Geek Bravado

The blown hard arrogance of Parallax Abstraction.

Tag Archives: computers

Apple’s beginning to test the limits of their fans

Leave a Comment Posted by on October 26, 2012

Strap in, it’s another Apple post! It’s been a busy week for them so you know I had to get one in.

We had the announcements of the iPad Mini, a tablet that’s substantially more expensive than most of its rivals and inferior to many of them on features. We also got a new entry is the ludicrously overpriced segment of the MacBook line as opposed to just the normally overpriced segment and to the shock of pretty much everyone, a new full size iPad, a mere 7 months after they started pushing the iPad 3. This was all intentionally timed around the launch of Microsoft’s own Surface tablet as well as Windows 8. All that was followed up by Apple’s latest quarterly earnings which were still very rosy but had a few negative surprises. As usual, the fanboy press corps is spinning like a washing machine in a tornado to minimise the negatives as if it’s somehow their job to keep Apple elevated in the realm of public opinion. None of this is a surprise.

However, the reactions I’ve seen from many an hardcore Apple fan mostly this week but to a lesser extent in the last month as well have me very curious and wondering if the company everyone loves to love is beginning to test the limits of their fandom.

Whenever Apple has a press event or an earnings call, the most telling elements are never what they say but what they don’t say. They are masters of massaging their message and spinning without the appearance of doing so. It’s incredible and no one I’ve seen can do it like they can (though having most of the press never ask tough questions for fear of losing access certainly helps too). They will always hype up their successes and distort numbers into universal positives but they will simply avoid talking about things they can’t brag about. iAds, iCards, Siri, Apple TV sales and many more are all examples. The notable recent exception is Maps, only because it was so unbelievably terrible that they had to say something because even the press had a hard time defending them on it. Being a public company means they can’t hide sales figures though and this quarter, the shock was that while they still sold a boatload of iPads, it was noticeably lower than forecast. This was made up for and then some by iPhone sales that clobbered last year’s but there’s a telling omission in that stat as well. They never say how many of the new iPhones being sold are to new customers and how many are just existing customers replacing old handsets. A sale is a sale either way but the latter is a worse kind of sale because it indicates that they aren’t necessarily growing the user base as much, something that could be a long term challenge as other platforms like Android and Windows Phone rapidly start catching them in the app department.

Everyone, fan or no, was stunned to see them announce the iPad 4 (or the new New iPad). There’s been much speculation as to why they would replace their flagship tablet after such a short period as they have built their empire on relatively predictable yearly product cycles.

Some are claiming that the iPad 3 was actually not fully baked when it was shipped and that it was merely a stop gap measure until they could get this one out. I don’t go for this as there have been no major reported faults with the iPad 3 and it’s biggest new feature was the Retina display which impressed everyone and still hasn’t been matched elsewhere. The only real change in the iPad 4 is a faster processor which isn’t a big draw since barely anything’s making use of the iPad 3′s processor yet anyway.

Others speculate that Apple wants to put all their iOS products on the same refresh cycle so that they can have new iPhones and new iPads both come out in the Fall and have the same guts, rather than the iPhone always leapfrogging the iPad for six months. I don’t buy this either because people don’t have unlimited money and if you release both a new iPhone and iPad at the same time, I think you’re less likely to guarantee a sale of both as opposed to staggering the releases which makes it easier for consumers to justify the additional expense.

I speculated after the reveal that there may be an unannounced tablet coming from a competitor that destroys the iPad 3 and Apple was desperate to get something slightly better out ahead of it so they don’t get killed in the high-end segment this Christmas. That’s a long shot though. While the Surface looks promising, no one thinks it’s an iPad killer and if someone had an superior device coming for Christmas, a PR push would already be in full swing. It’s possible that Tim Cook is scared of Windows 8 and it’s potential impact among the crowd who still own PCs but don’t have a tablet yet. Given how much time he spends making snide remarks about the platform, it certainly seems to be on his mind a lot.

iPad sales do seem to be in decline and while it is modest, that the year of the iPad 3 is the first year of this decline could be a bad omen for the future. Does a slightly faster upgrade fix that though? At best, it puts a finger in the dyke.

Of course, I have no real idea what their motives were in doing this. What I do know is that a lot of iPad 3 owners feel burned, many of whom are hardcore iFaithful. Now, this is technology and one can say that getting upset because something you bought got upgraded is a classic example of First World Entitlement Syndrome. The thing is, this is the culture Apple has carefully cultivated for many years now. The yearly technolust and turning technology into fashion accessories is what’s driving their growth. For whatever reason, they feel the time is right to push the boundaries harder and try to get consumers to upgrade yet again. Maybe it’s out of arrogance (which they certainly have plenty of), maybe it’s out of fear of the real competition that’s coming and the inevitable race to the bottom that will ensue, maybe it’s just an experiment that they won’t repeat . Either way, I’ve seen more than a few people who have lined up to give them money for years now questioning if they want to as often and some are even saying they’ve had enough with Apple altogether. Take this quote from the iPad Mini thread on Gamers With Jobs:

“I am a longtime Apple guy – a musician, audio producer, and have been using them almost exclusively for the past 15 years. We have 2 iPhones, an iPad 3, & an iMac in our home, and I switched my dad over to OS X a few years ago and just recently bought my mom an iPad. The last 2 or 3 years have really disillusioned me, though, and I’m no longer viewing Apple as exclusive in my home. I’m considering my next PC purchase and highly suspect it will be a PC. I’m switching to WinPhone 8 when it launches, I’m getting a Surface, and will probably move my composing rig over to Windows soon, too. Maybe I’m unique, but Apple isn’t winning me over these days.”

