Slashdot Mirror
Behind a Steve Jobs Keynote
Shree writes "The Guardian has an article about what it takes to prepare that smooth Steve Jobs-style keynote. When Steve launches iPhoto and says 'here we have 5000 or so photos', he actually means here we have 5000 or so carefully picked photos ... " From the article: "Objectively, Apple Computer is a mid-sized company with a tiny share of its primary market. Apple Macintoshes are only rarely seen in corporate environments, and most software companies don't even offer Apple-compatible versions of their products. To put it another way, Apple is just bit larger than Cadbury-Schweppes and about the same size as Nike or Marks and Spencer in terms of annual sales. Such comparisons come up short in trying to describe Apple's place in the world of business, because they leave out a key factor: Steve Jobs."
The power of Steve Jobs is that he is able to get people to notice what he's doing. Part of that includes his large following of people who hang on his every word. It shouldn't come as a shock to anyone that he works very hard to maintain the effortless appearance of his public persona in order to maintain that following.
Apple makes great products, sometimes jumping into market segments that have other businesses with a head start, makes them slick and easy to use, then markets the hell out of them. The iPod wasn't the first portable mp3 player, but it put the product on the map. If next week's keynote unveils a media-centered Mac Mini with DVR features, it won't be the first such creature (Microsoft's been trying to break into that segment for a while, and Bill Gates just demoed similar features in Vista), but I guarantee that Jobs will unveil products that are much closer to market, and that the proportional effect on Apple's sales will be tremendous...
-JMP
are completely different.
"There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people."--Howard Zinn
And owning apple-stock would make you ponder; who will lead apple/my money after steve goes away..? he won't be there 4 ever, will he?
But as for now, he *does* put apple on the map!! Go Steve!!!
--- 'Pain heals, chicks dig scars... glory... lasts for ever!' -- "Footstep" Falco
I digg
/.'s a little slow on the uptake here.
Oh wait...
This story has been on digg TWICE already.
Cadbury Schweppes was a bad name to throw in there because they seem to be ubiquitous in the UK.
Were that I say, pancakes?
It is a strange comparison because, even though revenue may be in the same ballpark figure as these other companies, they are not growing as quickly as Apple has done since it launched the iPod, and while Apple may be medium sized now, it is steadily getting larger. It is also well known to anyone aged 16-30 - how many American readers know what product M&S sells, or what its famous for.
I also don't understand why he appears to suggest that announcements made by the CEOs of other companies are scrutinised by brokers and other analysts. It was interesting to see all the work that goes into Jobs' presentations, but I think the author of the article was over-egging the importance of these presentations by attempting to diminish the size of Apple's importance and comparing the impact of the announcements to those made by other similarly sized companies. A bit dishonest I feel
They forgot the most important things -- the Levis blue jeans and Gap black turtleneck sponsorships.
Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
People who use Macs picture themselves as a blend of geek and artist. A shiny, beautiful piece of equipment that is easy to use and gets the job done is like a little slice of heaven to them. So when Steve Jobs does his dog and pony show, everyone laps it up.
The difference between Macs and clothing or books is that the personal computer industry, being the interface between pop-culture and the mysterious world of high tech, gets more press and money thrown at it than most other industries. So when there's a new marketing effort it gets picked up by more of the world than similar efforts in other industries.
This isn't to say Steve Jobs doesn't deserve credit for being good at what he does, but I don't think he's particularly unique in his approach or methods.
Source: 500 Days at the Helm: The Rise and Fall of Gil Amelio by Tom Hormby
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
"...To put it another way, Apple is just bit larger than Cadbury-Schweppes and about the same size as Nike or Marks and Spencer in terms of annual sales..." Apple influences IT market as much as AMD or Intel do. Sometimes even more.
Xatrix Security - Computer Security news portal
The things that impressed me most about the article were the apparent commitment to excellence that Steve Jobs has; His hands-on, detail-oriented, perfectionistic level of involvement; and the demi-god status he appears to receive from his employees. That's why he's so successful, IMHO.
honestly a steve jobs' show is as exciting as an episode of Desperate Housewives (though no cleavage is involved) - it's not the dull drone of a corporate talk. it's quite fun to watch and i regularly watch all of his addresses - can't wait for his MacExpo keynote! no wonder a lot of work goes into it - who can forget the priceless moment where he pulled out the ipod nano out of his coin pocket in his jeans!that's good stuff...
My sig has been answered.
I think describing Steve Jobs as a rock star of the business world is fairly accurate. People forget that no matter how much technology changes or how many articles talk about the evolving nature our society, people are still primarily influenced by their reactions to others as individuals. For whatever reason, Jobs captivates those around him. He demands a reaction, and it is frequently visceral. What's more, is that he is able to make it work for him instead of against him (we all knew people in high school who had, to some degree, this type of personabut for whatever reason, it was their greatest handicap). It's the kind of thing that other CEO's, though they may be more financially successful than Jobs, are frequently jealous of.
Just my 2 cents.
Jobs knows how to show a product to enhance the consumer's understanding. Example, I went to Sandisk's site yesterday to check out their upcoming mp3 players. The site does a horrible job letting the consumer know things like size (Apple shows the tiny Nano in someone's hand), I have to read a all the text (not that I mind reading, but the impact is not the same). Jobs, and his helpers, know how to deliver a pithy, and flashy message.
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
When Steve Jobs speaks he shows enthusiasm for Apple and the products, which is expected of someone in his position. What makes his keynotes so notable is the way he invites the audience and the faithful to join in his enthusiasm, as if all are participants rather than customers.
funny how the guy that wrote the very pro-steve and pro-apple piece is named mike evangelist.
can't make this stuff up......
The IRS is the one organization that you don't want to fuck with. Remember, these are the guys who took down Al Capone.
And, as a result, they don't look like idiots when plugging in a scanner BSOD's their box in front of a couple of thousand people ;)
That all said, even non-fanboys have to admit that there is something about an apple keynote that is a bit different than what the rest of the industry has. You don't see people actually "excited" about a Microsoft event (or really, any computer related event).
The vast majority are actually quite boring and to be completely honest, I think the only "excited" people at these events are those getting free food, swag or the latest copy of vs.net and a xp pro CD.
I'm not saying that the events aren't informative, and I'm not advocating that people turn release events and conventions into E3, but it would be nice if some events tried to be a bit more like apple.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
And my myopia, plantar fascitis, and unibrow were cured!
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
...the greatest carnival barker ever. "Step right up and see the iPod... no looking behind the curtain... Step right up, get your first look at the new Intel Macintosh... No sir, no touching the merchandise unless you plan to buy..."
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
The team and I spent hundreds of hours preparing for a segment that lasted about five minutes...My team picked the best and confidently presented them to Steve. True to his reputation as a perfectionist, he hated most of them....But Steve never does the demos of the pro software; he always relies on someone on the product team more familiar with its features and operation.
Sounds like a fun job.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
- smoke
- mirrors
- reality distortion machine
- black mock turtle necks
- Steve practicing saying "It's insanely great!" and "...and it's available immediately!"
Hey, hey, hey, I love Apple as much as the next guy, but you have to admit Steve is quite the showman (salesperson).fak3r.com
...because if there is anyone in the industry who could be described as an oracle to what the future holds, he's it. But more than just predicting it, he directs the company to make it. The NeXT machine heralded the future back in 1988....Unix-based, security-focused OS with a great GUI and awesome development tools. Did he actually write any of it? No, but unlike another operating system (*cough* Linux) that has awesome tech but remains a bit ... unfocused ... and an operating system that seems focused on the wrong things (*cough* Windows) Steve Jobs had/has a clear vision of what he wanted, and where things should go. And frankly, whether you like him as a person or not, he seems to have been pretty much correct.
Consider this example: The original iMac had no floppy drive and used USB ports instead of ADB. People *howled*, but time has proven him right...the iMac did more to jumpstart widespread adoption of USB than anything else (I had two PCs that had USB ports that went to the junkyard without ever having been used). On top of everything else, I'm sure companies did a good business for awhile selling ADB-to-USB converters and USB-based floppy drives.
Jobs is the only guy who has the cajones to risk alienating everyone to push the tech world further, and the world always catches up. *That* is why he is deservedly famous.
BTW, contrast this to Wozniak who is also decidely famous, but as the wizard who made it all work. It's too bad the two of them didn't collaborate on more things...maybe those warp drives wouldn't be so far off after all...
Ooh, really? Can someone point me to where I can find some?
..because if there is anyone in the industry who could be described as an oracle to what the future holds, he's it. But more than just predicting it, he directs the company to make it. The NeXT machine heralded the future back in 1988....
And like he foresaw, NeXT is now at the nexus of modern computing. I mean, everyone here has a NeXT machine, and when was the last time you saw a non-NeXT computer in an office?
