Apple Legend Woz Blasts iPhone Price Drop

Stony Stevenson writes "Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak Saturday blasted Steve Jobs' decision to drop the price of the iPhone by $200 just two months after the product was launched. Said Woz: 'Everyone expects technology to drop in price. The first adopters always pay a premium. I am one of them. I am used to that. But that one was too soon, too harsh ... A lot of people from Apple, even a lot of people that worked on the Apple Lisa and Macintosh computers in the beginning now work at Google. The thinking over at Google is very much like early Apple days. The fact that they give people time off to work on their own ideas is exactly matches some of the things that made Apple great. I wish Apple did that.'" We just discussed the price drop last night.

Comments

Supply and Demand

[seanadams.com]

I work in the hardware business and I can tell you it is difficult enough to get enough inventory built for an ordinary product launch, but for what has been called the most successful CE launch _ever_... there is just no way they could have met demand without boosting the initial price significantly. And the problem with keeping the price high too long is that your momentum will dry up, and people won't even be paying attention any more by the time it does drop.

You can call it gouging if you want, but what if they'd instead just run out of stock immediately? Think "tickle me iPhone" - I don't think consumers would have been impressed by that.

Jobs did exactly the right thing. Price no lower than where you meet demand, and only once production has ramped up (which usually takes about two months - go figure) THEN price it at the sweet spot. Also consider seasonal factors which made it necessary to do this before the Xmas shopping season, which for the gadget industry begins right now.

I don't think that ANYONE, not one single person, who can afford a $600 phone and 2yr commitment to a $100+/mo plan, has a valid gripe about paying $200 extra up-front to be among the first to own it. If it was worth buying when you bought it, who cares what it sells for now? Were you hoping it would keep it's resale value or something?

Re:Supply and Demand

[QMalcolm]

It's true. In the end, you were paying $600 for a phone. You can also get phones for $50. By paying WAY more, you either want to get it first or have the absolute best phone possible. Your phone still works. You got it first. If that $200 will actually harm you financially, you shouldn't have bought a $600 gadget in the first place.

It sucks, but there's nothing WRONG about it.

Re:Supply and Demand

[not-quite-rite]

The pricing seemed quite a smart way of letting market forces apply feedback in the control loop for the sale of the iphone.

As much as people cry about the price, it means that those early adopters payed a premium for what they wanted(an iphone straight away gimme gimme gimme), and those slower to take it up, will also buy and feel better about it due to percieved value.

(I'm also happy because it means all the US early adopters took the brunt, while the rest of the world reaps the rewards :P)

Re:Supply and Demand

[RonnyJ]

I don't think it's just the loss of $200 that bothers everyone, the price drop also makes the product seem a little less 'exclusive'.

(I'm sure that's not the factor most people would be annoyed about, but I'm sure a fair few people bought it largely as a status symbol.)

Re:Supply and Demand

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I didn't buy one and I thought it was a kick in the gut. Just about everyone knows that CE devices drop in price over time, but the duration and percentage of the price drop is a bit steep. If they are pricing it for exclusivity, then dropping the price is a bad idea. Still, I wouldn't be buying it to show off, I try not to flaunt any of my consumer electronics stuff.

I wanted one but just couldn't justify it. I'm glad I didn't and it doubly puts me off buying a launch product, I can wait a product generation if I have to, I renewed my contract elsewhere because I also wanted the product to mature before buying into it. It's not a good idea to buy a first revision product anyway. The adage has been well known in the Apple world, though it should apply to any brand product, wait a while to make sure there aren't any systematic flaws.

BTW: the basic 2yr commitment was for a $60/mo plan. It's not well known, but it can be used without a contract, just that the per-minute costs are higher.

Re:Supply and Demand

[W2k]

The reason people are upset is probably that they are coming to realize they paid $600 for a shitty designer phone with an expensive lock-in contract, and by waiting two months, could have paid $200 less for the exact same deal. Still a rip-off, but maybe it'll be another couple hundred less in a year...

Re:Supply and Demand

[Ripping Silk]

I'm in New Zealand, and today I saw a local 'parallel importing' house advertise iphones modded to work with the local vodafone GSM network, for the princely sum of... wait for it... $NZ1199.. that, at todays conversion rate is $US892 !!! These I would suggest come with no warranty or official support as they have been modified outside Apple specs. You'd hafta be keen !

Re:Supply and Demand

[amRadioHed]

A fool and his money are soon parted. Sure Apple accepted their money, but who wouldn't?

Re:Supply and Demand

[tacocat]

I think this is a variation of Block Pricing which is supposed to be illegal in the US most of the time. But for someone in the Business and not Geek community, it's a nice thing to be able to do. The idea is to adjust the prices offered based on the individual's demand for the product. Overly simplified examples would be to charge more for food in expensive suburbs than others, raising prices for people who come to your store in newer more expensive cars, increasing the cost of cable TV during the football season.

This isn't really block pricing since, as mentioned, it's more a management technique of supply/demand curve. I think this was a good idea. But I wonder if this was a price cut that was driven by other factors than just the Economics 101 Supply/Demand curve.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Dr. Slacker]

Give me a break. A low price and lack of inventory hasn't hurt the Wii.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

So fucking what......

Exclusive???? shit you are exclusive when one or two exist, millions have been sold, sorry man, if you wanted to be original, you should of thought to buy something else.

Re:Supply and Demand

[x1n933k]

I absolutely agree, it isn't wrong. However in a lot of cases it is the people who cannot afford these items who do end up purchasing them. I use to place a lot of calls for clients to T-Mobile and AT&T who would purchase expensive phones (Sidekicks comes to mind), sign a contract and would be in poor financial shape a few months down the line because they paid $300 for the phone, then $80 data/phone plan with a credit card.

My point is that a lot of customers are lower-middle class who are spend happy on credit they can't support. This is a major problem is North America, and companies can't help but to take advantage of that.

[J]

Re:Supply and Demand

[homer_s]

I didn't buy one and I thought it was a kick in the gut. Just about everyone knows that CE devices drop in price over time, but the duration and percentage of the price drop is a bit steep.

So you would've been happier if the price *didn't* drop and the consumer paid more for a longer period?

This just shows that you and Wozniak do not understand the role price plays in regulating supply and demand. I bet you also complain about "price gougers" after a hurricane hits.

A higher price draws more supply in (either from the same producer or different producers) - when more supplies hit the market, the price drops due to competition (the single supplier or monopolist will drop prices to increase volumes).

If the initial price is set artificially low (by govt edict or other pressures), the additional supplies will not come in. This is the reason price controls always lead to longer lines and empty shelves. Just ask Robert Mugabe - the invisible hand just smacked his people hard.

Re:Supply and Demand

[bkr1_2k]

Apple has never tried to "price for exclusivity". It's just not what they're in business to do. The market for "being different" but they are the exact opposite of "different" in the media player market and hope to achieve the same in the CE market.

People do buy things to show off. They do buy them to be "different" and they do buy things to be just like everyone else. The goal of being a "different" sheep is exactly the market Apple is shooting to hit with any of their products. That's the point of the "switch" campaign.

Most of us know that any first gen product is likely to have bugs and flaws that users will find and manufacturers will fix. That's why the bell curve for product sales always has early adopters at the fringe (right), while most people are in the bell, and late-comers are in the fringe (left).

Apple is no different than any other company in their pricing schemes. Early adopters always pay more, and they expect to, for whatever their reasons. Woz has no reason to be bitching.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

Um... my plan is $55, and I paid $500 for my iPhone. And I was pissed too...

Re:Supply and Demand

[stewbacca]

I hear the claims of status-symbol this, and smug that thrown around Apple, but the truth is that normal, hard-working people, regardless of income level, use Macs, iPods and iPhones. The Nokia N95 costs several hundred dollars more than the iPhone, so if people wanted to impress, they'd buy that instead, no? Perhaps you aren't giving people enough credit here. People like myself (37-ish years old, $60,000/yr, Graduate degree, 2 kids, mortgage), seem to not mind paying a small premium as long as we are getting a good product in return. It seems to be that $7/hr, lives-in-the-basement-with-parents guy that can't handle the fact that some of us are productive members of society and have a little cash to burn on things we like (not things we want YOU to like).

The same thing goes for cars (slashdot can never use enough car analogies). I love the BMW 3 series, because it is an engineering marvel, at any cost, and would never buy it as a status-symbol. I would buy it because it is a GREAT car and I could care less what the rest of you think. Sure, in the States, where BMWs aren't the ubiquitous average commuter car like in Europe, some idiots buy them for that, but that doesn't make it any worse of a vehicle.

A ROLEX is a status symbol. It doesn't do anything better than my $15 Casio, yet costs thousands of dollars. A BENTLEY is a status symbol. It is a piece of shit car that costs about $200,000 more than it is actually worth, and gets pwned by a Volkswagen. An iPod (yes, I've frequently heard this referred to as a status symbol) is a sub $200 electronic gadget. I would be sad if I lived in an country who's economy considered $200 gadgets to be luxury.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Ilgaz]

I'm in New Zealand, and today I saw a local 'parallel importing' house advertise iphones modded to work with the local vodafone GSM network, for the princely sum of... wait for it... $NZ1199.. that, at todays conversion rate is $US892 !!!
  These I would suggest come with no warranty or official support as they have been modified outside Apple specs.
  You'd hafta be keen ! Can you blame the guy while those Apple fanatics are enough delusional to claim "Woz doesn't know shit" just because he said 2 words about a $200 price drop?

I would price it $1000 and still sell.

There is a guy on The Register (which cult members flamed) made a basic calculation. He can buy high end Nokia N95 (3.5 G!), an iPod and a low end PC as a bonus with TCO of UK iPhone.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/uk_iphone_at_last/

If I was a cell phone dealer doing grey-hat jobs, I wouldn't be that nice even.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

The competition DIDN'T, that's for sure.

Dickwad.

Re:Supply and Demand

[EastCoastSurfer]

I love the BMW 3 series, because it is an engineering marvel, at any cost, and would never buy it as a status-symbol. I would buy it because it is a GREAT car and I could care less what the rest of you think.

You should check out the Infinity G35 (or it might just be G now). At least when I looked a couple years ago they had better performance and were less expensive than the 330. Now, a friend of mine used to have an M5. All I can say is wow! Talk about an amazing piece of machinery.

Re:Supply and Demand

[aichpvee]

Well, who else gives money to apple?

Re:Supply and Demand

[stewbacca]

actually I'm considering the lexis is 350 to replace my aging contour act. I'll look into the infinity though

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes it has - Nintendo could have made more money if they'd judged the supply/demand correctly. When you can only produce a certain quantity - how does it benefit you to sell it at less than the market is willing to pay? What's more annoying to the consumer, no availability or a higher price?

Re:Supply and Demand

[poot_rootbeer]

A low price and lack of inventory hasn't hurt the Wii.

There's no question that the Wii has been a successful game console, almost certainly the most successful of the current generation. But could it have been EVEN MORE successful, had Nintendo priced it at $299.99 and spent the extra revenue on additional production capacity? It's a moot point but an interesting one.

Re:Supply and Demand

[onetwentyone]

My point is that a lot of customers are lower-middle class who are spend happy on credit they can't support. This is a major problem is North America, and companies can't help but to take advantage of that. You're telling me companies should be responsible for the self control and fiscal responsibility of the individual? Sorry but if someone puts themselves in a bad financial position through unnecessary "for me" purchases, they have no one to blame for themselves. Proper budgeting, hell even SIMPLE budgeting, should be something we teach our kids in school from early to out.

Re:Supply and Demand

[DavidShor]

It's perfectly rational for first adopters to be angry. Signaling is a large motivation behind buying an Iphone, purchasers want to show others that they have $500 to wantonly spend on a phone. When the price drops to $300, they are now indistinguishable from those who purchased at the lower price, and so the value that they recieve from the phone is much lower.

I remember a class action lawsuit that sued Mercedes for making a little bought shitty model, on the basis that it cheapened the signaling value of Mercedes cars everywhere.

Not that society should care about the rational anger of first adopters.

Re:Supply and Demand

[DavidShor]

Block pricing is known in economics as price discrimination. It is only relevent in monopolies, as otherwise, price collapses to marginal demand.

But even so, price discrimination can't be too bad, as arbitrage soon destroys any signigant spreads.

As for the legal status, I am pretty sure that it is legal.

Re:Supply and Demand

[pnutjam]

I love the BMW 3 series, because it is an engineering marvel, at any cost, and would never buy it as a status-symbol. I would buy it because it is a GREAT car and I could care less what the rest of you think.

Flaunting the ability to buy an engineering marvel, at any cost is a status symbol. Just because a BMW does something better then a Hyundai doesn't mean it is better for it's intended use, some people treasure utility. And a $200 item is a luxury item in most of the US. There are many people who spend days agonizing over any purchase more then $100 when it is not a necessity.
(30-ish, $50,000/yr, Associate degree, 3 kids, rent)

Re:Supply and Demand

[tukkayoot]

You're telling me companies should be responsible for the self control and fiscal responsibility of the individual?

No, it did not look that way to me. He said in his first sentence, "it's not wrong" and in his closing remarks that companies "can't help but tale advantage." It's ugly and one might say amoral, but ultimately the most culpable party in a situation like this is the individual buyer.

Proper budgeting, hell even SIMPLE budgeting, should be something we teach our kids in school from early to out.

I agree 100%.

People are stupid, especially about how they spend their money, but they are stupid because they've grown up in a consumer culture where they're bombarded with slick marketing and have their spending impulses egged on at every level, while most receive no education on how to properly manage a budget, or think critically, or about what their psychological blind spots and weaknesses might be, or how others will seek to exploit them.

In my opinion, this is basic, important stuff, and yet I doubt you will find any of it on a NCLB test.

Re:Supply and Demand

[cylcyl]

Wait, so Apple didn't sell out of iPhones in the first week? I call BS. Apple store was selling as fast as they could swipe credit cards and they only took so long to sell out because they stocked so many. If they only stocked 50-100 like the at&t stores did, they would have sold out in 1-2 hrs like they did. So claiming that price was used to control stock is BS.

iPhone would have sold out as fast at either price.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

the truth is that normal, hard-working people, regardless of income level, use Macs, iPods and iPhones.

Yes, that is because they want the status... Even a few people who I know to be getting government assistance have iPhones, and their kids wear expensive Nikes. Does this make sense? Sure, they are cool gadgets, but a $600 piece of electronics isn't as important as putting food on the table.

An iPod (yes, I've frequently heard this referred to as a status symbol) is a sub $200 electronic gadget. I would be sad if I lived in an country who's economy considered $200 gadgets to be luxury.

When you can buy a MP3 player for sub $40 that does everything an iPod can do (and even has larger capacity)... When people pay the extra money for replacement white Apple ear buds because they "look cool" instead of buying quality head phones with better quality for the same price or a set of cheapies from the dollar store... YES, the iPod is a status symbol. Do a price vrs size vrs formats vrs warranty comparison and you'll see it's not worth it.

I have a two questions for you to ask your self. Between the cost of your car, your iPods and/or iPhone how much have you spent? How much have you given to charity (not counting tithing, if you Christian and go tithe to your church) in the last year?

