Slashdot Mirror
Why Apple Doesn't Blog - Vaporware
DECS writes "If anyone is still wondering why Apple does not encourage its internal developers to maintain blogs, Roughly Drafted is carrying an example of how the good intentions behind sharing information can result in unpleasant, unintended consequences." From the article: "As customers, we all want to know what's going to happen in the future, but we will also turn around and beat developers with the very information they share with us. One of the terms we hit them with is, of course, vaporware. The other thing about blogs is that written text fails to capture the full range of rich human communication. It's easy to take more offense than is necessary to the wrong choice of words. Minor and casual criticism can quickly ferment into a difficult stink, and attempts to burry it can often just make it worse. Blog entries are like emails that cc: to the entire world."
Apple may not have an official corporate blogging outlet like some enterprises, but some Apple employees do in fact blog in a (sometimes quasi-)official capacity.
Dave Hyatt's (now WebKit's) Surfin' Safari is one notable example of success, with Apple engineers being able to directly blog and communicate with end customers. It has now become a blog for all of WebKit, where other WebKit contributors - some within Apple and some not - can post as well.
Mac OS forge (and the hosted sites within it) is another recent example: Apple engineers, blogging, on servers owned and hosted by Apple. This wouldn't have happened a few years ago, and was a result of responses to community concerns about Apple's interaction with the open source community. (And no, it's still far from perfect, but the interaction is increasing, and that's a good thing.)
Both of these examples of Apple blogs are also open for comments, something some corporate "blogs" don't allow.
So are these "official Apple blogs" in every sense of the phrase, or in the vein that the article is intending to discuss? Maybe not, but it represents a lot more openness than Apple ever used to exhibit in this context. And anything greater than zero is "more open". Will Apple ever open up blogging to just anyone or blog about futures and abstract ideas? Unlikely. But there are notable exceptions to the blanket statement that "Apple doesn't blog".
"Why Apple doesn't blog?", why not ask "Why should Apple blog?". Why is it that everyone takes corporate blogs for granted these days?
So what would be the answer? "Because everybody is doing it!". "because I want to know what they are up to!". "I love Apple and I want to get constant news and articles about Apple!". Well, none of those are a valid reason for blogs, really.
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
Hey look! Someone who can define Apple as uber sneaky/cool by be being secretive and not blogging more BS for him to drool over. Not forgetting the side swipe that Microsoft sells you a future they don't have, and that's vapourware.
Enough with links to blogs of people who - in Wikipedia terms - are not notable.
Where's the Kaboom?
There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
At the 1996 Apple Worldwide Developer Conference, the newly-appointed head of developer relations--details of the painful 1996 WWDC are mercifully fading and her name escapes me--said that she had been talking to developers and one thing had emerged as the most important single issue in developer relations.
Developers, she said, had been begging Apple for one thing: "Tell us what you're going to do. Then do it."
Avoiding all talk of the future is a seemingly risk-averse strategy, but it carries risks of its own. If a company wants developers to be ready consistently on day one of new-product introductions, they need to have a reliable roadmap.
Accusations of vaporware are a real problem, but I at least suspect that one of the reaons why companies hate discussions of futures by technical people is that it provides a public record of changes in internal direction, inconsistent decisions by executives, etc. which can be embarrassing to the company.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Quoth the article:
"...written text fails to capture the full range of rich human communication. It's easy to take more offense than is necessary to the wrong choice of words. Minor and casual criticism can quickly ferment into a difficult stink, and attempts to burry it can often just make it worse."
I'm glad that never happens here at Slashdot!
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
I assume that Apple have always been very keen to keep new products under wraps, because that (and getting as close as possible to 'build to order') means they can sell the last few of a product that's about to be superceded, not to remove accusations of vapourware.
I'm not sure this is still a wise thing to do when they are entering new markets, as the much rumoured iPhone would do (if it exists). I need a new phone, but I'm holding off until Macworld San Franciso because of the rumours, rather than being tied in to a 12 or 18 month deal on a cometitor's product - which must be good for Apple if the rumours are true, and better if they publically said "we will ship an iPhone soon", as more people would wait.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
Not necessarily. That just means no one actually ever filed suit. But potential lawsuits are not typically reported by the media unless one side or the other makes public statements about the legal threat (or there was a leak).
Hypothetical: Acme Widgets Corp. buys a SA license in 2001. Microsoft doesn't Vista deliver until late 2006. Someone at Acme notices and gets angry about it in 2004 or 2005 perhaps. They threaten to sue Microsoft. Microsoft then may make some sort of concessions to Acme Widgets Corp. Discounts on Office 2003 or Windows 2003 Server, free support for an additional year on one or more products, and maybe even cash incentives. So Acme Widgets never goes public with its plans, satisfied that it got something out of the bargain. You get the picture, I'm sure.
My blog
I keep blog (what I used to call an online journal before that stupid term came about) but I disable comments. I think this would solve a lot of the problem. If developers simply want to do a brain dump every once in a while and share it with the world they should not feel obliged to turn on comments and subsequently respond to them. As a journaller from way back (junior high school) I have found journalling to be a very valuable process for collecting my thoughts and forcing myself to take stock of where I am currently at. The process itself is rewarding. But I feel no obligation to share my journalling with others (although I do in one venue, but in a self-censored way) or enable responses. I certainly see how enabling feedback/comments adds a whole new dimension to the process, but it's certainly not a necessary quality of a blog.
