3D printing produces a curious lightweight motorcycle - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21699432-3d-printing-produces-curious-lightweight-motorcycle-alloy-angels <comment><USER4> Interestingly, this is using mostly bicycle (mountain-bike) components not traditional motorcycle parts.

From the photos I can identify at least these as mtb/bicycle parts:

        - front suspension forks
        - disk brakes
        - rear shock
        - <USER2>
        - <USER3>

So basically this is a heavy electric bicycle with no pedals to push when the battery runs out.

The frame looks great though! Might have applications in other forms.

edit: By looking closely at the videos on their website you can see weld marks that show the frame was probably 3d printed in sections and then welded together.

<comment><USER4> (Can´t edit top comment anymore)

Meanwhile I was curious about the tires and noticed that it has different front and back tires Turns out neither is built for speed, one is a cruiser bike tire, the other is a fat bike tire.

 _[Back tire]_ [https://static.wixstatic.com/media/ee8ba9_3c48823dff9e4cdaad...](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/ee8ba9_3c48823dff9e4cdaad5fb6a20ca3b17f~mv1.jpg/v1/fill/w_824,h_549,al_c,q_90,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/ee8ba9_3c48823dff9e4cdaad5fb6a20ca3b17f~mv1.jpg)

Vee Rubber Vee Mission Fat Bike Folding Tyre

This is a Fat Bike tire (A mountain bike "type" that went mainstream in the last few years. where the proposition is to have a bike with extremely large diameter tires (for mtb standards) to roll over obstacles or to "float" on top of sand/loose gravel/snow (well for snow use it already existed for a long time, but was quite a niche thing)

back tire more info: [http://www.on-one.co.uk/i/q/TYVEVMFB/vee-rubber-vee- mission-...](http://www.on-one.co.uk/i/q/TYVEVMFB/vee-rubber-vee-mission-fat- bike-folding-tyre)

 _[Front tire]_ [https://static.wixstatic.com/media/ee8ba9_7a508f9284164dddbf...](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/ee8ba9_7a508f9284164dddbffc788efec19eab~mv1.jpg/v1/fill/w_1047,h_710,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/ee8ba9_7a508f9284164dddbffc788efec19eab~mv1.jpg)

This looks like a cruiser/low rider tire

front tire more info: [http://www.feltbicycles.com/USA/2016/Parts/Cruiser/Tires- Tub...](http://www.feltbicycles.com/USA/2016/Parts/Cruiser/Tires-Tubes/Berm- Master-Tire.aspx)

[http://www.classic-cycle.de/en/Tires-Tubes-Parts/Berm- Master...](http://www.classic-cycle.de/en/Tires-Tubes-Parts/Berm- Master-24-x-3-0-pure-black.html)

<comment> at-fates-hands >> This is a Fat Bike tire (A mountain bike "type" that went mainstream in the last few years.

As you point out, the tire has a very specific use. I see these _everywhere_ now and its clear it has become a some kind of fashion trend now. I see people out riding them on city streets all over my city - makes no sense to me really.

<comment><USER5> When I see these when I'm out biking, all I can think of is "Man, the rolling resistance on that bike must be immense." I live in the Midwest so we can get some snow but funny enough, I never see those bikes out in it. Also, it's flat as heck here and there's no trail biking to speak of.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Not a motorcycle. This is an electric bicycle. Forgetting the weight of the bike, that front brake isn't enough to properly handle the mass of a rider panic-braking at 100kph.

Also, look into modern Japanese motorcycle design. Their frames are much less than 6kg. Many don't have anything worthy of being called a frame. The rear swing arm is bolted to the engine block, with the only load-bearing structure being between that and the triple clamp (The bit where the front forks attach).

These are proper electric motorcycles:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TT_Zero](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TT_Zero)

And here is what they can do:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlxZs2-gICc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlxZs2-gICc)

<comment><USER6> If anyone here is interested in design, look into what I meant by Japanese bikes. Motorcycles, all of them, can be divided into those with integrated engines and those with engines sitting inside frames. In Japan, where the entire bike was built by the same people and was meant for export, the result was engines with parts bolted on to create a bike. There are all sorts of weight/reliability advantages in doing this. In the west, the engine was built at a different factory and sat on mounts inside the frame ... exactly like the arrangement in the OP here. So whenever you see a two-wheeled vehicle with an engine wrapped inside a larger frame, know that it was the result of a very different development process.

<comment><USER7> _look into what I meant by Japanese bikes._

Do you have any links or more specific search terms?

<comment><USER6> "The big four" are Honda, Suzuki, Yamaha and Kawasaki. This group does on occasion act together, specifically when a few years ago there was an agreement to limit bikes to 300kph in reaction to the Hayabusa and associated tech that suggested a topspeed war was about to happen.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Hayabusa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Hayabusa)

It's a great bike. A true monster but also easy to ride, particularly for short people. So everyone knew a faster bike was on the horizon.

<comment><USER7> I was curious about the variance in the design you mentioned, reading the comment again, I got more of what you meant. So this is something unique to all Japanese bikes and has been something of a mainstay? At first read through, I mistakenly got the idea this was some new innovation. But now I get what you were saying about how these companies are vertically integrated much like Apple, so all components of the product can be more tightly integrated.

So what would you say the main advantages here are? The bike can perform better in terms of handling because all parts are designed to work most effectively with the others?

How much does the engine shape/design vary with Japanese bikes compared to bikes of other origins? Different attachment points with the engine to the other components?

Do you know of any pictures of a Japanese bike without the body shell/faring on it, or just the bare frame?

Quick Edit:

Do you have any opinion on what you think the best Japanese touring and/or dual sport bikes are?

<comment><USER6> Honda's VFR line, specifically the VFR800.

Bolting everything to the engine means lighter weight. It allows one to isolates loads/jobs. The weight of the rider on the seat is handled by a very light frame, a frame that doesn't have to deal with forces from the rear wheel shocks. And with the rear swing arm attached directly to the transmission, which is built into the engine block, nothing is wobbling around. But to do this you need a well-balanced engine. Watch any harley accelerate. It's engine is bouncing around on soft mounts.

Here is the definitive japanese sportbike, the honda CRB600. The last pic is "naked", ie without the plastic fairings and "birdcage" that holds the instrument cluster and windscreen. Look at how tightly integrated everything is. You don't normally get engineering like that in a vehicle selling for only 12k. Chances are you can pick up a slightly used one for 6k.

[http://www.redline.co.za/Honda%20CBR600RR.htm](http://www.redline.co.za/Honda%20CBR600RR.htm)

<comment><USER7> cool, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Less than 20% of the page is visible on kindle fire. Then a full screen advert pops up with nothing in it. Not even aclose button. I despair. Anyone got a better link?

Edit: [http://www.lightrider.apworks.de/](http://www.lightrider.apworks.de/)

</comment><comment><USER9> This is interesting there is a definite niche market for small, lightweight electric commuter motorcycles. I think this motorcycle (It's not bicycle), is a good demonstration piece and a cute collectors item. But there design flaws that put this out being a production machine in it's current configuration. The components (wheels, brakes, etc) seem to be undersized for the task at hand. But considering the whole bike weights roughly 70lbs I believe it will work over all over the short term. Braking from 40mph on those brakes and forks would be interesting. Also foot pegs integrated into the frame may look good but in a low slide crash could prove catastrophic.

<comment><USER10> > Also foot pegs integrated into the frame may look good but in a low slide > crash could prove catastrophic.

They also appear to have a taper to them, leading to a somewhat thin edge. My dad still has the scar from when he put a footpeg into his foot on a motorcycle when he was younger. That was from a fixed but fairly blunt footpeg. No idea the kind of damage this thing would do.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> 6kg for an ebike frame is not lightweight at all. Downhill mountain bike frame with traditional aluminium tubing weigh less and have to handle much greater forces.

<comment><USER12> This is not an ebike, it is an electric motorcycle. They are similar, but definitely separate classes. 13 lbs is crazy light for a motorcycle frame.

<comment><USER4> The thing is this really isn't a motorcycle at all.

The tires are Bicycle tires (cruiser tires for one) not rated at all for the kinds of speeds they are advertising.

The front suspension while rated for MTB downhill use (which puts up with some heavy stress loads) would need to be tested for those speeds as well.

The fact that they are taking speculative pre-orders for a $56,000 product and don't even give out a parts spec on their website is very fishy.

<comment><USER13> Even though it is constructed from bicycle parts, this would be considered a motorcycle by legal standards in the US. Ebikes in the US generally are not allowed to exceed 20mph, but the motor in this can go well above that limit. I believe the limit is actually lower in the EU[1]. They may have to market this as a motorcycle on this fact alone.

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bicycle_laws#European...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bicycle_laws#European_Union_definition)

<comment><USER14> >Even though it is constructed from bicycle parts, this would be considered a motorcycle by legal standards in the US.

Without DOT approved tires, it's legal status is off-road vehicle.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > At some €50,000 ($56,000) each, it is not just the bike that is exotic but > also the price.

And the buyer must have an "exotic" brain

Who would pay 160% the price of a Tesla 3 for this "aerospace-motorcycle" which is actually a lousy electric bike..

<comment><USER16> This is a prototype, a first of its kind. Of course it's going to be insanely expensive in such a limited run. It's also (hopefully) going to be refined and improved in testing, and the future generations will be cheaper and more efficient.

