Long post from Wil Shipley exploring some of the seemingly greedy moves Apple has made of late. I've got a post like this one coming, but haven't had the time yet. John Gruber seems to agree, adding:The best thing that could happen to Apple this year would be for Microsoft's Zune 2.0 to be a kick-ass product, both technologically and in terms of being designed to make customers happy, not entertainment conglomerates. Apple needs competition. And I think he's right. Except what are the chances Microsoft is going to make a kick-ass product designed to make customers happy? That's exactly why we've all been counting on Apple.
Anyway, I still think Apple is going to dominate with the iPhone (and successors like the iPod Touch.) Part of the reason why is precisely that these products aren't aimed at geeks like me (and Shipley and Gruber, not to put myself in their company) - they're aimed at the masses. Apple controls the whole stack - the portable device, the computer it syncs with, the OS and software that runs that computer, and the online store it all connects to. They don't care about interop with 3rd parties, they don't care about making geeks happy, and they don't have to (except for the cell carriers, but they'll get rid of them as soon as possible.) It's an interesting dynamic.
WHY DO PEOPLE WANT TO BUST SOMEONE FOR DOING THINGS GREAT??
is it to keep prices down??
I guess the main thing is that geeks (advanced users? developer/users?) want certain features that the majority of users wouldn't ever use or want. One way to deal with this situation is what we could unfairly call the "Linux" way - which is just to add another option to some incredibly complex preference menu in an effort to please everyone. Windows does this a bit too. Apple, unlike any other computer related company I can think of, is relentlessly minimal. This follows, I think, directly from Jobs' artistic vision (remember, he's *not* an engineer in any sense.) He's a minimalist. Clutter is the enemy. Extraneous functions are the enemy. Choice is the enemy. A device, or a piece of software, should do what it does and nothing else - in this way you can make something that "just works." Take it out of the box; plug it in; there is no step three.
But I guess you can maybe take things too far. Or, at least, other people can become suspicious about your motives.
When Apple first introduced the iPhone I immediately fell in love. This was the holy grail and Apple was delivering, seemingly years ahead of what I expected. They were moving the personal computer into its' next phase: the pocket sized portable wireless computer. And this is the future I think. I doubt many people will have desktop computers in ten years. You'll have some box hooked to your giant flat screen TV (TiVO and/or Wii + wireless router/NAS, etc...,) and you'll have something you carry around with you (the cellphone/PC hybrid) and what we think of as a computer today will basically disappear (yeah, there's the small problem of replacing the keyboard, but we'll figure something out.) Anyway, the iPhone was clearly the future. OS X on a pocket sized wireless computer. Hallelujah.
Except it turned out that it wasn't quite OS X. I mean it is, the code is in there, and I'm sure to Jobs it is clearly OS X. But people like me all thought he meant that it was going to be a general purpose computing device. I actually thought the whole open source development stack was going to be running, just like on my PowerBook. I was already planning my Apache/PHP/MySQL apps that were going to be served from my phone. And of course this turned out to be completely wrong. Apple is not making a general purpose mobile computer (or at least not yet, and I suspect never.) What they are making is something closer to a portable wireless iTunes music store client machine. And with the iPod Touch it's even clearer.
So this is where the bad feelings start. I can understand the minimalist vision. Personally I want more features, but I understand they are developing for the majority of consumers, not for me. And if fewer features, and the resulting intuitive streamlined interface, are what's necessary to make it "just work" for regular people, then who am I to complain. I'm free to start my own company I guess.
But what people, including me, are starting to argue is that recently Apple has stepped beyond this. Their minimalism (I'm probably overusing and distorting that word, but I can't think of a better one) has perhaps begun to cross over to the dark side of lock-in and artificial product segmentation.
Why can't 3rd party software developers write programs for the iPhone? According to Jobs it's because of security concerns and the ability of rogue (or just badly written) software to bring down the cellular networks. Except nobody believes that. Why doesn't the iPod Touch have an email client? It runs the same binaries as the iPhone, so the client is already written, there's no extra work for Apple to include it. I think Apple's thinking is that they want to really target a product as narrowly as possible. The Touch isn't an email device, it's an iPod (or really, a portable wireless iTunes Music Store client.) So focus focus focus and make it do one thing insanely well.