I don't own a Mac, but I've been surprised to see them used in my client's sites, which include manufacturing plants and government (city, state and fed labs). Publishing and graphics design work mainly. And it does run some major pieces of software (anything that runs Microsoft Office can claim to support the most-used business software out there), even popular tax software. I notice my kid's educational video games run on both Windows and MacOS 8.6 & up
For as "small" as Apple is portrayed, their CEO, at the very least, is visible to the public, which is more than I can say for many of tech companies larger than Apple (or any corporation for that matter). At least we know a CEO that actually does something (in the eyes of the public) that justifies a high salary.
Like Coach Bowden of the Seminoles, just his image and persona alone is more valuable than all of his other qualities.
-Santoro
monopolion
I do this sort of stuff for a living, and while most of the shows I do are more on the "hey gang, let's do a meeting" level, when someone's spending a couple of million bucks to fly in a few thousand folks, put them in hotels, and cram them into one ballroom, there's a very high level of expectation.
Sure, a lot of companies have Really Dull Meetings, but some others are much like the "Jobs Model." Slick, professionally-produced presentations, lots of cool videos and music, light shows, several HDTV-level projection screens, 100 kilowatt sound systems, and expensive pro talent to help entertain the crowd between product demos.
You also get stuff like Larry Ellison rappelling down from the ceiling of the ballroom, the head of a soft drink company crashing a golf cart through a frangible projection screen, rotating platforms for the audience (to turn them to different stages) for another soft drink company, or any of a hundred different Big Show stories.
You also get the Big Disasters when they don't prepare right. Like the above-mentioned rotating platforms not turning when the weight of the crowd is actually on them, or a full-sized luxury car on a raft in a lake doing a quick 180 degree roll and ending up suspended under water...
Apple Macintoshes are only rarely seen in corporate environments
I wonder if that is starting to shift at all? I know from my own experience, our company is about 32 people or so, and I can count 10 or 11 Mac users. Not one of them is involved whatsoever in graphics or design. Most are developers, but the Sysadmin, CEO, COO, and VP of Product Development all use Macs, and the VP of Sales is a Mac user at home, but chooses a Win laptop just for compatibility sake when she's onsite @ client's offices.
Roughly 30% of our company is Mac. And barely any support is ever needed for any of them.
OK, I gotta bite. M&S is famous for two things: its underwear and not having changing rooms.
It is axiomatic that all middle class British women buy their underwear in M&S.
With regard to not having changing rooms, if you'll indulge me with a further cliche:
"I used to have a girlfriend who worked for M&S, she wouldn't let me try it on."
I imagine that Jobs knows pretty much where Apple is going to be in 90 days/180 days/a year. I don't think that he has such a unique vision - it is just that he has a vision. From reading the article, it seems like the guy knew exactly what he wanted from the presentation, no matter how unreasonable it seemed.
You know, if a Linux company had half the focus of a Steve Jobs and had a clear vision they would sweep the market (k/ubuntu is getting getting better each day). So many FOSS-based companies seem very passive to me when it comes to defining their product.
Imagine this in every key notes with Steve Ballmer. From AQFL. :)
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Anyone building a company would love to have it become the same size as Nike, Cadbury and even that English store thingie. That's not chump change.
I've got to say it's the Santa Jobs factor. The anticipation of new products always seems to be on the mind of attendees and remote Apple watchers. A MacExpo keynote is like Christmas morning. If you can understand the excitement surrounding the age-old tradition of sneaking a peek at Santa Clause delivering his presents, and wondering ahead of time what you'll get this year, you can understand a Steve Jobs keynote.
Why can't you play the tracks you ripped yourself? Did you end up using Apple Lossless? Because that's the only format I can think of that might be incompatible with other such things (if someone doesn't want to support AAC, an open standard, that's their own fault, or yours for not ripping as MP3).
I don't want to imply that you're just trolling, but your second statement seems unqualified. iTunes DRM on purchased songs, though, that's one I'll give you.
"he actually means here we have 5000 or so carefully picked photos ... "
Years ago a story come out about MS doing some careful selections for demo (i think it was for XP) and your guys tooled them. I mean many of you were just vicious; "disingenuous, deceitful, EVIL, liars, etc. etc." That was one of the most hate filled threads I has seen. So we fast forward to today and well I guess I just think it's funny that when Apple does it... it's a stroke of genius.
"Such comparisons come up short in trying to describe Apple's place in the world of business, because they leave out a key factor: Steve Jobs."
LOL. One word, FANBOY. seriously though, we should get him some knee pads. lol.
Anyone following the CES from this site most likely is not having a good week. MS is making out pretty friggen well on allot of fronts. Their stuff certainly is doing a good job of trivializing Apple (less the iPod of course). Go ahead flame, its still pretty funny...
Hmmm. I always got the impression that Gates was a wannabe Jobs.
the business market.
He's never been in the same playground that Microsoft's in.
Apple's business has always been more about the consumer market. By design! When Stevev Jobs was (and as he is again,) in charge anyway.
The creation of a platform which supported VisiCalc, which propelled sales of the original Apple][, was a happy accident but it was just that, an accident. Then the creation of the DTP market with Adobe (originally called Aldus) was another happy accident. Their subsequent ability to retain market share in that market is due to the fact that creative people appreciate elegance.
He doesn't want to play in the business arena. He never did. Its too cut-throat to charge the margins he could possibly chage by staying in the home market.
The thing to remember about Apple is 'style.' He wanted a company with some style and which produced products that had style. Style derives from elegance. Elegance derives from two Latin roots, 'e' (meaning 'out') and 'legare' (meaning 'to choose'.) Elegant designs are those which have all the 'cruft' out-chosen from them. Apple hardware designs are definitely elegant and OS X's Aqua GUI interface is also elegant.
The business market doesn't give a crap about style or elegance.
It all about the Benjamins. The one who can deliver the most bang for the buck wins the contracts. Its made Dell what it is today. Its also what has unmade a host of companies, like IBM PC hardware. Not even their line of laptops, which can charge a premium for design, survived.
Dell was possible because Microsoft was never in the hardware market so they were able to commoditize it all without getting hurt. In a kind of symbiotic relationship, Dell exists because they were able to get control of the supply chain and leave the software R&D to Microsoft.
That's just a fact.
Microsoft could have played 'by the rules of law' and still have emerged on top. Now they're tainted by their past and they are no further ahead in the other markets because they have to depend on their hardware makers.
The hardware makers are locked in cut-throat competition and don't have the cash reserves to do any R&D.
They can't even change chassis because it costs money that nobody's willing to pony up. Hence you're stuck with ugly boxes and that's all you can get. That's all you're ever going to get because its not worth it for chassis manufacturers; the two big remaining are Chinese, all too well versed in the costs of change, and NOT about to change how they manufacture chassis. The're making money now and they don't have a culture which responds, swiftly to change.
You're stuck with the same box as ten years ago while in that time Apple came up with three generations of award winning designs for their iMacs, their PowerBooks, their iBooks and their PowerMacs.
The iPod and subsequent entry into audio and video blogs (and the distibution of RSS content,) ARE what Apple is about.
The PC will forever rule the 32-bit business desktop market.
My 2 new AMD64 Athlons are runing crappy 32 bit implementations of WindowsXP and most of the CPU cycles are devoted to keeping viri, worms and other creepy-crawlies at bay. (One of them is actually dual boot; running slackware Linux 99% of the time; then it runs flat out.)
I wouldn't WANT to move the business machines into my living room.
There I've got a wireless network, a 400GB NAS server, an older G4 PowerBook and a G5 iMac taking care of 'business' without 'looking' like business machines. With the addition of a digital tuner, my home entertainment center is my iMac.
And I've got OS X 10.4.2, some A/V components, a podcasting set-up, the software, and iTunes (running on all of them and sharing my library on the NAS server).
And that's the way I LIKE it.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
as Steve is to Apple. They have similar pitches ... and, you just can't stop watching. Both focus on simplicity ... Just set and forget it ... Only six buttons. To match the same functionality with a Dell, feature for feature, you would have to spend a fazillion dollars. But, with a Mac you get all of this, and more. You get iLife with Garage Band, iPhoto, iTunes, and iMovie -- in HD. It only costs $1299 ... and, its available right now!
Em, I don't know exactly how the Windows iTunes is set up, but on my mac:
iTunes -> Preferences -> Advanced -> Importing -> Import Using: MP3 Encoder, Setting: Higher Quality (192 kbps)
Stuff from the music store? Burn it to an audio CD. You can probably figure out what to do from there.
I used to be convinced that there are two sides to every question, but I'm not so sure anymore....
It's more likely that Bill Gates wants to be Steve Jobs than the other way around.
"Be nice, veer left, and never stop thinking" Iain Banks - Walking On Glass
if he is a wannabe Gates, why is he focused on and responsible for the innovation, direction, quality, and sheer excellence that comes out of Cupertino? Gates is a businessman who realizes that Good Enough is good enough. The two have taken TOTALLY different paths.
