Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd Jun 2012 08:30 UTC
Apple I had written an entire article on the debate about whether or not the iPad is a pure consumption device, but realised I could summarise the entire debate into a single sentence: it's the difference between 'suitable' and 'ideal'. You can ride a unicycle from Amsterdam to Paris, but that doesn't mean it's better than just taking the car or the Thalys.
Thread beginning with comment 523291
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Fri 22nd Jun 2012 08:33 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Philosoraptor time: If you can’t compile software on a device, does that make it non Turing complete?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Kroc
by M.Onty on Fri 22nd Jun 2012 08:55 in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
M.Onty Member since:
2009-10-23

No

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Fri 22nd Jun 2012 16:38 in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Think about it carefully. If you cannot generate the code of another system on one computing device; because of _arbitrary_ restrictions put into place by the manufacturer, then is it truly a computing system?

Can one be productive on an iPad? Yes, absolutely. Can one make iPad software, that can make iPad software, on an iPad ? No.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by Kroc
by galvanash on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 00:46 in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

According to Stephen Wolfram, you can make a machine with a single head, only 2 independent states, and 3 symbols (i.e. trinary bits) that is Turing Complete.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfram's_2-state_3-symbol_Turing_machine

I know that you weren't being literal... I just thought it was interesting how simple a Turing Complete machine can actually be.

Reply Parent Score: 2