And that sort of makes sense, except it's hard not to start disbelieving them. You can't enter appointments in iCal on the Touch? C'mon, that's just rubbing it in. Why the fuck not? I guess, obviously, because they want to keep the cheaper iPod Touch from competing with the iPhone. But is crippling the calendar really going to be a good move in the long run? I doubt it.
But on the other hand, even though these moves bug me, I have to keep reminding myself that it doesn't really matter. And I think this is where Jobs really shines. I wish he was different, but I've got to give him credit. When you pick up one of these devices and play with it you just want one. Whether you can enter appointments in the calendar just isn't going to be a deal breaker. Apple is going to sell as many of these things as they can make whether or not I'm disappointed I can't get to the command line. Like I said, I'm free to start a company and build the device I want. The main problem there is that only a few hundred people would probably want my device, and hundreds of millions are going to want Apple's.
My hope, and I still really do hold out some hope, is that Apple is just concentrating on getting it right first. Build it with a narrow focus; target the largest audience possible; then once you have a giant hit you can start gradually adding features. You have to bring people along slowly if your vision is way out ahead of most people. You just can't drop the uber device made whole out of nowhere. You have to slowly iterate up to it. And they've made a good start. I think they still have some important distance to cover, and a lot of other geeks (especially Apple loving geeks) are thinking the same thing - but at least they've made the start.
Still, in my heart I can be a little disappointed.
jim, you have such a fantastic ability to break things down and convey your enthusiasm. you would be a great teacher. i'll remember that when ryley's attending brooklyn free school and they need guest lecturers/explainers.
ok, understand....merci
I'm sure a guest lecture on Apple's product development strategy will be big hit. Let me know when and I'll email my rider.
Thx for the overview. If it was open, I could slide my EVDO PCMCIA card (not gonna happen) and run the app to get on the internetz. When there's competition (e.g. someone like Samsung comes out with an almost elegant WiMax pocket computer), Apple may be more motivated to open up the gizmo.
I'd buy one tomorrow, but I'm a disc hog. I want a 160 gbyte iPod Touch.
"e.g. someone like Samsung comes out with an almost elegant WiMax pocket computer..."
Exactly. That was Gruber's point about it being a good thing if the Zune 2.0 is really great. Everybody needs competition. You're probably right though that Samsung would be a more likely competitor than MS. They make some nice stuff. Still, I don't think they are going to suddenly develop their own OS, and I don't think Windows Mobile is up to the task. Maybe the Symbian OS on a Samsung or Sony device?
Agreed about wanting a large drive. But on the other hand if the syncing is seamless enough 8 or 16 GBs is plenty big. You've got to plug it in to charge every couple of days, and your music can just rotate then without you having to think about it too much. Combine that with being able to pull something you really want to hear right now off the net and it's not too bad. I guess Apple is pushing hard to go all flash instead of hard drives since this gives them more battery life, probably more reliability, and I'll bet they have a huge cost advantage in flash since they buy so much. I wonder if they are the biggest buyer?
Flash does have wear out. At work we've had issues with flash with apps that get too crazy logging stuff. But in Apple's view, the device is disposable. I agree that the power issue is real, as is the issue of G-force tearing up hard drives. I'm not much of a sync-er. I'd really like a 1 TB iPod. But I'm going to have to wait a few years.
(Should I go ahead and trademark TeraPod? -- "The TeraPod always wins!")
I'm impressed by the number of phones Symbian has racked up, including top tier suppliers.
this one seems cool
Symbian Phones
Nokia N93i
The Nokia N93i follows on from the success of the Nokia N93, which is also based on S60 software on Symbian OS, and is slimmer and more compact in design. The device boasts a host of advanced features including DVD-like quality video capture, direct video uploads, 3.2 megapixel (2048 x 1536 pixels) camera with Carl Zeiss optics, 3x optical zoom, autofocus and close-up mode. With the 1 GB miniSD card included in the standard Nokia N93i sales pack, up to 45 minutes of DVD-like quality video or up to 1250 high-quality photos can be captured.