I'm definitely not trolling. Am I ignorant to what you referred to? Maybe. I used to be able to pop a CD in I-Tunes, rip it, and be able to play the music in I-Tunes (through WinXP) and in my Linux players. Something happened in one of the updates over the past year or so and, while following the same procedure, my ripped music only plays exclusively to I-Tunes...seems like it's ripped in the same format as purchased music. I will be fair and say this: I did not pay attention to the format I ripped the music in. I never had to change it before, so I never really paid attention to it. I will take a closer look, though.
He is a study in cult of personality. Speaking as someone who hates crowds, mind you, I am not exactly popular (nor particularly unpopular). I've noticed that I have friends, some I just consider natural born leaders (with all of their ignorace/faults). The one thing I've noticed is that tall people tend to more often get people to listen...er, rather... people naturally listen to them/believe them, even if what they say is really dumb. Sociologically speaking, I really wonder what all of the traits are of the person that is naturally popular, the person that no matter what they do, never seems to do anything to maintain friendships, never calls anyone back, seems to always be busy with something, always has people sort of following them. I think Bill Clinton is another decent example of this. What is it about these people? Napoleon wasn't tall, so its not just height. Could it be a biological/chemical/genetic trait? Or is it something that even the most naturally unpopular person could master?
The Admin and the Engineer
Jobs doesn't predict the future -- he dictates it!
USB only became popular because Apple stopped selling computers with other ports (serial, ADB, SCSI) AND because Windows computers already had support for it. If Windows machines didn't ship with USB ports, USB peripherals would be no more common than ADB, AAUI, or Mac serial peripherals were 10 years ago.
NextStep only became the basis for MacOS because Jobs decided to use it (there were other options at the time, such as BeOS) and it was pretty much a failure for the 12 or so years until they stopped selling computers that would run earlier versions of MacOS. The NeXT machine didn't herald the future of computing, it merely foretold the future of computers Steve Jobs would sell. It's not like ObjectiveC has taken the computer world by storm, or something.
dom
Pretty sad.
1) Microsoft Sucks ass -- everything and anything is better.
2) *ix is the bomb, not matter what flavor. Especially when used in Beowulf clusters.
3) Everyone wants Linux to have the polish of the OS X interface.
4) We like Apple and Google is godlike.
5) In Soviet Russia things are in reverse.
In the end, I don't know what stranglehold or blackmail Steve Jobs has against other Apple execs, but if the rest of them were smart, they would drop Steve Jobs like a lead balloon. The only problem is, Apple execs have never shown one drop of intelligence in their entire history of the company.
Oh my fucking god, you have GOT to be joking. Apple is having (a) record growth (b) record profits and (c) a stock price that keeps going up and up and up. What in the holy hell are you talking about? They are respected and make excellent products that consumers love and have captured a large amount of mindshare. The executives would be completely RETARDED to get rid of Jobs. He's an excellent CEO. Much better than, I think, you are.
Put down the crack pipe, baby. Or maybe it's a anti-Jobs pipe? Whatevah, you need to think about quitting. :)
Ha! Ha! Ha! Ohhh.. Heee.. Ha! Jeez... stop, you're killing me. Someone get the MBA here a company to run! What a hilarious combination of FUD and disconnection from reality. This is the funniest post I've read in weeks. Thanks!
The way market share was calculated the last time I looked at the market research numbers a couple of years ago, Apple's market share for desktops and laptops was calculated against the sum total of all other windows OS brands.
At the time Apple was #1 by a good margin in laptops and in the top-5 for desktops. Yet their market share was always referred to as "miniscule."
I still don't understand why no one's bothered to mention this from the media side.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
Along with your Steve Jobs profile, you paint a picture of an elitist, which is presicely where I believe he wants Apple Computer at. I think he perceives an Apple Computer to be an experience worthy of the cost, any cost; better than anything else by leaps and bounds, and worth the time and effort to make it so. He wants an Apple computer to equate to a Bentley automobile or some other ultra-luxurious item.
What you didn't hit upon is that there actually are people in the market that will pay (up the nose) for so-called "ultra-luxury" items. The same folks that pay $10,000 for a platinum-plated bathroom sink may just very well see Apple computers as that type item for their computing need--if only by appearance and price alone. While I have in no way gone out to actually see if higher income brackets prefer Apple computers to others, I do know off-the-cuff that an awful lot of famous people tend to have them (Actors, Musicians, etc)--and probably for the status/fashion appeal as well as the functionality.
Whether that approach it is right or wrong for the Apple Computer, Inc. and its stock holders is up for grabs, but the "image" he has built for his company has no doubt been reinforced by his self-promotion and mangement style. And I think that 5% market is exactly what he intended.
-brain
"can't listen to the 200+ songs I've purchased through I-Tunes because of his DRM practices" What??? Describe the problem you have in some detail. Me or others will tell you what to do about it. There should be no problem with either the purchaced songs or the ones you riped from CD both should play on almost any portable device.
I think the parent means "hectomillionaire," as being a centimillionaire isn't all that exciting.
See the list of SI prefixes here.
Write Only Memory: Another pointless blog.
set iTunes to rip songs in MP3 instead of AAC. It can be done, I'm doing it right now.
It's possible that something changed, but I haven't had a similar problem recently. Even the AAC's that were generated from iTunes played in Windows Media Player, of all things (with a quick codec update).
It may be possible that with your installation of one of the recent major updates (maybe to 6.x series of iTunes?) that the encoding was set to Apple Lossless by default, rather than MP3 (or AAC). A good way to tell would be to look at the filesizes -- if you're ripping a CD down to ~300 megs total, rather than ~30-40, then it's probably doing everything using ALAC. All you should have to do is switch it back.
But what he fails to realize is the Microsoft's Media Center is actually designed to be a Home Theater component, allowing users to view and record television, payback DVD's and video, access media libraries, as well as general naviation of an OS environment.
That still doesn't explain why you need 200 dedicated-function buttons on the remote, rather than 10 or so multi-function buttons.
Consider DVD playback. At the menu screens, you need navigation buttons to move between menu items, and an enter button to activate the selected item. While playing a video stream, you need the abilities to pause, rewind or fast-forward, and return to a menu.
Those functions don't overlap -- you can't navigate menu items when there aren't any, and you can't fast-forward a menu screen. An intelligently-designed DVD application will use the same remote buttons for different purposes depending on the context.
"This isn't to say Steve Jobs doesn't deserve credit for being good at what he does, but I don't think he's particularly unique in his approach or methods."
Oh? Did you see the head Microsoftie's presentation at CES? If not, check it out. Then watch the Apple show next week and see if you still feel the same.
A former Apple employee once told me that everyone there knew what their REAL job was -- making stuff for Steve's next demo.
:)
And it works. Whatever is announced, the Apple Store will be swamped with pre-orders for it, and I will again be amazed at his ability to tempt me to pull my credit card out of my wallet and click on store.apple.com.
(Fortunately, I'm poor enough to resist, but I sure feel the tug!)
Geoff
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
What's pretty sad is that with humble beginnings like this Microsoft has become so popular/profitable/unstoppable.
fak3r.com
I sure hope you don't mean to suggest that carefully picking "stock photos for iPhoto" and is comparible to carefully picking "screenshots of a beta product". Because if you are, you need to do yourself a favor and slap yourself silly.
// don't feed the trolls
Jeers have been going to software companies for decades for using screenshots that carefully mislead how an application or game really looked, like only picturing the cut scenes for a platform game.
And if you're referring to what I think you are, a few years ago Microsoft submitted a video of web browsing trying to prove that Windows was faster with IE than without IE. That video, submitted as evidence in the trial, was later proved to be edited to appear to be faster.
/ way too tired for this
Everyone is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts.
Steve Jobs says that PC and home theater integration is a fad that won't last. So why even bother coming out with a half assed product that claims to do everything Windows Media Center does, only slicker, or so Steve Jobs says.
When did he ever say any of these things? A quick googling didn't turn up any first-hand reports of Jobs quotes calling PC/home theater integration a "fad", nor any feature comparisons between Front Row and WMC apart from the design of the remotes.
Are you trying to FUD us?
Its a fad until Steve Jobs says it isn't, a lot like portable video devices which he said were impractical for the average user. Until Steve Jobs added video support to the iPod. Now its the cat's meow.
Yes. Circumstances change over time. Two years ago, typical consumers weren't willing to pay the premium to add video support to their iPods. Today, costs have come down and now they are. Jobs wasn't going to osborne Apple out of 2 years of iPod sales by announcing that a video iPod was eventually coming out.
Apple has been selling only a few million computers a quarter, compared to dozens of millions by Dell, HP, an others.
And how does Apple's profit margin per unit compare to Dell's? Growth is great, and market share is great, but in the end all that matters is profit.
