Slashdot Mirror
NYT on Apple's Digital Way of Life
sinalet writes "The New York Times is running an article on Apple's 'digital way of life'. Most interestingly are some comments about the history of the iPod and its developers. 'Apple says it developed the iPod in just six months, faster than any major product in the company's history. The hand-held device, which contains more computing power than an early Macintosh, was put together starting in 2001 by hardware designers led by Tony Fadell, a young engineer who had worked briefly at RealNetworks, led by Rob Glaser, who has developed the Rhapsody music service.'"
But isn't the NYT the same rag that supports ass sex for monkeys?
What is so special about this? It is a really nice MP3 player and all, but it isn't like it was revolutionary or anything. Slap a hard drive in a little box and put in an earphone jack. The design is really nice, but I don't see why it wouldn't have been their quickest major project.
Oh, Yeah, He Also Sells Computers
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: April 25, 2004
STROLL the corridors and the atriums on Apple Computer's corporate campus these days and you will notice that something is missing. Gone are the posters and graphics accenting the company's sleek personal computers. In their place, in the main lobby, is a striking, three-story-high billboard celebrating Steven P. Jobs's brand-new billion-dollar consumer electronics business - the iPod digital MP3 music player.
In just two and a half years, Mr. Jobs, Apple's chief executive, has managed to take a well-designed hand-held gadget, add software connecting it to Macintoshes and Windows-based personal computers and convince the recording industry that he has found an elegant solution for ending its nightmare of digital piracy. In doing so, he has shifted the emphasis of Apple from what made it famous - hip, even lovable computers - to what he hopes will keep it relevant and profitable in the future: products for a digital way of life.
In fact, the wild success that Mr. Jobs has enjoyed with the iPod may have come in the nick of time. For all the acknowledged design and ease-of-use advantages of the Macintosh, Apple's overall PC business is still growing more slowly than that of its Microsoft- and Intel-based competitors.
Moreover, it was obvious at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas in January that a horde of consumer goods and computing companies is preparing a fresh assault aimed at bringing computerized gadgets into every nook and cranny of the home. In particular, two powerful Apple rivals, Sony and Microsoft, are betting that Mr. Jobs is wrong when he says, "It's about the music!" This year, both companies plan to release more expensive, hand-held combination video and audio players that their executives hope will blow the iPod away.
So will Apple eventually be overwhelmed by its bigger, better-heeled competitors? Throughout the technology world, there seems to be a simple, uniform answer to that question: Never underestimate Steve Jobs.
With roots both in Silicon Valley's digital culture and the 1960's counterculture, Mr. Jobs has long been an arbiter of what is cool in technology, much like a real-world version of a trend-spotting character from "Pattern Recognition," one of the cyberpunk novels by William Gibson.
AND, helped by his growing prominence in Hollywood through his second company, Pixar Animation Studios, Mr. Jobs has attained a level of influence over how life is lived in the digital age that is unmatched by even his most powerful computer industry rivals. "He is the Henry J. Kaiser or Walt Disney of this era," said Kevin Starr, a culture historian and the California state librarian.
Since returning seven years ago to Apple, the computer maker he helped to establish in 1976, Mr. Jobs has created a fusion of fashion, brand, industrial design and computing. He has opened a chain of 78 retail stores to showcase Apple's consumer-oriented designs and to surround the company's computers with an array of digital consumer products. The stores themselves have become another billion-dollar business, a feat all the more impressive considering that one of Apple's chief competitors, Gateway, failed with a similar retail strategy during the same period.
As a result, Apple is acting less like a computer company and more like brand-brandishing, multinational companies such as Nike and Virgin. The iPod's success is also the clearest indication that Mr. Jobs, if he is to successfully revamp Apple, will ultimately win not by taking on PC rivals directly, but by changing the rules of the game.
The Apple that is starting to emerge may be a harbinger. The company's growth may no longer be defined by its PC market share, now a declining sliver of the PC industry, but instead by Mr. Jobs's ability to create consumer markets.
