games of these qualities. [TS]

  Couple people posted games or they thought here's this game from five years ago that I was in college or whatever [TS]

  but the reason I say it's a sucker's bet because whatever game anyone was to cite someone will say well that one is not [TS]

  alike enough because there's always some extra nuance [TS]

  or Flappy Birds has this game doesn't have the down to the fact like well that doesn't include birds in flappy birds [TS]

  includes birds and do the history of the App Store with or as a call Angry Birds and tiny wing that birds [TS]

  and selves you know therefore fly the birds was this perfect thing you know and it would be impossible. [TS]

  There was I see that little nuance that I point out this game has a neck [TS]

  and doesn't have you know extra levels all on one screen doesn't scroll doesn't matter where you tap on the screen to [TS]

  some like the always be some difference treating the game that you cite in that game [TS]

  and say See that's why flappy birds. [TS]

  Yes and his other game wasn't and that's why I think flappy bird itself is the best example. [TS]

  Which is why I gave the time travel scenario on the show which is like OK go back in time to before it was created. [TS]

  Bring the Flappy Bird diary with you submit it to the App Store across you know provisioning profiles would never let [TS]

  you do this but anyway. [TS]

  And and you'll see that it doesn't sell and flappy bird itself is on the App Store for months and months and months [TS]

  and it didn't it didn't sell right [TS]

  and even then with this example I imagine someone will say well there was some minor gameplay tweak that happened just [TS]

  a week. [TS]

  It took off and that was a minor game which gave gameplay tweak that made it happen all of this is true or not [TS]

  and of fighting for its gameplay was updated all between the time it was released six months ago now [TS]

  but that's what some would say [TS]

  and the reason I bring up these hypothetical you know people's complaints that they would have if you were trying to [TS]

  say earlier games or if you were trying to say flappy bird itself which I did frequently on Twitter [TS]

  and say what about fly the result was over six months was not successful. [TS]

  Like well you know understand it was it was you know it had to be it had to be in the store gestating for six months [TS]

  because of how long the ramp takes for viral whatever you know there's always something you can say [TS]

  and this is the point I really wanted to get at on this part of cast and that I didn't bring up the last one. [TS]

  It's the second side of excesses people seeing something through festival [TS]

  and then working backwards from its success to determine why is why it was successful it's kind of this fatalistic [TS]

  everything happens for a reason mindset where you see something successful [TS]

  and decide that every attribute of that thing that you find admirable has to be in exactly that position for it to be [TS]

  set otherwise how could it have happened. [TS]

  Right and this I think even applies to really good games and most other things in life where you look at the success [TS]

  and even the really admirable awesome things about it. You'll say that's why it succeeded. [TS]

  And also every other detail of that thing because how could it have been any other way you know this is what happened [TS]

  so it was written so it shall be done. [TS]

  Be married to the perfect game because it is massless it has no other games that were not five birds were not [TS]

  successful therefore you must be like flappy birds. Nothing but flappy bird could have been together also and so forth. [TS]

  And to address this friend of the show Kieran Healy put a blog post he's the sociologist [TS]

  or does he play on the Internet I think is a real sociologist and teaches sociology. [TS]

  He's really smart he teaches it do you believe that's true and if that's not true when I go and he's actually U.N.C. [TS]

  or Something I'm being real deep trouble. [TS]

  He posts something where the sociologists are interested in this phenomenon of like how do things become successful [TS]

  and the angle they were taking on it was why can't record executives and stuff predict like hit songs [TS]

  and ideas like don't you guys know anything about their business how come they have such a poor track record a perfect [TS]

  hit song some songs hit some songs don't [TS]

  and if you asked executives beforehand they would be totally sure the song that was going to be a hit and it was [TS]

  and other people say the song is going nowhere and becomes a mega-hit. Why can't we predict that. [TS]

  So trying to figure out this phenomenon they ran a series of experiments where they had a bunch of songs in this case [TS]

  and had people listen to them and download them. [TS]

  It was like fourteen thousand different people [TS]

  and in some situations the people could see what other people were doing. [TS]

  They could see how many downloads a song have. [TS]

  And in other situations they can see how many songs how many times a song is downloaded. [TS]

  So it's basically trying to move the slider on social influence from like zero all they have to maximum [TS]

  and what they found an experiment was that increasing the strength of social influence increased both the inequality [TS]

  and unpredictability of success. [TS]

  So as they made the social aspect more relevant like as they show the download numbers more primally as they sort of [TS]

  buy downloads or whatever the difference between the most only successful became much bigger. [TS]

  The difference you like the winners of the races which you kind of expect because like this a piling on effect of like [TS]

  once everyone recognizes a winner everyone's going to download it [TS]

  and losers want to download it all versus if you had no signal from what other people are doing there would be you [TS]

  wouldn't see this runaway success. But the other part of the thing was that the predictability of success went down. [TS]

  So in general the best songs never do really bad. On the worst songs. [TS]

  Never did really well but almost any other result was possible I'm quoting from his blog post there. [TS]

  So basically once you add social signal to the mix amongst the games amongst the songs that were kind of in the good [TS]

  category as the social signal increased which one of those songs would be that it became totally unpredictable [TS]

  and he when he wrote he first wrote this blog post I was like oh this is one point I didn't make [TS]

  and I'm excited to make it on the on the pod cast next week but only updated his blog post making my additional point. [TS]

  He told me I could still make it because we're both right so I will use the phrase that I was going to use here I had [TS]

  to come up with different wording to that I want to copy is right exactly the way he's trying to explain the reluctance [TS]

  of people's reluctance to agree that true unpredictability is a real feature of markets like this like people don't [TS]

  want to believe that there is that unpredictability as you increase also saying NO among the top they want to believe [TS]

  that the one that came in number one was always going to be the number one [TS]

  but these experiments prove that in a totally different set of people with the same set of songs. [TS]

  Run this experiment to different times amongst the sort of good enough to be good songs as you increase a social signal [TS]

  a totally unpredictable and people do not want to believe that so he says. [TS]

  Psychologically people are often predisposed to believe in some version of a just world hypothesis where people are [TS]

  fundamentally get what they deserve and that's trying to get it [TS]

  but the fatalism thing people want to believe that the world is fair and just [TS]

  and that what happened deserve to happen especially with something like well I like this game [TS]

  and it's the number one game. [TS]

  Obviously it's number one because it's a good game [TS]

  and if you try to tell them that it's number one for reasons other than just it being a really good game you're saying [TS]

  this game is terrible or you know you just don't understand why this game is good or anything like that. [TS]

  Here [TS]

  and even cites the other example that I was hoping to bring out which is you see this all the time in books about how [TS]

  to succeed in business but what happens basically in the eighty's [TS]

  and I guess in the ninety's probably today as well as some. [TS]

  Some rich white dude had a very rich white dude who shows in a row. [TS]

  Some are trying to you may or may not people there where if you pay [TS]

  but the eighty's becomes amazingly successful for whatever reason and besides I now know everything. [TS]

  I'm a mass of the successful I need to write a book telling everybody else what I know and they don't [TS]

  and they write these books about like here's what I do like every morning and have cornflakes are right [TS]

  and then make sure you drive an American car [TS]

  and we get into work early like they did they just take every detail from their life [TS]

  and they say because I am successful. [TS]

  Everything I do in my life must have led to the success there for all of you people should do this [TS]

  and you're not successful so who are you to complain. [TS]

  Again working backwards from success in every business is like that like we did this in our business [TS]

  and we're successful therefore you can do this. [TS]

  Seven Habits of Highly Effective People [TS]

  or whenever we get the software methodologies about in the future show I'm sure talking about this is a year where it's [TS]

  like we did something we were successful therefore this methodology should work for everybody [TS]

  and all the business book in particular love to just that the winners come and tell you here's what I did [TS]

  and if you do that you'll be successful because otherwise to think otherwise would be to think that your success is [TS]

  derived from something other than the merits you consider admirable if your success is derived from like you know the [TS]

  fact that you had rich parents [TS]

  and got into a good school because their legacies the fact that you were in the right place at the right time with a [TS]

  product that was merely satisfactory and [TS]

  and you know you decide it's because of your great business AQIM in really any monkey could have run the business [TS]

  and would have been just fine and had the same result. [TS]

  No one wants to believe that happenstance or things that you don't consider admirable contributed to your success [TS]

  but I think in general that is more often the case. [TS]

  Anyway this link to Karen's article but the results and links to the papers that no one's going to read [TS]

  but he has a really good summary of it with some grass and then encourage everyone to read it. [TS]

  I agree Marco that most people that agree with you [TS]

  but I think all of them are suffering from the symptoms described in Karen's blog post or well and also. [TS]

  I think one other valid point to make here. [TS]

  I'm not going to even try to address all that because I'm not qualified really [TS]

  and I have to save my words tonight so I don't and I'm coughing all night. But that's science. [TS]

  Yes and I and science is always right. [TS]

  So I think another thing to consider here is [TS]

  when trying to apply lessons learned from someone else's success to two general cases [TS]

  or to your case during the the great Gruber and Marilyn South by Southwest. [TS]

  Oh nine Talk what your was at a nine car rolled up in the show. [TS]

  It's one group Merlin talks and it's the titles like how to supercharge your blog [TS]

  and that's of course as I cast a title and it's a fantastic talkers audio recordings of it [TS]

  and it was two thousand nine hundred fireball it's not really going to work because we already have a Daring Fireball [TS]

  and Daring Fireball got big in an environment that didn't have a Daring Fireball and so [TS]

  and the environment back then was different and then he succeeded in that environment. [TS]

  But if you try to do the same thing today you're in a completely different time with different set of conditions [TS]

  and you know the same lessons don't always work more than once because they they have this context that let them work [TS]

  or that or that they thrive with and so like everyone's going to make all these flappy clone games now [TS]

  and try to replicate this but this succeeded you know in part because of the environment and the time [TS]

  and the fact that something like this hadn't really done this before so it was this novelty you know all know something [TS]

  like this or something like this. Hadn't done it before that people had seen. [TS]

  And it's why people thought that the interesting thing but like that. [TS]

  That's why [TS]

  when people brought up the Flappy Bird clones like you know lots of those a lot of debate that sort of mention me that [TS]

  I didn't participate in on Twitter [TS]

  and some of them were like well just look at all the flighty Bird clones why are they succeeding all that is obvious [TS]

  you know like they're just whatever is already exists like that that's the reason I came for the time travel scenario [TS]

  you can't you can't say Welcome make a bird just like bloody birds now [TS]

  but better doesn't succeed therefore you know what I was describing. [TS]

  That's that's not a valid example you know by the way the Flappy Bird clones are succeeding. [TS]

  Well you know they think the same way that the mains water succeed you know typos [TS]

  and the wonders of the App Store search ensure that far outweigh don't look at the pop charts like the Clones are still [TS]

  happening. [TS]

  Well you know it's also the fact that now you can get flappy bird so it's wide open for Flappy Bird clones [TS]

  but you know what I mean like they're not none of those cones is going to be flooded roads because flooded roads [TS]

  already so that is that's not irrelevant to talk about. [TS]

  We are sponsored this week by our friends attending Tang is mobile that makes sense. There are no B.S. [TS]

  Simple to use mobile service provider from the people at two cows the company behind hover ting is a reseller of the [TS]

  Sprint network in the U.S. They have a great solid network behind them. It's going to a special U.R.L. [TS]

  To learn more A.T.P. Ping dot com It's a very simple take it has great rates. [TS]

  There's no contract and there's no early termination fees. [TS]

  You own your device out right from the start and then you just pay for what you use every month so here's how it works. [TS]

  You get any compatible Sprint device you can get through them you can get it new you can get it used you can buy [TS]

  yourself on e Bay [TS]

  or whatever you can you know ask a friend if they have an old Sprint device including the Sprint i Phone So check check [TS]

  them to see exactly which models are compatible they have all the stuff up going to A.T.P. [TS]

  That can not come to see so anyway you get your phone somehow doesn't really matter how any kind of any spring [TS]

  compatible phone that they list in their site and then you just pay a base price of sixty. [TS]

  It's a month to get connected [TS]

  and then on top of that there's all these buckets for there's a bucket set for for data buckets for talk minutes about [TS]

  get set for S.M.S. [TS]

  and Use pay for whatever you use whatever bucket is the cheapest that will accomplish what they use they pick that one [TS]

  needle you for and there are a few bucks each so you can see. [TS]

  So for example you know if you use use one hundred megs of data this month on a device you'll just pay for that bucket [TS]

  if you use a gig next month you'll pay for that bucket next month [TS]

  and the next month after that if you switch was back down but right back down so you never really pay for it. [TS]

  You don't have to remember to like you know go to their site or call them and get it increased when you go on a trip [TS]

  and then get it decreased when you go back home. None of that you just pay for what you use. [TS]

  Simple as that their prices are actually recently even lower. [TS]

  They discounted a bunch of their data presence bestially So five hundred megs twelve bucks two gigs is just twenty nine. [TS]

  So really really cheap data here that it includes tethering too. [TS]

  So really great so you can see how much you can save by going to tango eight A.T.P. [TS]

  To come check out the savings calculator you can enter in your last few bills from a carrier [TS]

  and they'll show you based on your usage how much you will save with Thing [TS]

  and over time they can show you OK well let's say you go to buy a device up front. [TS]

  Then you'll pay for it in three months with the savings or whatever it's a really great stuff here. [TS]

  They also have this cool program where if you're stuck in a contract with someone else [TS]

  and have to pay an early termination fee to get yourself to Tang. [TS]

  They will even give you twenty five percent of that early termination fee in service credit up to seventy five dollars [TS]

  to help get you over the ten years with this possible. They have great customer support just like cover. [TS]

