PDA

View Full Version : Steve Jobs Dead: Apple Co-Founder Dies At 56



Pages : 1 [2]

Ninjahedge
October 19th, 2011, 11:30 AM
But reading your post... who is the one here being pompous and judgemental?

Pompous? No. Logic does not fall into that. Judgmental? How can one not be when one is judging the actions of another?

http://www.kingmarketing.ca/weblogs/ajkandy/photos/Picture%201.png

And this is the "Like" person who just could not, you know, UNDERSTAND a PC and all...

http://www.dailyapplequiz.com/wp-content/uploads/switcher-ellen.jpg



It just might be that there are millions of people buying the products that are genuinely happy with them, have made comparisons before spending their money, and feel the quality, performance, and style is unequaled.

You skirt right around my qualifier.

How many people have made the comparison? Most I have talked to have not. Their main arguments being:

"I like the way it looks"
"My last machine was a Mac"
"I know it was expensive, but..."

I have noticed that, more often than not, when a technical purchase is made with emotion, people are rarely upset with it later even when it does not meet all their expectations technically.

The technical purchase, one done by comparison and research, is more likely to have criticism afterwards, even if the person is satisfied with the product in the end.

A beer aficionado will still give you criticism of their beverage even if they loved it. A devotee will have only words of criticism for anything that is not their favorite, and get insulted if you criticize it as if you insulted them personally. (Go to a Bud fan and comment on the pisswater he is drinking and see what reaction you get. Even touching on it you are walking on shaky ground).

Emotional connection is a fickle, but oxymoronically powerful sales tool.

Fabrizio
October 19th, 2011, 11:50 AM
I hate the CD players on Apple products. Discs jam ...the keyboard will not always expell and I'd prefer a mechanical method to eject them in an emergency.

I have had issues will Apple build quality in the past.

The Apple mouses are still pretty lousy (I use a pen and Wacom tablet).

I'm sure there are other things if I think long enough.

Oh...I hate it when you want to disconnect a hard drive and you have to expell the icon before disconnecting... and if you don't that stupid warning comes up. I hate that.

And this: The Apple monitor is one huge sheet of glass. There is no frame. No friggin' frame. It's beautiful but my cleaning lady accidentally tapped the edge with a wine bottle that was on my desk and chipped it (the monitor...not the wine bottle.) I threw a fit.


In the meantime: I love the products and Steve Jobs was a genius and true modern visionary.

Fabrizio
October 19th, 2011, 12:05 PM
RE: Mac advertising:

Countless times you have brought up these Mac ads from years ago.

There were aired y e a r s ago.

It sounds like they scarred you pretty bad.

But you know, life moves on.

Sometimes you just have to get over things.

Ninjahedge
October 19th, 2011, 12:07 PM
I hate the CD players on Apple products. Discs jam ...the keyboard will not always expell and I'd prefer a mechanical method to eject them in an emergency.

I have had issues will Apple build quality in the past.

The Apple mouses are still pretty lousy (I use pen and Wacom tablet).

I'm sure there are other things if I think long enough.

Oh...I hate it when you want to disconnect a hard drive and you have to expell the icon before disconnecting... and if you don't that stupid warning comes up. I hate that.

And this: The Apple monitor is one huge sheet of glass. There is no frame. No friggin' frame. It's beautiful but my cleaning lady accidentally tapped the edge with a wine bottle that was on my desk and chipped it (the monitor...not the wine bottle.) I threw a fit.

Well, that relieves you of the moniker "fanboi" ;)

Ninjahedge
October 19th, 2011, 12:13 PM
RE: Mac advertising:

Countless times you have brought up these Mac ads from YEARS ago.

There were aired years ago.

It sounds like they scarred you pretty bad.

But you know, life moves on.

Sometimes you just have to get over things.

No, they did not "scare" me, but when you are discussing the life and achievements of an individual, meaning THE PAST, things from the past will come back into conversation.

That said, their campaign has not been as insulting as it has in the past, but it still lacks any solid data about the machine itself. They play pretty music with a soothing voice overlay, cute pictures and demo programs that really do not perform as well as you see on TV (as with many programs, not just Apple).

They are BOSE, who will show you how small their speakers are, but not tell you they use paper cones instead of polymer or other materials. (paper = cheap). They focus on "room filling sound" that gets by by literally leaving out certain frequencies and tricks the ear into hearing them by playing an octave up the scale.

Does Apple do this? Nope. But it makes you FEEL good about buying it, and, admittedly, makes a better looking product than many of its competitors.

So does this make the man who was pushing this advertising campaign a technical visionary? Not really.

Again, square 1. Great CEO, decent techie and ergonomic design manager.

Teno
October 19th, 2011, 07:28 PM
The questions were referring to your original claim that somehow when using Google's Cloud, you are tied down, but that somehow the iCloud breaks free from these constraints, that the (and I quote you) "iCloud is definately different....you have to log into Google's service to use it....the iCloud is service agnostic".

Google Docs is a web based word processing application. iCloud is not an application it is a conduit for syncing information between devices.


That is clearly incorrect, because you need an Apple ID and you are restricted in the services that can use the iCloud, e.g. you need iTunes, Pages, etc...

As I said the purpose of the Apple ID is to give iCloud permission to share information across devices.

For any device to use a particular iCloud account you log that device in with the Apple ID.

How else do you suggest they secure your iCloud account and secure the data that is shared accross iCloud?


Microsoft Office file extensions are compatible with the Google Cloud, the difference is that I can connect with the Google Cloud via Microsoft Office, but am unable to connect to the iCloud unless I restrict myself to iWork. Microsoft didn't make Google Cloud Connect for Microsoft Office, so why should they make an application for Apple?

Yes, what you are missing is that iCloud does not work with file extensions. iCloud works from inside the application itself.

Google Cloud Connect grabs the .doc file from your computer and uploads it into Google Docs. Or downloads the .doc file from Google Docs back to your computer. Google doesn't need anything from MS to be able to do that.

iCloud support has to be built ino the application because iCloud works from within the application itself.

iCloud is brand new. At the present moment iWork is the only word processing application that utilizes iCloud support, over time other word processing applications will add support.

Teno
October 19th, 2011, 07:33 PM
Do you have a source clarifying that the reason Microsoft Office products aren't on iOS devices is because of 'spite and denial'. I suspect the real reason is mostly related to the different platform nature (absence of a keyboard and mouse), processing requirements and Windows 8 development,

Well for one when the iPhone was relased MS CEO Steve Ballmer said: There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance," (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2007/04/ballmer-says-iphone-has-no-chance-to-gain-significant-market-share.ars")

Actually supporting the success of the iPhone would entail him eating his words.

Microsoft has an entire divsion dedicated to Macintosh development called the Macintosh Business Unit (http://www.seattlepi.com/business/article/The-Mac-lovers-of-Microsoft-1135816.php)

Both Mac OS and iOS use the same basic development tools. If small software companies can create software for both Mac and iOS, I doubt the MS Macintosh Division would have much trouble doing the same.



after all if Microsoft was such a dastardly corporation why did they launch Microsoft Office for Macs!

The first verions of Word on a GUI was on the Macintosh in 1985, before Windows existed.


Amazon utilise Flash because it is a very basic multimedia platform that is embedded in the majority of web browsers/OS's,

Flash is a plug in (an add on to your web browser). It is a rich application and multimedia platform.


subsequently it can be accessed exceptionally easily across numerous computer environments.

Yes Adobe can create one multimedia player that can be used on any device that supports Flash.

Flash in this instance is being used as a front end facing media player. The media management is on Amazon's servers.


iTunes is a software programme which needs certain requirements to operate sufficiently.

iTunes is a multimedia management application local to your computer. This is entirely different from Flash.

iTunes uses a rich application platform called HTML/Javascript/CSS. Which is similar to Flash

iTunes uses a multimedia platform called Quicktime. Which is similar to Flash.

Apple is promoting HTML/javascript/CSS as the rich application platform over Flash. Because HTML is the native language of the internet and not a proprietary plug in like Flash.


I already provided a source that clearly stated that Apple are utilising the services of Microsoft Azure and Amazon Web Services for their cloud platform. Apple isn’t incompetent to realise that they can't rely on a single data centre.

A website that states "we have an inside source". I'm not saying they are wrong, I am saying that that is not emperical information. Plus the inside source gave no detailed information as to Apple's implemtation of their cloud service.

Teno
October 19th, 2011, 07:50 PM
Your post history in this thread is littered with whimsical comical attempts at directing credit solely to Jobs.

Such as stories that include first hand statements from people who worked directly with Jobs?


Whether that be trying to align the invention of the Macintosh to Jobs (Jef Raskin and others given no mention),

I'm giving credit to Jobs for creating the leadership and the environment for Jeff Raskin and everyone else to create the Macintosh. I've stated that Jobs was not a software developer or hardware engineer.


that it was Jobs that turned Pixar into a feature film producer (ignoring the contributions of Lasseter and Catmull)

Jobs provided the leadership and environment for Lasseter and Catmull to create Toy Story and all the rest.


or that Jobs developed Next OS (Forstall would question that).

Jobs provided the leadership and environment for Scott Forstall to create Next Step OS.


Lately you've tried to state that somehow Jobs is behind the cloud computing revolution, when Apple is a late and lagging participant.

That is not what I said.

In the video from the 1997 meeting with Apple. Jobs stated how he was setting up a network at Next. In where his information and content were not primarily stored locally on one computer. He could log into the network from any computer and automatically all of his information and content were accessible and avaialble.

Steve was talking about bringing that ability to the average person in an intuitive and easy to use way. iCloud is the realization of what he was talking about.

What makes iCloud different from other cloud services. Is that once you've set up the syncing between content and devices, iCloud does the syncing automatically without the user having to directly interact with the process.


I can't envision this thread going any further what with the baseless fantatical claims being made, but as I said originally in this thread - it's a damming verdict on society and the dominance of consumerism if someone like Jobs can be held aloft by many. There are far more deserving people that we should be looking up to, whether that be charity workers, scientists working on cures for diseases, etc...

My point is that Steve Jobs' leadership has contributed to the tech industry in a way that has forever changed our world. Our access to information, our ability to communicate with each other.

Thus far no other company under any other leadership has been able to do this as consistently with technology.

Baby Thinks a Magazine is a Broken iPad! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APE8M9MeOWA)

scumonkey
October 19th, 2011, 08:00 PM
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb276/scumonkey/tumblr_llziu3Jaz51qii6tmo1_250.gif

Teno
October 19th, 2011, 08:27 PM
I hate the CD players on Apple products. Discs jam ...the keyboard will not always expell and I'd prefer a mechanical method to eject them in an emergency.

I agree with this. I don't think Apple cares about optical media drives anymore.

Back in 2001 when Apple first began to use DVD drives in Power Macs. They were using the top of the line drives made by Pioneer. The drive itself cost $1000 a pop.

I expect next year all of Apple's notebook computers from 11" to 17" will be like the Mac Book Air and have no optical drive.

http://gadgetmix.com/wp-content/gallery/macbook-air-3/macbook-air-9.jpg



The Apple mouses are still pretty lousy (I use a pen and Wacom tablet).

Yeah Apple has had some terrible mice. I agree with that one.


http://images.apple.com/magictrackpad/images/hero_1_20100727.png

Since I'm used to using notebook computer I do like the Magic Pad.

Teno
October 19th, 2011, 08:38 PM
That said, their campaign has not been as insulting as it has in the past, but it still lacks any solid data about the machine itself. They play pretty music with a soothing voice overlay, cute pictures and demo programs that really do not perform as well as you see on TV (as with many programs, not just Apple).

What solid data are you looking for? People crack open Apple's devices and find out what parts are inside of them. Its not a secret.