Re:Supply and Demand

[Applekid]

I hear the claims of status-symbol this, and smug that thrown around Apple, but the truth is that normal, hard-working people, regardless of income level, use Macs, iPods and iPhones. I think the source of the status-symbol business is really design. Apple products are pretty. I think money has less to do with it than ugly vs pretty. I take it like the fact that no fat and greasy nerd likes the pretty boy jock that's popular with all the ladies.

I'll be the first to admit that with iPods being a lot of Apple's bread and butter these days didn't help that... especially when you have other less pretty, more functional, and more bang-for-the-buck products out there.

The jock goes to the party and ditches school, the nerd stays at home and builds the next killer app. In the end, one winds up being more valuable to the society but the other will always be thought of in better terms. It's almost like it's nature's way.

Re:Supply and Demand

[purfledspruce]

It doesn't matter if you think there's no valid gripe.
 
Apple upset its most loyal, most wealthy customers. Upset customers don't buy things. Loyal, wealthy customers not buying things is bad for business.
 
You can waste your time complaining about these upset customers all you want--it won't affect this obvious logic.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Jonny_eh]

"by waiting two months, could have paid $200 less for the exact same deal"

An they could also now unlock it, meaning that they don't need a 2 year AT&T contract. The early adopters paid more in price and freedom.

Re:Supply and Demand

[stewbacca]

Apple products have a nice design. I'd hardly call them pretty, as that has a female-centric bias to it (in my mind). I think people who enjoy design elements also enjoy Apple products (moreso than, say, Dell). People who have no interest in design, not suprisingly, don't understand the hoopla for Apple products, and instead flood /. with articles about how their Palm-this, and Nomad-that are so much better than the current Apple lineup. Yeah, we get it, but it is our money, and we value different things. Get over it already.

Your pretty boy analogy is pretty good, except I'd argue that Apple products actually have substance to go with the looks.

Apple will NEVER appeal to the bang-for-the-buck crowd. It isn't in their corporate culture to cut corners to pump up stats. Apple is not making Dodge Chargers with huge Hemis, cranking out big horsepower... No, Apple is making sleek v-6s that get just as much horsepower with half the displacement, and can actually go around corners too. (Yes, another car analogy!)

Re:Supply and Demand

[kestasjk]

Simple budgeting is common sense. Imagine teaching simple budgeting in school:

2. ii) You have $3,250 in the bank, 5 unpaid bills, 2 kids, and a five figure income. Do you:
A) Buy an iPhone
B) Invest in the sub-prime market
C) Pay the bills

Re:Supply and Demand

[BlueF]

You're dead wrong and you're missing the point entirely, like so many posts below (and before).

This IS is price gouging, plain and simple. Worse than that, it is HORRIBLE customer relations, at time when perhaps Apple should be riding their impressive market upturn. From my own perspective, having just come on board with Apple last year with the switch to intel processors, I was beginning to appreciate the Apple OS _and_ philosophy. I own two Mac Mini's, one MacBook, and now an iPhone. All along, I was happy to pay the marked price premium... for design, aesthetic AND, well thought out interfaces (usability/function). THIS is what apple sells and why they are more "exclusive" (highly regarded/perceived). I see the he "apple tax" not so much a "look at me, look what I have". It is the price for superior engineering. There is (was) greater VALUE in Apple products due not only to their design, but due to their intuitive function.... Until now.

Bottom-line, this was a HORRIBLE move by Apple. People can turn the cold shoulder, claiming early adopters got what they (we) deserve and that they are being unreasonable. I say, those calling this anything but a kick in the teeth are blind or vindictive. Ala, Nelson Munch... "Haha".

Never before, that I'm aware of, has there been such a sudden and drastic price drop on the latest must have gadget. More than harming Apple's credibility, I'm thinking many who would have continued being early adopter consumers may now think again before opening our wallets. Hell! Perhaps Apple has done us a favor, brining us to our senses? Still, is this a lessen Job wants in on? Is this his form of social commentary?? Talk about biting the hand that feeds.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Belial6]

"Proper budgeting, hell even SIMPLE budgeting, should be something we teach our kids in school from early to out."

Yes, you are absolutely correct, but our public schools are lost. Unfortunately this generation of parents are particularly crappy, so the idea of teaching your kids things yourself doesn't even come to mind.

Actually since the Baby Boomers, there has been an attitude that "kids shouldn't have to worry about money." That they should just "have the chance to be kids". This has lead to the idea that we should hide finances from kids.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

I would be sad if I lived in an country who's economy considered $200 gadgets to be luxury.

There are only about five billion people in the world like that.

Re:Supply and Demand

[seanadams.com]

Give me a break. A low price and lack of inventory hasn't hurt the Wii.

Bad example - while both products are luxury goods, the Wii has totally different customer demographics. The Wii customer is far more price sensitive and will simply buy a different console if it's overpriced. So a higher launch price would have caused a _failed_ launch, and immediately earn the product a reputation of being overpriced. Capturing some extra revenue in the first couple months is fine if you can do it, but not if it kills your product for the long term.

With the iPhone, there is a tremendous amount of price elasticity - units could be profitably sold at anywhere between $0 (with service plan) and perhaps $999. That's a different ball game altogether.

Re:Supply and Demand

[statusbar]

A fool and his money are BEST parted.

The last thing you want are fools running around with economic power.

It can be viewed that it is on of your responsibilities to humanity is to extract money from fools.

--jeffk++

Re:Supply and Demand

[Pollardito]

i know what you're saying, and i'm not taking it personally as some people are. but early adopters are the lifeblood of Apple, so they damn well better have some consideration for them. all those MacWorld conferences with the hype and the minute-by-minute liveblogs? those are early adopters. if you send a message to early adopters that not only will they be running the expected risk of early-stage product issues, but that they will be paying a 33% premium for that privilege and you're driving a stake through the heart of your hype machine. i'm not saying that paying a premium isn't part of the early-adopter expectation also, but a 33% markup for a 2 month period is pretty awful

Apple's core market is people that will pay a little extra for a shinier product. those people hear criticism all the time from people who think they're crazy for paying more for an Apple, but they didn't expect to hear that FROM Apple.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

DON'T DO IT! If you truly appreciate BMW engineering, then get the 335i. I considered lexus/audi/infiniti before settling on the 335i. The car simply sold itself, performance numbers aside; it has an unbelievable road feel and wicked power.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Supergibbs]

Plus there is a $100 apple store credit.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Swift2001]

"I didn't buy one and I thought it was a kick in the gut." Just not in YOUR gut.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Swift2001]

They especially hurt people in forums like /., most of whom spend their time ridiculing Apple. I'd like to see an actual poll of early adopters. I'd bet that the few elite, named users are upset, and no one else. Oh, tech writers who like to bash the company also are vewy, vewy angwy.

I use a crappy old Razr, which I bought -- sigh -- for looks. When it came out, it was $400. Look at the interface, it's worth about $25. It's about seven key presses away from doing something like turning on Bluetooth, and to sync it you've got to use this crappy little USB cable.

I paid $100 for it, and I can't wait to get a new one when my contract is up. iPhone maybe? If the price for the original model hits about $250. I'd love to be an early adopter, but my financial advisers laugh at the idea.

Re:Supply and Demand

[W2k]

Very true. Just like "wait for the first service pack" has become something of a thumb rule for new Windows releases, "wait until someone cracks the DRM" may have become the rule for Apple. :)

I consider carrier lock-in a form of DRM, since it digitally restricts what a person may do with his phone, including things which are perfectly legal and constitute common use of the product.

Re:Supply and Demand

[hobo sapiens]

Interesting.

In response, I guess you could say that being a bit miffed is a fitting punishment for one who uses a product or a brand to define oneself. Taking your example, a $100K car cannot make up for a small wiener or whatever ineptitude you are trying to compensate for. A Mercedes is mass produced just like a Chevy. It's not as though they are hand crafted by elves from virgin metals in a misty valley of verdant beauty and bestowed upon their owners by divine providence. It's essentially a churched-up Dodge.

Or, in other words, as you said: "Not that society should care about the rational anger of first adopters." I think it's just distasteful that Woz is complaining about the money. There is no moral objection to anything, just the fact that he had to spend money that, had he waited two frickin months, he would not have had to spend. As a previous poster said, if you have the kind of disposable income to get an iPhone (or iPhones) then you should stop whining about the price. You willingly spent what you spent. If you feel that an iPhone is worth $1000 and you pay for it, how on earth can you whine about paying $1000 for an iPhone? If you want to whine about it, then do like everyone else: write a rant in your blog site that nobody cares about. But just because he's Woz he gets an article to contain his ranting. I like Woz but in this case I say he needs to grow up. I think he is SO used to preferential treatment that he's come to expect it.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Cornelius the Great]

A BENTLEY is a status symbol. It is a piece of shit car that costs about $200,000 more than it is actually worth, and gets pwned by a Volkswagen.
Since 1998, it is a Volkswagen.

Re:Supply and Demand

[shmlco]

"Apple upset its most loyal, most wealthy customers."

Correction, Apple upset SOME of its most loyal, most wealthy customers. I'm pretty loyal, but not wealthy and definitely not upset.

With the coupon I basically spent an extra $100 to get a phone two months sooner. Enjoyed having it too. Heck, it seems like I've paid nearly that much at times to get Express shipping for some product or gear I bought mail order or via the web.

Will it affect future buying decisions? Maybe. Depends on what it is, what it does, and how badly I want it. Just talked to a friend who bought two and she feels pretty much the same way. So I think you're extrapolating your own feelings onto the customer base, which may not or may not reflect the actual reality...

Re:Supply and Demand

[rkanodia]

I was born in 1982. Around 1987, my father decided to get out of management and go back to doing software. For about a year, he had no job, and I spent every day terrified that we would lose our house.

As it turns out, my parents had planned and budgeted the entire thing. My dad figured he'd need a year to learn C++ well enough (having not done any programming in several years) to be a architect-level engineer, and so my parents saved enough money for us to live decently well for about 18 months with no income before my father quit his management gig. Thanks for not making me worry about money, guys.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Belial6]

You have it backwards. If they had kept you in the loop, you wouldn't have spent a year terrified that you would be out in the streets. Instead you would have understood that your father had a plan. It was totally irresponsible for them to cause you that much unnecessary stress. So, you shouldn't be thanking them for making you think you would be homeless. You should be giving them a big FU for being horrible parents.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

d. steal shit from work and sell drugs to support my expanding crack/speed habit.

Re:Supply and Demand

[shmlco]

"I'm thinking many who would have continued being early adopter consumers may now think again before opening our wallets."

I have a friend who bought two iPhones for her family who was initially upset with Apple, but was mollified with the rebate. When asked if it would impact future purchases, her answer was a firm "it depends". For example, she's been waiting for a new super-slim aluminum 12" MacBook for ages. If announced tomorrow, she'd be first in line, no questions asked.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Buran]

"I remember a class action lawsuit that sued Mercedes for making a little bought shitty model, on the basis that it cheapened the signaling value of Mercedes cars everywhere."

On what grounds? That a company dare sell to a market that it perceives as a possible source of revenue, when people indicated that they wanted a car from Brand X to be priced at $Y?

What was actionable there? I don't think you can sue for something like that. Now, if the car were unsafe that would be another matter.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife bought an iPhone soon after launch. She's been happy as hell with it and doesn't regret paying full price. I bought one of the closed-out 4GB iPhones the day after the price dropped to replace my broken Blackberry Pearl (it lasted about 9 months and then a critical key broke off which is not covered under warranty). Each of got what we wanted or needed. In my case, the repair/replacement cost for the Pearl came damn close to the $299 I paid for the iPhone. In my wife's case she got hours of enjoyment out of watching YouTube videos and a decent phone.

There is only one truth about markets: prices are set by what people are willing to pay. Job's strategy seems, to me, to be indicative of his understanding of the market. Remember all the stories of the bozos who thought they were going to speculate on iPhones? That didn't work out. Everyone who wanted one got one. Then when production ramped up, the price dropped and people like me were able to get one at a price we were willing to pay. Who loses? Apple's competitors. It's hard to fault Jobs on that one.

Oh yeah, the iPhone is, by far, the best phone I've ever had in the 13 years since I got my first one. I'm a very satisfied customer.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Ephemeriis]

If that $200 will actually harm you financially, you shouldn't have bought a $600 gadget in the first place.

Agreed. $600 for a phone is excessive, as is $400. If you're spending that kind of money on a phone then you probably don't need to worry too much about an extra $200. Sure, it'd be nice to save the money... But it was obviously worth the money at the time.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolutely the case. The biggest people crying (in a BAWWWWW fashion) about this price drop are the people who bought the phone as a status symbol. I have no sympathy for these people. If anything, I'm slightly embarrassed to use mine in public, worried that people will think I paid a foolish $600 for one (when I only paid $300.)

Re:Supply and Demand

[ksheff]

A 5 year old shouldn't worry about finances. If he would have expressed his fear to his parents, they should have told him about the plan and to not worry. Being scared shitless is a a good way of being motivated to make a change to improve the situation, though. Not that a 5 yr old could do much to change anything for the better, however he did learn a good lesson about planning ahead.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Buran]

Seems to me like what you're saying is that now the plebes can afford the stuff you thought was reserved only for the rich. Now, I love my Mac and other Apple products, but I really don't care for the snobbish attitude that some people seem to have about this, or the implied "price-gouging is OK if it keeps the rabble out of my neighborhood"

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

Common sense is not so common.

Many less educated people think that any money they have access to is money they *should* spend. They have no idea that they should be saving money because they think the government is going to keep them fat and happy in retirement, when in reality all the gov't will do is allow them to subsist a bit of the poverty line (which I think is a perfectly sufficient level of support).

Schools should at least offer electives in personal finance for high school students. My university had a seminar on the subject (it was either no credit or 1 credit pass/fail) that I think every student could have really benefited from.

A more useful budgeting lesson would be as follows:

You make 75k/year. The government will take about 30% of this away in various taxes, leaving you with $4000/month to take home.
You should spend no more than 40% of your take home salary on living expenses- in this scenario that means you have $1600 for rent/mortgage (with a lesson explaining the tax benefits to owning a home, how mortgages work, etc.) You should have 6 months of living expenses in an emergency fund in case you lose your job, and be socking away 6-15% of your income for retirement... etc...

The final (it could even be take home) would be giving a few different scenarios of income+ obligations and creating a budget plan for them- IE: You are 27, have 60k in student loan debt, need a new car, pay $750 a month in rent, and make $50k per year. How much can you afford?

These are life lessons that are usually learned only after a fair deal of pain, the details and options are not necessarily obvious or easy to figure out on your own (There is a great deal of non obvious terminology around things like 401k's, IRA's, taxes, mortgages, etc).

Re:Supply and Demand

[ksheff]

got a link to that 160G mp3 player for $40? I wouldn't mind getting one of those.