  No hold no wait. Telephone support during the business day so you can just call them between A.T.M. and Eight P.M. [TS]

  Eastern and a human being will pick up the phone who is ready and able to help you. [TS]

  No waiting on hold for Evernote transfers two million different departments. [TS]

  Great set up here and they have tons of features only one time talk about. [TS]

  They they have you can pull devices to manage a fleet of devices all this crazy stuff great stuff here. [TS]

  It's also really good for developers if you want test devices on different platforms like Android you can get a test [TS]

  device have it connected with the great data plan you can even buy a Nexus five from the Google Play store at a great [TS]

  rate and bring it over to saying great stuff here sort of find out more. Going to A.T.P. [TS]

  Tang dot com and I believe that's it I don't think you have to enter coupon code or anything. [TS]

  Yep that's a good thing that come [TS]

  and learn more about this great company Thanks a lot to take in for sponsoring the show once again. [TS]

  So powerful very birds brands that at least I'm continuing to refer to this as flappy birds when it's singular. [TS]

  I was not going to correct you on that. Everyone's doing this by the way. [TS]

  Yeah I know I know I [TS]

  and I have the opposite problem with tiny wings where I feel like I always want to call tiny wing [TS]

  but it wouldn't make no sense that there was just one wing anyway all these birds [TS]

  and then a series of other things I was there is another thing with the birds like things that contribute to this. [TS]

  Flappy Birds I have to think somewhere in the list of things that contribute to this is us is the fact that it features [TS]

  a bird. [TS]

  Absolutely yeah I mean [TS]

  and the fact that that birds are you know common in the App Store there's been a lot of hit games birds [TS]

  and their cuteness games about flying and it's had good artwork I mean it's there's no question that was part of it. [TS]

  Like in terms like your inherent experiments that he cited in his blog like what is the thing that caused the Angry [TS]

  Birds to hit or go go back in time why the bird games are associated with mobile devices angry it was anger [TS]

  but it's the first one was it building on something else like it's such an incredibly complex situation which I didn't [TS]

  think you could ever devise an experiment to try and isolate the things that I saw it in this experiment [TS]

  but even this experiment is much simpler than the actual app store because songs are sort of I guess they have titles [TS]

  and maybe that contributes to but they don't have artwork [TS]

  and I guess they have the entire history of music behind them [TS]

  but it's kind of like you don't know what you're getting into you click on the thing [TS]

  and then you listen to it like what determines as they increase [TS]

  or which one becomes a hit it's one of those ones in the. [TS]

  But which one and likely run the experiment a million times and it keeps becoming incredibly important to Bill. [TS]

  Which one will be the runaway success there are it is a runaway success [TS]

  but you don't know which one out of the good group it is [TS]

  and I think they'll be the next phase an experiment trying to figure out is it really completely random [TS]

  or what other variables contributing towards increasing [TS]

  or decreasing your stance your chance of sort of being the lottery winner among the games that have these among the the [TS]

  songs that have these qualities to put them somewhere and a good group and a flapping. [TS]

  So we had the kind of monumental moments over the last week and our member exactly when it was the image I was wrong. [TS]

  I'm going to choose to not engage on that one but I think you have to choose K.C. Mommy or daddy. [TS]

  Right so we're professionals. [TS]

  So we had an interesting moment over the last week wherein we actually got a bit of not complimentary feedback about [TS]

  John of all people which never really happens this is very rare that's not true that it doesn't come to the show comes [TS]

  directly to me and believe me it exists. MEIGS Yes but Hand on heart. [TS]

  I've seen maybe five less than complimentary things about John [TS]

  and about five hundred for Marco on about five thousand for me. [TS]

  Well that Marco gets a lot of them directly to do with what they know like where they can reach you they don't need to [TS]

  go through the show feedback form to say mean things to you usually get on Twitter. [TS]

  The email is mostly stuff since I pulled my email address off of my site. It's all hard to figure out. [TS]

  Yeah well anyway So John do you want to address what this what this person said. [TS]

  Yeah I didn't put it in there because I was such a big deal that you know I get hate mail because if I get a mail right. [TS]

  But because I thought well a couple aspects of it were interesting [TS]

  and I'm going to read a paragraph of it here not the whole thing it's sent from that what they put in the feedback. [TS]

  When was goofball Jones purchased fake name obviously [TS]

  and it says a throwaway accounts not really looking for this to be read on air [TS]

  and it probably won't so there are some good reverse psychology there like you know [TS]

  when they say I don't expect a reply I don't expect this to be read on air [TS]

  and if I say that I'll read it in there that's not why I'm reading out of there but in effect it works. [TS]

  Oh you plan also before you get into it that somebody criticize urine [TS]

  and as a result our notes file now has fifteen links in it for this topic. [TS]

  I'm going to put all of them into the show not continuing. [TS]

  I can take a listen to this part guess anymore I mean I know it's artistic is not like anything after all his old [TS]

  podcast was called hyper critical and it wears thin after a while the guy complains about everything. [TS]

  Well it's OK once in a while it's all the time all in caps. It's not even funny anymore. [TS]

  It sounds more like a miserable person just whining about his miserable existence. [TS]

  What are we to do with this does it really offer any insight to anything are people actually entertained by this on a [TS]

  sustained level Now the reason I bring that the show is to put this in the shows two reasons one. [TS]

  I'm fascinated by the idea that this person put in a fake email in the feedback form [TS]

  or that use like a throwaway account [TS]

  or whatever like I don't even know because I think that the real I mean why would you create a fake. [TS]

  Can't you just type anything in the email field it doesn't make you confirm that your email is real right. [TS]

  I don't think so yeah I think you can just buy anything there. [TS]

  And like why wouldn't you put just put your regular you like either put it either put like X X X X dot com [TS]

  or something or just a made up thing [TS]

  or put your real email in like is there is there a downside to having a really male like I'm going to harass them by [TS]

  email or tell people their email I don't know [TS]

  and that that confuses me as as does NOT using their real name who cares like if you don't like it you know put your [TS]

  real name like it's not talking about you and me anyway. [TS]

  So want to put in the show nuts because you are a whole bunch of links to me being not critical about things [TS]

  or talking about things that I mostly like or that like a lot. Yeah. [TS]

  And like I put these in here not to convince anybody of anything because I just want to provide context [TS]

  and I have a preface by saying that if your state of being requires some elaborate explanation there's already a [TS]

  problem. This person is never going to like how much contact so I don't know you don't understand. [TS]

  Here's the context maybe complaining about things like Oh yeah. [TS]

  Now I find it much more enjoyable like I'm not letting this person over those persons not wasn't the target anymore [TS]

  or whatever [TS]

  but I thought it was worth talking about because it's easy for me to assume an easy for all of us assume I think that [TS]

  everybody already knows where we're coming from that they know all of our conduct so they've read our blog for years [TS]

  they've read everything we write on the web and all our old podcast they know everything about us [TS]

  and that's just not true. [TS]

  We can kind of feel like you know of course everybody knows who these people are except for Katie obviously [TS]

  and you know and where they're coming from and what opinions they've had before [TS]

  and what other part because they've been on things they like one things I don't myself like that I mean I find myself [TS]

  doing it too. [TS]

  Like I assume that you know everyone who listens the show has listened I have are critical [TS]

  and I find someone who listens the show and as never heard of hydrocortisone I'm surprised and I shouldn't be right. [TS]

  So I think it's worthwhile providing contacts to the people who do actually enjoy the show. [TS]

  I think they would enjoy it more understand it better with a little bit of context to that into the main thing I object [TS]

  to in this person's emails not so much they don't like the show. [TS]

  Fine you know like you know like whatever you don't like me you know like me that's fine [TS]

  but the idea that I'm a miserable person [TS]

  and I have a miserable existence that's easily refuted by a long list of pod cast I've been on where I talk about [TS]

  things that I almost you know unabashedly love almost everything about and I put tons of links [TS]

  and they're not going to read off what they are. Marco will copy and paste them into the show notes. [TS]

  But suffice it to say that I talk about some podcasts I mostly just talk about things that I like [TS]

  and the one link that I want to put in here for the people who want to kind of this is the original thing that I posted [TS]

  the. [TS]

  In two thousand [TS]

  and nine with the title hypercritical which is sort of my explanation of my shtick as he put it like what's the deal [TS]

  with a guy who complains all the time. [TS]

  Here is my attempt at explaining it again this explanation is not going to convince anyone that they are all not [TS]

  something I like hearing complaining all the time you know obviously if I go when I went over [TS]

  but I think it does provide context and again I always assume everyone who reads my blog [TS]

  or listens to this part of death or help I guess. [TS]

  Of course they read this article How could they be listening to this you know that would know where I was coming from [TS]

  but that seems to not be the case. [TS]

  So anyway and also we didn't have a sort of a dippy by the way where we talk about how we deal with criticism [TS]

  and all that stuff which again some new listeners may not have heard so there will be a cornucopia of show notes links [TS]

  this week for people who want to hear me liking things you know I think the most obvious example of this which is the [TS]

  first one you listed is you [TS]

  and Dan Benjamin doing your five by five movies is that still the only edition of five by five of the movies. [TS]

  Now I think the second one and you know what the point is there's not many. [TS]

  And this this podcast which which you did with Dan if you don't know listeners in you should listen to this. [TS]

  Dan and John took the movie Goodfellas [TS]

  and you literally spin something to the order of one hundred fifty percent of the length of the movie discussing the [TS]

  movie I remember you being extremely If you save and [TS]

  and it it's how do you spend three hours talking about a two hour movie. [TS]

  You know if you love it like that that to me is just a seminal example of you being extremely positive [TS]

  and if you set about something I mean it's one thing to spend an hour talking about a two hour movie [TS]

  and liking it it's another thing to spend two hours talking about a two hour movie and liking it. [TS]

  But you sent something to the order of three hours discussing this two hour movie [TS]

  and how phenomenal it was in every frame. [TS]

  And that's pretty darn complimentary and I loved it and I love Goodfellas and I've seen them. [TS]

  Movie thank you very much and I'd seen it before you'd done that pod cast thank you very much. [TS]

  I know you're proud of the truly that podcast is wonderful [TS]

  and in you know it it reminded me a lot of the really fantastic ones that that John Gruber [TS]

  and Dan did about the Bond series but either way the point is it was extremely If you say that [TS]

  and to me one of the things I love so much about the work that you do [TS]

  and why I'm so lucky to be on the show with you is because a lot of the times [TS]

  when you tear something apart it to me it's so clearly out of love not out of hate and [TS]

  and that's that's what makes it so enjoyable because if it really was negative I wouldn't want to be on the show. [TS]

  Now as the saying goes the opposite of love is not hate it's indifference. [TS]

  And if I'm indifferent [TS]

  or something you don't hear me talk about it all the good example that I was that well you know it is [TS]

  but we did the incomparable covered the first three Star Wars movies which I really like [TS]

  and we did two episodes on each movie set six total episodes of the original trilogy of Star Wars [TS]

  and of course the video game that I could not stop talking about you know since it was released [TS]

  and for having talked Ernie we did an episode of Being comfortable about that as well. [TS]

  So anyway there's tons of me liking things if you want to hear that which you may or may not. [TS]

  I was expecting a much better rant [TS]

  and a little disappointed now because I sent a NIAM to Margo a couple that we get there to now saying hey man if you [TS]

  look at the show notes lately because you're in for a good show of history I don't want to write like this one I'm [TS]

  going to try to convince someone who doesn't like me that they should like me like this. [TS]

  The section was not for that person who presumably is not listening to the show anymore [TS]

  but for the people who are listening and do enjoy it and might enjoy it more with more context and background. [TS]

  Right now I'm a little disappointed. [TS]

  It's OK You know we're also sponsored this week by our friends at square space the on one platform that makes it fast [TS]

  and easy to create your own professional website or online portfolio for free trial [TS]

  and ten percent off going to squarespace dot com and use offer code. Casey that is see. [TS]

  Why in case no one knows how to spell Katie's name like all the people who e-mail us square spaces always improving [TS]

  their platform with new features new designs and even better support. [TS]

  They're beautiful to learn to start with [TS]

  but then you can also customize them with all their cool tools online that are really easy to use [TS]

  and also if you can inject custom H.T.M.L. C.S.S. and Javascript if you so desire. [TS]

  They also have mobile layouts for all their sites they're fully response of layouts so they're great on any device any [TS]

  screen size. [TS]

  If you need any help doing all this stuff they have an amazing support team with over seventy employees right here in [TS]

  New York City. [TS]

  They works twenty four hours a day seven days a week on support their customer support team has won numerous awards as [TS]

  have their designs and many other things about square space because they are just that awesome. [TS]

  Just eight dollars a month and includes a freedom eighty percent for a whole year up front. [TS]

  And they're doing they have a couple new things for the same read over [TS]

  and over again because they sponsor the entire pod cast a sphere which we love them for of course they have a couple [TS]

  new things so they're this new thing called square space logo in addition to build a new Web site they now have this [TS]

  thing actually lets you create a logo for your side business cards shirt whatever you want you can go check out [TS]

  squarespace dot com slash logo. [TS]

  Also every square space plan now includes that they built this cool commerce functionality [TS]

  and before it was limited to only certain accounts. [TS]

  Now all accounts include the commerce functionality so you can have you can now have you can make your own store online. [TS]

  Online goods or offline goods if you want to like sell shirts or anything [TS]

  or if you want to sell like you know e-books anything electronic [TS]

  or physical you can sell through their store full integration full you know store front carts all this crazy stuff they [TS]

  have all this built for you comes with every square space player now at no additional charge. [TS]

  And a really cool thing now is if you want to work at square space. So go to be a part of it. [TS]

