Six Figures in 6 days(tr.af)
tr.af
Six Figures in 6 days
https://tr.af/6
290 comments
It's funny you mentioned this. When I was on iOS, I was never satisfied with the icons (or the UI in general). I always wanted to customize it. The stock colors/design just left me wanted for more. It's an unconscious feeling; there is no concrete thing to pin point and say that the UI is bad.
What's strange is that, since I switched to Android a couple years back, I no longer had the urge to change the icons or customizing the UI. There is something about the design that makes it feel "okay". You don't feel like you're fighting the phone or being left wanted for more.
I just picked up an iphone from family to check it out, and instantly feel the need to customize it. For all the UX experts, is there a theory/phenomenal for this that I can read more?
What's strange is that, since I switched to Android a couple years back, I no longer had the urge to change the icons or customizing the UI. There is something about the design that makes it feel "okay". You don't feel like you're fighting the phone or being left wanted for more.
I just picked up an iphone from family to check it out, and instantly feel the need to customize it. For all the UX experts, is there a theory/phenomenal for this that I can read more?
I don't think it's really that Android design is more "okay." I think it's that the iOS (and moreso macOS) icon design-language has the potential for some really distractingly-beautiful outlier icons — icons that really twig on people's "gathering fresh ripe fruit" reward system. And when there's some of those sitting on your Dock as part of your every-day experience, you start to both:
1. want every icon to be as tantalizing as those icons already are (and so desire to customize the "lesser" icons to achieve that); and
2. feel like something very precious has been lost whenever an icon is made less tantalizing.
I would hazard a guess that the "greyscale makes people less addicted to their phones" research is more true for iOS users than Android users. iOS just has a higher average level of visual addicting-ness in its design. (Which, to be clear, has nothing to do with differing levels of "polish" or anything like that; addicting-ness is its own thing. Some [good] design-aesthetics have it; other [also good] design-aesthetics don't.)
1. want every icon to be as tantalizing as those icons already are (and so desire to customize the "lesser" icons to achieve that); and
2. feel like something very precious has been lost whenever an icon is made less tantalizing.
I would hazard a guess that the "greyscale makes people less addicted to their phones" research is more true for iOS users than Android users. iOS just has a higher average level of visual addicting-ness in its design. (Which, to be clear, has nothing to do with differing levels of "polish" or anything like that; addicting-ness is its own thing. Some [good] design-aesthetics have it; other [also good] design-aesthetics don't.)
The Photos icon on macOS Catalina and iOS (I haven't taken a look at the Big Sur redesign yet) looks like literal candy—it's a great example of this phenomenon, in my opinion. I love how the colors blend together and overlap with partial transparency.
Not a UX person.
There's a threshold after which something is so good it's worth criticizing?
There's a threshold after which something is so good it's worth criticizing?
That's interesting, I experience the exact opposite. I find iOS quite satisfactory after some very light customization (mainly wallpaper), but when using Android something consistently feels missing and although it drives an urge to customize, I'm not sure could be sated through any amount of tweaking.
Are you used to iPhone? Would you try to make it work like the iPhone way?
Do you feel the same with an iPad? I do with my phone but I think it has more to do with your utility of it. The iTunes app may not look proper in your computer. Android may simply suit you better. Do you find yourself trying to make it work like Android?
Nothing like free users when it comes to entitlement. I think this is mostly because they don't realize which companies are large and which are small or even just hobby projects, it is trivial to appear much larger than you are on the web.
A lot of free users also simply have no concept of how much effort something takes since they've never done it themselves, and by extension have no concept of what that effort translates to in zero cost labor. It's something I see a lot in the maker side of the world with things like 3d printable files.
Huge problem in the creative fields.
Almost everyone is super hyped that someone finally likes their work enough that they actually want it, let alone actually want to pay for it. So they undervalue their work and sell it for peanuts. I sometimes see work priced so low that it barely covers the supplies. They might sell a few but don't want to raise their price as they get better. Get a few people doing this and it becomes hard for legitimate creatives to sell their work at higher realistic prices.
Then there's overseas creatives. Some can do phenomenal work but you just can't compete with their prices even if they're pricing realiatically for where they live.
Almost everyone is super hyped that someone finally likes their work enough that they actually want it, let alone actually want to pay for it. So they undervalue their work and sell it for peanuts. I sometimes see work priced so low that it barely covers the supplies. They might sell a few but don't want to raise their price as they get better. Get a few people doing this and it becomes hard for legitimate creatives to sell their work at higher realistic prices.
Then there's overseas creatives. Some can do phenomenal work but you just can't compete with their prices even if they're pricing realiatically for where they live.
It's sort of the reverse side of The Greater Fool Theory in economics. Not sure if there is a term specifically for this, but it definitely causes a lot of irrational business decisions even outside of creatives.
I used to have a pretty successful business buying products at the monthly USPS lost mail auctions and reselling them online.
But a bunch of bloggers picked up on the opportunity and started hawking it as a get rich quick scheme. So people started showing up and way overpaying for things because there was so much competition. People were paying more for things like Macbooks than you could buy them new at Best Buy.
The first few times I saw it happen, I thought, well, this won't last, these fools will lose their shirts on all this and never come back. And I was right, people rarely came back a second time. But for months and months, new fools would show up and repeat the same exercise and never come back. After more than a year of that, we couldn't afford to keep going regularly. But for years kept checking back periodically and I saw no sign of prices going back to anything reasonable.
Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.
I used to have a pretty successful business buying products at the monthly USPS lost mail auctions and reselling them online.
But a bunch of bloggers picked up on the opportunity and started hawking it as a get rich quick scheme. So people started showing up and way overpaying for things because there was so much competition. People were paying more for things like Macbooks than you could buy them new at Best Buy.
The first few times I saw it happen, I thought, well, this won't last, these fools will lose their shirts on all this and never come back. And I was right, people rarely came back a second time. But for months and months, new fools would show up and repeat the same exercise and never come back. After more than a year of that, we couldn't afford to keep going regularly. But for years kept checking back periodically and I saw no sign of prices going back to anything reasonable.
Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.
Oh yeah I had family that did something similar. They did that whole thing where you bid on abandoned storage lockers. They actually did quite well considering how you can't rummage through everything prior to bidding. Made a small profit for a few years.
Then the TV shows came out and that put an end to that for them. Bids were too high that it wasn't feasible anymore.
Then the TV shows came out and that put an end to that for them. Bids were too high that it wasn't feasible anymore.
'Race to the bottom' is the term I think you are looking for.
I think this is a problem for android apps as well. People are used to free or 99c, so charging a fair price for the effort put in is a non starter.
This is really it. I just came here from the /r/arduino subreddit where I was shaking my head at the guy who was "lol, someone want to write me some free code" (that would be easily thousands of $$ if it was a project at my day job).
Maybe the problem is that we make things look so easy that no one realizes how difficult and/or time-consuming producing code is.
Maybe the problem is that we make things look so easy that no one realizes how difficult and/or time-consuming producing code is.
To be fair, part of that (as suggested by "getting mad at me that I hadn't updated the file to work with newer versions"), is that macNchz was providing a service that should have been provided officially by Apple, and many users lack (or decline to exhibit) the perceptiveness to realize that Apple has abrogated its reponsibility to correct defects in products it recieves payment for, and that this is not a official Apple website, but rather a internet rando cleaning up after one small subset of Apple's negligence.
Though, as MiroF points out, some people are just jerks.
Though, as MiroF points out, some people are just jerks.
> think this is mostly because they don't realize which companies are large and which are small or even just hobby projects
Definitely - it is hard for many to grasp how productive a single engineer can be in putting together a project that looks quite polished and professional.
But also, some people are just mean.
Definitely - it is hard for many to grasp how productive a single engineer can be in putting together a project that looks quite polished and professional.
But also, some people are just mean.
That was you! Thank you so much! I still use iTunes 10, with the coloured icons.
I just can't move on from the mini player, 18 years of play counts/last played, AppleScript, offline USB sync with an iPhone 4S, and of course your coloured icons. I even had to make my own RSRC edits with Themepark to show the icons correctly on Retina, based on your work. I'm not mad at you; I'm grateful for keeping the best music player (in my opinion) looking beautiful.
Any suggestions for other media management software is welcome, but I don't know if I'll ever be able to leave my beloved iTunes 10.6.3. More likely I'll run a 10.5 emulator just to keep it going through future decades.
I just can't move on from the mini player, 18 years of play counts/last played, AppleScript, offline USB sync with an iPhone 4S, and of course your coloured icons. I even had to make my own RSRC edits with Themepark to show the icons correctly on Retina, based on your work. I'm not mad at you; I'm grateful for keeping the best music player (in my opinion) looking beautiful.
Any suggestions for other media management software is welcome, but I don't know if I'll ever be able to leave my beloved iTunes 10.6.3. More likely I'll run a 10.5 emulator just to keep it going through future decades.
That’s awesome–glad it was helpful back in the day! Honestly I totally agree about iTunes 10, I‘ve come to mostly dislike the current iTunes but never thought to try downgrading. I still maintain my iTunes library with play counts and metadata going back to 2003, but find myself reaching for Spotify first these days.
Have you considered putting the website back up and instead adding a purchase link so the hosting costs are worth it for you (assuming people are still bugging you about it).
As an Android user, I am completely blown away by two things: #1 iPhones got this only in 2020, when Android had this since the first version, #2 iPhone owners are willing to spend $28 for a icon pack, a very nice one, but still an icon pack.