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me?
Apple gets too much attention from their current way of doing things to want to change. They probably get more blog attention from outsiders guessing what is coming out at the next conference than they would letting employees blog or pre-announcing products. Apple's policy of secrecy and Job's showmanship have been a winning combination.
Perhaps we need to clarify the various flavors of vaporware, distinguished by intents and causes: (1) Deceit-o-ware: Marketing announces a "product" in order to discourage competitors, stake out mindshare, commit the partners and developers, and other dishonorable reasons. ( Taligent, others ) (2) Wish-o-ware: Developers promise to enhance a product, not realizing the current code isnt extendable. ( Copeland ) (3) Bloat-o-ware: Soo many promised features, the resulting code is too embarrasingly complex or slow to ever be released. ( Cairo, SQL file system, .NET code in the OS )
Now #1 is totally indefensible, but #2 and 3 are more likely unintended consequences of good intentions.
Chuq Von Rospach, 17.5 year veteran of Apple, well known for his insights into email / usenet / web issues, did a series of blog entries on how Apple communicates. He went into, from his former privilaged position inside Apple, about how & why it communicates how it does, and what it is like being a communicator for Apple, officially & unofficially.
The postings about Apple & blogging start at Why Apple doesn't have a blogging policy (it ain't what you think....) and then goes for a few days, with responses to/from other bloggers.
Interesting stuff, insightful, and first-person from someone who was on the inside.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
Agree... I think most of it is due to Steve Jobs and his vision. Steve Jobs is generally very closed and attempts to have strong control. This isn't necessarily bad per se but that's Apple's corporate culture. Steve Jobs has done a great jobs as an executive but his style is rough.. Do note that I have never worked at Apple so I am not sure how rigid they really are. All I know is that their executives are very rigid and secretive (they rarely talk about future visions or potential products unless they know they are going to do something for sure)...
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
You say informal, I say professional. They believe in letting their products speak for themselves and not letting company personalities or marketing messages get in the way. Contrast to Microsoft, which is all about marketing slogans like "Welcome to the social," stock-photo-ridden ads, and goofy quotes from Ballmer.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Hey Schroeder, don't try to be a smart ass. I did extensive research before I wrote my article and the last thing I want is some nobody to tell me that I am wrong.
s -Stop-Talking" department.
Just STFU already!
Daniel Eran, RDM | Homepage | 12.08.06 - 8:48 am | #
This in response to a lengthy comment posted with plenty of meat to it as a counterpoint. This is the author's way of defending his article?
This should be filed under "Stick-Your-Tongue-Out-And-Scream-Until-The-Other
I think the GP was referring to consumer devices like the iPod and consumer macs. If you only count the retail home market, Apple is one of the top brands by marketshare for computers as well.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
First, if your product developers blog, they may be giving your competition advanced notice of what you are up to much sooner than you otherwise might.
Second, the bloggers do not necessarily represent the average user. In fact, in my experience those that read and respond to blogs often have widely divergent needs from the targeted customer. If your responders are largely hard-core geeks, say, they may be pushing for more advanced features instead of what the other 90% of your customers most want (e.g., usability). Advanced feature requests are rarely appropriate for a product at an early stage of development and that time is generally better spent on more fundamental issues.
Third, what someone asks for and what they actually most need as a real world customer are often very different. Having been involved in product development, it has been my experience that most people can't articulate what they most want. They often do not understand, for instance, that the current products out there are horendously and unnecessarily hard to use. Even if they "feel" frustrated with usability, they can rarely identify what frustrates them exactly, let alone propose a better way to solve it. Often times their requests actually hamper what they need (e.g., add this feature as the expense of greatly increasing UI complexity).
Lastly, I believe you can actually increase negative publicity about your product by blogging. If your blog readers are heavily exposed to your product and expect that their suggestions will be taken seriously, you have to also remember that they may represent the bulk of the first users when you launch. They may take for granted what you have already accomplished and their expectations may be out of line with what you can or will deliver. Instead what you may get for your troubles is negative publicity coming from a bunch of people that really don't represent your target base and yet these same people might serve to steer a good number of your target customers away.
I'll admit that I didn't RTFA. However, I would argue that Apple and companies like them are perhaps the best arguments not to blog. I would assert that their products are far more focused on usability (and ultimately their customers) and have tended to be far better recieved on a marginal basis than any of their competitors. If you were to read many of the modern blogs on, say, the ipod and other portable players you would get the impression that customers prefer anything but and that they really want a ton more features. In practice, most people still prefer the latest iterations of the ipod and I would argue that apple's marginal efforts are still better directed than most...
Blogging probably makes sense sometimes (depending on: the stage of development, user base, type of product, etc) but I also think there are many where it is very much counter-productive. You might argue that management might simply, say, ignore certain input, but this kind of input can also serve as a distraction for your developers and may be bad for morale.
I appreciate feedback from readers, but it's more useful when its about actual ideas, not numerology.
Seriously, you sound like somebody watching the Daily Show saying, OMG, I know that Jon Stewart is going to make some comment about Bush... THERE, THERE IT IS!!!
As for Digg: it exists to tell weak-minded people what they already think they know. More than 80% of it is now PR fluff and other inoffensive written-for-digg articles that say nothing, and are commented on by people like yourself, who add nothing to the conversation apart from hypocrisy, impune bad motives without any proof, and generally suck.
So go roll in Digg and leave the bits of the web that are not yet as stupid alone.