  That's squarespace dot com be a part of it. They are hiring and they are really rolling out the red carpet here. [TS]

  If you have you for an engineering [TS]

  or design position before March fifteenth they will invite you in your partner to be New Yorkers for a weekend. [TS]

  They'll fly you out to New York put you have one of the city's best hotels [TS]

  and give you a long weekend of checking out some of their favorite attractions cultural icons [TS]

  and restaurants in the city. And Squarespace picks up the tab for the whole thing. [TS]

  They've been voted one of New York City's greatest places to work for two years running. [TS]

  So put them on your short list if you're looking for a job they're looking to hire thirty engineers [TS]

  and designers by March fifteenth. So go to be a part of it that's where Space dot com to learn more about that. [TS]

  Anyway thanks what a square space for sponsoring our show. [TS]

  Once again good scripts based are commies offer code Casey for ten percent off. [TS]

  Thanks a lot to square space for sponsoring the show again. [TS]

  Do you have any thoughts on what's app what's up on even I don't freeze this I don't really to be honest this is kind [TS]

  of unimportant and boring to me which I know is making friend of the show Ben Thompson pulls hair out [TS]

  but I don't to me it's just very unremarkable other than the cost because it doesn't mean it doesn't mean anything to [TS]

  me I've never seen the app outside of a screenshot I think of one on one of St T. Cories posts. [TS]

  Nice This is matter to you too. [TS]

  I think what's interesting is that we don't know that much about it [TS]

  and it has been right you know I think this shows more than anything recently that you know there were there were [TS]

  always you know there's the consumer tech stuff that we all see [TS]

  and there is there was always like the kind of business side of enterprise tech stuff that was mostly invisible world [TS]

  to those of us outside of it that you know we don't really care like if s.a.p bought Oracle it would be a major deal to [TS]

  a lot of people but consumers wouldn't know who these people are and wouldn't care. [TS]

  This I think shows that the consumer tech world is now so big you know what SAP is as far as I know and I. [TS]

  I know very little about I really shouldn't be talking about it but as far as I know it is huge in lots of places [TS]

  but North America is not one of them. [TS]

  And so as far as I know at any rate it's really massive were everywhere else at least [TS]

  and so I did a lot of Americans aren't familiar with it you know [TS]

  and the fact is it's it got so big to be a major threat to Facebook and Facebook also you know so. [TS]

  So what's app is is basically a replacement for S.M.S. [TS]

  and There's a few other apps that do this like there's a line and there's a couple of [TS]

  but I think I think this is the biggest worldwide I think I'm not sure about that. [TS]

  But what this really shows you know S.M.S. Is extremely valuable and Facebook want. [TS]

  Facebook has wanted to own that they want to they want it when you say it's the messenger [TS]

  and not everyone use Facebook Messenger [TS]

  and I think that's pretty much the reason for this that Facebook saw this major market. [TS]

  This is worth a ton of money because it replaces S.M.S. For so many people. [TS]

  And Facebook wants in on that and Facebook is not a part of that and it's not some kind of standard protocol like S.M.S. [TS]

  Was then they're kind of locked out and it could actually work against them to not own this in the future. [TS]

  You know if all the socialization ister is happening on something that someone else controls [TS]

  and that someone else could lock up [TS]

  and to keep Facebook out of that's pretty bad for them so I think this there's no question why Facebook would want this. [TS]

  That is very no question that that is that is clear. [TS]

  As for the finances I have no idea people who are more no more knowledgeable about the stuff than they seem to seem to [TS]

  think this is actually not a terrible price for this [TS]

  but I think it just really shows the tech world is so big now that it's such a massive collection of multiple [TS]

  industries even though this isn't even just want to scream [TS]

  or it's so big that extremely major things like this can happen in it and most of us don't know anything. [TS]

  About it [TS]

  and you know the idea of having like a tech show that comments on everything in the world tech is completely outdated [TS]

  now because the world tech is too big and like one show not only doesn't have time for that kind of thing [TS]

  but even the host on the show like you can't you can't get enough hosts on a show taping experts all these areas were [TS]

  big news is happening anymore. [TS]

  You know I agree the only reason I think that maybe we don't understand this is how many how many friends do you have [TS]

  Marco that you communicate with on a regular basis regular enough that you would desire to send them text messages that [TS]

  do not live in the United States. Exactly how are you John. [TS]

  Well we don't we live in the United States [TS]

  but if you lived in a right on trade be communicating with different countries. [TS]

  Well but the thing of it is is that the United States lives in a very kind of sheltered the right word [TS]

  but we we live in our own little igloo insular. Thank you. [TS]

  That sort I'm looking for and so we're looking at Europe for example Europe. [TS]

  In Europe it's very easy to go to another country because all the countries in Europe are the size of Rhode Island [TS]

  and only it's a did just email Marco. [TS]

  But anyway the point is the point is locating a side is that there's a lot more international contact in Europe [TS]

  and from everything I've gathered anyways [TS]

  and so it would not be surprising to me if if it was a much more important thing to have international text messaging [TS]

  between countries and I know I have a friend that lives in Wales and he happens to be American but he lives in Wales [TS]

  and about a year [TS]

  and a half ago maybe two years ago he begged me to install Viber which was some equivalent to what's happened that [TS]

  would let us exchange text messages for free and that was before i Message [TS]

  or it was around the time that I message was the thing [TS]

  and I know that I wouldn't talk to for example my curly nearly as much as I do it wasn't for the fact that he you know. [TS]

  Can I messaged back and forth and I message was doomed to never be this thing because you couldn't do it on Android. [TS]

  Yeah exactly. [TS]

  And the advantage of what's happened all environ all these other things is that they are cross-platform so by by virtue [TS]

  of them being international [TS]

  and being cross platform which are two things that don't matter that much to the three of us the cross-platform part [TS]

  anyway [TS]

  and certainly don't matter that much to us in the international part I don't think we were ever really in a position [TS]

  that Americans would understand this plus most American cell phone plans. [TS]

  It's a feat to get unlimited text messaging [TS]

  but nearly everyone paid everyone that I know pays it in fact I was one of the big holdouts to not get an unlimited [TS]

  text messaging plan and even I eventually caved. I don't know three years ago four years ago something like that. [TS]

  So it's it's not surprising to me that Americans don't understand it [TS]

  but it's also not surprising to me that it is a pretty big deal. [TS]

  I still have an unlimited texting plan which will surprise you don't you don't really have a cell phone. [TS]

  I know very well I don't have one either because I've been holding on A.T.M. [TS]

  To the one of the reasons why everyone has these on them in a plant in the U.S. [TS]

  Now is because the carriers have removed most sensible options to force you to pay to pay more money. [TS]

  It's just like the triple play deal that every cable company [TS]

  and file is pushing extremely hard anybody who doesn't have all the services you know that is similar with protest [TS]

  plans where I'm still using this grandfathered like five dollar a month for a few hundred text message plan because I I [TS]

  just don't need anything more than that [TS]

  but you know if you had to start a new line today your only choice basically is like no texts [TS]

  and pay for each one which usually ends up being a lot or unlimited like in the U.S. [TS]

  There's almost no other options right now that this whatsapp thing assists. [TS]

  When I look at it it looks like more sort of kind of useless churn. [TS]

  In the market for things that like we all know that people want [TS]

  but that we can't seem to get an A in a nice pleasant way like more people want to talk to each other like the [TS]

  telephone was a nice way for people to talk to each other but it had both real [TS]

  and artificial barriers the real barriers where that you know the power of the president to be there [TS]

  when you call them [TS]

  and then international calling it like of course I can delay for you know the distances traveled that was weird for [TS]

  real time [TS]

  and then the artificial barriers Well no kind of real to it like a long distance fees because all costs more money to [TS]

  call for their wages to pay for the infrastructure to get there [TS]

  but in the long distance fees scaled up on a scale that wasn't a portion of the cost of making the call that was all [TS]

  kind of weird but people want to talk to each other [TS]

  and so instant messaging with the advent of the Internet is like well you know now we don't need to pay long distance [TS]

  fees I can talk immediately to someone in another country this is a paper you can do e-mail you know the one that kind [TS]

  of sort of worked out although you know that terrible secure decisions lead to spam [TS]

  but at least there's only sort of one email but instant message there was tons of instant messaging client [TS]

  and it was all surrounding us wanting to talk to each other in real time [TS]

  and all that stupid churn between I think you and I am in Yahoo Instant Messenger and M.S.N. [TS]

  and Skype and like all these different networks each Sometimes getting critical mass [TS]

  and nothing will ever be as big as I think you and I remember my C Q number till the day I die [TS]

  and then it just goes away and the name is big and everyone the name and all my friends are on AIM and then S.M.S. [TS]

  Comes [TS]

  and everyone's texting like all these things are churning around the basic desire we have to communicate to each other [TS]

  in more or less real time with maybe a little bit of asynchronous stuff allowed like [TS]

  but you know shorter than an email not a phone call text to and from each other [TS]

  and Whatsapp was taking advantage of I go as I messages are a feeling where they charge you ten cents for the stupid [TS]

  things that they're piggybacking on analog cell signals anyway back in the day you know I was like it was free for the [TS]

  carriers and they would say we can charge people ten cents we think we'll make a mint and they did [TS]

  but that was an artificial back that people start to realize I was out of it was no reason to hate our son. [TS]

  As it always struck me as like you were charging money for something that should not cost much [TS]

  but people found a valuable so they paid and then as soon as people could bypass that with Whatsapp and vibe in line [TS]

  and I message [TS]

  and all the other apps we have access to the public Internet over the data network the same cell providers give us a [TS]

  why would I pay ten cents [TS]

  or paper a texting plan well because all my friends aren't actually the room texting each other whatever well whatsapp [TS]

  and the other apps like it got enough people to say hey come over here it's cheaper or free [TS]

  and we don't charge attendance for message and you can do it across countries [TS]

  and we can eliminate all these other artificial barriers and everything will be good [TS]

  but really that was just another private company now being swallowed up by another private company like I don't feel [TS]

  like we're making progress there is just shifting around us just like this this big you know it's like a pile of chips [TS]

  on the table and we're shoving the chips toward this corner OK now towards that corner for that corner [TS]

  and it never is it landing in a place where if you like is there a sustainable way that we can all talk to each other [TS]

  in semi real time we're on the same network and we can all take some each other [TS]

  and it's you know it may be it's not free [TS]

  but it sustainable over some pricing structure it's on a standardized protocol [TS]

  or anyone can implement it like it's so hard to get to even a solution is crappy the malware we kind of all agree on [TS]

  the protocols even though the protocols of terrible need to discourage of spam even that sometimes I think well at [TS]

  least we got an email this this is one emails us [TS]

  and we don't have to deal with every single day every single you know decade [TS]

  or so some new e-mail service coming up like oh I can't tell you now because I'm on the G. [TS]

  Mail email [TS]

  and you're on the Hummel email we can send him across because an email to a cello competition for the front end client [TS]

  and everything but the back end is all you know interoperable [TS]

  and we have not achieved that with ways to send little bits of text to each other [TS]

  and I think Facebook buying whatsapp doesn't bring us any closer to that goal which makes me sad. [TS]

  And there's also you know I think I mean I've been beating this drum a little bit recently [TS]

  but I think this is kind of creepy or like just kind of negative news to me. [TS]

  Because it's such a massive acquisition like it. [TS]

  It looks to me like Facebook is just like taking out a competitor like that. [TS]

  That's all this was is Facebook got freaked out and has now neutralized a competitor [TS]

  and that which they've done before and that's an Instagram was [TS]

  and it just seems like the more like these the Web Giants are so giant these days that they can afford to buy pretty [TS]

  much anyone else besides one of the other web Giants. [TS]

  Even then sometimes they can do that [TS]

  but they can afford to buy pretty much anybody who ever becomes a threat to their business [TS]

  and this has to be limiting the amount of true innovation [TS]

  and progress that we're seeing in our industry because you know it's pretty much impossible at most most big tech [TS]

  startups who are doing very well are going to have a really hard time turning down a multiple billion dollar offer of a [TS]

  buyout. [TS]

  And so this basically give it basically gives Facebook and Google [TS]

  and you know if you watch anybody who has enough money [TS]

  and willpower to buy a multi-billion dollar company it gives them all assurances that they're not going to really be [TS]

  messed with by anybody. [TS]

  And occasionally something will break out [TS]

  and not take that route like Twitter did that most recently where they just went for the I.P.O. Instead. So far right. [TS]

  Yeah that's a good point. [TS]

  But you know I guess I can't I can't help [TS]

  but be sad at what this actually does to the big picture where there is so much less competition in progress. [TS]

  Once everyone gets so big they can just buy one who's a threat. [TS]

  If your business is based on like everybody being on your platform like if you're trying to be a protocol like e-mail [TS]

  didn't have a company behind it but Facebook is a company behind it [TS]

  and so many people on Facebook that it's like their their goal is you know everyone should be on Facebook. [TS]

  And so if they perform well in their business plan it's like we have stuff. [TS]

  Find the other thing that is going to get enough critical mass that we can never compete with it no matter how good we [TS]

  make our product and buy it before it gets that critical mass and become so expensive [TS]

  and I think they waited a little bit too long [TS]

  and what because they always what they want to buy it like they want to be sure that it would be something that they [TS]

  couldn't compete with like look you know Instagram's got too much mass like no matter how good we make pictures [TS]

  features we're never going to pull that Instagram people where they've gotten too big. [TS]

  We need to snap them up now and maybe they will do a little bit along and Instagram too [TS]

  but they don't want to buy all these companies like oh my god they're a threat they're going to buy them for like five [TS]

  hundred million dollars and they never would have been a threat they never would've done anyway it's so hard to tell. [TS]