I also get the feeling they are limiting the top speed not due to technical limitations, but for safety reasons since it's an unproven frame. Once they work out the weak spots, they will likely increase the top speed and range, and simultaneously bring the price down to a realistic level (assuming consumer interest).

<comment><USER17> 3D printing is not currently a technology that gets significantly cheaper with mass production. The assembly process would get cheaper with volume, but I suspect a lot of the cost is in that huge metallic frame component they printed.

The usual trick is to 3D print large components folded up and unfold them afterwards - I don't think that would be very feasible for a bike frame that needs to be stiff, but you never know.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> While an interesting concept -

"The motorcycle is driven by a 6kW electric motor and battery. It reaches a top speed of 80kph and hits 45kph in three seconds."

Considering they're pushing this as the strongest possible, lightest possible frame - you'd think they'd focus on more impressive statistics.

</comment><comment><USER19> > This complex and hollow structure could not have been made with anything > other than a 3D printer

Eh? What about die casting? That's how we usually make complex shapes out of metal like an engine block.

</comment><comment><USER20> Some materials scientist must have already done their thesis on this problem: optimally span two spatially separate beams with a homogeneous material transmitting some impedance designated force between them and subjected to increasing mass reduction. Given a ceramic material (strong in compression) we'll assume we end up with some sort of bone matrix [1]; a bit like we see here for this 3d printed frame. But given metals what do we observe?

[1] [http://goo.gl/SdtMoc](http://goo.gl/SdtMoc)

</comment><comment><USER21> Does anyone with an aerodynamics background know more about the holes in the frame?

How do you think about whether this frame on the bike is better for aerodynamics than a more continuous but wider surface?

<comment><USER22> Wouldn't the big human on top of it be the worst part of its aerodynamics?

<comment><USER23> That's a given in either case, though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> There are more photos and details on their website

[http://www.lightrider.apworks.de/](http://www.lightrider.apworks.de/)

</comment><comment><USER24> So much for 3D printing being the harbinger of inexpensive, home-made objects >.<

But in any case I'm more curious about the design approach, which others are suggesting involves optimisation. Could be, I'm not sure, (could design such a thing in solidworks by hand) but I'd love to read about it. For instance I'd love to know if it takes into account wind resistance, and if so, do they use fluid mechanics simulation to test it? Is it compared with real-life wind tunnel results? The combination of 3D printing and simulation/optimisation is a really interesting avenue for future design and construction.

<comment><USER25> If you're interested in this kind of thing you might want to take a look at Autodesk Dreamcatcher.

I'm not sure which software APWorks used. They're worked with Autodesk in the past, but I wasn't able to find any information about this case. In any case, it is almost certainly topology optimization.

Disclaimer: I work at Autodesk

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Looks like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topology_optimization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topology_optimization)

</comment><comment><USER27> This looks like the kind of structure generated by an algorithmic solver when given a motorcycle chassis as input, mount point definitions for mountain bike pieces, and material data for their custom "Scalmalloy" material.

Kind of a weird hodge-podge, but nifty looking. :)

Anyone know which software they used for the material optimisation? solidThinking Inspire?

</comment><comment><USER28> So the 3D printing spits out a big chunk of finished product that "could not" be made by assembling parts more conventionally.

What happens when a piece breaks? Just throw the whole thing out?

<comment><USER29> Recycle and reprint it again.

<comment><USER30> Neither the consumer nor a repair shop will have the 3D printer to do that, and it would be almost as expensive as buying a new bike anyway (after the labor).

Worse, economy of scale means that you could just buy a new frame from the manufacturer for less than making one yourself.

So in practice this option boils down to "throw the bike and/or frame out (scrapyard) and buy a new one."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Someone really should make a Giger alien mod of that, paint it back with clear resin wet look gloss on top and a xenomorph head over the headlight. It would look amazing.

</comment><comment><USER32> Too bad the price is so high I always wanted to get a electric motorcycle and this seems like an interesting one to get.

</comment><comment><USER33> How do I read this site with uBlock? Graylisting all requests/scripts only gave me a header and a footer.

<comment><USER34> I am assuming you are using uBO in "medium mode"[1]? If so, simply locally noop-ing `static-economist.com` will allow the page to render fine.

[1] [https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking- mode:-medium...](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode:-medium- mode)

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Interesting. Does anyone know a more affordable electric motorcycle?

<comment><USER36> Zero is actually a bit more reasonable(~$10k): [http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/](http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/)</comment></comment>


Revising MailChimp's logo - <AUTHOR> http://jessicahische.is/monkeyingaround <comment><USER2> This is one of those things that I read through and go "yep. yep. yep. and yep." But I would have _never_ seen those things if not for a before and after or having a trained designer point them out to me.

There's a big difference between understanding something and being able to generate it ex nihilo. Years ago, I would look at code samples and think "ah! how clever! why couldn't I think of that?" Now, having had much more practice I can come up with all those once-clever solutions on my own. It's fun to move from looking at other's people work and thinking you could never do it, to realizing they've done it a good way, but you might do it a bit differently.

Now I just look at my code and say, quit being so damn "clever", but that's a different topic.

<comment><USER3> You know what's funny? I had the same feeling when I was working with Jason Long who designed the git-scm.com logo [1]. I asked if he could help me design a logo for [http://gitignore.io](http://gitignore.io) and he came up with an awesome design [2]. It took elements from the original git-scm.com and used them in a creative way to emulate a dot file. I showed it to my friend and he was like "That's so easy to do" and my response was "yeah, but you would have never come up with it 100 designs." My friend didn't refute that.

[1] - [http://email@example.com](http://git- firstname.lastname@example.com)

[2] - [https://raw.github.com/joeblau/gitignore.io/master/public/gi...](https://raw.github.com/joeblau/gitignore.io/master/public/gi/img/gitignore- logo-dark.png)

<comment><USER4> I started watching the Github repo [1], I love your website!

1: [https://github.com/joeblau/gitignore.io](https://github.com/joeblau/gitignore.io)

<comment><USER3> Thanks :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I will probably get downvoted into oblivion for this... So let me preface by saying that I really like the new design.

At what point do you as a startup justify spending a huge amount of money on a "designer" to tweak a font? Does it look nice? Absolutely.

Would I, as a business owner, pay a lot of money to change one cursive font to a slightly different cursive font? I'm not so sure.

Sub question: What does a design tweak like this cost? From what I've seen, sought after designers can go for some serious $$$.

<comment><USER6> A fair question. It's essentially the design equivalent of optimizing your db code: Will your business suffer because you get 8% fewer writes per second than you could with some refactoring? Probably not. But it all adds up to the responsiveness of your web application, and likewise, the easy-to-miss typographic nuances add up to the overall impression of quality of the product.

By the way, to be designer-pedantic... There are actually no fonts involved at all here, as far as I can tell – the original logo appears to have been an original calligraphic piece, and the new one is an iteration on that, further refining its calligraphic form.

<comment><USER7> So long as we're being pedantic, the original logo used Wendy Std Bold with a slightly modified "C": [http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/adobe/wendy- lp/](http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/adobe/wendy-lp/)

<comment><USER6> Wow, I stand corrected. The original logo also has subtle adjustments to one or both of the lower-case 'i' characters to make them each different, which was what threw me off.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Here's a question:

I noticed that in the last step, she separated the words Mail and Chimp with a space. Given that this article is kind of about subtleties making a difference, does that introduce confusion as to whether the company is Mail Chimp or MailChimp? When I look at the text portions of the page, I see it referred to both ways (ex: in the page title and left sidebar). On the MailChimp site itself, it's without the space. So, I assume that's correct.

So, could the logo confuse the branding? Or is it unimportant?

<comment><USER9> It's not a space. The l and the C are at the same distance as before. She just remove the ligature. I looks more natural I think. Writing with a pen on paper, I wouldn't write the l and the C with a single line. There's a natural cut here.

<comment><USER8> Ah, you're right. It's not a space. That brings up and interesting point. Because, in cursive, the removed ligature means there's a word break. So, that and the upcased "Chimp" seem to suggest that it's two words. OTOH, I think it is an easier read and more natural, as you suggest. I guess there's a little "tension" between the design and the naming elements of the brand? Maybe one that was introduced by the original cursive choice?

I am usually not a pedant, but it raised the question since the article is about nuanced choices in branding.

I also may be sensitive to it because I founded a company with such a compound name, that is also meant to be written without a space and with the first letters upcased. We don't use cursive in our logo, but people frequently write our name without the space as well. And I've always wondered what, if any, impact it has on our branding, SEO, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "[http://jessicahische.is/monkeyingaround"](http://jessicahische.is/monkeyingaround") has got to be the best URL I've seen in a long time.

<comment><USER11> There are plenty of gems in her work. Here goes the last hour of work...

[http://jessicahische.is/rememberingherlisafranktrapperkeeper](http://jessicahische.is/rememberingherlisafranktrapperkeeper)

[http://jessicahische.is/anaaaaarrrrrrrrtist](http://jessicahische.is/anaaaaarrrrrrrrtist)

[http://jessicahische.is/illustratingpenguinsinbathingsuits](http://jessicahische.is/illustratingpenguinsinbathingsuits)

[http://jessicahische.is/eatingcornflakesforbreakfast](http://jessicahische.is/eatingcornflakesforbreakfast)

<comment><USER12> [http://jessicahische.is/workingwithwesandersonomg](http://jessicahische.is/workingwithwesandersonomg)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Why not link directly to her site?