Technically it's still not available to iPhone users. The actual method of changing the icons is a really nasty workaround that needs to be performed for each and every application. Instructions: https://icons.tr.af/how
Don't get me wrong, I do love my iPhone, but this isn't something most people (myself included) will have the patience to do.
Don't get me wrong, I do love my iPhone, but this isn't something most people (myself included) will have the patience to do.
It also slows down the launch of every app because you're launching an app to launch your app. The idea that people would pay money, do a bunch of extra work and make their device slower just to change the appearance of their home screen because a handful of people on social media popularize it blows my mind.
> The idea that people would pay money, do a bunch of extra work and make their device slower just to change the appearance of their home screen because a handful of people on social media popularize it blows my mind.
I'm surprised you find that surprising because customisation isn't exactly a new phenomenon. I mean is it really any different to techies slapping stickers on their laptop? Or car enthusiasts modding their vehical? Or home owners decorating their house? Maybe you consider this different because it is software rather than physical stuff; but people do also change their ring tones and wallpaper images too, people customise their avatars on MMO games and profile pictures on social networks. Heck, I even have an alternative coloured border on HN. So while this particular workaround will undoubtedly be more work than most people are willing to take I do still get why some people might want to customise their home screen.
I'm surprised you find that surprising because customisation isn't exactly a new phenomenon. I mean is it really any different to techies slapping stickers on their laptop? Or car enthusiasts modding their vehical? Or home owners decorating their house? Maybe you consider this different because it is software rather than physical stuff; but people do also change their ring tones and wallpaper images too, people customise their avatars on MMO games and profile pictures on social networks. Heck, I even have an alternative coloured border on HN. So while this particular workaround will undoubtedly be more work than most people are willing to take I do still get why some people might want to customise their home screen.
> I'm surprised you find that surprising because customisation isn't exactly a new phenomenon
An entire generation of developers is growing up being told that users like being told how to use their devices, and that options scare them.
An entire generation of developers is growing up being told that users like being told how to use their devices, and that options scare them.
Devil's advocate: this is true. The people buying this icon pack, and the people who spend time on software customization in general, are a negligible subset of iPhone users. If you're making an app that aims for the lowest common denominator, options should be a low priority and well hidden once they're added.
If you're targeting a segment that likes options it's a different story.
If you're targeting a segment that likes options it's a different story.
I think this opinion is similar to the opinion that people don't value their privacy: it is a very convenient viewpoint to have when it comes to a company's bottom line.
Sure, if you approach the average person about an obscure topic like their privacy on the internet, they probably don't have strong opinions about it because that is outside of their wheelhouse, and they probably haven't given it much thought. If you couch privacy in terms that they are familiar with, such as drawing parallels to Supreme Court cases regarding surveillance and privacy, suddenly they care about whether or not they're being stalked online by corporations and governments.
For example, right to repair is something that most people don't think about. However, if you press the average person about whether they think they have the right to repair their own vehicle, suddenly everyone has strong opinions about it. People assume they have the right to use their hardware as they see fit, and aren't afraid of such options.
Sure, if you approach the average person about an obscure topic like their privacy on the internet, they probably don't have strong opinions about it because that is outside of their wheelhouse, and they probably haven't given it much thought. If you couch privacy in terms that they are familiar with, such as drawing parallels to Supreme Court cases regarding surveillance and privacy, suddenly they care about whether or not they're being stalked online by corporations and governments.
For example, right to repair is something that most people don't think about. However, if you press the average person about whether they think they have the right to repair their own vehicle, suddenly everyone has strong opinions about it. People assume they have the right to use their hardware as they see fit, and aren't afraid of such options.
I spend a lot of time teaching non-technical people to use software, and in my experience the two things aren't the same at all. These sorts of users aren't too aware of the invasive aspects of modern programs, but if told, they're against it. However, they already know software with lots of options has those options. They just don't understand most of the choices and are afraid to try any in case one changes state in a way they can't get back from. More options scare and confuse them and make it much harder for these people (the vast majority) to use modern tech.
To be clear, I don't like the Apple approach. I think the options should still exist--but they need to be far removed from the UI without significant, non-discoverable steps.
To be clear, I don't like the Apple approach. I think the options should still exist--but they need to be far removed from the UI without significant, non-discoverable steps.
I find weird that there's a whole market of plastic stuff with lots of colors and designs for the exterior of the phone, but somehow it's given that stuff inside the screen is different.
Maybe the subset of people who spend time on software customization is small because software customization tends to be low priority and well hidden?
Maybe the subset of people who spend time on software customization is small because software customization tends to be low priority and well hidden?
I'm convinced the poster above is only surprised because of the combination in this case:
It costs (a lot of) money to buy this set. It requires a lot of manual work to add the custom icons. And - most importantly - it slows down every app start.
While I myself don't really like to change defaults, I can very well see the benefit of customization for other people. But at the expense of performance this becomes very questionable.
A lot of?
It's like the cost of eating lunch out three times in a big city.
Given the amount of work put into drawing icons, I'd say it's fair. I'm absolutely thrilled someone found a way to charge for something that is a personal project and not backed by some big corporate marketing buck.
It's like the cost of eating lunch out three times in a big city.
Given the amount of work put into drawing icons, I'd say it's fair. I'm absolutely thrilled someone found a way to charge for something that is a personal project and not backed by some big corporate marketing buck.
Yes. A lot of.
I value the work the designer put into it. But you have to also consider all the variables:
1. This is not a one and done deal. If he had a single client paying that for 80 icons, of course it wouldn't be fair. But since it's a product that is created once and sold multiple times, the price shouldn't be decided by the hours of work or craft put into it.
2. These icons are minimalistic. There certainly is a craft behind this design choice, but compared to more realistic icon depictions (comparing to macOS icons for example), it takes far less effort to design these.
3. A lot of them have already been established. If you can simply take a pre-existing pattern and adapt it to your style, there's not much for you to do. Official logos of other companies and adaptions of app icons.
Don't take this the wrong way. I'm happy for the designer to have been so successful. I'm merely pointing out that the price is relatively steep in comparison with other icon kits of the same craft. But good for him that he was so bold to go with the price and get rewarded for it!
Don't take this the wrong way. I'm happy for the designer to have been so successful. I'm merely pointing out that the price is relatively steep in comparison with other icon kits of the same craft. But good for him that he was so bold to go with the price and get rewarded for it!
Not sure if you've used shortcuts on iOS but a lot of those customizations don't change the performance of anything. The shortcuts on an iphone add a half second each time you use the app, because the icon has to open the shortcuts app THEN open the app the shortcut is linked to.
If adding a sticker to your laptop increased the boot time a fraction of a second some people would still do it, but many would it find it maddening!
If adding a sticker to your laptop increased the boot time a fraction of a second some people would still do it, but many would it find it maddening!
Half a second is actually quite a big deal.
"A delay of less than 100 milliseconds feels instant to a user, but a delay between 100 and 300 milliseconds is perceptible. A delay between 300 and 1,000 milliseconds makes the user feel like a machine is working, but if the delay is above 1,000 milliseconds, your user will likely start to mentally context-switch."
http://designingforperformance.com/performance-is-ux/#design...
"A delay of less than 100 milliseconds feels instant to a user, but a delay between 100 and 300 milliseconds is perceptible. A delay between 300 and 1,000 milliseconds makes the user feel like a machine is working, but if the delay is above 1,000 milliseconds, your user will likely start to mentally context-switch."
http://designingforperformance.com/performance-is-ux/#design...
Not in the context of an 8 second boot time. Almost no one will notice 8 vs 8.5s
Most apps start in about a second.
I've seen people mod their car in ways that are detrimental to it's performance. I've also known people who have intentionally bought inferior hardware because it looked nicer. In fact I've seen some people wear shoes that has give them blisters but done so because those shoes were pretty.
You'd be surprised at the lengths of inconvenience some people will endure for the sake of aesthetics.
You'd be surprised at the lengths of inconvenience some people will endure for the sake of aesthetics.
> I mean is it really any different to techies slapping stickers on their laptop? Or car enthusiasts modding their vehical?
Stickers take a trivial amount of effort and don't impair performance. Car mods take time and money, but often make things functionally better. The icon app takes time and money to setup and the only functional change is for the worse. I think the icons are just enough different/worse than most other customizations that it's reasonable to be surprised at their popularity.
Stickers take a trivial amount of effort and don't impair performance. Car mods take time and money, but often make things functionally better. The icon app takes time and money to setup and the only functional change is for the worse. I think the icons are just enough different/worse than most other customizations that it's reasonable to be surprised at their popularity.
None of the things you listed have any downside. This shortcuts workaround makes opening apps a horrible experience.
I've seen people mod their car in ways that are detrimental to it's performance (and intentionally too). So yes, some of those examples can sometimes affect the product negatively.
Never underestimate a persons vanity.
Never underestimate a persons vanity.
> customisation isn't exactly a new phenomenon
Another classic example: https://skins.webamp.org/
Another classic example: https://skins.webamp.org/
Digital life is taking over. It's the equivalent of putting some plant trees in your living room. As we spend more time (most of our time?) on our digital devices, the aesthetic is switching from real life to digital life.
It also removes context menus from app icons, reduced functionality on top of slower launch time.
Well, here is some history (from 1992):
https://winworldpc.com/product/icon-do-it/1x
I remember it was not inexpensive ($19).
https://winworldpc.com/product/icon-do-it/1x
I remember it was not inexpensive ($19).
It's so common to open apps from the search bar (and the app drawer now, I imagine), that it probably becomes less of a burden. Might even make people use those other patterns more, who knows.
I see no one remembers MySpace.