  Again getting back to the unpredictability of success once you cross some threshold of value [TS]

  and Whatsapp like it's that type of situation where it's like look how big they are [TS]

  and there's no way Facebook messaging is ever going to pull those people away like they've got the critical mass in the [TS]

  same way that we did. We've got critical mass. [TS]

  Our only option is to buy them because that's you that's what you do you know that's the final play [TS]

  and you would hope that they would go for that from there again from the perspective of the strategy. [TS]

  If they're doing well they do that before they cost sixty million dollars [TS]

  but it's actually worse to say well they're too big now I'm not going to basics team billion dollars let's just let [TS]

  them go because they're never going to you know they're never going to make a messaging product that dethrones whatsapp [TS]

  once that'll be thrown by something else but probably not Facebook So yeah the strategy [TS]

  when you go this money is we may be too long [TS]

  but late is better than never because if we just ignore them then no they'll be there on doing like one of my space I [TS]

  don't you know the timing has worked up a lot of my space had the wherewithal to offer a newly born Facebook before it [TS]

  was anything another money to live in is better. We'd all be talking about My Space by about that now. [TS]

  Those darn monkey those darn butterfly wings laughing but anyway you get the idea. [TS]

  Like that's the strength of your one of those companies were like are the only way we succeed is if we get everything. [TS]

  Birth in the world like if we offer a feature that's the future that everybody in the world that they use for that you [TS]

  want to summary pictures and tell them about your kid's birthday you have to do it on Facebook [TS]

  and of someone who is in something other than Facebook to do that [TS]

  and those somebody's there are hundreds of millions of somebodies. We've screwed up we need to buy that company. [TS]

  And yeah that's from a consumer's perspective a terrible But if you are acting as Facebook that's that's their strategy. [TS]

  Our final sponsor this week is Lynda dot com L Y N D A dot com When the dot com health [TS]

  and human learn creative software and business skills to achieve personal [TS]

  and professional goals they have over two thousand high quality engaging video courses. [TS]

  Top by industry experts with new courses at it every day. [TS]

  These courses span huge range of difficulty and complexity and skill levels from beginner to advanced. [TS]

  The videos are very well produced. [TS]

  They have animations and diagrams [TS]

  and then they even have as Katie pointed out last time they even have like the scrolling transcript on the side so that [TS]

  you can see what's being said. [TS]

  You can scroll around and you can even click on a point the transcript will seek to that point in a video. [TS]

  Really cool stuff. [TS]

  Here's the deal you pay twenty five bucks a month flat rate for unlimited access to their entire catalog over two [TS]

  million people worldwide are doing this and it's really great. [TS]

  So the teachers of these things are experts in their field working professionals not just like some random person on [TS]

  You Tube They're actually working professionals in this field that are experts and can [TS]

  and know what they're talking about [TS]

  and they have all sorts of stuff that they tell you about business strategies all the way down to like you know you [TS]

  know management and then all the dental development stuff you can learn. I was development web development. [TS]

  You can learn creative cloud apps if you want to brush up on Photoshop learn how to use in design stuff like that basic [TS]

  office stuff you know advance stuff in Excel [TS]

  or how to use Quick Books how to use Power Point effectively even media production stuff. [TS]

  If you know videography pod casting photography all this sort of stuff. [TS]

  They have an amazing course library here you know I I went on there [TS]

  and learned a lot about how to use logic better to edit the show [TS]

  and just kind of you know get better at this whole feel that I've never had any training as an audio engineer [TS]

  and will now I have kind of. [TS]

  So check out when the dot com L Y N D A dot com They really have an amazing range of video courses here [TS]

  and again twenty five bucks a month get you access to the entire catalog [TS]

  and what's best is that you don't even have to pay up front to see if you go to L Y N.D.A. Dot com slash A.T.P. [TS]

  That's Lynda dot com slash A.T.V. You can get a seven day trial for free. [TS]

  So before you pay anything you go there when the cons less A.T.P. [TS]

  and Star seven to trial and watching videos you know anything. Browse the whole catalog. [TS]

  You will be you'll be shocked how many videos they have. It's really quite impressive. [TS]

  So once again check out Linda dot com When the dot com slash A.T.P. [TS]

  Thanks a lot to Linda for sponsorship once again they are really a great service and and I personally have used them [TS]

  and recommend them. [TS]

  You know I looked at them a couple weeks back when they first sponsored I saw this really long list of videos [TS]

  and I was like you know that's a lot but not overwhelming. [TS]

  And then I realized I was only looking at the new videos area [TS]

  and out come to find out there were eleven good Jillian videos waiting for me I just hadn't navigated away from the new [TS]

  video section yet. If you just look at any of the categories. [TS]

  You know like pick an application will learn how to use better or pick a permanent widget you want to learn [TS]

  and you can see like it's it's pretty pretty. [TS]

  Their pricing plan a certain life because [TS]

  when you have a huge selection like that if you had to pay like even like a dollar video you'd worry like oh is this [TS]

  the right video out of the umpteen you know you like a pickle. [TS]

  Even it was just a dollar video you can spend all the time fretting this is a flat fee just like sit there [TS]

  and watch videos. It doesn't matter how many you watch. [TS]

  Exactly right so we put this off last week [TS]

  and I think we should talk about it this week before it becomes so stale that it's not worth talking about. [TS]

  It seems like it's that time of year and it's that time of year [TS]

  when everyone in the eye less development community says oh objectives he's objective see sucks [TS]

  and we really need to get over it we need to get away from it. We need to move on to something better. [TS]

  Apple Why won't you help us. [TS]

  And this was originally Well in my exposure originally posited by John's piece called Copeland twenty ten [TS]

  and I guess John would you like to describe simply what Copeland twenty ten was saying would can you summarize that for [TS]

  us. Yeah I think I don't have a link in here but one that I read that two thousand and five or something. [TS]

  The stone ages. [TS]

  It was a long time ago when it was before twenty two [TS]

  and the point of my blog post was that I was I was worried about what Apple was going to do with its language in A.P.I. [TS]

  and Going forward because it seemed like all those competitors were moving to sort of memory manage higher level [TS]

  languages and Apple was not they were sticking with the C. Base language Objective C. This is all. [TS]

  Yes two thousand and five this is all before the i Phone and for all the stuff or whatever. [TS]

  And Copeland is a reference to one of Apple's many failed attempts to get a next generation operating system they had [TS]

  the classic macro S. [TS]

  Which is a really old to go operating system where any application can write any part of memory including the parts [TS]

  that are used by the O. S. [TS]

  and Everything like that [TS]

  and so which meant that badly behaved app that started writing memory to a bad pointer would just scribble over random [TS]

  parts of memory and bring your whole machine down and that was just archaic [TS]

  and everyone else was getting protected memory and pre-emptive multitasking where the O. S. Could take the C.P.U. [TS]

  Away from a process that wasn't true on the old mac operating system less the process yielded so it had these technical [TS]

  problems with. [TS]

  So I could not figure out a way to get a next generation operating system [TS]

  and Copeland was the highest profile failure I have a book on my shelf to my right that Goebbels going to America was [TS]

  eight and it's called Macca was a revealed [TS]

  and it's a book published by Apple with an Apple logo from Apple Press describing the next generation. [TS]

  Frank Sesno will be macro S eight [TS]

  and you know Copeland basically that operating system never shipped Apple cruise ship something called Magaw was eight [TS]

  but it was not Copeland. [TS]

  There were other failed attempts and other weird partnerships and this is all the dark times of Apple's existence [TS]

  but the Copenhagen thing was me saying If Apple doesn't get its act together [TS]

  and come up with whatever it's going to plan for its next generation programming language an A.P.I. [TS]

  You could find itself in the distant future like the year twenty ten you know our founding of two thousand. [TS]

  I've read artist Clark as a kid so crossing a point [TS]

  and if they don't get their act together they could find themselves in a situation just like they were with Copeland [TS]

  where everyone else has something they don't have it [TS]

  and they don't have a viable plan to get it because it's not so easy to snap your fingers [TS]

  and get a new modern language runtime and an A.P.I. To go with it. [TS]

  I also wrote another article in two thousand and ten called Coban Point Henry visitors explaining what I got wrong [TS]

  and why about you know about people about the year twenty ten because people say Well here we aren't trying ten apples [TS]

  not having any problems because they don't have a memory and language an A.P.I. [TS]

  and There are lots of other reasons for that [TS]

  but in general the the major failings like any time you try to break if you just pick some round number in the future [TS]

  that seems so distance then really it's only five years away and that's just you know bad thinking [TS]

  and economists take when trying to deal with the future. But anyway. [TS]

  OK so the comp topic came back up again and I'm not sure why it came back up again [TS]

  and I'm not sure what people are saying about it's different than what's been said before maybe you can enlighten me. [TS]

  Well there were these two post there was one by one by Steve stress a little put in the show notes [TS]

  and basically with the you know just saying we have to see and with a few a few things that we need there. We better. [TS]

  And then our friend Guy English wrote a post in response to these that basically said [TS]

  and forgive me if I'm butchering the argument that basically said like it's easy to like can we even say we need [TS]

  something better. But we need more specifics like what exactly needs to be better and how would that work. [TS]

  Like you know it's easy to just say oh well we need something that's higher level. [TS]

  OK Well it does that mean garbage collection of that mean you know reference counting in a different way like you know [TS]

  like that me in a dynamic type does that mean like all these all these decisions about higher level languages [TS]

  and it seems like not a lot of the arguments contain answers to questions like that it's just like oh we have to have [TS]

  something that's newer and that will by default be better which I think is itself a flawed argument. [TS]

  Yeah it seems like you know it's tough because I have tremendous respect for for Ashley and for Steve [TS]

  but it seemed very hand wavy and this argument tends to go around regularly in the West about in circles [TS]

  and it seems like every year or two everyone gets all upset about the fact that we're still writing in Objective C. [TS]

  but This is a problem that guy seemed to have and I concur with it is OK That's lovely that you think that Objective C. [TS]

  Is bad. [TS]

  Tell me what's bad about it or tell me why we need something new [TS]

  and you know before our automatic reference counting and before Grand Central Dispatch in blocks. [TS]

  I would have probably said the same thing [TS]

  and I probably would have said that you know not having closures in twenty twelve twenty thirteen that's a problem [TS]

  but I don't remember when blocks became a thing but it was I want to say twenty twelve [TS]

  but so up until twenty four that I probably would have agreed. [TS]

  And in some way there were a couple of really big advancements really big [TS]

  and important Vance events in the last couple years that I really think brought objective see. [TS]

  Two position where it's it's relatively modern in its arcane it's own archaic ways [TS]

  and so I don't I don't really see what's so terrible about it and I can sell you that cocoa [TS]

  and cocoa touch which are the frameworks. They are they are unbelievably good. [TS]

  They're truly amazingly good and I love me some C. [TS]

  Sharp I really do but the done a frame work while very solid is nowhere near as good as Coco and Coco touch [TS]

  and so I don't really see what the urgent burning need is to get rid of Jack to see that I have had the urgent burning [TS]

  need to get rid of a victory in two thousand and five that I still feel and really what I was writing there. [TS]

  The audience that was not so much developers trying to tell them that the language they're using is bad or something [TS]

  but it was really apple [TS]

  and I think that by the time I was getting a little bit panicked about this whole part of it is kind of like you know [TS]

  how someone who grew up in the depression is always panicked about money and worried about not having enough food [TS]

  and stuff like that. [TS]

  If you live through the whole Copeland disaster obviously going to be a little bit more panicky about oh oh my god what [TS]

  is what is Apple's plan for a Texan aeration whatever because I don't want to see that thing that I'm you know the [TS]

  Apple today is so different in the apple than that it's a little bit ridiculous [TS]

  but a lot of that is that's where that's coming from someone who experience there that you know a company that they are [TS]

  mired in thought should be successful almost die because they failed to think about stuff like that time [TS]

  but as the years pass I don't get more relaxed about this. [TS]

  Just you know if I continue to worry about it [TS]

  and my point would be like if I was in charge of Apple I would have had starting and like starting basically [TS]

  when javac say you do it or totally asleep at the wheel and Java comes on the scene. [TS]

  I would have had multiple teams multiple small teams of the fanciest you know computer science Ph D. Whatever. [TS]

  Maybe these teams don't know about each other maybe they're on different continents you know. [TS]

  Whatever working on the next generation language runtime an A.P.I. [TS]

  All those things and most of those teams I imagine would fail and produce nothing useful [TS]

  but you know you're Apple you have all this money the empire the modern apple budget you know like maybe maybe the old [TS]

  Apple could only afford one or two teams of the few people who aren't that good. [TS]

  But at this point Apple could have ten teams with you know the ten best people money can buy all working on this [TS]

  and the reason I bring this up is not so much. We need to replace Objective C. Next year. [TS]

  W W C twenty sixteen Apple doesn't replace coke or Objective C. They're doomed Of course not right. [TS]

  It's because doing this making a new language and A.P.I. [TS]

  It's so incredibly difficult and takes so long to wring out [TS]

  and you have to bring it out not just in these little these little labs in these competing teams [TS]

  but then you actually have to build real absolute Didn't you have to sort of like it's just so hard to do this [TS]

  transition so hard to make it harder to make the language and on time people focus on the language and runtime so much. [TS]

  But that's kind of like you know that's mostly just picking from you know what do you want what features do you want [TS]

  and they can do experiments that making the A.P.I. [TS]

  That matches up with the language because I've always said that you can't just have a new language you have to have the [TS]

  A.P.I. [TS]

  and Languishing with it and cocoa has been in development basically since like the eighty's [TS]

  and it's taken that long for a cover to get from where it was in the eighty's to where it is now. [TS]