Notice how this isn’t a decision he just reached, he said this has been building for the last couple of years. This is not the first such sentiment I’ve read either. I’ve seen blog posts (I unfortunately lost the links to them) from decades-long Apple users who have become disillusioned with the company’s recent direction. They say product quality has gone down (in stark contrast to the public perception about Apple stuff), their software has become much less reliable and buggy and that they seem more focused on cranking out expensive, consumable consumer electronics on a yearly basis than supporting their existing customers well and keeping everything polished to a mirror shine. Some have too much investment into Apple hardware and software to be able to switch, some still consider them a lesser evil than Microsoft and a few are actually considering dipping their toes in the other ocean. I’m not talking fickle mainstream customers here, I’m talking guys who have been using Macs since they were in black and white, since long before OS X and who stuck with the company even when they were on the brink of bankruptcy. These are the people who started the iCult. And they’re considering change.

Is this the majority of Apple customers? Of course not. It’s a tiny, infinitesimal slice of the user base and even for how much money they give the company, no one would notice if they went somewhere else. The thing is, these people are the taste makers. When Apple was almost dead and released the first iPod, these were the people who convinced the mainstream to try it. These are the people who stuck with the company through thick and thin and who were the first ones to preach the genius of Steve Jobs to the world. They may not mean much monetarily now but some of them questioning their long-time loyalty is a very telling sign.

Apple have purposefully created and curated monumental, astronomical and I believe unsustainable market expectations for themselves and while they’ve managed to capitalise on them so far, cracks are beginning to show. The “old guard” may be beginning to lose faith and while that’s not the end, it could be that the bubble is about to pop. When that happens, the reaction will be massive and will likely multiply exponentially as more of the mainstream public realises that the company’s image of infallibility is just that, an image. This won’t happen overnight, it won’t even happen in a year but their fortunes can still turn quickly. The “old guard” customers are not where Apple’s making most of their money right now and they shouldn’t necessarily be focusing on them. I do however believe that what these people have to say is a sign of potential major challenges ahead. Apple’s leadership should be paying close attention to what these people are saying and taking their words to heart before their sentiment expands and begins to run away from them.

I know this post sounds very doom and gloom and I’m sure more than a few of you dismissing it as “haters gonna’ hate.” I am not a fan of Apple and have very sound, legitimate reasons for that but I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I don’t want to see them fail or go away. Apple has woken up the rest of the technology industry from a stagnant slumber. They’re forcing others to think outside the box and innovate and it’s about damn time that happened. I guarantee that things like Surface and Windows 8 wouldn’t exist (or at least not in their current forms) were it not for Apple forcing the issue. I do believe Apple has gotten too big, too powerful and way too high on its own success. Their leadership is arrogant and greedy, their die hard fans are insufferable and they all need to be taken down a few pegs. Their growth needs to stabilise and they need to become one player in a vibrant, competitive market. Having one company so far out in front is not good for anyone, as Microsoft’s once near total dominance proved.

Despite Apple’s continued great successes, I believe some events in the last month or so are providing small signs of where things could be heading. The people leading Apple are much smarter than me and that they’ve managed to maintain this bubble as long as they have so far is remarkable and admirable. It can’t last forever though and if they don’t want it to burst suddenly, they need to reign themselves in a bit. Your most loyal fans are speaking Apple, you ignore them at your own peril.

Business, Mobile Phones, Predictions, Tablets, Technology , , , , ,

Gabe Newell says a lot of things

2 Comments Posted by on July 26, 2012

I think Valve are awesome. They make great games, Steam while not perfect by any means is still a fantastic digital distribution platform and they have a corporate culture I would do morally questionable things to be able to work in. I would argue that no one company has done more to advance and evangelise the ideas and strengths of PC gaming than this company.  Their founder and “leader” (you can’t really call him that within their structure) Gabe Newell is an incredible genius and business driver who I would place on a podium right beside the likes of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. I would consider it the thrill of a lifetime to be able to meet and talk with him for even five minutes.

He also likes to make waves in the press and has once again by commenting that the upcoming Windows 8 is “a catastrophe” and that it is,  among other reasons, why Valve is beginning to heavily invest in Linux. This originally came from AllThingsD which is to Apple what Fox News is to Republicans so it’s possible the context of his quote is being twisted but it wouldn’t surprise me if it was true. Now, I’ve not yet written about Windows 8 because I haven’t used it enough to form a full opinion but I have my worries about its radical changes as many others do. These changes are significant but I would hardly call it a “catastrophe”, especially since everything that’s great about Windows 7 is still there and not going away any time soon. Nonetheless, when someone with the knowledge and clout of Gabe Newell speaks, people listen. As well they should.