> iPhones got this only in 2020, when Android had this since the first version
It's not a technical achievement(that took Apple 10 years to do), it's a design choice(that Apple made then and now). It can have multiple motivations that we can speculate on, would have been great to have someone from Apple to give us some perspective.
>iPhone owners are willing to spend $28 for a icon pack, a very nice one, but still an icon pack.
There are multiple games that make billions of $ by simply selling cosmetic items, this is very similar. It also has a a version in the physical world, people pay a premium for stuff with a special visual design and no functional advantage all the time. Handbags, clothes, cars, jewellery, movie merchandise(like Darth Vader helmets etc), houses, paint, books, computers - you name it, people actually pay for design.
It's not a technical achievement(that took Apple 10 years to do), it's a design choice(that Apple made then and now). It can have multiple motivations that we can speculate on, would have been great to have someone from Apple to give us some perspective.
>iPhone owners are willing to spend $28 for a icon pack, a very nice one, but still an icon pack.
There are multiple games that make billions of $ by simply selling cosmetic items, this is very similar. It also has a a version in the physical world, people pay a premium for stuff with a special visual design and no functional advantage all the time. Handbags, clothes, cars, jewellery, movie merchandise(like Darth Vader helmets etc), houses, paint, books, computers - you name it, people actually pay for design.
It seems more like an unintended consequence, not a design choice by Apple.
> It's not a technical achievement(that took Apple 10 years to do), it's a design choice
That's the most poetic way of saying "it's not a bug, it's a feature"
That's the most poetic way of saying "it's not a bug, it's a feature"
Is the average iPhone owner willing to spend $28 on an icon pack? Probably not.
Can you find 3626 iPhone owners willing to spend $28 on an icon pack? Sure you can. In fact I bet you can find 3626 Android owners willing to part with $28 too.
The key to this success story is this:
> Then, MKBHD happened.
Can you find 3626 iPhone owners willing to spend $28 on an icon pack? Sure you can. In fact I bet you can find 3626 Android owners willing to part with $28 too.
The key to this success story is this:
> Then, MKBHD happened.
the key to his success is honing his craft via side projects, sharing these ideas often, having a quick and easy tooling to publish ideas, pushing to prod and sharing these ideas. thats the key to success. the MKBHD pickup is just the recognition of the skill honed through this process.
MKBHD picking it up had nothing to do with his journey or level of skill.
MKBHD could have picked up something much less refined and it would have been popular, a different designer dabbling with no prior mobile icon interest could have come up with something appealing to others as well.
Being there and getting an influencer is what made this story, and can be repeated by anyone. OP is conflating the rest of it with his own trials and tribulations.
MKBHD could have picked up something much less refined and it would have been popular, a different designer dabbling with no prior mobile icon interest could have come up with something appealing to others as well.
Being there and getting an influencer is what made this story, and can be repeated by anyone. OP is conflating the rest of it with his own trials and tribulations.
> MKBHD could have picked up something much less refined and it would have been popular
I think MKBHD also has to worry about his reputation, if he promoted something less refined his viewers might get pissed off.
I think MKBHD also has to worry about his reputation, if he promoted something less refined his viewers might get pissed off.
It can happen and happens to influencers all the time. I'm glad it worked out for everyone involved. OP's prior work is not why it worked out.
That seems to ignore the fact that there are hundreds of people of equally "honed skills" not having earned $100k over 6 days.
The key to a success of this type is luck. Sure, you can optimize for being on the path of success, but majority will still be missed.
The key to a success of this type is luck. Sure, you can optimize for being on the path of success, but majority will still be missed.
I mean, it's obviously both skill and luck. Like pretty much anything else that's "instantly" successful.
"Luck" is what happens when the prepared are given opportunity.
Being "prepared" for a given opportunity is often trivial. Whether the opportunity you're prepared for ever arises is luck.
If you're good and persistent eventually you get lucky. Most people just give up because being persistent is emotionally draining.
Do you consider death to be giving up or getting lucky? Or had you just not considered that some people try very hard until the day they die without getting lucky?
If you're good and persistent and happen to be prepared enough for whichever type of opportunity happens to present itself for you
No, you underestimate that. Being prepared is increasing your chances. There's one thing to be lucky as "1 in a billion" chance, and there's another to be lucky as "1 in 100"; the odds are always stacked against you, but with preparation & many attempts, your odds start looking better, and "luck" starts happening. (or not; some people are indeed unlucky, despite doing everything right. But that's less common than the other extreme - people that get lucky despite not doing anything rights).
>The key to a success of this type is luck.
What an odd mentality.
No, the key to success is skill, with effort (grit?) thrown in there as well. Luck can sometimes play a significant factor, all else being equal. But the idea that everyone is equally "good" at things, or put in the same effort, and that it's mere chance that success happens to someone is...pessimistic to say the least.
What an odd mentality.
No, the key to success is skill, with effort (grit?) thrown in there as well. Luck can sometimes play a significant factor, all else being equal. But the idea that everyone is equally "good" at things, or put in the same effort, and that it's mere chance that success happens to someone is...pessimistic to say the least.
Kylie Jenner was proclaimed the "youngest self-made billionaire" by Forbes magazine. Remind me, what is her skill or talent again?
Making money is quite a valuable skill.
Sure, but the "self-made" claim is entirely laughable in this case.
Not odd – it's a common misconception.
But your point is entirely correct.
But your point is entirely correct.
They're not keys, they are requirements. And soft requirements, on top of that.
But luck is a huge component in getting wealthy. Plenty of people with equal skills, equal expertise, and equal hard work never succeed because they don't get the magical conjunction of right time at the right place.
But luck is a huge component in getting wealthy. Plenty of people with equal skills, equal expertise, and equal hard work never succeed because they don't get the magical conjunction of right time at the right place.
Look at Facebook. When it was released there were a hundred products like it, but the specific combination of things Facebook did made it super popular. I cannot believe that was due to skill.
You have to have a certain baseline of skill in order to not automatically fail, ie in order to be one of those hundred products in the first place.
It's also worth remembering that Facebook pivoted several times before it became what it is now, taking on ideas that worked for other platforms. For example feeds were added after Twitter became popular.
There is no need to assume that everyone is equally good at things, or puts in the same effort. Some people are much better than others at many things, and yet luck is the biggest determinant of success.
That being said, it doesn't mean that one shouldn't hone their skills and try to be successful. It's just that it's not likely that you will have such meteoric success no matter the skill or effort you put in.
Luck doesn't just play a significant factor, luck almost always plays the biggest factor. But being skillful and putting in effort is the only thing you can change and definitely does help too.
That being said, it doesn't mean that one shouldn't hone their skills and try to be successful. It's just that it's not likely that you will have such meteoric success no matter the skill or effort you put in.
Luck doesn't just play a significant factor, luck almost always plays the biggest factor. But being skillful and putting in effort is the only thing you can change and definitely does help too.
Academic studies have repeatedly found that one of the single biggest determinants in success of just about any kind is luck. It is a very common misconception that hard work results in success, or that talent results in success, but that's looking at the successful from the wrong end.
It is rare to find someone very lazy or completely talentless among the most successful, so it must be hard work and talent, right? No, because it's easy to find very hard-working and talented people who are not successful. In fact, according to research[0], the most successful are usually not the most talented, but those of mediocre talent and a lot of luck.
[0] https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07068
It is rare to find someone very lazy or completely talentless among the most successful, so it must be hard work and talent, right? No, because it's easy to find very hard-working and talented people who are not successful. In fact, according to research[0], the most successful are usually not the most talented, but those of mediocre talent and a lot of luck.
[0] https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07068
The discussion just pointlessly spun out of control.
The key to finding those 3626 people willing to shell out $28 was the exposure, with MKBHD being the biggest contributor.
Whatever was the key to getting that exposure in the first place is irrelevant to my point.
The key to finding those 3626 people willing to shell out $28 was the exposure, with MKBHD being the biggest contributor.
Whatever was the key to getting that exposure in the first place is irrelevant to my point.
Sure. He said it himself.
And went on to say:
> The market will decide a huge part of what comes after sharing something, so continually increase your odds by building, publishing, then repeating.
All the people here decrying everything he had done up until this point and proclaiming any degree of success is attributable only to luck is amazing. It's not the same as stumbling on a winning lotto ticking on the street (unless you have spent years scouring the streets looking for winning lotto tickets).
And went on to say:
> The market will decide a huge part of what comes after sharing something, so continually increase your odds by building, publishing, then repeating.
All the people here decrying everything he had done up until this point and proclaiming any degree of success is attributable only to luck is amazing. It's not the same as stumbling on a winning lotto ticking on the street (unless you have spent years scouring the streets looking for winning lotto tickets).
If by "amazing" you mean "embarrassing and enraging", yes.
It's one of those things that makes me want to scream at Hacker News regularly.
Even if you think it's about "luck", how are you modelling it?
MKBHD did a fair coin toss between all of his options?
Nah, doesn't seem realistic.
Some options are probably more likely than others.
Based on what? Oh well, the quality of the product, the buzz around it (which itself is probably based on the quality of the product, how it matches the zeitgeist's aesthetic (which means good understanding of trends, marketing, psychology, etc.)), the original reputation of the person creating the product, and so on.
Hacker News's take: it's just luck, it could have been any other icon set with the same probability.
Yeah, no.
It's one of those things that makes me want to scream at Hacker News regularly.
Even if you think it's about "luck", how are you modelling it?
MKBHD did a fair coin toss between all of his options?
Nah, doesn't seem realistic.
Some options are probably more likely than others.
