History Repeats Itself — Mac & the iPad

Keith found an interesting story telling a bit about how Steve Jobs operates. It involves small teams of young engineers willing to work 90-hour weeks in total secrecy, and a complete willingness to throw away bad ideas without flowery language. The iPad is surprisingly similar to the Mac."

Comments

Paranoid hippie leader and all

[elrous0]

"a tiny group of intensely-focussed young people working in extreme secrecy . . . sets them to work for '90 hours a week and loving it.'"

You mean like a cult?

Article premise is completely wrong

[gatkinso]

Let's conveniently leave out any mention of OS 9, NeXT Step, and the fact that for a while it looked like Apple was going the way of the Dodo.

Re:Article premise is completely wrong

[elrous0]

And, of course, let's not forget the greatest example of Jobs' clever vision, the Apple Lisa. And, lest we forget, more modern successes like the revolutionary AppleTV. I don't begrudge the author his respect for Jobs and his successes, but you're right, this guy seriously whitewashes over the many times where Jobs' smug "vision" has failed miserably.

Re:Article premise is completely wrong

[bigstrat2003]

The fact that he is listed on the patent tells me that Jobs has a great deal of hubris and wants to have his name on things, not that he actually is inventing them. Do you seriously expect me to believe that he has anything to do with product development beyond generic ideas ("Hey, let's make a phone"), and testing the prototypes out ("I like this, I don't like that, fix it")?

Re:Oh please

[ultrabot]

Oh please, Apple has come out with some Spiffy stuff.
The I-Pad is a Vanilla offering undeserving of the apple moniker..
And no, I'm no Mac Fan.

If you are no mac fan, why do you use the phrase "undeserving of the apple moniker"?

Who gets to decide what the iPad is?

[betterunixthanunix]

The iPad has everything that any other computer has...so who is to say that it is not a computer? Apple can market it as a "media device" all they want, but if people want to use their iPads in other ways, they should be allowed to do so. Nobody, not Apple, and certainly not Steve Jobs, should be dictating what people are allowed to use their iPads for (except perhaps as a deadly weapon).

The iPad does not need to "mute" anyone, as the Time article puts it. Apple is dictating that it should, because of their desire to do business with book publishers.

Re:Who gets to decide what the iPad is?

[elrous0]

The iPad has everything that any other computer has...

You mean like USB ports, the ability to create and run your own software, the ability to chose your own OS, the freedom to download software from anywhere you chose, Flash support, the ability to export and import files at will, etc.?

Re:Who gets to decide what the iPad is?

[Enderandrew]

A timeclock is often a computer as far as hardware goes. If I went up to your grandma and gave her a timeclock and told her it was a replacement for her computer/laptop, she wouldn't appreciate it very much.

A computer in the common sense is a combination of hardware and software. The iPad's limitations in both hardware and software keep it from being considered a computer.

That being said, I'd buy one at $200, just not $500.

Re:Who gets to decide what the iPad is?

[voidptr]

People pointing out the problems with hyped products is extremely useful.

The problem is the people pointing out problems seem to refuse to accept that other people are capable of comprehending those problems. A minority of people are complaining about limitations those of us who are interested in the product either doesn't see as a limitation, or limitations that are outweighed by other benefits of the product.

I don't need another device for doing "content creation". I already have one of those I use when I'm at work. When I'm at home or traveling, I want something light I can use to keep in touch with people and entertain myself; I'd rather carry an iPad than a 7 lb laptop. Even at the office, my laptop is tethered to my desk all day, and it's something of a pain to undock it, reset all the open network sessions, and fire up the VPN just to take it into a meeting. With an iPad, I still have a way to check email, read PDFs, and interact with our internal engineering wiki without disturbing my laptop.

My mother doesn't do content creation. She emails her kids, plays light games, and bugs us on Facebook. I'd much rather give her an iPad and force her into Apple's walled garden where she's guaranteed some minimal level of protection from malware than spend another weekend cleaning shit off her Windows laptop because some friend of hers sent her some crappy game with a bunch of spyware inside.

Re:Who gets to decide what the iPad is?

[Bakkster]

I assume you refer to removing Other OS.

The difference, of course, is that Sony advertised Other OS as a feature, and it was purchased as such. The iPad and iPhone never advertised nor implied that you could run any general user software.

It is wrong to remove an advertised feature, but it isn't wrong (particularly from a moral standpoint) to not add something that wasn't advertised.

Closed Developer ecosystem, !"Closed system"

[derinax]

The fact that Company X makes a closed system is nothing new, nor is it noteworthy. Closed systems are a dime a dozen.

What the blogs are on fire about, and what we ALL should be worried about, is a closed developer ecosystem. It's Apple's new focus, and if it's allowed to propagate to the open platform we're all screwed.

Re:Closed Developer ecosystem, !"Closed system"

[derinax]

The end does not justify the means. Anything that restricts developer and user freedom in a mass-market channel should be argued against.

And anything NOT open source can be considered a "closed system". Windows is a closed system. What Apple did was to extend the closure to the developer channel, such that it provides a single, monolithic, commercial gateway to the system, which has been very rare in the industry. Not even Microsoft at their most abusive would have attempted that kind of developer lockout.

Why 1st gen. Apple products lack "features"

[Gallamine]

For those that didn't RTFA, this paragraph, on the small team approach, is golden:

It is this small-team approach that, of necessity, results in important capabilities being left out of the first release. The payoff, though, is that Steve ends up with a central core of perfectly-integrated functionality instead of a rambling labyrinth of disjointed “features.” This design framework is so well conceived that it can be built upon for years, even decades, without being stripped out and restarted. Compare that with the history of Windows, with false start after false start, resulting in their repeatedly beginning design anew.

Re:the ipad isn't a computer

[Sancho]

The same could be said of televisions. Does Grossman own a TV?

Or radios. Does Grossman own a radio?

Why are you disappointed with the iPad due to its difficulty with creating content? What were you expecting, exactly? If it doesn't suit your needs, don't buy one. They aren't replacing computers, you know....