Before the fanboy press uses this as a reason to point at Microsoft and go “SEE! We were right!” (they’re already doing that anyway), I think it is important to also consider Newell’s history with strongly worded comments like this and how his company’s view has often not followed through on them. Back in 2005, Newell commented that the Xbox 360 “makes his life a lot worse” because of justified gripes like the optional hard drive. He’s also recently railed against Microsoft’s ridiculous certification process and insistence on charging for all DLC, both of which I also agree with. Nonetheless, this hasn’t stopped them from releasing all their recent titles on it to very healthy sales. He also called the PlayStation 3 a “total disaster” but ended up embracing the platform to an even greater extent by putting a version of Steam on it with Portal 2 and taking PS3 development internal after EA buggered up its version of The Orange Box.

I don’t consider him a hypocrite for these statements really. That Valve ended up supporting both systems isn’t an indication that his feelings weren’t genuine or that his gripes weren’t real, just that they had the talent to overcome them. Still, that he seemingly comes out against something publicly doesn’t mean that Valve won’t support it and in the end, possibly end up liking it. Newell likes to speak his mind, something I’ve said I think more people in this industry need to do. I think he intentionally makes these bold statements about new platforms yet to come out because he knows people listen to him and he wants to see people both inside and outside of Valve take it as a challenge and rise to the occasion. He knows this stuff will get quoted and if there’s one thing about Gabe Newell I’m sure of, it’s that he never says anything without a lot of thought having gone into it.

Personally, I still don’t think Linux will ever gain major desktop or gaming adoption. There’s too many editions with inconsistent features, not enough hardware support, it’s a technical support nightmare and while it’s an incredibly powerful and flexible platform, it’s still built first and foremost by engineers. Even after using editions built for more “mainstream” users like Ubuntu, I still don’t feel they fully understand ease of use and there’s still too much elitism within its community. That’s not to say I wouldn’t like to see it gain traction (especially given it’s wide open nature) and if anyone can make it happen, it’s Valve. I eagerly await the chance to try out Steam and Source Engine games on a Linux drive at some point soon.

I do wonder if Newell is less worried about the major interface changes in Windows 8 and more about the fact that it comes with a built-in store that could compete with Steam, something I’m not big on either. Microsoft hasn’t yet been able to do a digital store elegantly (especially on PC) but I think more competition is always better. I would love to be able to hear him speak on this subject in greater detail and hear how his experiences with it differ from mine. I’m hoping to get to spend enough time with it to be able to write up my own impressions soon.

What Gabe Newell said was important and should be talked about but as fanboys chalk this up as another reason why Microsoft, Windows and PCs will be dead in a few years, I think it’s important to remember his history of saying such controversial things and what’s really ended up coming out of those statements. He’s a brilliant man and part of a brilliant company but one of its many strengths lies in that they tend to find slick ways to embrace, rather than ignore the things they’ve talked down about. Despite what he’s said, I’m guessing we’ll see Steam playing very nicely with Metro and if Valve’s really smart (and they are), quickly getting a version of it made for Windows 8 tablets as well and putting their flag down in a whole other market. I very much look forward to what they do in the future but Valve is still one company in an industry and I think people shouldn’t take Newell’s carefully planned statements as die hard gospel.

Business, Predictions, Video Games , , , , , , , ,

DayZ: A Wonder Impossible In the Cloud Future

3 Comments Posted by on June 25, 2012

A couple of weeks ago, I got wind of the DayZ mod for ArmA II from some friends at Gamers With Jobs. This has been out for a little while now. A single guy from New Zealand decided to take this hyper-realistic military game and write a zombie apocalypse survival mod for it. Check his site if you want more details but basically, your goals are to stay alive as long as possible in a world where you have to scavenge for everything while surrounded by a ton of zombies and other human players, most of whom want to kill you on sight and steal your stuff. You can be ended very easily and if you are, you have to start all over again with nothing. The average person’s lifespan in the game is less than an hour. Did I mention the mod is also in very early alpha? It’s incredibly hardcore, brutally difficult, tense, buggy and frustrating as all Hell.

And it’s awesome!

Many prefer to play DayZ by themselves but that’s not really my thing. When I manage to meet up with a group of friends though (which is often hard as most people rarely have maps and have to navigate the massive island by landmarks), this is some of the best multiplayer fun I’ve had in years. Collaborating with a group of people over Ventrilo is incredible because though the challenges are many, the satisfaction of going on a successful raid or fighting off an attack by human bandits or a horde of zombies is unlike what you’ll experience in almost any other game. DayZ makes you work for every little thing but you feel on top of the world when you get it. Its popularity has taken off and in addition to having a growing and thriving community, it’s actually sold thousands of new copies of ArmA II as new players buy in to be able to try it out.