Re:Supply and Demand

[djh101010]

"by waiting two months, could have paid $200 less for the exact same deal"

An they could also now unlock it, meaning that they don't need a 2 year AT&T contract. The early adopters paid more in price and freedom.
Well, they gave me $100 back, _and_, I'm saving 20 bucks a month and getting better coverage with AT&T than I did with Verizon. The usability of this thing is much better than my Palm based Treo that I replaced with it. So...better coverage, more usable, a full Unix system I can do whatever I want with, and cheaper per month... I'm not seeing the downside.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Belial6]

"A 5 year old shouldn't worry about finances."

It is amazing that you are actually endorsing the idea that making a 5 year spend a year of their life being terrified of being homeless is good, and that teaching them how money works with real world examples is bad. Simply amazing.

And that is why so many people are permanently in debt. The majority of people now think that how money really works should be hidden from kids until the day they become 'adults', and then they are somehow supposed to instantly understand one of the most complex subjects they will ever learn. In a best case scenario, they expect them to get a part time job at 16, where they pick up even worse habits concerning money, because they can go out and spend every dime they make, the day they get paid with no repercussions.

I can guarantee you that teaching kids how money works by getting them involved with the household finances is going to prepare them for the rest of their lives WAY better than hidding it until they are thrown to the wolves. The only reason that being involved in the household finances should cause any worry for at all for a child is if there is something to actually worry about. The example we are debating right now is a perfect example. Keeping the kid in the loop would have caused no worry, but hiding it caused the kid to spend a year of his life in terror.

If the family finances are in trouble, then it is even more important that the kids understand what is going on so that they can adjust their expectations accordingly, as well as learn what not to do, and why not to do it.

My three year old in very happy, and you can be sure he doesn't 'worry' about money. But he also knows that when dad goes to his client site, or has to stay in his office working, it is so he can earn money. He knows that money is what we trade for our home, our food, and our toys. Heck, he even know that we pay taxes on our income, and why we pay it. When his mom was laid off last year, we discussed it with him and explained what it meant that mom wasn't earning money. When we decided that she would not go back to work, we discussed with him what the trade offs were.

So, now instead of having a kid that thinks that money just shows up, he understands that people give you money in exchange for work. He also understands that by giving up a little on things we buy, he gets to have Mom stay home with him instead of having to go to daycare.

So, instead of spending the next year being terrified that he would be homeless, he can enjoy the time he gets to spend with his mom.

This whole idea that getting kids involved in finances is causing them 'worry' is just simply BS. The example parents were a perfect example of parents being abusive by NOT getting the kids involved.

"If he would have expressed his fear to his parents, they should have told him about the plan and to not worry."

Really, blaming the 5 year old because his parents were abusive is just plain stupid.

Re:Supply and Demand

[hawk]

It's not as though they are hand crafted by elves from virgin metals in a misty valley of verdant beauty and bestowed upon their owners by divine providence. What? They never let me know. My Mercedes was made by ugly and promiscuous elves? I want my money back! :)

hawk

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

d. Prostitute my daughter and help my son start an at home pharmaceutical business.

Re:Supply and Demand

[flappinbooger]

I think some people are annoyed by the price drop because they actually thought it was worth that much.

Re:Supply and Demand

[x1n933k]

No, I'm not telling you they should be responsible my comment was in regards to the parent because I believe it isn't those who can afford the $600 phone who would complain.

Thanks for reading.

[J]

Re:Supply and Demand

[Urza9814]

The sad part is, they _do_ teach simply budgeting in school. The class is called 'on your own', and we're required to take it to graduate. I went through it two years ago, and budgeting is a rather large part of it. It's also worked into math classes on occasion...though that's mostly the lower level algebra classes...which was 7th grade for me.

Re:Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no moral objection to anything, just the fact that he had to spend money that, had he waited two frickin months, he would not have had to spend.

He had no way of knowing that in 2 months, Apple was going to slash the price.

Re:Supply and Demand

[smenor]

When people pay the extra money for replacement white Apple ear buds because they "look cool" instead of buying quality head phones with better quality for the same price or a set of cheapies from the dollar store.

About that.... I broke my iPod ear buds recently, and decided to try something new.

First I went with some of the Shure E4Cs that I heard all sorts of good things about. Maybe my ears are just weirdly shaped, but none of the plastic or foam sleaves felt right. Also, I could hear all sorts of noises that I didn't want to (myself breathing; bone-conducted sound from walking; electrical noise from my iPod's amp; etc.).

Then I decided to just try the el chepo Koss $5 ear buds.

They actually sounded a lot better than the Shures (because of all the missing noise), but they were uncomfortable and kept falling out.

Finally, I broke down and got another pair of the Apple Earbuds.

They were even better than the ones that came with my iPod. Molded to fit better; rid of the worthless foam cover; more sturdily built.

Given my druthers, I'd just assume not walk around with Apple ads sticking out of my ears, but having tried both extremes, they were simply the best choice for me.

Also - your price vs format comparison completely neglects quality and usability.

I don't want to play Oggs or WMAs, but I do want controls that don't get in my way. Not being as clunky or fugly as the competition doesn't hurt either.

Re:Supply and Demand

[hoopshank]

This comes just a week after the European launch was announced (November 9, approx. $550, tied into an expensive, exclusive contract).

Surely, this announcement is going to hurt early sales in Europe. Or is demand really so high that people will pay through the nose just to have it a short while before anyone else?

Re:Supply and Demand

[mixmasta]

Sure, I just think Apple could have been smoother here ...

They shoulda dropped the price $100 this time, then another $100 in November.

This would have given them two news events for the price of one, and spread the pain a bit to make it easier for the most loyal customers to take.

Re:Supply and Demand

[aywwts4]

Your experience is not universal, Many schools do not offer such a course. I wish they all did. Just explaining to someone what credit card debt means, in real dollars would be insanely helpfull to thousands and thousands of young people who go to college and start using a credit card like free money, hiding it from their father's as long as possible. Of course the credit card companies prey on those with student loans in particular since they know there is a very good chance of both huge racked up interest and a father or mother who will "make all the bad things go away, just this once"

Re:Supply and Demand

[Urza9814]

Eh. Thing I've noticed is that even though people are required to take the class and pass it, most of them then immediately forget whatever they were taught. Just because it is taught doesn't mean it is learned. Plus the fact that it is required to graduate means that it tends to be a fairly easy course to just pass without paying much attention. It shouldn't be, but it is.

Re:Supply and Demand

[evilad]

I call dismal.

Or were you merely attempting to express that Apple holds a monopoly on iPhones?

Re:Supply and Demand

[rhizome]

Nintendo could have made more money if they'd judged the supply/demand correctly.

They're still making money. Come back when the numbers turn south.

Re:Supply and Demand

[ksheff]

It's amazing that you were able to type all of that and have such poor reading comprehension since what you got out of my post is 100% wrong.

Re:Supply and Demand

[tehcyder]

You should have 6 months of living expenses in an emergency fund in case you lose your job

Yes, and you shouldn't have any student loans, credit cards or other debts as you should have worked from the age of ten to get a college fund, and you can survive on $1/day with rice and beans, and run to work so you don't need a car, and you don't need to drink alcohol to have a good time, and it's a sheer waste of money having a girlfriend or children or friends.

Re:Supply and Demand

[zacronos]

The competition DIDN'T, that's for sure.

Didn't, or couldn't?

Re:Supply and Demand

[zacronos]

So... you think they're upset because the two-month price drop made them realize just how much of a premium they paid to get it first?

I dunno, I agree with some of the other posters -- if they were willing to pay the premium, they were willing to pay the premium, and that should be the end of that. I can't imagine they didn't realize they were paying it -- and even if they didn't know how much was going into Apple's pockets, they were still willing to pay the high price.

I have a different theory. There's a very subtle difference between being upset they paid so much and being upset others aren't having to pay as much, and I think a lot of the bitching is probably because of the latter. The short wait before the steep drop offends their sense of fairness more, and it makes the iPhone less of an elite status symbol than if it had stayed more expensive longer. So in that second sense, they may not have gotten what they thought they were paying for -- 2 months of elite status rather than, say, 6 months.

Of course, anyone bitching that they would prefer for others to pay more for something (rather than because they would prefer to have paid less) will be recognized for the elitist, superficial snob they are. Therefore even if that is the real reason behind much of the bitching, I bet they won't say it that way -- they'll complain that it was a "stupid" move for Apple, or that Apple gouged them, or something else that misses the reason they're actually upset. I'm not saying that Woz is one of those people -- just that he probably knows how many of that type of people are customers.

Re:Supply and Demand

[bdulac]

I think everyone needs to be responsible for their own finances and not get mad at paying up front for having the latest technology. If you can afford $600 for a phone and you just can't wait to have it then you probably shouldn't complain about a price drop. Did the price drop too soon and too much....yes but that's how it goes. Anyone complaining about the fact should have been smart enough (like the rest of us) to wait until the drop happened. Duh.....

Re:Supply and Demand

[rkanodia]

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. The 'thanks' in my post was intended to be sarcasm.

Re:Supply and Demand

[coolGuyZak]

You can call it gouging if you want, but what if they'd instead just run out of stock immediately? Think "tickle me iPhone" - I don't think consumers would have been impressed by that.

Considering the recent press concerning manufacturers artificially limiting supply to get press (XBox 360, etc), I'm somewhat glad that Apple decided to manipulate demand instead. The blowback seems less damaging, too. It's far cleaner to say "Oops, here's a rebate" than to get caught with no means of recourse.

Jobs did exactly the right thing. Price no lower than where you meet demand, and only once production has ramped up (which usually takes about two months - go figure) THEN price it at the sweet spot. Also consider seasonal factors which made it necessary to do this before the Xmas shopping season, which for the gadget industry begins right now.

I have been thinking about Apple's move in relation to sub-prime lending woes. /IANA.+/, but I know that the dollar took a big hit recently. When that happens, consumers are more cautious spenders; they tend not to take big risks, buy flashy toys, and what not. Thus, while far from a primary motivator, the price reduction aids the climb to Apple's target market share. Or it could be a (an?) RDF hardener/marketing device.

On release, the iPhone was too expensive to justify my expense, especially considering OSX Tiger and the opportunity cost of early-adopting*. The 200 dollar drop allowed me to justify the expense in several ways:

• I needed to replace my iPod (stolen) and cellphone (borked). Purchasing each individually only cost about 50 bucks less than the iPhone.
• The price was already cheaper than my former carrier's offers**. The drop exaggerated the difference.
• I could spend the 200 bucks "left over" on Tiger. (It's great when you can have your cake and eat it too).

Disclaimer: I am a fanboy, and I love the iPhone. However, it's a dangerous device. Its such a blast to use that I've upgraded my plan already, and can foresee spending additional dollars tricking it out. Damn Apple to hell, but I love their products.

* I was an early-adopter for the MacBook, and was disappointed when Apple upgraded the product six months after it debuted.

** Over the lifetime of the contract, with a phone of comparable functionality, including Apple's battery replacement fee.

Haha.

[kraemate]

This guy has reason to be miffed. Didn't he buy, what, 4 of those iphones on the first day or something?

Re:Haha.

[anagama]

I haven't RTFAd, but the summary implies that Woz thought Apple should have gouged for a longer period. Is that a worthy thought for someone held in as high esteem as Woz? Sounds very accountantish.

Re:Haha.

[Anonymous Coward]

What I heard he bought 20 of them! If he bought with the same amount of money after the pricedrop he would have had 30 of them!

Re:Haha.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, who is this asshat, anyway?

"Woz"? That's not even a real name, for chrissakes!

He should leave the tech stuff to us gurus.

I'm gonna be a fucking squillionaire when I leave college and start some tech company!

Re:Haha.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget that Steve Jobs offered Woz a free iPhone which he declined.

Re:Haha.

[Lumpy]

A guy that has twenties bound into a pad and uncut but perforated on the edge all for nothing but a clever joke / prank has no right to complain about a price drop.

BUT, Woz is not complaining. He is pointing out it was a major corporate blunder. It DOES cause harm and he sees apple spiraling in a direction he does not like.

Honestly I put way more value in his words than those of any CEO. Woz does not do the marketing speak game.

Re:Haha.

[shmlco]

Methinks, perhaps, that the thought was that Apple should have charged $399.95 in the first place.

Pffft

[EEPROMS]

Pffft iPhone thats so yesterday..

Re:Pffft

[Anonymous Coward]

Pffft iPhone thats so yesterday.. I, as a Mac owner wished your joke/troll to be true. It is not so yesterday, it is still covering entire Mac news scene for months.

Look to digg.com/Apple once was a good, "lighter" source of Mac news, impossible to stand now. Macworld barely figured their users MAY HAVE zero interest in iPhone while they own Mac and even iPod.

I have a my yahoo page just covering Mac news sites jokingly named "Maccie" and I am not seeing anything except that damn phone.

Thanks to Slashdot, every site has "comments" section and you can't dare to hate iPhone or ignore it. I made my point numerous times that it is _not_ a smart phone, it is a high tech multimedia device with communication capabilities. I will keep saying same thing until Apple puts a SDK with a frightening NDA (or not) to their Developer pages and release iPhone supporting XCode.

That time, a true revolution which everyone wished for will happen and it will deserve to be top spot of news.

I have really gave up reading Mac sites except a few highly respected, non fanboy blogs which are founded long time before iPod or iPhone. I lost my complete respect to some blogs after figuring they are _really_ Apple fanboys, amateurs and nothing else.

I was happily ignoring the device and thanks to cult member people who even flames Woz, one of the founders of Apple just because he dares to bitch about price, I now hate it.

As Woz is engineer, he is being nice to Apple. I am sure such a legendary hacker may have couple of thoughts about no SDK situation.

Didn't somebody...

[renegadesx]

... trade in a few hacked iPhone's for a Nissan 350Z a while back?

Full transcript of the interview

[Stony Stevenson]

A full transcript of the interview can be read here: Interview: Wozniak slams Apple for iPhone price drop snafu

Just did?

[biocute]

We just discussed the price drop last night.

Then instead of starting a new story, why didn't Woz contribute to that discussion?

That is what makes Slashdot great. I wish he did that.

Why is Woz still relevant?

[not-quite-rite]

This is probably going to get me in trouble, but I really don't know why people care about Woz so much.

There are hundreds of engineers that have done amazing things, and are still doing them.

Why do people still care what he thinks/does?

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Don Negro]

He's still relevant because out of all the engineers who've ever done anything, Woz is very arguably in the top 10, period, of all time, end of story (which makes him one of the few, if any, who are still alive)

He's he first man who built modern computer hardware, then personally wrote the software that ran on top of it, all the while providing an extensible hardware and software system that other engineers could (and did, wildly) build upon. He literally built a huge chunk of this industry by himself, and another huge chunk was built on his shoulders.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[chris_mahan]

Go read Founders at Work (link to Amazon, no ref to me) and read the chapter on Apple. He's a f'ing genius.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[rs79]

" He's he first man who built modern computer hardware, then personally wrote the software that ran on top of it, all the while providing an extensible hardware and software system that other engineers could (and did, wildly) build upon. He literally built a huge chunk of this industry by himself, and another huge chunk was built on his shoulders."

I hate to say this but you could say the same thing about Gates.