[http://jessicahische.is/monkeyingaround](http://jessicahische.is/monkeyingaround)

The blog you linked to (and you seem to link to it a lot) simply excerpted some of the text from her site, and then included some of the images (but not all) from her blog.

At least that post's author had the decency to re-host the images and put a source link at the bottom.

<comment><USER14> It looks like the OP took your advice & did so, editing the post to link to the url you posted in your comment, at least when I visited it.

<comment><USER15> You can't edit the URL on HN submissions. A mod must have changed it.

<comment><USER13> Thanks, Mods.

Thmods

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> MailChinys

<comment><USER17> I saw exactly the same thing. The older logo was definitely clearer in that area.

<comment><USER18> looks like mailchimjs to me...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Am I the only one that feels the logo now reads as: Mailchimys?

<comment><USER20> I agree. The 'm' is nicer, but the 'p' is not as nice.

<comment> k-mcgrady I don't think it's a problem with the 'p'. The join between the 'm' and 'p' is too large. Closing the gap between those two letters would make the join look much less like a 'y'.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Instagram had a similar redesign recently.

[http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/hand_bea...](http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/hand_beats_filter_in_new_instagram_wordmark.php)

I recommend subscribing to the Brand New blog if you're interested in logo redesigns. (They got the news about MailChimp weeks ago.)

</comment><comment><USER21> Well done. It's amazing how micro improvements to a logo can make it stand out more, be more memorable, and more readable by getting rid of imperfections and distractions like misalignments. Oddly enough the same can be said for plastic surgery, less is often more. As others pointed out, the only little issue is that for some the logo now reads "Mail Chinys" or "Mail Chimys". A slight alteration to the curvature of the "p" can fix this. Basically by making it rounder and less like a cursive "s".

</comment><comment><USER22> Looks fantastic, and I really like the presentation of how it was improved.

<comment><USER23> For the most part it's excellent, and I love Hische's work, but the lowercase 'm' is not as distinct as before. It looks like it says "MailChirry".

<comment><USER22> For people who dig cursive writing that last part isn't great. But many only claim to like cursive writing. They don't actually use it or read it often.

I think phony cursive works well for this project, and goes well for the MailChimp esthetic overall.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'm embarrassed to admit that both logos look same to me and that the changes this designer made are really trivial.

<comment><USER25> It's nothing to be embarrassed about!

Appreciating and understanding the changes to the full extent would require a solid education in visual communication and typography. Just as you might look at my disgustingly hacked together jQuery scripts, a visual designer might look upon your typography with contempt.

That being said, Hische's changes concentrate on a more nuanced intuitive flow of the letterforms that to the lay person, results in a more balance at-a- glance look. It's hard, because it's very subjective, but Hische's redesign is the equivalent to using a spirit level when laying blocks. Hardly noticeable to the man-on-the-street under the microscope, but when delivered in context, consistently and as part of a whole, lends a stronger and more concrete presentation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Honestly, the old logo looks better. Not everything needs a symmetrical aligned look..some things look better..organic.

</comment><comment><USER27> I cant help but say that the P, is almost read as a Y, I think the opening of the Y tail, helps suggest that this is a cursive y. The spacing is widened, and places the p further out. Maybe pulling the lower gap between m and p in, reducing the spacing, and keeping the open loop.

</comment><comment><USER28> Noticed that not only the ligature between 'l' and 'C' is removed, the designer's also, on a few occasions, type the client's name with a space between the 'l' and 'C'.

</comment><comment><USER29> Great post, awesome to see how much of a craft(wo)manship design actually is. :)

</comment><comment><USER30> The changes are subtle but nice. Does anyone know how much mailchimp would have paid for a redesign like that? I just want to get a better understanding of how the design industry would work in that respect.

</comment><comment><USER25> So good to see some design related news on here. Especially when it comes from one of the nicest and best in our industry. Her presentation to the lay person is not only informative but engaging as well.

</comment><comment><USER31> Putting the new and old logo on different color backgrounds makes it much harder to notice the difference in the two designs.

</comment><comment><USER32> Mailchimy?!

Well atleast it wasn't about flattening anything.

</comment><comment><USER33> Hacker news?</comment>


The New Wizard of the West - An interview with Tesla (from May 1899) - <AUTHOR> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/forgottenfutures/tesla/tesla.htm

<comment><USER2> Genius and leadership expresses itself in many ways.

I imagine a young 20 yr old Albert Einstein reading this article and asking himself "what else can this electromagnetics do?"

</comment><comment><USER3> "The Miracle Factory"

Great name for a movie honoring Tesla.

Well, "Tesla" has more punch, I guess.</comment>


MacBook gets a Skylake speed boost, 8GB of memory, longer battery life - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2016/04/19/skylake-when-it-crumbles-we-will-stand-tall-face-it-all-together-at-skylake/ <comment><USER2> I found this statement interesting.

>The new guts are getting you better performance but also better battery life with what Apple says is 10 hours of web browsing or 11 hours of iTunes movie playback.

Movie playback used to be considered the de facto test of the most rigorous power use a computer would go through. Spinning DVDs and hard drives have been replaced with SSD, hardware accelerated decoding of video has replaced maxing out your CPU.

On the other hand, web browsing used to be considered a light use of power. Pull some network content into memory, parse some basic html, etc. Now with javascript EVERYWHERE and the rising complexity of web pages, web browsing has become one of the most taxing things you can do as far as power use is concerned. In fact, on my MacBook Pro now that OS X tells you which processes are using the most power, web browsers like Safari and Chrome are the only thing I ever see show up in "Apps using significant energy"

<comment><USER3> Indeed, I use Safari because it seems neither Firefox nor Chrome are optimized at all for battery usage. Chrome is a huge power hog.

I wonder if it's the same on the Windows side; has Microsoft optimized IE (or the new browser, whatever it's called) for power usage?

<comment><USER4> That's why I use Safari as well. The difference in power usage is enormous between Safari and Firefox.

I have Windows on Bootcamp but I don't know if Microsoft breaks down power usage like Apple does. I could compare Firefox to Edge, otherwise.

<comment><USER5> It's almost purely a function of CPU usage especially if you have an SSD.

I don't think the mac power usage thing takes into account GPU usage but for that you'd probably want to download something third party to check the watt usage itself.

<comment><USER6> In the early days of SSDs, power draw of an SSD was usually around the same as for a spinning platter. Has this changed?

<comment><USER7> According to OCZ's marketing material ([http://ocz.com/consumer/ssd-guide/ssd- vs-hdd](http://ocz.com/consumer/ssd-guide/ssd-vs-hdd)), SSDs use 2-4 watts vs 7 watts for HDDs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It is starting to look like the MacBook Air may not get processor/PCIe Flash refresh, and if that's the case, I'm going to be very upset - that laptop is perfect in almost every conceivable way for me. I am very much not interested in the MacBook, despite wanting to like it. The weird keyboard, smaller screen, Mobile/slower Processor, 2 hours less battery life, Just a single port; other than being lighter, zero value _and_ they are charging an extra $300 for it. Note - The Retina screen, despite a lot of A/B testing by me, is not anything I really care about.

I get, and respect, the desire to move everything to USB-C, and I'm willing to take the hit with dongles to help move things forward - but couldn't we do that on the MacBook Air?

I know, everyone will say, "MacBook Pro" \- but, once again, I don't care about the Retina, and the MacBook air is a _monster_ of a system, awesome processing power - I'm running 31 Apps right now on my MBair, including two Virtual Machines (one of them Windows), full office suite, Aperture - and it's not even spinning up the fans.

The MacBook released today is a less useful system for me in almost every way than the MacBook Air released three years ago.

<comment><USER9> > they are charging an extra $300 for it.

The MacBook comes with a base configuration of 256GB SSD and 8GiB of RAM. The MacBook Air comes with a 128GB SSD and 4GiB of RAM (Edit: _came with_. Apparently this year they finally upped them to 8GiB RAM, so the price difference may have widened.). For the MacBook Air 13" and MacBook Pro 13" upgraded to 256GB SSD and 8GiB of RAM, the price is closer IIRC.

(I'd check, but Apple's website is amusingly broken right now.)

<comment><USER9> The website works again now, so I can finally look up the current prices:

MacBook with 8GiB RAM, 256GB SSD: $1,299 (base model)

MacBook Air 13" with 8GiB RAM, 256GB SSD: $1,199 (upgrade from 8GiB RAM, 128GB SSD $999 model)

MacBook Pro 13" with 8GiB RAM, 256GB SSD: $1,499 (upgrade from 8GiB RAM, 128GB SSD $1,299 model)

So the MacBook is somewhere between MacBook Air and MacBook Pro pricing, $100 pricier than a comparable Air in terms of RAM and SSD, $200 cheaper than the Pro. Interesting.

In their default configurations, the MacBook has an m3, the Air a low- clockrate i5, the Pro a high-clockrate i5. On the other hand, the Air does not have Retina, while the Pro and MacBook do.

<comment><USER8> Thanks - I've been doing the same thing. Here was my ask back in 2012 when I was waiting for a new laptop from Apple (this is my "Now I will Upgrade" point): 500+ Gigabyte SSD, 16 Gigabyte Memory, 7 Hour Battery, 2880x1800 13" Air w/802.11ac (500 megabit WiFi) - $1200

Back then, I thought that system would land in Spring/Summer 2014. Things have certainly slowed down - at least they got the Battery life in a good place.