As I played the other day, a thought occurred to me. Lately, many in the games industry have been hyping up “cloud gaming” as the primary future for the medium. Basically, the idea is that most gaming will be done via streaming services, where you don’t actually run the game on a computer or console on your side but access it on someone’s server and have the video streamed to you as you play. Companies like OnLive and Gaikai have been experimenting with this and the tech is rocky but improving. Recently leaked internal documents from Microsoft show they are positioning the next Xbox to become a cloud system later in its life and Sony has openly said they believe cloud gaming is the future. There are definitely advantages to it, such as only needing a basic, low power computer or console to play on as all it’s really doing is decoding a video signal while the heavy lifting is done elsewhere. This means you could buy one box and theoretically play technologically evolving games on it indefinitely. That’s kind of where the benefits for the consumer end though.

Let’s leave aside for the moment that Internet service providers are already going out of their way to try and stop this kind of thing. If cloud gaming is indeed the future, there’s a lot of powerful lobbyists that will have to be silenced first, and that’s only in the relatively few parts of the world where fast, reliable broadband is commonplace. What concerns me more about this future is the lack of ownership, control and freedom consumers will have over the games they buy. Official mod support has become less and less common these days, with a few companies like Valve, Bethesda and Bohemia Interactive (makers of ArmA II) still embracing and encouraging it. In all cases though, modding a game involves well, modifying existing game assets and code in order to create something new. In the cloud future, where no one owns anything they purchase and the game you play lives entirely in an instance on a server, modding would be largely impossible. How would people like the makers of DayZ get access to the code, scripts, artwork and server infrastructure necessary to make their creations? How would they be able to test and quickly update it in a virtual environment that’s being tightly controlled by a large publisher, distribution service or platform holder? Indeed, how would amazing new experiences like DayZ ever get a chance exist in the cloud future?

Sure, there are ways that such things could be done in this environment but really, how likely are they? Mods generally enjoy only small user bases, not enough to even be a rounding error to a large publisher. In the cloud future being prophesied, small companies like Bohemia Interactive couldn’t afford to create their own mod-friendly cloud services from the ground up and the big boys who would be running them don’t care about mods as they see them as a threat to paid DLC. This future has the potential to stamp out one of the greatest independent creative outlets in gaming, possibly ruining the future for a great many innovative ideas before they even have a chance. Some of gaming’s greatest successes like Counter-Strike, Team Fortress and Day of Defeat began their lives as mods and new projects like DayZ are showing that when developers and publishers embrace modders, a single guy can take an existing game, turn it into something incredible and make a pile of extra money for the developer at the same time. It’s win-win for everyone but the cloud future that the big companies want would end that.

Maybe DayZ isn’t for you but if you’re a PC gamer at all, chances are you’ve played and enjoyed at least one mod in your time. When you’re next hearing about the cloud future and thinking about all the ways that’s going to make gaming easier and better, stop and think about what it could mean the end of. DayZ is a wonder and there are potentially many more like it to come, but only if we still get to control our purchases after making them. The cloud future isn’t for our benefit, it’s for the benefit of the big games industry and the big guys don’t want DayZ, they want more Call of Duty and overpriced map packs to go with it. That’s definitely not what I want.

Business, Predictions, Video Games , , , , , ,

UPDATED: Mike Daisey Stretched the Truth But There’s Still A Problem In China

1 Comment Posted by on March 16, 2012

If you’ve been reading the Internet this afternoon you’re probably aware of this already but This American Life has retracted the story Mike Daisey about Apple factory conditions after further fact-checking revealed that some of the more dramatic portions of his story either stretched the truth or were outright lies. I did a post about this story and though I don’t claim to be any kind of journalist, it appears I now used a bad source and for that, I admit it and want my readers to know if you don’t already.

It’s always a shame when one of the few sources of real journalism left in the world has a misstep like this and I will give This American Life credit, they seem to be owning the mistake. They are planning to devote an entire one hour episode to coming clean, pointing out the errors that were made and asking those involved to clarify. You’d never see Fox News or CNN do that. I do think the timing of this is highly suspicious as this is iPad 3 launch day. While it’s easy to say that this shows they were bowing to pressure from a mega corporation and are doing this to appease them, I actually don’t think that’s true. I do think that they are intentionally making this announcement today in the hope it will get drowned out among the sea of other lazy outlets devoting “news” time to covering the lines at Apple stores, something that involves about as much journalism as the Apple advertisements that will likely follow. Honestly, I think that’s kind of a shady thing to do but This American Life of all people know that many are incredibly connected (especially those who would buy an iPad) and word of this is going to make it out regardless. Since their site is currently down due to overloading as I write this, I think it’s safe to say the word is out.

Regardless of the reasons for this retraction, my great fear is that this will give the iCult and those of it who have infiltrated the press like David Pogue cause to go “SEE! There’s no problem in China, it’s all just made up by Apple haters!” Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s true that I have many legitimate reasons to dislike Apple as a company but that doesn’t mean there is no problem. Around the same time as Daisey’s story, other detailed reports were made about conditions in Apple factories, reports that haven’t been called into question. And as I’ve said before, this isn’t just an Apple problem but one that involves nearly every major electronics manufacturer. That one guy misrepresented some things doesn’t suddenly mean there’s no issue and that companies like Apple and many others shouldn’t be doing a lot more than they are to make things better.

