Slashdot Mirror
The Economist on Apple, the iPhone, and Innovation
portscan writes "This week's Economist has a special report on Apple, Inc. and innovation. 'The fourth lesson from Apple is to "fail wisely". The Macintosh was born from the wreckage of the Lisa, an earlier product that flopped; the iPhone is a response to the failure of Apple's original music phone, produced in conjunction with Motorola. Both times, Apple learned from its mistakes and tried again. Its recent computers have been based on technology developed at NeXT, a company Mr Jobs set up in the 1980s that appeared to have failed and was then acquired by Apple. The wider lesson is not to stigmatize failure but to tolerate it and learn from it: Europe's inability to create a rival to Silicon Valley owes much to its tougher bankruptcy laws.' There is also an article on the business of the iPhone and the future of the company. "
I mean, hell, they've been a doomed company for what 10 years now? 12?
The last thing that enjoyed this much hype was Snakes on A Plane. Remember how good that was when it actually came out? I predict iPhone will share the same fate, and shares of Apple will plummet!
I keep telling that to my father.
Apple has cultivated its brand through sleek products and sexy advertising. The first major MP3 player (ignoring the obscure MPMan) was the Diamond Rio, which looked alright... until the iPod came out. Don't underestimate the importance of style when it comes to selling consumer electronics.
It's pretty much on-target within the Apple Product Cycle.
More Twoson than Cupertino
Oooh, Look At Me, I Read The Economist!
But let's not call iPhone a success yet. It had an exciting demo that got a lot of buzz. It hasn't sold a single unit yet. Expectations are sky high already, so if this one doesn't do as well for some reason -- or even if it just has a slow start for whatever reason -- the perception could be that it's a disappointment, under-performer, or outright failure. It's hard to imagine it being a complete failure, but at the price tag that they're commanding, it's not like you can guarantee its success.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Apple learned from its mistakes and tried again
Same with Microsoft, except it usually takes them three tries.
[Insert pithy quote here]
So when Apple bombs, its "Learning from Mistakes" and when they get the next version right, its "Insightful Market Understanding", but when Microsoft bombs, its "Rushing it out the door to crush competitors" and when they get the next version right, its "Stealing technology from their competitors". Everyone in business learns from their mistakes and improves their subsequent product, or fails to remain in business. Just look at the stability of the latest IIS vs the earlier ones, for example.
..."Plan to through your first efforts away... because you will"
But really, there's wisdom there. You never really know what will be successful until you've gotten something out and developed. If only business people understood that, they could likely leverage it to do exactly what this article recommends -- "fail wisely".
21st-Century-Citizen
What sort of political shilling is that?
/loose/ bankruptcy laws. It was GREAT for the "entrepreneurs" and loan officers working on "commission" when you could write a loan to finance your business, liquidate it, write off the loan having effectively pocketed the cash, then walk straight back to the bank to pull a new one for a new business, rinse, repeat and retire to the Caymans having produced absolutely nothing.
Perhaps the author should look towards Central Europe ca. 1991-2001 to see what economic wonders occur when you have
Not quite, they were developed at the same time. The Lisa project began in 1978 and released in 1983. The Macintosh, 1979, released 1984.
I tried telling my parents when I was in high school that those were *wise* failures they were seeing on the report cards. If only this article had been around back then...
CC Licensed Serialized Story and Podcast: Ingenioustries
The Motorla ROKR was designed to fail with the arbitrary 100 song capacity limit.
The last thing apple wanted was a successful ROKR that might have cannibalized sales from the iPOD and the Apple branded music phone that everybody knew would come out eventually.
If the ROKR were an Apple product, you could make a case that Apple "failed", in this case Apple succeeded, they held off the market until they could debut their own device that makes them money.
The iTunes-compatible motorola phones were always intended to fail from day one. They were severely crippled compared to most low-end MP3 players at the time. The only purpose these phones served was to see if there was a market for phones with iPod-like integration, but only with features so excessively limited that Apple could crush it at any time by entering the phone manufacturing business themselves.
Comparing the Motorola phones to the Lisa probably has every Lisa in the world rolling over in their mass-grave.