Woz is a legend because he's been there, and got out at a good time and hasn't had the chance to screw anything up for a while.

I had an S-100 system and just sneered at the apple frankly, then got an Amiga. Until OSX Apple was utterly irrelevent to me.

Woz is a celebrity because he's a celebrity and a decent guy. But lots of people did far more to get you an I where we are now.

His Steviness is indeed (from personal obervation at a meeting) a real prick, but current Apple users owe more to him than Woz.

I can't get too excited whether it's a $400 phone or a $600 phone. My phone was $50 and came with $50 of airtime. New stuff from Apple is always expensive.

I just don't see how this is news.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[not-quite-rite]

I know he did amazing things back then. What I am asking is what makes him special lately?

Genius isn't forever. Much like sporting ability isn't forever.

He just reminds me of an athlete that did an amazing thing, but now is just sad and broken.

And it's not to say that I don't respect what he did back in the day. He changed the world in a lot of ways.

But people change, and the Woz now does not appear to be the same Woz that did those things.

Hence I ask, why is he still relevant?

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Anonymous Coward]

If he didn't do it some other loser would have so quit milking it.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[not-quite-rite]

Woz was pretty damn awesome back in the day.

But how is he now? Does his words still mean as much? Do you consider Woz-of-now equal with Woz-in-the-heady-beginnings-of-the-computer-revolution?

That is why I ask the question: why is he still relevant?

I guess blind idol worship exists in the geek world too....

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[servognome]

He's he first man who built modern computer hardware, then personally wrote the software that ran on top of it, all the while providing an extensible hardware and software system that other engineers could (and did, wildly) build upon.

Many people were doing similar things at the time. The difference was how Wozniak went about engineering focusing on usability and openness. Rather than making personal computers an engineering device (something you make), he made them an engineering platform (something you use)

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Lord Kano]

That's a valid question.

I'm a former Apple user. Woz helped make Apple great, but he and Jobs caused Apple to stagnate and pretty much kept Apple out of the position that Microsoft and IBM(Lenovo) are in now.

When Woz speaks about social issues, I'll give a listen, but even though I have great respect for him as a man, his business instincts are worth no more than yours or mine.

In short though, why do people care? It's in large part because of Woz's innovation, the personal computer revolution was born.

LK

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[aviators99]

He's still relevant because the computer engineering ideas he came up with back then still hold up today, and some board designers could still learn lessons from what he did. His designs are still works of art.

In addition, his philanthropy and dedication to children in need (both materially and intellectually) should be an example to us all.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[chris_mahan]

Bad analogy. Sports require physical attributes that are well-known to deteriorate over time. Mental skills, unless degraded by disease or advanced age, do not.

The genius of Woz is that he used pen and paper to create something that had not been created by people who used actual hardware. He understood the fundamentals completely, but let his imagination run wild on a "what if".

How do you know he is still not doing that right now?

Must skill and artistry, in order to be recognized as valuable, serve the corporation?

Must Steve Wozniak, in order to be relevant in your world of Treasure, build another such financial behemoth as Apple?

Surely you must recognize that there are many people around the world who pursue their interests with dedication, skill, and imagination with little care of the financial gains to be derived.

Allow me to speculate. If Steve were independently wealthy, and no longer constrained to generate income to feed and shelter his family, would it not be a better use of his time to use his talents and breadth of experience to help his fellow man? Perhaps it is completely understandable that he should not relish the prospect of working at a soul-crushing cube farm. Perhaps it is acceptable for a man to stop trying to maximize shareholder investment when such a man has already done so amply, and rather dedicate himself to a different purpose.

Perhaps he has indeed changed what he does. But that does not make him less of a man.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are hundreds of engineers that have done amazing things, and are still doing them.

Why do people still care what he thinks/does?

He's a personality and an icon, and I dare say a beloved one.

He's the oddball genius and the most identifiable "Pirate of Silicon Valley", the one who couldn't hack it in business and dropped out to tinker. If you were an 80's geek there's a good chance he was one of your heroes.

And nowadays he's an interesting outcast for whom we still have affection. And it doesn't hurt that he's outspoken and honest (some times brutally so.) There's also a but of soap opera to his relationship with Jobs and Apple.

If you don't get it, you don't get it. We all have our personalities we like to elevate, and outsiders rarely get it, and explaining why is generally a futile gesture.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Evets]

Woz is no Dvorak. He keeps a low profile. It's a bit sad that this kind of a statement ends up making news, because it really isn't much of a statement at all.

He's one of the guys who is largely responsible for making computers the mainstream tools that they are today, so he's worth listening to. Jimmy Carter still makes headlines when he says anything. So does Paris Hilton. Certainly a guy like Woz who has actually made a much more direct impact on each of our lives is deserving of attention from our community.

If he does a tech talk or does some sort of commentary on the future of our industry, I'll be listening. He certainly is deserving of respect. You might say he doesn't have the business sense that some of the other guys like Jobs or Bill have, but maybe he does. He had the brains to get out and live a normal life, whereas Bill and Steve have been slaves to their success. When it came down to the question of how much is success worth, Woz' answer was closer to what mine would be than most other industry giants.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[not-quite-rite]

All excellent points and I agree with most of them. But I do disagree with your first one.

Mental ability changes over time. Be it flexibility, adaptability, etc there is a marked change as one gets older. Once you throw in a bit of trauma, emotional distress, etc there are many things that can happen "upstairs".

(Ever hear the old saw about most maths guys making their breakthroughs in their early days?)

And when I use the term relevance, I mean why does his doing something great years ago automatically qualify him as someone to listen to on everything that he chooses to ramble about? Or do we stop evaluating the source of information, because of emotional bias and hero worship?

I don't mean to come off ungrateful for what he did for the world back then, but how many free dinners does he get off it. If anyone else said what he gets quoted on, would it be special?

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[clickclickdrone]

I don't think Gates did the hardware and software, just the latter.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[clickclickdrone]

With his track record, I don't think being relevent today is neither here nor there - he's already done enough to be great for the rest of his life.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Anonymous Coward]

out of all the engineers who've ever done anything, Woz is very arguably in the top 10, period, of all time, end of story

You have got to be fucking kidding me. Even the craziest Apple fanboy wouldn't argue that - or at least that what I would have thought, a couple minutes ago.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Opportunist]

For the same reason all "great founders" are somehow relevant. I don't know, does Linus still write code for the Kernel, or is he just the one to nod changes through? Doesn't matter, when he says something, people listen. He's an icon. Just as much as Jobs and Woz are.

And that's why their word has weight. Not because they do something important. But because there are people who consider them important who will follow what they're saying, thus making them important. It's kinda self perpetuating.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Viol8]

"focusing on usability"

Sorry , but many many more people at Xerox PARC did that much more and much earlier. Before you start regurgitating the Woz myth verbatim I suggest you go look up some of their achievments in GUIs and man-machine interaction before Apple was even a glint in Woz or Steves eye.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[zorn169]

The ironic thing is that I remember a WOZ interview a long time ago where he mentions not being able to hold whole designs in his head after he hit a certain age. Not sure how old it was. Maybe 40-45. I hope someone else comes up with a link for it.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[servognome]

Sorry , but many many more people at Xerox PARC did that much more and much earlier. Before you start regurgitating the Woz myth verbatim I suggest you go look up some of their achievments in GUIs and man-machine interaction before Apple was even a glint in Woz or Steves eye.

I wasn't referring to GUI, I was referring to the hardware hardware design.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Viol8]

Their hardware was far superior to his many years earlier. Woz was/is a good engineer , but he's visionary either in hardware or software design.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Viol8]

That should have read *no* visionary.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Anonymous Coward]

AFAIK: He was in a plane accident, ended up in a coma for a little while from which he recovered, since when his memory doesn't work like it used to.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[homer_s]

He might have been a very good engineer (I cannot judge - I'm not a good engineer), but he is certainly does not sound very smart here:

I feel badly about the situation for everyone. I don't think Apple should have even done it. ***Maybe a very much more gradual price reduction,***

So he favors consumers paying more for longer? So he is ok with the initial price, but he feels that Apple should charge consumers more than Apple wants? And he also wants Apple to settle for a lower volume (if the price is higher, the volume will be lower) and hence lower profits ?

So, Woz wants Joe Consumer to pay more, Apple to settle for lower profits - all to make the early adopters feel better?

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[LKM]

You also would expect people like Jobs, Woz, Gates or Thorvalds to have some insight into this stuff; one, because they have a lot of experience doing it; and two, because they are among the few who actually were successful.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[stewbacca]

Considering Woz left Apple during the Mac's very first years, he really has nothing to do with the current state of Apple. Unless, somehow, he secretly has been helping develop OS X and iPods. If the Apple II were still kicking, then yeah, maybe he would be relevant to the current state of Apple. Hell, Al Gore, the inventor of the Internet, is more relevant to Apple than is Steve Wozniak.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Ilgaz]

Woz was pretty damn awesome back in the day.

But how is he now? Does his words still mean as much? Do you consider Woz-of-now equal with Woz-in-the-heady-beginnings-of-the-computer-revolution?

That is why I ask the question: why is he still relevant?

I guess blind idol worship exists in the geek world too.... All of this because he said a couple of words about iPhone price drop yes?

I like Macs, I pay for my software and even purchased iWork '08 right after it is available but the "Mac community" is really beyond fixing. I would trade some cult member group that believes in aliens rather than Apple cult.

Answer to your question: He is one of the 2 (two) guys behind that "fruit logo" you see. Should he code some C++ cool,tricky code to become relevant to you or prove himself being relevant?

He is Woz, one of founders of Apple Inc. generous and engineer enough to donate most of his money for educating children. Who the hell are you and why are _you_ relevant?

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Anonymous Coward]

Woz: launches the home computer industry from his parents' garage.

You: trolls on slashdot from his parents' basement.

What was your question again?

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Man On Pink Corner]

Yeah, he's like that Gutenberg asshat. WTF has ol' Johann done for me lately?

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[thePsychologist]

Bad analogy. Sports require physical attributes that are well-known to deteriorate over time. Mental skills, unless degraded by disease or advanced age, do not.

Not true about mental skills. Many mental abilities seem to stay the same: often authors write their best books in their older age. But creative intelligence: the ability to come up with new ideas slowly goes away. G.H. Hardy remarked "young men prove theorems, old men write books", and although this is not evidence of my thesis, it's his own observation that he did his best work when he was younger (in mathematics).

Older people have more trouble learning new ideas. Someone in their late 40s will have much more difficulty learning a new language than they would have in their 20s. Their reaction time is slowed. Creativity slowly disappears, unfortunately.

The brain gets older.The "fluid" intelligence as defined in psychology decreases with age: for references please see the wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_and_crystallized_intelligence.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Experiment 626]

He's still relevant because out of all the engineers who've ever done anything, Woz is very arguably in the top 10, period, of all time, end of story

I'd definitely agree if we were talking about engineers of computer-related technologies, but in your statement he's up against Archimedes of Syracuse, Leonardo Da Vinci, Thomas Edison, Nicola Tesla, Wernher Von Braun and some other pretty exclusive company. As great as Woz's accomplishments are, I'm thinking the top 10 engineers of all time might be a pretty tough list to break in to.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[switcha]

Sports require physical attributes that are well-known to deteriorate over time.

I don't think I like where you're going with this argument.
-B. Bonds

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Etyenne]

The difference was how Wozniak went about engineering focusing on usability and openness.

Huh?

I readily acknowledge the focus on usability. But openness ? They did ship schematic with the Apple II, but that does not extend to the Macintosh, which was (and still is to some extent) as closed as you can get.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Anonymous Coward]

...
Perhaps he has indeed changed what he does. But that does not make him less of a man.

no, but griping about a $200 discount on a phone may well make him a lesser man.

how does paying more for an iphone help out humanity again?

love doth weaken the intellect.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[Anonymous Coward]

I readily acknowledge the focus on usability. But openness ? They did ship schematic with the Apple II, but that does not extend to the Macintosh, which was (and still is to some extent) as closed as you can get.

Woz had nothing to do with the Mac, having left Apple in 1981 after a head injury from a plane crash.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[jeremyp]

He's still relevant because out of all the engineers who've ever done anything, Woz is very arguably in the top 10, period, of all time, end of story (which makes him one of the few, if any, who are still alive)

Archimedes, Telford, Brunel, Stephenson, James Watt, John Von Neumann, Wilbur and Orville Wright, Tommy Flowers, Rudolf Diesel, Edgar Djikstra, Tesla, Edison, Knuth, Denis Thompson, Linus Torvalds. That list took me five minutes to come up with. I only had to resort to Wikipedia once - to figure out how to spell Djikstra. Give me an hour and I could come up with 50 engineers who are more important than Woz.

Wozniak designed a microcomputer. It happened to be the best around at the time, but it was hardly unique.

He's he first man who built modern computer hardware

Not remotely true. Microcomputers in the days of the Apple II were unbelievably primitive compared with the minicomputers and mainframes of the day.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[rs79]

"Many people were doing similar things at the time. The difference was how Wozniak went about engineering focusing on usability and openness. Rather than making personal computers an engineering device (something you make), he made them an engineering platform

The way I see it was this. At the time lots of people were doing exactly what Woz was doing, building the hardware and software, but they were for business or scientific applications.

The end result of hat Woz did was, in a nutshell, for hackers. Nasa didn't use Apple II's, neither did business. It was poeple lke you and I (modulo the ones that already HAD computers). In that sense, he's a hero.

Re:Why is Woz still relevant?

[i41Overlord]

He's still relevant because out of all the engineers who've ever done anything, Woz is very arguably in the top 10, period, of all time, end of story (which makes him one of the few, if any, who are still alive)

Do you often spell out your punctuation? Do you often put the period in the middle of the sentence?

Apple advertiser slashdot runs third iphone ad!

[plasmacutter]

disclaimer, loyal user of mac computing platforms, self avowed telephone luddite! (if I want my phone to play videos and surf the web i'll run voip on a LAPTOP)

In the news today, the long time apple astroturfing ground, slashdot, has run the third iphone ad in the past 48 hours, topping all records for coverage of apple products since the launch of macos X.4 tiger.

Cowboy neal has yet to respond to questions regarding possible payola or hijacking of the firehose system : )

Re:Apple advertiser slashdot runs third iphone ad!

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't a troll, it's fucking insightful. Slashdot might as well be called iDot anymore. The bias is even stronger than the linux bias of old.

Re:Apple advertiser slashdot runs third iphone ad!

[ShieldW0lf]

It's kind of sick, isn't it.

I like my phone. It plugs into the wall. When I go out for a walk to the park, no one can call me. I consider this a feature. It never runs out of batteries, it never needs to be recharged, it works when the power goes out, and you can use the buttons, which are real, actual buttons, without even looking at the phone. It also makes this distinctive "ring-ring" noise instead of playing music, which I really like. Also, it only cost me $10.00.

I wonder how much longer you'll be able to buy them.

Re:Apple advertiser slashdot runs third iphone ad!

[milwcoder]

Slashdot is also pleased to announce the recent addition of paid product placement ads embedded in vaguely related posts!