Armani and Samsung Electronics Join in Product Design
Apple working on an uber iPhone esque PDA? Externally, the mutil-touch PDA has been described by sources as an ultra-thin "slate" akin to the iPhone, about 1.5 times the size and sporting an approximate 720x480 high-resolution display that comprises almost the entire surface of the unit. The device is further believed to leverage multi-touch concepts which have yet to gain widespread adoption in Apple's existing multi-touch products -- the iPhone and iPod touch -- like drag-and-drop and copy-and-paste....
More broadly characterized as Apple's answer to the ultra-mobile PC, the next-gen device is believed to be tracking for a release sometime in the first half of 2008. Assuming the project remains clear of roadblocks, sources believe it could make an inaugural appearance during Jobs' Macworld keynote in January alongside some new Mac offerings. Still, manufacturing ramp and availability would seem unlikely until closer to mid-year, those same sources say. Appleinsider.com hasn't been infallible, but they do get a bunch of things right. I hope this is true. It would seem to support the more generous reading of Apple's moves, i.e., they are moving toward producing a small, portable, wireless, general purpose computing platform, but they are just doing it one small step at a time. The iPhone isn't quite it; the iPod Touch isn't quite it; they are the beginning. This device would be the next step.
Ars says no real SDK for stand alone 3rd party iPhone software development (at least for the foreseeable future,) but somewhat interestingly, Safari is reportedly being updated with a Google Gears like off line local storage capability. Other rumors include more javascript hooks into local resources, and possibly the ability to add local webapps to the home screen.
For the hard core this won't be enough. But might it actually be just enough? Depends on how they deliver, but it's at least possible that they could satisfy most people with this approach. My prediction is that they will fall short on delivery though.
At a minimum we need: access to local storage; full screen operation (so you don't know you're in Safari when you run the app); native widgets; and the ability to add app icon to the home screen. My guess is Apple is going to deliver only the first.
But beyond all that, a big problem few people are noting has to do with the Edge cellular network the iPhone runs on. For most Edge towers (where most really means most) you cannot receive a voice call when using the data connection (the call goes to voice mail.) This is a pretty serious failing of the web based application model. If you're on WiFi okay, but if you're on Edge then using an app makes the phone not work!!! Obviously this makes web apps second class citizens on the iPhone, regardless of how many improvements Apple makes to Safari.
The new 1.1.2 software update gives the iPod Touch the ability to add and edit calendar events. It's a small thing, but at least they worked that out. And maybe the original lack of this feature was a bug as Jobs has suggested.
|
Anyway, I still think Apple is going to dominate with the iPhone (and successors like the iPod Touch.) Part of the reason why is precisely that these products aren't aimed at geeks like me (and Shipley and Gruber, not to put myself in their company) - they're aimed at the masses. Apple controls the whole stack - the portable device, the computer it syncs with, the OS and software that runs that computer, and the online store it all connects to. They don't care about interop with 3rd parties, they don't care about making geeks happy, and they don't have to (except for the cell carriers, but they'll get rid of them as soon as possible.) It's an interesting dynamic.
- jim 9-20-2007 8:38 pm
WHY DO PEOPLE WANT TO BUST SOMEONE FOR DOING THINGS GREAT??
is it to keep prices down??
- Skinny 9-21-2007 5:05 pm
I guess the main thing is that geeks (advanced users? developer/users?) want certain features that the majority of users wouldn't ever use or want. One way to deal with this situation is what we could unfairly call the "Linux" way - which is just to add another option to some incredibly complex preference menu in an effort to please everyone. Windows does this a bit too. Apple, unlike any other computer related company I can think of, is relentlessly minimal. This follows, I think, directly from Jobs' artistic vision (remember, he's *not* an engineer in any sense.) He's a minimalist. Clutter is the enemy. Extraneous functions are the enemy. Choice is the enemy. A device, or a piece of software, should do what it does and nothing else - in this way you can make something that "just works." Take it out of the box; plug it in; there is no step three.
But I guess you can maybe take things too far. Or, at least, other people can become suspicious about your motives.