Mr. Jobs, who says he has a 70 percent share of the market for legal music downloads and a 45 percent share of the MP3 market, see
quote: "Since Mr. Jobs returned to Apple, he has increasingly insisted that the company speak with just the voices of top executives, so Mr. Fadell was not permitted to comment for this article. "
Why is this? Apple obviously has many talented, intelligent people working for it. But it seems that Jobs wants the general public to think that it was Jobs himself who dreamed up and designed these products. Sounds like the ultimate karma whore to me.
Glad to know John Markoff still can't write his way out of a paper bag. Some of the research in this article is interesting, but... that's assuming that it's the truth.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
Wow, I never realized that Tony Fadell, who worked briefly at RealNetworks, which is led by Rob Glaser, who of course developed the Rhapsody music service, was the one responsible for leading the iPod design team, whom developed the iPod, which has more computing power than an early mac, in just six months, or that you could have this many commas holding a sentence together, for this long, and not think back to yourself, "Perhaps this sentence is a bit long", or something to that effect, so now you can flame away, if you want.
me too.
Not much interesting in the article until one gets to near the end and the speculation as to where Jobs is going next... Why release an Airport with voIP and power over ethernet if you don't plan on releasing a new product to make good use of those features. hmm.
Tony Fadell, a young engineer who had worked briefly at RealNetworks, led by Rob Glaser, who has developed the Rhapsody music service
It's a good thing these people's amazingly successful software business principles didn't carry over to hardware.
Someone who I trust to be knowledgeable on the subject once told me that the developers of Watson actualy had inside knowledge of what Apple was doing with Sherlock. Whether it was code or concept they knew Apple was doing Sherlock and they wanted to be there first. And the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I mean think about it. Why the hell would they name it watson? It's a search program, search -> detective, when people say detective, I doubt they think of watson before Sherlock. So why Watson? If you thought your product was first of it's kind, and original, and didn't know another company was producing and releasing a similar program called Sherlock, why would you use Watson? It makes no sense.
Complete fabrication. Believe it if you can't bring yourself to believe Apple would rip anyone off, but it is nonsense. Check out this FAQ.
Does it sound likely to you?? That a small developer would have an inside track on what Apple were up to that much earlier? That they would have such detailed info as to duplicate the look and feel so thoroughly?? Wake up my friend. This journal also put it nicely.
~SO
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
I don't know the whole story, but touching up on what you're saying about the name.
One could think the name Watson was used becuase Watson was the assistant to Sherlock. In this case, Sherlock would be you, or the user of the Mac, and Watson would be assisting with the searching.
There's never enough when you have too little
The success of the iPod doesn't seem to have significantly changed Apple's market share," said T. Michael Nevens, a director at both Borland Software and Broadvision and the former director of McKinsey & Company's technology consulting practice. And Mr. Nevens said that there was "no support for the theory" that the new digital appliances would bolster computer sales.
T. Michael Nevens is completely missing the point, I think.
I am reminded of an earlier interview with Jobs - I don't have the link, I believe it was maybe a Time article around the launch of the flatpanel iMac - and the interviewer kicked off the story with a description of his arrival. He came into the room that Jobs was in, sitting on the floor yoga-style, with a powerbook, and he was going through fonts. He sat there for 10 minutes looking at these various fonts, not speaking to the reporter. Then he looked up and said something like, 'Aren't these just beautiful? I love the fonts we licensed for OS X.'
This is a funny insight into Steve Jobs. I think he's just really bent on the idea of these seamless computers. When you really think about it, that real plug-and-play sort of mentality has always dominated the Mac experience. I think Jobs, Zen Weirdo that he is, fucking hates the whole Windows scene because to him it is just really really tacky. Too many options that are crap, none of it consistent, none of it forming something totally coherent from top to bottom.