Based on what? Oh well, the quality of the product, the buzz around it (which itself is probably based on the quality of the product, how it matches the zeitgeist's aesthetic (which means good understanding of trends, marketing, psychology, etc.)), the original reputation of the person creating the product, and so on.
Hacker News's take: it's just luck, it could have been any other icon set with the same probability.
Yeah, no.
I wonder what he would have gotten had he did a paid advertisement on Daring Fireball, MacRumors, etc
#2 A few thousands iPhone owners out of 900 millions willing to pay $28 for a icon pack. Not that mind blowing for me.
Compare that to the billions of $ users spend on loot boxes.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-05-01-loot-boxes...
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-05-01-loot-boxes...
It's not an apt comparison. Loot boxes is gambling, which is something completely different.
Off topic, but I really like that I don't have to customize my iPhone much at all. It works great right off the bat, I don't need to download another camera app, another gallery app, or have to root it so I can fix my CPU settings so the phone won't melt just in my pocket (happened on my LG android back in 2015 which made me switch to iOS and never look back).
In fairness, I don't have to do any of that to my Google Pixel either. It all just works great off the bat. I can if I want to, but I don't. I do appreciate being able to install my own fully open source web browser of choice (Firefox) and my own fully open source ad blocker of choice (uBlock) instead of being stuck using skins over Safari's engine.
Oh yeah for sure! I'm developing mobile apps now, and I'm excited to get my hands on a pixel device some time. It's too tempting after using simulator :)
Other than the derisive "sheeple" response, why do people stick with iPhones when Androids have more desirable features?
> Androids have more desirable features
That's subjective. Many people prefer iPhones. They may find the features of iPhone more desirable or some other aspect about it like the Apple ecosystem.
That's subjective. Many people prefer iPhones. They may find the features of iPhone more desirable or some other aspect about it like the Apple ecosystem.
I'm referring to features that were in Android and later implemented on iOS - presumably those are desired features, and at some point Android had it and iOS didn't. There's likely features that Android has today that will at some point be implemented in iOS in the future. Yet those features aren't enough to encourage switching.
(For context, I'm writing this not as an Android fanboy, but as an 11-year iPhone user, though I've often had a secondary current gen Android for testing, etc, and have constantly evaluated switching and never found a compelling reason for doing so, despite some of those attractive line-items)
(For context, I'm writing this not as an Android fanboy, but as an 11-year iPhone user, though I've often had a secondary current gen Android for testing, etc, and have constantly evaluated switching and never found a compelling reason for doing so, despite some of those attractive line-items)
This is true, but for the most part the Android features come earlier but are very poorly thought out and usually have usability issues which prevent people from using them effectively. In contrast Apple usually waits a couple of years and ends up releasing something that solves the problem in a usable way.
Let's talk about cameras specifically. Samsung has this "burst mode" feature which lets you take 100 or 200 shots in rapid succession. This was linked to a long press of the "take picture" button, so when I would use my wife's phone if I paused for a moment with my finger on the button it would fill up the memory card with hundreds of identical JPEG images that she would then have to sort through and delete individually.
Contrast this with Apple's "Live Photo" feature which takes a short 2 or 3 second video around the moment when you take your picture. You can still sort through each individual frame and pick the best one but it doesn't completely fill up the device's memory with hundreds of identical JPEGs. And it gives you this cool video of the moment for every picture.
Being first to market doesn't matter if the feature isn't actually usable.
Let's talk about cameras specifically. Samsung has this "burst mode" feature which lets you take 100 or 200 shots in rapid succession. This was linked to a long press of the "take picture" button, so when I would use my wife's phone if I paused for a moment with my finger on the button it would fill up the memory card with hundreds of identical JPEG images that she would then have to sort through and delete individually.
Contrast this with Apple's "Live Photo" feature which takes a short 2 or 3 second video around the moment when you take your picture. You can still sort through each individual frame and pick the best one but it doesn't completely fill up the device's memory with hundreds of identical JPEGs. And it gives you this cool video of the moment for every picture.
Being first to market doesn't matter if the feature isn't actually usable.
For sure. Apple can get market research for free by just waiting.
Apple's obsession over small details and creating a delightful UX.
Apple does not create a delightful UX, but the phone feels a lot more... refined than any android phone I’ve had.
I don’t deny I can do more with the android phone though.
I don’t deny I can do more with the android phone though.
I dont know, for me the phone with just one button (no physical back button like on android) is incredibly clunky.
You constantly hover your finger over the top left (?) of the screen because the options are there.
Meanwhile android has 3 nice buttons at the bottom that are there always.
Meanwhile android has 3 nice buttons at the bottom that are there always.
Most Androids don't have those physical buttons anymore; they are a full pane of glass, like iPhone X +.
My iPhone is almost 4 years old. It is still very fast (never had to reset it) and still gets updates.
What's not to like?
My last Android (Nexus 5) stopped receiving updates just 2 years after I bought it, because of some ridiculous graphics driver bs.
What's not to like?
My last Android (Nexus 5) stopped receiving updates just 2 years after I bought it, because of some ridiculous graphics driver bs.
Same story with me.
My Galaxy S7 is 4 years old. It's still very fast (never had to reset it) and still gets security updates (last one in August) although no more OS updates.
If I played AAA games on my smartphone, I might want an upgrade, but I do my gaming on PCs. Otherwise newer models don't really have that much appeal, except for the better camera (although I am not impressed by the fake bokeh effect). However, even for the camera, it always feels like a compromise whenever I use it, in that I put up with lower quality in exchange for convenience.
My Galaxy S7 is 4 years old. It's still very fast (never had to reset it) and still gets security updates (last one in August) although no more OS updates.
If I played AAA games on my smartphone, I might want an upgrade, but I do my gaming on PCs. Otherwise newer models don't really have that much appeal, except for the better camera (although I am not impressed by the fake bokeh effect). However, even for the camera, it always feels like a compromise whenever I use it, in that I put up with lower quality in exchange for convenience.
This is anecdotal of course. But I was an Android user since the first Galaxy S until the Galaxy S7 (with Nexus and some others in between).
I don’t know if this is still the case but every single time I had one of the big updates my phone just started getting slower and slower, most of my phones got a crack in the screen, battery started draining really quickly. I couldn’t spend more than 1.5 years with the same phone without wanting a new one really bad.
Then I got my first iPhone almost three years ago, and I still have the same phone and I don’t feel a need to get a new one. After several major updates my phone still works perfectly (even better I would say). Battery is in 85% and still lasts a whole day. Do I miss some features? of course, but the same would be true if I switched to Android, I would miss Shortcuts, Airdrop and other small features, plus at present time I can’t think of a big feature I’m missing from Android.
Then I got my first iPhone almost three years ago, and I still have the same phone and I don’t feel a need to get a new one. After several major updates my phone still works perfectly (even better I would say). Battery is in 85% and still lasts a whole day. Do I miss some features? of course, but the same would be true if I switched to Android, I would miss Shortcuts, Airdrop and other small features, plus at present time I can’t think of a big feature I’m missing from Android.
Apple was literally fined for slowing down older phones: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724
If you want your phone to last forever, you need to take control of it yourself. Get a Lineage OS compatible phone and ditch the play store. Not only will it be faster, the battery life will quadruple.
If you want your phone to last forever, you need to take control of it yourself. Get a Lineage OS compatible phone and ditch the play store. Not only will it be faster, the battery life will quadruple.
[deleted]
They were fined for not telling people that they were slowing down older phones. It's a subtle difference. I'm not saying the fine was unjust, only that it doesn't reflect on the performance or quality of the product. Instead now we know that a simple battery change will restore the speed.
My 4 year old Apple phone continues to work great, while every Android phone I've used would get progressively slower and less capable with each Android update.
Also there was a plethora of Android features to support local advertising that I considered very invasive of my privacy. One example was an ad campaign for a children's clothing store called "Charming Charlie" which would pop up on my phone whenever I walked past their store at the mall regardless of whether Bluetooth and Wifi were on or off.
Finally, I can actually talk to a live human when I'm having problems with my Apple phone.
Also there was a plethora of Android features to support local advertising that I considered very invasive of my privacy. One example was an ad campaign for a children's clothing store called "Charming Charlie" which would pop up on my phone whenever I walked past their store at the mall regardless of whether Bluetooth and Wifi were on or off.
Finally, I can actually talk to a live human when I'm having problems with my Apple phone.
I'm still using a Galaxy S3 with no problems. YMMV.
Different people value different things. What's desirable is not the same for everyone.
Also, never underestimate the magnitude of inertia. There's a point many of us reach where we're more interested in your tools being consistent and predictable, rather than bleeding edge. We dread OS updates rather than look forward to them, because it means we'll need to allocate brain cycles to something that's changed and that's just not that important.
We'd rather be allocating those brain cycles to a project that we consider interesting and maybe even important, rather than adding fancy stuff to our phone's home screen layout.
They last longer physically. Apple supports them with updates and security fixes for absurd lengths of time (like 5 years or something). So if you take care of your phone it's better for the environment.
My iPhone 7 is a tool. It does its job, I don't feel any need to hack it, mod it or change it or upgrade every year. I text people, call people, take pics, browse the web, install other apps for things like ordering food, maybe play a game, etc.
In my opinion, most features that have come out in recent years for smart phones don't really matter to users. They are marketing checklists.
In my opinion, most features that have come out in recent years for smart phones don't really matter to users. They are marketing checklists.
There are very few things in my life where I’ve purchased the highest-features version. I have a regular Medeco lock on my house instead of a Smart Lock. I didn’t give my TV internet access so it acts as a “dumb TV.” I own two kitchen knives instead of a set with a knife for every single scenario. Instead of the fancy closet organizers I have a regular bar and a set of shelves. Phones are no different — I rarely prefer the one with the most “stuff,” I like the thing that has the best execution on the stuff it has.