8==8 Bones 8==8
I wonder what their response will be to the failure that will be hitching their reigns to Cingular for 5 years.
Did anybody notice ex-Apple VP of iPod Jon Rubenstein is now Chief XYZ at Palm? Does the investment firm that took the Palm stake have any other Apple ties?
I mean, if Apple acquired Palm, and Palm already has deals in place with Verizon, Sprint, NexTel, et. al., well, Apple couldn't very well not honor those commitments. And Palm just happens to be re-tooling their XScale phone to run on a small Unix OS (Linux). So, it wouldn't very well make sense to develop two completely different yet entirely similar products, would it?
But, hey, I've been known to claim the 3GHz promise was just a strawman to excuse sacking IBM. Steve learned from his NeXTMachine failure that a software company is better off using cheap commodity hardware.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
One definition of an expert is someone who has triewd every conceivable way of doing something wrong.
There are rumors from people who have (supposedly) seem/operated the iPhone who say it operates about how you would expect. Regarding the slow network connection, it may be slow when using the Cell network (what can Apple do about that?), but it should at least be decent when within range of WiFi.
Don't forget about the new product-unveiling product!
I left my wallet in El Sigundo!
You seem to be totally unaware that some things are actually better than other things, and some things are purely about status.
Not all status symbols are actually good. Most decent restaurants are actually better than fast food, but what exactly does a Rolex do that a regular watch doesn't?
A good segment of the population are, to put it bluntly, fucking morons who will believe anything they see on TV. That does not exactly bolster your case.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Wait, I know this one ... oh yes, put a 3G radio in it.
And then have zero to sell at launch?
They need to be able to get them here to sell them.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"The only NeXT technology that appears in Apple computers is BSD."
Well, there's Interface Builder. They got that from NeXT. But apart from Interface Builder and BSD, there are no NeXT technologies whatsoever in current Apple computers. Except of course for Cocoa, which is heavily based on NextStep/OpenStep, hence the fact that it has all those classes with names prefixed by "NS". But with the exception of BSD, Interface Builder, and Cocoa, there are no NeXT technologies in Apple computers at all. Unless of course you count Objective-C as a "technology", which NeXt licensed for programming in NeXTStep and OpenStep while Macs were being programmed in Pascal and C++. But I agree that apart from BSD, Interface Builder, Cocoa, and Objective-C, Apple computers are completely devoid of NeXT technologies. OK, I'll admit that Portable Distributed Objects also came from NeXT. I'll give way on that one. But if you discount BSD, Interface Builder, Cocoa, Objective-C, and PDO, current Apple computers are totally and completely free from NeXT technologies. Utterly without _anything_ from NeXT. Honestly. I mean, WebObjects, which is admittedly a NeXT technology, isn't even installed on most Macs, so _the majority_ of Macs are free from it. Well, they are. Really. So I can, without any pangs of conscience, categorically state that, with the exception of...
I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
Most buisnesses exist and function soley so that they can take as much of your money as possible;
I disagree. Most businesses are started because the founder(s) have a vision of what's possible, as with technology. The WOZ didn't design and build the Apple I to make money, he wanted a computer he could use at home. Much like Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard he did the work in a garage. It's only later, usually after incorporation, that some turn to the idea of making money. But then they have shareholders they have to satisfy.
FalconShould there be a Law?
What does a Rolex _do_.? It costs a lot of money. This will occasionally impress some people. If impressing people who are impressed by Rolexes is important enough to you to make the $3000 cost worthwile then by all means buy one. Being impressed by $3000 wristwatches is totally incomprehensible to me.
I wear a $29 timex ironman. It keeps almost perfect time (loses 4 seconds a year), it has a countdown timer and 2 alarms and runs about 5 years on a battery. Nobody is going to hold me up for my watch either.
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
Just longer than FreeBSD's been dying if I recall correctly
Netcraft confirms it!
(In Soviet Russia Netcraft confirms YOU!)
*ducks*
**AA: a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes
Second, I hate telling things where they are when the technology exists for it to know. The "Calamari" iPhone ad was a great example--"Hmm, where's a good seafood restaurant close to where I am."