So when T. Michael Nevens, or Random Slashdot Angrybot, says something about iPods not selling more Macs or affecting Mac sales, or not inreasing market share which clearly they have, just not appreciably in Macs, they are missing the context. Jobs' whole Seamless Vision Thing flows down from his input into the designs. The reason that iPods talk to iTunes so well, which talks to iPhoto and iDVD and all the other iCrap is because he just insists that it should work that way.
Then Rob Glasner talks about opening the iPod up to Rhapsody users, of course Jobs balks because he already has made the concession to market forces in selling the iPod for Windows at all. That is his mea culpa for keeping the original Macintosh project clamped down.
If Jobs had his way all of these little projects would make money - but if some of them have to act as bridges, or enabling mechanisms - the physical stores, the iTMS - then they will do so. The fact that all of the software and hardware work perfectly together is just the way Jobs wants it to work.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
I believe there are twelve step programs for peple like you.
"one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
I have a Canon digital camcorder, a Fuji digital camera, an Apple iPod (mini). I don't care about making music so garage band isn't for me but if I did it would be a non-Apple keyboard.
My point? Where is Apple going with this digital hub thing? They make great software (that they give me) for all these other pieces of equipment, so where the heck is Apple going?
a couple thgoughts:
The PDA/Phone - Jobs said he isn't interested in a PDA and they are way behind on cell phone tech (not to mention, everyone has one or three) but there are few good options for BOTH and if Apple could do for the PDA-Phone what they did for the digital music player, it would really shake up the market. So the chipset is Mororola or whatever, as long as the interface is from Apple they would control the experience.
The Digital A/V Player - I don't know about you but I don't own a DVR yet because I want a device that will manage music, broadcast / captured broadcast video, and prerecorded media (CD/DVD). Another area where Apple could use iPod lessons learned and make something to build into TVs and stereo systems. It is high time HDTV's started coming with Eithernet and Airport Extreme!
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
Because steve jobs thinks that he has to have credit for everything.
Just ask Woz, who he lied to and stole money from in the past.
And damn it, this isn 't a troll. These are facts and spending 3 minutes on google will back me up.
So back it up
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
This story is much more intriguing than that. Bushnell assigned Steve Jobs to design the circuitry for Breakout, but it was too difficult for Jobs. He asked his friend (and Apple co-founder) Steve Wozniak to help, and promised to split the payment from Bushnell. Wozniak did it in four days and was paid $350. But it turned out that Bushnell actually paid $5,000 for Breakout -- Jobs pocketed the remaining $4,650.
Ironically, Wozniak's design was so complex that no one at Atari could figure out how it worked. They had to redesign the entire game so it could be tested.
Remember how his largely untrue article about Kevin Mitnick led to a lucrative book-writing deal for himself. Watch the 2600 documentary "Freedom Downtime" to see their take on Markoff too. They interviewed him and tried to give him a chance, but it turns out he sucks.
--
A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men. -Willy Wonka
It'll be a sad day for everyone if apple decide their 'embedded lifestyle device'-thing is more lucrative, more fun than the mac; which they then discontinue.
They have in the past brought a lot of small things to the consumer desktop that have made life easier for everyone who uses a GUI. You don't have to use a mac, or ever have used one, to benefit from that. I think we'll see Expose-like features on everyone's desktop soon, for instance.
Anyone else get the impression that Jobs is a little unhinged? If Apple leave (or even just stop paying so much attention to) the PC market, where else are the insane ideas that work in unexpectedly cool ways going to come from? Redmond? Or a swarm of open-source people who hate writing GUIs anyway?
In general, less competition is going to mean less innovation (and less eye-candy). So I hope Apple realise that I want to buy a mac at some distant point in the future, and keep making them.
1998: Apple introduces Mac OS 8.5, with its new search application, Sherlock. IIRC, this first version of Sherlock gave users the ability to find things on the Internet using more than one search engine at once. I thought it was pretty cool, although I don't think they ever made it work with Google.