Not even that but, you can't change icons. What you can do is create a siri shortcut, assign an icon to that, and make the shortcut just open an app. Everytime you click it, it'll load siri, then siri loads the app, visibly and with a delay.
It's painful to use and look at, all of which was described in the video, and people paid $28 for it. Pretty insane.
It's painful to use and look at, all of which was described in the video, and people paid $28 for it. Pretty insane.
It's almost as ridiculous as people spending $100 on windows 10 licenses so they can change their desktop background.
Different platforms have different priorities.
Is android still using really low resolution icons?
Is android still using really low resolution icons?
Of course most X11 DEs have had this since the 90s.
Yeah. On the other hand we had 1/10 less mallware, faster UIs, updates for older devices up to several years, and other small things since day one which Android still doesn't have :-)
I would ignore most of this advice and simplify it this way:
Act Immediately
Get an influencer
All the rest of OP's journey doesn't really matter.
My newest venture this summer did 7 figures after I got motivated by watching Hamilton, this was also a week long period of sales, which came after a 2 week long period of idea and building hype. It definitely came down to doing something very trendy and having people know about it, and there is nothing organic in that process. I don't think the same venture could do that now already. It would have to be new trendy things.
Act Immediately
Get an influencer
All the rest of OP's journey doesn't really matter.
My newest venture this summer did 7 figures after I got motivated by watching Hamilton, this was also a week long period of sales, which came after a 2 week long period of idea and building hype. It definitely came down to doing something very trendy and having people know about it, and there is nothing organic in that process. I don't think the same venture could do that now already. It would have to be new trendy things.
I think "Publish Often" is also an important part of OP's success. Had they not practiced making custom icons since 2013, they probably would not have been ready to capitalize on the one time they got buzz.
I don't.
I've hired people on fiverr and tapped development teams I've worked with before to deliver quickly.
"Had I not have already vetted that development team I wouldn't have been ready to capitalize so quickly. Had I not practiced making static websites. Had I not practiced tying SSL to domain names so that people take me seriously."
I'm not diminishing OP's skill, I am diminishing the message and pointing out which parts are repeatable. This is prosperity preaching (being rewarded for prior sacrifices because of those prior sacrifices) and wasting everyone's energy if they actually believe that and approach life this way. Unsubscribe to that logic and you still have execute quickly + make sure people know about it.
I've hired people on fiverr and tapped development teams I've worked with before to deliver quickly.
"Had I not have already vetted that development team I wouldn't have been ready to capitalize so quickly. Had I not practiced making static websites. Had I not practiced tying SSL to domain names so that people take me seriously."
I'm not diminishing OP's skill, I am diminishing the message and pointing out which parts are repeatable. This is prosperity preaching (being rewarded for prior sacrifices because of those prior sacrifices) and wasting everyone's energy if they actually believe that and approach life this way. Unsubscribe to that logic and you still have execute quickly + make sure people know about it.
You're hitting the nail on the head but people can't bring themselves to accept you're right.
Yes the OP lovingly crafted his skills over a period of several years, but let's face it, his skills are commodities and you too could have achieved his success if you took a shortcut to hire someone to produce an icon pack quickly and professionally and then partnered with an influencer to sell the productized version of it.
Probably 94% of the success here is due to the influencer's exposure. The moral of the story is become good friends with influencers in relevant industries and be ready to act quickly on new business ideas, and keep access to cash to invest in whatever is needed.
Yes the OP lovingly crafted his skills over a period of several years, but let's face it, his skills are commodities and you too could have achieved his success if you took a shortcut to hire someone to produce an icon pack quickly and professionally and then partnered with an influencer to sell the productized version of it.
Probably 94% of the success here is due to the influencer's exposure. The moral of the story is become good friends with influencers in relevant industries and be ready to act quickly on new business ideas, and keep access to cash to invest in whatever is needed.
I appreciate this view. The story our culture tells us of reward being proportional to sacrifice is well entrenched and of course a complete fantasy.
> This is prosperity preaching (being rewarded for prior sacrifices because of those prior sacrifices)
But don't those prior experiences grow your skill to a degree?
But don't those prior experiences grow your skill to a degree?
An influencer pushing your version of a product is a greater reason for prosperity than any merit of the product. That's the only point.
You are grasping at straws to support traf's view of the events.
Yes, doing something in the past helps you do something in the future. No, thats not the reason traf's work went viral.
You are grasping at straws to support traf's view of the events.
Yes, doing something in the past helps you do something in the future. No, thats not the reason traf's work went viral.
That's not the only point. You are confusing necessary and sufficient conditions. Being able to do the thing that needs to be done at the right time is a a necessary condition for this success. It's definitely not sufficient condition as you rightly point out. You note that you use fiverr and development teams you've worked with before to deliver quickly. Without that you have nothing to deliver or it is beat in the market by the time you figure out how to make it. An influencer isn't going to magically create products for you.
Exactly. And without having made things, shared and built an audience, he would have been broadcasting into a void. Then there "influencer" would have never been part of the equation.
Is there some "luck" in that? Of course. But that bit of luck does not happen in a vacuum.
Is there some "luck" in that? Of course. But that bit of luck does not happen in a vacuum.
> "Publish Often" is also an important part of OP's success
100% this, I sell audio plugins and every time I release a new product there is a huge uptick in sales, and not just from existing users.
100% this, I sell audio plugins and every time I release a new product there is a huge uptick in sales, and not just from existing users.
Where do you sell these audio plugins and for what daw
I was similarly motivated after reading Chernow's biography of Hamilton. Reading about how he wrote his 51 essays for the Federalist Papers in such a short time, often publishing one or more per week... that kind of intellectual energy really blew me away.
same experiences here. timing and big scale. trends and influencers are powerful.
[deleted]
Hamilton the 2020 movie?
Yes, I find it very motivational
I'm a little confused, what did you actually sell? If its not a secret of course.
I always find it odd when people ask this. If someone is selling something and you ask them what it is and they refuse to tell you... what does that even mean?
Primarily that I opted out of tying my identity and screename here to that product.
But yep, if I didn't specify then it should be pretty clear I wasn't going to specify.
To their credit, sometimes it is still worth asking, like instead of me being seen as shilling in my first post, I could just be responding to someone and mention the product then.
Spot on analysis that I wasn't going to specify though.
But yep, if I didn't specify then it should be pretty clear I wasn't going to specify.
To their credit, sometimes it is still worth asking, like instead of me being seen as shilling in my first post, I could just be responding to someone and mention the product then.
Spot on analysis that I wasn't going to specify though.
totally understand you don't want to specify, but could you say what kind of product it was (ie mobile app, saas, udemy thing, crypto...etc)?
just asking as someone curious about this type of thing
just asking as someone curious about this type of thing
You're coming across as creepy right now dude. You don't need to know, stop pestering them.
I asked a single question and said I was just curious and didn't need specification lol.
why go out of your way to spread negativity?
why go out of your way to spread negativity?
Because I was once a five year old who didn't know how to stop when someone told me no, and it brings back shameful memories when I see the same behavior from grown men.
again I asked one question. I was only a little bit curious because op's experience sounds a lot like what my friends and I did when the iOS app store first came out in college, so I was just wondering what platform people were having that experience on these days.
I see you are committed to being angry online so I won't stop you from following your passion, but I hope you see eventually that it is strange behavior.
I see you are committed to being angry online so I won't stop you from following your passion, but I hope you see eventually that it is strange behavior.
Of course I check the comments here and theres the usual chorus of dismissals as "just luck."
It's funny because anyone who actually believed that would never have created those icons 7 years ago. They would have never published them and they would have never stuck their neck out to promote them.
In a way it seems like the best way to ensure that you never "get lucky" is to assume that it's all just luck in the first place.
It's funny because anyone who actually believed that would never have created those icons 7 years ago. They would have never published them and they would have never stuck their neck out to promote them.
In a way it seems like the best way to ensure that you never "get lucky" is to assume that it's all just luck in the first place.
This is basically the origin of the saying "you create your own luck".
Luck is absolutely, 100% a factor here, but you won't get lucky without putting the effort in first.
Luck is absolutely, 100% a factor here, but you won't get lucky without putting the effort in first.
Opportunity is where preparation meets luck
"Victory awaits him who has everything in order — luck, people call it. Defeat is certain for him who has neglected to take the necessary precautions in time; this is called bad luck."
-- Roald Amundsen
-- Roald Amundsen
It's not just luck because it's talent plus savviness plus the ability to spin your story. Sure, luck factors in but as anyone with a success story will tell you, it's never just luck unless you're talking about the lottery.
The problem is that the article does not describe a repeatable process. Maybe the author's experience is repeatable, but that is not part of the content. The most critical component was the marketing, i.e. "going viral" on Twitter. Some marketing firms specialize in doing so and seem to have skill, yet I see no indication of where the author intentionally took steps to achieve that effect. Therefore, yes, it does seem like the author "got lucky".
Since when is “repeatable process” a requirement for not being qualified as “lucky”? Maybe the OP is just a talented and dedicated person who delivers high quality work, and because of their dedication, was at a place where they were ready-to-go and seize the opportunity when iOS 14 arrived.
Someone much wiser than me once said, “dedicated people can force luck to happen”, implying that it’s only a small part of the equation.
Someone much wiser than me once said, “dedicated people can force luck to happen”, implying that it’s only a small part of the equation.
