Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

The core of its success

MATT HARTLEY

Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 11:32 AM EDT 01/04/08

The design process of this culture-changing icon is shrouded in mystery. Matt Hartley gives us a look under its skin ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Ed Long from white Rock, Canada writes: The stock quickly tumbled from a high of $200 in November to $118 in February.

    I held on because I believe they know the market and understand the need to produce global cutting edge products. They are currently negotiating ChinaMobile to allow access for the iPhone and the impact of the Euro music downloading deal has yet to take effect on the balance sheet.

    The stock has recovered to $140 plus.
  2. stan bink from Tee Dot, Canada writes: sigh I'm one of those loyal early adopters that didn't but stock in the 90's. Hindsight really is 20-20.
  3. Hornsworth Portswiler from adanac, Canada writes:
    Apple is one of the few companies that makes design a fundamental. I've sat in enough meetings where developers overrule designers, and we end up with crappy compromised designs. Design has to be baked in, ground up, otherwise we get pasted on efforts like the "touch" interface on Windows Mobile phones, once you get past the front end it's the same old 90s interface. And the sadder thing is the checklist features - many notebooks now include a webcam, for example, but the quality is horrible compared to the average Macbook. Compare. You'd never see such low quality on an Apple product.

    But when you get down to it, most people use computers for a few basic chores, a file browser, Web browser and basic Office apps are all they need, easily met by a $700 HP bought from Future Shop. All running crappy Windows, and schmucks like me have to provide product support to the bug ridden, overly complex Windows. It's too bad that Apple couldn't strike a deal with Sony, Lenovo or some other company, because they don't produce enough variety in computers - there's no decent 4lb Macbook, either the sleek overweight blimps like Macbook/Macbook Pro, or the underpowered Macbook Air.

    Apple only wants to sell in a niche. It's not like Apple is perfect anyway, with the complex key sequences and windows flying everywhere of the modern OS X interface, they can't decide what they are.

    I think with the determination of Gnome and the functional dazzle of Compiz, this year Linux will become mainstream on notebooks. The only thing holding it back is the tickless kernel and pluggable displays, both due to be released this spring, and HP, Lenovo, Dell and others sell computers with Linux distributions now. So finally some real competition, and Apple can be sidelined again, just like in the 90s because they are too smug and afraid to try their advantage in the mainstream.
  4. P W from Penticton, Canada writes: We finally took the bait and switched to Macs this year. It has been disappointing. I think our next upgrade will be Linux.
  5. Comments are Closed from Toronto, Canada writes: But Mr. Goss fails to grasp that that Apple profits more from it's almost totally closed restrictive architecture and abnormal price and profit structure. Something we were never never taught when I was in his department many years ago. For that I had to go to a real university.
  6. Michael Mitchell from Belleville, Canada writes: I became a first-time Mac'er last May with the MacBook. Phenomenal. I'll never return to PC. P W, how could you possibly be disappointed? I'm not a big computer guy, but Safari is lightning-fast, their 'Pages' word processor leaves Word and WP in the dust with its ease, their 'Keynote' leaves PowerPoint miles back, and the other fun stuff like the built-in camera/microphone, the GarageBand recording studio, and . . . I'll stop. I just bought the iTouch, too. Don't get me started. Crazy, these people. Brilliant-crazy.
  7. Hornsworth Portswiler from adanac, Canada writes: Michael Mitchell, I had a Mac for a year. Everything was an upsell. Pa for Quicktime Pro, pay for iTunes, pay for .Mac. Apparently Jobs called their computer line "iPod accessories"and it's true.

    Safari (which is based on open source tech Apple barely acknowledges) may have been fast when they did their comparisons, but Firefox 3 is faster and not tied to the OS (Safari on Windows is a dog). I suspect when you say Pages &c are great, you may not have tried modern MS variations of office programs, which are simply more powerful, and sometimes those new features are meaningful.