  So assume whatever thing you're going to make to replace cocoa is going to take at least as long to get at least as [TS]

  good you know in terms of rail routes you know. So you're not going to jump from OK Objective C. [TS]

  Is done everyone try this new language in this new A.P.I. [TS]

  and It will be better than Coakley it won't be out of the good will be worse in the beginning just like it was ten was [TS]

  worse think like a classic macro as in almost every respect. [TS]

  For years you know and it took years to develop [TS]

  and it was false starts with the whole Rhapsody project every like that. [TS]

  I know how long it takes to do this I know how badly wrong you can go I mean like. [TS]

  Think of every other company that's tried to do this even Microsoft C. [TS]

  Sharp [TS]

  and a common language runtime which I would say is the biggest success story hasn't been a clean win in terms of getting [TS]

  rid of win thirty two. [TS]

  All you know now when sixty four if you want to call that all of the stuff [TS]

  and that also took years to be adopted widely for developers. [TS]

  Yeah and it just and they put tons of money and tons of like you know you can't wait you can't say like Objective C. [TS]

  Is fine now it's going to be fine for five years therefore we need to do nothing. [TS]

  Assume that it's going to take you ten fifteen years to get this crap figured out [TS]

  and assume you're going to fail a couple times before you do because I think those are safe bets. [TS]

  Someone in the chat room posted oh maybe to Apple's is holding its cards close to his vest. That's entirely possible. [TS]

  As with anything in Apple you have no idea what the hell is going on over there. [TS]

  They could have seventeen games [TS]

  or people who they kill after their three years are up of they don't produce something and they hide the bodies [TS]

  and we have no idea what's going on. [TS]

  That's where I'm coming from with this not so much from the perspective of like I'm developing today [TS]

  and I think this is ridiculous I do think a lot of stuff is ridiculous [TS]

  but I feel like I understand how incredibly hard it's going to be to make something that's better than this [TS]

  and the second part of this is I think a lot of people don't want to sign up for a maybe is not relevant to them is [TS]

  that this day will come [TS]

  and I think a lot of people are either are of the opinion that this day will not come in their lifetime which may be a [TS]

  very safe bet in which case you know they feel justified in saying look I'll be dead or retired [TS]

  when this happened so I don't have to worry about it so it's not on my radar at all. [TS]

  And how it may be the current leaders of apple think I'll be dead or retired but on this happens [TS]

  but I'm I'm thinking longer term. Like yes I am I and everyone know I'm going to die. [TS]

  But if Apple wants to live on our as humans want to live on there will come a day [TS]

  when it isn't acceptable to have a pointer that you can scribble all over the memory. [TS]

  Yes just of your own memory of your own process Sure but that's barbaric. That's going away. [TS]

  We all agree it's going away it's just a question of the timing [TS]

  and a lot of people think well the timing is not in my lifetime therefore I don't care about it [TS]

  but someone's gotta care about otherwise Apple's going away [TS]

  and if you don't care about who goes away you know then fine [TS]

  but someone an apple presumably should care about Bill goes away even if they're retired Well I don't know maybe maybe [TS]

  I'm thinking too long term maybe this is not how human beings think and I just have to accept that. [TS]

  Apple's going to go under in seventy five years because they're never going to get away from Jack to see [TS]

  and someone else is going to replace them and that's the way of the world and I should just be OK with that. [TS]

  But that's where I'm coming from with this [TS]

  and that's why I think calls for like what specifically do you want to whatever as many people pointed out that's what [TS]

  Apple's supposed to figure out it's not our job to come up with Apple's next generation language [TS]

  or our time it's their job and how do they do it. [TS]

  It's going to take on a whole bunch of tribes and it's going to be really hard [TS]

  and they should have been started working on it two decades ago [TS]

  when it was obvious that this is the way that the world is going [TS]

  and it should have always been obvious is the way it always goes to higher level languages so that's what I'm fretting [TS]

  about and it's kind of an esoteric concern that no one really cares about but the rank [TS]

  and file people have to Jill exactly see every day they see what other languages are like [TS]

  and those other languages have peakers that everyone agrees are good that they wish they had an Objective C. [TS]

  and It's like well you can't just have that feature you can just have the you know the native regular expressions [TS]

  or nicer strings or you know memory protection action you know management Imrie [TS]

  and not having pointers of I guess you can just pack them on right. [TS]

  That's what they see them in other language they see them in contemporary languages that are doing similar things [TS]

  and they say well everyone agrees that's good why did I have that here. [TS]

  And that kind of discomfort is maybe how this type of stuff begins [TS]

  but this is not something you can begin from the outside it can be a bunch of developers complaining about Objective C. [TS]

  They can't be developers leaving the platform because they don't like to see it wasn't going to happen as long as they [TS]

  continue to sell apps. It has to be from within. [TS]

  So this is something that Apple needs to undertake and that's always been my my thrust with the whole Copeland point [TS]

  and thing it's not telling developers what to do. [TS]

  It's trying to tell Apple what to do and we know how successful that usually is right [TS]

  but the problem is is that as someone who has a leg in two worlds there are definitely things about Objective C. [TS]

  In cocoa that I that I wish I had when I do my day job of writing C. [TS]

  Sharp like Grand Central Dispatch is a great example. [TS]

  It is unbelievably easy to just throw things on to random cues and to throw. [TS]

  Things on to the main thread without even having to think twice about it [TS]

  and you'll see sharp has gotten better with that over the years but Apple did a great job. [TS]

  Now granted the syntax is unbelievably bad and there is an entire website whose U.R.L. [TS]

  I can't mention without having a horn go off [TS]

  but there's an entire website based on the syntax for how to write a blog how to write blocks properly. [TS]

  And that's probably not a good sign but the [TS]

  but nevertheless there are things about Cocoa this antiquated language that we all want to throw away. [TS]

  That framework [TS]

  but there's things about object of seeing cocoa as a as a pair that is supposedly science equated that I would love to [TS]

  have an Objective C. [TS]

  and It doesn't mean that you're wrong John [TS]

  but I don't see the urgency that perhaps a lot of other people see I concur that it needs to be being worked on [TS]

  but I don't know that we are at the day where they need to flip the switch [TS]

  and then I don't think you're saying that either but it seems like it's still a little bit down the road to me. [TS]

  As long as there's continued improvements to both cocoa and Objective C. [TS]

  Which there are well like the urgent they should be at Apple and I understand for enterprise N.T. [TS]

  Pattern they're defending against is if you spend all your time worrying about your stupid next generation thing then [TS]

  you take your eye off the ball which is people making Objective C. [TS]

  Better people working on KOGO like Apple [TS]

  or so about focus I can fully understand though that's that's a sucker's bet you'd not want to spend all your time [TS]

  coming up with these crazy new A.P.I. [TS]

  These crazy new languages you're taking your eye off the ball you should be making the product that you have now better [TS]

  like what they're doing with object is the an el of the EM like us exactly what they're supposed to be doing [TS]

  and any effort they spend so they might think any effort they expend on like what is the next generation pie in the sky [TS]

  architecture astronaut crappy thing that we're doing that is just like that's not in our D.N.A. [TS]

  We don't worry about that or whatever. And I understand the urge not to fall into that. [TS]

  But the other trap is we will never have to do that we will get there by increment starting from C. [TS]

  Pointers forever until we don't and that will somehow make that transition like. How do you get from point A to Point B. [TS]

  Like it's kind of like what they tried to do with the classic macro us Copeland was like we can try to keep kind of [TS]

  some kind of compatibility and old style mac apps will be able to scribble all over memory [TS]

  but will make these new style absolute run on this new kernel that are protected from each other [TS]

  and eventually all the old Absolute go away I'll be able to translate it was an idea to transition into protected [TS]

  memory [TS]

  and pre-emptive multitasking maintaining backward compatibility with existing classic apps by allowing them to still [TS]

  have free reign of memory. [TS]

  But just like the device drivers and new apps wouldn't like it was it was a hybrid type incremental solution [TS]

  and they could never pull it off [TS]

  and it's not to say they can pull off because it was incremental is just to say that it I think history has shown that [TS]

  the thing that the next generation thing will be very different from the previous thing it won't be the previous thing [TS]

  just improved in small increments. [TS]

  It will be something entirely very often something entirely different from a different company which is not what you [TS]

  want. Apple managed to do it to itself by saying Well sort of like we sent our C.E.O. [TS]

  Away and I did a five and he made another company and he made no new O.S.'s and we're just going to bring that back [TS]

  and that's our newest convenient that was all secret plan all along he says. [TS]

  Very clever anyway it was a complete replacement. Like people jacked it on Twitter. [TS]

  I was citing like I was ten as a complete rewrite of the mac operating system from the perspective of the app it is a [TS]

  different operating system it has a compatibility layer that was you know you know virtualize for Classic apps [TS]

  and everybody but holy cow is it different than Classic MacOS Unix for crying out loud. So incredibly different. [TS]

  I know that was the thing that was the thing that worked right there [TS]

  and most often the thing that replaces it was radically different and also from a different company. [TS]

  So Apple doesn't want that to happen if they don't want the next thing to be radically different [TS]

  and also for a different company. [TS]

  They need to balance their desire not to take their eyes off the current ball which I agree with with the reality of [TS]

  that. Like eventually got to come. [TS]

  You got to where we are away from pointers not this year not this decade like [TS]

  but it's like whenever you think it is in the future I don't think I've never met anyone who says no pointers are going [TS]

  to be forever seven thousand years from now he'll be writing programs [TS]

  and if they DRAM is a bad pointer they're going to scramble her memory like that if you're not going to have them write [TS]

  an apple begun then it is not like I guess it just depends on what time horizon you consider fruitful to think about [TS]

  and I'm thinking about time horizons that I myself would have to say are perhaps not for me for me to be thinking about [TS]

  but that's that's those are the type of things I think about I think someone an apple somewhere should be high minded [TS]

  enough to realize this is a concern and to start doing something to help that. [TS]

  See I'm I'm a lot less convinced that this is inevitable that that a progression like this has to happen even within a [TS]

  time span of like you know twenty years thirty years about two hundred three hundred pick your time scale everyone [TS]

  agrees is going to happen right. Well sure but you know I think so he does argue over the number that's it. [TS]

  I think Objective C. Monetarist of C. [TS]

  and The tools that we have for it have are so much more advanced than where it was five or ten years ago [TS]

  and you know I think that we I don't think modern Objective C. [TS]

  Is as far away from what people want as they think when they write a blog post like this. [TS]

  Like if you look at a lot of the complaints are a lot of thing people say it needs a lot of them are our A.P.I. [TS]

  Is not part of the language a lot of them are like really fairly minor cosmetic details almost And you know a lot of it [TS]

  it already has [TS]

  and you know looking at looking at the history of programming languages there's there's this assumption that you've [TS]

  said that most of these posts are based on which is that everything always moves higher higher level higher you know as [TS]

  time goes on but that's not necessarily true. Stuff moves higher level at the beginning. [TS]

  It's true with bumps obviously it's not a straight line but it's true. The trend line. Sure. [TS]

  There are certain things the kind of settle in and become and become kind a locked in [TS]

  and I think one of the one of the greatest examples of this is see you know see has has been around for ever. [TS]

  Is no part of it is new except blocks and it you know no part of that in general use is is really that modern [TS]

  and yet it's been around forever and it's everywhere and any and every language usually languages are written in C. [TS]

  Usually you know languages have tons of C. [TS]

  Modules that can be added on anything that high performance is required is usually written in C. [TS]

  You know there is I would not historically I would not bet against C. [TS]

  but but You have to you know it's going like it's not going to go away the same with some wouldn't go away [TS]

  and tell you the machine go didn't go away like people running game console someone's writing some hexadecimal numbers [TS]

  then Norma Jean got right by and saw me feel like a layer cake but C. Will lose its primacy eventual E. [TS]

  The same way assembly lost its primacy is the way you program computers the same way the machine code it sees as having [TS]

  a much longer life than a C. Had a longer life in assembly. [TS]

  I'd have to look at the numbers to see [TS]

  but certainly assembly had a longer life than writing machine go because it was so incredibly unfriendly [TS]

  but like all you're arguing about a timescale you think like oh this is a long plateau you're right it is along the [TS]

  plateau how long it'll plateau going to be [TS]

  but I think the the systems that we have now that do use higher level languages are out there enough to sow a little [TS]

  discontent even then just the regular rank and file people who find it like so much less verbose. [TS]

  Like the sort of the same operation done in a higher level language like Python or Ruby [TS]

  or something like Boy after so much less typing [TS]

  and it's so much more clear what I'm doing it's just is just more concise it's a higher level [TS]

  and I can do more with less typing. [TS]

  I could be more clear with my intent that even things like go where you know implicit parallelism [TS]

  and other other abstractions that allow you to express yourself in a way that would not be possible in C. [TS]

  Even in a language that's not particularly hard. Evelyn see because go is very similar to C. [TS]

  but With like better libraries and buildings [TS]

  and stuff like that because of all the existing high level languages that people do other kinds of development [TS]

  and it allows them to see what the future might look like even if we're not quite ready for it today [TS]

  and I think that's I mean that's that's the beginning of the writing on the wall for C.B.S. [TS]

  Languages and you know you say I wouldn't bet against sea [TS]

  and it's locked in like those are all relative terms like you [TS]

  and I start throwing out big year numbers eventually you agree with me. [TS]

  But like you don't want to read them in any year number that you can envision either being alive during or [TS]

  or in vision like anyone you know being alive during And that's maybe that's just human nature [TS]

  but like everything just depends on what the time scale looks like [TS]

  and their discontinuity is where suddenly you make a great leap forward because some reason because you know an [TS]

  earthquake wiped out Apple and Google and some new company has to rise from the ashes [TS]

  and it bases everything on Erling or something and we enter the new Erling age [TS]

  or I'm trying to think of a crazy language but I think your or your desire not to think about anything beyond C. [TS]