Is that a problem, though? A major component of success is in fact luck. Doing the right thing at just the right time, with enough prior planning and skill to be able to follow through if it takes off. If making a bunch of money somehow with few hurdles was reliably repeatable, everyone would start doing it. Until the market is saturated and then it stops being repeatable.
First mover advantage ties into this here, as does discussions on the free market, and other interesting economic theory.
First mover advantage ties into this here, as does discussions on the free market, and other interesting economic theory.
I have to disagree that a major component of success in business is luck, generally speaking. A successful business relies on having repeatable processes that generate profit. If one wants to talk about becoming a billionaire or growing a social media company to the level of IPO, then I concede that an above-average degree of luck is involved.
Alternatively, it seems like many successes are built off the back of virality.
> A successful business relies on having repeatable processes that generate profit
It can take luck to get the business off the ground though.
> A successful business relies on having repeatable processes that generate profit
It can take luck to get the business off the ground though.
Some do, yes. I think this is especially true for independent content creators, as one example.
It may not be a perfectly repeatable recipe (that doesn't exist), but there's solid, actionable advice here. Particularly "act immediately". Things only go viral when the moment is right, and that moment is usually very fleeing.
One supporting data point: back when the game 2048 went viral I happened to be on a break with nothing to do, so I coded up an AI for it in one night [1]. The next day it blew up on Twitter and elsewhere. There have since been many other, better AIs, but since mine was first and came out when the game was on everyone's mind, it was the only one that got so much attention.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7379821
One supporting data point: back when the game 2048 went viral I happened to be on a break with nothing to do, so I coded up an AI for it in one night [1]. The next day it blew up on Twitter and elsewhere. There have since been many other, better AIs, but since mine was first and came out when the game was on everyone's mind, it was the only one that got so much attention.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7379821
"The harder I practice, the luckier I get' - Gary Player, a legendary South African golfer.
It is really just luck. For every OP with 6 figures in profit for their icon pack, there are a thousand more who dream of making $17 and will never see it. The reality of the world is that there are far more hardworking and talented people than there are successful people, and blindly toiling holding out hope of getting lucky might not be the best use of ones efforts. Imagine if OP never got the plug from the influencer. Would it be worth it to take time away from, say, working a full time job to make a grand total of $17 for all your efforts? Absolutely not, that is realizing a loss. Instead, people should be strategic about their efforts, and direct them toward whatever opportunities are available in your life that offer a return for little risk. Not busting ass and hoping luck will one day come in to pay you for all the labor you put in.
>people should be strategic about their efforts, and direct them toward whatever opportunities are available in your life that offer a return for little risk.
I believe you summed up what he did to achieve his "luck."
He said he made $6k before the influencer came along. Seems pretty good for a start.
And because he has made strategic, low-risk efforts in the past, this opportunity actually became possible. The influencer never would have gotten a whiff of this otherwise.
I believe you summed up what he did to achieve his "luck."
He said he made $6k before the influencer came along. Seems pretty good for a start.
And because he has made strategic, low-risk efforts in the past, this opportunity actually became possible. The influencer never would have gotten a whiff of this otherwise.
So you, I, all the HN commenters, and the author, all had the same probability of making $100,000 from iOS icons last week? Was it just a random roll of the dice? I guess we were just unlucky then. Fingers crossed for next week.
To say "it is really just luck" is honestly just ridiculous. Our probability was 0%. His probability was significantly higher, due to the previous work and decisions he has made. That's not "just luck".
There is no such thing as a deterministic, risk-free business strategy. You can only make bets, try to maximise your odds, and repeat. That's what the author is doing. I knew nothing about him before today, but I can see his business ethos. He's doing a good job, and the market is validating that with their wallets.
To say "it is really just luck" is honestly just ridiculous. Our probability was 0%. His probability was significantly higher, due to the previous work and decisions he has made. That's not "just luck".
There is no such thing as a deterministic, risk-free business strategy. You can only make bets, try to maximise your odds, and repeat. That's what the author is doing. I knew nothing about him before today, but I can see his business ethos. He's doing a good job, and the market is validating that with their wallets.
It sounds like you did not make six figures from your icon pack. Do you have a link to it so that I can buy it? I'm dying to try it out.
It's like Among Us.
Published in 2018, absolutely exploded in 2020 due to a single Twitch streamer. I'm pretty sure the devs of Among Us became millionaires virtually overnight. Influencers with large followings wield awesome power.
Published in 2018, absolutely exploded in 2020 due to a single Twitch streamer. I'm pretty sure the devs of Among Us became millionaires virtually overnight. Influencers with large followings wield awesome power.
Also before the hype, Among Us wasn't doing well at all. They went from practically zero to straight millions. That's some crazy luck.
And Flappy Bird before that, right?
I don't think Flappy Bird went viral as a result of a single or even multiple influencers. It seemed to spread by word-of-mouth and blew up that way.
> Although originally unsuccessful, the game received a massive influx of players after being reviewed by the Swedish YouTuber PewDiePie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flappy_Bird
Wikipedias source for that, https://www.businessinsider.com/flappy-bird-origin-2014-2?r=...
Wikipedias source for that, https://www.businessinsider.com/flappy-bird-origin-2014-2?r=...
I stand, incredibly, corrected.
My takeaway from the success of these things is that influencers need to happen upon them organically rather than being paid to advertise them.
Influencers are so valuable per hour that I doubt there is any real estate on their social media pages for organic content that hasn't already been paid for.
distribution > product
There is nothing on this blog that I can see except text and some links at the bottom, yet if I have JS disabled I just get a black page.
JS to display text. Brilliant.
JS to display text. Brilliant.
I recently made the switch from a Gatsby-powered version of my blog to a traditional server-templating based one. Currently there's zero JS on my website. The immediate impact is that my website is much more lightweight and loads and renders much faster. I plan to A/B test the visitor behavior across these two versions and share the results.
Though if you really go all in on no-JS (which I understand what OP isn't recommending), there are certain issues. Like if you have a "subscribe" button at the bottom of your page, using a non-AJAX POST request to submit the email will not get you to the bottom of the page by itself (which would come for free if using JS). So using JS can provide a better UX in these aspects.
EDIT: The blog in question: https://pythonautomationtutorial.com
Though if you really go all in on no-JS (which I understand what OP isn't recommending), there are certain issues. Like if you have a "subscribe" button at the bottom of your page, using a non-AJAX POST request to submit the email will not get you to the bottom of the page by itself (which would come for free if using JS). So using JS can provide a better UX in these aspects.
EDIT: The blog in question: https://pythonautomationtutorial.com
I really wish HTML5 supported the image loading style where a very low-res image is encoded in base64 with a heavy blur, and then the real image is loaded later and then replaced. That's the default in Gatsby (and its clones), and it truly does feel quite nice. You have a huge (0.25MB, 1080p, never cached due to bad ETAG generation) JPEG that takes at minimum 1.6 seconds to download, and keeps showing the browser loading animation while it's active, while the image is loaded in vertical chunks at a time. Firefox puts a turtle next to that asset to show that it takes a while to download.
> much more lightweight and loads and renders much faster
Were you hosting it on the same host you're currently using? The downside with server-side templating is that you can't use a cheap global CDN like GitHub Pages or Netlify, which will be faster than your own servers in pretty much every case. The few extra KBs of JS (compressed) is likely offset by the latency of physical distance.
> much more lightweight and loads and renders much faster
Were you hosting it on the same host you're currently using? The downside with server-side templating is that you can't use a cheap global CDN like GitHub Pages or Netlify, which will be faster than your own servers in pretty much every case. The few extra KBs of JS (compressed) is likely offset by the latency of physical distance.
I think the animsition plugin I was using was causing some issues, so I removed it.
I also have JS disabled on mobile and it loaded fine. Using Chrome on android. Maybe its something else?
I guess you're not a "practicing minimalist"
Works fine for me on Firefox 81 with JS disabled.
React.
Doesn't this piss search engines off? Does the content even get indexed?
I'm sure they're sophisticated enough to be able to render the website properly w/ JS. Search engines aren't just regular simple crawlers (not that I condone the use of JS for what could have been a simple static HTML & CSS page given how minimal it is).
Google started rendering pages before indexing a while back because of this...so generally it's ok from an indexing perspective (assuming you still have working URLs that can also be loaded in the same way for all your linked-to content).
So the trick to being in the right place at the right time is to find the right place, then just wait there for the right time to arrive.
I guess the gist of it is more that with digital assets you don't really need to wait at the right place. You keep laying "traps" in several places as you "wait". Then just keep on the lookout and when one of the "traps" is triggered go and attack it again taking in mind the current context.
If you read his post, he says to continually publish to find out what sticks. Your comment sounds like you want to publish once and succeed. You need to also fail to succeed.
I don't think we disagree. One of Unity's founders once compared what they did, making a game engine for Mac, to building a ship in the desert. Then the iPhone App Store came along, like a tidal wave through the desert, and they've been riding that wave ever since.
> find the right place
But you won’t know it’s the “right place” until after the fact.
But you won’t know it’s the “right place” until after the fact.
Meta rant: Why, oh why do people use low contrast colors and expect people to be able to read their blog? Has nobody heard about accessibility? Or do they not care, because “I can read it”.
> Has nobody heard about accessibility? Or do they not care, because “I can read it”.
Genuinely, no. For those who have it, vision is such an integral part of...well, existence that intuitively grasping that people have completely different ways of perceiving it beyond the obvious is extremely difficult. This goes a bit beyond the "try to explain 'blue' to someone" troupe. I have difficulties explaining my own brand of vision difficulties (or hearing difficulties, for that matter) without basically explaining the optics of vision and going from there.