:-)
2000: Apple introduces Mac OS 9, with the new version of Sherlock: Sherlock 2. I believe Sherlock 2 added multiple "channels", which were hooks into individual sites' (e.g. AppleCare's) search engines. Apple published a spec so that third parties could write their own channels and allow users to install them.
2001: Karelia introduces the first version of Watson, right around the release of Mac OS X 10.1, which included the last version of Sherlock 2. I believe they marketed it as a new concept in software, but one that was inspired by and supposed to supplement Sherlock. Sort of doing for the rest of the Internet what Sherlock did for search engines (but more successfully). It did not replicate many (if any) features of Sherlock. Its "tools" were and are little bitty Cocoa apps that hook into the main app in some way that I couldn't possibly understand. Some tools are front-ends to sites that had channels in Sherlock 2 (like Amazon, I think). Those tools not only allow you to search the sites, but also browse them. Much more useful, IMHO.
2002: Apple announces the new version of Sherlock. I don't think they ever put a version number on it. You could think of it as Sherlock 3, although it was actually version 3.5. Sherlock 3.5 was totally different from all previous versions, greatly resembling Watson. Its channels are written in JavaScript and something else; the Watson people claim that their app is much easier to develop for (with its Cocoa-y goodness).
My family has had a household license for Watson since shortly after the new version of Sherlock was announced. That was when I first took a look at Watson, and I got absolutely hooked on the (third-party but available through Karelia) Baseball Scores tool. It hasn't quite worked right this season, but it's been great before, and I'm sure the developer (Sujal Shah) will get it fixed soon enough.
Please do post corrections if you see any mistakes, fellow Apple history buffs!!
This is simply not true, apologist.
When returning to apple he had a Toshiba running NT
It is true if they need a selection! Do you think there is nearly enough selection in the indie market? What happens when people want to buy the great majority of popular music? Duh.
Nope. IBM ThinkPad running NEXTStep. I remember the controversy during his first MacWorld keynote, post-return, pre-OS X.
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
"on his desk was a Toshiba laptop running Windows NT" - it is in his biography. I don't know what he used for his MacWorld Keynote, but the above is what he used for office use.
I can't believe I actually wasted my time reading the entire article hoping it might get better.
clicky.
It shows a software that turns your Symbian device into an Apple PDA phone. The automatic google translation makes it sound a little weird, but should be legible.
That is not the mark of a good software designer. It's the mark of a hack.
90% of Woz-worship comes from people who hate Steve Jobs and don't ever want to acknowledge that he accomplished anything. The truth is that Apple Computer never would have happened unless both of them were involved, and Woz had almost nothing to do with the evolution of the Macintosh. The Mac came about (by way of the Lisa) after Jobs visited Xerox PARC and decided that the GUI was the future of consumer PCs. You could say that it was an obvious desicion now, but none of the executives at Xerox saw it at the time, and sold the technology to Apple for almost nothing.
WFT are you talking about? You didn't respond to a word of what I said.
There was a NeXT-related services company which did custom installs of NeXTstep, esp. to laptops and the listed Steve Jobs as ``their favorite customer' with a picture of him and the Toshiba Tecra they'd set him up with. Should be findable at groups.google.com --- they announced it at one time.
He also had an IBM ThinkPad, one of the single-spindle models, also running NeXTstep or OPENSTEP depending on the timeframe --- remember this guy liked Concurrence.app so much he had Apple write Keynote.
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Nolan Bushnell Paid $7000 for the breakout game.
Woz's design was not so complex that no one at Atari could figure out how it worked.
"Bushnell dangled a financial reward. Payment was to be based not upon delivery of the new game, but on how efficiently it could be manufactured."
"Woz needed no excuse to bury himself in a design project - especially ont that put a premium on a solution using the fewest number of chips."
From "APPLE: the inside story of intrigue, egomania, and business blunders"
Ironically, Wozniak's design was so complex that no one at Atari could figure out how it worked. They had to redesign the entire game so it could be tested.