For the first time in history, a Mac is 99% identical to a PC except for the BIOS and a few hardware/software tweaks.
This is true, if you count "an entirely different operating system and user experience" as a mere software tweak. People who subscribe to the Megahertz Myth may think Win86's and Mac86's can be compared directly, people who actually interact with a computer to determine its value will have other criteria for performance and value.
OSX is FREE to Apple to install on their hardware unlike Dell having to buy a Windows license for every computer they sell.
And Apple hasn't have to spend a cent to create or support OS X, no! It just sprang fully formed from the CVS repository one day.
I think Apple would be better off without Steve Jobs and his ego and arrogance.
We've already seen what Apple is like without Jobs at the helm. It's not a pretty scene, either for the customers or the investors.
Meanwhile, with Jobs in charge Apple is more popular and profitable than they've been since the 8-bit computing era. You'll have to forgive them if the board of directors doesn't take your advice to "drop him like a lead balloon".
And this is where I say the figures are spun against Apple.
Roughly 6th is about right and I'd guess they are within a few percentage points of being 4th. So when claims about top-ten PC shipments are made by the media and research firms, Apple should be in the top-ten. They are not because they specifically exclude Apple. Intention is impossible to establish. (Where's my tinfoil hat?)
The picture for Apple is only getting better. Now, with Longwait coming the fanboy hype is going to drown out the good work Apple and OSS is doing for an utterly mediocre product, but so what.
BTW, I don't even own a Mac though personally I quit windows a couple of years ago. Every client I've switched has only been happier for the change. I don't generate more money moonlighting by recommending Macs, but I get plenty of referrals as a result.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
This is clearly coming from a technology worshipper who believes that more features=better, and ignores any other aspect of the decision. I have news for you - the usability of something is FAR more important to many people than "all the things it can do" or abstract technical specs.
I expect that when you make a purchasing decision, you sit down and compare features vs price, and buy the things that have the most features. For you, that might be fine. For me, and many other people, something irritating to use has NO value at all.
I used to get excited about new technology, until I kept buying it and realized that I never ended up using it nearly as much as I thought I would. I ended up asking myself why, and realized that the reason was that technology for the sake of technology is crap and a waste of money. Technology is about helping PEOPLE accomplish things. For my parents, the 3 remotes with a gazillion buttons is simply complexity to be managed because it obscures what they want to do (watch TV or a DVD). And, even though I'm a software developer and can use any system just fine and dandy, I feel the same way about things. For another example, I had a PDA because on paper, the features looked handy - carrying around lots of information, etc. Now I'm back to a paper organized, because it's more efficient to use (and actually has more features, because I can draw diagrams, etc). I thought I could use it as an MP3 player, but it was irritating for a number of reasons. When I sold it, I used the money to put towards an iPod, which I use all the time. Now, I walk through local electronics stores and think "that's terrible"... "I would use that, if it were designed better"... "how is this supposed to make my life better again?"... I've been wanting Apple to come out with a tablet PDA for a while now, because I have faith I would actually want to use it. Until then, I've pretty much given up on them.
Yup, the hardware specs for Apple machines mean that the PC user's CPU is 10% faster for crunching SETI-at-home data. However, I am able to do much more with my iMac than I ever could on any Windows or Linux box, because it makes the functions easily available to me and I don't have to spend buckets of time learning it. I don't like pissing around with computers after I leave work for the day, but I like to do things that involve computers. Using Windows is an irritating experience. Linux is OK to use, and gets a lot of slack for usability because I appreciate all the work that's gone into it and what it stands for. But they don't come close to using my Mac.
That, by itself, is worth any "premium" to me. And if businesses looked at things holistically and factored in the productivity of people's time, overall job satisfaction, support costs, etc (and actually considered other options besides Windows), I bet a LOT more businesses would be using Macs.
As for your comments about the media center PCs, I believe an appropriate question to ask is whether or not all those features (like general OS navigation) are good features to try and put on a remote? (I haven't actually used either, so I can't comment directly on them).
So, your constant comparison of "the same thing" is not even close to the mark. Also, over the past few years, comparing a comparably equipped Dell PC and an Apple PC, including software, the Apple's were actually a better value, except for the machine's technical speed. At least for my needs, I know the PC world lets you customize things to specific needs a lot better.
And you know what? It's Steve Jobs that makes the difference and makes the company keep the eye on the prize, and build things that are fun to use.
"BMWs are way overpriced! So are Hondas. Really, you can find used cars for just a few hundred dollars that will drive on more roads and take any kind of engine oil."
"BMW and Honda should just fold. Nobody takes them seriously, and their products are way overpriced. Also, hybrids are a waste of your money because at todays prices, you only break even on gas prices after five years. Design, comfort, size, color, leather, safety, and appearance aren't quantifiable and are pointless expenses."
"If you like BMW, you're just a fanboi and have been duped by the vast marketing machine. Sucker."
Everyone is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts.
The idea of "The Apple Tax" is prevalent and popular. It's also mostly not true.
As an example, one of the "Mini PC" deals from a local computer company costs ~$680 - it lands performance-wise between the $499 and $599 Mac mini, and comes without an OS and logically also without any software. The Mac mini not only already has an OS, but comes with more software than has been bundled with my latest two PCs (and as far as I can tell, most of the software that comes with the mini doesn't suck).
The above example was a fairly well-equipped box, on par with the Mac mini. If we were to go up to the current PowerBook, for example, it'd have Firewire 800, optical audio, gigabit ethernet, Bluetooth 2.0 and a full-sized DVI. I agree that it performance more or less sucks (with a 167MHz system bus, no wonder they're going Intel), but try to find a comparable port setup on a PC laptop for the same price. (The PowerBook also comes with even more software.)
It's true that you can put together an eMachine for $300 with less features that still does everything you want. At that point, there *will* be an overwhelming Apple tax if you were to look at the alternatives, and unless you want OS X, there's no good reason to buy a Mac. It's also true that you can probably find a technically better laptop than the iBook for the same price. To me, this is the only noticable Apple tax. But most of this is also a general tax - if you were buying a better Dell for $500, would you also call that The Dell Premium? No, you'd recognize that it was a higher-end model than your current one, and get on with your life. The only reason this doesn't happen with Apple is because they don't additionally make low-end models as low as the others.
Another scenario: you're trying to buy a Quad PowerMac G5, and you're complaining about the price - a workstation computer costing $3300. I went to Dell's site and configured a Dell Precision 670 MT64 - also billed as a workstation computer - with two Dual-Core Xeons. It cost $4634. $3300 is heinous, but compared to what the market's low-cost provider has, it's cheap.
At very few points, even today, are you paying a $500 premium for Apple computers. If you're not satisfied by a Mac mini and want an iMac, there's an exact $500 difference between the top mini and the low iMac, so if you're in that position and strapped for cash, I pity you. At even fewer points - none? - do you have one PC and one Mac, both with comparable hardware and the Mac costing $500 more.
Your argument that PC users won't switch may prove to be correct. Really switching to the Mac and actually abandoning your current PC is not something you accomplish over an afternoon, and unless you're a "Student/Teacher"; the Mac version of Office isn't cheap either. Even if we consider the people that will like to have one box booting OS X, Windows and natively, or even just the first two, they're practically a rounding error in comparison to potential switchers.
But where I know that you're absolutely full of crap is the bit about driving loyal Apple customers away. Most loyal Apple customers have already been through either OS 9 to OS X or that AND 68k to PowerPC. This transition promises to be a lot smoother, which is astounding, considering how the emulator this time around is crappier. There's absolutely no evidence that the new Macs will be significantly worse than the current Macs, other than possible manufacturing defects with new rounds of hardware - nothing particularly unique to either this transition or Apple products.
Other people have said it better that Apple is making more money than ever currently. Steve Jobs stood on the WWDC stage seven months ago and proclaimed that by summer 2007, every Mac would be shipping with an Intel processor. Since then, sales of would-be-obsolete machines are going up. It's not exactly your average Osbourne effect. If you cared about your profits, you would be nuts to fire Jobs if you were in the position to do so.
My last point is that of the double-play
I'd never thought I'd say this - but this was one of the most insightful articles into life at Apple. I'm not saying its a positive thing, knowing Jobs' famous tantrums and "getting things his way" attitude to whatever he does.
Nevertheless, It is an important aspect of post 1997 Apple, with all their products being released in this fashion, and I guess its important for them to spend so much time rehearsing things - after all, they can't afford to have Gates' fiasco at the Windows 98 launch (When the printer crashed the system on being plugged in!). But whats interesting is that Jobs comes across as a stickler for personalization and perfection - which in my opinion is commendable, when you're holding a job which can often lead to overlooking the finer aspects of things.
No wonder Apple products set the industry standard in terms of looks, design and most of all, presentations.
If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed...oh, wait a minute - he already does.