Simpsons reference

[old and new again]

in the simpsons tonight, burns shopping a cell phone, the clerk in the mic says "iPhones now only 20 cents"

I can see both sides of the debate

[rolfwind]

but, ultimately, the people who bought it were willing to spend $600. Plus that $200 is insignificant in the long run, you are spending, what? $60 on that phone for 2 years? That 400 + 1440 = $1840 vs 2040. Not that big of a deal. Subtract the $100 giftcard (hey, if you don't want to buy anything with it, it makes a great birthday/christmas gift to someone who does).

I know, I hate when technology drops too, but the psychology of this is fascinating. It's similiar to gasoline - people watch the price like hawks and when its $.05 lower across town, they'll waste 20 minutes driving and another 1/4 gallon to reap "savings" that are not worth the cost in the end.

And people are getting so stressed out over this, you have to wonder if they are the same people who'd buy some new (american) car during the first 9 months only to get stressed out over the end-of-year price breaks into the thousands or the fact that that car is worth a few thousand less once they sign the papers?

Look at it this way: You got a nice product. As a bonus, out of the blue, you got a $100 gift certificate. Now that it's slightly cheaper, maybe you can get your spouse one, whatever.

abe simpson?

[Potor]

the summary makes him sound like abe simpson

Re:abe simpson?

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of that, they had a last minute (episodes take 9 months to create, overall) audio drop-in in the season premiere: Burns in a cellphone store, PA announcement says "attention shoppers, iPhones are now on sale for 20 cents!"

The iPhone isn't the same as other Apple products

[bgspence]

No one outside of a small circle in Apple and ATT know what the real deal is. Apple is getting something for the phone and something each month for the service. ATT signed up using a spreadsheet with one set of assumptions. Some suggest Apple gets $200 per phone plus a bit of the monthly service charge. ATT's calculations could never guess Apple would change the equation this big so soon. It's not Apple's normal thing to slash prices. ATT will sell more services, but Apple probably gets a huge iPhone subsidy. I bet Apple took ATT to the cleaners with the deal.

"A fool and his money are soon parted"

[Colin Smith]

The first adopters always pay a premium. I am one of them. I am used to that. But that one was too soon, too harsh ... "Too soon, too harsh"? Oh, poor babies... Get real. First adopters are idiots who'll pay to show they can afford the latest and greatest gadgets. Businesses are perfectly aware of this and quite rightly take fool advantage of them.

Translation

[LaTechTech]

"Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak Saturday blasted Steve Jobs' decision to drop the price of the iPhone by $200 just two months after the product was launched.

Translation: I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!

Just as well they dropped the price....

[Anonymous Coward]

..because I understand the dollar is to plunge to 1.5 euros as the Middle East stops selling oil in dollars.

Looks like we've picked a bad time to have a recession. Our Foreign Policy has made the world our enemy, and now we need them to rally round and get us out of the mess we're in because we've been living beyond our means.

But if we've pissed off the world once too often, there's a good chance they will just let us collapse. Then we'll really need the $200 drop for an iPhone - it will help us to buy bread!

Apple, Google and the iPhone

[shird]

I don't get it. What does the price drop on the iPhone have to do with working at Google over Apple? Did the price drop affect the employees of Apple in some bad way, that Google didn't/wouldn't? Are they going to lose their job as a result? The two stories seem completely unrelated.

Unite!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm with you! You know what else I hate? Those damn cotton mills!

Steve Jobs' reply

[xmpcray]

Here is Steve Jobs' reply to Woz's interview -

Oh wait....

Name Incorrect

[Anonymous Coward]

It's Steve Wozniak, not Steve Wozniak Saturday.

Well at least the Lisa owners got a store credit

[mozumder]

http://www.bbspot.com/News/2007/09/jobs-offers-apple-lisa-early-adopters-store-credit.html/

I don't get this...

[toQDuj]

So the iPhone became a lot less expensive now. And everyone complains? Why?
I mean, the alternative is that Apple would have kept the price high, and made more money. That would have had some people complaining, for sure!

Sometimes it seems you just can't do things right.

B.

Re:I don't get this...

[LarsG]

Yeah, I really don't get that. If I were in a flippant mood, I'd say something like "ils sont fous ces americains, only in America would people complain about a price drop".

What exactly were the complainers so angry about? iSuppli and pretty much everyone not affected by the RDF knew Apple had a large margin on the thing. That Apple would eventually lower the margin to be more in line with what the other handset mfgs has was a given. If you bought the phone, you evidently thought it was worth the $600. If you didn't, why did you buy it? One might argue that Apple gouged the early adopters, but that is par for the course in tech - happens with anything from the latest nVidia card to CPUs. So it seems counter-intuitive that the anger was about the price drop itself, at least not for those who have a realistic understanding of the market. I'd venture a guess that it had more to do with the iPhone losing its caché, the price change moved it from the 'louis vitton' range of expensive designer gadgets to the more pedestrian. Simply put, it lost its magic.

What is interesting is what Jobs will take home this whole ordeal. Not only did it take press and buzz away from the new iPods, but it probably also taught him that the Apple faithful do not look kindly on price drops. So iPhone2, or whatever the next hot iThing will be, is less likely to see a significant price drop.

Re:I don't get this...

[toQDuj]

Ils sont fous, bien-sur. (disclaimer: I'm not a French-speaking person :) ). Shooting themselves in the Fous, they are.

Re:I don't get this...

[clayanderson]

Made more money? Do you know how supply and demand works? Trust me, this price drop is not about Apple being generous or altruistic. The price drop is for the very purpose of helping them make the most money. They've already sold the phone to nearly everyone who was willing to pay a $600 pricetag (ridiculously high, compared to the rest of the cell phone market) for it. Saturated. Now it's time to sell to all the folks who will pay $400 for it. In a year, they'll drop the price again, and collect the stragglers. At the same time, they'll also introduce iPhone 2.0 at $499, and start the process all over again. Dropping the price will help them sell more, and in the end, they will make more money. Less money per phone, yes. But it will have a positive impact on their bottom line, and it's all very intentional.

WTF??

[iamacat]

A price drop does not harm you, it only benefits other people. I don't understand why Woz, a generally great guy, sympathizes so much with other people's simple jealousy. You thought the price was right when you bought it. What changes now? And you always can choose to only buy from stores with 30 day price guarantee.

Re:WTF??

[SteveWoz]

actually, I'm just echoing Steve Jobs' apology - sort of plagiarism on my part.

Re:Well at least the Lisa owners got a store credi

[Cafe Alpha]

As if anyone saved their receipt and the box. Even if they did, and it was printed on that early thermal paper, then it's no longer readable.

This is bullshit, it really only mocks Lisa buyers. If I had bought a Lisa, I'd be ready to kill the 'xec at the center of a certain reality-distortion field right about now.

Re:Well at least the Lisa owners got a store credi

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear friend, bbspot is a satire site. That article is not real.

Happens all the time with cars.

[Animats]

Big deal. Early this year, I bought a 2007 Jeep Wrangler. If I bought the same vehicle today, it would be $3000 cheaper, because Jeep is now offering big sales incentives. And the warranty period was only three years when I bought it; now there's a lifetime power train warranty. (That has more to do with the breakup of Damlier-Chrysler and retaining customer confidence, though.)

What's really annoying iPhone suckers, I suspect, is that their overpriced status symbol just stopped being an overpriced status symbol. The CEO of Rolex once said "We are not in the watch business. We are in the luxury business." That applies here.

Re:Happens all the time with cars.

[Anonymous Coward]

there's a difference:

You need a car. You want that iPhone.

Who cares what Woz thinks?

[CountBrass]

He's a clever geek, no doubt but he owes everything to the good fortune of meeting Steve Jobs. Without him Woz would still be a calculator engineer at HP. And frankly I find it difficult to take him seriously when he calls his biography "iWoz" when he had nothing to do with the Mac let alone any of the "i" products. Publicity hungry empty vessel. Who cares what he thinks: he has no particular insight.

Re:Who cares what Woz thinks?

[unitron]

He's a clever geek, no doubt but he owes everything to the good fortune of meeting Steve Jobs. Without him Woz would still be a calculator engineer at HP.

Are you sure it wasn't the other way around, that Jobs had the good fortune to be in the right place at the right time to exploit Woz's talents?

Re:Who cares what Woz thinks?

[Opportunist]

Both were lucky. They are complementary to each other, neither of them would have succeeded alone. Woz would've created a computer nobody wants to use, Jobs would've gone bankrupt trying.

Re:Who cares what Woz thinks?

[king-manic]

He's a clever geek, no doubt but he owes everything to the good fortune of meeting Steve Jobs. Without him Woz would still be a calculator engineer at HP. And frankly I find it difficult to take him seriously when he calls his biography "iWoz" when he had nothing to do with the Mac let alone any of the "i" products. Publicity hungry empty vessel. Who cares what he thinks: he has no particular insight.

Without Woz, jobs would be a sleazy new age religious leader. Without Jobs, Woz would be somewhere in the upper echelon of HP, wasting away his genius on crappy main frames and calculators. without them both meeting Personal computing would be very different. Billy and his gang would have no one to steal ideas from. IBM wouldn't have been panicking and signed their john handcock on a really dumb licensing deal with Billy. Ubiquitous computing may never have happened. And We may all be marveling at how the IBMs new Big Blue 1.0 gzh main frame is just a paltry $500,000, 600 lbs, and comes with 10 gigs of hard drive space because computing never hit it's stride with efficiencies of scale.

don't' over estimate Jobs. He's done well because he's foudn the right people to do the right things and has both vision and business accumen but he didn't do it all alone. dont' under estimate WOZ, a hardware/software genius is hard to find. He wrot ehte OS and designed the hardware. Few can do both.

Re:Who cares what Woz thinks?

[Anonymous Coward]

...and signed their john handcock...

You'll forgive me, sir, if I don't shake hands with you.

I think the turn of phrase you're looking for is this.

Re:Who cares what Woz thinks?

[Anonymous Coward]

Jobs lost it big time in Apple killing the money making Apple II line so that the world would go to his(?) dearer Mac ceding the education market to others.

At Nextstep he attempted to put right what was wrong with the Mac but nobody wanted to enter the RDF.

He came abck to Apple criticised its GUI and waited 4 years until Apple could join the rest of the computer world in the 20th century.

We were in the 21st at the time.

Apple's decline can be put down to having no one to keep Jobs out of the RDF. He was lucky that the two met each other but unlucky in destroying a market because he did not invent the machine. Will he do it again with the iPhone and iPod?

RTFA guys

[Edmund Blackadder]

Ok Apple fanboys, before you start flaming Woz and or biting your nails in despair over having to choose between Jobs and Woz, you should read the entire article.

Woz was not nearly as confrontational as the slashdot summary suggests. Also, the summary combines to quotes from completely different and unrelated parts of the interview which is pretty confusing (no Google has nothing to do with Iphone pricing). Also, Woz said that he thinks that Apple is still more innovative, even though he said all these nice things about innovation at Google.

So yeah, the slashdot summary was very sensationalistic and misleading. So no need to tear down that topless Woz poster from your bedroom wall just yet.

Re:RTFA guys

[stewbacca]

I pick Jobs over Woz because if Apple were run by Woz, it would be another geek-factory, like the rest of the industry, and Apple would have died years ago. But thankfully, Apple is an alternative, and not another choice that would be lost on most geeks. Not that Woz is a bad guy, he's just so obviously into binary, whereas the average human likes to click on pretty icons.

With that said, how can anyone take this lead-in seriously. That was the most disjointed, non-sensical summary of a slashdot article ever. That seems to be the pattern with Apple related stories when some repressed Mac-bashing geek hurries to be the first with his/her lame attempt to flame Apple.

So yeah, nice try, but the reality is that Woz bought 10-grand (plus) in iPhones and spent $200 too much for each one...he is a little miffed, obviously.

TIME OFF? What is Woz talking about?!?

[JonTurner]

>>The fact that they give people time off to work on their own ideas is exactly matches some of the things that made Apple great.

Wait one second here! Are we talking about the same Apple Computer company because the one I know about routinely worked its engineering teams (all the way from the Apple ][gs, Lisa, Macintosh up through Newton) to the point of complete exhaustion and then at various times, during the "Black Friday" purges, suddenly ended people's careers. Frantic system development and high stress was the norm. To attempt to cast it as anything else is pure spin.

Maybe Jobs' Reality Distortion Field is finally affecting The Woz. Or maybe this mythical "time off" applies only to Apple Fellows and the most senior employees.

Re:TIME OFF? What is Woz talking about?!?

[squiggleslash]

In fairness, when Apple was started, it was just three people, one of whom was Woz. Perhaps he's talking about the six months or so it was that?

Re:TIME OFF? What is Woz talking about?!?

[Swift2001]

Anybody remember the price of an Apple II? In Canada, they were over $2000. $1,200 in the States. Maybe Apple should have kept the price right there, and charged about $5,000 for the original Mac. Wait, that's almost what they were in Canada.

Is this who's on top syndrome?

[edwardpickman]

I'm curious about all the Apple bashing? Just look at the posts over the last few days and they have been numerous and by and large very negative. It was a boneheaded move dropping the price that much that quick but given the iPod Touch it was obvious it had to happen when it did. The real point was it was priced too high out of the gate and the drop should have only been a $100. Apple has tried to address this with the store credit. The point is half the whining was about price then after they drop the price steeply the whining shifts to the sudden price drop. Difficult to please much? I guess the biggest remaining complaint is the bundling with the provider but the simple solution is if it bothers you that much don't buy one. Just odd that a company that seems to be catering in some ways to computer and tech fans is getting so blasted. The OS is far more secure and stable than Windows and OSX has a massive potential. Microsoft has chosen "we're the biggest so you'll buy what we offer and like it" approach to customer service. Notice the lack of customer enthusiasm over that stance with Vista. I just say to cut Apple a little slack. It's a first generation product that has a huge potential. Since it's running OSX it's biggest limitations are battery life and chip speed, both are interconnected. It does have the potential to run desktop apps so in three to five years when chip technology catches up they'll be well positioned to take advantage of it. They did that with OSX and got flack for it early on but it turned out to be the right move and now they have a stunning, easy to use OS with lots of power and features Vista can only dream of. Also as I run my spyware software several times a day and deal with disk defragging and such I have to comment on how realitively maintainence free their products tend to be. I built several PC computers a few weeks ago and I'm still trying to iron out the bugs. My Mac I plugged in 18 months ago and I've barely touched it since except to allow updates once a month and install new software. I'm in it for the software not the daily OS fight that is Windows. iPhones are amazing for first generation and they are likely to be radically better in a couple of years. Try to see the price cut as a good thing. Would you be happier if they still cost $600? What if that meant the iPod Touch had to cost $500? Would that make you happier? Change is happening faster than ever so fast price drops shouldn't be seen as an evil empire issue. The had to set prices well before the release of the iPhone and my guess is the memory dropped faster and more than they expected. Obviously the costs wound up being lower than they thought so they passed on the savings and went for a larger market share since they were already set to hit their sales goal. Remember everyone laughing about their goal? No one is laughing now.

Re:Is this who's on top syndrome?