  May be well founded because for your entire career you'll never have to think about that but your grandkids probably. [TS]

  Yeah I mean [TS]

  and I think I totally agree that given a long enough time scale you're right that given a longer time scale this will [TS]

  have to be replaced [TS]

  but I think that I think it's pretty likely that by the time that happens Apple might not be that relevant [TS]

  or we might not be running the same or less even you know like well they don't listen to me of course they're right. [TS]

  Like you know I think you know there's a lot of things that that keep Objective C. [TS]

  As it is in power you know and part of it is you know that there's the whole tool chain that kind of requires And [TS]

  but even know the reasons why things that are compiled down to get to see various toolkits [TS]

  and stuff haven't really been huge is mostly because you know here to see as I said before it's it's close enough in a [TS]

  lot of ways. [TS]

  What people actually want and you know you can say oh look the brackets are ugly [TS]

  and you know that's mostly people who are unfamiliar with it who say that [TS]

  and then once they get familiar with it it just as mattering because you know every language look we have been familiar [TS]

  to you and [TS]

  and I think so I think it's close enough to a lot of what people want I think a lot of the alternatives are not clear [TS]

  cut like if if you say OK well you shouldn't even to think about memory ever again OK well then you know which memory [TS]

  management model do you pick and then that's not an easy question. [TS]

  You know the question of types and how they are implemented that's not an easy question. [TS]

  But also we've got this this great like reset with the rise of mobile where efficiency is certainly a lot more [TS]

  important than it was in two thousand five thousand five your billion desktop app. [TS]

  You know then the new C.P.U.'s are so powerful back then for desktop apps for most types of use that you could do [TS]

  anything with the language you have a language having tons of overhead and tons of dynamic safety stuff and it be fine. [TS]

  Whereas in Mobile that was a great reset and obviously mobiles getting faster it will it will keep getting faster. [TS]

  And you know eventually this will this will become a lot less of an advantage [TS]

  but it sure has helped Iowa so far that most of the after people use are written and a very little of the language [TS]

  or these are compiled down to a very low level language so that they have a lot less overhead than say Android apps you [TS]

  know and there's different things like just in time comp compilation that have been very advanced in recent years [TS]

  but still the compiled C. [TS]

  Based language that is mostly static and fast has a lot of advantages in Mobile [TS]

  and what's different in mobile is that the power budget is so much tighter that it actually matters not only for speed [TS]

  or for battery life and so this will continue to matter for a while and you're right. [TS]

  Eventually it will over a longer time scale but. [TS]

  I think I'd say we probably have a good ten years at least where this will continue to matter [TS]

  and where it would be unwise sticking around numbers I think we have another seven point two years. [TS]

  Yeah I know I know it's the same thing and they're trying to end the revisited article I felt like in two thousand [TS]

  and five when I didn't see coming two thousand and five was you know the i Phone I mean who did right. [TS]

  But like the prominence of Mobile right and that I wouldn't call it a reset. [TS]

  It's a delay and if it could be a massive laughing at what I said [TS]

  and I read it as an article I give that a twenty year delay it adds at least a decade you know because yeah all the [TS]

  things you Senator with mobile being low level such a massive advantage in mobile like that why Apple was able to do [TS]

  this type of evidence of the i Phone was fake because you know you can't do that. [TS]

  They were like the java apps that are running on the stupid smartphones then there's no way you could just I got a nose [TS]

  job like you would you need to have a crazy desktop powered C.P.U. [TS]

  In there well if you have a language that's more efficient than Java on your phone you can do pretty amazing stuff [TS]

  and yet so this this is been an advantage [TS]

  and it's a sustainable advantage in Apple's investing in that advantage in making Objective C. [TS]

  Better in everything so I don't know how long that delays things that delays things for a long time you're right. [TS]

  But on the other side of the like yeah it's going to happen eventually [TS]

  but not in my lifetime I always think about like it we're just talking about whatsapp [TS]

  or think about any you know think about My Space. [TS]

  Things move faster and industry than than most of us are comfortable with. [TS]

  Like even just reflecting I was every time I see like the timeline of something that like oh this happened a long time [TS]

  ago way back in two thousand [TS]

  and four like you know before Facebook even existed how many years ago how old it is Facebook even how old is Instagram [TS]

  all this Twitter like all these things to be accepted institutions how old is whatsapp that just cost sixteen billion [TS]

  dollars like in some respects things have a lot of momentum [TS]

  and mobiles going to going to keep us to keep Apple's advantage of actressy relevant for a long time [TS]

  but in other respects that's what I'm about discontinuity like the graph is not smooth as long plateaus for nothing. [TS]

  There's a big spike we're crazing strange [TS]

  and you never know what's coming down the pike so it could be that we are all stuck with C. [TS]

  Based languages for our entire lives and careers. [TS]

  But it could be that twenty years from now something dramatic happens that we didn't predict [TS]

  and suddenly all sea based languages are swept under the carpet because big mazing new company that is becoming to [TS]

  prominence uses a language at super high level that everybody loves [TS]

  and everyone looks down at the barbaric people flinging pointers [TS]

  and relegates them to writing device drivers for whatever. [TS]

  Well you know I was really upset at Marco because I was going to make the same plucking Tapout mobile kind of resetting [TS]

  everything already made of the revisited article on twenty eight Then I now I know well OK some of Sapper did it first [TS]

  time but set it both of you then but the other thing to consider is if this suppose it I watch is really a thing. [TS]

  I mean that that kind of does this whole being near the metal It makes being near the metal [TS]

  and a huge advantage all over again. [TS]

  Well I think the power constraints of the watch are that much different than a phone. I mean probably like two X. [TS]

  but Maybe not ten X. Less I don't know your but do you think you do you think you're being. [TS]

  You'd be in a position that running a just in time compiled or or [TS]

  or a Common Language Runtime kind of set up is really going to be a good call on a watch. [TS]

  I don't think it's as big a delay as going from a laptop or a desktop to a phone. [TS]

  Think there's a smaller jump going from a phone to a wearable that's probably true. [TS]

  But yeah like you are they continuing the continuation of mobile [TS]

  and battery powered stuff is going to be a substantial delay in making any kind of high level language [TS]

  and may end up being a disadvantage to anybody who doesn't have a C. Based language but it already is. [TS]

  Talk to talk to the windows so I mean it's hard to say because it's again it's kind of like the you know working [TS]

  backwards from successes like well the i Phone is so awesome. And yeah. [TS]

  I could've existed probably without this type of language [TS]

  but if Microsoft had not been so incompetent its mobile strategy and had come up with an O. S. Like you know I O. [TS]

  Us years before the i Phone using C. [TS]

  Sharp it would have had terrible performance and been like everywhere to look at [TS]

  and said Why the hell are you doing this you're making everything so slow C.P.U.'s can't handle this. [TS]

  There's no mobile G.P.U. They can sling as many pixels it's embarrassing and it would've reminded me of O S ten. [TS]

  All that was one hundred percent true voice ten ten point no a composite of gooey running on the C.P.U. [TS]

  It was slow as balls you couldn't even scroll windows full of Texas like this is your next generation operating system [TS]

  I can scroll a window full of text without it stuttering forget it [TS]

  and Apple's like no no no we think this is the right way to do things. [TS]

  Eventually the heart will catch up and it did so. [TS]

  If Microsoft had had fielded you know sort of Windows Phone seven [TS]

  or of the whole number there up to way back in the day or done something like i O. S. On C. Shop and it was slow. [TS]

  That may have you know and they became successful they became you know the i Phone because they did it first [TS]

  and they got in and they made this amazing product and you know eventually got good enough. [TS]

  And Apple was like the you know Johnny come lately. [TS]

  You wouldn't be able to make the argument that like oh well the only way you can do this type of thing is with a low [TS]

  level language. I think something like C. [TS]

  Sharp in the common ground time now are good enough to make something kind of fast on a phone probably would've taken [TS]

  longer to be as fast as the i Phone is and it would have been as good [TS]

  but who wouldn't have the i Phone to compare it to so we would be like oh this is good as it can possibly be like. [TS]

  That's what I like the whole the whole idea that the way things currently are going where they could possibly be a very [TS]

  very big objection to that and it's human nature to just assume that's the case. [TS]

  So while I think that objective has been such a big advantage to Apple I don't think you say well you can never have a [TS]

  phone type device with C. Shop because the shop is not that slow no slower. [TS]

  You know but like I mean how people can do amazing things with stupid javascript just crazy lately. [TS]

  We have those classic mac emulators and stuff inside a browser window [TS]

  and javascript are about a slow language is not designed to be fast at all so I'm I'm not convinced that that Objective [TS]

  C. [TS]

  Is the only way that we could have a i Phone like devices in our lifetime [TS]

  and I think even the current state of Windows Phone which as I know uses code that you know Concord native code to do [TS]

  with things that have to actually be fastened same thing with Android with its native code [TS]

  and I understand all these these things that they have to do to be faster [TS]

  but I don't think the shop is necessary to have you know smartphones for example [TS]

  or objective third a smartphone right out of the game is making that argument. [TS]

  I think it's more that you know if you if you can have something that's this fast in this efficient it's an advantage. [TS]

  It's not a requirement but it's an advantage for sure [TS]

  and as time goes on it becomes less of an advantage proportionally but still you know it still is significant now [TS]

  and you know again I just think like you know Casey even knew you were very qualified to talk about dot net You know [TS]

  and that's I would I would say like C. [TS]

  Sharp in that framework are very good example of the kind of thing that would that we might be moving towards although [TS]

  we probably go you know hopefully another evolutionary step to that's now you know fifteen years old or whatever [TS]

  but you know based on what you know with dot net [TS]

  and what you know with with modern literacy development are they really like is Dot Net really that much easier to use [TS]

  for mobile app development. [TS]

  If you had asked me a year or two ago maybe two three years ago actually I would've said yes it is considerably easier. [TS]

  Ref counting is not that conceptually difficult [TS]

  but it's still a lot hell of a lot more difficult than just writing the new keyword all over the place. [TS]

  But given the advantage the advances of are given the advances of having closures in Objective C. [TS]

  No I don't think it's really that different in the end that's kind of what I was driving at earlier. [TS]

  You know there are things in Objective C. That I love. In that I miss when I write C. Sharp. [TS]

  There are things that are in C. Sharp that I love that I missed when I write Objective C. [TS]

  but If I were to like the first thing that jumps to mind of something that I really missed an Objective C. [TS]

  That I enjoy so much in C. [TS]

  Sharp is something silly like reflection [TS]

  or introspection which really is not necessary in is completely ancillary to the conversation we're having. [TS]

  Like that it's been a lot out there to say you know you know what is there [TS]

  but it's no it absolutely is there just a comparatively a royal pain in the butt compared to how easy it is in some [TS]

  trouble [TS]

  but it changes the way the right programs like it mean think of think of writing an action actual very high level [TS]

  language it's not just like us. Incremental stuff. [TS]

  If you have those features in there kind of built into the language in a convenient way it it informs how you write [TS]

  A.P.I. Spelling Absolutely. Think of all like the ruby people writing this to be a D.S.L. [TS]

  So making a little you know because it's so easy to just add methods to classes [TS]

  and throw that like extending the number of classes they can put like one dot times in three days not a go at all this [TS]

  like now I'm saying all this stuff is good but like language features change what the A.P.I. [TS]

  Looks like and another thing that change will be a palace like success [TS]

  and I think a lot of the sort of the narrowing gap between objective seen tea shop is based on the success of the [TS]

  companies that shepherd them the relative success over the past decade of Apple versus Microsoft. [TS]

  It's pretty stark contrast now though Microsoft has been improving the shop [TS]

  and everything they have not had the dominant thriving big new platform as a tractor to pull their language A.B.I. [TS]

  They have had the kind of fizzling out really doing well in the mobile market platform [TS]

  and the old legacy Windows platform and a bunch of other confused the eyes you know point along [TS]

  and so yet the gap is narrowing because Apple's fire and also owners with objectives [TS]

  and Microsoft is another DON'T was a shock but what will you say that. But I mean C. [TS]

  Sharp is making considerable strides on a regular basis and what the language yes but yeah I do that's fair point. [TS]

  The U.P.I. [TS]

  Has done a little better with like parallel programming for example I would argue it's not as clean [TS]

  and simple is as Grand Central Dispatch but it's better. But C. [TS]

  Sharp as a language I really really really really like it a lot a lot a lot [TS]

  and I'm not saying I love Microsoft I mean Microsoft has its own woes but C. [TS]

  Sharp as a language is really truly incredible and I really really like it and some of the things you can do in C. [TS]

  Sharp like someone brought up in the chat a minute ago link link language in the query you can do some of that with [TS]

  predicates in cocoa but it's not as nice it's not as easy and [TS]

  and like I said reflection earlier some of those things are really incredible into having easy access to introspection [TS]

  having easy access to writing seek will ask queries against objects. [TS]

  It makes the way you write code very different just like you said John in so I see both sides of this coin [TS]

  and it's so tough I want to be more definitive and come down with a particular perspective [TS]

  but I don't know I don't know I don't know what I would do if I was Apple other than put some really big nerds on it [TS]

  and see what they come up with I think the link is a good example because there's this whole thing of like you know [TS]

  higher level language with manage memory in these other features and native strings [TS]

  and all of those things from a high level language that we think we want [TS]

  and in providing you the ability to like let's try to you know link link isn't yet another attempt to sort of make it [TS]

  easier to deal with big buckets of data in a language that you want to get the data out [TS]

  and we want to get the data into like variables essentially in our language so we can deal with [TS]

  and we want to take whatever structures we have in our language with objects or something else [TS]

  and put them into some other big bucket of data probably a database like how many times have we taken a run of this [TS]

  problem with object relational mapping and direct sequel queries and link with the another example and it just goes. [TS]