As for Mike Daisey, I think his attempt to justify what he did by saying “it wasn’t journalism, it was just theatre” is complete crap. He did what he did to get his story on the air and draw attention to his one-man show about it. By fabricating stuff as he did, he only served to damage the cause he was championing, a cause I believe in and which many more should. Now we have one of the most vocal and rabid fanbases in the world using this as a reason to deny the problem and one of the last bastions of truly great journalism has been shamed and perhaps damaged permanently for what many will say was slandering the world’s most powerful and admired company. Thanks Mike, a lot of good you’ve done. I really hope he’s smart enough to just fade away and not continue to try to defend himself or represent the cause for fair treatment of Chinese workers anymore. He screwed up, he got caught, now he needs to go away and leave the honest people to continue to press the issue. He should be disgraced.

If you’re one of the people who got an iPad 3 today (I almost was but am not going to be for now), please take a moment to think about where it came from and what the people who made it for you went through so you could have your shiny new toy. A lot of this stuff is made in not so nice ways and one guy’s exaggerated tale of those ways doesn’t mean that obscenely rich companies like Apple can’t and shouldn’t do more to address it. We as consumers are the ones with the ultimate power to make things better and there has never been a more important time to do so.

UPDATE: I finally got a chance to listen to the full Retraction episode yesterday. I now have even more respect for This American Life than I did before and even less for Mike Daisey. The show went far and above what was required of them to admit their mistake and it was clear from his tone of voice that Ira Glass is deeply embarrassed and upset. As for Daisey, he did apologise for submitting the episode to them as journalism but still refused to accept responsibility for his lies which he was caught red handed in. He continued to use the “it was just theatre” defense and it clearly demonstrated to me that he has no remorse for what he did, only for getting caught. As I said, the man’s a disgrace to his cause. I was also pleased to hear the third act devoted to talking to the New York Times report I mentioned and addressing the real problems that do exist in China which Daisey used as the stepping stone for his narrative. I am glad they didn’t try to ignore the issue but said “We know we screwed up but this problem is real.” I truly hope that those who listened paid attention to that.

Thankfully, I haven’t seen that much backlash from Apple’s defense force. Even some of those I expected to scream how they’ve somehow been vindicated have either remained quiet or have praised This American Life for doing the right thing. I’m glad for that as the show doesn’t deserve to have its reputation tarnished. If anything, this shows how committed they are to proper journalism. When I have the means, I will be donating money to the show and needless to say, I will keep listening. I hope their listener base doesn’t take much of a hit from this.

Business, Computers, Mobile Phones, Tablets, Technology , , , , , , , , ,

The Worries of An Apple Led Post-PC World

4 Comments Posted by on March 8, 2012

So the iPad 3 was announced yesterday (yes I know it’s just called the iPad but it’s the 3rd one so it’s the iPad 3) and as usual, the press tripped over themselves to give them free PR. The mainstream news media which wouldn’t give any other tech launch more than a cursory mention practically live blogged the event and well, the fanboy driven tech press did what it always does with Apple launches, gush like teen girls at a boy band concert, much like the legion of practically religious level Apple enthusiasts who clogged my Twitter feed during the reveal. It’s still gross and in the press’ case, the opposite of journalism but it’s also par for the course now and my getting mad about it is pointless. Truthfully, I was paying closer attention than I usually would because my girlfriend and I were strongly considering splitting the purchase of an iPad 3. She wants it to surf and do e-mail easily when she travels for work and I want it to see if it’s possible for iOS games to hook me in (which they haven’t to this point). Something unexpected happened after work that may result in us moving soon and thus delaying that money being spent for a while but we’ll see.

Among all the gushing comes the usual talking points about the “post-PC world” tablets are supposedly ushering in, points Apple themselves trumpet whenever they can. They are quick to point out that the term doesn’t mean the end of traditional computers (an area where they still make a lot of money) but it does mean a reversal of the current roles where the desktop or laptop is a person’s primary means of computing and the tablet complements that. Tablets don’t really fit in with how I do my day-to-day computing, mostly because I am usually either at home or the office, type at a blistering speed an on-screen keyboard simply can’t keep up with and I’m used to a heavy multitasking environment where I can do and monitor several things at once. You put two copies of myself on a couch with stuff to do and the version of me using my HP ProBook will leave the tablet version of me in the dust. However, I’ll be the first to admit that the way in which I use a computer now is not at all mainstream and this is most certainly a vision based around the mainstream. If my girlfriend and my Mom found themselves using a tablet first and foremost, that’s cool by me as long as I can still have my laptop and gaming desktop too.

Tablets require less material to make, can arguably be priced to be much more accessible than traditional computers (though Apple is trying their damndest to avoid this), can be carried around as easily as a pad of paper and can do most day-to-day computing tasks without even breaking a sweat. I’m not denying the benefits of the “post-PC” world and many elements of it I will welcome. What I do have many concerns with is Apple being the leaders of this world. The original iPad kind of came from nowhere and virtually everyone trying to compete with it has been stumbling over themselves to catch up, while also thinking they can charge similar prices for devices that are simply inferior. As tablets go the iPad is virtually unchallenged and barring some major missteps by Apple or a roaring comeback into the space from Microsoft (whose missteps with Windows 8 will be the subject of a future post), it stands to be that way for the foreseeable future. And this is not good for anyone.