They are BOSE, who will show you how small their speakers are, but not tell you they use paper cones instead of polymer or other materials. (paper = cheap). They focus on "room filling sound" that gets by by literally leaving out certain frequencies and tricks the ear into hearing them by playing an octave up the scale.

What in the blue blazes are you talking about?

Fabrizio
October 20th, 2011, 02:14 AM
Ninja wrote: "That said, their campaign has not been as insulting as it has in the past, but it still lacks any solid data about the machine itself. "

It is just funny to me that someone can hold a grudge over some long-ago Mac advertising, calling it "insulting"... but then proceeds to insult people who simply enjoy the products... "sheeple" etc.

And as far as solid data goes: all advertising includes a web address. At the Apple web site you'll find everything you need to know. (I can't believe this has to be explained). Or stop into one of their stores and ask.

You seem to be assuming that people (other than yourself) are suckers and do not comparison shop. Not so in this economy. And so much of Apple's business is with repeat customers... it means that people are happy with what they are buying. That is the best testament to products.

And this:

"They are BOSE, who will show you how small their speakers are, but not tell you they use paper cones instead of polymer or other materials. (paper = cheap). They focus on "room filling sound" that gets by by literally leaving out certain frequencies and tricks the ear into hearing them by playing an octave up the scale."

^ "They are Bose" ??? Did I read that correctly?

You are so free with your opinions about how others post here.... uh... all I can say concerning the above statement is: no comment.


BTW: what is the Mac equivalent of Bose's "paper cones"?

Ninjahedge
October 20th, 2011, 08:37 AM
What solid data are you looking for? People crack open Apple's devices and find out what parts are inside of them. Its not a secret.

That's not the POINT.

The point is, when you are looking at a car and are serious about what it can DO, you get info on the MPH, HP, Torque, lateral acceleration, horizontal G. When you are looking for an image you get a Jag or a Beemer, regardless of what it can actually DO.

Other ads have tried, in the past at least, ti give you an idea of the chip, memory and other things that you get in a machine. But now they are following lock step with the "I don't care what it does so long as it looks cool and has a good commercial" *cough*Dell*cough*.

Apple's commercials almost NEVER tell you what the machine IS, but how you will FEEL when getting it. They avoid the stats and play on the emotions. While that is great marketing, that says very little about the product itself.


What in the blue blazes are you talking about?

Go look up a Bose ad and tell me what the stats are on what they are advertising. Then go look at an ad for a Yamaha amp and tell me. Bose focuses on feeling, not fact. Apple does the same.

Fabrizio
October 20th, 2011, 08:46 AM
Go look up a Bose ad and tell me what the stats are on what they are advertising. Then go look at an ad for a Yamaha amp and tell me. Bose focuses on feeling, not fact. Apple does the same.

^ Not true.

Everyone is on the net. That is where advertising takes place today... especially if you are buying a computer.

How much print and TV does Mac actually do? Very, very little.

This is how Apple advertises their computers. What info is lacking?:

The MacPro http://www.apple.com/macpro/

Ninjahedge
October 20th, 2011, 10:30 AM
Fab, Lesson learned from the past is to not reply directly to your posts... especially right after I post something.

it usually degenerates into name calling and such, so I would just give up for now and let it rest...

Fabrizio
October 20th, 2011, 10:46 AM
The name calling always, but always starts with you. This thread is a perfect example.

And: you usually have no problem posting right after my posts. (Especially if they are not even directed at you.) And you usually show up with some sort of offensive comment.

Also: it's funny how you have no problem making the most offensive oberservations but if someone does the same to you, you get very, very upset.

Merry
October 21st, 2011, 06:16 AM
^ Cut it out, you guys ;)...:).


Steve Jobs Believed Google Committed 'Grand Theft,' Regretted Using Alternative Medicine

By Caroline Bankoff

In the days following Steve Jobs's death, publisher Simon & Schuster decided to release its authorized biography of the Apple founder (http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/10/steve_jobs_biography_coming_so.html) a month earlier than planned. The book, written by Walter Isaacson and simply called Steve Jobs, will be out on the 24th, but various reports have already given readers an idea of what to expect. According to the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/20/steve-jobs-google-grand-theft_n_1023111.html), which got a hold of a copy, Jobs was "angrier than had ever seen him" when Google released its Android operating system, which he felt infringed on patented iPhone technology:



"Our lawsuit is saying, 'Google you ****ing ripped off the iPhone, wholesale ripped us off,'" Jobs said, according to Isaacson. "I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product."




Jobs also slammed Google's work, telling Isaacson that "outside of Search, Google's products--Android, Google Docs--are shit." Though Jobs received criticism for his tight control over the iPhone ecosystem, which contrasts sharply with Android's "open" approach, he told Isaacson that Apple's approach stemmed from the company's desire to "make great products, not crap like Android."


The author has also issued some previews of his own in the form of a [I]60 Minutes appearance (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/20/60minutes/main20123269.shtml) set to air on Sunday. In the television interview, Isaacson explains why Jobs initially declined to undergo surgery to treat his pancreatic cancer, hoping instead that alternative therapies would be enough to cure the disease:


"I've asked [Jobs why he didn't get an operation then] and he said, 'I didn't want my body to be opened...I didn't want to be violated in that way,'" Isaacson recalls. So he waited nine months, while his wife and others urged him to do it, before getting the operation, reveals Isaacson. Asked by Kroft how such an intelligent man could make such a seemingly stupid decision, Isaacson replies, "I think that he kind of felt that if you ignore something, if you don't want something to exist, you can have magical thinking...we talked about this a lot," he tells Kroft. "He wanted to talk about it, how he regretted it....I think he felt he should have been operated on sooner."



The 656-page book, which is based on years of research and dozens of conversations between the writer and his subject, also addresses less weighty topics, such as the contents Jobs's iPod, which included Bob Dylan, Yo-Yo Ma, and the work of his onetime girlfriend Joan Baez.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/10/steve_jobs_believed_google_com.html

Fabrizio
October 21st, 2011, 07:52 AM
^ So Steve Jobs and Joan Baez were a couple. I knew he was into the 1960's but... that is really something.

And about his Ipod... the Times today in an article about him says this:

"During one interview, Mr. Jobs played music from his new iPad (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/i/ipad/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) 2, cycling through the the Beatles, a Gregorian chant performed by Benedictine monks, a Bach fugue and “Catch the Wind” by the Scottish musician Donovan."

I think it's charming that he was a fan of that particular song... sort of a rip-off of "Chimes of Freedom" and long forgotten... but no matter, it is achingly beautiful. It's one of my all-time faves.

I wonder how many people in the world have Donovan on their Ipod?

Below is a video that I love love love... everyone sitting around in the dirt and smoking cigarettes:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FudeqOhaeI&feature=related

Ninjahedge
October 21st, 2011, 08:39 AM
Merry, i read that. He was a very VERY controlling issue with a set of problems that prevented him from getting the care he needed when he needed it.

pancreatic cancer is VERY deadly, but like with many things, when discovered early, treated aggressively and smacked around by crap-loads of money, stands a good chance of being healed.....

eddhead
October 21st, 2011, 09:58 AM
The problem with pancreatic cancer is that it is almost nevre discovered early. Unfortunately, but the time it is discovered is is almost always too late. Median Survival rate is 10 to 6 months.


Pancreatic cancer often has a poor prognosis (http://wirednewyork.com/wiki/Prognosis): for all stages (http://wirednewyork.com/wiki/Cancer_staging) combined, the 1- and 5-year relative survival rates (http://wirednewyork.com/wiki/Prognosis) are 25% and 6%, respectively;[2] (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/#cite_note-ACS-CFF-2010-1) for local disease the 5-year survival is approximately 20%[2] (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/#cite_note-ACS-CFF-2010-1)[3] (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/#cite_note-NCI-GIAPC-2) while the median (http://wirednewyork.com/wiki/Median) survival for locally advanced and for metastatic (http://wirednewyork.com/wiki/Metastatic) disease, which collectively represent over 80% of individuals,[3] (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/#cite_note-NCI-GIAPC-2) is about 10 and 6 months respectively.[4] (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/#cite_note-CM13-3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancreatic_cancer

I

Teno
October 21st, 2011, 01:31 PM
http://i.techrepublic.com.com/blogs/android.JPG

Here is an early prototype of an Android phone before the success of the iPhone.






http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3651/3654266210_3b3e9f476d_o.jpg

Here is what Android looks like after the success of the iPhone.

lofter1
October 21st, 2011, 01:39 PM
The first android looks like some Star Wars prop -- the vision for the future circa 1977

eddhead
October 21st, 2011, 01:39 PM
LOL ... First they ripped off the Blackberry, than they ripped off the i-phone. Still, shit like that happens all the time.

lofter1
October 21st, 2011, 01:40 PM
As a non-techie, I'm curious: Who first came up with touch screen technology?

Teno
October 21st, 2011, 01:51 PM
Yes, I don't blame Google. They saw where things were headed and switched to what was going to be more successful.

The problem is that the CEO of Google Eric Schmidt was on Apple's board of directors and had direct information about the iPhone and Apple's future plans with it. This was before Google had any open aspirations of being in the phone business.

Jobs was pissed because he felt Eric Schmidt used secret information he knew about the iPhone to help develop Android.


LOL ... First they ripped off the Blackberry, than they ripped off the i-phone. Still, shit like that happens all the time.

Teno
October 21st, 2011, 02:02 PM
Experimentation with touch screen technology goes back to the 60's and 70's.

The iPhone's touch screen technology comes from a company that Apple bought called FingerWorks. FingerWorks specialized in touch screens being able to recognize multiple finger touches and gestures.

FingerWorks was started from a touch screen research project from the University of Delaware.



As a non-techie, I'm curious: Who first came up with touch screen technology?

Teno
October 21st, 2011, 02:49 PM
People don't care how it works.

iPhone 4S:Siri (http://www.apple.com/iphone/#video-4s-ad)


Apple's commercials almost NEVER tell you what the machine IS, but how you will FEEL when getting it. They avoid the stats and play on the emotions. While that is great marketing, that says very little about the product itself.

Ninjahedge
October 21st, 2011, 02:57 PM
I know that "people" do not.

Again, you keep trying to justify their reasons. I just keep explaining what they are and you try to make their shortcomings seem like good things.

They marketed to the technically illiterate and borderline phobic. They did not tell you really what their players could do, they just showed silhouettes of people dancing around with white wires.

Again, it was not so much their product as it was their marketing of the product. They were not the best of anything besides HF advertisement and product placement, and found that making a person "feel" good about a product is worth more, in cold hard cash, than actually making the product better.

Are they BAD products? Not by any means, but we get right back to square one. It is easier to mark up a product people "love" than to mark one up that just performs better.

Is that something that "changed the world".

Not by a long shot.

The more people bow and praise the non-existent accomplishments of a dead man, the more they are affirming their own insecurities and desire to praise one that is seen as their own emotional flagman. It is just unhealthy.

Fabrizio
October 21st, 2011, 03:09 PM
The first android looks like some Star Wars prop -- the vision for the future circa 1977

Ah...1977 and the asthetics of the time...

This is a great artice from Ross Douthat of the Times, writing about Jobs' contribution to beautifying our world:

Up From Ugliness
By ROSS DOUTHAT
Published: October 8, 2011



FROM the 1960s through the 1980s, the United States of America conducted a long experiment in ugliness. Our architects grew bored with beauty, our designers tired of elegance, our urban planners decided that function should trump form. We bulldozed row houses and threw up housing projects. We built public buildings out of raw concrete. We wore leisure suits and shoulder pads, buried heart-of-pine floors under shag carpeting, and paneled our automobiles with artificial wood.