So, here is what we are looking at with the MacBook

       2304 x 1440 pixels.  (12" IPS Retina)
       10 Hours Battery
       8 GiB Memory
       512 GB SSD
       802.11 ac
       1.3GHz dual-core Intel Core m7, Turbo Boost up to 3.1GHz
       $1749

You can save a bit of money ($150) by going with the 1.2GHz dual-core Intel Core m5, Turbo Boost up to 2.7GHz - so, base price $1599. (You could save another $300 by dropping down to a 1.1GHZ, and only 256 GB SSD @ $1299, but I drive my system pretty hard on the CPU, and it seems like the Turbo to 2.7 GHz + 512 GB SSD is worth $300)

I'm trying to figure out if I can hold out another year. I kinda want the 13" display. I use this screen for everything, and real-estate is precious, but I don't know if it's a deal killer - particularly as it supports the same scaled resolution as my MBair (1440x900) - and my close up eyesight is awesome. Might have to see what the Terminal looks like in scaled resolution. I'm not a big fan of the mobile processors on this box, but everyone says it's ok. Be interesting to see how VMware holds up with Windows/OpenBSD. 8 GiB/memory, turns out to be fine. Apple isn't increasing it because you really don't need more with OS X on a non pro system - so I'm dropping 16 GiB from my wishlist.

It looks like this may be the end of the line for the MacBook Air (other than a memory bump for the 13" up to 8 GB for the same $999 price) - Given that Retina probably isn't that big a deal, I'm almost considering the 2015 Broadwell MacBook Air just as a holder for my older Laptop. I can go light on the CPU and probably still come out ahead of the MacBook, even with the pre- skylake architecture. Take good care of it for three years (it won't be my daily driver) - and there will still be probably 50% of it's value when I finally upgrade to my "final" system (or at least something I hold onto for six or so years). $1199 MBAir gets me 1.6GHz Dual-Core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 2.7GHz, 8GiB, 256 GB PCI-e SSD, 12 Hours Battery.

I may just wait for Anandtech/GeekBench to review this gear to see how the Skylake m5 1.2 GHz compares with the Core i5 1.6 GHz before making a decision...

<comment><USER10> _> Given that Retina probably isn't that big a deal,_

It is. Trust me. Once you get used to smooth print-like text, nothing else compares.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Still only a 480p camera [1] in the year 2016?

Reminds me of this funny video from last year [2].

[1] [http://www.apple.com/macbook/specs/](http://www.apple.com/macbook/specs/)

[2] [http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KHZ8ek-6ccc](http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KHZ8ek-6ccc)

</comment><comment><USER12> 8GB RAM? When I was buying my Yoga 2 Pro with 8GB RAM I already hesitated, it is a bare minimum these days. Browsers alone can eat it all with ease. Today I wouldn't buy a new laptop without more RAM or at least upgrade options.

<comment><USER13> As someone who upgraded my own 13" MacBook Pro to 16GB RAM, I would NEVER recommend 16GB to anyone except those who can justify it.

The extra RAM has some big disadvantages:

1\. As I recall, I lost about 40 minutes run time on batteries.

2\. It decreases battery sleep time. Prior to the upgrade, I could go for 4 or 5 days in sleep, and still have useful enough battery life. Now it is more like 2 or 3 days.

3\. It dramatically increases time to sleep and wake from sleep.

4\. It eats valuable SSD space. You need 16GB to sleep. And you swap files will be bigger. You likely need a bigger SSD to support the RAM

5\. RAM does cost money up front.

If you do need 16GB, you know it and should be ready for these trade offs. As someone who regularly runs 2 or 3 browsers, Mac and Linux development tools, MS Office, Adobe, Linux and Windows VMs, etc, I am in the class of people who need the extra RAM. Most people do not.

<comment><USER14> > _3\. It dramatically increases time to sleep and wake from sleep._

Well, I'll have to call BS on that. It maybe increase it, but hardly "dramatically". In fact time to sleep/wake is fast enough to barely care about it.

And I have 16GB RAM and the older, 2013 era, SSDs. Newer MBP SSDs are 2x-3x the speed of mine.

Plus, since then Apple added memory compression...

<comment><USER15> Meh, even with a mbp with 16gb of memory, I still want more. I'd like 64 or even 32. I tend to be running enough linux vm's for dev with things like kernel stuff that the more the merrier.

That and I'm a bit heavy on the tab (ab)use.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Apple is annoying the crap out of me with their Macbook line.

I bought a 13" Macbook Air in 2011 that I still use. It was and is an amazing laptop. It's really in a sweet spot for size and power.

For _years_ buyers including me have wanted a retina display and (ideally) the option for 16GB of RAM.

The Macbook is just too much of a compromise. Crappy keyboard. Only one port that's also used for power. Really low power CPU.

Why can't I just get the Macbook's display on a Macbook Air?

<comment><USER17> I feel for you. I'm typing on my 13" Macbook Air from 2011. Apple wants to banish 5-year-old PCs, so I'm all in to banish my trusted Air. But what's my next option? Pro is too hefty for me and '' is underwhelming, while Air is left behind.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> This really is a neat machine for consumers. I would never buy one, but I'm always really impressed at the size / build quality whenever I see one. The price tag is definitely up there for what it is hardware wise, but I think it's one of a kind build makes it justified. Just not my cup of tea :)

<comment><USER19> We said the same of the MacBook Air when it first came out of its gimmicky manila envelope on stage. Or, for that matter, when the iMac came out with no floppy drive, and only USB ports!

<comment><USER8> But, none of us _did_ buy that MacBook Air - it was too expensive at the time. It was later generations that hit the sweet spot.

<comment><USER20> I knew a couple non technical people who bought and loved the first gen Air. The appeal broadened with later revisions, for sure.

I also know a bunch of developers who bought and love the MacBook. Not sure how they're making do with that single port but apparently it works for some.

<comment><USER8> Hold on - are you sure we're talking about the _first_ gen Air - that device was more like a concept prototype than anything people actually bought/used. It came with a slow spinning disk by default, and the SSD was hellishly expensive. It was also pretty slow, particularly if you didn't upgrade to SSD. I know some people who did purchase latter generations once the SSDs were within reach.

<comment><USER21> I did buy and use it. I know other people who bought and used it. Of course the subsequent iterations were better, but the first gen was not unusable.

<comment><USER22> I used it too. Skype and Youtube was unusable unless it was cold that day.

<comment><USER21> Overheating was indeed an issue, but I think it didn't affect all the units to the same extent. It was a problem for me, and increasingly so if I remember correctly with later macosx releases, but another machine bought at the same time worked much better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> PSA: If you intend to use it for Linux - don't buy it yet. I have the old generation. There is problem with recognition of the SPI keyboard and trackpad. There are lots of kernel org bugs open for the 8,1 and no solutions as of yesterday.

<comment><USER24> If you're looking for a similar size and spec laptop for Linux, I've thoroughly been enjoying Ubuntu on the Dell XPS 13 developer edition. It comes with core i5/i7 so it's snappier but also has a fan. And you can charge via USB-C or the included power adapter. [http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/xps-13-9350-laptop- ubuntu/...](http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/xps-13-9350-laptop-ubuntu/pd)

<comment><USER25> How's the power management on it? That's always been the weak spot for me with Linux on a laptop.

<comment><USER26> According to mjg59, not good [1] [2]. I've found the power management pretty bad on Windows myself but then again my 9350 is scheduled for repairs tomorrow (backlight issues and screen "disconnecting")

[1]: [https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/41713.html](https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/41713.html)

[2]: [https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/42156.html](https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/42156.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> What's up with that URL? skylake-when-it-crumbles-we-will-stand-tall-face-it- all-together-at-skylake

<comment><USER28> It is a cheeky reference to the theme song to the movie Skyfall by Adele.

[1]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyfall_%28song%29](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyfall_%28song%29)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> This is shaping up to be a nice machine. Now if only the keyboard travel weren't so shallow...

<comment><USER30> They're hard to find, but I've finally tracked down a place in Australia (mechkb.com) that will internationally ship me one of these convertible Cherry MX key babies, that supports both Mac and Windows, both bluetooth (pairing with four devices) and USB (for low latency gaming and charging):

Filco Majestouch Convertible 2 review: the quest for a Mac-compatible, wireless, mechanical keyboard: [http://johnscullen.com/filco- review/](http://johnscullen.com/filco-review/)

<comment><USER31> [http://www.keyboardco.com/](http://www.keyboardco.com/) sells the Filco Convertible 2 [0] and a few other Filco keyboards - they also ship internationally. Bought from them before, would definitely do it again.

[0] - [http://www.keyboardco.com/keyboard/filco- convertible-2-usa-a...](http://www.keyboardco.com/keyboard/filco- convertible-2-usa-ascii-keyboards.asp)

<comment><USER30> That's a great store, but they were out of stock, and nobody selling them on Amazon would ship to the Netherlands. Maybe they're easier to find in Japan, where they're made. I made sure to lock in my order from Australia where they had one in stock, before blabbing about it on Hacker News. ;)

It seems so sensible, I don't understand why there aren't more convertible keyboards like that! Together with a convertible bluetooth mouse like the Razer Orochi that also supports multiple bluetooth pairings, it's the best of both worlds for low latency USB gaming, charging, and wireless switching like a KVM between Macs, PCs, tablets, phones, GearVR, etc.