When Apple first introduced the iPhone I immediately fell in love. This was the holy grail and Apple was delivering, seemingly years ahead of what I expected. They were moving the personal computer into its' next phase: the pocket sized portable wireless computer. And this is the future I think. I doubt many people will have desktop computers in ten years. You'll have some box hooked to your giant flat screen TV (TiVO and/or Wii + wireless router/NAS, etc...,) and you'll have something you carry around with you (the cellphone/PC hybrid) and what we think of as a computer today will basically disappear (yeah, there's the small problem of replacing the keyboard, but we'll figure something out.) Anyway, the iPhone was clearly the future. OS X on a pocket sized wireless computer. Hallelujah.
Except it turned out that it wasn't quite OS X. I mean it is, the code is in there, and I'm sure to Jobs it is clearly OS X. But people like me all thought he meant that it was going to be a general purpose computing device. I actually thought the whole open source development stack was going to be running, just like on my PowerBook. I was already planning my Apache/PHP/MySQL apps that were going to be served from my phone. And of course this turned out to be completely wrong. Apple is not making a general purpose mobile computer (or at least not yet, and I suspect never.) What they are making is something closer to a portable wireless iTunes music store client machine. And with the iPod Touch it's even clearer.
So this is where the bad feelings start. I can understand the minimalist vision. Personally I want more features, but I understand they are developing for the majority of consumers, not for me. And if fewer features, and the resulting intuitive streamlined interface, are what's necessary to make it "just work" for regular people, then who am I to complain. I'm free to start my own company I guess.
But what people, including me, are starting to argue is that recently Apple has stepped beyond this. Their minimalism (I'm probably overusing and distorting that word, but I can't think of a better one) has perhaps begun to cross over to the dark side of lock-in and artificial product segmentation.
Why can't 3rd party software developers write programs for the iPhone? According to Jobs it's because of security concerns and the ability of rogue (or just badly written) software to bring down the cellular networks. Except nobody believes that. Why doesn't the iPod Touch have an email client? It runs the same binaries as the iPhone, so the client is already written, there's no extra work for Apple to include it. I think Apple's thinking is that they want to really target a product as narrowly as possible. The Touch isn't an email device, it's an iPod (or really, a portable wireless iTunes Music Store client.) So focus focus focus and make it do one thing insanely well.
And that sort of makes sense, except it's hard not to start disbelieving them. You can't enter appointments in iCal on the Touch? C'mon, that's just rubbing it in. Why the fuck not? I guess, obviously, because they want to keep the cheaper iPod Touch from competing with the iPhone. But is crippling the calendar really going to be a good move in the long run? I doubt it.
But on the other hand, even though these moves bug me, I have to keep reminding myself that it doesn't really matter. And I think this is where Jobs really shines. I wish he was different, but I've got to give him credit. When you pick up one of these devices and play with it you just want one. Whether you can enter appointments in the calendar just isn't going to be a deal breaker. Apple is going to sell as many of these things as they can make whether or not I'm disappointed I can't get to the command line. Like I said, I'm free to start a company and build the device I want. The main problem there is that only a few hundred people would probably want my device, and hundreds of millions are going to want Apple's.
My hope, and I still really do hold out some hope, is that Apple is just concentrating on getting it right first. Build it with a narrow focus; target the largest audience possible; then once you have a giant hit you can start gradually adding features. You have to bring people along slowly if your vision is way out ahead of most people. You just can't drop the uber device made whole out of nowhere. You have to slowly iterate up to it. And they've made a good start. I think they still have some important distance to cover, and a lot of other geeks (especially Apple loving geeks) are thinking the same thing - but at least they've made the start.
Still, in my heart I can be a little disappointed.
- jim 9-22-2007 6:51 pm
jim, you have such a fantastic ability to break things down and convey your enthusiasm. you would be a great teacher. i'll remember that when ryley's attending brooklyn free school and they need guest lecturers/explainers.
- linda 9-23-2007 6:13 am
ok, understand....merci
- Skinny 9-23-2007 2:17 pm
I'm sure a guest lecture on Apple's product development strategy will be big hit. Let me know when and I'll email my rider.
- jim 9-23-2007 5:44 pm
Thx for the overview. If it was open, I could slide my EVDO PCMCIA card (not gonna happen) and run the app to get on the internetz. When there's competition (e.g. someone like Samsung comes out with an almost elegant WiMax pocket computer), Apple may be more motivated to open up the gizmo.