This is the world in which Steve Jobs came of age. It was, not coincidentally, a world in which it became easy to believe that the United States was in decline. Our churches looked like recreation centers, and our rec centers looked like re-education camps. Our campuses and civic spaces were defaced by ziggurats of cement. Our cities had crime-ridden towers and white elephant shopping centers where the neighborhoods used to be. Our suburbs were filled with what James Howard Kunstler described as the “junk architecture” of strip malls and ranch houses.


Then, gradually and haltingly, beauty began to make a comeback. A “new urbanist” movement championed a return to walkable neighborhoods, human-scale housing, and pleasant public spaces. Our clothes became less garish, our cars more curvaceous, our civic architecture less offensive. And most remarkably, our machines ceased to be utilitarian boxes, and became something beautiful instead.


When we think about what Jobs meant to turn-of-the-millennium America, this is the place to start: not just with the technical wizardry behind Macs and iPhones and iPads, but with the Apple founder’s eye for grace and style, and his recognition of the deep connection between beauty and civilization.
There would have been some sort of desktop computer without the Macintosh, some sort of popular smartphone without the iPhone, some kind of big-screen computer animation without Pixar. But there was no guarantee that any of these technological wonders would be so exquisite, or that the age of information would also be an age of artistry.


Jobs wasn’t an artist himself. But he was a curator, a critic and a patron. Whether he was deciding that the first Macintosh computer would feature beautiful typography or telling Pixar’s animators to “make it great,” he played a decisive role in restoring a kind of defiant aestheticism to American life.


Like the glories of Art Deco and the allure of the “Mad Men” era, his products were a rebuke to the idea that the aesthetics of modern life needed to be utilitarian and blah. From the Apple store to “The Incredibles,” Jobs revived the romance of modernity — the assumption, shared by Victorian science-fiction writers and space-age dreamers alike, that the world of the future should be more glamorous than the present.


The question is whether this revival has staying power. The age of architectural Brutalism is past, but between the travails of planning-by-committee and the red tape of bureaucracy, our civic projects still tend to be uninspired in design and interminable in execution. (The newest additions to the Washington Mall, the World War II and Martin Luther King Jr. memorials, look like rejected rough drafts for monuments rather than inspiring finished products.) For all its successes, the new urbanism sometimes feels more like a reclamation project than a renaissance: it’s saved the row houses of yesterday without building the neighborhoods of tomorrow.


So too with technology, where some of the eulogies for Jobs have highlighted the gulf between the computer revolution’s rapid progress and the lack of advancement in fields like medicine and transportation. The iPhone and the iPad may be aesthetically perfect, but in an otherwise stagnant society their charms can be an invitation to solipsism — holding up mirrors to our vanity, instead of opening windows to breakthroughs more impressive than the latest app.


You can see a version of this peril in our politics as well. In a sense, Barack Obama’s 2008 march to the White House was the iPhone of political campaigns: a perfect marriage of aesthetics, spectacle and social media, a revival of the old New Frontier excitement, the natural culmination of glamour’s post-1970s comeback in American life. But three years later much of that looks like an illusion — a temporary echo of liberalism’s golden age, evoking successes that today’s Democratic Party can’t recapture.


Right now, Steve Jobs’s legacy seems more secure than President Obama’s. (Certainly his fan base is less fickle.) But there’s still a danger that we’ll look back on Apple’s golden age and see it as a fleeting creative spike in a larger story of cultural decline.


Whether that happens is up to tomorrow’s innovators. If they learn anything from Jobs, it should be that their vocation isn’t just about uniting commerce and technology. It’s about making the modern world more beautiful as well.

Teno
October 21st, 2011, 04:14 PM
I know that "people" do not.

Again, you keep trying to justify their reasons. I just keep explaining what they are and you try to make their shortcomings seem like good things.

You say you understand that people don't care. Then you say that Apple not giving more detail about how their products workis a shortcoming even though people don't care.

You aren't making sesne.


They marketed to the technically illiterate and borderline phobic. They did not tell you really what their players could do, they just showed silhouettes of people dancing around with white wires.

Correct becasue 99% of the people in the world don't care how it works. They care about dancing in colorful sihlouettes.


Again, it was not so much their product as it was their marketing of the product. They were not the best of anything besides HF advertisement and product placement, and found that making a person "feel" good about a product is worth more, in cold hard cash, than actually making the product better.


Sounds like you are mostly talking about the iPod. Well when Apple originally launched the iPod + iTunes, what do you feel was a better system?



Is that something that "changed the world".

Not by a long shot.

A 1000 songs in your pocket doesn't change the world?

Ninjahedge
October 21st, 2011, 04:37 PM
No, you keep saying 99%, which implies that it is "normal" to want a piece of technology you know nothing about.

That number is a bit too flattering, especially when it comes to technology such as this.

And 1000 songs does not change the world when you had 3600 in your pocket 4 years before the iPod.

Teno
October 21st, 2011, 04:54 PM
No, you keep saying 99%, which implies that it is "normal" to want a piece of technology you know nothing about.

People understand what the technology does. They understand that music comes out when you press the play button.

Its normal for people to not understand (or be very interested in) the mechanics of what happens when you press play and how the music is generated.

You are confusing the two.


And 1000 songs does not change the world when you had 3600 in your pocket 4 years before the iPod.

Of course you don't give the name of the device you are referring to.

Teno
October 21st, 2011, 04:59 PM
In that commercial I posted about the iPhone 4S. People speak into the phone asking questions - giving it commands.

"I have a flat tire"

"How do you tie a bow tie?"

"I'm locked out of my house?"

People don't know how it understands what they are asking and giving the correct answer. That really doesn't matter to the average person.

All they care about is the fact that it DOES understand what you are asking and can give the correct answer.

eddhead
October 21st, 2011, 05:16 PM
I know that "people" do not.

Again, you keep trying to justify their reasons. I just keep explaining what they are and you try to make their shortcomings seem like good things.

They marketed to the technically illiterate and borderline phobic. They did not tell you really what their players could do, they just showed silhouettes of people dancing around with white wires.

Again, it was not so much their product as it was their marketing of the product. They were not the best of anything besides HF advertisement and product placement, and found that making a person "feel" good about a product is worth more, in cold hard cash, than actually making the product better.

Are they BAD products? Not by any means, but we get right back to square one. It is easier to mark up a product people "love" than to mark one up that just performs better.

Is that something that "changed the world".

Not by a long shot.

The more people bow and praise the non-existent accomplishments of a dead man, the more they are affirming their own insecurities and desire to praise one that is seen as their own emotional flagman. It is just unhealthy.

Ninj, with all due respect, EVERYONE markets to the technically illiterate because for the most part the technically illiterate are the consumers. I am technically illiterate; i just want the damn thing to work well and to include features that are convenient to me. Who is going to market a PC by advertising about the technology components? Who cares? I want the thing to perform

And by the way, Apple DOES market performance. Remember those commercials where one guy's a mac and the other is a PC? They're selling cool, but they are also selling performance; no freezing, no crashing, etc...

Look, I own a Dell and a Mac book. When I want to use a computer, I will reach for the macbook over the dell 10/10 times. It doesn't freeze one me, it doesn't crash on me, it is not susceptible to viruses, strange things don't happen when I accidently hit two keys at one time, etc, etc.... It just works better.

Teno
October 21st, 2011, 08:25 PM
This is a story about the next CPU design for the iPad. It also gives evidence of how directly Steve Jobs had his hands in the development of everything. Even down to the architecture designs of the CPU.



1) As he said many times, Steve Jobs liked to have options. From the very beginning of OS X, Apple kept an internal, top-secret x86 port of the entire OS up-to-date, just in case Jobs might one day decide to make the change that he eventually in fact did make.

2) For whatever reasons of ego and romance, Steve Jobs also liked to have his very own, non-commodity CPU hardware. This attachment to proprietary hardware is why Apple was one of the original ARM partners at the latter’s launch, it’s why Apple stuck with PowerPC through the lean years, and it’s why Jobs agonized over the decision to finally give up on the dream and go with Intel.

3) Jobs was notoriously capricious and mercurial when it came to making big hardware decisions, much to the chagrin of Apple’s processor partners. The story of Mac CPUs is a story of surprise and heartbreak—not so much heartbreak on the consumer’s part, though there was that, but heartbreak on the part of Motorola, IBM, and P.A. Semi.


ARM’s Cortex A15 (http://www.wired.com/cloudline/2011/10/meet-arms-cortex-a15-the-future-of-the-ipad-and-possibly-the-macbook-air/Meet)

Merry
October 21st, 2011, 08:29 PM
Isn't this meant to be a thread about the untimely death of Steve Jobs and its overall impact?

Surely discussions about Apple products, etc., etc. can be conducted somewhere else?

scumonkey
October 21st, 2011, 09:07 PM
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb276/scumonkey/tumblr_llziu3Jaz51qii6tmo1_250.gif

eddhead
October 21st, 2011, 09:30 PM
Isn't this meant to be a thread about the untimely death of Steve Jobs and its overall impact?

Surely discussions about Apple products, etc., etc. can be conducted somewhere else?

Possibly you have a point, however I might also suggest that the debate about whether or not Apple created superior products in some way correlates to Jobs' legacy and the impact of his death. Not withstanding the cool clappy guy.

Fabrizio
October 22nd, 2011, 07:34 AM
The product posts have all been related to Jobs' impact: Jobs as a visionary or no.

So while the product posts have been on-topic, clap your hands if you think the thread can do without this idiotic gif :


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/ronaldo/tumblr_llziu3Jaz51qii6tmo1_250.gif

scumonkey
October 22nd, 2011, 05:07 PM
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSpxhSyvuHXLx3bkTxuaPZUlzQQwGXGk CXApgGdOjzkC4dxgFpLvw

Ninjahedge
October 24th, 2011, 10:17 AM
I actually feel sorry for Clappy....


Unless he is trying for a part in a Fox sitcom.....

eddhead
October 24th, 2011, 11:10 AM
I feel sorrier for the worm.

Ninjahedge
October 24th, 2011, 11:57 AM
Did you do the worm? (Or the bird?)

Teno
October 24th, 2011, 01:06 PM
60 Minutes had an interesting story about Jobs' life last night. Seemed straightforward and honest.

Also a pretty good explanation of Steve's reality distortion field.

Steve Jobs: Revelations from a tech giant (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-20124391/steve-jobs-revelations-from-a-tech-giant/?tag=contentMain;cbsCarousel)

Teno
October 24th, 2011, 01:08 PM
The original iPod wasn't the first MP3 player, but it's the one that will end up marking the point in history when MP3 players became all the rage. Its unique controls, playlist functionality, easy syncing ability with iTunes, and of course the iTunes Music Store helped to put the iPod and its successors into millions of hands.

The original iPod, 10 years later: a re-review (http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2011/10/2001-to-2011-ars-re-reviews-the-original-ipod.ars)

GordonGecko
October 24th, 2011, 01:23 PM
Freaky! http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/steve-jobss-search-for-his-father/


...[Steve Jobs] didn’t share [his sister's] desire to track down their biological father, a Syrian-American, Abdulfattah Jandali, who had abandoned Ms. Simpson and her mother when the novelist was a child. Ms. Simpson found Mr. Jandali working in a restaurant in Sacramento, but her brother had asked her not to mention his identity to his father.
..
When [Steve Job's sister] met him, Mr. Jandali told her that he used to run a restaurant in Silicon Valley that attracted many high-profile people, including Steve Jobs, and that the Apple executive was a “great tipper.”

In the recording, Mr. Jobs said he remembered being in that restaurant a couple of times and meeting a manager there who was from Syria. “I shook his hand and he shook my hand and that’s all,” Mr. Jobs said.