    I agree the webcam on the Macbook line is very good, I wish it could lead to more people using videoconferencing, but it's likely only if they're using Macs or third party cameras as most Windows computer built in cams are awful. Built in microphones, well, this comment led me to my comment about running modern office programs, as every new notebook has a good quality mic built in.

    I liked the MB's low power standby, but the jewelry box latch that kept opening in my bag sucked.

    The iTouch? Does it make your music sound better?

    Enough cynicism out of me. :) Apple is certainly raising the bar, but when the author says they eat their young he should research the products Apple ripped off to integrate into their OS without so much as a "Thanks." They're good, but not earth shattering, they are not popularizing computing or recognizing features as basic low cost commodities accessible to anyone, low cost computers running open source software are much more likely to do this.
  8. Swifty J from Mariposa, Canada writes: Oooh look! It's time to play another round of Fanboys vs. Haters! YAY!
  9. Swifty J from Canada writes: Yes, BOO Apple, Open Source thieves and ingrates! www.apple.com/opensource/
  10. Josh Taylor from St. John's, Canada writes: The IPhone is slick but its hardware is still a little lacking. No 3G and only 8GB of memory. I will stick with my nano until the next version...
  11. Hornsworth Portswiler from adanac, Canada writes: Swifty J, you don't see Apple actively promoting open source, and how many of those projects does Apple really contribute to? Almost none, compared to a company like Sun, IBM, or HP. Not to mention their abuse of the largely open source Java (from "we're going to make OS X the best platform to develop Java on!" to "we're not going to support the Java ball and chain" when it suits them).
  12. Barton Fink from Canada writes: I'm a newly minted mac guy. Bought my macbook about a year ago and love it. Do I think it leaves the competition choking on it's dust? No. Do I think its ahead of the curve and easier to use? Yes. Do I like the company? Yes. Why? Jobs has figured out how to play medium ball very well. Appealing to my ego's need for something flasher than ceaseless singles and my realistic side, that home runs every at bat are impossible. I've consciously bought into the stylish stream of doubles and triples Apple consistently cranks out.
  13. Rob Gilgan from Canada writes: I keep supporting Apple so I never have to rely on Redmond - because you can't rely on Redmond, period. Office isn't rich and powerful, it's a POS, the most-counterintuitive collection of software on the market. Its ubiquitousness just exposes the lemmings in the corporate sphere as the dumb dinks they truly are.
  14. Swifty J from Mtl, Canada writes: Hornsworth, you claimed Apple "ripped off" products "without so much as a thanks". I showed you a clear "thanks" at a very obvious URL (looks like active promotion to me). I'm sure you'll find much more information at their developer site.

    So now that "thanks" is out of the way, you want to change the subject to how much they really contribute -- and the article is about design philosophy. While software development is certainly part of that, they use open-source code on the back end. Even if it were, as you falsely claim, all ripped off without so much as a thanks, that would still be tangential at best.

    The front-end of every Apple product (the part that's most relevant to a discussion of design philosophy) is built from evil proprietary code, and a good thing because front ends built by committee/community have a powerful tendency to suck.

    If you think Linux is ready to "sideline" the Macintosh, you're dreaming in Technicolor. Like it or not, the Mac has immeasurably more mainstream appeal. And always has, despite the "real soon now" proclamations we've been hearing from Linux evangelists for the last decade. Linux has its place... in the server room and on the desktops of hardcore power users. Good luck moving it to the average person's desktop.

    Bottom line: I like a lot of Apple products, yet I do bear in mind that it's a large, sometimes ruthless corporation. But that's no reason to go digging for criticisms that are completely beside the point.

    So there's my fanboy contribution of the day. Over to the haters.
  15. Hornsworth Portswiler from adanac, Canada writes: Swifty J, there are certainly haters and fanboys. I don't consider myself either. There is obviously a long way to go for computers, and lots of room to intelligently build on other people's work, which is what open source is all about. I don't consider open source by any means design by committee software.