  Show that like the features of language that we're talking about being a higher level will become a necessity it will [TS]

  be necessary to be to you know dream memory manage to not be able to have a site fall to have things that we all expect [TS]

  to have like you know name parameters native strings and maybe regular expressions [TS]

  and native implicit parallelism baked into the runtime and all these things. [TS]

  Those will be necessary [TS]

  but they will not be sufficient to be a better language because I think many people Lincoln many people hate because [TS]

  they like you know everyone hates or around this right but then link people like oh this is a great idea [TS]

  and then you link throwing like links not that great either [TS]

  and some people go back to writing the sequel queries like just because you have these features doesn't mean you're [TS]

  going to make an awesome A.P.I. G.C.D. [TS]

  Is a great example the people who made that had a better idea of what would make a good easy A.P.I. [TS]

  For new pals and they sure are going to just see for crying out loud right. [TS]

  You know it just because you have married doesn't mean you're going home with A.B.I. [TS]

  Was good is easy doesn't mean that you're going to come up with a way of dealing with databases that's better than a [TS]

  link that's better than or ends better than writing direct queries like it doesn't automatically make you the winner [TS]

  but it will eventually be necessary [TS]

  and eventually you get to the point like Apple was with Copeland where no matter how good your stuff is if you don't [TS]

  meet this in the bar you do not have every protection you become a nonentity you it's like you can't play in the game [TS]

  anymore no matter how awesome your stuff is in like oh look at this we have this [TS]

  and we have done our new I know I saw it I was like I'm sorry you spent a long time over there dicking around [TS]

  and the bar has moved and now you are just and not a player anymore and that's the scenario that trying to avoid here. [TS]

  It doesn't mean that if you make a memory management which then it will be better than Objective C. [TS]

  In fact chances are very great that it will not be and your A.P.I. [TS]

  Will not be as good as cocoa That's why I was saying make seventeen teams put them against each other don't tell them [TS]

  each other exists like it's going to be difficult to do is not even guaranteed that you're going to be successful [TS]

  but if you don't try you are guaranteed long term that you're doomed. Yeah I agree it's just. [TS]

  It's it's so tough in one thing I should point out is that link is about more than just hitting databases I mean what's [TS]

  what what's really powerful about link is if you have a dictionary [TS]

  or a hash table in memory you can write really expressive queries against that half sure that dictionary [TS]

  and you can do it either in a format that that smells a lot like sequel literally within code you can you can write you [TS]

  know from a dictionary where blah select blah or you can do it in a more traditional way but [TS]

  but link is extremely powerful and it's things like that that make me think you're right [TS]

  but I don't know I think the most the most pressing thing you said was that it takes a long time to develop a really [TS]

  solid A.P.I. [TS]

  Of a really long time and I don't think that done it very much there [TS]

  and I would take I would say Coke over the Dot Net framework as much as I would miss link as much as I would miss [TS]

  reflection in the easy peasy form that it is and net I would probably take took Ko-Ko over it and that's saying a lot. [TS]

  Even if you have an awesome A.P.I. and Even if you have an awesome language and every agrees A.B.I. [TS]

  Is better than everything else in the market never degrees your language has been [TS]

  or the market is not attached to a successful product that will also do middle health like the things that have to come [TS]

  to get like that's how we end up with like see an objective. [TS]

  It's like in the end like it no matter how great a thing you make in terms of the underlying thing that doesn't get [TS]

  attached sessile product it's gone [TS]

  and whatever it is it has a successful product provided to meet some pretty low minimum bar of suitability. [TS]

  It will be wildly successful [TS]

  and will be still be stuck with the decades for decades anyway so that's the other you know again the theme of the show. [TS]

  Like just because it is ever [TS]

  and uses it to Natasha successful products it doesn't mean that it is the best thing that we could ever possibly have [TS]

  and its success you know like Objective C. [TS]

  Would be nowhere paddled in by next right is it because I had no object is the is better in many many ways than a lot [TS]

  of its contemporaries. Languages but it would be nowhere if Apple hadn't bought them and so like that Apple has. [TS]

  When you have a successful product [TS]

  and you have the ability as Microsoft sort of had to try to to try to prevent yourself from becoming irrelevant by [TS]

  revving your technology stack trying to good at the same time is also making successful products on maybe it's [TS]

  impossible maybe Apple maybe Apple's life time is limited by the lifetime Objective C. [TS]

  Of it's institutionally uncapable capable of ever making anything good enough to replace it. [TS]

  Then it will be Apple the company will live as long as it takes or Objective C. [TS]

  To become like a disqualifier where now just like memory protection was like memory lack of memory to action preemptive [TS]

  multitasking became a disqualifier for the desktop P.C. [TS]

  Market and Apple had to do something [TS]

  and then most went out of business well that if that's Apple strategy if we ever get Tim Cook on the shelves I would [TS]

  ask him this super esoteric question is like this I think this is like you know it's probably pet he'll be retired [TS]

  but he doesn't have to worry about this. [TS]

  Like personally [TS]

  but I wonder if your SEO company if you ever think about things like this like three C.E.O.'s are now that guy might [TS]

  have to worry about this do I care at all and if I do my planning for it now [TS]

  or my discontent to say we're going to make competing proving objective as long as hard as we can ever never becomes a [TS]

  disqualifier success Well that's the end of Apple but that'll be so long from now nobody alive cares. Good job. [TS]

  So my what I keep wondering is right around the time that I think all of us were getting completely fed up with the [TS]

  fact that we needed to to perform our own reference counting in Objective C. [TS]

  That's when Art came out and at the last possible moment the biggest issue that all of us had [TS]

  or I would say the biggest issue all of us had with Objective C. Suddenly wasn't an issue anymore. [TS]

  If Apple continues down that road [TS]

  and at the eleventh hour finally fixes whatever the current issue is is that it is not a long term plan that'll work do [TS]

  you think. [TS]

  It took them two tries to do that because the first try was garbage collection right and that [TS]

  and that was a multi-year effort that ended in failure because like it wasn't while they got the by anybody something I [TS]

  think they made Xcode guys do it I forget who they had dog food the garbage collection [TS]

  but like it didn't work out because it wasn't nicely compatible with the sea place language they found a better [TS]

  solution that had better characteristics it was a better fit for their language that is more of a compromise in many [TS]

  senses than garbage collection but is so much better fit for a C. [TS]

  Based language and also garbage collection has many disadvantages [TS]

  and mobile that arc doesn't have the ark was the right solution at the right time for Apple. [TS]

  No question but it's not really the right solution. [TS]

  If you're ever if you're going to try to incremental lies your way from where we are now to a higher level language. [TS]

  I guess if you're phenomenally successful you can use that to extend your life for a really long time [TS]

  but eventually we're going to get it kind of get to the point where we are like with age of us plus where there we go. [TS]

  Where you kept attacking stuff on to something for as long as you possibly could [TS]

  and as long as you're still successful you know hailed as i Phones There is a response on there must be pretty awesome [TS]

  right like you can keep adding features for pretty long time if you have an excess of products you're just really [TS]

  delaying the inevitable though [TS]

  and I have a hard time seeing a path from something like object to see like how the transition of the transition is [TS]

  when do the pointers go away. [TS]

  That's the really hot like there's always like a chasm that you can keep making things better improving the syntax dot [TS]

  notation string literals object literals like you can do lots of awesome things especially with L V M The new compiler [TS]

  infrastructure like they have a lot of runway out in front of them they can do lots of awesome things again long enough [TS]

  probably for everyone who works at Apple to get old retire and die. [TS]

  But eventually the runway does run out [TS]

  and you're left with this crazy ass mongrel like the runaway I think is run on each of us plus that is just you can [TS]

  tell has had tons of stuff modified and tacked onto it [TS]

  and some other successful product will come along will be successful not because of the language [TS]

  but just incidentally also happens to have a language where you can express yourself. [TS]

  Concisely you know in that summer's nicer manner that people will in addition to saying I'm going to write for the [TS]

  whatever contact lens O.-S. [TS]

  Because that's awesome in the year twenty whatever and by the way the programs are awesome [TS]

  and you know how do you know if you're going to say square brackets a gang of us all be able to see the stupid syntax [TS]

  you know it's not the most important thing. [TS]

  But yeah there there will be a better way to program [TS]

  and it will be attached to some other product if Apple doesn't make it. [TS]

  Yeah and I think this conversation is the conversation of like Oh Apple needs to do this. [TS]

  I think if you're going to make that point I think it needs specifics [TS]

  and you know it's easy to say oh well Apple needs to do. [TS]

  They need to move in this direction in general terms [TS]

  and I agree that they did need to move in the direction of higher level of Angele [TS]

  but there's a big question mark there of what exactly that means [TS]

  and you know you said earlier John that you think it's Apple's responsibility. [TS]

  I don't necessarily think that's the case and I think they should have to turn the thinking [TS]

  but I think it's up to it's up to like the world of developers really to to to figure out what the heck we want [TS]

  and that I think is a much harder question you know if. [TS]

  I definitely think that the whole platform [TS]

  and all developers benefit substantially by their only really being like one conical language that you write apps for [TS]

  these platforms that there's one language with it with the officially by [TS]

  and yeah you can there's there's fringe efforts to you know languages [TS]

  but I think I think overall everyone benefits from there being like want to greet upon default language so the question [TS]

  is is something's going to replace that that language. It Like what. [TS]

  What changes and what decisions are good enough to replace it. [TS]

  Because if you if you try to have it both ways try to maintain both you know you had a whole show you had two of the [TS]

  shows on bridges that you know it doesn't really work very well. [TS]

  So what you know what choices would they make right now Objective C. [TS]

  Is pretty good at most stuff really good at some stuff and really rough it some other stuff [TS]

  but overall I would say it's pretty good right. [TS]

  And I think overall people who are familiar with that are enough to look beyond the brackets would probably agree with [TS]

  that it's pretty good. So what. [TS]

  What new thing would be at least that good to at least as many people or or a clickable to as many circumstances [TS]

  and I think that's a really hard question [TS]

  and you know this is this is like a design question this is not this is not as much a technical question. [TS]

  This is a design choice and design is hard because a lot of times with these quick questions there is no good answer. [TS]

  It's a lot like politics like there is like no good policy in some cases where everyone's going to be happy [TS]

  or to Universal winner or even everyone can agree that it's a net win at all and so I think Objective C. [TS]

  Replacements are going to face a big problem there which is like there's this huge A.P.I. [TS]

  That has to be you know poured over or core converted or rethought. [TS]

  There's a huge installed base is all these developers know what it is [TS]

  and it works for the most part it works really well like all the problems of of C. [TS]

  That make it hard to use or or clunky or hard to maintain. If it's badly written Objective C. [TS]

  Tackles a lot of those and severely reduces the impact of a lot of those [TS]

  and so it like a lot of the a lot of the problems of C. [TS]

  Aren't really problems an object to see or are so much more that it's you know it's basically irrelevant. [TS]

  And so to make something that substantially better is. [TS]

  Technically yeah you're right a lot of work it can take a lot of time [TS]

  but I think the much bigger question is what is just deciding what exactly that should be and how it should work and [TS]

  and all that. All the decisions that go into designing a language and the associated framework. [TS]

  But you know just the tech. [TS]

  That's a really big question [TS]

  and I don't see any consensus forming among developers who are suggesting that it should be different. [TS]

  I don't see any consensus forming to say like oh it should be it should move from where it is to X. [TS]

  and You know what exactly X. [TS]

  Is a little bit of consensus because of all the other high level languages there are other because so much development [TS]

  these days is done not on you know native platforms going go you know server side programming like there's always a [TS]

  language like Python Ruby and even P.H.P. and All you know all the stuff out there is giving P. [TS]

  and Javascript giving people a taste of the things they don't have a native languages [TS]

  and there's some consensus on things of the day I think everyone agree that a modern language has to have a. [TS]

  I'm thinking more like you mention a transition before it transitions can be terrible because you can't just wake up [TS]

  one day and say OK everybody right new A.B.I. and If you language go like. [TS]

  But luckily Apple has some experience in this area. It transitioned everybody from A C C plus plus you know A.B.I. [TS]

  System for reading that whether it's next to a box or power plant [TS]

  or whatever it transition them from that to a language it almost looks like a lateral move to Objective C. [TS]

  Also sea bass but totally different totally different language. [TS]

  They manage that transition perhaps not as well as they could have but for a long time they had things like carbon [TS]

  and cocoa and you make a new control is control only available in cocoa [TS]

  and it's one thing carbon people would complain why can't I get that control I want to draw [TS]

  or my carbon up in the head Quickdraw still in there in the course like it was a hairy mess [TS]

  and that move was such a tiny move like you're saying you need a language it's so maidenly betterness confesses was [TS]

  there consensus that objective seeing Coco is better than carbon. [TS]

  Definitely not among old school mac developers doubling out among like Adobe and Microsoft and stuff like that. [TS]

  It's I'm not going to say it's going to be easy [TS]

  but I think the the carbon to Cocoa transition is evidence that it is possible to do that in a way that doesn't totally [TS]

  destroy your platform which is not I don't think was a given that I don't think any one of the ripple of a transition [TS]

  like Microsoft still hasn't managed I think to pull it off. [TS]

  With the shark now desiderata a mac app you're writing a cocoa out. [TS]

  But nowadays if you're writing a windows app are you writing C. Sharp app and whatever the hell A.P.I. [TS]