I wish there were more convertible devices like that to choose from. The KBTalKing Pro looked wonderful, but never made it to regular production ("factory issues"). [http://kbtalkingusa.com/](http://kbtalkingusa.com/) [http://www.keyboardlover.com/kbtalking_review.php](http://www.keyboardlover.com/kbtalking_review.php)

Be careful shopping for convertible devices that actually use Bluetooth and not some proprietary dongle, and that actually use USB for fast low latency data instead of just charging!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm wondering if, at some point, they'll ditch the headphone jack for a second USB-C port. But that would require having USB-C headphones, which Apple might not be willing to make.

<comment><USER32> Actually it would just mean only supporting wireless bluetooth headphones from now on...

<comment><USER9> Are Bluetooth headphones practical, though? Does Apple even make any of their own?

<comment><USER33> Although I use Bluetooth headphones on a phone or tablet, I would be disappointed if I was required to use them on a laptop I'm using all day long.

Normal usage time is about 4 hours on the cheaper units I use, and that's just playback without any microphone use. Maybe longer on more expensive units, while they are new, but I doubt many would get you through a whole work day of continuous activity.

Also, pairing is still fiddly and would probably put off a lot of casual users. (Especially when you have a N-to-N mapping between devices and headphones.)

USB-C could still work if there are enough ports. While it's been great having a common standard for headphones across devices (partly thanks to the original iPhone not requiring a custom dongle), it does start to feel a bit of an anomaly in an era where everything is converging on the new USB standard(s).

<comment><USER34> You definitely pay for what you get in the battery department. I personally have a pair from Sony claimed to get 20 hours of battery life on a charge. I've never fully tested the claim, but they are more than enough to make it through a couple workdays without charging.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> We have a few executives that would love one of these systems. But you cannot connect them to any of Apple's displays. Which is sort of insane to me.

</comment><comment><USER36> I wonder how this performs under XCode.

Currently I lug around a 15" MPBr and I would like something lighter to do development on the train but I wonder about performance.

Has anyone tried to do C++ builds on XCode using one of these machines?

<comment><USER37> Yeah, pretty horribly. XCode compile times are about 200 - 300% of those on a rMBP 15" for the same project. Those machines are very very very very slow.

<comment><USER38> Is this with the standard CPU or with that 1.3 GHz max option?

<comment><USER37> IIRC it was topped out rMBP 15 (mid-2014) vs. topped out MacBook.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> It seems even with Skylake it still can't power a 4k monitor at 60Hz, oh well, next year maybe :)

</comment><comment><USER40> I wish Apple would transition all computers to USB C to allow for easier charging. Being able to buy an Anker battery for cents on the dollar vs the three batteries on the market that support magsafe would be a godsend. I love magnets, saved my ass quite a few times, but I want to be able to charge my laptop on the go cheaply.

<comment><USER41> Considering the number of faulty/dangerous USB-C cables and chargers out there I don't expect to see Apple to do this.

<comment><USER42> It's not like the magsafe story is all great ([http://www.righto.com/2016/03/counterfeit-macbook-charger- te...](http://www.righto.com/2016/03/counterfeit-macbook-charger- teardown.html)). They'd just sell their own branded cables.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Now, if they only could bump the MBP to skylake as well...

<comment><USER44> The chance that it would come with WWDC would actually be a pretty good sign towards significant evolution rather than just internals update: the 13" MBP was added to the lineout at WWDC 2009 (Apple's first sub-15" "pro" laptop since the 12" G4), the rMBP range was unveiled at WWDC 2012 and the new Mac Pro at WWDC 2013.

<comment><USER45> That makes me worried. RMBP 13" is pretty much perfect (maybe the resolution could be higher), so they can only fuck it up.

<comment><USER46> Probably they will make it "thinner and lighter", cutting one or two hours of battery life and few hundred megahertz processor speed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> I am waiting for the Macbook Pro. Yes. I believe it will kick ass upgrade compared with 2015 models.

</comment><comment><USER48> This is the perfect home computer for me. I wouldn't do much work on it – I don't think it supports 2 4K monitors – but it would be great for casual use while not at the office where I don't need a lot of power.

</comment><comment><USER49> I am really looking forward for an VR headset as a replacement to a laptop for on the go working.

Something like a GalaxyVR with an VR first DesktopEnvironment. That will have a huge 3d floating code editor.

This and a lightweight/wireless keyboard. Could be perfect, and mean less slouching.

Unfortunately smartphones aren't probably high resolution enough, yet.

</comment><comment><USER50> I'm torn. I don't know if I want a MB or a 12.9" iPad Pro. Most of my "fun" development is done in a cheap GCE instance on the command-line.

</comment><comment><USER51> Not that I number myself among them, but I'm sure the hackintosh people will be happy if this refresh adds support for things found in skylake NUCs like bluetooth and networking.

</comment><comment><USER52> I'd be interested in seeing a CPU benchmark between the new MacBook (Skylake) and existing MacBook Pro's (Core i5).

</comment><comment><USER53> If only they offered Blue Gold...

</comment><comment><USER54> Shame they didn't drop the 3.5mm jack on the right for a second USB-C port. That is the only flaw for me.

</comment><comment><USER55> Why don't they just drop in the new gen (6) intel cpus? Or did they?

<comment><USER56> It's in the title: "Skylake" is the codename for Intel's latest desktop CPU microarchitecture.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> Rose gold, finally. This will do wonders to my code

<comment><USER58> I also don't get it. Why don't more tech people run companies? Are we too busy amusing ourselves by making fun of things we don't understand?

[http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/03/28/iphone-se- preorder...](http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/03/28/iphone-se-preorders- top-34m-in-china-gold-rose-gold-most-popular---report)

<comment><USER9> What makes you think a "tech person" would be less likely to offer products in a range of colours? "Tech people" also have æsthetic sensibilities, surely?

<comment><USER58> The point is that it's a popular color in a very important market. Someone looked at a market then chose the color. The comment to which I was replying was just one of many comments you'll see from tech types. Don't we want to have a better understanding of why decisions are made?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> I see Apple completely ignored customers' demands to add another port. Hardly surprising but rather disappointing.

<comment><USER60> I don't understand why you're disappointed at all. Apple has never caved to "customer demand" for things like this.

I own a 12" Macbook as a secondary machine and frequently bring it with me to travel. I have never felt the need for a second USB-C connector.

What would a second USB-C connector do for you?

<comment><USER59> External monitor + power at once. I highly doubt that battery's going to drive a 4k for 8+ hours. Actually, I doubt it can drive a 4k @ 60hz at all but mostly because Apple has not released the full specs even though it's been over a year since the Macbook has been released. Even @ 30hz though or 1440p @ 60hz, this can often be taxing on an MBPro let alone the regular Macbook. There might be an adapter that provides both power and Displayport 1.2 or greater, but after months of research I stopped looking. I can barely find regular USB C cables and accessories that people have had good luck with as it is.

<comment><USER61> Pretty sure this would be included in the box [http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJ1K2AM/A/usb-c-digital- av...](http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJ1K2AM/A/usb-c-digital-av-multiport- adapter?fnode=8b&fs=f%3Dusbtypec%26fh%3D4595%252B44c3)

<comment><USER62> You have to buy it separately. But it does let you use a monitor, charge and use a USB device at the same time. It does everything I need.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> _" You can also get Apple's Rose Gold finish on a Mac for the first time ever, if that's your sort of thing."_

Bro.

They left off the 'bro' at the end.

Pussies.</comment>


How many people died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? - <AUTHOR> http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2020/08/04/how-many-people-died-at-hiroshima-and-nagasaki/ <comment><USER2> How many died (easier to count) is only part of the picture when it comes to disasters. How many badly injured? How many unaccountably died young?

In the ensuing cold war, what was the cost to the world economy and in human misery?

The answer is that war and oligarchy depends on such uncertainties.

"Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." — George Orwell</comment>


Bootstrap 2.1 released - <AUTHOR> http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2012/08/20/bootstrap-2-1-0-released/ <comment><USER3> Thanks as always for working on bootstrap, its an invaluable tool.

Couple thoughts:

Maybe its just me but I think the docs site a huge step backwards in usability. The dark blue <-> red graphics offset by the blue of their primary buttons is a little...gross. I am also not at all a fan of the left hand navigation panel, I get that they are trying to show off the affix component but I'd rather have the content be full width as its all I am really there for. I found the sliding top sub navbar far less obtrusive and easier to navigate. Also: so white is the default for the navbar but the demo site is still using black?

<comment><USER4> I <3 Bootstrap, but I did find the old documentation easier on the eyes and easier to navigate as well.

<comment><USER5> This is just a speculation, but I think bootstrap-affix.js is their new baby. If there is one thing that the new navigation does well, it's promoting the affix js feature (scrollspy stuff).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Unfortunately, it seems like submenu implementation has the classic mistake: it requires mouse cursor to travel strictly along the menu item to get to the submenu.

Pictures: <http://imgur.com/a/pSDOo>

<comment><USER7> Yep, the trick here is to keep the menu open even after the mouse has left the parent menu area. It's so simple yet probably quite difficult to code.

<comment><USER6> Yes. Not only that, it should keep the submenu open when traveling inside this triangle (but close on timeout if mouse stays still inside it):

          +</comment></comment></comment><comment>--+
          | parent |
          |        +</comment><comment>--+
          |       /|submenu |
          |      / |        |
          |=====/==|        |
          |=====\==|        |
          |      \ |        |
          +</comment><comment> \|        |
                   +</comment><comment>--+

and close immediately when not inside the triangle.