[bentcd]

I'm curious about all the Apple bashing? Apparantly, Apple customers come across as smug bastards and, in a twist of irony, Linux users seem to really really dislike smug bastards. Or perhaps it's just smug bastards from a different camp they dislike, it's a bit unclear. Anyway, this tends to transfer over into any discussion involving Apple regardless of the underlying facts of the matter. The only thing that is holding Slashdot together at the seams is the unsurprising coincident that both smugh Mac-owners and smug Linux-users both harbour an overpowering dislike for Microsoft (which isn't smug, just evil). So long as this tenuous alliance is kept alive with the odd Microsoft-bashing article every now and then, our little community shall prevail! :-)

For the record: I own two Windows boxes, two Linux boxes and one OSX box. I use most of them on a regular basis, for various purposes.

Re:Is this who's on top syndrome?

[zurmikopa]

For the record: I own two Windows boxes, two Linux boxes and one OSX box. I use most of them on a regular basis, for various purposes.

Let me see if I understand correctly. That makes you 3 parts smug and 2 parts evil?

Re:Is this who's on top syndrome?

[bentcd]

Let me see if I understand correctly. That makes you 3 parts smug and 2 parts evil? No, no, no. You clearly do not understand the times we are in. I am a victim, of course. :-)

Re:Is this who's on top syndrome?

[tehcyder]

I'm curious about all the Apple bashing?

And I'm curious that you've never heard of paragraphs.

Woz makes 10 to 100 times what we do

[Anonymous Coward]

Woz makes 10 to 100 times what we do, so he's getting on his high horse for a drop of "20" or "2" dollars. Hardeharhar

Re:Woz makes 10 to 100 times what we do

[ericartman]

Woz is a nice guy, seen him in action. Unlike the current management of Apple, Woz does really care about people. The idea that Apple has changed since its conception seems pretty clear. In the old days working for Apple you could go in on your own time and build whichever Mac you wanted and take it home. Wonder if there is a program for free iPods or iPhones in place these days? LOL. I remember the company wide parties thrown when new products were released, boy those people knew how to throw a classy party. Wonder when the last time Apple stopped everything for the day and threw a party just to thank the employees? Miss the old days. But Woz, yeah he was cool, and some say he was the soul.

Cart

Re:Woz makes 10 to 100 times what we do

[C0rinthian]

Didn't Apple give everyone working for the company a free iPhone at launch?

Re:Woz makes 10 to 100 times what we do

[Fordiman]

When, by the way, did Woz become a whiner?

I'm sorry, but if you're well aware that a hardware vendor's going to drop the price, why would you buy it before then in the first place?

"Oh, I just had to have the latest thing from my Corporate Masters! $600? But a pittance for them!"

To anyone who shelled out a waste of $200 for a locked-in phone: You paid $200 for a few months of being pseudo-elite. The remaining $400 is the cost of the phone. Don't like it? Be more fucking patient next time; apparently your useless elite status isn't worth quite as much as you thought.

Re:Woz makes 10 to 100 times what we do

[buckhead_buddy]

Apple _promised_ all of the employees a free iPhone at launch; they didn't receive one at launch.

I recall two weeks after launch one Apple employee still hadn't received hers and we were teasing her that as soon as they had enough to "refurbish" then the employees would be getting theirs. What sort of amazed me were her stories of the number of Apple employees who couldn't wait for their free phones and went out and bought a new one. I guess the free one will be for Christmas presents or something.

The price drop was probably pretty hard psychologically on the Apple employees.

Re:Woz makes 10 to 100 times what we do

[ksheff]

The price drop was probably pretty hard psychologically on the Apple employees.

Only if they intended to sell their employee perk to the highest bidder.

Woz vs. Gates

[JonTurner]

Let me put this into perspective:

Woz designed the Apple ][ from scratch, invented the A][ hard drive controller, wrote the system monitor in machine code (without the aid of an assember, mind you!) as well as the Integer Basic interpreter and did this at least twice (he lost the source code) and it was several bytes smaller the second time, etc. etc. etc.

Gates, Davidoff and Allen as a team gave us a hacked version of someone else's basic interpreter. Gates gave us donkey.bas

I rest my case.

Re:Woz vs. Gates

[clickclickdrone]

Not /quite/ in the same league but Doug Neubauer wrote most of the seminal Atari 8bit game Star Raiders before the hardware existed. He worked from chip designs (one of which he helped design) and built a 3D game with sprites, multiple screens etc that fitted a single 8K cartridge back in 1979. Most impressively, he claims that the 80% done version pretty much compiled fine first time once he got real hardware to try it on.

Re:Woz vs. Gates

[rs79]

You know, back in the day (70s) gates published code in dr. dobbs documenting undocumented Z-80 instructions. Woz just made $2500 computers that those of us with s-100 systems found rather irrelevant. Gates built his own machine but had no interest in selling hardware, just software, which I kinda wish Apple had done.

Point is, back then Gates seemed like a fellow hacked and woz was just one of 100 guys that started a computer company and did all the hardware design.

I can't say I'm real impressed at having written machine code or done a (very non-statndard) disk controller. We all did that back then.

The first x86 on the net was an S-100 system running Gates Xenix in LA (gryphon.com). I don't think an Apple II ever talked to the network.

Obviously I'm not talking about now. Woz is cool, Bill is not. But that's not how it looked back then. The Apple II was regarded by people that already HAD a computer as a toy not worthy of much of anything and never understood what the fuss was all about. I think the reverance of Woz was strictly by people whose first computer was an Apple.

In a world without Apple there were still lots of choices and I have a greater revernce for say, Jay Miner than Woz. But if Apple hed nevr existed I'm not sure the landscape now would have changed much. Again, much as I hate to say it, MS drove the market and was responsible for the advent of cheap usable computers even your grandmother could use.

Let me be clear, I loathe gates and ms. But if you strip the emotion away gates has done more to get us where we are then woz ever did.

You may now mod me down to "-5, asshole". But you know I'm right. And don't worry it pains me as much to write this as it does you to read it.

Re:Woz vs. Gates

[not-quite-rite]

That is an awesome post. Good to see something so clearly written, and contains "non-mainstream" computer history.

Kudos

Re:Woz vs. Gates

[clickclickdrone]

Hmmm, not so sure Gates was ever cool, even back then. His Dr Dobbs article early on where he argued people should *gasp* buy software went down like a lead balloon at the time. You're right though about the number of people doing really funky stuff with hard/software on their own.

Re:Woz vs. Gates

[Ilgaz]

Not /quite/ in the same league but Doug Neubauer wrote most of the seminal Atari 8bit game Star Raiders before the hardware existed. He worked from chip designs (one of which he helped design) and built a 3D game with sprites, multiple screens etc that fitted a single 8K cartridge back in 1979. Most impressively, he claims that the 80% done version pretty much compiled fine first time once he got real hardware to try it on. I better add that one Atari 800XL game developer couldn't get his money from game publishing house for his legendary game, he happily gave up game developing and went straight to code B2 Stealth Bomber all by himself. Yes, not a "game", the actual bomber itself.

That could give a clue about the developer/engineer qualities you need to release a working desktop machine those times and why people listen when a engineer like Woz speaks.

Re:Woz vs. Gates

[rs79]

"His Dr Dobbs article early on where he argued people should *gasp* buy software went down like a lead balloon at the time. "

Yeah. And every time an open source project complains about being broke or folds from lack or money, keep this in mind.

Balance in all things. At one end of the spectrum we have free software with no ("vendor") support and at the other end we have pay for software with pay for support. I sorta wonder where the compromise exists. Free software with pay for support?

I dunno. I don't think anybody else does either. As a user of free software who doesn't need any support I appreciate this model. But as a programmer, ya know, what am I supposed to do, shovel shit to pay the rent and iove away what I've in at least one case spent 14 years writing?

sales slowing

[sylverboss]

this is probably due to: - sales slowing down - and re-launching the brand good job, Steve, iPhone is still hot stuff :)

Re:Well at least the Lisa owners got a store credi

[Cafe Alpha]

Ah. Didn't look closely at the page.

Anyone

[edittard]

Anyone else read "cofounder" as "confounder"?

Re:Shut up Woz

[tgatliff]

He undeniably "was" a great engineer... Unlike Jobs, he gave up real work along time ago.... Besides, an engineer voicing his opinions on individual product prices is like a business person voicing his opinion on the design of the product. He has no damn idea what he is talking about, and is simply showing his ignorance by talking about it...

Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[Viol8]

Here we go again with the Woz-n-Steve show with all the mythology about how they revolutionised computers.

Err no , they didn't. At least not from a technological point of view. Xerox PARC did.

Check out this link if you don't believe me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto

That was 1973 , long before Woz had even thought up the prehistoric command line drive Apple I.

Sorry , how great was Woz again?

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[LKM]

I don't even quite understand what you're trying to say. What exactly did Xerox revolutionize "from a technological point of view"? Did they make PCs mainstream? Did they create a UI that everyone can use?

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[73]

> I don't even quite understand what you're trying to say. What exactly did Xerox revolutionize "from a technological point of view"? Did they make PCs mainstream? Did they create a UI that everyone can use?

Ok, so now ENGINEERING talent is all about marketing? What about who INVENTED it all? Sure PARC blew it when it came to marketing what they came up with, but they were a research center not a business incubator.

Back on Topic: The more Woz opens his mouth the more he looks like a whiny rich kid.

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[Viol8]

"I don't even quite understand what you're trying to say"

Shall I draw it in crayon for you?

"Did they make PCs mainstream?"

Wtf has the PC got to do with a technological revolution??? The thing was old tech when IBM brought it out!

"Did they create a UI that everyone can use?"

Yes actually. They invented it you moron. Apple simply used their ideas.

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[LKM]

Ok, so now ENGINEERING talent is all about marketing?

A few engineers inventing a new UI does not a revolution make.

What about who INVENTED it all?

You think Xerox invented the Lisa's UI? Have you even ever seen the Alto's UI?

I know "Apple stole it all from Xerox" is a popular idea for Microsoft apologists. After all, if Apple copied it all, it can't be too bad that Microsoft did the same. Except Apple didn't actually take that many ideas from Xerox. The simple fact is that the original Lisa and Mac teams had some of the best UI designers. People like Jef Raskin were on that team. They took ideas from Xerox, sure, but the Mac's UI is a new, original take on a graphical user interface, and not a copy of a Xerox UI.

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[LKM]

Well, I would encourage you to do three things: First, stop being such an ass. Second, try learning about punctuation. And third, go have a look at an actual Xerox Alto. You might be astonished to find out that it looks nothing at all like the Lisa's UI. It's graphical, yes. It's not, however, "a UI that everyone can use."

So thanks for calling me a moron, but I actually suspect the person with a lack of knowledge is you, not me. Have a nice day, uninformed asshat.

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[Viol8]

Whoa , you're really firing on all cylinders with that punctuation comeback.

The Alto UI had all the features of a modern GUI - desktop metaphor, windows , icons and a mouse all on a bitmapped display. I'm not entirely sure what else you want? Ok , it had tiled windows not overlays , BFD.

"It's not, however, "a UI that everyone can use."

Right , and I guess no one could use Windows 2, GEM or the original X windows system either? Anyone not mentally retarded could have used the Alto if it had been available at the time.

"Have a nice day, uninformed asshat."

Yeah , whatever.

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[Goldarn]

The Alto UI had all the features of a modern GUI - desktop metaphor, windows , icons and a mouse all on a bitmapped display. I'm not entirely sure what else you want? Ok , it had tiled windows not overlays , BFD. And a chariot had all the features of a modern automobile: wheels, a place for the driver, and a power source in the front.

So, it needed a few tweaks -- that hardly made the Model T revolutionary.

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[Viol8]

If you think the "modern" computer arrived with the Mac I guess you never tried using a 1984 128K version.

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[Goldarn]

Hey, the 1984 Mac had a desktop metaphor, windows, icons, and a mouse, all on a bitmapped display. I'm not entirely sure what else you want.

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[Swift2001]

Apparently, he wants a "Start" menu on the bottom left, at which point computing began.

Re:Bullshit. Xerox PARC gave us todays computers.

[LWATCDR]

Yes they did create a UI that everyone does use. PARC pretty much invented the GUI as we all know it. They also invented Ethernet, laser printers, and some claim object oriented programming.
So yea they revolutionized how we use computers.
AT&T also revolutionized how we use computers. MS-DOS 2.0+ was really a very weak copy of Unix tacked on to a copy of CP/M

And what about the vasectomy guy?

[denzacar]

And what about the guy who went through vasectomy to get his iPhone? http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_6552323

Will he get one of his balls back with his discount coupon?

Re:And what about the vasectomy guy?

[Anonymous Coward]

A vasectomy is not the same as neutering.

Re:And what about the vasectomy guy?

[denzacar]

And a trollific comment on a obvious joke is not insightful or really that smart.

But I guess you already know that - posting as AC and all...

Grammar check!

[smithcl8]

What did that editor use to check the spelling and grammar in that article? That was almost as hard to read as the average Slashdot post!

Quit complaining and take some responsibility!

[Lethyos]

To the whiners about the price drop: I see no rational reason for you to be upset. You are early adopters and you evidently decided favorably to the value proposition of the iPhone. People who complain about a price-cut being a bad thing simply amaze me: they are pinning their own impatience, foolishness, or buyers remorse on someone else. If you feel cheated, take some personal responsibility and accept that if you did not like the price, you should not have made the purchase! When prices are lowered, it is almost always a good thing (there are exceptions for undercutting and subsidized goods, but I digress), and in this case, it is likely in response to market forces. That is how capitalism is meant to work. All of that is neglecting the fact that analyses of the manufacturing costs revealed huge margins for Apple almost immediately after the release (and reported on again, and again, and again). To the people who are complaining, you should make sure you understand caveat emptor before you plunk down over half a grand for a cell phone, especially since many—if not most—of you had all the facts available up-front. And in the interest of full disclosure, I do own an iPhone and made my purchase shortly after Apple subsidized my $200 early termination fee to Sprint. In closure, thank you for the price-cut, Steve!

Boo hoo

[massysett]

Woz bought TWENTY iPhones? So he spent twelve thousand ($12,000!!) on phones as gifts, and now he is complaining that the price has dropped $200 and he can't get his instant refund? I knew the price drop would spark complaining, but a rich guy who spent twelve thousand dollars on phones is complaining? I don't feel sorry for anybody who willingly paid $600 for a frilly gadget, but a rich man buying twenty phones inspires the LEAST sympathy.

Woz, Gates or neither of them?

[LKM]

But if Apple hed nevr existed I'm not sure the landscape now would have changed much. Again, much as I hate to say it, MS drove the market and was responsible for the advent of cheap usable computers even your grandmother could use.

I believe that without Apple, our user interfaces would look substantially different. I mean, try this: Get the latest Ubuntu Live CD and boot it. Now compare this to the UI of the Apple Lisa. Not a whole lot of differences! You got your overlapping windows that you move by dragging the title and resize by dragging the bottom right corner, your dropdown text menus with keyboard shortcuts, your trash can, your icons for files and applications with names below them... Apple actually came up with, or made popular, a great number of the UI abstrations we take for granted nowadays...