  They're pushing these days for the good. Like who's running Windows apps. Yeah I mean that's a question too. [TS]

  It's going to be really difficult and the transition is almost a little [TS]

  but I think the thing you're transitioning to I don't think you need all that much consensus [TS]

  and I don't think it needs to be that fantastically better Big Apple's kind of shown that you can do it sort of by [TS]

  Fiachra and eventually people will come around to the thing. If the things that you can program in Objective C. [TS]

  Are popular enough like the i Phone and you know that you will you don't you managed to bring along like Microsoft [TS]

  and Adobe eventually kind of kicking [TS]

  and screaming like I was the first cocoa version of Photoshop like to version of the go or something like that. [TS]

  It's taken a long time but you manage not to lose them [TS]

  and they've basically completely transitioned if you're writing an application for Apple's platform you doing it [TS]

  objectives the echo despite the fact that they're not all that different from C.C. [TS]

  Plus plus A P I's that preceded them. [TS]

  What I don't see though is Mark [TS]

  or you said a minute ago you know it's up to the developer community in order to kind of I don't dictate is a strong [TS]

  word to kind of help figure out what the what the way forward is I mean how do we do that as a community do we just [TS]

  write blog post we write our own coffee script kind of equivalent that trains compiles into Objective C. [TS]

  You know what how is it up how to hell can we influence that change. [TS]

  I would say that that's exactly it it's you know we do it by both discussion and by example. [TS]

  Again though I think the biggest challenges that this is a really hard problem. [TS]

  It's a really hard question to figure out like what should be next [TS]

  and you know like you know the most of the posts have said that you know no one no one saying oh you should switch to [TS]

  python like. Like no one is putting like with like a specific language in place to say this. [TS]

  This specific thing is what you should switch to. [TS]

  It's just you know very hand we'd be like oh well it needs to solve these criteria or it needs to change. [TS]

  This list of my personal nitpicks about the language and and you know [TS]

  and as I said earlier like you know a lot of the things could be solved by A.P.I. [TS]

  Changes not not language changes and and a lot of those things do require language changes [TS]

  but are like superficial like the brackets and so I don't to be just too much of the ground further [TS]

  but I just think that one of the biggest reasons why we don't have something like this yet is because what what that [TS]

  next thing should be is really not obvious to anybody as far as I can tell [TS]

  and no one's clamoring for something specific that is widely considered a good idea. [TS]

  Well there's never going to be consensus outside Apple unavailable for consensus to form that consensus would take [TS]

  would be all their developers leaving to develop for a more popular platform [TS]

  and then the only thing Apple could take away from that was well everybody leaving to develop for whatever the new you [TS]

  know pinky ring platform is that's become very popular and then they would decide whatever the hell [TS]

  and language of the pink platform uses that's what they should use in on even though that would be the case because all [TS]

  it would mean is they just moved to a more successful platform the same way that people would say Objective C. [TS]

  Is the best language ever because look at all these developers who one developed [TS]

  and it's not really because the language they learn the language because of the way they get out of the i Phone so that [TS]

  signals from outside as well you can get from any kind of is like a big fuzzy noise. [TS]

  If you wait for a clear signal the clear single will be a sign that you waited too long and you're doomed [TS]

  and it's probably not a good signal anyway because you were to get a look at the thing that they're moving to [TS]

  and say that's what we should have done not necessarily You could've been something entirely different ten years ago [TS]

  and been and prevented this from happening but you didn't [TS]

  and so now you've lost the opportunity to dictate what the next language an A.P.I. Is going to be. That's why. [TS]

  I think Apple has to do it because they they have to do it now [TS]

  when they're in their position to be masters of their own destiny. [TS]

  If they were never going to be consensus outside them all they can look at is sort of the buzz of noise of high level [TS]

  languages and pick and choose the features they think like what one of the biggest pain points. [TS]

  I mean the kind of doing it with ARC and everything now [TS]

  but like how can we transcend those pain points not just patch over the not to make them a little better not just find [TS]

  a solution to those things it's a better fit for our current language than for example garbage collection was [TS]

  but so what is the next leap in languages. [TS]

  And I have to look at everything across the entire world all the different ways you can write software [TS]

  and maybe come up with some new ideas of their own it's a big responsibility but [TS]

  when you're the biggest technology company in the world that's what you have to do. Thanks a lot. [TS]

  Two or three sponsors this week King Squarespace and Linda dot com and we will see you next week. [TS]

  Now that's accidental. John thanks again today. [TS]

  And you know it says to that list and I don't know if anyone else enjoys it but I freakin love heard out like that. [TS]

  I think we do that all the time. It beats. [TS]

  And I would hate to show software methodologies because I know one of these things is going to be an even longer show [TS]

  one of these days we'll talk about why link and our arms are not solutions. [TS]

  Nice to see you keep associate yngling with with link to sequel which is one piece of land I know I know I know I [TS]

  didn't realize I can create my database using X. Path will be awesome. [TS]

  Nor did I bring up of the database drivers for in memory things in common separated files all the good stuff the pros [TS]

  doing decades ago. The opportunity memory operated the first program. Now I think Link is awesome. [TS]

  I think it's amazing. I just think that like the ability to try something like that is the important thing. [TS]

  Actual success like was once you tried you're like well I have strengths [TS]

  and weaknesses versus all the other things we tried before and then someone else tries again [TS]

  but you can even try something like a link if the language doesn't provide support for it. [TS]

  So you know we will keep trying. [TS]

  Like I don't know what the solution is to turn to the problem that link and or EMS [TS]

  and everything else who tried to use you know people here. [TS]

  Again he keep shooting link with or EMS and it's so much more than that. I know but it's a way to get a date. [TS]

  Doesn't have to be in a database it's basically a way to bridge the world. Like I want to get this information. [TS]

  It's in some place like to be able to view everything through a certain lens. [TS]

  What if I could query a dictionary the same way I can query a database now they're unified under the single A.P.I. [TS]

  And yes that's a much better way of looking at it. Their advantage to that. And then sometimes like. [TS]

  But that's not really a good fit for this type thing. [TS]

  Maybe I want to get in a different way [TS]

  and in the same way that people that say I don't want to view my database as a database I want to view it as a bunch of [TS]

  objects and I don't like at all. I like R.M. [TS]

  Better or maybe I don't object database because in a database I actually will be like the objects [TS]

  and I'm getting with an object database is going to keep trying to figure this out. [TS]

  As you know I give it full marks for being an interesting and novel way approach to familiar class. [TS]

  It's aided by the abilities of the language. [TS]

  Yeah that's the thing that I love so much about link is I use it against objects constantly [TS]

  and not just dictionaries you know use against a raise you know gimme gimme all the items where such [TS]

  and such a property is greater than such and such value give me all the people where age is greater than twenty one. [TS]

  And yeah that sounds a lot like a database query. [TS]

  And that's where link got it started but I can do that against an array of memory [TS]

  and that's what makes it so powerful and I very very rarely in fact almost never use link again sequel. [TS]

  I almost exclusively use LINQ against objects and it's so powerful again you can do a lot of that with an S. [TS]

  Predicate [TS]

  but it's not quite so clean it's not quite so transparent although perhaps I'm saying that because I'm just used to [TS]

  link that you would love Perl Perl is the big thing about Perl is that like your come you're comfortable speaking in [TS]

  that sort of you know not dialect but like I want to get things out of an array [TS]

  and I think of it I can think of it in the same way that we think of getting out of a dictionary it's cultural. [TS]

  Yes Perl is the poster child for giving you a way to express the same sentiment in whatever way you're the most [TS]

  comfortable thinking about it so if you're more comfortable thinking about getting information about a re is phrasing [TS]

  it in that way then that's a way that will work [TS]

  and you know like not just more than one way to do it in more than one way to say and what I like. [TS]

  People would argue why do you want to save me through different ways will sometimes people's brains work a certain way [TS]

  and they think of it in this matter knows how his people brains think of the same as I passed in a totally different [TS]

  way with everything switched around in a different order. They should be able to express that as well. [TS]

  That does make sense. [TS]

  I also want to bring up one more quick thing that's famous last words and that's concurrency [TS]

  and a lot of a lot of the the posts [TS]

  and thoughts about the new the next big language revolve around concurrency which is a valid concern the problem is [TS]

  that what a lot of people seem to want is for concurrency to be like hand wave the way. [TS]

  Oh it'll just always make everything concurrent at the language level and noodle little. [TS]

  And currency easier and the reason why concurrency is hard is not because of the language. [TS]

  My concurrency is hard is because it's complicated and it's so there are language aspects of it [TS]

  but I can relate to something like her language if you design the language around the idea of concurrency. [TS]

  A lot of the code that we have to right now to do things safely [TS]

  and concurrently like implicit concurrency where I mean go has a little bit of this [TS]

  and you know other things that where you can express something in a high enough level way where not only do you not [TS]

  care about the details of how it's done you don't have any control over the details of how it's done [TS]

  and there are invariants that are provided by the language in runtime that you can guarantee. [TS]

  All that does is just move your set of problems up to a higher level if you like [TS]

  but at least it gets rid of like the super low level concerns in the medium level concerns [TS]

  and now you deadlock on much higher level concerns think you are right [TS]

  but that's progress you know because like you don't like you want to have some sort of primitive like semaphores [TS]

  and you know atomic operations I.C.P. [TS]

  Usenet let us stop thinking about that particular problem think one level up and it's never going to be easy [TS]

  but what people want is like look I'm tired of thinking about concurrency at this level I would love it if simple [TS]

  things I could do simple concurrent operations on sets of data where I didn't care about the power of them [TS]

  and there was like built into the language I was sixteen implicitly expressed something like doing all this on all [TS]

  these With goes away towards that worth it I don't want to worry whether the details of the language itself can provide [TS]

  lots of ways of worrying about things at a slightly higher level concern [TS]

  and I think everyone would see that as a big win and that's what they're mostly talking about concurrency. [TS]

  Maybe they have fantasies where like there's not going to be a problem that really they're just going to reduce the [TS]

  number of deadlocks or deadlock and higher level things but again isn't. [TS]

  I mean so many of these of these wish list items This included in this much more an A.P.I. [TS]

  Problem than a language problem [TS]

  but it can be a language problem if you design a language with parents in mind even if it's. [TS]

  Part of like the standard library to go to know whether they're concurrently things are part of the language [TS]

  or there is a library that comes in the language and that that line is fuzzy to begin with I mean like Objective C. [TS]

  Technically is basically a C. Library it's not like it's there in Objective C. Language with C. Runtime which is a C. [TS]

  Program that runs your you know what I mean like it's a fuzzy line but I think Erling and Haskell [TS]

  and other kind of things where you express operations in such a high level that there's no way to control any sort like [TS]

  the parallelism may either be nonexistent or like pervasive [TS]

  and you just you know you know sort of the preconditions in the post conditions in a language you guarantee you that [TS]

  and you're not concerned with how outperforms of things if you can get that kind of implicit parallelism built into the [TS]

  language whole classes of problems that people [TS]

  but that regular sort of run of the mill programmers are afraid to tackle with concurrency now even though they totally [TS]

  have the tools to do it. Become open to them in the same way the G.C.D. [TS]

  Has opened up parallelism to people who otherwise wouldn't try have been part of this great library G.C.D. [TS]

  Previously able to run on the main thread but it's so easy for me not to run the main thread out of throw it off [TS]

  and those people learn that actually you can screw yourself doing that too you know. [TS]

  But like it's it's all about lowering the bar to whatever powers in the my willing to attempt [TS]

  and feel confident is going to work and if you can bake things like that into the language [TS]

  or into a library that's so much a part of the language it seems like the language. [TS]

  It lets more people do parallels and more you. [TS]

  Yeah I don't know I guess I'm I'm much more of an optimist that there are still tons of room for improvement with [TS]

  libraries an A.P.I. [TS]

  With the same language in that you don't need to throw out the entire language and the entire existing A.P.I. [TS]

  To get progress in a lot of these fronts people are asking for [TS]

  and I think that's you know you're right that if you if you make it like part of the syntax [TS]

  and part of the native way of doing things then it certainly can go deeper [TS]

  but I just think there's so much more we can do and I think it's one of the reasons why Objective C. [TS]

  Has stuck around all this time [TS]

  and probably has a pretty long future because there is so much more you can do with just libraries and. [TS]

  Changes and maybe a little help from the editor and the tools are written in very a court date. [TS]

  Speaking of like Link and R.M. [TS]

  In all other ways a court date is yet another way to try to deal with like large troughs of data that you can rummage [TS]

  through [TS]

  and they had to have a different model of its kind of like go around not really like a link like you don't call the [TS]

  database you mention as predicate it's an object store it lets you know that probably didn't run at many different [TS]

  times never I think at the language level I think maybe link is closer to God even though it's not language levels like [TS]

  flies on language features but it's language integrated. That's what it says in the day you know. [TS]

  But is it language and if I don't you know I know it's like yeah. [TS]

  Problems here having more tools to run [TS]

  and a problem having a language help you in that regard can let you try new solutions those solutions may not be better [TS]

  or worse than what came before but at least opens up the door [TS]

  and I think I don't know enough about these highly parallel languages to know like we're given an early expert on here [TS]

  they would explain what it is specifically about her lying that makes it so much better than doing the same things in [TS]

  any other language because the language was designed with concurrency in mind [TS]

  but I'm convinced enough from what I have from things that I read about language that that is the case it's just that [TS]

  or lying is so much worse that everything else that people want to do with programs that it hasn't really caught the [TS]

  world on fire but who knows if the if the pinky ring program but only in Erling [TS]

  and everyone earth bought ten of them then we'd all are alike. [TS]