Having a single dominant player in any market is a bad thing because it discourages innovation and leads to higher prices because of reduced competition. One need look no further than when Microsoft Windows was basically your only real choice for a desktop operating system. Poor performance, gaping security flaws, massive product delays, tiny incremental updates and bullying of OEMs were all the orders of the day back then. Apple is still a distant minority in the traditional computing space but they gain ground on Windows every day and the iPad led post-PC world could put the writing on the wall for Microsoft’s key rainmaker. When Apple put their feet to the fire, what we ended up with was Windows 7, arguably the most polished and solid version of Windows ever and a product which I happily use every day and firmly believe is superior to Mac OS. However, even when Microsoft Windows was at its flattest and most stationary, there were a number of key differences of PCs compared to Macs which Microsoft embraced and still does to this day. Apple does not share these values and should they become the dominant player in the market, their continued adherence to them doesn’t do good for the future advancement of computing. Here are some examples of what I mean:

  • Apple likes closed platforms: The original incarnation of iOS didn’t allow third party applications of any kind. This was the way Steve Jobs wanted it because he believed these external influences destabilised the user’s experience and he was right, they do. But after screaming demand from users (and Android right around the corner who embraced third party software), he relented and it was arguably the smartest thing Apple ever did. Apple nonetheless still holds the keys to the kingdom and while they’ll let anyone write apps for iOS, you have to get their permission to make it available and they can refuse you for any reason, including for things like making an app that’s better than one of their stock ones or making a game that raises awareness of their supplier’s factory conditions. The biggest innovations have come from people breaking the mould and disrupting trends with new things. You know, exactly like iOS did. On Windows, you could write any program you wanted and put it out there with permission from no one. In an Apple post-PC world, only one entity has control of what you get access to and they have an agenda that doesn’t always favour innovation. That only benefits them, not the innovators and not the users.
  • Apple hates user choice: Want an iPad? There’s three different memory sizes and you can have it with cellular capability or not. Want an iPhone? There’s 3 of them and they aren’t expandable. Want an iMac? There’s 4 of them. A MacBook? 8. Want a gaming system? Sorry, there isn’t one. Don’t care so much about having a lot of disk space but want a faster CPU? Can’t do that, you pick a template. Want a desktop PC but also use your own monitor setup? You can only do that with a Mac Pro that starts at $2,600. And since the Mac and iOS aren’t open platforms where you have different manufacturers offering different products and competing on price (someone tried to do this with Mac OS and Apple destroyed them for it), you either go with their options at their prices or stay out. For your average mainstream end user, this probably isn’t a big deal but the enthusiast and professional markets are massive and growing and Apple doesn’t care about those. With Windows PCs, you have all the choice you could ever want from a bare bones netbook to an $8,000 gaming rig that will dim the lights on your whole block. There’s something for everyone and it’s easy to find something that will do what you want for the price you’re willing to pay. Which brings me to the next point.
  • Apple products are purposefully overpriced: This is less of a problem than it used to be but it is simple fact that at least when it comes to desktop and laptop computers, Apple products cost substantially more relative to the technical capabilities you’re getting. You show me an iMac and I will show you a PC with similar specs that costs way less. Apple makes something like $200+ on every iPad sold from day one, an utterly obscene profit margin by modern tech industry standards. Now, there’s nothing wrong with a company charging what the market will pay and at least right now, Apple has managed to convince many people that paying hundreds more than a similarly speced competitor’s product makes economic sense. However, the only reason they’re able to do this is again because they have no competition in their space. Yes, we do still have Windows PCs that are fiercely competing on price but remember, we’re talking in the context of a post-PC world where tablets are the de facto standard. Right now, inferior Android tablets are going on sale for the same $500 price as the iPad because Apple has wrongly got it into the heads of the mainstream public that any tablet under that price isn’t worth considering. If we enter a post-PC world that Apple largely controls, the cost of computing will go up substantially, making it harder for less wealthy people to get into and thus, reducing the number of people using what is now a fundamental part of everyday life. Competition is key to lower prices, innovation and accessibility and with Apple running things, there would be no such competition.
  • Apple believes they still own the products you buy: If you have an iPad, iPhone or iPod and want to load media or apps on it, you do it through iTunes. Period. A Mac App Store is already available and many believe software on Mac OS will eventually go the same way. On Android, there are multiple app stores that compete to offer the best products and prices and on Windows, you can get software in literally thousands of different ways to suit your preference. On iOS, there is no such thing unless you jailbreak your device (which of course voids the warranty and locks you out of future updates). Apple claims this is in the interest of making sure the user experience is always seamless and reliable but that’s a thin smokescreen. In reality, it’s structured this way to make sure anything you do with that device has to be approved by and more importantly, purchased through them. Apple takes a substantial cut of every single thing sold through iTunes and as with hardware, it’s not in their interest to let you shop elsewhere where they can’t control the experience and more importantly, their slice of the action. So after paying a minimum of $500 for your new iPad, Apple still believes they have the right to tell you how to use it and if you don’t agree, you don’t get to play in their sandbox. This is incredibly arrogant and despite what their carefully curated marketing tells you, this isn’t about ensuring a great experience for you but about how much they steer you into exclusively giving them more money, even after you’ve already given them a lot of it. In other words, they still believe they have a right to control your device, even after you’ve paid for it. As anyone who has used Windows 7 on a capable PC will say, you can have an open platform with choice and still have a rock solid, pleasing experience. You don’t have to wall it up for things to work well.
  • Apple is becoming a patent troll: There’s no denying that at least right now, Android based tablet competitors can’t hold a candle to the iPad. Frankly, Google and their partners need to get their act together and fast because every month they don’t bring out an iPad killer, more Android loyalists get fed up with waiting and go to the Apple camp. Windows 8 is also a long way off and we have no idea how that’s going to go. Beyond that though, there is another darker reason for this. Apple has been on a patent bender for the last several years, locking down everything they can and threatening Android partners with potentially bank-breaking lawsuits. They are already locked in many such fights across Europe. One of the main reasons Google bought Motorola Mobility for billions of dollars a while back was just to lock up their patent portfolio in order to use it to stare down Apple. Yes, lots of companies are doing this and yes, much of this is a result of an American patent system that’s broken to the point of absurdity. I don’t deny that but one also can’t deny that Apple is a company with $100 billion in cash with no end in sight, they don’t need the money and patents aren’t like trademarks, you don’t lose them if you just sit on them and don’t sue everyone. They’re doing this to bleed their competitors dry and trying to stop other, potentially better devices from entering the market alongside theirs. This isn’t an innovating marketplace of ideas, this is Apple trying to use their massive cash reserves to bully out anyone who can mount a threat to them. If they truly stand behind their products, then they should be able to stand on their own and if someone uses a slightly similar case design or the magnetic charging connector, they should have nothing to worry about if their stuff is still better. Using the courts to stop competition is manipulating the market and that doesn’t serve consumers.