Microsoft actually went into a quite different direction with Windows 3.x, but "came back" to the Lisa/Macintosh way with Windows 95. Nowadays, most computers work like Lisas... So, in a way, it was neither Woz nor Gates who actually influenced computers. It was Jobs, who was part of (or leading) both the Lisa and the Mac team at Apple.

Re:Woz, Gates or neither of them?

[mdwh2]

Apple actually came up with, or made popular, a great number of the UI abstrations we take for granted nowadays...

Ah but which is it - came up with, or made popular?

Yes, they did come up with a few things which weren't developed by Xerox (though lots of little improvements to the GUI were developed by different companies over time). But "made popular"? For that, the grandparent's points still stand. If they were pre-existing concepts, they still would have existed if Apple hadn't been around. By the time Windows 95 came around, there were loads of other operating systems that had also popularised these concepts. And, as much as I hate to say it, it is Windows that has popularised the GUI, in that it is by far what most people first used. Popularity isn't really a good measure here.

Re:Woz, Gates or neither of them?

[LKM]

Ah but which is it - came up with, or made popular?

A lot of both.

People always seem to think that Xerox had a finished Mac in its lab. Apple simply went in, took a look, and copied it wholesale. Not the case. Xerox's system was very, very different from the Lisa and the Mac.

Re:Woz, Gates or neither of them?

[rs79]

" I believe that without Apple, our user interfaces would look substantially different. I mean, try this: Get the latest Ubuntu Live CD and boot it. Now compare this to the UI of the Apple Lisa. "

The Lisa "borrowed heavily" from the Xerox Star, the hardware for which was done in Palo Alto and the software in El Segundo.
Bitmapped graphics, mice, icons are what made the Star what it was (never mind Xerox couldn't and bever has had a commercially viable product).

Do you really believe if Apple hadn't copied from this heavily then we'd never have got where we are now? Nonsense. In the day X windows and Sun's NeWS (much nicer than X, too bad it died, it would have fixed a LOT of problems with the web today) also copies the Xerox paradigm.

You could buy Apollo computers that used these before the Lisa came out.

Iconic interfaces are a time saving tool. I contend we would have ended up here anyway even if Apple had never existed.

Apple just made the fitst consumer level device that did this, before it was just industrial grade (Sun, Apollo) "workstations" that had this and were very very expensive. But good ideas have a way of being adopted no matter what.

Re:Woz, Gates or neither of them?

[mdwh2]

Oh I know, but my point is that it's the "came up with" that's important here, not "made popular". By all means give credit for what Apple came up with first - but it's hard to know what they did come up with first, because you usually only hear from people who seem to think that Apple created the GUI as a whole (or people who only ever go on about "Apple made it popular").

As I say, other operating systems followed quickly after Apple, each introducing new bits here and there.

Re:Woz, Gates or neither of them?

[LKM]

Oh I know, but my point is that it's the "came up with" that's important here, not "made popular".

I would argue that both are equally important - without coming up with stuff, you have nothing to make popular, and stuff you come up with and don't make popular is basically worthless. Either way, Apple did a lot of both. Maybe more of the "making popular" than the "coming up with," but they definitely originated a lot of the concepts that we still use to this day.

By all means give credit for what Apple came up with first - but it's hard to know what they did come up with first, because you usually only hear from people who seem to think that Apple created the GUI as a whole (or people who only ever go on about "Apple made it popular").

I think if you take a Lisa or an original Mac and subtract everything that is also in the Xerox systems, you get a pretty good idea of what Apple came up with.

Here's a screenshot of the Alto (if the link doesn't work, googling for images of xerox alto returns a bunch of screenshots). Doesn't look a whole lot like a modern Windows, Mac or Linux system. Here's the Lisa. The parallels to modern systems are very, very obvious.

As I say, other operating systems followed quickly after Apple, each introducing new bits here and there.

Sure, everyone contributed, and everyone copied. All I'm saying is that the people who claim that Apple copied Xerox wholesale and added nothing are wrong. Of all the companies involved, Apple probably contributed most of the concepts we use in today's grahical computer user interfaces.

Re:Woz, Gates or neither of them?

[LKM]

" I believe that without Apple, our user interfaces would look substantially different. I mean, try this: Get the latest Ubuntu Live CD and boot it. Now compare this to the UI of the Apple Lisa. " The Lisa "borrowed heavily" from the Xerox Star, the hardware for which was done in Palo Alto and the software in El Segundo. Bitmapped graphics, mice, icons are what made the Star what it was (never mind Xerox couldn't and bever has had a commercially viable product).

First of all, Apple was already working on a graphical user interface before they visited Xerox, so they already had stuff like the mouse and bitmapped graphics, and probably some kind of windowing system. Second, I never disputed that Apple took ideas from Xerox. I simply dispute that they copied Xerox's system wholesale and sold it as their own. As I already wrote, you only have to compare screenshots to figure this out.

Do you really believe if Apple hadn't copied from this heavily then we'd never have got where we are now?

Straw man. I never said anything like this. Just the opposite: I don't

Iconic interfaces are a time saving tool. I contend we would have ended up here anyway even if Apple had never existed.

Oh, yeah, we would have some kind of graphical user interface. Just probably a very different one - whether it would be better or not, nobody can say :-)

Oh, and Bruce Horn and Andy Hertzfeld wrote essays about this on folklore.org.

Re:Woz, Gates or neither of them?

[rs79]

Forget the alto, that was a research prototype (or something). You need to look at the Xerox star and compare that to modern interfaces.

Xerox actually sold a small number of Star systems in the US and Japan, where it was called the Jstar.

Slashdot contributors suck

[stewbacca]

That is the product of another horrible slashdot contributor's summary. In fact, the Google part has nothing to do with the iPhone, but in the true spirit of being an Apple-bashing slashdot nerd, this guy decided he wanted to be first to attack Apple with a completely out-of-context summary. I'm beginning to think it is time for me to move on to something else...anything good over on Digg?

A grain of truth

[palladiate]

First adopters are idiots who'll pay to show they can afford the latest and greatest gadgets. Businesses are perfectly aware of this and quite rightly take fool advantage of them.

You miss a point. This means that businesses are generally very aware that even if a customer is an idiot, he's an idiot who is willing to give you their money. And if you make the customer feel like an idiot for buying the latest gadgets, they'll stop doing it. There may be some schadenfreude in it for people like you, but this wasn't a great business decision, period.

Woz's geek handler takes vacation...

[Gary W. Longsine]

... and another stupid Woz story results. Can't the guy get a second geek handler to keep him from looking like a dope every time the first one gets a cold or something?

How about some facts in our headlines?

[skia]

"Apple Legend" or "Embarrassing Uncle You Hope Doesn't Stop By When You're Entertaining Guests"?

I know I made up my mind years ago (he's EUYHDSBWYEG, all the way), but why even troll for debate? Why not report facts instead of contentious, emotionally loaded rhetoric? Would this post be harmed in any way if the headline read "Apple Co-Founder Woz Blasts iPhone Price Drop"?

ok

[nomadic]

'Everyone expects technology to drop in price. The first adopters always pay a premium. I am one of them. I am used to that.

See? He's willing to face the financial hurt to enjoy the benefits of being an early adopter. I mean, $200 isn't really that much to me, but Woz has been out of a job for a long time, so that $200 really does hurt.

wiit a minute

[Anonymous Coward]

Really, what do you call the wii then...utter failure?

It was over SIX MONTHS before I saw a system sitting in a store that I could buy. You know, walk in a store, get someone to unlock the case, put it in my cart, that kind of buy.

I didn't camp out at any electronics stores before opening or check some internet tracking site just so I could slip out of work to run over to whatever store *might* have one or pay half a grand for some tripe "bundle" with games and accessories I didn't want or worse yet just plain overpay to some scalper that probably is one of those stores employees.

The Prince

[FrizzleFrylok]

I'm not a big Apple guy; in fact I look at any product with a lower-case i in front of it with disdain. But...this move is pure Machiavellian business sense. While other companies are on the cusp of offering up their answer to the iPhone, Apple just threw their production pricing (& resulting profit margin) for a loop. Apple was able to reap that extra profit margin for two months, but their soon-to-be competitors, who may have been hoping for at least a 4 to 6 month stretch at the current market price, are probably stunned.

Pot, kettle.

[hotsauce]

You seem to enjoy your overpriced mode of transportation, so why not let others enjoy their phones and watches?

Re:Pot, kettle.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. The Jeep Wrangler, starting at $18,610. What a luxury item.

Driving is not flaunting

[SuperKendall]

Flaunting the ability to buy an engineering marvel, at any cost is a status symbol.

That may be your impression, but as stated he would just buy it because it was fun and so your impression is irrelevant to the actual choice he is making. As for "flaunting" since sedans all look alike anyway just the outward presence of it is hardly "flaunting"...

And a $200 item is a luxury item in most of the US.

Sneakers, TV's, game consoles, snowboards, heck even the iPod itself - the list of mass market items that cost just as much but sell into the tens or hundreds of millions is nigh endless. Even for people that make just $50k a year. Almost anyone can afford at least a few cool things if you budget right (or decide you need to make more to pay for what you want).

For starters it helps not to be jealous of those that are rich, but aspire to that situation yourself...

Re:Driving is not flaunting

[Grimbleton]

$50k a year? Heck, I made about $25k the last three years combined and still had enough to get all the latest-gen consoles and a 37" HDLCD, on top of all my other "toys". It's all about which corners you cut. (Shopping at Aldi for groceries as opposed to going to Giant Eagle, $30-40 New Balance shoes when an old pair wears through, new clothes from WalMart, clipping every coupon you see etc.) Of course, splitting the bills with my fiancee also helps, but hey. (21, working on a Bachelor's, unemployed and living on school loans while classes are in session)

Re:Driving is not flaunting

[pnutjam]

I'm not trying to come off as jealous, it just strikes me as odd that some people don't understand what a status symbol is. Certain things are a status symbol whether you like it or not. A luxury car is a status symbol whether you purchased it for that or not. The list of "mass market" items you provided are status symbols. Just because you, I, and others in our income bracket can afford these things doesn't mean they are an easy purchase for everyone.

I do aspire to better myself financially, and my income has increased substantially in the past few years. I'm doing very well thank you. I just don't see people's obsession with toys and trinkets that depreciate.
They are nice, but most people can't really afford them even if they have the cash in their pocket (hint, that cash is probably borrowed and many people have a negative net worth).

Let's do two simple calculation.

1. cost per hour of device
($60,000/52)/40 roughly equals 28.84, this means a $200 item costs you just shy of 7 hours of pre-tax work. Almost a day of your life.

2. percentage of your emergency fund (emergency fund should be 2-3 months of income)
($60,000/12)*3 = $15,000 so $200 is only about 1.3%
($60,000/12)*2 = $10,000 so $200 is an even 2%

Most people don't have this kind of money in their emergency fund so they are buying luxury items with the money they should be using to insure their future.

Vast difference

[SuperKendall]

Rolex is a true luxury, there are any number of devices that can provide exactly the same functionality, in a less impressive package. You are wholly paying for the "time casing" and the name.

In the case of the iPhone, there are no other phones that do what it does - period. Frankly I would have been happy to pay $1k for the phone, because I plan to use it for many many years and I like having a phone I don't hate. A phone is the one thing I have to carry every day. You wouldn't wear clothes you hate every day, that actually made you uncomfortable, so why should it be the same with a phone.

Other people can be happy wiht other phones and that is great, but realize there are those of us (and they are most of us) that use an iPhone because of what it can do, not what other people think about it.

Re:The iPhone isn't the same as other Apple produc

[clayanderson]

Oh come on. Do you really, seriously believe that this price-drop was not the plan from day one? And that AT&T was not fully aware and approving of the plan?

Apple wants marketshare. You can't get marketshare with a $600 phone. But, you can't keep up with initial demand with a $200 phone. (Yes, there's also a short-lived sense of exclusivity offered to the early adopters who pay the $600 price.) So, Apple prices high, fills initial demand, then as soon as demand starts to drop, they drop the price, and demand spikes back up. Wouldn't be surprised if they drop it again ($300? $250?) sometime in '08. As with most phones, the real money is made in the plan, not the phone. (Give away the razor, sell the blades. Give away the printer, sell the ink.)

And because of that, I guarantee you that AT&T is part and parcel in all pricing decisions, for as long as their contract with Apple is in effect.

Re:Well at least the Lisa owners got a store credi

[put_the_cat_out]

How in the world does a comment that simply is an external link get modded funny? Sure, the link may be funny, but the poster didn't bother with any commentary. Aren't we supposed to be rating the comments? Rating the links makes the whole system next to useless. $0.02

Wow

[Neko_D]

This is a most amusing article

Just leave WoZ alone!!!

[micromuncher]

In the words of Chris Crocker.

Re:The iPhone isn't the same as other Apple produc

[Alomex]

Do you really, seriously believe that this price-drop was not the plan from day one?

Absolutely. There is no indication that a price drop of this magnitude was in the cards. If you look at the iPod history, the top of the line iPod remained at the same price (or nearly so) for quite a while. The price "reduction" was in the form of higher capacity. This $200 drop is unprecedented and as far as I can see it can only be due to one of two choices, not necessarily mutually exclusive: (1) the iPhones were not selling as fast as expected and (2) the revenues from usage (yes, AT&T agreed to give Apple a portion of monthly billings) proved far higher than expected, hence a reduction in price in exchange from more monthly revenue would make sense.

It's about time they got all up in it

[rholland356]

I think this outrage is long overdue!

Consider that Google Video dropped its $1.99/view video service, and offered $2 credit at the Google checkout, and the industry and users unleashed scathing commentary, forcing Google to restore the PPV service for 6 months, and fully refund the cash.

Apple does it 100 times greater and the fanboys just accepted it. Until now, rallying around Woz's battle cry, which is, ironically, "I wish Apple were more like Google!"

Woz, Woz, Woz

[Swift2001]

Woz made a big deal of standing in line for an iPhone -- but he gave himself tickets 1 through 9, even though lot of people arrived before him. Woz is, or was, a brilliant engineer, and a lot of fun at a party. But I think his understanding of pricing and business is not his strong suit. And what the sudden price drop was a sign of was a VERY successful launch. Why the hell should Apple apologize for a successful launch? Shut up, rich fanboys, and pocket your $100 credit. You know you're going to spend it, you do. Leopard's coming out soon. Don't you want Leopard for $29? You know you do. Why, the Dock is 3-D, and it's got blue folders. It's 64-bit, through and through. And the menu bar takes on the color of the desktop. Cool! Jobs gave you money, to apologize to you that you're a bunch of rich spoiled brats who got to sit out front of the Apple store with all your rich buddies! "B-But Steve must have known he was bilking us!" Well, he hoped he was. He hoped that he would have a very successful launch and be able to drop the price substantially by Christmas, and thanks to your wallets, he could! And thanks to the still-growing sales, he could offer you $100 in credit. This is supposed to make you feel warm and fuzzy. You have a place in the Apple community. You are our shock troops. Steve makes something, you buy! Okay, some of you get whatever glitch there is in the early software. Some of you find yourselves in possession of bad phones, and a new one is given to you. This is your function within the Apple community. You spend money for our sins, and we are saved. Did Jesus start whining, "Ow! Those nails really hurt!"