The two men never spoke again. Not until 2006 did Mr. Jandali learn that his son was Apple’s co-founder...

lofter1
October 24th, 2011, 05:23 PM
On 60 Minutes last night it was All Jobs for All 60 Minutes, and author of a new Jobs biography said that the father, the Silicon Valley restauranteur, used to brag to folks that business was great -- so good that even Steve Jobs ate there (not knowing he was referring to his own, abandoned son).

Truth definitely stranger than fiction.

Teno
October 24th, 2011, 05:49 PM
Another example of iCloud and how it is different from any other cloud service. As I said its a conduit for syncing information across devices. It can be used in many different ways.

iCloud Delivers Seamless Gameplay Narratives

“iOS 5 is really slick,” Mustard says. “The best thing it offers to developers is iCloud.”

Mustard described how he was playing Infinity Blade II on an iPad 2. His character had just finished a fight, and picked up a sword that had fallen on the ground. Mustard then opened up Infinity Blade II on his iPhone 4S — and began playing the game exactly where he had just left off, his character with sword in hand.

“Seamless syncing across devices is a huge thing for gaming,” Mustard says. The iCloud feature enables users to effortlessly transition a game-in-progress from one iOS 5 device to another, allowing for an uninterrupted gameplay narrative as they move from, say, their subway seat to their couch, or even from room to room.

iCloud offers other unique benefits that game developers can begin coding for in updates and new titles. In Infinity Blade II, for example, users will find a new community-based gameplay mode called Clash Mobs.

It works like this: You get a notification that a big monster is available to fight for the next 24 hours. The monster is loaded with 1 million hit points. You fight him, knocking off 10,000 of his hit points. The monster now has 990,000 hit points. Thousands (if not millions) of other gamers take their hacks at the same bad guy, and together you work in concert to take him down, unlocking weapons and other features.

How Apple’s A5 Chip and iOS 5 Will Change Mobile Gaming (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/10/ios-5-a5-processor-gaming/)

Teno
October 26th, 2011, 03:54 PM
For those who feel Jonathan Ive doesn't get his due credit. Here he is talking about Steve Jobs in his own words.

Ive says he and Steve would spend months perfecting a part of the machine that no one would ever see.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JD2d2bWZVNs

Teno
October 26th, 2011, 03:56 PM
Revealed: The dinner with a Microsoft employee that irritated Steve Jobs so much he created the iPad. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2053242/Steve-Jobs-iPad-idea-originated-dinner-Microsoft-employee-irritated-him.html)

Apple owes an enormous debt of gratitude to Gates' firm - because the iconic iPad would never have been created had a Microsoft employee not boasted to Jobs over dinner that they had a revolutionary tablet in production.

'This dinner was like the tenth time he talked to me about it, and I was so sick of it that I came home and said, "F**k this, let's show him what a tablet can really be",' Jobs said.

MidtownGuy
October 26th, 2011, 05:52 PM
On 60 Minutes last night it was All Jobs for All 60 Minutes...
He's the new Jesus, doncha know...but with an updated (shorter) beard and a new attitude.

MidtownGuy
October 26th, 2011, 05:53 PM
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb276/scumonkey/tumblr_llziu3Jaz51qii6tmo1_250.gif

Sometimes a gif says a thousand words.

Fabrizio
October 27th, 2011, 05:24 AM
For those who feel Jonathan Ive doesn't get his due credit. Here he is talking about Steve Jobs in his own words.

Ive says he and Steve would spend months perfecting a part of the machine that no one would ever see.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JD2d2bWZVNs

^ I listened to the entire service: the Ives segment was great. Really touching. Norah Jones & Coldplay fab. Al Gore was a pompous bore.

MidtownGuy
October 27th, 2011, 11:05 AM
That seems to be going around.

Anyway, people die. It's old news. Why spend any time on it. Like child labor for Apple and other American companies...even torture, the death penalty, war....you know. Just expect the worst and move on.

BTW, the one man show about Jobs was excellent. One man on stage for all that time, and not boring at all.

Fabrizio
October 27th, 2011, 04:13 PM
RE: "Macs cost too much"

Apple’s Lower Prices Are All Part of the Plan
By NICK WINGFIELD - NYTimes
Published: October 23, 2011

Something unexpected has happened at Apple, once known as the tech industry’s high-price leader. Over the last several years it began beating rivals on price. People who wanted the latest Apple smartphone, the iPhone 4S, were able to get one the day it went on sale if they were willing to wait in a line, spend at least $199 and commit to a two-year wireless service contract with a carrier. Or they could have skipped the lines and bought one of the latest iPhone rivals from an Apple competitor, as long as they were willing to dig deeper into their wallets. For $300 and a two-year contract, gadget lovers could have picked up Motorola’s Droid Bionic from Verizon Wireless, or they could bought the $230 Samsung Galaxy SII and $260 HTC Amaze 4G, both from T-Mobile, under the same terms.

Apple’s new pricing strategy is a big change from the 1990s, when consumers regarded Apple as a producer of overpriced tech baubles, unable to compete effectively with its Macintosh family of computers against the far cheaper Windows PCs. But more recently, it began using its growing manufacturing scale and logistics prowess to deliver Apple products at far more aggressive prices, which in turn gave it more power to influence pricing industrywide.

Apple’s innovations — including products like the iPhone, iPad and the ultrathin MacBook Air notebook — are justifiably credited for their role in the company’s resurgence under its chief executive and co-founder, Steven P. Jobs, who died on Oct. 5. But analysts and industry executives say Apple’s pricing is an overlooked part of its ability to find a large audience for those products beyond hard-core Apple fans. Apple sold more than four million iPhone 4S smartphone over its debut weekend. People can still easily find less expensive alternatives, with less distinctive and refined designs, to most Apple products. Within the premium product categories where Apple is most at home though, comparable devices often do no better than match or slightly undercut Apple’s prices. “They’re not cheap, but I don’t think they’re viewed as high-priced anymore,” said Stewart Alsop, a longtime venture capitalist in San Francisco.

Prices in the ultrathin notebook category are an illustration of Apple’s strategy. While there are much cheaper laptops for sale, ranging all the way down to bargain-basement netbooks that cost a few hundred dollars, Apple’s MacBook Air has become a hit among computer users seeking the thinnest and lightest notebooks available. The product starts at $999 for a model with an 11-inch screen.
On Oct. 11, the Taiwanese computer maker Asus introduced its answer to the MacBook Air, a sleek device that uses Windows. But it was unable to undercut Apple; the Asus computer also starts at $999. Samsung’s wafer-thin Series 9 notebook, with comparable features, costs $1,049.The computer maker Acer, however, began undercutting the cheapest MacBook Air this month with an $899 ultrathin notebook, the Aspire S series, that has a bigger screen.

The original MacBook Air catered to a more rarefied audience when it came out in early 2008, priced at a whopping $1,799 for a model with a 13-inch screen. A year ago Apple revamped the notebook to make it thinner and smaller and reduced its entry-level prices to $999 and $1,299 for models with 11-inch and 13-inch screens. Jean-Louis Gassée, a venture capitalist and former Apple executive, said there was a “collective gasp” at how low Apple priced the new MacBook Air. The aggressive pricing, analysts say, reflects Apple’s ability to use its growing manufacturing scale to push down costs for the crucial parts that make up its devices. Apple has also shown a willingness to tap into its huge war chest — $82 billion in cash and marketable securities last quarter — to take big gambles by locking up supplies of parts for years, as it did in 2005 when it struck a five-year, $1.25 billion deal with manufacturers to secure flash memory chips for its iPods and other devices. By buying up manufacturing capacity ahead of time, Apple forces its competitors to scramble for the parts that are still available, raising costs for their products, analysts say. Apple is the biggest buyer of flash memory chips in the world, according to the research firm iSuppli. Mr. Gassée said Apple’s pricing decision on the MacBook Air made it clear that Apple’s management of its supply chain had become a “strategic weapon.”

Another example of that was Apple’s decision to price the entry-level iPad at $499 when it was introduced early last year, hundreds of dollars lower than many analysts expected. “I think everyone was stunned at the cost of the iPad,” said John Gallaugher, an associate professor of information systems at Boston College. “It was a very competitively priced device.” For a time, Apple’s biggest competitors were unable to go below the iPad’s price with their own tablets. When Motorola Mobility Holding’s Xoom tablet hit the market in February, the cheapest model available without a wireless service contract was $800. Motorola later released an entry-level model with more storage than the least expensive iPad, priced at $599. After lackluster sales, Apple’s major competitors are now finally undercutting the iPad on price, though it is not clear how sustainable that approach is. Motorola recently announced a plan to offer an entry-level Xoom tablet for $379 at Best Buy stores for a limited time. After Hewlett-Packard, having missed sales goals, announced plans to discontinue its TouchPad line of tablets, it dropped the price of its cheapest model to a fire-sale $99.

The most credible challenge to the iPad is likely to come from Amazon’s $199 Kindle Fire tablet, which goes on sale in November. While analysts say they believe Amazon will lose money on each device sold, the Internet retailer’s plan is to use the device to encourage purchases of other Amazon products and services, like e-books. Toni Sacconaghi, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Company, said the price of the iPad reflected a “mind-set change” at Apple after the introduction of the first iPhone in 2007, which started at $499. That was an eye-popping sum for a phone in markets like the United States, where people had become accustomed to getting lower-price, carrier-subsidized phones in exchange for committing to long wireless contracts.

Only a few months after the product went on sale, Apple cut $200 off the price of the high-end model of the iPhone, to $399. Apple shifted gears again in 2008 with a new model called the iPhone 3G that it priced at $199, after beginning to accept handset subsidies from its carrier partners, something it did not do with its first version of the phone. Carriers pay Apple more for the latest iPhones — around $600 each, analysts estimate — aiming to profit by locking consumers into wireless plans.

Mr. Sacconaghi said Apple’s pricing of the original iPhone and its exclusive distribution deal with AT&T in the United States at the time created an opening for Google and its handset partners to flood the market with phones running its Android operating system. While Apple’s iPhone business is thriving, Android handsets accounted for 43.4 percent of the worldwide smartphone market in the second quarter, compared with 18.2 percent for Apple, the research firm Gartner estimates. Many carriers now offer older Android handsets that cost customers nothing if they sign up for two-year contracts. And now even Apple is getting into that act: when it announced its latest iPhone model this month, it said its two-year-old iPhone 3GS would be free with a two-year contract.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/technology/apples-lower-prices-are-all-part-of-the-plan.html?pagewanted=2&sq=apple wingfield prices&st=cse&scp=3

Ninjahedge
October 27th, 2011, 04:55 PM
Um.... The 4S is not a revolutionary product. It is not the 5 yet, so you can afford to make it cheaper.

Releasing something at the same time does not necessarily make it equal...


(BTW, I was able to get the HTS Incredible 2 for $30 at CostCo..... So... what apple product could I get for $30?)

GordonGecko
October 27th, 2011, 04:59 PM
(BTW, I was able to get the HTS Incredible 2 for $30 at CostCo..... So... what apple product could I get for $30?)
Hmm is that with or w/o a carrier contract? If it isn't I'm going to go buy a few of those to use as spares

Ninjahedge
October 28th, 2011, 08:30 AM
Two drawbacks:

1 = It was with contract
2 = it is now $50 even with....

I got it because I needed one for work (they are covering data charge). Verizon was letting me have a "deal" on one for $175 because I was a "loyal" customer. ("Normal" price was $225).

I still cannot figure out all the payment chains with these things.

Oh, as a "New" customer, the price was $20.... I just wasn't new enough.