You’ll notice one common theme in all those points: Choice or in Apple’s case, lack thereof. Everything Apple has built their impressive and continuing success on is based around restraining user choices which keeps prices high and ultimately, limits innovation only to their own and the ones they permit. So far this strategy seems to be working for them and probably will as long as they can string out the fashion trend that’s fuelling their current growth. But competition is what made the PC strong and it was a need to compete in new and creative ways that made Apple invent iOS and all its associated devices in the first place. Now that they are ruling the roost (at least as far as tablets go), their objective is about shrinking the scope of choice down and that’s something that only benefits them, not the customers and not the high-tech industry as a whole. Microsoft was accused, tried and heavily fined and regulated in Europe and almost in the US for doing far less nefarious things than that what I listed above. They were considered an evil predator but Apple does the same and in some cases worse and is considered a pioneering innovator.

Is a company who does all of what I’ve written and more the one you want having dominance of the post-PC world? I don’t know if I am. If you’re a hardcore Apple fan, you’ve likely blown off what I’ve written as me just being another hater who dislikes the top dog and that’s not what I am. Keep in mind, I almost bought an iPad 3 today and the only reason I didn’t was because of an unexpected event that should it not pan out, will have me considering the purchase again. I don’t want to see Apple fail, I just don’t want to see them being the only ones who have a say in the post-PC future.

Apple has done one thing exceedingly well: They took a very bloated, arrogant and stagnant high-tech industry and shoved a massive wad of humble pie in its face, almost overnight. That’s damn impressive and the shake up is exactly what the industry needed. I thank them for bringing about that change. However, I believe the tides have changed too quickly and even when they were almost down and out, Apple and their devoted fans were still incredibly arrogant. If they control the post-PC world, the same problems we faced before could be faced again, only with a different company at the top and no one in a position to challenge them. That’s bad for the industry, bad for consumers and bad for innovation. I truly hope that some of Apple’s competitors who are still scrambling to find their feet manage to do so and mount a proper fight. And I really hope that as consumers get more tech savvy, that they start to realise that Apple is supposed to work for them, not the other way around.

The post-PC world has the potential to be awesome and revolutionary but for it to realise its full potential, user choice must be at the forefront of it. In their current form, that’s not what Apple wants.

Business, Computers, Mobile Phones, Predictions, Tablets, Technology , , , , , ,

Apple Can Do Better for Chinese Workers

1 Comment Posted by on January 13, 2012

With surprisingly coincidental timing, Apple today released a statement about working conditions in the Chinese factories they employ that has nothing to do with the recent This American Life story, honest. They’ve announced that they will now produce a continually updated list of all the suppliers they do business with and they have put an independent, non-profit organisation in charge of conducting audits of the factories. Sounds like good progress right? Well, not really. While it does seem like Apple is trying to take this issue more seriously, there’s a few problems:

  • The list simply shows a bunch of company names, it doesn’t list what factories they are using or even what cities or countries they are in. Saying you buy services from Foxconn is all well and good but it’s a company with nearly a million employees all over the world.
  • This Fair Labour Association they’ve appointed to do the audits has only worked with the clothing industry. One would presume they will read up on the high tech industry and the specific manufacturing challenges it has but was there no one with actual experience in the field they could turn to?
  • They claim the audits will be unannounced but these companies have ears everywhere and many of the audits where they “fix” the results are also supposedly unannounced. They did not address how they will overcome this challenge.
  • Neither the auditors nor Apple themselves will release which factories are checked, who owns them or which ones are found in violation of standards and how. The only way we will find out if Apple has stopped dealing with a supplier is if their name disappears from the list and we will never know the reason.
  • The audits will only cover 5% of the factories Apple deals with.