Also, if in the parent there's another menu item with submenu somewhere on the path of mouse inside this triangle, ignore this item.

For best results, if mouse was inside the submenu for a moment, keep the submenu open until clicking away from it or moving over a different item in the parent menu. So many details!

<comment><USER8> Upvoted for the ASCII art alone. That seems to be a lost art, particularly here on HN. Long live the ASCII art diagram!

<comment><USER9> Yeah! Was it done in Emacs artist-mode by any chance?

<comment><USER6> Haha, no, Vim in replace mode. But yeah, artist-mode is awesome.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I love bootstrap. Yeah, i hate the fact that all the mvp's out there basically look & feel the same by using it as the go-to css framework, but at the same time it's helping people iterate a lot faster and that's rarely a bad thing.

In addition, given how Twitter's bootstrap's look & feel is starting to influence web design at large, I wonder if there is a case for other large web-players to make their own css framework to impact the look and feel of sites to their favor. Think of it as disguised propaganda.

<comment><USER11> I agree with one exception: fixed headers are an eyesore and a usability anti- pattern in most cases. Even regular users know how to scroll to the top.

<comment><USER12> Nearly all desktop applications use a fixed header, it has fine usability there. For a web app, as opposed to a primarily informational site, I think there are definite cases where a fixed header is preferred. Gmail for example, it makes sense to have control butons for your message always visible.

tl;dr on your average blog I agree, but in a web app I don't.

<comment><USER13> Since lukifer wrote "in most cases" you're only disagreeing if you think there are more web apps out there than blogs or informational sites. He didn't say a fixed element is _never_ desirable. I think you're agreeing.

<comment><USER12> Apps are a _lot_ of cases and most of the cases for Bootstrap.

<comment><USER11> Even with apps, it varies. My frustration is that it often seems to be used thoughtlessly, by default.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Interesting comments on the Extend page [1] on why LESS vs SASS:

 _Why LESS?

One of Bootstrap's creators wrote a quick blog post [2] about this, summarized here:

\- Bootstrap compiles faster ~6x faster with Less compared to Sass

\- Less is written in JavaScript, making it easier to us to dive in and patch compared to Ruby with Sass.

\- Less is more; we want to feel like we're writing CSS and making Bootstrap approachable to all._

[1]: <http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/extend.html>

[2]: <http://www.wordsbyf.at/2012/03/08/why-less/>

<comment><USER15> To each their own. The third point is actually why I prefer SASS. I like meaningful whitespace.

<comment><USER16> I'd prefer Stylus over both LESS and SASS. Now that Bootstrap is relatively stable, I intend to port it.

<comment><USER17> It may be easier to just help update this to 2.1-

<https://github.com/thomas-mcdonald/bootstrap-sass>

<comment><USER18> I believe they were referring to porting bootstrap to Stylus (rather than SASS)…

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Is the semicolon in "tl;dr" strictly necessary?

<comment><USER20> Yes. "Too long didn't read" is not grammatically correct.

<comment><USER21> (For those who don't know there was a standoff between the bootstrap guys and the maker of a popular js minifier tool [Douglas Crockford I think?] over the pragmatism of ending lines in js with semicolons. Bootstrap claims that semi- colons are optional and verbose, while the minifier folks espouse semi-colons as a best practice, and have chosen to consider it "not a bug" that their minifier breaks working code with no semi colons in some cases.)

<comment><USER20> tl;dr

I'm in the optional semi-colons camp, and it _is_ a bug in the minifier :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Can you actually host the old documentation this time and not leave us in the dust like you did in the 1.4 => 2.0 release?

<comment><USER23> It's still available in the source.

<comment><USER24> That is not enough. Old documentation MUST STAY ONLINE.

How can that possibly be not obvious?

<comment><USER25> I'm amazed by your sense of entitlement.

<comment><USER21> While the attitude is a little entitled, there may still be a valid point for other users as well. Couldn't se properly crafted URLs on the homepage solve this problem? Like /tags/2.0/documentation/index.html [1]. And run it right off of bootstrap?

Edit: the point being that we can point links at pages from previous commits, branches, and tags Shouldn't this help?

[1] that URL was slightly bastardized but I'm sure someone could very quickly whip this up

<comment><USER21> Boy I was half asleep when I wrote that comment, all I was saying was that since github lets you reference previous versions of files by crafting the URL properly to include a tag/branch/hash, it should be possible to link to previous versions of the documentation straight from the latest version, eliminating the need for someone to clone the repo to access them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I just tried out 2.0.4 (and Bootstrap in general) for the first time an hour ago. I'm already obsolete!

</comment><comment><USER27> Bootstrap has restored the joy I used to have in building websites. I can think more about design and what I want to stay instead of cross site compatibility, pixel dimensions, and building responsive designs. Thanks so much to the team at Twitter for putting this out there.

</comment><comment><USER28> Excellent work, Bootstrap is awesome! Thanks!

BTW, I found almost all Bootstrap-powered websites I visited uses _sticky_ top navigation, which wastes considerable amount of my precious vertical screen estate.

Another wide-screen wasting example is the new Gmail and Google Groups - <USER2> what's even worse is that they force you to use the new UI.

I find sticky top navigation is annoying and nothing else, I just don't get it, aren't many people using width screens nowadays? Or is it just me?

Maybe Bootstrap's nav should be non-sticky by default?

</comment><comment><USER29> Bootstrap has been an invaluable asset for building our MVP. I'm glad we got rid of the top bar, and very few people actually think we use bootstrap. But it affords us wonderful defaults for tables, buttons, menus, modals etc.

If the team making it reads this, thank you. I owe you many beers for what you've given us.

<comment><USER30> What is MVP in this context, ModelViewPresenter?

<comment><USER31> minimum viable product (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_viable_product>)

<comment><USER30> Thanks!!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I'm happy that the fluid offsetting made it into this version.

</comment><comment><USER33> I've been using Zurb Foundation (<http://foundation.zurb.com/>). It doesn't have as many feauture-rich components, but found the responsive grid easy to use and I really appreciate the fact that my site doesn't look like everyone else's...

</comment><comment><USER34> Sorry to be a noob, but how does one get that glowing button effect as seen on <http://rc.getbootstrap.com/index.html> ?

<comment><USER35> CSS Box Shadows: <http://css-tricks.com/snippets/css/css-box-shadow/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> _The navbar component is now white by default_.

Thank you for handing out coloring papers to the devs. Seriously, this will make the entire web 10% more unique.

</comment><comment><USER36> The docs for previous versions: <https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/tags>

</comment><comment><USER37> I really do not like this new boostrap page. There's too much back and forth (left and right) hopping going on with my eyes. It doesnt feel very natural. It's like driving and then looking at the passenger over and over. I don't like it. Keep everything above the content and keep it full width like it was, but that's just my opinion.

</comment><comment><USER38> I wonder if moving further away from the twitter.com look is intentional, for branding purposes.

</comment><comment><USER39> None of the table examples in the documentation work (striped, hover, etc) at <http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/base-css.html#tables> on Chrome 21

</comment><comment><USER40> I've already started a 2.04 site. As a web design newbie, how hard is it to update to the latest version? Just copy over the js and css? (I realise I'd need to re-write my html to use the new features).

</comment><comment><USER41> One of my main beefs with Bootstrap was that it felt cramped. The switch to 14px body text with 20px line height addresses that. Personally, I'd increase the default line height a bit more.

</comment><comment><USER42> It's fantastic! With the addition of date/timepicker it'd be complete.

</comment><comment><USER35> Q: I run "less ./less/bootstrap.less > bootstrap.css" – but the bootstrap.css just contains links to all the less-files, and not one full css-file. What command do I need to do?

<comment><USER43> the command you want is 'lessc'. 'less' is the standard Unix command for displaying text files

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> It's strange to browse a website while someone changes pages from up underneath you. I'm trying to develop here!

That aside, thanks for creating this. Bootstrap makes prototyping a pleasure.

</comment><comment><USER45> Any plans for dropping JQuery as a dependency on the controls?

</comment><comment><USER46> The customize area is really helpful and chops off time lost going through the source trying to customize it by hand. Great addition. Thanks for all the hard work.

<comment><USER16> Have you checked out the LESS code (instead of the compiled CSS)? The file variables.less has the same settings (with comments!) as the online customizer. It's much faster to tweak that file and recompile than it is to use the compiler.

<comment><USER46> Yes, thank you. I'm just a sucker for GUIs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> I'm not very colorblind, but the "warning" color used for the progress bars is far too similar to the "success" color. Please consider a brighter yellow.

</comment><comment><USER48> Awesome news. For me the most important thing about the update is that the modal popup works with the latest Opera. Also the docs feels easier to use.

</comment><comment><USER49> 2 days early! So excited. Too excited perhaps.

</comment><comment><USER50> One tip I use with icons, especially on colored backgrounds like alerts, is using a class like :

i.icon-blend { opacity:0.8; }

</comment><comment><USER51> Oh wow, I love the new doc website. This is so cool! Keep up the great work!

</comment><comment><USER52> Looks like www.bootstrapcdn.com has already updated their files.

</comment><comment><USER53> Thanks , hope to play around with it this week.