I'd buy one tomorrow, but I'm a disc hog. I want a 160 gbyte iPod Touch.
- mark 9-24-2007 8:19 am
"e.g. someone like Samsung comes out with an almost elegant WiMax pocket computer..."
Exactly. That was Gruber's point about it being a good thing if the Zune 2.0 is really great. Everybody needs competition. You're probably right though that Samsung would be a more likely competitor than MS. They make some nice stuff. Still, I don't think they are going to suddenly develop their own OS, and I don't think Windows Mobile is up to the task. Maybe the Symbian OS on a Samsung or Sony device?
Agreed about wanting a large drive. But on the other hand if the syncing is seamless enough 8 or 16 GBs is plenty big. You've got to plug it in to charge every couple of days, and your music can just rotate then without you having to think about it too much. Combine that with being able to pull something you really want to hear right now off the net and it's not too bad. I guess Apple is pushing hard to go all flash instead of hard drives since this gives them more battery life, probably more reliability, and I'll bet they have a huge cost advantage in flash since they buy so much. I wonder if they are the biggest buyer?
- jim 9-24-2007 5:55 pm
Flash does have wear out. At work we've had issues with flash with apps that get too crazy logging stuff. But in Apple's view, the device is disposable. I agree that the power issue is real, as is the issue of G-force tearing up hard drives. I'm not much of a sync-er. I'd really like a 1 TB iPod. But I'm going to have to wait a few years.
(Should I go ahead and trademark TeraPod? -- "The TeraPod always wins!")
I'm impressed by the number of phones Symbian has racked up, including top tier suppliers.
- mark 9-24-2007 9:12 pm
this one seems cool
Symbian Phones
Nokia N93i
The Nokia N93i follows on from the success of the Nokia N93, which is also based on S60 software on Symbian OS, and is slimmer and more compact in design. The device boasts a host of advanced features including DVD-like quality video capture, direct video uploads, 3.2 megapixel (2048 x 1536 pixels) camera with Carl Zeiss optics, 3x optical zoom, autofocus and close-up mode. With the 1 GB miniSD card included in the standard Nokia N93i sales pack, up to 45 minutes of DVD-like quality video or up to 1250 high-quality photos can be captured.
- Skinny 9-24-2007 9:58 pm
Armani and Samsung Electronics Join in Product Design
- mark 9-24-2007 10:02 pm
Apple working on an uber iPhone esque PDA?
Appleinsider.com hasn't been infallible, but they do get a bunch of things right. I hope this is true. It would seem to support the more generous reading of Apple's moves, i.e., they are moving toward producing a small, portable, wireless, general purpose computing platform, but they are just doing it one small step at a time. The iPhone isn't quite it; the iPod Touch isn't quite it; they are the beginning. This device would be the next step.- jim 9-27-2007 7:40 pm
Ars says no real SDK for stand alone 3rd party iPhone software development (at least for the foreseeable future,) but somewhat interestingly, Safari is reportedly being updated with a Google Gears like off line local storage capability. Other rumors include more javascript hooks into local resources, and possibly the ability to add local webapps to the home screen.
For the hard core this won't be enough. But might it actually be just enough? Depends on how they deliver, but it's at least possible that they could satisfy most people with this approach. My prediction is that they will fall short on delivery though.
At a minimum we need: access to local storage; full screen operation (so you don't know you're in Safari when you run the app); native widgets; and the ability to add app icon to the home screen. My guess is Apple is going to deliver only the first.
But beyond all that, a big problem few people are noting has to do with the Edge cellular network the iPhone runs on. For most Edge towers (where most really means most) you cannot receive a voice call when using the data connection (the call goes to voice mail.) This is a pretty serious failing of the web based application model. If you're on WiFi okay, but if you're on Edge then using an app makes the phone not work!!! Obviously this makes web apps second class citizens on the iPhone, regardless of how many improvements Apple makes to Safari.
- jim 10-04-2007 8:26 pm
The new 1.1.2 software update gives the iPod Touch the ability to add and edit calendar events. It's a small thing, but at least they worked that out. And maybe the original lack of this feature was a bug as Jobs has suggested.
- jim 11-09-2007 7:27 pm