GordonGecko
October 28th, 2011, 10:57 AM
The carrier sets a referral fee for the agents based on client contract length. So if Amazon for example sends someone over for a new 2 year contract with minimum $60/month plan, the referral fee might be something like $250. So if Amazon is selling a $300 wholesale phone, they may be happy enough with a $50 profit margin by selling it to you for $99, whereas other retailers may want higher margins and the carrier itself figures why compete with all the stores, might as well charge $199 because they have a captive audience

Teno
October 28th, 2011, 02:13 PM
Um.... The 4S is not a revolutionary product. It is not the 5 yet, so you can afford to make it cheaper.

You think the version number is what should determine the cost?



(BTW, I was able to get the HTS Incredible 2 for $30 at CostCo..... So... what apple product could I get for $30?)

You paid the carrier subsidized cost. The Incredible 2 is not a flagship phone that's why its so cheap. Its also likely you are not going to get the latest OS updates anytime soon if ever.

AT&T offers the iPhone 3G for free under contract. Even though the iPhone 3G is over two years old it still receives the latest OS updates.

Ninjahedge
October 28th, 2011, 03:41 PM
You think the version number is what should determine the cost?

no.





You paid the carrier subsidized cost. The Incredible 2 is not a flagship phone that's why its so cheap. Its also likely you are not going to get the latest OS updates anytime soon if ever.

Already got one. It still costs a similar amount to make, so calling it a flagship has little bearing on it.

Let me break it down for you:

Retail = $400
Standard contract = $225
"Special" contract = $175
Costco + contract = $30

"It just don't add up!!!"


AT&T offers the iPhone 3G for free under contract. Even though the iPhone 3G is over two years old it still receives the latest OS updates.

3G and OS updates do not matter. Just like a Prada bag from 2-3 years ago. Most of the people I know that have talked or salivated over the phone are more interested in getting the latest, not necessarily in what it does.

If you want an EXTREME example of this (with portable technology) go to Tokyo.

Teno
October 28th, 2011, 05:52 PM
Already got one. It still costs a similar amount to make, so calling it a flagship has little bearing on it.

The Incredible 2 is a four month old phone. The specs of the newest premium Android phones have far surpassed the Incredible 2



Let me break it down for you:

Retail = $400
Standard contract = $225
"Special" contract = $175
Costco + contract = $30

"It just don't add up!!!"


Because among the Android world they come up with the "newest most amazing Android phone" every two weeks. The value of any one Android phone doesn't last very long.

Gordon said in the earlier post.

Verizon is going to get the two year contract either way. So they have little reason to heavily subsidize the phone.

Verizon's third party phone vendors are able to undercut Verizon because they primarily sell phones while Verizon gets the two year contract.

Costco is able to cut the subsidy deeper because selling phones is not their primary business.




3G and OS updates do not matter. Just like a Prada bag from 2-3 years ago. Most of the people I know that have talked or salivated over the phone are more interested in getting the latest, not necessarily in what it does.

Now you argue people don't care what the phone does. Dude you are all over the map.


If you want an EXTREME example of this (with portable technology) go to Tokyo.


"The iPhone captured 72% of Japan's small but growing smartphone market in the last year
Apple said on its most recent earnings call that last quarter's iPhone sales in Japan grew 183% year-over-year."


The Crazy Phones In Japan That The iPhone Is Competing With (http://www.businessinsider.com/japan-mobile-phones-2010-4)

scumonkey
October 28th, 2011, 06:02 PM
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb276/scumonkey/tumblr_llziu3Jaz51qii6tmo1_250.gif


Again...What does any of the above discourse have to do with the death of Steve Jobs?

lofter1
October 28th, 2011, 10:15 PM
His appliances live after him.

Fabrizio
October 29th, 2011, 06:58 AM
Scumonkey, maybe instead of contributing nothing to the thread other than the "what does this have to do with" whine (and again the visual), you can instruct us on what would be on topic regarding "the death of Steve Jobs". Shall we talk about pancreatic cancer? The finer points of cremation?

scumonkey
October 29th, 2011, 04:48 PM
instead of contributing nothing to the thread
pot meet kettle...
look who STARTED the thread.

Fabrizio
October 29th, 2011, 05:16 PM
Oh. Ok....I see. Sorry about that.

You started the thread and so naturally you want to keep it pure with posts that "have to do with the death of Steve Jobs".

Well, this is from Wikipedia...it's the best I can do for now:

"On October 5, 2011, around 3:00 p.m., Jobs died at his home in Palo Alto, California (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Alto,_California), aged 56, six weeks after resigning as CEO of Apple. A copy of his death certificate indicated respiratory arrest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respiratory_arrest) as the immediate cause of death, with "metastatic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metastatic) pancreas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancreas) neuroendocrine tumor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroendocrine_tumor)" as the underlying cause. His occupation was listed as "entrepreneur" in the "high tech" business."

(Let's see if this passes the "clappy guy" test)

scumonkey
October 29th, 2011, 05:41 PM
:rolleyes:
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSpxhSyvuHXLx3bkTxuaPZUlzQQwGXGk CXApgGdOjzkC4dxgFpLvw

Ninjahedge
October 31st, 2011, 10:28 AM
As funny as wormy is, I don't get the slam......

As for clappy, the only point being, people seem to focus more on the commercial success of a product than the actual contributions (or lack thereof) of the man himself.

He is an interesting individual, to say the least, but those that seem to lament him as if he were some sort of saint is just kinda creepy.

Teno
October 31st, 2011, 06:05 PM
What's an example of him being lamented as a saint?




He is an interesting individual, to say the least, but those that seem to lament him as if he were some sort of saint is just kinda creepy.

Merry
November 1st, 2011, 07:14 AM
The worm has turned ;). Something relevant.


Editorial> Good for Apple, Good for Architects

Sam Lubell on the design genius of Steve Jobs.

We all knew it was coming, but the news of Steve Jobs’ death still shook most of us as if a close relative had passed.

We all have our own reasons for grieving this man that we had never met. But one factor we all have in common is that for better or worse, Jobs had more of an impact on many of us than presidents and Nobel Prize winners. His products, and the culture they created, touched us every day, and, more accurately, every minute.

It’s this aspect of his legacy that can be a lesson to architects and to anyone in the creative fields. The greatness of Apple’s products, honed immeasurably in Jobs’ second stint at the company since the late ‘90s, is that they are designed to make the user experience as pleasurable as possible.

Architects often forget this cardinal rule of production. I’ve heard several tell me that they’re happy if they’re pleased with their designs, even if their clients or neighbors are not.

Architects don’t make spaces for themselves, but for others. In the hyper-competitive world of technology design, this plays out quickly. If people aren’t happy with their products they shift to something else. Even if it’s not as apparent, the same goes for architecture. If they don’t listen to what people want, architects will fail and lose the business.

Jobs, like the Eameses and other innovators before him, separated himself from the pack by combining Apple’s legendary functionality with a perhaps more legendary sense of design. It’s the reason that people wait in line for Apple’s products, that iPads are the subjects of museum shows, and that Apple’s stock price has reached ridiculous levels. It’s not flashy design—in fact the products are minimal to the extreme—it’s their beautiful, sophisticated design merged seamlessly with functionality.

“The details are not the details. They make the design,” said Charles Eames, who along with the rest of his office is currently the subject of several shows as part of the Getty’s Pacific Standard Time series of exhibitions.

And this seamless, detail-obsessed design, of course, was combined with Jobs’ other genius: marketing. He was not only a technical and design wizard, he was a promotional genius, combining the cool of his products with ads that were equally hip—another seamless transition. Marketing sense is a talent that so many architects lack. But no design can flourish without being properly sold, and the business end of design is at least as important as the creative end.

While it’s true that in architecture and design less is often more, in marketing more is always more, and it’s something that Jobs knew from the beginning, when he launched Macintosh with an inspiring Super Bowl ad.

“Architecture is the will of an epoch translated into space,” said Mies van der Rohe, the master of minimalism. Jobs taught us that in this age of distraction and short attention spans, functionality merged with striking design in an equally seamless package still stands out above the rest. If architects and designers shortchange any of these elements, they will probably take the same path as the Zune did against the iPod. Ever heard of Zune?

http://www.archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=5730

Ninjahedge
November 1st, 2011, 08:39 AM
I gave up after the second paragraph or so.

Can you really kiss the ass of a dead man THAT fervently?

Teno
November 2nd, 2011, 03:27 PM
He did all of these things before he died.

Is it better to kiss the ass of a live man fervently?


I gave up after the second paragraph or so.

Can you really kiss the ass of a dead man THAT fervently?

Ninjahedge
November 2nd, 2011, 03:49 PM
Irrelevant.

Troll bait.

MidtownGuy
November 2nd, 2011, 08:58 PM
We all knew it was coming, but the news of Steve Jobs’ death still shook most of us as if a close relative had passed.

This has got to be one of the most idiotic, bombastic sentences I have ever read. A close relative? Like a brother or parent? Is he fu*kking kidding me? get a grip!!

I wouldn't even waste one more second of my time reading the article if that's the premise he's starting with.

Fabrizio
November 3rd, 2011, 10:55 AM
An interesting article in today's NYTimes on how fast the media turns:

Short Sainthood for Steve Jobs

By ALEX WILLIAMS
Published: November 2, 2011

THE glowing obituaries appeared moments after Steve Jobs’s death was announced on Oct. 5. “Silicon Valley’s radiant Sun King,” eulogized The San Jose Mercury NewsHis name was floated for Time magazine’s Person of the Year, though the honor traditionally goes to the living. Even Gawker, the snarky media blog, adopted the sober tone of a state funeral. “The scope of Jobs’s achievements is hard to put into words,” Gawker wrote in a respectful 1,200-word post simply titled “Steve Jobs Is Dead.”

That tone lasted 18 hours. By 2 p.m. the following day, Gawker posted another item, “Steve Jobs Was Not God.” It argued: “If you like Apple products, fine. They are products. They do not have souls. They are not heroes, and neither is their creator, no matter how skilled he may have been.”

It wasn’t just Gawker. The waters quickly muddied after the first wave of obituaries passed. Thanks to Facebook and Twitter, anyone with a beef against Mr. Jobs or Apple found a platform to sound off about an industrialist who doubled as a pop star.
The Steve Jobs backlash began as quickly as the mythmaking had. Candlelight vigils were just starting to form outside Apple stores worldwide when bloggers began their assault.

“Was Steve Jobs a Good Man, or an Evil Corporate CEO and Wall Street Shill?” asked a contributor on the Occupy Wall Street Web site.
Then, on the Forbes site, David Coursey, a technology writer, wrote an article called “Steve Jobs Was a Jerk, You Shouldn’t Be,” in which he
suggested that Mr. Jobs might have been “a borderline sociopath.”

There was a time when the gloves stayed put after the death of a legend. After John Lennon was murdered in 1980, news outlets generally painted him as a guitar-strumming prince of peace, and were loath to dwell on old tabloidish tales of him as a skirt-chasing druggie who was mean to Paul. But the velocity with which Steve the Saint stories morphed into Steve the Sinner stories was striking, said Kurt Andersen, the novelist and former New York magazine editor. “It’s the speed of the news cycle writ large, in terms of legacy and existential worth,” he said.

On Twitter, while Apple cultists wrote 140-character homages, nonbelievers passed along snipes about Steve the Tyrant, Steve the Evil Boss, Steve the Micromanaging Perfectionist. As for the mainstream press, it cleared its throat, straightened its tie and dived into the fray with the rest of them. Five days after Mr. Jobs’s death, the British news magazine The Week published aroundup of “anti-Jobs” stories. It included an essay titled “In Praise of Bad Steve” by a writer named D. B. Grady in The Atlantic (“Apple wasn’t built by a saint. It was built by an iron-fisted visionary”); a 2010 investigation in The Mail in England into the “Chinese suicide sweatshop” where iPods are made; and an Op-Ed article in The New York Times by Mike Daisey, a monologist, who pounded Apple for what he saw as Orwellian tactics (“There is no tech company that looks more like the Big Brother from Apple’s iconic 1984 commercial than Apple itself”).

