This kind of reasoning makes the same presupposition as the article's author. But it is ironic that he mentions musicians--a professional musician's tools, like a programmer's are basically high quality versions of the amateur's.
The conjecture about keyboards being suboptimal is verifibly true, but that does not automatically extend to the machine as well. I also suspect coding experiences will be pretty subjective.
1. The amateurs tools are a low quality, oversimplified version of the professional's. The same goes if you compare a Korg Trinity to a cheap Casio keyboard (I've owned the earlier of the two for 16 years and play for 2 hours a day at random intervals if that's any help supporting the difference in quality).
2. The machine is definitely suboptimal. I suggest that you read the remainder of the author's blog about sane computing.
Comments
This kind of reasoning makes the same presupposition as the article's author. But it is ironic that he mentions musicians--a professional musician's tools, like a programmer's are basically high quality versions of the amateur's.
The conjecture about keyboards being suboptimal is verifibly true, but that does not automatically extend to the machine as well. I also suspect coding experiences will be pretty subjective.
I think the point is the wrong way around.
1. The amateurs tools are a low quality, oversimplified version of the professional's. The same goes if you compare a Korg Trinity to a cheap Casio keyboard (I've owned the earlier of the two for 16 years and play for 2 hours a day at random intervals if that's any help supporting the difference in quality).
2. The machine is definitely suboptimal. I suggest that you read the remainder of the author's blog about sane computing.