The real Steve applauded my poetry.  Apple could care less.

As was all too predictable, the thread has descended into irrelevant “mine is better than yours” territory.

Of course.  It’s an Apple thread and I eventually got tired of the endless bullshit spewing.  I’m calling out truth when I see it because it often empowers others when you do.  But, anyway…

Speaking of which…

it spoke volumes to me that nobody was talking about Fred Shuttlesworth, who died on the same day.  We have truly lost perspective when we venerate a business leader over a social reformer.

I agree with you completely.

Steve Jobs was a consummate businessman and marketer.  He died a billionaire.  He didn’t change the world; actually, he reinforced the status quo.

I disagree with you completely.  Like Fred, Steve empowered people.  It’s not in the same admirable way that Fred did by any stretch, but to say Steve didn’t change the world is not looking at what he did and what drove him beyond his insatiable, megalomaniacal desire for wealth and power.

It’s complex and everyone else all over the place is explaining how Steve bettered the world, so I don’t find the need to continue in that vain anymore.

But at the same time, I heartily agree it would appear Steve was no Fred as far as moral character goes.  But, it doesn’t have to be a black and white thing either, where Steve did nothing and Fred did everything.

Life just doesn’t function like that.  Life is more complex than that.  I think Fred might agree… and so might Steve.

As it stands I don’t see any Apple product that isn’t crippled in some way or simply worse than the competition.

Please explain to me how my MacBook Pro i7 with a 17in screen at 1920×1200 resolution and able to push much more with multiple external displays and 4 processors capable of running 2 threads each (basically like having 8 processors) at top speeds of 3.33 GHz with two on-the-fly switchable high-end graphics cards running MAC OS X 10.6.7 is crippled and worse than all the competition?

Oh, and when I bought it in early 2011, it was considered by PC magazine (and everyone else) to be the fastest laptop on the planet.

I will warn you in advance, I’m sitting here next to 2 top-of-the-line Windows machines running Windows 7 and I also have and utilize Windows 7, Windows XP and Windows 8 Developer preview on said Macbook Pro as we speak.

[note: I don't use iPhones]

Or do you not know what you’re talking about?

I have always felt that Apple’s products with an open attitude could be amazing. Jobs’s arrogance held their products back. As it stands I don’t see any Apple product that isn’t crippled in some way or simply worse than the competition.

The irony is that Apple have always promoted themselves as ‘different’ from the others, and that Apple users were in some way rebelling against IBM, etc. But Apple products tend to be the most homogenous and restricted (I believe that technology should be about doing what you want to do regardless of what that is, and I believe that technology is a great way to express or indulge your individuality). Many Apple users come across as clones of each other with identical laptops, iPods, iPhones, etc…all the while thinking they are in some way ‘different’ even though Jobs has been dictating how they act and think for years. Yes, that’s a gross generalisation, but it’s certainly more true of Apple users than any other group.

Steve Jobs was clearly into controlling his products as well as how they are used.

No, Apple isn’t the only tech company guilty of such things, but they are at the forefront of that kind of behaviour, and that is in stark, ironic contrast to the mainstream perception of them.

At least Jobs didn’t electrocute elephants to prove Windows was dangerous.

Xerox did not sell personal computers.  They made computers for businesses. 

Marketing things is absolutely not trivial.  Think about this:  The Zune.  The Zune is a nice device.  Compared to the iPod the audio quality is better, the headphones were better, the screen was better, the Zune desktop software is much better than iTunes, and the subscription model is cool.  If you want to know why the Zune device failed, the first place you should look is the marketing.  How often do you see an Apple commercial on TV?  How often did you see a Zune commercial?

The iPod was not the first MP3 player, it wasn’t even the first GOOD mp3 player.  It was slightly easier to use initially since it had iTunes, but if you weren’t into paying for music, it didn’t offer you anything compelling.  The reason it worked is because it was MARKETED.  Most people didn’t know mp3 players EXISTED, Apple solved this with complete market saturation.  

Can you think of any tech company which markets things anywhere close to as much as Apple does?  I see a MS commercial every once in a while, usually around when they are having a new product release, but Apple’s marketing is persistent, and quite good.

Perception is very important, Jobs understood that.  It’s proven by the fact that people think Jobs and Apple invented the computer, or the mouse, or the GUI, because that’s what Apple has trained you to perceive.

It cost 75 bucks. 

HP, Dell, etc. design stuff the way they think you would accept it.

Apple designs stuff the way they want it to be themselves.

Quite a separate issue is whether trade between low-income and high-income countries makes the world a better place or not (and, therefore, whether companies participating in this trade are inherently evil). And since you are talking globally here, let me bid greetings to you, my fellow 4%-er!

I will miss most Steve’s last act when he, like Bill Gates, redirected his Fortunes, Energies and Vision from the Triumphs of Technology to the Sufferings of Humanity.

“I have traveled to southern China and interviewed workers employed in
the production of electronics. I spoke with a man whose right hand was
permanently curled into a claw from being smashed in a metal press at
Foxconn, where he worked assembling Apple laptops and iPads. I showed
him my iPad, and he gasped because he’d never seen one turned on. He
stroked the screen and marveled at the icons sliding back and forth, the
Apple attention to detail in every pixel. He told my translator, “It’s a
kind of magic.””

[Edit: yes, you could argue that they aren't, strictly speaking, employees, since they only produce the products under the auspices of a separate shell company. But I call that weasel words.]

