Contrastingly, Minimal (minimal.app) is a markdown notes app made by me for me (for one person!) improved to support 100 thoughtful writers, improved again to support thousands, then tens of thousands… now 6 years later I continue to ship meaningful updates (OS parity, new features, better designs for existing features, greater stability and performance, and occasionally entirely new patterns).

What made the difference? For one thing, I know better than to ignore the future. A small success in 2020 was like a seed planted amidst an infinite future, and I knew to water the seed. Secondly, I continue prioritize this fulcrum between complexity and utility, where the app gets better by getting simpler wherever possible (most people neglect this fulcrum as not offering much “business opportunity,” failing to realize it is the foundation of all business opportunities). Finally, I just love it, and appreciate that others love it too.

(For those interested, you’re welcome to join the beta at minimal.app/#beta on Apple devices and contribute to the roadmap.)

I was speaking with an architect a few months ago and dismayed to learn that they no longer bother designing for thermal management (relying on air-conditioning alone). They are fully focused on the aesthetic "integration" of the structure in the landscape. (I use quotes for the word "integration" because it implies a harmonious coalescing across domains, including temperature.) Their prior work beautifully incorporated passive heating/cooling, much to the benefit of the clients' health and happiness. Where did this architect lose the thread?

I've noticed in general a thorough dismissal of passive benefits. It seems that we are caught by a cultural need for immediacy. Thermal management, and particularly passive thermal management, pays immense dividends slowly, but it takes a greater intelligence or broader perspective for anyone to appreciate these advantages.

Those who sit still and think clearly see the advantages of passive benefits, and anyone who gardens or does systems design intrinsically observes the long-term flows and thus understands the passive benefits at play. But so many people – from practitioners like the architect to stakeholders like their clients – go through life wholly unaware of this goldmine that is right there in front of their imagination.

> passive thermal management

I lived in an almost passive house for about a year. When the HVAC system stopped working* in July, I didn't notice until the middle of November.

* Air handler was running, compressor was off.

Key adjustment to your first proposal: the additional property tax should also be waived when having long-term renters/occupants.

The surface area of the Apple suite is now enormous. We now have an incredible array of devices, physical environments, and purposes. It's really quite staggering: just look at the spans between a) checking the UV index on Apple Watch and writing code in Xcode on Mac, b) tracking an outdoor run and navigating with Car Play and watching a movie on Apple TV, and c) messaging and maneuvering spreadsheets and designing/building. Huge expanse across each spectrum.

Apple's effort to maintain some semblance of consistency across this incredible array is laudable. (Which is not the same as letting the grievances highlighted in this article slide; I agree with the author 100%.) We all want consistency (probably to a degree greater than Apple is capable of delivering) simply so that we can use the metaphors we're familiar with.

I imagine Apple has dozens of design teams, each of which cannot talk to more than a sliver of the others, with probably not a single person aware of exactly how many design teams exist at once. There was probably a period in Apple's history – and probably not that long ago – when a single employee could assess the iconography across the entire suite. Those days are over.

My question: beyond preventing the obvious and severe transgressions (Liquid Glass), what systemic solutions are available on a scale like Apple's to maintain high-quality and strong consistency?

(I appreciate that Apple does generally one design refresh per year, in contrast to the continuous zero-utility tinkering observable in Google's products, for example.)

> We all want consistency (probably to a degree greater than Apple is capable of delivering)

This thinking is the fatal poison of the tech industry. The further you repeat it, the faster the industry dies. Watch:

"We all want privacy, probably to a greater degree than Facebook is capable of providing."

"We all want browser competition, probably to a greater degree than Microsoft is willing to provide."

"We all want advertisement options, probably to a greater degree than Google can tolerate."

See what's happening here? You're not making a concession, you're flat-out accepting their failure. Apple can provide consistency, they're a trillion-dollar business that has every incentive to compete on their own merits. Instead they carve out arbitrary and harmful rules for each platform and then steelman it when any authority of any kind suggests that they're wrong.

This isn't a "perfect being the enemy of good" situation, it's degraded into "good being the enemy of intolerable defaults" instead.

My question "what systemic solutions are available on a scale like Apple's to maintain high-quality and strong consistency?" was sincere.

I'm neither complacent (as you seemed to imply) nor magically hand-waiving a "just do it" notion (as you seem to exemplify). I'm seriously interested in what it takes to effectively manage complexity as this scale.

1. Consider preordering the book if you're already reacting to part of its premise; it should be a juicy read.

2. Regarding the power of billionaires vs the power of the median voter, consider that each lever in a system deserves attention before pulling on it or reconfiguring it. How can one determine "the biggest threat to democracy" without digging into the details?

It sounds like this book would be a good candidate for your reading list.

It would be great if you have tried to express yourself other than some weird implications.

The comment is sincere. You appear to disagree with the book’s argument prior to having heard it — a great candidate for a mind-opening read. If the book (once published) proves its premise, you’ll disproportionately benefit from the read. (I personally like it when a book stretches my existing conceptions.)

I thing you might have misunderstood me.

I do not disagree with the book's argument. I'm just pointing out (or rather expressing my doubt) that the word "code" brings no additional context to the sentence.

As others (and I) rightfully noted - code and modern tech does make things cheaper and easier, but this can be said about all advances.

The "nerd reich" is not possible without code, code is not possible without computers, computers are not possible without abacus etc.

As I see it the word "code" sells this book better than, say, "taxes". Because taxes are boring and obvious.

> Profitability isn't unambitious; it's controlling your own destiny.

Even better, profitability is all about a harmonious developer-customer relationship. This was alluded to later in the essay, but I believe it is worth emphasizing. The entire point of business is to serve customers. That relationship is everything, and profitability indicates the presence of net-positive impact.

I’m curious if any of these centrally planned capital city relocations have succeeded. Brasilia, for example, is widely considered a terrible city. Are there successful examples?

St. Petersburg (at least for some time)

Washington D.C.

Constantinople.

Author here. I am aware of the excessive simplicity, but the 60/30/10 thing is deliberately unsophisticated to make it easier to apply and easier to reason about. My goal in writing this is less about hustle culture and more to consider the asymmetry of our own initiatives: everything matters in different ways, with varying degrees of cascading effects, with varying levels of immediate accessibility. I find this paradigm an effective means of considering what I have going on.