Happiness is an Old iPad Keyboard
This morning I picked up on an article sent to me by Apple News. I like these daily emails because they give me headline overviews of curated articles, only some of which I have otherwise seen in my regular news feeds from the New York Times, Washington Post, WSJ, the New Yorker, National Geographic or Financial Times. I would estimate that at least two thirds of the headlines are things I would not otherwise see in magazines like The Atlantic, Vanity Fair, Scientific American and the wider array of publications that just don’t fit my limited capacity for regular consumption. I could probably find out, but I don’t know if this curation process involves personalization (my guess it does, like so much these days on the internet and in entertainment). What I do know is that there are always a few articles that I will click through to and read in greater detail. If I am taken to a site that doesn’t give me access to the article because I am not a subscriber, I give both that publisher and Apple News a demerit and very rarely will consider a “forced” purchase like that. Luckily, most of the click through work and just serve to generally promote that publisher to my thinking as to whether I want to add them to my subscription array (something I try very hard not to do). The article that grabbed me this morning is on a topic that always interests me…happiness. Ever since I went through the Coca Cola World Happiness Center in Atlanta about ten years ago, I’ve been interested in the theories of happiness. This article in Apple News came from Health and it was titled What Does It Mean To Be Happy?
The article looked at the thinking of six purported experts on happiness (does that mean they are really good at being happy or just students of the topic of happiness?) who range in age from 35 to 64. I thought it was interesting that the author, Stephanie Booth, chose to list every expert’s age, but hasn’t listed her age in the article, on her personal website or in the various bios that I was able to find on her online. My question is an obvious one, is age a factor in happiness? I can vote either way on that. Most of us would assume that the young are bright-eyed and happier by nature than older, more jaundiced versions of ourselves. Then again, older people like me that are retired and doing more of what they want to be doing should have the time to be reflective (one of the characteristics the experts cite as the basis for happiness) and thus, should be closer to finding happiness. We have all heard that money cannot buy happiness, but we all also know that the basis of so much unhappiness defaults to financial issues or the lack of money. So what’s the answer there as well?
One of the most compelling theories on happiness is the one espoused at the Coca Cola Happiness Center, that the ability to live in the moment (not in the past and not in the future) is the secret to that higher state. That makes some sense because you have all of your senses working for you simultaneously, both physically and mentally and, after all, life is, by definition, an ephemeral state that we all get in only limited quantities, so it would seem a waste of a precious resource to not embrace every moment to its maximum. But then again, memories are very pleasant and can filter out the bad and pain and leave only the best of life. And dreams of the future are generally thought to be the very essence of euphoria (assuming that your mindset avoids the dread and fear of the unknown). You can pick at any of these analyses of something as intangible and undefinable as happiness. I guess that’s why people like to study it, write about it and collect the various views of it to share in survey articles like this one from Apple News. By the way, I copied the link and texted it to my inner circle family members (meaning Kim, the kids and their significant others).
That causes me to ask myself why I chose that subgroup to send this piece on happiness. I share everything with Kim, so that is no surprise. And I feel very close to my kids and have always said that all I want for them is that they be happy, so that seemed appropriate grounds for sending the article. I also adhere to the notion that you are as happy as your unhappiest child, so there is something in it for me to see to their happiness as much as I can. I included their significant others because if they are anything like me (and I think they all are to some degree), their happiness is very much a function of their happiness in their primary relationship. As to why I didn’t include my other family or friends with whom I feel close, I always worry that I might be sending them too much. I send them photos from our journeys. I send them my blog stories. I send then emails with important observations or updates about our lives. I figure that by now they all know and have access to my blog and if they have the time, interest and inclination, they can read about things like this happiness article in this very blog. They can then either just search for it online or ask me to forward it to them. If they can’t be bothered to do either of those, then I chose wisely in not sending it to them in the first place. That’s my argument for who I include or exclude in such things, and I’m sticking to it.
In a few weeks I will be traveling to Des Moines, Iowa for a trial in which I am an expert witness. There was a scheduling issue of concern given the relative scarcity of airline seats these days and the need to book in advance combined with the uncertainty about when the trial would require my presence. Naturally, the client does not want to pay for an expert to be sitting in a hotel room waiting to give his testimony, so they were a bit unsure of how to schedule this. I gave them an easy answer. I said I would plan to come for three nights and that I would not charge them for waiting time since I can do what I do when not giving expert testimony in the hotel or generally in Des Moines so long as I had my iPad with me. That pleased them and solved the problem, but it also made me think about what I was saying.
I live on my iPad. I spend at least 4-6 hours a day typing something on my iPad. My impatience combined with the technological efficiency of the iPad operating system make it far preferable to me than using a laptop computer. It’s size (I use an iPad Pro and have since they introduced it) is far superior to using any size of iPhone, which I use in a pinch (like when I fried my iPad during our cruise down the Nile). But the thing that makes the iPad work for me is the attached keypad that is now pretty ubiquitously attached to every iPad (certainly to every iPad Pro). For several years I used a basic Apple keyboard that had a fully sealed set of keys that had less than perfect key action, but also avoided concern about getting junk under and in-between the keys. The screen just had two leaning positions and Bob’s Your Uncle. It was small, lightweight and compact and did little to alter the profile of the iPad. Then a few years ago they released a new keyboard that had an aluminum hinge with and extra charging port and a sturdier yet less flexible screen stand. You couldn’t just fold it over to use the pure tablet if you wanted. But it did have regular, but low profile keys with more normal key action and, most importantly, a touchpad. This new keyboard cost more than double the price of the old simple one. In fact, the new keyboard costs more than most basic off-brand laptops. I eventually converted and got used to it, convincing myself that the pros outweighed the cons.
Lat week, my left shift key started to get sticky (like a piece of cookie or something had gotten lodged under it…an altogether likely possibility). I went to buy a new keyboard online and absent-mindedly bought one price pointed at the lower price range. What came was a keyboard from Apple that was identical to the old one I used to use. Gone were the new features and gone were the new drawbacks. So far, I think I like this old version better and have found happiness in an old iPad keyboard.