Jobs epitomized the 1%. Apple makes products their own 1% want? Well, bully for them, but don’t expect me to love them for it until they show at least some care for their own 99%, rather than letting them drop dead after working 34 hour shifts.

When a company has less of a sense of corporate responsibility than Microsoft, it has a *lot* of introspection to do.

I actually don’t think that’s completely correct. In my opinion, Apple is one of the few companies (The Economist is another that comes to mind) that focuses on producing on what its employees (and Jobs chief among them) want to consume. It’s almost the reverse of the ‘dogfooding’ concept – instead of making sure that you use what you sell, you make what you want to use and see if other people want to use it too. I’m sure most Apple employees (and again Jobs among them) use Apple tech because they genuinely believe that it is the best option for their present needs (i.e. not best abstractly, but best for *them*). I don’t think the same can be said of Samsung, Dell, HP or most other companies out there.

Perhaps that’s another reason why openness never played a huge role in the iOS ecosystem – to Steve, iOS was completely open and he could customise its next generation any way he wanted to…

Opponent? Dude, it’s an internet forum, not ‘Nam. Lighten up. It is just chit-chat, the exchange of ideas and opinions, and asking “How the fuck do magnets work?”.

One rarely gets their point across when they treat others as an adversary or opponent.

I find it interesting that Apple engenders such strong emotions from those who don’t use their products. … why do they expend so much energy venting about Apple?

It really is a strange phenomenon.  Often, I’ll see more Apple haters at a MacFixit thread than actual Mac users there.  The same old trite, uninformed garbage spewed daily.  I think there must be some sort of hole in their hearts and maybe their heads too.

If you don’t like Macs, don’t use them and certainly don’t spend your time in threads about them.  Get a life.  If you don’t like Steve Jobs, then why spend so much time in threads about him?  It’s a sickness I’ll never understand.  Maybe even some sort of obsession they can’t control.

I’ve heard it all before, if you DARE  mention Apple products with facts about why you personally choose them, etc. – you’ll get slammed all over the place, called names, etc.  It’s amazingly stupid.

Apparently Bill Gates IS a saint to them?

I think they are too busy worshipping themselves to be bothered with anyone else.

I would mostly disagree with with that statement.  I have ambivalent feelings about Jobs myself (but I love my Macs), but one of the things I think he got a kick out of was changing paradigms and making interesting things happen.  It’s hard to refute that he wanted to change the world when recounting that story of him convincing John Sculley to come work at Apple.  I mean, really.  His words were, “Do you want to sell sugar water for the rest of your life, or do you want to come with me and change the world?”

Oh, wait…

Your move.

But after that, I don’t see them relying on “WWJD” (that’s “What Would Jobs Do”, get it straight) forever. That will be hanging over their heads, of course, and I think that’s a good thing – “what would ASUS do” is not a good motto for several reasons.

I think the iTunes EULA is proof enough.

Is Apple really to blame for that or is it the RIAA and the MPAA? It has always seemed to me that Apple ultimately wants freedom and openness to the way users use their tools. But the DRM is a concession to a media world they are trying to push forward into the digital world. I mean iTunes still allows for CD ripping and doesn’t discriminate against non-iTunes store MP3s.  And while Apple TV has DRM for HDMI hookups, that again seems like a concession to the TV & movie industry.  Even the iPhone; it’s been pretty clear to me Apple went with AT&T in the U.S.A. not because of quality of service, but for market penetration.  Flash forward to today and the iPhone 4s officially can work with ANY cell provider… And the fact that Skype and such can work on an iPod Touch is something that wasn’t possible a few years ago; Apple has now proven the device in the market and is basically saying, “Okay cell providers, folks are sick of you… We’re allowing Skype on the iPod Touch…” I mean an iPod Touch is not a full replacement for a cell phone in places where wi-fi is scarce, but in major urban areas it’s a nice thing to have.

My general point being is that if—let’s say—Apple & Google partnered on a nationwide wi-fi network, made the iPhone a no contract device that could work with wi-fi, that would be cool, correct?  But it would also raise the ire of the FCC and the the telephone service providers who would fight that tooth an nail.  Ditto with DRM on iTunes music and movie purchases… This stuff is all political.  Because I genuinely believe that while Apple would never open up it’s OS and hardware to third parties, they do want to create tools that will allow people to use new media in different ways.

Given that Steve Jobs is dogmatically the singular genius of the age, any successor to the Throne of St. Jobs must do exactly what Steve would have done.  Any apostasy on the part of the next CEO will be a complete betrayal of the great man.  As a result the CEO must hew precisely to the doctrines of Steve. New directions are strictly out. And despite Steve’s regular “We have always been at war with Eastasia!” moments, his statements are now holy writ, thus no 7″ tablets EVER!

Most importantly, every new product must be perfect, and a massive hit. Being perfect every single time requires a risk adverse strategy. As a result management will be boxed in once the immediate pipeline is empty. As Raymond Chandler said “A writer who is afraid to overreach himself is as useless as a general who is afraid to be wrong.” 

On the other hand, CEO’s like Jerry Yang from ASUS will be tossing everything they can think up into the market, and running with what works, and laughing off failures.

Worse yet, once a product or two bombs, the dread words “Gil Amelio” will surface….

Tim Cook had better pray that in his last days Steve spent his time recording holographic keynotes in the fashion of Hari Seldon and that Jeff Bezos is not the Mule.

Thinking Different about Steve Jobs is a ThoughtCrime!