</comment><comment><USER54> @loceng I might be more excited than you

<comment><USER55> FYI: If you click "reply" on an individual comment you can respond directly to someone else's comment (as I've done here).

<comment><USER49> He was hoping this was Disqus platform perhaps..

<comment><USER56> Or he was commenting about the twitter bootstrap, in kind of a twitter reply.

<comment><USER54> im glad someone was able to figure it out...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> This is great tool</comment>


Combinator Recipes for Working With Objects in JavaScript - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2012/12/combinators_1.md#combinator-recipes-for-working-with-objects-in-javascript-part-i <comment><USER2> I had some experience using things like these inpractice. Some tips I would give out

* Make sure you make you library comprehensive. Remember that main benefit of doing something like this instead of explicit functions is conciseness and consistent patterns.

* Partial function application can be tricky. I find it is only really useful if you use it on all most of the standard combinators and you need to pay _very good_ attention to what is the order of arguments you use. I also suggest putting the arguments on the same line if you are doing partial functoins by hand like he did:

        //This way you don't confuse partial functions
        //and more general closures with inner state.
        function get(attr){ return function(object){
            return object[attr];
        };}

* There are _lots_ of way to do partial function application - do you let multiple arguments be passed at once or not? Do you allow for placeholder "hole" arguments or do the arguments have to always be passed in left-to-right order? What do you do with "this"? In the end I ended up having functions for all of the different cases but in general, I'd at least recommend not using null/undefined checks to test if arguments have been passed since that can easily mask dynamic errors. I'd rather check arguments.length explixitly or use a special placeholder object from my library if I need one.

* One of the big downsides of using partial function application and these combinators all over the place is that they make the call stack a lot more complicated. I use the JS debugger _a lot_ and this can make things much more annoying to deal with. In particular, your "real" code gets hidden inside opaque "f" variables, its harder to set useful breakpoints and sometimes its harder to look at closed over variables.

* Another problem I had was that many of my coworkers were not used to the partial application and functional patterns. In the end we ended up using these combinators less and less, and now they are too rarely used to justify the "abstraction cost".

</comment><comment><USER3> I love these kinds of articles.

I know about partial function application, and I'm already sold on the merits of higher-order functions, et al. (A one-two punch of Haskell and Clojure sold me.) Maybe that's why it's nice to see other ways of describing or encoding these concepts— it was a neat little "aha" moment when we got to pluck. Immediately it reminded me of how, in Clojure, keywords are functions.

For those of you who aren't familiar, Clojure has symbolic keys like in Ruby (e.g. :foo), called keywords. So given the 'inventories' variable in the pluck() example, you could write:

        (map #(get % :oranges) inventories)

The #(get % :oranges) syntax is an anonymous function, invoking get to retrieve :oranges from each inventory in inventories. But it turns out you don't even need to do that. You can just do this instead:

        (map :oranges inventories)

Anyway, I guess what's funny to me is that I used JS for a little while, and I liked it pretty well. It's only in retrospect that I start to see the extent to which it seeded my brain with these patterns.

<comment><AUTHOR> I left "compose" out of this excerpt, but in the book:

      var pluck = compose(splat, get);

<comment><USER3> Compose is another piece I wish more languages had. The functional style of small, orthogonal functions has changed the way I write code, but in many imperative languages, function composition as I know it just doesn't exist. And sometimes that disparity is a real bummer.

You can get close in dynamic languages, as with JS, Ruby, and Python. But if we're talking about Java or C++, it's just not happening, not without a bunch of work and not within an existing codebase where the introduction of new styles might actually be counterproductive.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> There's no need to rush out and buy the book, but if you're interested, here's a coupon code to get it for $9.99 today: "Hacker_saturday"

<http://leanpub.com/javascript-allonge>

<comment><USER4> Thanks. I've bought it, because the article was very informative.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Isn't splat() just an implementation of partial application around a specific function (map)?

<comment><AUTHOR> Very much so, thanks for pointing that out!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> In `maybe`, would it make sense to check the args passed to the wrapper against the number of args the original function expects? Something like this:

        function maybe (fn) {
          var expected_number_of_args = fn.length;
          return function () {
            var i, arg;
            for (i = 0; i < expected_number_of_args; ++i) {
              arg = arguments[i];
              if (arg === null || typeof arg === 'undefined') {
                return null;
              }
            }
            return fn.apply(this, arguments)
          }
        }

<comment><USER7> This would make it unusable for a function that, itself, uses the 'arguments' variable rather than formal arguments.

Function arity in Javascript is a tricky subject when we touch on partial application and other functional programming techniques that act on the arguments passed to a function, but the generally accepted solution is to avoid Function#length and ignore that formal arguments exist.

<comment><USER6> The `maybe` in the article allows for this ambiguous situation:

        var fn = function (a, b) { ... };
        var maybe_fn = maybe(fn);
        var obj = {};
        maybe_fn(1);  // calls fn
        maybe_fn(1, null);  // doesn't call fn
        maybe_fn(1, obj.nonexistent_prop);  // also doesn't call fn

In my mind, all of these calls to `maybe_fn` should do the same thing. Maybe not, though?

<comment><USER7> This is a good point, and may be an argument for having a "formal_maybe" or perhaps having it check _at least as many_ arguments as there are formal arguments. However, I don't think that this situation would be as important in practical use. You would normally use this function to allow for passed arguments to be null or undefined - not to allow for some arguments not to be passed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I find higher-order function to be really beautiful with CoffeeScript:

      partial = (fn, a...) -> (b...) -> fn.apply this, [a..., b...]
      compose = (fns...) -> (a) -> a = fn a for fn in fns; a

      splat = (fn) -> (arr) -> arr.map fn
      get = (attr) -> (obj) -> obj[attr]

      maybe = (fn) -> (args...) ->
        return unless args.length
        return arg for arg in args when not arg?
        fn.apply this, args

<comment><USER3> Beauty is, of course, subjective, but the use of 'this' stands out to me as unusual for these particular patterns. Call it a slightly leaky abstraction, I suppose.

That said, at least the function declaration syntax looks a lot like Haskell's type signatures. So maybe they're doing something right. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> This was a great post. Just a little nitpick. I think this line near the bottom:

var something = maybe(doesntCheckForSomething(value));

Should actually be:

var something = maybe(doesntCheckForSomething)(value);

If I'm wrong then I likely missed something so please let me know. Thanks.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think you're right, thanks!!!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> It is stated that JavaScript doesn't have partial function(al) application. Isn't it available through the built in Function#bind method?

<comment><USER7> Function#bind isn't the greatest solution, since it forces you to set 'this' and only allows left-to-right, flat application.

Many people have written partial application libs to make it easier to work with (I even have one of my own on github). A good one is substack's: <https://github.com/substack/node-ap>

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Part II:

[https://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2012/12/...](https://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2012/12/combinators_2.md#combinator- recipes-for-working-with-objects-in-javascript-part-ii)

</comment><comment><USER7> The functions covered in the article, if anyone wants to play around with them: <https://github.com/jrajav/rcombinator>

<comment><AUTHOR> Everything I write on my blog is covered by the MIT license, so go wild!

<comment><USER7> Oh, I do see now that there's a license.txt at the top level of your blog repo. Now I feel silly. :)

(Context: I contacted the author before publishing to see if this was alright.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The link to Part II seems to be broken.</comment>


Apple scrambling to merge Apple IDs to stave off iCloud sync mess - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/09/apple-scrambling-to-merge-apple-ids-to-stave-icloud-sync-mess.ars <comment><USER2> Even apart from iCloud I've been wishing for a way to merge all my Apple IDs. I currently have four between all the changes and the iOS development work. It starts to be a game of 'is this the ID I used?' Being able to link all the different email IDs to the same account would make it a non-issue.</comment>


Ask HN: Who's hiring contract/part-time sales/bd? - <AUTHOR>

I'm currently a software engineer, more interested in the sales/business development side of start-ups. Who's interested in a contract/part-time sales/business development associate? <comment><USER2> We're actually looking for some more sales help at DataKin and have been toying with training software developers, as we have a fairly technical product. I'd be interested in talking. Send me some info on yourself and what you're looking for: email@example.com

<comment><USER3> It looks like your mailbox is full.

<comment><USER2> Sorry about that. It's fixed.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Resources for Managers/Admin - <AUTHOR>

As I have transitioned into more administrative positions, I am longing for a HN-type forum geared toward that niche. I love the articles, people, and discussions here; however, I feel that a lot of the material is no longer relevant to me.<p>What manager/administrative resources have you found essential -- forums, blogs, books, podcasts? Is there a HN-type forum for those of us who are transitioning to this as part of our careers? <comment><USER2> When I sold my business I suddenly found myself in charge of four divisions of a much larger company. I found the YCombinator "How to Start a Startup" Lecture Podcast ([https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/how-to-start-a- startup/i...](https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/how-to-start-a- startup/id922398209?mt=2)) invaluable. Specifically the later lectures on "How to Manage" and "How To Operate" were fantastic.</comment>


Brexit Britain could form NEW superpower alliance - <AUTHOR> https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1320586/Brexit-news-uk-eu-canzuk-union-trade-alliance-US-economy-canada-australia-new-zealand <comment><USER2> Express, Daily mail... Are also forming a new superpower, the toilet paper!</comment>


Show HN: VoiceText – Voice notes with transcription in Slack - <AUTHOR> https://voicetext.presence.so/ <comment><USER2> why wouldn't you just use dictation? i've thought about this before and concluded that i certainly don't want my current employing corporation to own my voice data for eternity. specially with the advent of ML and deepfakes for voice, I would prefer to just send text.

at which point, I'd prefer the transcription to be rendered locally or if necessary by a service I trust (such as apple, reluctantly and tentatively).