For instance, for folks with without some kind of color difficulties, being able to look at two colors (what most would perceive as) completely different colors and being able to say "those colors would look the same to color blind folks" is almost impossible without training or extra tools.
So no, it doesn't occur to someone without training to constant question their own perception, unfortunately. The most we can do is give web masters a shout when we notice and promote accessibility tools wherever we can
Genuinely, no. For those who have it, vision is such an integral part of...well, existence that intuitively grasping that people have completely different ways of perceiving it beyond the obvious is extremely difficult. This goes a bit beyond the "try to explain 'blue' to someone" troupe. I have difficulties explaining my own brand of vision difficulties (or hearing difficulties, for that matter) without basically explaining the optics of vision and going from there.
For instance, for folks with without some kind of color difficulties, being able to look at two colors (what most would perceive as) completely different colors and being able to say "those colors would look the same to color blind folks" is almost impossible without training or extra tools.
So no, it doesn't occur to someone without training to constant question their own perception, unfortunately. The most we can do is give web masters a shout when we notice and promote accessibility tools wherever we can
I get what you're saying, but decreasing vision acuity is one thing everybody in this world is guaranteed to run into (barring an early death, that is).
100% agree. As someone who is sadly now closer to 50 than 40, I have endured a marked decrease in my ability to focus on things close to my eyes, such as ... my phone. This is especially painful for me because for most of my life I have had better than average vision. I still have great vision at a distance, but at arm's length I struggle. And reading glasses make me ill. It kinda sucks.
So I completely appreciate accessibility options. I've tweaked my iPhone settings to improve contrast wherever possible. What annoys me a lot is how many app designers think some form of gray-on-gray text is perfectly readable. No, no it's not. Black on white, white on black. Something with more contrast, please.
So I completely appreciate accessibility options. I've tweaked my iPhone settings to improve contrast wherever possible. What annoys me a lot is how many app designers think some form of gray-on-gray text is perfectly readable. No, no it's not. Black on white, white on black. Something with more contrast, please.
I also don't think it would be the firs time younger people do not comprehend the difficulties of aging, but that's a whole other bowl of wax
The contrast ratio between #000000 and #8F9BA8 is 7.42:1 which passes accessibility guidelines.
> For many of us, some of these combinations are not very readable. That is why 4.5:1 is a minimal contrast ratio.
Having a thin stroke (the space font face) and small character size (18 px, which is a 12 pt equivalent) for your typeface typically means that you need to increase the contrast to compensate.
In other words, 7.5:1 is insufficient given the design choices. Even if it's "legal".
Having a thin stroke (the space font face) and small character size (18 px, which is a 12 pt equivalent) for your typeface typically means that you need to increase the contrast to compensate.
In other words, 7.5:1 is insufficient given the design choices. Even if it's "legal".
Guidelines are only a map, they are not the territory. The eye of the beholder is more important than the contrast ratio.
I'm 25 and this is still a little uncomfortable to read.
Heh, the whole page just looks black to me, and I have normal vision and the latest version of Firefox.
When I was a teen white text on black was easy to read and cool. I remember my dad making a comment about how it was hard to read and a bit incredulous that I was fine with it. As I got older, not so much in certain contexts. The author is probably young.
I checked Chrome DevTools and it looks accessible. even though, it's hard to read.
Chrome tools will tell you if it meets the minimum "don't sue me" standards, not whether it's readable. Their other choices - thin stroke font, minimal font size - make the contrast insufficient.
Just use Reader View to make it more accessible.
Perhaps an unpopular opinion but I thought the opposite, was very easy on the eyes.
Also, I think the issue isn't contrast, but line weight
Pro tip: Ctrl+Alt+R in firefox :-)
This appears to do absolutely nothing.
Reader mode. The key combination will change by OS.
Looks like a Windows combination to me and it's not what FF uses for the Reader mode.
Maybe he's talking about reader view which, for me, can be enabled with F9 or clicking the icon in the address bar (https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-reader-view-clu...)
All I'm seeing is a completely black page. Wonder if it's uBlock origin, Firefox, or macOS that the page doesn't play nice with.
I believe this was the animsition script that was causing the issues. I removed it and should load fine now.
The same issue occurs on https://super.so/, if you happen to have any affiliation with them.
Same here, but if you let the page sit for ~30 seconds, it suddenly loads some content. Probably a very unoptimized homepage design.
For me, on Windows10/FF82b4, I had to click the reader view mode. No clue why it rendered like that by default.
I thought it was uBlock, and disabled it to see what would happen. Once I refreshed the page, it displayed which led me to believe something weird was going.
I tried again with uBlock enabled and refreshed the page which worked. So the bottom line is, refresh the page, and you should see the content.
I tried again with uBlock enabled and refreshed the page which worked. So the bottom line is, refresh the page, and you should see the content.
[deleted]
Blank page with FF + uBlock but then the text appeared after page refresh.
Two questions:
- who pays $28 for icons you have to install yourself one by one?!
- most of these icons are protected by copyright/trademark laws, how is still legal?
- who pays $28 for icons you have to install yourself one by one?!
- most of these icons are protected by copyright/trademark laws, how is still legal?
> Try many things once to figure out what you want to do twice.
For some reason, that was the line that stuck with me the most.
Now, the only real skill I have is in software development, but fortunately there are a lot of things to try in software development, so I can give that suggestion a try run.
For some reason, that was the line that stuck with me the most.
Now, the only real skill I have is in software development, but fortunately there are a lot of things to try in software development, so I can give that suggestion a try run.
Well, from a business perspective this is no less than very impressive. Was he just a heck of a lucky guy? I don't know, luck is everywhere now, but the guy was pretty aware of the steps his product was taking and was able to react accordingly to maximize revenue... that's the secret.
> So I quickly packaged them, uploaded them to Gumroad, and embedded them on a Notion site using Super. All of this took about two hours.
Love the software stack. Is this the norm these days? Am I out of touch with web tech?
Love the software stack. Is this the norm these days? Am I out of touch with web tech?
This is heartening. I've made some goofy stuff recently that I've been vacillating between releasing or not.
The most complete thing is a uhh.. parody text editor.. game. I've seen other indie projects recently that gave me all sorts of imposter syndrome and made me second guess the value in something so critical as a text editor made for laughs. I'm encouraged by a 28$ icon pack to wrap it up and put it out there, even if it's for 2$ and doesn't sell at all. Ride or die, right?
The most complete thing is a uhh.. parody text editor.. game. I've seen other indie projects recently that gave me all sorts of imposter syndrome and made me second guess the value in something so critical as a text editor made for laughs. I'm encouraged by a 28$ icon pack to wrap it up and put it out there, even if it's for 2$ and doesn't sell at all. Ride or die, right?
Ah, success, luck and skill. A really interesting topic.
There is also a very good Veritasium Video about that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LopI4YeC4I
There is also a very good Veritasium Video about that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LopI4YeC4I
This is a typical phenomenon of Extremistan: https://coffeeandjunk.com/mediocristan-extremistan/
28 is too high for icons. The conversion rate is very telling. Do a 70% sale and promote it and watch it rocket. Maybe that was the plan
The good-ole be lucky story.
Re: the icon set that this guy's pitching - does anyone remember the Prada phone? It was one beautifully done UI.
https://www.slashgear.com/prada-phone-3-0-by-lg-review-08215...
https://www.slashgear.com/prada-phone-3-0-by-lg-review-08215...
It looks like an amateurishly themed phone to me. But I probably would have thought differently in 2012.
I have several side projects and blog regularly and can definitely agree that it's rain or shine for smaller creators without large audiences. I go from several sales in a day to weeks without any interest.
Edit: That being said I'm on Twitter @k0ode if you want to follow along.
Edit: That being said I'm on Twitter @k0ode if you want to follow along.
Get an influencer and you can sell even an icon pack at $28 to thousands of people.
"the idea of being annoying or over-sharing is only an idea that you invent to stop you from sharing" - I strongly disagree. It's invented by the community to prevent enormous amounts of spam.
Anyone know which font that is? Devtools says "space" but for obvious reasons it's hard to find with Google search. Space Mono is made by Colophon but I don't see it on their website.
Space Grotesk by Florian Karsten
https://fonts.floriankarsten.com/space-grotesk
Thanks!
> All from one. Single. Tweet.
Well yes, but you usually either need (a) tens of thousands of pre-existing Twitter followers or (b) a huge amount of luck that some celebrity that you @ed retweets you.
Well yes, but you usually either need (a) tens of thousands of pre-existing Twitter followers or (b) a huge amount of luck that some celebrity that you @ed retweets you.
Seems lots of people are jumping on the bandwagon: https://gumroad.com/l/aLnrp
Hmm I can see this potentially creating a new market. The biggest issue is probably getting app developers on board with variations of their logo.
Nothing is as powerful as having someone’s attention. If Brownlee can get this guy $100K with a tweet imagine what he’s pulling down himself.
The most important point was missed: MKBHD happened
How do these idea even pop into ones head? How can I start hustling? I’m a simple pleb engineer at FAANG, but want to get rich quick.
If you are working at a FAANG you are already getting rich quick.
Working as a freelancer / small business hustler etc., bursts of success like this are extraordinarily rare, and typically fall between long seasons of not making much at all.
The upside of the freelancing / side hustling life isn’t the money, it’s the freedom.
Working as a freelancer / small business hustler etc., bursts of success like this are extraordinarily rare, and typically fall between long seasons of not making much at all.
The upside of the freelancing / side hustling life isn’t the money, it’s the freedom.
