Slashdot Mirror
Top 10 Apple Flops
Kelly McNeill writes "Though Apple computer is known for some of the computing and technology industry's most notable innovations, its not as if the company hasn't also taken its lumps. Thomas Hormby submitted the following editorial contribution to osOpinion/osViews, which supplies us with his top ten list of Apple's (and some of associated partners) most significant flops throughout the company's history."
I wonder why the cube isn't on the list. Seems like it should be.
I'm very responsible, when ever something goes wrong they always say I'm responsible.
At least one of the flops isn't the OS the entire company is based on. Just sayin'.
I know nothing
(For every Cube Apple produces, Microsoft is happy to come back with a Windows ME or MS Passport. At least with Apple, the flagship OS doesn't kick you in the jewels every time you sit down to use it. ^_^)
I just think it's a bit sad to concentrate on someone's failures.
I think if you were to look over the last few years of posts on slashdot, regarding Apple, you'd see that "we" have been concentrating on their successes, with very few exceptions. I don't think an article that will probably generate interest for a few hours will do Apple's rep any harm.
Because the only way you can innovate and try and make better is by getting out there and trying risky things and learning from your mistakes. I applaud any company willing go out and try these things.
What do you know I wrote a novel
Apple starve the market of "old tech" just before releasing "new tech", thus creating massive demand and huge sales figures, and you describe this as a blunder? I'll have two of whatever you're having!
was really the whole Performa line of computers. At the time the Performa's were aimed at the home user and overall they were a decent computer. But the flop part was the fact that there were something like 8,000 different versions! (Of course, I am exaggerating, but only by a little bit.)
I remember going to OfficeDepot and looking at the Performas and they along had like six different models with six different model numbers. Something like 6510, 6511, 6512, 6514, 6515, etc. (I know the actual numbers were different. These are to illustrate my point.) There were just very subtle differences between the models but for whatever reason, it warranted a different number. Basically it was a nightmare trying to remember what was the difference between any two numbers. That whole scheme of trying to provide a range of configurations was a flop. Fortunately, Steve undid that and cut down the product line into four basic models. I, for one, welcomed that.
No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
Virginia Tech did.
don't even get me started on the Apple //c.
Don't forget the II GS. That was a killer machine with sound processing to die for. When it was released it made the available Macs look a bit weak (I think all there was available was the 128/512K models, the Mac Plus, and the Lisa/MacXL). All monochrome, very dull, totally unexpandable. Very pricey!
People who say that Apple's rot began when Jobs was fired miss the point. Jobs had managed to convince the execs (both regulars and the people who replaced him) that the II line was dead as a dodo and they should focus on the Mac. So Apple did, basically letting their mindshare evaporate within the personal and education markets. Apple had an extremely strong position but managed the transition to Mac very badly, or in fact failed to manage it at all. The II died from neglect.
One reason lots of other companies that emerged as PC makers in the 80s went on to massively outgrow Apple (think, Compaq...) is that they managed their transition from the 8/16 bit IBM PC through lots of architecture and CPU generations without suddenly dropping support for their existing customer base or alientating them completely. That kind of demonstrated lack of commitment to preserve existing relationships is why so many companies and purchasers found and find it hard to trust Apple, or to believe that its direction or strategy will endure past a few quarters.
Apple has always had problems as a company splitting its focus between different product lines. Witness the prolonged dullness and fading away of the Mac line the past few years as the iPod has obsessed the one-track-mind of Jobs.
The best thing for Apple the *computer* company right now might be to spin off or float iPod as a separate division, much as 3Com spun off Palm. use the massive cash raised to do something exciting for the computer line like, I don't know, buy Sun or something! Apple would then be selling both low-end, mid-range, and high-end Unix products!
Or given undercurrent of US regulatory resistance to Lenovo's purchase of IBM's PC business, why not buy that? An Apple-IBM PC combination would easily pass regulatory hurdles, and uniting two premium brands might work quite well. And of course, the ironic denoument would be priceless.
Da Blog
The Newton was a Palm Pilot before there was a Palm Pilot, and it was supposed to have handwriting recognition, but it didn't live up to expectations. The breakthrough of the Palm was that you had to relearn your handwriting in this gestures thing the computer could understand.
I'm a Plastic Engineer. Those cracks are not so easy to eliminate. On a molded 2 cm thick piece of PolyCarbonate, it is very difficult eliminate internal stresses. It can be done, but the cycle times on the molding process probably would be measured in hours instead of minutes or seconds. If they had introduced a heavily "cracked" model of the Cube they probably could have gotten away with saying it was "character marks". All that they would have to do is spead up the cycle time and build in some more internal stresses. Pop a piping hot piece of plastic into a tank of ice water and then build a computer in it! I think that it would have looked cool.
Why doesn't anything interesting happen when I have mod points?
Aston Martins, mamma mini-vans, and red-neck giant tires stupid trucks all serve the same purpose. They take you from point A to point B. There is a distinction between tasteful design, practical, and just bad taste. It's irrelevant if you cannot afford it. Just recognize the distinction.
The original Mac ran on a 68000. A slow 16/32-bit processor with no MMU or support for VM. It also had limited memory.
There is nothing wrong with assembly language or cooperative scheduling, if you are willing to take the time to do it well and in a disciplined manner.
The Mac team did their best with what was available at a reasonable cost. I'm not going to blame them for decisions that were suboptimal on processors that would not exist for many years.
If you wanted a Xerox workstation, they were available, at stratospheric prices.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Averatec 3200 series. http://www.averatec.com/notebooks/3200series.htm
My dad got one for $999 with DVD burner, 80gb HD, etc.
Not only is this laptop sub-1000$, it specs closely to the Mac and is a much better deal than the 12" iBook. In fact, I bought one myself when I was shopping for a laptop and even w/ the Apple education discount, the Averatec was a better deal.
Sometimes, as with the iPod, they come up with the right product at the right time and win big. However, sometimes they get there too early: the Newton was ahead of it's time and much better than the other first generation PDAs, but people just weren't ready to buy them yet.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?