Jobs has a reputation of beings hands-on in some things, but he either knows where to delegate on tech features, has great instincts, or has more nuts-and-bolts knowledge than I suspect. I don't quite get how he pulls it off. He must listen to techies at least some, wouldn't you think?
Though I never owned one, by all accounts the NeXT was great. Jobs probably knows a few technical things, but how much input does he make about some of the lower level technical details?
Who are you kidding here? The car industry is completely different from the computer industry.
First of all, a Mac is hardly a Porsche. It doesn't run any faster, turn corners any better, and yet it costs more and underperforms.
Computers are not meant to be fashion statements like cars. They are there to make your life more productive, to get work done. Period. Same can be said for cars, but as you know, that's hardly the case in real life.
eTrade SUCKS
"I'd guess they are within a few percentage points of being 4th."
Again, you're technically correct (4th place is Acer, with 4.7% vs. Apple's 2.3%), but in this case "a few percentage points" actually means that Apple would have to double their sales in order to make up that difference. I'm a major Mac advocate, and Apple is certainly kicking ass lately, but their actual market share is only just now starting to rise from it's all-time low (which was actually 2004, believe it or not). Again, however, market share isn't nearly as important as profitability.
"So when claims about top-ten PC shipments are made by the media and research firms, Apple should be in the top-ten. They are not because they specifically exclude Apple."
And again, it depends on what you're measuring. If you include Macs as "PCs", a top ten list should definitely include Apple. If you're distinguishing "Macs" from "PCs" (which most people do, even though they shouldn't in this context), then of course Apple wouldn't be included.
There is a danger in putting all your eggs in the basket of your CEO. Just read "Good to Great" by Jim Collins and you'll see from objective research that companies that outpace their rivals in every sense NEVER revolve around the CEO. He/she is just part of an organization that is set up to run well on it's own without a figurehead CEO. So, even though Apple is now doing well under Jobs, what happens if something happens to him or he leaves? Then how does Apple continue it's current trend?
For someone who rants about Steve Jobs being arrogant, it's the first word that comes to my mind when reading your post.
I'm sure his daughter really appreciates being called "illegitimate."
The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
You're exactly right on both accounts...I hunted around for the Import setting while on my lunch break. I can't believe I missed it. Ditto for the music store...was just trying to avoid doing that as a last resort.
That should be "yes".
Something happened in one of the updates over the past year or soAround iTunes 4.0 or so, the default ripping format changed from MP3 to (non-DRM'd) AAC. Just go into the preferences and change it back to MP3. Or, find a player that can play AAC.
Firstly, I'd love to know why this was modded "+3, Interesting" rather than "-1, Flamebait", or "-infinity, Stupid".
Lets take a few points here...
They continuously sell overpriced hardware
On the contrary, my mac laptop cost me a little over £600, and for a laptop still easily capable of five hours battery life a year later, is the embodiment of value for money.
more robust modulare components with a wide selection of available hardware and features
Proof? More to the point, however, it's simply incorrect. How many people in the target audience for the iMac even know they *can* upgrade their computer, much less how to go about doing it? And this is without mentioning that it comes with pretty much everything you ever need anyway (internal bluetooth and wireless LAN are still not commonplace in machines from other manufacturers). The Power Mac, you must note, is a tower unit and can be upgraded with exceptional ease.
I am sure his FIRST mistake will be to overprice computers which can be directly compared to against' PCs.
Firstly let's define PCs. I always took it to mean "personal computer", which Apples are. Now lets see what *you* mean, which is computers running Windows. And for that precise reason, machines made by Apple are NOT comparable, since they run an operating system based around common sense security models such that they do not get viruses or spyware infections easily, and has not remained static for four years.
Apple should sell computers cheaper then Dell simply because they don't have to charge themselves OS licensing fees. OSX is FREE to Apple to install on their hardware
This shows you to *really* be an idiot. Who exactly do you think pays for the development of OS X?
Apple should sell computers cheaper then PC's if they ever want to gain marketshare.
No, this is the Dell approach. What Apple should continue to do is sell good quality products, not the cheapest.
but if the rest of them were smart, they would drop Steve Jobs like a lead balloon.
John Sculley anybody? Look where that ended up.
The only problem is, Apple execs have never shown one drop of intelligence in their entire history of the company.
Debatable, however what is certain is that you showed no sign of intelligence in your entire post.
I already replied to a later comment (not by you) concerning the same thing you just mentioned above concerning the default ripping format. I investigated this while on my lunch break and found out the embarrassing (for me) truth. Thanks for the reply. I didn't pay the attention that I should have to the ripping formats in the past because the default had not changed to AAC yet, so that's why I overlooked it.
More specifically: I cannot get AmaRok, Juk and NoAtun to play my I-Tunes purchased music. Is there a workaround, besides burning the music to an audio disc and then ripping the tracks again into MP3 format? Thanks for any assistance you can provide.
I'm extremely uncomfortable in this akward position of defending Bill Gates - but since I value the method of thinking about any given thought I'm going to do it.
In my opinion, Bill Gates is to be blamed... They are the result of Bill making money the center of his whole life. They are the result of his sneaky aggressive behavior.
Money is clearly not the center of Bill Gates life. If it was, he wouldn't be the biggest philanthropist of all time. This doesn't make him a saint (he may be in it for fame and ego) but it does indicate that money isn't his only idol. You quick assertion that it is indicates to me that you - like many of us - are quick to oversimplify and lay far more blame than can really be laid at the foot of corporate figureheads.
Note that Bill Gates suffers from depression. This is exactly what you would expect of a man who has spent his entire adult life acting out sneaky aggression. It's all fun and games to paint demonic horns and a tail on Bill, but in all seriousness you continue to indicate this desire - universal to humans - to live in a universe that is neat and tidy. Things happen because they are someone's fault, people's actions can be explained by their character - which is itself simple and comprehensible.
The points I'm questioning are bigger than either Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. It has to do with the way that we manufacture celebrity for celebrity's sake - just as we manufacture notoriety for notoriety's sake.
The truth is that sometimes things happen not "just because", but for a variety of reasons that are so complex that there's really no better explanation. A multi-billion dollar business is an incredibly complex structural organization. Of course a CEO can set the tone - it's about leadership. Steve Jobs appears to be a leader. But how much do you think that leadership translates directly into "cool new products?"
I think that there's a ton of luck that goes into it as well. I imagine there are probably many people who could do what Steve is doing, but who will never be in that position (and probably suck in whatever position they are in now because they don't have the temperment for it).
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
Instead of quoting market share figures that are two years old, how about something a little more recent?
- share-breaks-4_22.shtml
http://www.methodshop.com/2005/12/apple-os-market
I have read similar figures elsewhere as well, but please do your own research to find those corroborating numbers.
The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
Hate to tell you this, but you're wrong on two points here:
1. My figures are based on ACTUAL SALES FIGURES from 2005. They are not 2 years old, nor are they limited to the United States (which people commonly get confused about--Apple's U.S. market share is higher than it's overall worldwide share).
2. Your figures are based on INTERNET TRAFFIC. That tells you what percentage of people browsing the internet are using a particular operating system, not what percentage of computers sold that quarter were made by a particular company.
Now, your figures would be more closely attuned to Apple's installed base, which is just fine, but that includes all computers currently in use, not new computer sold in a particular time period, which is what market share refers to.
Ferrari and Porsche are niche players, BMW is not. In Germany, BMW is just another car manufacturer and the cars are everywhere, likewise Mercedes. In fact Mercedes is sort of the German version of Chevrolet. The only reason all the German cars (except some of the shittiest E-class Mercedes) in the US are so pricy is the broad assortment of import tariffs we levied against Germany after WWII.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
OSX seemingly only fully supports the BT either built in or one external adapter from D-Link. I have an iogear adapter (GBU311) that OSX won't support fully; I can use it to transfer data to and from my cell phone, but I can't use my headset with it, because it claims that the adapter doesn't support handsfree or headset profiles. Ironically, in Windows, it supports them.
I am an actual former NeXT Registered Developer. I was CEO of a software company that developed expert systems for physicians on the NeXT. We were instrumental in getting the MUMPS language ported to the NeXT.
Steve, at the time, had a real hard-on for stuff that WASN'T another spreadsheet, word processor, etc. (although everyone loved the hell out of Lotus Improv and that was definitely Steve's baby) so we were one of the companies selected to show our stuff in San Francisco in Septmember of 1990.
This was the event where the NeXT Dimension color card for the Cubes was introduced, along with the NeXTStation pizza-box, and of course, NeXTStep 2.0.
We were in the building for 3 or 4 days before the big show getting our stuff working on almost hourly new builds of the OS.
So, more than a few of us took breaks and watched Steve rehearse his presentation. Trust me, he leaves nothing to chance...nothing. His air of casualness is the result of lots or preparation and practice.
He absolutely IS a showman, but he's also unquestionably, undeniably brilliant.