Mr. Daisey is no stranger to the Jobs backlash. He produced and stars in an extemporaneous one-man show, “The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs,” that, by coincidence, opened at the Public Theater on Oct. 17, making its New York debut after touring for 14 months. The play blasts Apple and other technology companies for alleged harsh conditions in their factories. The fortuitous timing of his show’s opening in New York prompted a deluge of hate mail and a couple of death threats, Mr. Daisey said, but he was unfazed. “Are we seriously going to read one more time he was a genius?” he said. “By not sharing anything of his dark side, the complexities of his life, you’re sort of shortchanging the true complexity and interestingness of the story.”

And, of course, there is the publication of Walter Isaacson’s 630-page authorized biography, “Steve Jobs.” While the book is hardly a hatchet job, bloggers looking for a fresh angle skimmed it for juicy bits, like how Mr. Jobs, in the early days of Apple, stiffed an original employee, who was a close friend, on stock options. But Mr. Isaacson, who worked with Mr. Jobs on the book for two and a half years, said that it was not fair to Mr. Jobs, or the book, to cherry-pick the Bad Steve anecdotes. “The way the book turns out, he developed a very loyal team who was very inspired by him, and he has a very loving family,” Mr. Isaacson said. “In the end, you have to judge him on the outcome.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/fashion/the-steve-jobs-backlash.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1320331226-qKNwoMskcI2gY3sCxyRqCA

----

I see it this way:

1 - Saint Steve... a ridiculous sentiment.

2 - Steve Jobs Visionary&Genius.... IMHO absolutely true (but legitimately debatable).

3 - Steve Jobs the Bad Guy... I like the knowing juicy details but it has nothing to do with point 2.

GordonGecko
November 3rd, 2011, 11:26 AM
We all knew it was coming, but the news of Steve Jobs’ death still shook most of us as if a close relative had passed.


This has got to be one of the most idiotic, bombastic sentences I have ever read. A close relative? Like a brother or parent? Is he fu*kking kidding me? get a grip!!

I wouldn't even waste one more second of my time reading the article if that's the premise he's starting with.

Actually, I hate Apple products and generally think they are overpriced and often poorly constructed, but I have to agree with the above statement. This was a great man, and it really did feel like a close relative had passed. Being involved in IT for many years, I can truly appreciate the greatness that this man represented.

MidtownGuy
November 3rd, 2011, 12:45 PM
A close relative. Wow. Having lost my father, my grandparents, an Aunt who often took care of me when I was young...I think for most people that losing a close relative is not even in the same ballpark as when some guy you never even met dies. No matter how "great" he supposedly was.

But that's just me...I don't usually shed tears when humanitarians, Nobel Prize winners, or people who discover new medicines pass away...and yet I was pretty shaken at quite a few family funerals over the years. Go figure.

Ninjahedge
November 3rd, 2011, 02:24 PM
A close relative >> A CEO.

It shows our disconnect when people are willing to place flowers around the RETAIL STORE in memory of a man whose most humanitarian moment was making a portable music player.....

Again, lack of scope and perspective makes this so wonky.

Teno
November 3rd, 2011, 07:42 PM
That's an interesting statement seeing as how obsessed Jobs was with design and function.

All of Apple's primary products are built from solid pieces of aluminum and glass. Other computer and electronic manufacturers have tried this and have found the process difficult to design and costly to manufacture. To the point where several laptop manufacturers make laptops made of plastic that looks like the metallic Mac Book.

In what context do you feel that Apple's products poorly constructed?


Actually, I hate Apple products and generally think they are overpriced and often poorly constructed,

GordonGecko
November 3rd, 2011, 09:59 PM
In what context do you feel that Apple's products poorly constructed?
My significant other has been buying macs forever. I've seen so shortage of cracked AC adapters, noisy laptop fans, failed CD slots (that Apple refused to create trays for), batteries that couldn't hold a charge after a few months, etc etc. Yet she still won't buy a PC, go figure

Ninjahedge
November 4th, 2011, 08:41 AM
Suffice to say, I still believe they have a very good product, just not one that demands the price they ask for it....

I have never said "Apple sux"... they may $uck, but it is not from producing crap.

Teno
November 4th, 2011, 02:00 PM
I won't question your anecdotal experience, stuff happens.

Back in 2006 when Apple first switched to intel processors. There was an issue with the notebook fans running hard. With the notebook being made of aluminum most of the heat is dissipated from under the bottom, now the fans rarely run very much. But the bottom gets very hot.

Tray loading optical drives have more moving parts and more prone to damage and need of repair. I once saw someone using their optical disc tray as a cup holder. Just all types of wrong.

Though I will say Apple is using poor quality optical drives these days. I think by next year they will eliminate optical drives from their computers all together.

So far Apple tops consumer satisfaction ratings across its products.


For the eighth year in a row, Apple's Macs have satisfied more customers than any other vendor's PCs. (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20108336-17/apple-tops-in-customer-satisfaction-for-8th-year/)




My significant other has been buying macs forever. I've seen so shortage of cracked AC adapters, noisy laptop fans, failed CD slots (that Apple refused to create trays for), batteries that couldn't hold a charge after a few months, etc etc. Yet she still won't buy a PC, go figure

Teno
November 4th, 2011, 02:30 PM
The MacBook Air is Apple's best selling computer. So far no one has been able to match the MBA on price or performance.

"Surely no one can tell me Apple's competitors couldn't see this coming? Sony, Dell and others previously attempted to introduce thin and light but full-featured notebooks, but they didn't sell: they were too expensive, had lousy battery life, or were too thick or too slow."

Apple's MacBook Air just kills the competition (http://blogs.computerworld.com/18796/apples_macbook_air_just_kills_the_competition)


I have never said "Apple sux"... they may $uck, but it is not from producing crap.

eddhead
November 5th, 2011, 02:03 AM
An interesting article in today's NYTimes on how fast the media turns:

I see it this way:

1 - Saint Steve... a ridiculous sentiment.

2 - Steve Jobs Visionary&Genius.... IMHO absolutely true (but legitimately debatable).

3 - Steve Jobs the Bad Guy... I like the knowing juicy details but it has nothing to do with point 2.

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/images/misc/progress.gif

I agree but ....


A close relative. Wow. Having lost my father, my grandparents, an Aunt who often took care of me when I was young...I think for most people that losing a close relative is not even in the same ballpark as when some guy you never even met dies. No matter how "great" he supposedly was.

But that's just me...I don't usually shed tears when humanitarians, Nobel Prize winners, or people who discover new medicines pass away...and yet I was pretty shaken at quite a few family funerals over the years. Go figure.

I also agree with this.

Fabrizio
November 6th, 2011, 07:56 AM
Since Job's death, The NYTimes seems to feature an article about Apple nearly everyday. This one has got to be the strangest:

Is the Era of the Motorcycle Over?

By FREDERICK SEIDEL
Published: November 5, 2011

ARE motorcycles passé? Are they sort of over? I ask as a rider of two-wheel Italian beauties that go very fast, gracefully streamlined subsonic technology from the Ducati
factory in Bologna. I own two sport bikes and two racers. I ride racing motorcycles on the street. One of my motorcycles is capable of nearly 200 miles an hour. I write prose about motorcycles. I write poems about motorcycles.

So I ask with some authority. Are motorcycles — even superb and lovely Italian motorcycles from the land of Donatello and Bertolucci — being replaced as love objects, as arm candy, by other more contemporary show-off desirables?

Electronic ones. Mostly made by Apple.

The iPhone 4S, the iPad 2, the 11-inch and 13-inch thin, light MacBook Air computers — these are the sleek gorgeousness young people go on about, have to have, and do have, in the millions. These machines, famous for the svelte dignity of their designs — and of course, far less expensive than a motorcycle — are a lens to see the world through and to do your work on. It’s their operating speeds that thrill. Young people cut a bella figura on their electronic devices.

Now, of course, it is not just the young who buy Apple products. I lay emphasis on the young, particularly young men, because they are the ones who might otherwise be buying motorcycles, and aren’t, at least not at all in the numbers they did before the economic downturn. The great recession was disastrous for motorcycle sales around the country, especially, it seems, for sport bikes, the ones that perform with brio but have no practical point to make. In other words, they are not bikes to tour on, they are not a comfortable way for you and a companion — wife or partner or friend — to travel to work or to a distant campground. You can do it, but it’s not ideal. Young riders were not buying motorcycles of any kind, and especially, it seems, not sport bikes.

Or, to say it another way, it’s as if the recession induced a coma in all the potential new motorcyclists, and in so many of the already experienced motorcyclists, from which they woke changed, changed utterly, and found themselves standing in line outside an Apple store, patiently waiting to buy the latest greatness. They are buying a slice of what Apple does — and how it does it — and how it looks doing it. They are buying function but, just as important, they are buying glamour. The device enhances the buyer’s sense of self. It helps the person think and at the same time not think. Once, not so long ago, motorcycles did the same thing.

In a few days, at the International Motorcycle Show in Milan, Ducati will introduce a radically new sport bike called the Panigale, after Borgo Panigale, the neighborhood on the outskirts of Bologna where the Ducati factory is. The Ducati people are being secretive about how the Panigale will look and how it will perform. But there have been spy photos of the bike being tested on the Mugello circuit, with the former World Superbike champion Troy Bayliss aboard, and plenty of rumors and speculation about the tech specs.
We know this much. It will make brave hearts beat faster. It will weigh less than its predecessor. It will have a new sort of frame. It will have an ingenious new exhaust system. It will handle. It will be fast. It will be beautiful. How many Ducati followers — the Ducatisti — will have to have one? Some. Oh, for the days — not so long ago — when a boy’s world would have fallen to its knees before a new Ducati design.

In Dallas, at Advanced Motorsports, his motorcycle dealership, Jeff Nash, a gentleman and one of the great Ducati racebike tuners in America, and a racer himself, deplores the passivity of the young who would rather be home with their iPads playing computer games than astride the red-meat lightning of an 1198 Superbike blazing down a Texas highway making that unmistakable growling deep Ducati sound. Mr. Nash would go further.
Better to be out in the air astride just about any motorcycle alive!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/opinion/sunday/is-the-iphone-replacing-the-motorcycle.html

(http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/opinion/sunday/is-the-iphone-replacing-the-motorcycle.html)----
A number of these articles mention Apple with a comparison to Italian design: if one is going to do that, I'd cite Giugiaro:

http://www.italdesign.it/home (http://www.italdesign.it/home)

And the Italian electronics company Brionvega that was making these Apple-esque styled beauties in the 1960's:

http://blog.iso50.com/6461/brionvega-doney/

http://brionvegas.wordpress.com/
(http://blog.iso50.com/6461/brionvega-doney/)
http://www.thecoolhunter.net/article/detail/1400

ZippyTheChimp
November 7th, 2011, 08:47 AM
The New Yorker


The Tweaker

November 14, 2011

Not long after Steve Jobs got married, in 1991, he moved with his wife to a nineteen-thirties, Cotswolds-style house in old Palo Alto. Jobs always found it difficult to furnish the places where he lived. His previous house had only a mattress, a table, and chairs. He needed things to be perfect, and it took time to figure out what perfect was. This time, he had a wife and family in tow, but it made little difference. “We spoke about furniture in theory for eight years,” his wife, Laurene Powell, tells Walter Isaacson, in “Steve Jobs,” Isaacson’s enthralling new biography of the Apple founder. “We spent a lot of time asking ourselves, ‘What is the purpose of a sofa?’ ”

It was the choice of a washing machine, however, that proved most vexing. European washing machines, Jobs discovered, used less detergent and less water than their American counterparts, and were easier on the clothes. But they took twice as long to complete a washing cycle. What should the family do? As Jobs explained, “We spent some time in our family talking about what’s the trade-off we want to make. We ended up talking a lot about design, but also about the values of our family. Did we care most about getting our wash done in an hour versus an hour and a half? Or did we care most about our clothes feeling really soft and lasting longer? Did we care about using a quarter of the water? We spent about two weeks talking about this every night at the dinner table.”