Re:Woz, Woz, Woz

[SteveWoz]

who's whining?

I was asked what I thought about the price drop. I had to be honest and tell what tons of people, including many industry analysts, said when it occured. Apple has said the same thing, that the price drop was too much too fast. Steve Jobs apologized for it. Apple recinded to the tune of $100 store credit faster than new Coke was pulled. There's very little to debate here. I'm on the same side as Apple and Steve Jobs.

Re:Woz, Woz, Woz

[Reality Master 101]

Steve Jobs apologized for it. Apple recinded to the tune of $100 store credit faster than new Coke was pulled. There's very little to debate here. I'm on the same side as Apple and Steve Jobs.

Well, you appear to be on the side that it was an unethical move by Apple. You know him better than I do, but I don't get the impression that Steve Jobs woke up one morning and said to himself, "Good God! I see the error of my ways! I did a wrong, and I need to make it right!"

I more get the impression that he woke up one morning to a P.R. disaster, and decided to write a check to calm the firestorm.

By the way! Speaking of the iPhone, you replied to a post of mine about how I had set my old digital watch to the Telephone Time, and it ended up being way off. You then made a comment about how accurate time is available to everyone in the age of cell phones.

Well, I just bought a clock that sets itself automatically to WWV, and guess what? The good ol' iPhone via AT&T is 11 seconds off. Even in 2007, you STILL can't trust the phone company to have the right time! :D

What I don't understand is how it could possibly be off in the age of self-setting time daemons.

What about the $100 refund?

[Dasher42]

I'm just really surprised to see so much talk about a $200 price drop and so little mention of the $100 refund Apple offered previous iPhone buyers (link here). Can you really make a fair assessment of the subject without mentioning that fact?

Given the high levels of demand for the iPhone, I think the initial price was justified. I could barely avoid the stampede in the Apple store where I was taking in my heavily used laptop in for repair, the day it was launched. The early iPhone adopters I know, once they've weighed things, are happy campers.

In short, I don't think it's worth your time to bitch about this!

Wow calm down... do the math

[Jahz]

This thread has a level of trolling rarely seen. Way beyond the normal fanboy vs anti-fanboy crap. The iPhone is at least "good." Admit that and then criticize and nitpick if you want. Starting arguments by calling it a worthless piece of crap just shows people that you're a very angry troll and that your post is safe to skip. I have an iPhone... my sister doesn't want an iPhone but wants (for some reason) a smart phone. She said it was too hard to use. I gave it to her last weekend to play with and she figured out *almost* everything on her own. She still doesn't want one, but since we need to get her a phone regardless, I did the math for her:

We're AT&T customers. She needs more text messages than 200 (around 400 would work). She also needs data.

Including AT&T new customer / upgrade discounts, mail-in rebates, etc, the prices for the phones are:
BlackBerry Pearl: $99.99
BlackBerry 8700: $200
Treo 750: $249
BlackBerry 8800: $300
iPhone 8GB: $399

iPhone is the most expensive choice, right? Not so fast. Add in the annual data and text message charges, you get:

All blackberry models:
Monthly:
BB Internet Service Plan: $29.99
200 text/unlim M2M: $9.99

Annually:
Text: $119.88 (200+unlim/mo)
Data: $359.88
TOTAL: $479.76/yr

Treo 750:
Monthly:
PDA Personal Plan MAX: $39.99 (inc 1500 text & web)

Annually:
Data/Text: $479.88
TOTAL: $479.88 /yr

iPhone 8GB
Monthly:
200 text: free
200 more texts: $4.99
Data: $20

Annually:
Text: $71.88
Data: $240
TOTAL: $299.88 /yr

Now multiply out the first year of costs, including phone purchase price, data and text:
BB Pearl: $579.75
BB 8700c: $679.76
iPhone: $698.88
Treo 750: $728.88
BB 8800: $779.76

Wow! Surprise, after the 1 year basic costs necessary to use the internet with your smart phone, iPhone is just average cost! But wait, contract length for some of these is 2 years. Even if it weren't, who spends $250 or $300 on a phone that they'll only use for a year? So lets add another year to the cost analysis:

Two-year cost of phones, including purchase price, monthly data, monthly text:
iPhone: $998.76
BB Pearl: $1059.51
BB 8700c: $1159.52
Treo 750: $1208.76
BB 8800: $1259.52

Oh wow! Looks like in the long run, the iPhone is cheaper than other popular comparable options! If you don't text at all, you can remove the text message options, but it doesn't make a difference in the ordering.

STOP THE BITCHING ABOUT HOW EXPENSIVE IT IS!!
iPhone has high UP-FRONT cost, but reasonable and sometimes even CHEAP long-term costs because of it's inclusive plan!

Re:Wow calm down... do the math

[Emetophobe]

Sorry, but I find it extremely hard to trust your numbers as you don't even cite one source. Also, you aren't showing the full picture (where's voice charges?!). Give me a full picture with voice calls and I will be more inclined to believe you.

Go to AT&T's iphone website and click on "Activation/Plans/Services" at the bottom.

The cheapest contract is $59.99/month price, you get 450 minutes, 200 text SMS messages, unlimited data and 5000 night/weekend minutes. For $79.99/month you get 900 minutes, 200 text messages, unlimited data and unlimited night/weekend minutes. This goes all the way up to $219.99/month for 6000 minutes, 200 text messages, unlimited data and unlimited night/weekend minutes. Also, you can pay an additional $10/month for 1500 text messages (instead of 200) or $20/month for unlimited text messages.

Now find comparable plans for the Treo, BlackBerry, etc.. and compare them using those real figures and then I'll be impressed. From what I've seen, the iPhone isn't the most expensive, but it's definitely not the cheapest either.

Also, most of the plans you're comparing aren't even fair comparisons. A lot of them have 1500 text/SMS messages, but you're only using the 200 message plan for the iphone? Atleast add the additional $10/month for 1500 text messages to the iphone plan to make it a bit more even. You mentioned 200 additional messages for $4.99/mo with the iphone, but from what I've read, that only covers direct AT&T to AT&T messages, but I could be wrong.

Text: $71.88
Data: $240
TOTAL: $299.88 /yr

How does $71.88 + $240 equal $299.88 and not $311.88? I hope all these mistakes were just honest mistakes and not a result of you purposefully modifying the results.

Re:Wow calm down... do the math

[Jahz]

you don't even cite one source. All of the numbers are from the AT&T website. Why must I cite AT&T's website when all I talk about is AT&T rates?? I thought it was common sense.

Give me a full picture with voice calls and I will be more inclined to believe you. Then believe me... because I did account for voice.

I left out explicit voice prices because it doesn't really matter. Everybody needs a voice plan to suit their own needs. The cheapest non-iPhone voice plan is $40/month and does not include any data or text messages. The iPhone plan is $60/month and includes the same terms as the $40/month plan WITH ADDITIONAL unlimited data and 200 texts added. Therefore, I just wrote the iphone data plan as $20/month (since $60-$40 = $20). So as you can see, I did account for voice. Does that clarify it for you?

The data plans chosen are the cheapest ones you can get that provide unlimited data and qualify for all rebates. Phone prices (and plans) all meet the rules for getting all of the available AT&T rebates, and the phone prices listed reflect cost after rebates.

Also, most of the plans you're comparing aren't even fair comparisons. A lot of them have 1500 text/SMS messages, but you're only using the 200 message plan for the iphone? That is irrelevant. I've included the cheapest possible way to meet the minimum of service defined at the start of my original post. That means that if the Treo plan includes 1500 text messages, but I only need 200... well then 1300 will be wasted. There isn't any option to remove the 1500 messages, so it's fair game to include in the comparison. It DEFINITELY doesn't mean that I have to upgrade all other plans to have 1500 message when I only want 200!

Note that I said that based on a year of past bills, I needed 400 texts. Further note that if you remove the text plans, the conclusion doesn't change much at all.

You mentioned 200 additional messages for $4.99/mo with the iphone, but from what I've read, that only covers direct AT&T to AT&T messages, but I could be wrong. Yes you are wrong. But it is understandable because I had to ask an AT&T person about this option. The $4.99/mo plan includes 200 general text messages. The $9.99/month plan includes 200 general text messages and unlimited AT&T network text messages. Remember, the goal was to get to 400 test messages as fast as possible. In my case, upon profiling past bills, it became apparent that less than 200 texts per month went off at&t's network (our of 350-400 total). Now if you only messaged to non-AT&T customers, you'd have to pay much more, so it would make the iPhone even cheaper! This is because the iPhone has 200 general text messages free and you can pay $4.99 for 200 more general messages. Without the 200 free, to make 400 off-network texts you need the $19.99/month plan!!! WOW!

How does $71.88 + $240 equal $299.88 and not $311.88? I hope all these mistakes were just honest mistakes and not a result of you purposefully modifying the results. The $71+$240 thing was indeed an accident. However it doesn't change the conclusion at all because the iPhone is much more than $24 (over 2 years) less than the others.

Rebate information is here: http://www.wireless.att.com/global/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/MIR_NAT_Device_110307.pdf

Next time you feel like making unbiased claims, do the research. Just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it isn't true!

Re:Wow calm down... do the math

[Emetophobe]

Thank you for clearing things up. I've never owned an iphone or a cellphone, so I don't really know how things work. I was pretty skeptical with your original comparison as it seemed you were showing an iphone bias. Again, thanks for replying and I'm sorry if I had to question your comparison, that's just my nature to question anyone who doesn't show sources.

Re:Wow calm down... do the math

[Jahz]

Thank you for clearing things up. I've never owned an iphone or a cellphone, so I don't really know how things work. I was pretty skeptical with your original comparison as it seemed you were showing an iphone bias. Again, thanks for replying and I'm sorry if I had to question your comparison, that's just my nature to question anyone who doesn't show sources. No problem. :-)

Topless Woz Posters!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

So no need to tear down that topless Woz poster from your bedroom wall just yet.

So....ummm... Where would one see about obtaining one of these posters?

$100 Apple store credit

[Anonymous Coward]

which still leaves most Apple hardware in the "ridiculous" price range.

Just remember what happened to Apple

[Infonaut]

The thinking over at Google is very much like early Apple days.

Google may be following in Apple's footsteps a bit more closely than it should. Maybe Woz is forgetting what happened to Apple after those heady early days. The company went through a long, painful slide through the 1990s.

Any questions?

[FriedDylan]

Any questions left over on why Woz and Steve don't play together in the garage anymore?

if not Woz then who

[moankey]

If Woz cant get a refund or even special treatment re: his refund on 20 iPhones what chance does the average Joe on special circumstances.
Guess being one of the founders and creator of the first Apple PC doesnt get you much respect in a corporate Apple world.

Re:if not Woz then who

[stewbacca]

What makes you think he paid anywhere near the full retail price in the first place (unless it says so in TFA, but of course I didn't read it).

You thought $600 was fair

[Cajun Hell]

But Wozniak complained that he has bought some iPhones

There you go, Woz. You bought it. You thought the price was fair. Now you've changed your mind?

Sure, I happen to think it's (still) an overpriced product with all kinds of creepy lock-in, so I decided to Just Say No. But you thought otherwise, so unless the product has underperformed your expectations, just be happy, dude.

Here's what I think is really happening: you see that other people can now get it for less. Your sin is ENVY. Get over it, or you'll have a lot more unhappiness in life than dissatisfaction with Apple.

I Dont see the big issue with the price drop

[pbxtreme8720]

In the uk when the nokia n95 came out on contract it was £189.99 on £30 a month 18 month contract now 3 months down the line its free. no ones kicked up a fuss about thats its normal. so why should the iPhone be any different

Re:Shut up Woz

[Anonymous Coward]

Wuz has been irrelevant for at least a decade now. Jobs is Apple is Jobs, period.

Uh... Woz?

[ahl0003]

What made you think you were still relevant?

Woz

[scolbert]

I think Woz is a great engineer and certainly a valley legend and I respect him highly. But why he finds it necessary to opine on Apple's marketing decisions is beyond me. I guess he just has an opinion and his soapbox is bigger than most.

Now I am curious...

[Belial6]

OK, now I'm curious. What could you have possibly meant by

"If he would have expressed his fear to his parents, they should have told him about the plan and to not worry."

other than pointing out the child's error?

PS: Hertzfeld and Horn's views

[LKM]

Bruce Horn and Andy Hertzfeld wrote essays about this on folklore.org.

Horn writes:

As you may be gathering, the difference between the Xerox system architectures and Macintosh architecture is huge; much bigger than the difference between the Mac and Windows. It's not surprising, since Microsoft saw quite a bit of the Macintosh design (API's,sample code, etc.) during the Mac's development from 1981 to 1984; the intention was to help them write applications for the Mac, and it also gave their system designers a template from which to design Windows. In contrast, the Mac and Lisa designers had to invent their own architectures. Of course, there were some ex- Xerox people in the Lisa and Mac groups, but the design point for these machines was so different that we didn't leverage our knowledge of the Xerox systems as much as some people think.

Re:PS: Hertzfeld and Horn's views

[mdwh2]

Well, note it's the Lisa that introduced changes that weren't in Xerox - not the Macintosh, which just developed on changes just like every other GUI in the 80s did.

Re:PS: Hertzfeld and Horn's views

[LKM]

Well, note it's the Lisa that introduced changes that weren't in Xerox - not the Macintosh, which just developed on changes just like every other GUI in the 80s did.

Yeah, I don't disagree with that, and Horn - who was only in the Mac team, I think - points it out in the quote, too.

Still playing the role

[BubbaJonBoy]

Woz always was an idealist and a damn good engineer, but ultimately Jobs' business acumen and chutzpah made Apple the corporation possible. Woz should stick with what he knows best...

Re:Hey, libertarians!

[yndrd1984]

Our government is itself a product of the market system. ... they compete for capital, talent, and prestige

True, but that kind of "market" has about as much to do with economic markets as it does with the dating "market".

Somalia, being a libertarian paradise

Somalia is an anarchy with no government. Anarchism and libertarianism have about as much in common as socialism and fascism.

Now go suckle Ayn Rand's rotten tits some more and leave the rest of us alone, you stupid fucking Paultards.

So your response to an explanation of a situation is an idealogical screed against the wrong ideology, a horribly crude analogy and weird insults?

Ahhhh!!!!

[Belial6]

Ahhh... That makes more sense.

A Given

[JMoriah11]

Of course the price for a new emerging piece of technology, in this case the iPhone, will cost a couple hundred of dollars, in fact more hundred that it is really worth, but that is the price you pay as an early adopter. If you really, truly want the iPhone, will pay anything and don't mind that it may have 'bugs' being it's brand new to the market; then by all means pay the large price for it. However, when the price comes down due to low sales or the fact that it's not brand new anymore, don't start crying at the fact you want your credited difference. It's called supply and demand or the simple fact that technology prices come down. Be patient or pay more, you pick.