    In the first paragraph I strongly supported Apple's design philosophy and basically said no other company is like them. At the same time, the whizziness of OS X is a pleasure to some, a torment to others. Try explaining the bizarre system of shortcuts you need to really use OS X effectively to a typical user (screen capture? show desktop?)

    But I also pointed out we've been here before - Apple was coming on strong in the 80s, then stumbled badly in the 90s. Apple's smugness (smarminess) is just as likely to backfire with mainstream people. But I'm not a superstitious type, just because it happened once doesn't mean it will happen again. Which is why I'm willing to believe that Linux has a good chance to become mainstream, as we realize basic computing functionality - file management, web browser, office apps - is a commodity, just as well provided by your PS3, Wii2, N95, or $300 Eee or KPC running some distro of Linux.

    As for apple.com/opensource, as I said, it is only there for people looking for it, I do not see a single link to it on their front page or mention of open source in their advertising, you know, -active- promotion. Which means they just don't really care and would probably replace it with their proprietary goo if it weren't so darned good and cost effective.
  16. Swifty J from Mtl, Canada writes: Thanks for the reasoned reply, Hornsworth, and sorry for my aggressive tone.

    Two quick points:

    Apple, like any company, is of course at risk of stumbling. And if I were a shareholder I'd be especially be worried about what happens when Jobs is gone. But at the moment, I don't see a whole lot of repetition of their missteps from the 90s, when they clearly let themselves fall behind in just about every way. I think there's still a fair bit of room for them to make mainstream inroads.

    Re Linux and the mainstream: all I can say is, I'll believe it when I see it. I don't think mainstream adoption of Linux would be a bad thing, either, but there's a strong historical tendency for evangelists to overestimate the platform's mainstream appeal. It's certainly conceivable that the capabilities of inexpensive hardware will give it that long-awaited push. Not holding my breath, though.

    As for Apple and open source, I think it's obvious enough that open source per se just doesn't matter to the vast majority of consumers, and Apple is fundamentally a consumer company. The information is well known to geeks, but it comes as no surprise to me that they don't use this as anything more than a minor selling point for their primary audience.

    Unfortunately I probably won't have time to add much more than that today, so I figured I'd at least get that in.
  17. Hornsworth Portswiler from adanac, Canada writes:
    Apple wants to be simple, and they want to be pro.

    So you have things that work nicely and logically, and you have contorted required shortcut keys and the command line (yay!)

    Apple wants to provide a simple information appliance (an "iTunes injection device," to use Tobacco industry parlance), and they want a respectable computing platform.

    The former is a commodity, you plug it in and it works, when it's outdated you buy the next version. The latter requires constant adjustment to what the best is in every relevant sphere. (Though Apple basically ignores gamers.)

    More importantly, a respectable computing platform requires an ecosystem of third party supporters. Apple likes encouraging, then taking the best ideas of their third party supporters, and they also tend to promote then scorn various important third party products. That's one reason I don't feel much loyalty to them. I don't consider "business" an excuse to be rude and disingenuous.

    As for Linux, there are many idealists and evangelists, but there are also a lot of business forces lining up behind it, like Dell, Lenovo, Sony, Nokia, and HP, not even including software companies. And when the hardware costs $100, it doesn't make much sense to put a $50 operating system on a basic computer. (Microsoft was afraid of turning Vista into a commodity so would rather appeal to enthusiasts who like complexity, so Windows XP is becoming their commodity OS, against their will.)

    Anyway, I think Apple is probably following the best course they can now. Macs are a strong niche alternative. And it almost doesn't make sense to buy any other music device than an iPod. As much as I am a contrarian, they do so much volume and keep the price low, and it's almost impossible to find third party support for other music devices (which sucks for the consumer, if Apple were Microsoft they would have at least come up with an industry standard connector).

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top