Steve Jobs, Isaacson’s biography makes clear, was a complicated and exhausting man. “There are parts of his life and personality that are extremely messy, and that’s the truth,” Powell tells Isaacson. “You shouldn’t whitewash it.” Isaacson, to his credit, does not. He talks to everyone in Jobs’s career, meticulously recording conversations and encounters dating back twenty and thirty years. Jobs, we learn, was a bully. “He had the uncanny capacity to know exactly what your weak point is, know what will make you feel small, to make you cringe,” a friend of his tells Isaacson. Jobs gets his girlfriend pregnant, and then denies that the child is his. He parks in handicapped spaces. He screams at subordinates. He cries like a small child when he does not get his way. He gets stopped for driving a hundred miles an hour, honks angrily at the officer for taking too long to write up the ticket, and then resumes his journey at a hundred miles an hour. He sits in a restaurant and sends his food back three times. He arrives at his hotel suite in New York for press interviews and decides, at 10 P.M., that the piano needs to be repositioned, the strawberries are inadequate, and the flowers are all wrong: he wanted calla lilies. (When his public-relations assistant returns, at midnight, with the right flowers, he tells her that her suit is “disgusting.”) “Machines and robots were painted and repainted as he compulsively revised his color scheme,” Isaacson writes, of the factory Jobs built, after founding NeXT, in the late nineteen-eighties. “The walls were museum white, as they had been at the Macintosh factory, and there were $20,000 black leather chairs and a custom-made staircase. . . . He insisted that the machinery on the 165-foot assembly line be configured to move the circuit boards from right to left as they got built, so that the process would look better to visitors who watched from the viewing gallery.”

Isaacson begins with Jobs’s humble origins in Silicon Valley, the early triumph at Apple, and the humiliating ouster from the firm he created. He then charts the even greater triumphs at Pixar and at a resurgent Apple, when Jobs returns, in the late nineteen-nineties, and our natural expectation is that Jobs will emerge wiser and gentler from his tumultuous journey. He never does. In the hospital at the end of his life, he runs through sixty-seven nurses before he finds three he likes. “At one point, the pulmonologist tried to put a mask over his face when he was deeply sedated,” Isaacson writes:



Jobs ripped it off and mumbled that he hated the design and refused to wear it. Though barely able to speak, he ordered them to bring five different options for the mask and he would pick a design he liked. . . . He also hated the oxygen monitor they put on his finger. He told them it was ugly and too complex.


One of the great puzzles of the industrial revolution is why it began in England. Why not France, or Germany? Many reasons have been offered. Britain had plentiful supplies of coal, for instance. It had a good patent system in place. It had relatively high labor costs, which encouraged the search for labor-saving innovations. In an article published earlier this year, however, the economists Ralf Meisenzahl and Joel Mokyr focus on a different explanation: the role of Britain’s human-capital advantage—in particular, on a group they call “tweakers.” They believe that Britain dominated the industrial revolution because it had a far larger population of skilled engineers and artisans than its competitors: resourceful and creative men who took the signature inventions of the industrial age and tweaked them—refined and perfected them, and made them work.

In 1779, Samuel Crompton, a retiring genius from Lancashire, invented the spinning mule, which made possible the mechanization of cotton manufacture. Yet England’s real advantage was that it had Henry Stones, of Horwich, who added metal rollers to the mule; and James Hargreaves, of Tottington, who figured out how to smooth the acceleration and deceleration of the spinning wheel; and William Kelly, of Glasgow, who worked out how to add water power to the draw stroke; and John Kennedy, of Manchester, who adapted the wheel to turn out fine counts; and, finally, Richard Roberts, also of Manchester, a master of precision machine tooling—and the tweaker’s tweaker. He created the “automatic” spinning mule: an exacting, high-speed, reliable rethinking of Crompton’s original creation. Such men, the economists argue, provided the “micro inventions necessary to make macro inventions highly productive and remunerative.”

Was Steve Jobs a Samuel Crompton or was he a Richard Roberts? In the eulogies that followed Jobs’s death, last month, he was repeatedly referred to as a large-scale visionary and inventor. But Isaacson’s biography suggests that he was much more of a tweaker. He borrowed the characteristic features of the Macintosh—the mouse and the icons on the screen—from the engineers at Xerox PARC, after his famous visit there, in 1979. The first portable digital music players came out in 1996. Apple introduced the iPod, in 2001, because Jobs looked at the existing music players on the market and concluded that they “truly sucked.” Smart phones started coming out in the nineteen-nineties. Jobs introduced the iPhone in 2007, more than a decade later, because, Isaacson writes, “he had noticed something odd about the cell phones on the market: They all stank, just like portable music players used to.” The idea for the iPad came from an engineer at Microsoft, who was married to a friend of the Jobs family, and who invited Jobs to his fiftieth-birthday party. As Jobs tells Isaacson:



This guy badgered me about how Microsoft was going to completely change the world with this tablet PC software and eliminate all notebook computers, and Apple ought to license his Microsoft software. But he was doing the device all wrong. It had a stylus. As soon as you have a stylus, you’re dead. This dinner was like the tenth time he talked to me about it, and I was so sick of it that I came home and said, “**** this, let’s show him what a tablet can really be.”


Even within Apple, Jobs was known for taking credit for others’ ideas. Jonathan Ive, the designer behind the iMac, the iPod, and the iPhone, tells Isaacson, “He will go through a process of looking at my ideas and say, ‘That’s no good. That’s not very good. I like that one.’ And later I will be sitting in the audience and he will be talking about it as if it was his idea.”

Jobs’s sensibility was editorial, not inventive. His gift lay in taking what was in front of him—the tablet with stylus—and ruthlessly refining it. After looking at the first commercials for the iPad, he tracked down the copywriter, James Vincent, and told him, “Your commercials suck.”



“Well, what do you want?” Vincent shot back. “You’ve not been able to tell me what you want.”
“I don’t know,” Jobs said. “You have to bring me something new. Nothing you’ve shown me is even close.”
Vincent argued back and suddenly Jobs went ballistic. “He just started screaming at me,” Vincent recalled. Vincent could be volatile himself, and the volleys escalated.
When Vincent shouted, “You’ve got to tell me what you want,” Jobs shot back, “You’ve got to show me some stuff, and I’ll know it when I see it.”


I’ll know it when I see it. That was Jobs’s credo, and until he saw it his perfectionism kept him on edge. He looked at the title bars—the headers that run across the top of windows and documents—that his team of software developers had designed for the original Macintosh and decided he didn’t like them. He forced the developers to do another version, and then another, about twenty iterations in all, insisting on one tiny tweak after another, and when the developers protested that they had better things to do he shouted, “Can you imagine looking at that every day? It’s not just a little thing. It’s something we have to do right.”

The famous Apple “Think Different” campaign came from Jobs’s advertising team at TBWA\Chiat\Day. But it was Jobs who agonized over the slogan until it was right:



They debated the grammatical issue: If “different” was supposed to modify the verb “think,” it should be an adverb, as in “think differently.” But Jobs insisted that he wanted “different” to be used as a noun, as in “think victory” or “think beauty.” Also, it echoed colloquial use, as in “think big.” Jobs later explained, “We discussed whether it was correct before we ran it. It’s grammatical, if you think about what we’re trying to say. It’s not think the same, it’s think different. Think a little different, think a lot different, think different. ‘Think differently’ wouldn’t hit the meaning for me.”


The point of Meisenzahl and Mokyr’s argument is that this sort of tweaking is essential to progress. James Watt invented the modern steam engine, doubling the efficiency of the engines that had come before. But when the tweakers took over the efficiency of the steam engine swiftly quadrupled. Samuel Crompton was responsible for what Meisenzahl and Mokyr call “arguably the most productive invention” of the industrial revolution. But the key moment, in the history of the mule, came a few years later, when there was a strike of cotton workers. The mill owners were looking for a way to replace the workers with unskilled labor, and needed an automatic mule, which did not need to be controlled by the spinner. Who solved the problem? Not Crompton, an unambitious man who regretted only that public interest would not leave him to his seclusion, so that he might “earn undisturbed the fruits of his ingenuity and perseverance.” It was the tweaker’s tweaker, Richard Roberts, who saved the day, producing a prototype, in 1825, and then an even better solution in 1830. Before long, the number of spindles on a typical mule jumped from four hundred to a thousand. The visionary starts with a clean sheet of paper, and re-imagines the world. The tweaker inherits things as they are, and has to push and pull them toward some more nearly perfect solution. That is not a lesser task.

Jobs’s friend Larry Ellison, the founder of Oracle, had a private jet, and he designed its interior with a great deal of care. One day, Jobs decided that he wanted a private jet, too. He studied what Ellison had done. Then he set about to reproduce his friend’s design in its entirety—the same jet, the same reconfiguration, the same doors between the cabins. Actually, not in its entirety. Ellison’s jet “had a door between cabins with an open button and a close button,” Isaacson writes. “Jobs insisted that his have a single button that toggled. He didn’t like the polished stainless steel of the buttons, so he had them replaced with brushed metal ones.” Having hired Ellison’s designer, “pretty soon he was driving her crazy.” Of course he was. The great accomplishment of Jobs’s life is how effectively he put his idiosyncrasies—his petulance, his narcissism, and his rudeness—in the service of perfection. “I look at his airplane and mine,” Ellison says, “and everything he changed was better.”

The angriest Isaacson ever saw Steve Jobs was when the wave of Android phones appeared, running the operating system developed by Google. Jobs saw the Android handsets, with their touchscreens and their icons, as a copy of the iPhone. He decided to sue. As he tells Isaacson:



Our lawsuit is saying, “Google, you ****ing ripped off the iPhone, wholesale ripped us off.” Grand theft. I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go to thermonuclear war on this. They are scared to death, because they know they are guilty. Outside of Search, Google’s products—Android, Google Docs—are shit.


In the nineteen-eighties, Jobs reacted the same way when Microsoft came out with Windows. It used the same graphical user interface—icons and mouse—as the Macintosh. Jobs was outraged and summoned Gates from Seattle to Apple’s Silicon Valley headquarters. “They met in Jobs’s conference room, where Gates found himself surrounded by ten Apple employees who were eager to watch their boss assail him,” Isaacson writes. “Jobs didn’t disappoint his troops. ‘You’re ripping us off!’ he shouted. ‘I trusted you, and now you’re stealing from us!’ ”

Gates looked back at Jobs calmly. Everyone knew where the windows and the icons came from. “Well, Steve,” Gates responded. “I think there’s more than one way of looking at it. I think it’s more like we both had this rich neighbor named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it.”

Jobs was someone who took other people’s ideas and changed them. But he did not like it when the same thing was done to him. In his mind, what he did was special. Jobs persuaded the head of Pepsi-Cola, John Sculley, to join Apple as C.E.O., in 1983, by asking him, “Do you want to spend the rest of your life selling sugared water, or do you want a chance to change the world?” When Jobs approached Isaacson to write his biography, Isaacson first thought (“half jokingly”) that Jobs had noticed that his two previous books were on Benjamin Franklin and Albert Einstein, and that he “saw himself as the natural successor in that sequence.” The architecture of Apple software was always closed. Jobs did not want the iPhone and the iPod and the iPad to be opened up and fiddled with, because in his eyes they were perfect. The greatest tweaker of his generation did not care to be tweaked.