Third, there are times when I don't know where I am when I'm driving. While I hate people who stare at their GPS while driving, it is handy to at least have a device that says, "You missed the turn."
Fourth, I like the idea of a device that knows where I am and can configure itself appropriately. I don't have to go in and futz with time-zones. It can tell I'm somewhere around my house and set my network up appropriately. It can tell I'm somewhere around work and set my network up appropriately. It can even keep my clock accurate without an Internet connection. Heck, ideally it might keep track of all this stuff so once I year when I go through JFK airport, I don't have to spend half my layover trying to figure out how to get on the Internet because it remembers the configuration from last year and it's geo-tagged (to use a buzzword) to JFK Airport.
While a GPS isn't a killer app, per se, having a GPS in the phone and an API to get the data gives application developers some interesting ideas...
There's a sort of metalanguage there; you spend the money to communicate that you're committed to making an impression, which is a way of establishing group membership.
You know what? I never want people like that to talk to me. I will stick with jeans and t-shirts, because that gets me into conversations with people who have something to say, which is much more interesting to me than "a LOT of money".
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Second, I hate telling things where they are when the technology exists for it to know. The "Calamari" iPhone ad was a great example--"Hmm, where's a good seafood restaurant close to where I am."
That's a useful feature, but if it's easy enough to set a few default locations that you frequent not very much less useful.
Third, there are times when I don't know where I am when I'm driving. While I hate people who stare at their GPS while driving, it is handy to at least have a device that says, "You missed the turn."
I've been misled by GPS street systems before as well though. I'd much rather have a decent map of the turns I'm supposed to make, and know I've missed my turn by a series of street names I know mean I've gone too far.
Fourth, I like the idea of a device that knows where I am and can configure itself appropriately. I don't have to go in and futz with time-zones. It can tell I'm somewhere around my house and set my network up appropriately. It can tell I'm somewhere around work and set my network up appropriately. It can even keep my clock accurate without an Internet connection. Heck, ideally it might keep track of all this stuff so once I year when I go through JFK airport, I don't have to spend half my layover trying to figure out how to get on the Internet because it remembers the configuration from last year and it's geo-tagged (to use a buzzword) to JFK Airport.
But GPS is not needed from any of that. OS X recognizes networks you have been to before, and also allows you to have custom network profiles (though it's seemless enough that I have never used them) so it would remember that anyway. The timezone and time can come from the cell aspect of the phone, so they are just as accurate as they would be from GPS (moreso since cell towers know if a locality is in daylight savings or not, something a GPS is indifferent to).
And what if that network changed in the intervieing year? Having network setup behaviour rely on location triggers rather than recognizing known devices and networks, is I think more likley to have issues in the future.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
- January 10, 2007: MacWorld 2007 keynote, introduces iPhone
- Apple.com iPhone web site
- A couple interviews showing the phone, letting reporters hold it for a couple minutes
- A very few magazine articles with access to Steve Jobs and the iPhone
- Super Bowl "Hello" iPhone commercial
- June 3, 2007: Apple starts running four new commercials that demonstrate features of the phone
Really, this is far, far less promotion than you see for typical new products. Heck, hamburgers at Burger King get more hype than this, by far, in a six month period. Even though they probably eat a whole bunch of them, bloggers don't get excited and blog about it.Apple's biggest contribution to the "hype" came from keeping the project secret until it was up to a point where it could be demonstrated, and then keeping their mouths shut after the MacWorld Keynote, and refusing to answer questions about anything that wasn't demonstrated by Steve Jobs on January 10.
What we're seeing in the media, blogs, and in meatspace is, I think, genuine excitement. People can look at the information that's available, which is I grant you incomplete, but they can also look at the phone in their hand. They can tell immediately that several things they don't like about their phone are fixed by the iPhone. Visual Voicemail is damned exciting. A phone that can access the internet simply and easily is exciting. The Google Maps commercial makes girls squeel and giggle with delight when they see the pins drop... (try it sometime.) I don't think it's hype. I think it's genuine interest.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.