<comment><AUTHOR> Yea I understand why you might prefer dictation or a way to process your audio locally. The intent was to provide voice messaging with transcription. Not necessarily provide text as the only output—which dictation is designed for</comment></comment>


Dominos Pizza and Your Privacy - <AUTHOR> http://dbbo.posterous.com/dominos-pizza-and-your-privacy

<comment><USER2> None of the information listed is private.

<comment><AUTHOR> The phone number is unlisted, but the point is that it was supposed to be sent over HTTPS and it wasn't.</comment></comment>


A Democracy of Netbooks - <AUTHOR> http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001318.html <comment><USER2> _I don't care how "smart" your smartphone is, it will never escape those corporate shackles. Smartphones are simply not free enough to deliver the type of democratic transformation that netbooks -- mobile PCs cheap enough and fast enough and good enough for everyone to afford -- absolutely will._

In Europe, at least, smartphones are sold unlocked, and can be used with any WiFi-- so I don't really see in what sense they are "not free enough", or shackled to any corporation.

<comment><USER3> They also usually fail the "Runs my software." criterium. The most smartphones still have gatekeepers on what software you can install on them (with the iPhone being the primest example). And even the ones that let you install any software don't usually let you install software that can do anything because of security concerns.

Hopefully Android will win and this won't be an issue, but for now it definitely is.

<comment><USER4> General population does not have this problem. They do not care about feature lists, MHzs of CPU, they do not count watts and do not carry replaceable batteries. They do not give a damn how open or how closed the ecosystem is. Either device works for them or it does not. I guess very few geeks get that, and Jeff is sure not one of them. And it would be a mistake to think that Apple is going to release something along the lines of the slate MS presented at CES. The rumor goes, that Jobs has asked, what good the the new tablet device could do besides browsing internet in the restroom. I guess they are not going to release one if it does not have an answer to this question.

<comment><USER5> The general population cares about being able to do what they want to do on their machines. If there's software people really want they they aren't "allowed" to run on their machine by the gatekeepers, they will, as they have countless times in the past, vote with their wallets.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I wouldn't call that "thing" a netbook, but a small laptop. The iBook was about the same size and nobody called it a "netbook".

For me "a netbook" it's something similar to a product really called Netbook, the Psion Teklogix's "Netbook Pro". It was a little laptop with touchscreen, flash storage, and an Xscale processor running Windows CE.

I used to work for a warehousing company, and warehouse managers loved it. They could browse the Intranet, run a TN5250 terminal, answer email, etc... at any point of the warehouse, carrying almost no weight and, the most important thing, with near zero waiting time. It just booted in seconds. It was outrageusly expensive, may be something like 2000eur.

I understand that's the device Google has envisioned for its Google OS (but much cheaper obviously). A non-x86 CPU, flash storage, may be a touchscreen... something just different from the laptop you would use to run Windows, not just smaller.

<comment><USER7> > I wouldn't call that "thing" a netbook, but a small laptop. The iBook was > about the same size and nobody called it a "netbook".

I agree. I'm surprised Jeff missed the obvious rhetorical reply: 'Netbooks aren't lame laptops; laptops are lame netbooks.'

(And then one would go on to enumerate the advantages of size, battery-life, etc. and give the little mini-history of computer trends.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm not sure about being cheaper without the Microsoft tax. A few months ago, I was browsing a variety of netbook models and found no significant discounts for Linux. Dell actually charged _more_ for Ubuntu than XP on one model.

I think the reason is all the bundled trial software; they make enough money from the bundling to offset the Windows license and maybe even make a little profit. I think this, more than any pressure from Microsoft, cooperative marketing or lack of user demand is the reason PC manufacturers are reluctant to offer Linux and make it hard to find when they do.

</comment><comment><USER9> The thing I find with netbooks is that almost everyone is universally happy with them: geeks and non-geeks alike. It seems the only people really complaining are technology writers looking for more readers.

<comment><USER10> People are happy with netbooks unless they expect their laptop to be a desktop replacement.

As the owner of a nice beefy desktop, I find my eeepc to be delightful. Hour for hour, I probably even spend more time on it, but I never have to feel the frustration of not being able to do something, because I have my desktop machine.

<comment><USER9> Most netbook owners I know also have laptops (usually as their primary desktop replacement). So I guess laptops have becomes desktops and netbooks have become laptops as far as people are using them now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> He seems big on the "no monthly contracts" thing. But an increasing number of netbooks are being sold with data plans, and there's no reason to think this trend won't continue. Consumers prefer the monthly fees and subsidized purchase price to the lump sum buy-it-all-at-once price, even though it ends up costing them more. The idea that you can buy a semi-useful service and get an essentially free netbook is a very psychologically (if not economically) appealing notion, and one that I am sure companies will increasingly exploit.

</comment><comment><USER12> I did a lot of transatlantic flying this past year. I bought an acer aspire one, gave it 2gb of ram, bought a 9 cell extra battery, installed windows 7 ultimate and never looked back. Between both my batteries, I have 16 hours of constant laptop usage. It's enought to get me from barcelona to san francisco without a plug in.

I really couldn't be happier. I just never think about running out of power any more. And, I have a full dev box at my disposal that's lighter and smaller than most of the books I carry around with me to read.

</comment><comment><USER13> A very philosophical approach, but the main reason I have a netbook is that I can carry it with one hand and it does most of what I need a computer to do. I can read man pages about wget on the bus, I can test out little Ruby ideas I have and see what happens. I can send out a quick message to my friends. Just a really neat little machine. Now that being said, I don't have a smart phone (data plans were too expensive for my tastes) or a regular laptop (too heavy) so maybe my netbook partially fills two technological gaps in my life.

<comment><USER14> Same here. Pretty happy with the Dell Mini 9 (1.6ghz atom w/ 2gb ram and 16gb ssd) I bought a year ago. It was around $340 and I was able to put Windows 7 RC on it. It's been great for vacations and meetings where I don't want to lug around (or risk theft of) my macbook pro. It's pretty fast too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I don't know... I wonder if the netbook thing is a fad.

I bought an eeepc. I spent a few weeks hackintoshing / writing drivers for it. That was fun, I guess. It runs sloooow as molasses though. I can see Steve's point.

Tried a few Linux distros... all were either too slow or not powerful enough. Maybe I should try Windows 7?

I don't know if I've just gotten addicted to my dual-core MBP or what. But the aggregate cost of waiting another second or so each page load makes me want to scream inside.

<comment><USER16> I happen to be recovering from the flu and I spending part of the day hanging out on the couch. Instead of dragging my 15" notebook, I grabbed my recently purchased Acer (1810TZ- same form factor but slightly more powerful than the 1410 in the article).

It's an amazing machine. 11" screen. Dual Core. 3GB RAM. 300 GB HD. 8 hrs of battery life. Pretty good build quality. And I can really do my work on it. $550 shipped.

I really can't think of what Apple is going to deliver with their tablet that at twice the price and no keyboard is going to be any better than this machine.

<comment><USER17> Jobs' comment about build quality certainly rang true with me: My 1st generation eeePC basically fell apart after a year.

<comment><USER18> We have an eeePC at our house. It is one of the seashell models and only 3-4 months old. About two weeks ago, the power supply blew. Once we got a replacement power supply and were able to turn the eeePC back on, the screen had a large, wave-shaped swath of dead pixels at the bottom edge, so bad that the taskbar needed to be moved to the top, in order for Windows to still be usable. I've never had a laptop fail so hard, so soon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> It is very bizarre that netbooks, of all things, are something that people react to in such an idealistic (not sure if that it the right word) way.

There are some interesting debates like cloud vs local power or reinventing (touch screen) vs tweaking (small keyboard) embedded but you can talk about these separately if they are really what you are getting at. Netbooks are just another range of options in the computer family alongside normal laptops, desktops, desktop replacements, workstations, etc.).

Why would anybody possibly object to that? I mean there are plenty of reasons for plenty of people not to by one (I don't have one) or not to _personally_ like them (eg can't adjust to the keyboard).

Why do people object to (or defend) their existence?

</comment><comment><USER20> My netbook is an old Sony Vaio SRX51P/B that I bought for £2000 back in 2001. It had sat on the shelf for a couple of years as the Lucent Orinoco WiFi chipset didn't support WPA, had 256mb of RAM and the hard drive kept crapping out.

I recently put a 30gb hard drive in, an atheros USB wifi stick and installed Arch Linux on there and it's fantastic. It's not as quick as a modern laptop but is more than capable of basic browsing and xterm-based fun. Aside from the two years that I haven't used it, the overall cost works out at roughly £250 per year. It has a 10.4" screen and aside from the memory is roughly comparable to an EEE PC 701 in terms of performance.

I'm more than happy with it and it still holds a charge, 9 years later.

</comment><comment><USER21> I wonder if Chrome OS would still fit the requirement of "runs my software". Yes, you can navigate to any web app you want, but there is no control of the hardware.

<comment><USER22> I think there will be more control of hardware as time goes on. Palm provided methods of accessing hardware in the browser for webOS, I suspect Google will do something similar for web pages that you give permission to.</comment></comment>