Perhaps this is why Bill Gates—of all Jobs’s contemporaries—gave him fits. Gates resisted the romance of perfectionism. Time and again, Isaacson repeatedly asks Jobs about Gates and Jobs cannot resist the gratuitous dig. “Bill is basically unimaginative,” Jobs tells Isaacson, “and has never invented anything, which I think is why he’s more comfortable now in philanthropy than technology. He just shamelessly ripped off other people’s ideas.”

After close to six hundred pages, the reader will recognize this as vintage Jobs: equal parts insightful, vicious, and delusional. It’s true that Gates is now more interested in trying to eradicate malaria than in overseeing the next iteration of Word. But this is not evidence of a lack of imagination. Philanthropy on the scale that Gates practices it represents imagination at its grandest. In contrast, Jobs’s vision, brilliant and perfect as it was, was narrow. He was a tweaker to the last, endlessly refining the same territory he had claimed as a young man.

As his life wound down, and cancer claimed his body, his great passion was designing Apple’s new, three-million-square-foot headquarters, in Cupertino. Jobs threw himself into the details. “Over and over he would come up with new concepts, sometimes entirely new shapes, and make them restart and provide more alternatives,” Isaacson writes. He was obsessed with glass, expanding on what he learned from the big panes in the Apple retail stores. “There would not be a straight piece of glass in the building,” Isaacson writes. “All would be curved and seamlessly joined. . . . The planned center courtyard was eight hundred feet across (more than three typical city blocks, or almost the length of three football fields), and he showed it to me with overlays indicating how it could surround St. Peter’s Square in Rome.” The architects wanted the windows to open. Jobs said no. He “had never liked the idea of people being able to open things. ‘That would just allow people to screw things up.’ ”

© 2011 Condé Nast Digital

Ninjahedge
November 7th, 2011, 10:07 AM
Nice guy.

He sounds like the canary in the coal mine. One person that gets consciously irritated at the things that most would only feel subconsciously. Anybody that would be worried about the laundry taking longer, but then ironically take WEEKS in discussion about it is the mark of a perfectionist.

The classic line of someone not being able to tell you what they want, but have enough pull to get 10, 50, 100 versions in front of him and decide on what font best works for a particular app or request a NEW font made if all he sees is not what he wants.


He was lucky in that he had people that would tolerate that kind of selectiveness (in many professions it is rejected rather vehemently) and that it hit the right company at the right time.

I have no doubts that much of what he did made Apple what it is, but at the same time, much of what he did probably did not amount to a rats patootie.

Oh, and this:


Jobs, we learn, was a bully. “He had the uncanny capacity to know exactly what your weak point is, know what will make you feel small, to make you cringe,”

That explains some of his outright insulting advertisements.....

Sad part is, it worked... :(

Teno
November 7th, 2011, 03:53 PM
You make is sound like he got away scott free. Which clearly he did not. Like all of us, he had his own insecurities and inner demons to deal with.



Nice guy.

That explains some of his outright insulting advertisements.....

Sad part is, it worked... :(

MidtownGuy
November 7th, 2011, 04:01 PM
Sounds like he was a major league douche bag.

Ninjahedge
November 7th, 2011, 04:45 PM
You make is sound like he got away scott free.

How?

Seriously, I never said, or implied, he "got off" anything.

He was a real tool. He was mean to his family, his co-workers, and even to his customers. He wanted things his way.


Like all of us, he had his own insecurities and inner demons to deal with.

Waah. When you are an ass you SHOULD have to deal with your own "inner demons". Otherwise you are just a blind ass. I don't think for a moment he punished himself over these things. He knew what would work in many things, and that is a talent, but the fact that he did not have the ability to create it himself was a major liability that made it very lucky he had those around him that could.

Fabrizio
November 8th, 2011, 04:09 AM
I'd wager none of you have ever worked in a design studio. From my own first-hand experiences and the nightmare experiences I've heard from colleagues over the years... working for the big guys (as well as the people hired to keep their ships sailing): they're all sociopaths.

And sorry: who gets the credit for the interesting pleat you've designed? The person (or company) whose name is on the check. If you don't understand that, you'll not last very long.

The one person I learned the most from about design also happens to be one of the biggest assholes I know. Who cares?

MidtownGuy
November 8th, 2011, 11:44 AM
Who cares if someone who designs is an asshole? People do. Just like they do about any other professional (or human being!) who is an asshole. They're in every field. Why wouldn't character be a legitimate and significant part of a discussion about a man who died and whose life is being discussed? Who cares indeed. What rubbish.

As far as none of us ever working in a design studio, you'd lose that "wager". I'd "wager" I worked in design studios for as long as you ever have, and for a few of the top names in the business here in New York City. Then I started my own studio. Woopee-do. So...you have first hand experience with designers. Who cares?

Top surgeons can be douche bags...priests, celebrities, artists...Prime Ministers...and talking about them as such is a natural part of any discussion of them. So get off your high horse.

Yes, Steve Jobs was a major league douche bag...and not nearly as great as so many other individuals who merit and have received honest and well rounded posthumous appraisals.

Fabrizio
November 8th, 2011, 02:42 PM
I call Jobs a sociopath and I mention in a previous post that I like hearing the details. But his being a sociopath is, in my experience, par-for-the-course and does not diminsh his achievements.

From that, we get the above post.

Quite something.

MidtownGuy
November 8th, 2011, 03:04 PM
Sure, he likes hearing the details, until a bit later, then it's "who cares?"

Blah. Blah. Blah. All bases covered.

Teno
November 9th, 2011, 03:18 PM
Talk about taking it personally. You guys sound like Steve Jobs shot your dogs and slept with your wives.

Geez............

Ninjahedge
November 9th, 2011, 04:02 PM
Nah, he is just tired of people raising him to a level of recognition and praise that Mother Teresa did not even enjoy.... Well, as much as anyone could enjoy posthumously......

MidtownGuy
November 9th, 2011, 07:10 PM
Talk about taking it personally. You guys sound like Steve Jobs shot your dogs and slept with your wives.

Geez............
if that's how you want to play it, you sound like Steve Jobs polished your knobs and helped birth your children.

Fabrizio
November 10th, 2011, 03:43 AM
Ninja writes:



He is an interesting individual, to say the least, but those that seem to lament him as if he were some sort of saint is just kinda creepy.

Teno responds:


What's an example of him being lamented as a saint?

Ninja writes:


tired of people raising him to a level of recognition and praise that Mother Teresa did not even enjoy....


....and so it goes.

Ninjahedge
November 10th, 2011, 08:35 AM
Fab, if you need to have it explained to you, then you are either:

1. Blind
2. Trolling.

Fabrizio
November 10th, 2011, 08:37 AM
... and so it goes.

Oh...tell us again about how we are making Steve Jobs out to be a Saint.

MidtownGuy
November 10th, 2011, 11:57 AM
I vote #2.

scumonkey
November 10th, 2011, 12:00 PM
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb276/scumonkey/understand_detail.png

Ninjahedge
November 10th, 2011, 12:09 PM
... and so it goes.

Oh...tell us again about how we are making Steve Jobs out to be a Saint.

No.

eddhead
November 14th, 2011, 11:40 AM
Suffice to say, I still believe they have a very good product, just not one that demands the price they ask for it....

I have never said "Apple sux"... they may $uck, but it is not from producing crap.

If that were the case, people would't buy it ... but they do. BTW, i am typing this on a brand new lenovo think pad (work issued). I have to admit, I do kind of like it.

eddhead
November 14th, 2011, 11:46 AM
Talk about taking it personally. You guys sound like Steve Jobs shot your dogs and slept with your wives.

Geez............

I agree. I have not read anything to suggest that anyone believes Jobs should be nominated for sainthood. Only that he will arguably be remembered as a great 20th century visionary and innovator. Given his contributions to the digital age and the emergence of Apple as an commercial power I do not see how you can disagree with that assessment.

He may or may not have been a prick (as was said about Henry Ford) but that is immaterial to the argument about his place in history.

Ninjahedge
November 14th, 2011, 12:21 PM
If that were the case, people would't buy it ... but they do. BTW,

Incorrect. People buy things that are overpriced because they FEEL for it.

Examples:

Diamonds.
Jaguars (the car)
SONY products (especially in the late 90's)

Like I said, once you have an emotional link to a consumer, the product REALLY has to suck for them to become "disillusioned" and look somewhere else.


i am typing this on a brand new lenovo think pad (work issued). I have to admit, I do kind of like it.

Some machines are better than others. I am not saying that the lenovo you have is better than the Mac (I do not know what the iLaptop name is... :o), but there are some that definitely shine more than others....

eddhead
November 14th, 2011, 02:37 PM
Capitalism 101. The markey always seeks equilibrium, i.e. a price point where supply of a good = demand for that good. When supply gets too high, prices go down. When demand exceeds supply, prices go up.

The fact consumers are willing to pay the price is proof it is worth the price. It is about economics, not technology.

Diamonds, rare watches and other luxury commodities (not sure about Jags) are an exception because supply is artificially controlled. Not so with Macs.

Teno
November 14th, 2011, 05:04 PM
Yeah I've heard Lenovo actually makes pretty good notebooks.

Short cut gestures on the MBP have now become second nature to me. And using the full screen apps in OS X Lion, so that my desktop is not littered with dozens of open windows.

It would be difficult for me to break that work flow.


If that were the case, people would't buy it ... but they do. BTW, i am typing this on a brand new lenovo think pad (work issued). I have to admit, I do kind of like it.

Ninjahedge
November 15th, 2011, 09:07 AM
The fact consumers are willing to pay the price is proof it is worth the price. It is about economics, not technology.

There is a difference between real life and Economics 101.

If people can be fooled into believing that something is worth it, to "buy with their hearts", they will be convinced that it is worth it.

Classic example: Ford. Ford had many customers that stayed for MANY years in the 80's and 90's still claiming they made the best vehicles. Hell, the F150 is still THE largest selling vehicle on the market today.

Is it (or were they) the best? No. Were they the most economical, best bang for the buck? No. They simply had the "faith" of their "loyal" customers, which is ALSO something they teach you in Economics and Advertising.

When selling technology to non-techies, it is important to emphasize the feelings involved, not the actual stats. Once you get people away from the facts like battery life, speed, included memory, cross-compatibility and other strait numbers, it is much easier to get someone to be willing to pay more for something that did not cost more to produce.

As is the case with most emotional issues, it is difficult to ever reconcile them with strait forward logic.

So be it.

Steve was a genius that did more in the 20th century than any other techie and will live on in history as THE god of the machine. :rolleyes:

;)

Fabrizio
November 15th, 2011, 10:32 AM
We are all "non techies".

99.999 % of consumers who buy computers are non-techies.

99.999 % of consumers are non-techies when comes to buying washing machines and microwaves too...

...and electric razors and automobiles...

...and juicers and food processors and electric blankets.

So you do the normal non-techie thing and go to Consumer Reports:

"Apple’s MacBook line of portable computers are.... the top computer in every category on Consumer Reports.

Apple’s 11-inch MacBook Air scored a 62 out of 100 taking the top spot in the small laptop section. Scoring a 56, Gateway came in second while HP came in third with a 49.

The 13-inch model category was even worse for Apple’s competition. Apple’s 13-inch MacBook Pro took the top five of seven spots with Sony and Asus taking the final two.

The 15-inch category was much closer with Apple MacBook Pro taking the top three spots, but the competition did come in at just three points behind.

The 17-inch category was another big win for Apple. The MacBook Pro took the top two spots with the competition sharing the other six."

http://www.loopinsight.com/2011/05/24/apple-macbooks-top-all-consumer-reports-laptop-categories/