Lots of practice, learning, and failure. This guy got a great combination of product/market fit, timing, and exposure. Finding product/market fit is a skill trainable like anything else (although an incredibly difficult skill to master), timing is just that (plenty of luck involved - but easier with product/market fit). Finally: exposure is easy with the first two - if you have solved a hot problem really well, of course everyone will pick up on that and make it viral.
Start with practicing finding product market fit and getting better at timing things. If you can do those, the rest (exposure, wealth, connections, etc) fall into place. It’s that simple, but it definitely isn’t easy at all
Start with practicing finding product market fit and getting better at timing things. If you can do those, the rest (exposure, wealth, connections, etc) fall into place. It’s that simple, but it definitely isn’t easy at all
But I have the mindset that icons aren't worth a god damn dime yet 100k.
Be smart and creative, think different, and most importantly actually try stuff. Have a product in the world that people can pay you for. Don’t expect anything to happen but do it anyway. Whatever idea sets off a feeling of fear and excitement, do that idea. Don’t wait for a safe bet because there are none. If you are embarrassed to describe your idea because it doesn’t make sense to people, that’s also a good sign.
Oh no I just bought this but then I looked at the instructions... It's not for the faint of heart to do this for every app.
Nice coverage for super.so, too! That bump will keep boosting the earnings from this icon pack - whole ecosytem you have here.
The "no copyright intended" notice on super.so is the text equivalent of nails on a chalkboard.
My takeaway from this is build an audience.
I must congratulate you on having a settings icon not be a gear, or even a less meaningful tool of some sort.
People what to change an X
but can not make one theirself
so find someone who sell an X
that fits the willing
(x={icon,...})
(x={icon,...})
He writes "97% profit margins". How is that possible if AppStore takes 30%?
EDIT: This seems to be outside AppStore.
EDIT: This seems to be outside AppStore.
It isn't an App Store app, he's taking payment on his own site and delivering PNGs to an email address.
Not sure how I feel about the article. Kind of reads like those "I got stupid lucky this one time, so can you!" fluff pieces at best, and at worst is just further advertisement/marketing for the icon pack.
Not sure how I feel about the article. Kind of reads like those "I got stupid lucky this one time, so can you!" fluff pieces at best, and at worst is just further advertisement/marketing for the icon pack.
> I got stupid lucky this one time, so can you!
If you publish often, act immediately, be transparent, etc, etc. Luck is at the intersection of preparation and opportunity.
If you publish often, act immediately, be transparent, etc, etc. Luck is at the intersection of preparation and opportunity.
It is advertisement for his "Notion to Website" product. It's nicely done, because this is the first thing I got from the article, and I think so will most entrepreneur types reading it. The whole point is "I made $100k from being able to quickly spin up a website + payment system at the right time".
Not sure how far you read, but the "lessons learned" at the bottom abstracts very well from the necessary but not sufficient "I got lucky" condition. I found it informative.
> just further advertisement/marketing for the icon pack.
this reads 100% like most blog posts looking to promote their product. a bit of inspiration wrapped around 'try my product!', with a dash of bragging about their success.
this reads 100% like most blog posts looking to promote their product. a bit of inspiration wrapped around 'try my product!', with a dash of bragging about their success.
I shared the post with the sole goal of sharing the story behind it. I only linked the icons so people can have context.
> a bit of inspiration wrapped around 'try my product!'
Where exactly did you find a “try my product” in the post?
Where exactly did you find a “try my product” in the post?
The notion stuff. The entire post is about using his product to quickly create a website that capitalizes on timing.
Ok, I hear you. But I disagree that the entire post is about that. It was just a paragraph (which I didn’t even really notice initially).
the actual tweet (doesn't seem to be linked in the article) https://twitter.com/traf/status/1307707156788060160
Good job on the icons. They look more apple than the Appleish than the apple icons.
What blows my mind is how humble and optimistic that post is. I think the author is still a little bit sceptic: he was well prepared and after initial success he executed perfectly but still: what are the odds? Good luck!
The most important part to achieve this: Have a lot of luck
[deleted]
so how much was paid in ads on twitter and how much was paid to the influencer?
Congrats !
> In 2013, the jailbreaking days of iOS were in full effect.
I thought jailbreaking was basically over by 2013
I thought jailbreaking was basically over by 2013
That’s correct. That’s around
The downfall of jailbreaking.
it is always good to read success after the story.
[deleted]
Apple users pay 28 USD for an icon pack. I'm blown away. Is this how they behave with everything? Just ask what you want and they will pay for it?
4,188 sales out of 6,200,000 impressions. That's a 0.0675% conversion rate. The exposure is what's driving the numbers.
When the author said "charge more" that's correct when the initial price was $1. I wonder the conversion rate on this if it had been $7. Maybe at a quarter of the price there would have been five times or even ten times the sales. We don't know because no data was gathered. Clearly the conversions would have been higher at a notably lower price, but it's unclear where the crossover point for total profits would be. Alternately, some portion of those 4188 buyers would have purchased at $60 or even $80.
Something to remember here is while you can as a consultant make more money in 40 hours if you charge more per hour for your time rather than working extra hours or turning away excess work, the point the author made about leveraging digital distribution should prove it's not the same scenario. Once your development cost is sunk, distribution (outside of an app store) is nearly free. Selling fewer units at a higher price isn't necessarily any better than selling more units at a lower price. The total's the thing.
When the author said "charge more" that's correct when the initial price was $1. I wonder the conversion rate on this if it had been $7. Maybe at a quarter of the price there would have been five times or even ten times the sales. We don't know because no data was gathered. Clearly the conversions would have been higher at a notably lower price, but it's unclear where the crossover point for total profits would be. Alternately, some portion of those 4188 buyers would have purchased at $60 or even $80.
Something to remember here is while you can as a consultant make more money in 40 hours if you charge more per hour for your time rather than working extra hours or turning away excess work, the point the author made about leveraging digital distribution should prove it's not the same scenario. Once your development cost is sunk, distribution (outside of an app store) is nearly free. Selling fewer units at a higher price isn't necessarily any better than selling more units at a lower price. The total's the thing.
People who just want something that sets them apart from their peers.
Why are you blown away? People pay 50 USD for a personalised phone cover. Is this different because it's software?
Why are you blown away? People pay 50 USD for a personalised phone cover. Is this different because it's software?
There is no difference between these two kinds of insane behaviours.
Okay you seem to have a weird worldview. I’m intrigued. Why do you think it’s insane? Did you ever buy clothes? What did you buy and what was your reasoning?
> Just ask what you want and they will pay for it?
Consider that, for many, spending $28 on a meal is something they do without a second thought.
If they are willing to spend that on food, which is a need they have much more often, why wouldn't they spend it on frivolous one time purchases?
That's consumer culture in a nutshell.
Consider that, for many, spending $28 on a meal is something they do without a second thought.
If they are willing to spend that on food, which is a need they have much more often, why wouldn't they spend it on frivolous one time purchases?
That's consumer culture in a nutshell.
People pay to activate windows 10 which is 3x the price.
I'm an Apple user since 2007. I didn't buy this icon pack.
He forgot the most important lesson: be lucky :)
So he says oversharing doesn't exist? I built https://20-things.com but I doubt anyone would care to look at its source code since it was built with ASP.NET MVC (not Core). To publish or not to publish?
Microsoft published the source code for things like calc and other ancient tools (I seem to remember notepad and minesweeper but I could be wrong). The interest was huge and it made the HN front page.
So why not? If nothing else, it is historically significant.
So why not? If nothing else, it is historically significant.
Valid point. I'll get it out asap. Thank you.
What blows me away is that this is 2020 and iOS still won't let you place icons anywhere you want on your screen.
It's not just that you're not allowed to make your home screen look the way you want it, it's that even if you decide for a certain ordering, moving the icons in the right order is tougher than a sliding puzzle.
It's not just that you're not allowed to make your home screen look the way you want it, it's that even if you decide for a certain ordering, moving the icons in the right order is tougher than a sliding puzzle.
The way widgets are handled in iOS 14, I'll go so far as to say Apple decided this would never be available.
It's all very automated now, the re-ordering of icon placements based on widget insertion, the folding and unfolding of "screens" based on the flow of icons to the next screen when widgets push an overflow.
It's all very automated now, the re-ordering of icon placements based on widget insertion, the folding and unfolding of "screens" based on the flow of icons to the next screen when widgets push an overflow.
Apple decides things will never happen until they make them available (e.g. the iPhone 1 didn't support third party apps).
You are describing how the broken way iOS handles icons works. Great. That was not my point. It's broken in the first place.
Do you know how many operating system developed in the past forty years don't allow users to position icons where they want?
There's just one: iOS.
I just don't understand the motivation behind this decision. It makes no sense.
You are describing how the broken way iOS handles icons works. Great. That was not my point. It's broken in the first place.
Do you know how many operating system developed in the past forty years don't allow users to position icons where they want?
There's just one: iOS.
I just don't understand the motivation behind this decision. It makes no sense.
I saw other people complaining online so I posted the updated resource file on my $5/mo shared hosting and put a link on a forum...it was picked up on some blogs but I didn’t realize it had become popular, then I woke up a couple of days later and I’d blown through 10s of gigs of bandwidth and had my hosting account frozen (conveniently the day I’d planned a long roadtrip to test a gps/photo sharing app I’d been working on).
Years later people were still asking if I could help them change their iTunes icons, or even getting mad at me that I hadn’t updated the file to work with newer versions!
https://osxdaily.com/2010/09/03/get-color-icons-back-in-the-...