People remember the Apple IIe and the first (1984) Mac, but forget the Lisa. That "girl" was one of the greased skids for showing Steve the door. Not because it failed, but because Steve wanted about 500 million to 1 billion to build a better machine like it...the NeXT. No, that wasn't its name...but the idea was already there. The board balked, he got the bum rush from his own company.
NeXTStep was/is Mac OS/X. Avi Tevanian was at NeXT, he's Chief Scientist or something at Apple now. Testified at the Microsoft anti-trust trial, etc.
Steve didn't write the MACH kernel or bolt on BSD primitives and Display PostScript to NeXTStep, but damn sure knew what people to recruit and hire to get it done. And then took them back to Apple.
Considering that the Lisa and the seminal ideas for NeXTStep came about around 1985-86...about the time OS/2 and Windows were being created, I'd say the current state of the Mac OS and Windows shows the man ain't too stupid.
No, I am not a Mac fanatic. I have more PC hardware than NeXT and Mac hardware. I'm pretty much agnostic on this stuff...been doing it too long to be religious about any of it these days.
The point is that there's a whole lot to the guy doing the keynotes at MacWorld.
Steve is cool.
I am my own gestalt.
Its a fad until Steve Jobs says it isn't, a lot like portable video devices which he said were impractical for the average user. Until Steve Jobs added video support to the iPod. Now its the cat's meow.
Isn't that a good thing? Think about mp3 players in general. They used to be the type of things that only geeks would buy, a type of geek fad. Then Apple released the iPod, and found a way to successfully market the mp3 player to a much much larger segment of the population. The damn things are everywhere! Does that mean that they are better? Not necessarily, but the success of this "mp3 player fad" is leading to newer, better products from more companies, both in mp3 players and digital multimedia in general. Now tell me how much better off wwe'd be without Jobs. We may have eventually progressed this far, but when I see a frickin' iPod everywhere I turn, the guy's done something right!
Don't agree with what I say? Fine. Think I'm trolling? Say so. But how do you justify modding an un-rated post as "overrated"?
Someone's reality distortion field is in full force.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
"When Apple finally came out with a sub $1000 computer, it is so feature lacking and crippled that few PC users were ever convinced that the Mac Mini is a good alternative to a $600 PC"
That's the stupidest fucking comment I've read in years.
For the record (and I don't know why I'm even wasting my time replying to such bullshit) the Mac mini wasn't the first sub-$1000 computer. Goes to show what you know.
No wonder I quit wasting my time around here.
..as one who also has a penchant for doing live tech demos during presentations I can fully
understand the careful preparation required for such dangerous activities.
If anything can go wrong, it will go wrong. That is what you must remember... but balance that alongside the other belief that it will all work. that gives you the confidence to get over the
worries of the first thought...and if you are prepared, then when things do go wrong you can quickly make that switch (sometimes literally a VGA switch on the control console!)
I nevre used to watch the MacExpo shows...just used to digest the pages of reviews and reports. but now i watch the whole show. its broadcast and its fairly entertaining in some geeky way generally...so why not? I take the sales pitch with pinch of salt. the sales figures dont bother me generally. we dont run a high number of Macs but they are ever present...and whilst they generally are looked after by their owners i can foresee one day when they'll really need some high-expert tech support. I also like the Apple products. The powerbooks, the ipod, the G5 iMac and the mini are all good consumer products. I dont use their wireless kit, their mice or their keyboards. but thats preference. they do give you some freedom (their choice? probably)
having watched Jobs on stage I think I've improved my own presentation abilities and stage presence. he's a positive role.
Steve Ballmer is not. developers developers developers was not my cup of tea.
In soviet Russia, ... oh wait, you covered that already.
Computers are not meant to be fashion statements like cars. They are there to make your life more productive, to get work done. Period. Same can be said for cars, but as you know, that's hardly the case in real life. So first cars are meant to be fashion statements, then they are not? How about this: some people buy cars to make a statement, just as some people buy Macs/iPods/other gizmos to make a statement. People who want a modular system with cheap parts should stick with PCs; people who want simplicity should buy Macs. Not everyone uses their computer as a general purpose machine; this is a sad fact, but it is undeniably true. And how do Macs underperform PCs? My Powerbook runs faster and smoother than most equivalent laptops.
The work around you describe is the simplist one. There is software which will disable Apple's DRM too. Look for hymn or jhymn on Google. Also if you use Apple's iMovie to import a song from your iTunes library and then if you save it the song is unprotected. One other tip: When you use ITunes to rip CDs there is a setting in iTunes where you get to specify the file format. It's good to select "MP3" and choose a high bit rate Then your ripped songs are more generally usable. I'm slowly riping a CD collection of about 1,000 Rock, Jazz and clasical CDs. Next come a few hundred vinyl LPs. The encoder in iTunes is quite good. They did not write it they licensed it.
Even better method:
iTunes -> Preferences -> Advanced -> Importing -> Import Using: MP3 Encoder, Setting: Higher Quality (192 kbps) -> (some other apps) Convert to wav, copy to tape from audio out, copy to 8-track, copy to VHS tape, then copy to CD, then copy to wav, then MP3.......
I just love lossy formats and conversions, the sound quality is superb!
In the film and psychology fields, being able to use a mac is almost requirement.
Interesting. Any reference? Not doubting you, just hadn't heard it.
"For the first time in history, a Mac is 99% identical to a PC except for the BIOS and a few hardware/software tweaks."
This is true, if you count "an entirely different operating system and user experience" as a mere software tweak. People who subscribe to the Megahertz Myth may think Win86's and Mac86's can be compared directly, people who actually interact with a computer to determine its value will have other criteria for performance and value.
You have missed the point entirely. Take Dell computer A and Apple computer B with similar hardware specifications. We can install Windows on both computers and run benchmarks that demonstrate that both computers have comparable hardware. We can also look at trends to see which hardware is more reliable.
The problem for Apple is that they will no longer be able to make claims that Apple computers run faster; if trends continue, it will always be possible to buy a (hardware) comparable Dell for less money. Therefore, they will have to convince you that you should pay the Apple premium for the shiny case and the operating system (er, user experience), even though the $120 OS can technically run on any modern x86 machine with the proper video card.
Are you willing to pay hundreds of dollars extra to get Mac OS X? Do you think the average user will be?
I'm sorry, but does anyone else think this article is just plain poorly-written? He offers no real insight into the nature of the keynote addresses (possibly because none is necessary), and it all just seems like a pat-on-the-back "hooray, team!" for all those involved. It comes off about as interesting as a senior's college application essay about why their involvement in the stage crew of the high school production of "South Pacific" helped him prepare for the challenges he may face in his future at Dartmouth.
Right you are and interesting. How are those sales numbers obtained?
The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
Actually, Porsche and Ferrari make nothing but gas guzzlers. But they're fun gas guzzlers.
Oh, and for all that music you ripped, you probably did it in un-DRM'd AAC. You should be able to use the "Convert Selection to MP3" menu item in the Advanced menu on those, which should be more convenient than doing CDs.
People are watching Steve Jobs from seats they took a long time ago - maybe when he got booted from Apple, or maybe when Ross Perot invested millions in his new company, or maybe when the new company introduced the NeXT Computer, or when they stopped selling hardware to focus on software, or maybe when that software company was purchased for an insane amount of cash, or maybe when they decided that this was the first inverted-buyout/takeover in recent history, or when they saw an iMac for the first time, or...
Get some binoculars or read a little if you can't figure out where the interest comes from.
The only comparison I can draw is that Paris thinks she's the shit, and so does S.P.J. - does that *make* them the shit? According to Steve, it does.
Most of the quarterly numbers come from IDC and/or Gartner Group, research companies which specializes in compiling such figures.
0 0.asp
For instance, here's the 3rd quarter 2005 figures:
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,123213,
Note that the figures quoted may be a bit off from the numbers in the charts I linked to, because of error corrections which were made after the article posted, rounding errors, etc.
Apple's own official figures can be found in the Investor Relations section of their website:
http://www.apple.com/investor/
The Reality Distortion Field is widely misunderstood.
Steve doesn't simply change perception of reality, he changes reality.
The average Asian OEM PC maker sells more computers then Apple. The average Asian OEM maker also makes and sells more computers than Dell, HP, IBM, Gateway and your mother, assclown, because they are also the ones that make the computers for dell, HP, Gateway and your mother.
Dumbass.
Most of your complaints are directed towards Microsoft, not Bill Gates. You complain that it only wants to make money, but that's what should be the case. Microsoft exists to make money for shareholders. So does Apple. And Bill Gates is probably a good person. He's donated a lot to charity. And there is nothing wrong with him trying to make money, although I doubt it's the most important thing to him now considering how much money he already has. Steve Jobs is a much better speaker than Gates, and his company makes much better products than Gate's (In my opinion) but I don't consider him to be a better person. I'm fine with people criticizing Windows (Or any other Microsoft products), but saying Microsoft or Bill Gates is "evil" is stupid. For the record, I am a Mac user and I dislike Windows quite a lot.
Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
"The best way to predict the future is to invent it"
Confidence, empathy, and what Arthur Miller called "the ability to make them want /your/ approval".
Confidence you get from knowing what you are about. Empathy comes from knowing what other people are about, which means not focusing on useless thoughts like "I hate crowds". The third is more nuanced. If you watch closely, you'll see that great actors and leaders alternately project competence, compassion... and a vauge menace that is politely called 'drive'. Keeps folk on their toes and generates trust in a way below concious thought. While you can fake one or two of these traits you can't fake all of them without having some measure of genuine ability.
Considering the alternatives I'm grateful for his presence
and will take advantage of it as long as it lasts. Maybe someone
else will notice so that successful behavior begets successful
behavior. The bottom line is I won't bend over until I have to.
Purty soon everbody will be connectin dere cornputer to
dere phone and dere toilet and, hyuk hyuk hyuk, you won't be able
to have a decent phone bone on the throne without
a reboot and and an M$ upgrade, hyuk hyuk hyuk.
Ain't technology wondermous.
Moderators: "Troll" originally meant someone in a discussion who is intentionally causing trouble. Now it has come to mean "If you disagree with me, you must be a troublemaker."
.GIF and .JPG files to see if they are really WMF files, and, if they are, will execute any code in them!!! It's amazing.
I stand by what I said in my parent comment.
I sold computers that came with Microsoft's first product, Microsoft Basic, which Bill Gates had a hand in writing. The sloppiness of Windows XP is identical to the sloppiness in Microsoft Basic. Both are, in my opinion, products in which the level of sloppiness is finely tuned so that it doesn't interfere too much with sales. Bill Gates set the tone for Microsoft products: They are not really finished when they are released.
It amazes me how weak-minded people are concerning public relations. Bill Gates makes billions of dollars making products so sloppy that they waste the time of millions of people worldwide. Then he gives back a little of that money, and instantly the abuses are forgotten.
Super-rich people like philanthropy because it helps them feel superior. They can spend a lot of time with people who are very happy with what they are doing, and who never voice disagreement. Giving away their husband's money is the pasttime of the wives of super-rich men everywhere.
Yes, it is good that there is money available to solve major world problems. But we should not stop realizing that Microsoft has cost tens of billions of dollars just in viruses for vulnerabilities of kinds that don't exist anywhere else in the world of software.
This week's vulnerability is an example. Graphics in Windows MetaFile format (WMF) are allowed to execute code!!! Yes, graphics files. You should be safe with other formats? No. Windows operating systems check
Jobs is such an elitist prick.
I'm so glad he's much older than me so I can celebrate the day of his death.
Bill Gates' intoductions of Win95 and later versions stumbled when the OS crashed during the demonstration. Yahoo Go suffered a similar fate today.
Jobs' introductions work and they work impressively. Whether this is because the products are simply better or because Jobs makes sure everything works, I don't know. But it's most assuredly the product of hard work and dedication. Jobs' "reality distortion field" is just the fun part.
to err is human, to forgive is divine, to forget is... umm...
Actually, I always growl when I hear the "It's Sculley's fault" argument.
Sculley was CEO for 8 years, from 1985 to 1993. Consider what Apple came out with during that time:
(Aside about the PowerBook: I've seen comments about how Apple has to drop the moniker "PowerBook" because there will no longer be a PowerPC chip. The original PowerBooks had a Motorola 68K chip inside. The "Power" in PowerBook referred to Apple's marketing slogan, "The Power To Be Your Best.")
While people state that Apple "declined" during Sculley's tenure at Apple, Apple saw it's largest Macintosh market-share while Sculley was in charge.
Gates, Jobs, and the Zen Aesthetic looks at what makes Jobs' presentations so effective, contrasting with the dismal style that comes out of Microsoft.
Regardless of what you think of the products they are selling, or the cult of personality around Steve Jobs, I would recommend this article to anyone that ever has or ever will sit in front of PowerPoint or Keynote or Impress or who will give any presentation of any kind. The contrast is so sharp that I think everyone can learn something from it.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
You have summed up /. in five points. Congrats to you
---
In Soviet Russia, things reverse YOU!
If that average user is a cubicle-critter forever playing with Office and working on Solitaire, then no, that average user will not buy a Mac. But if that average user wants to make a home movie and burn it on a DVD effortlesly and elegantly (or just wants to avoid getting a taste of the virus/trojan/spyware de jour), then a couple of hundred bucks might be a small price. It all depends on the value they'd place on their time, their peace of mind ... (or just the value percieved in being with the hip well-heeled crowd).
Despite what the fan boys might claim, not many people used to buy Macs because they were faster (ok, apart from the VaTech BigMac.) Most users wouldn't even know basics of 680x0/PPC/Pentium/Athlon/ etc. And yet people have been buying Macs. All of my Mac using friends (4) have it 'cos of the overall Mac experience. All the folks with PCs (4) have Dell 'cos it was the cheapest (in every sence of the word.)
So as far as the "average user" market is concerned, not much will change with IMacs (IntelMacs)
First, Apple computers are in fact manufactured by Asian OEM companies, under contract with Apple. Apple is essentially a design firm; all manufacturing is outsourced. So your basis of comparison is flawed from the start.
Second, Apple is one of the top 10 largest computer companies in the world by sales volume. IDC reports that Apple's worldwide desktop market share in Q4 2005 was 1.75%. This ranks them in 9th, after:
Acer - 2.17%
NEC - 2.19%
Lenovo - 2.74%
Gateway - 3.00%
Fujitsu - 3.12%
IBM - 4.18%
HP - 15.28%
Dell - 17.30%
Note that this list only adds up just over 50%--almost half of all computer sales worldwide are from companies with a smaller market share (and therefore sales volume) than Apple.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
However, they also do have only a 2.3% market share.
Knowing absolute market share of a company is useless for competitive analysis unless you also know the equivalent numbers for its competitors. Here are the rest of the numbers from your link.
#1 - Dell - 18%
#2 - HP - 16%
#3 - Lenovo/IBM - 7.7%
#4 - Acer - 4.7%
#5 - Fujitsu - 3.8%
I think a lot of people would be surprised to learn that the market share leader, Dell, has only 18% market share.
The common assumption is that Apple's 2.3% market share is terrible because of Window's dominating market share. But this is a false comparison, because Windows is software and Apple sells computers (software + hardware). When comparing computer companies, the relative size of Apple is put into proper perspective...the factor between Apple and the leader of their industry (Dell) is less than 8x, not the 43x that is commonly assumed.
Apple is a very competitive computer company.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
On one side, there is this guy (who by all accounts is a quality-freak perfectionist and stickler for details), who started the personal computer revolution from his garage, got one of the first GUIed PCs to market, as CEO delivered a solid OS and got the company stock price to go up 15x and generally saved the company from oblivion, did wonders for digital music download market and started a world wide consumer iFad, .......
/.
On the other side, is this other guy wanking off on
Whose ideas should I listen to? Hmmmm...tough choice.
The real point everyone misses with Apple products, once they're out of warranty, Apple won't sell end users replacement parts.
So, if you're a corporate environment using Apple's XServe, make sure you get an extended warranty, or train a few of your staff members to be Apple Certified Desktop/Portable technicians.
I saw this recently and thought how well it summed up Jobs' presentations, very funny:
P OD.mov
http://vpwpartners.blogs.com/SNLJOBSIPOD/JOBSSNLI
-= This is a self-referential sig =-
I am already morning the passing of ADC.
I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
> Money is clearly not the center of Bill Gates life.
True, but that is only because the money is incidental to his quest for world domination as opposed to Steve Jobs who is equally driven, but motivated to offer the best product possible.
> If it was, he wouldn't be the biggest philanthropist of all time.
You must be young. Bill Gate's charitable giving was almost nonexistent until he was shamed into action. It was only after his miserly become so infamous that it was interfering with business that he was compelled into action. Not surprisingly, he crafted his donations for maximum PR value. The money does good work, more than you or I can ever hope to accomplish, but is a tiny amount compared to his personal fortune, let alone the wealth he controls.
> I think that there's a ton of luck that goes into it as well.True, hence the title of the book, Accidental Empires, that I cite above. But that doesn't give due credit to the full positive force of the personalities involved. These people would almost certainly have been successful (perhaps not famously so) in just about any field.
> I imagine there are probably many people who could do what Steve is doing.
That assumption is plainly incorrect. Great leaders are so rare that the U.S. cannot find compelling candidates for president. There are plenty of books about the great leaders in business. The potential for a single individual at the top to influence corporate culture is well documented. Apple's floundering without Steve Jobs, despite talented CEOs, and his demonstrated ability to lead them twice now (not to mention two other companies in the mean time) is a unique story even among these other luminaries.
I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
You state the the assumption that there are many people who could do what Steve is doing is plainly incorrect because the US can not find a compelling candidate for president. That's flawed logic - the problem may be with the system we use for selecting candidates and not with the pool of candidates. I believe that to be the case. I think there are many men and women who could make a very good president - certainly far better than either Bush or Kerry.
I'm also not willing to follow your logic that Steve Jobs is a giant among insects - which seems to be your claim.
Finally if the influence of personality of the CEO on the organization as a whole is well documented than I am generally interesed in reading more about it. I'm not interested in hearing people try to tell me that Bill Gates is a tyrant out for world domination - especially if those same people are telling me that deep down Steve Jobs just wants to deliver quality products. Those are not people - those are caricatures.
In my day to day experience the people I meet are neither angels nor demons - and I could not categorize myself or anyone I know accurately in a short one or two line synopsis. And yet people continue to act as though public personalities - about whom we know the least - are some how fundamentally easier to know and understand than our own neighbors and co-workers.
Lives and people and the world in general are more complex than that.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
> I imagine that Jobs knows pretty much where Apple is going to be in 90 days/180 days/a year. I don't think that he has such a unique vision - it is just that he has a vision.
Well, overlooking that any vision at all is quite rare, the shift to Intel (and that the project has been underway for years) evidences that Jobs vision extends at least that far out. Personally, I would love to know where he thinks we (not just Apple) will be in ten or twenty years -- because I suspect his vision is unique.
Other comments about dismissing Jobs ability to predict the future because Apple gets to influence the market are just silly. Jobs is not a random pundant in some non-profit think tank, he is running a commercial enterprise accountable to stock holders. Jobs didn't make consumers love the the iPod, he caused Apple to offer a product that people loved. He was able to do that because he predicted where technology was going and has the vision to see the potential for demand. Apple was (and remains) a couple of years ahead of the competition. That is long term business vision.
I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
You state the the assumption that there are many people who could do what Steve is doing is plainly incorrect because the US can not find a compelling candidate for president. That's flawed logic.
I cite that example as proof by demonstration that exemplary leaders are rare in general, not just in business. But politics being so corrupt, I understand how you missed my point.
I'm also not willing to follow your logic that Steve Jobs is a giant among insects - which seems to be your claim.
I find the example of Steve Jobs to be compelling even considering that the technology field offers many brilliant, interesting, and influential characters. The CEOs of these businesses are inevitably talented peoples. But even among these, Steve Jobs' track record is remarkable.
Finally if the influence of personality of the CEO on the organization as a whole is well documented than I am generally interested in reading more about it.
How about you start with Jack?
I'm not interested in hearing people try to tell me that Bill Gates is a tyrant out for world domination - especially if those same people are telling me that deep down Steve Jobs just wants to deliver quality products. Those are not people - those are caricatures.
When one reads widely, the same characterizations keep coming up, from disparate and varied source. Your skepticism is understandable, but the facts are dramatic enough to inspire two documentaries!
In my day to day experience the people I meet are neither angels nor demons.
So you extrapolate your mundane experiences to the rest of the world? Your homily is more true than false, but most famous people are notorious for valid reasons.
I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
First off thanks for the great responses. This is an excellent reason for why i like the slashdot discussions. Instead of just getting into pointless bashing all the time - I actually can learn a lot.
You seem to think it strange to extrapolate from my "mundane experiences" to the rest of the world - but I think that it's rationally more sound than the alternative. If we disregard our own experiences doesn't that make us completely credulous?
So I'm still somewhat skeptical. In my experience I've always felt that fundamentally people are people. This means they all operate on some relatively similar principles, but that they are all similarly irreducibly complex. To some extent what you say about great leaders holds true, but on the other hand we will never know how many Alexander the Greats or Napoleons never saw an army, or how many Einsteins spent their lives in manual labor. I'm willing to accept that there are extraordinary people - but at the same time I think that heroes and villians are largely products of the human attempt to impose narrative on our history. We need antagonists and protagonists - they are an essential element of the human experience even if they are not an essential element of objective reality.
But I'm eager to look into your references, and I appreciate them.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
First off thanks for the great responses. This is an excellent reason for why i like the slashdot discussions. Instead of just getting into pointless bashing all the time - I actually can learn a lot.
Thanks, I appreciate considered discourse as well.
You seem to think it strange to extrapolate from my "mundane experiences" to the rest of the world - but I think that it's rationally more sound than the alternative. If we disregard our own experiences doesn't that make us completely credulous?
All true, but it seems me that you are over-projecting from your first hand knowledge. What prompted me to chime in was your assertion that "there are probably many people who could do what Steve is doing" which I definitely do not find to be credible. (Substitute Bill Gates or Jack Welch or other luminaries in your assertion I quoted, and I will still disagree with you!)
So I'm still somewhat skeptical. In my experience I've always felt that fundamentally people are people. This means they all operate on some relatively similar principles, but that they are all similarly irreducibly complex.
Consider (but just briefly) a history you know well. Would your church exist were it not for the very individual contributions of Joseph Smith and of Brigham Young?
To some extent what you say about great leaders holds true, but on the other hand we will never know how many Alexander the Greats or Napoleons never saw an army,
I believe those two men would have been tremendous leaders in just about any time or place. If around today, they probably would be in business! They probably would not have achieved the same historical recognition of course.
or how many Einsteins spent their lives in manual labor.
I believe that number is probably close to zero. For example, the influence of an Einstein in North America a few millennia ago might leave history only with the myth of Iktomi. Can I prove that? No, of course not, but such supposition is less preposterous than imagining an individual like Einstein living his life in ignominy, merely given different circumstances.
I'm willing to accept that there are extraordinary people - but at the same time I think that heroes and villains are largely products of the human attempt to impose narrative on our history. We need antagonists and protagonists - they are an essential element of the human experience even if they are not an essential element of objective reality.
Ah, but heros and villians clearly exist at some point in time, why not ours? Sure, history magnifies their influenece, just as time makes invisible the work of so many others. There is even a New Testament verse about how difficult it is to recognize a contemporary prophet! Yes, luck counts for a lot (that is the lesson of Accedential Empires, but that hardly diminishes the influence of indivuals.
But I'm eager to look into your references, and I appreciate them.
Okay, Joseph Campbell was one of the most influential authors I read while I was in college.I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
Sadly, most engineers don't know the difference between crap and actual good HID. Many programmers still use CLIs with bizarre, incomprehensible commands, which is fine if you want to put in the considerable effort required to figure out how a computer works and then learn all the commands and such. And many of them still, after how many years, think that that's perfectly reasonable and that a CLI is a perfectly good way to make a program that people who don't do that sort of thing for a living would use.
Engineers suck at usability, unless they're trained in it. Even then, most of them can't be relied upon to produce something that is better than adequate. And even the few who can, can't be relied upon to produce something that is similar in usage and theme to a related set of products. If you don't have a unifying mind behind it all, you end up with a collection of widgets that don't look like they came from the same company.
I recall hearing that the iPod went back to the drawing board four or five times before they came out with the first generation model. I wonder what the first four or five of them looked like? Perhaps they really were just as good as the model that was eventually picked, and they were just rejected because of some obscure phobias on the part of Jobs.
Wouldn't bet on it, though.
-fred
Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
As you point out, people often choose cars in order to make a fashion statement or because of their unique design qualities rather than simply for providing a means for getting from A to B. However, I am arguing that this is now also more and more the case for computers, at least in the home-user market, and Apple is one of the few companies that realize this and are capitalizing on it.
I used to be convinced that there are two sides to every question, but I'm not so sure anymore....
Yes, BMW is certainly a bigger player than the other two, however it still sells far fewer vehicles than the big auto companies (e.g., VW sells twice as many, Daimler-Chrysler four times as many, and Ford, GM, Toyota yet more). During recent years, there has often been discussion in the business press about how long BMW, as one of the smaller players, could maintain its existence as an independent company. Indeed, VW wanted to take it over at one point. I hope Apple, too, can continue to survive and provide a choice in the marketplace.
I used to be convinced that there are two sides to every question, but I'm not so sure anymore....
Good point! I can imagine some who might draw an analogy to Macs and their consumption of CPU-cycles... ;-)
I used to be convinced that there are two sides to every question, but I'm not so sure anymore....
BMW will probably end up being purchased by someone. I hope it's VW/Audi, because they could definitely use some styling improvements.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Are you willing to pay hundreds of dollars extra to get Mac OS X?
Yes.
Do you think the average user will be?
Why would they? Do you think that the average driver drives a BMW like I do?
As the late Douglas Adams once said: "The Macintosh may only have 10% of the market, but it is clearly the top 10%."
The average people don't fit into that category. It doesn't come biggie sized.
Now you can super foe me!