I bolded that last point because it’s by far the most important one. This organisation, contracted by the world’s most valuable company will be auditing a percentage of Apple factories so low that it is within the statistical margin of error for most scientific surveys. Could this possibly be any more limp an attempt at dealing with this problem? I understand that as a non-profit, the Fair Labour Association probably doesn’t have a Foxconn sized workforce and that Apple can’t give them the funding to hire more staff without potentially contaminating their results. Nonetheless, audits this small make the whole process look like a public relations gesture more than a meaningful attempt to improve anything. I’m sure this will silence some of their critics and the Apple cultists both in the press and the public at large will show that this is them owning up to the problem and cracking down on worker abuse. In reality, this appears to me to be little more than a smokescreen and an attempt to rile up their fanbase to drown out those trying to expose a serious problem.

I’m not naive and I know that working conditions in Chinese factories is not a problem Apple created, nor are they the only or by far the worst offender. Part of the reason why we hear about this so much is indeed because their products are so hot right now and get a lot of attention. Foxconn has many customers and was run this way long before Apple became their biggest one. I single them out here partially because the published stories are about the factories where Apple products are made but also for another reason.

With their historic combination of simultaneously being the world’s most valuable company who has massive margins relative to their competitors and their uniquely rabid and growing fanbase, no one on Earth is in a better position to draw attention to this issue and affect change than Apple is. For better or worse, almost all their competitors are in a constant struggle to just keep up with, if not surpass many of their innovations. If Apple came out tomorrow and said “We’re going to make a little bit less on each product we sell in order to ensure our Chinese partners pay their workers fairly and treat them with respect.”, that would start a wave in the tech industry and their competitors could be forced to make similar commitments, lest they look like cold uncaring corporate monsters which less face it, they all are anyway. Imagine if they also did something like give a free iPad to everyone who works on Apple assembly lines. According to Mike Daisey’s story, most of the people who build them have never even seen them turned on. If they suddenly got to experience the end result of their hard work and were told “This makes millions of people happy and we want you to have one for free because you’re a part of that.”, I think that would do wonders for morale by making them feel even a little bit of appreciation. With Apple’s profits, it would cost them virtually nothing to do this.

Many people in the world see Apple as the gold standard for technology and indeed how to run a company in general. I think it’s their responsibility to uphold the standard they set for themselves in everything they do, not just the things their consumers can easily see. They have a great opportunity here to make the world better for everyone. There will be some investment involved but frankly, they can afford it and the potential benefits could outweigh that. All we have now is a half-hearted attempt to look like they care when in reality, they’re just waiting out the news cycle Mike Daisey and This American Life created. It’s clear you consider yourselves better than this Apple, start acting like it. I think you owe the workers that much.

Business, Computers, Mobile Phones, Politics, Tablets, Technology , , , , , ,

Amazing This American Life Story On Chinese Manufacturing Conditions

3 Comments Posted by on January 9, 2012

My preferred content to listen to at work is podcasts and as always, I start my week’s rotation off with the always fantastic This American Life from NPR. If you haven’t listened to this podcast, it’s a fantastic show where they choose a theme of the week (some specific, some often quite abstract) and a bunch of seasoned storytellers, authors and journalists tell a bunch of varied tales on that theme. Rarely can a show take subjects I would otherwise not be interested in and make them truly fascinating. In particular, this week’s episode entitled Mr. Daisey and the Apple Factory is one I think every Apple user–or really anyone who regularly buys electronics in general–should listen to.

Mike Daisey is a professional storyteller–and man, is he ever good at it–who is also an amateur tech enthusiast. He loves technology in general and in particular, Apple products. He is actually a self-confessed Apple fanboy, something I appreciate as owning your fanboyism is something I really think more people need to do more of (hinty hint the staff of Tested.com). One day, he read a story about an iPhone that left a factory in China with a bunch of photos still on it. All phones with cameras get test photos taken in the factory and they are usually wiped before the phone is sent out. The photos didn’t really show anything of interest but it made Mr. Daisey realise that he’d never really spent any time thinking about where his technological toys come from or what it’s like for the people who build them. What follows is an amazing tale in which he goes to Shenzhen, China and ends up finding out just how bad things are there. We’ve heard stories in the press before about poor conditions at Chinese factories but what Mr. Daisey finds is truly disturbing

I don’t plan to spoil the rest of the episode as I think everyone should listen to it in full. We’ve seen the occasional story in the press about horrendous conditions in these factories but the one consistent theme through them all is that things don’t seem to be improving to any meaningful degree and the companies that hire these Chinese factories really don’t care that much. Apple claims to be doing audits of their partners and ensuring that certain conditions are met but aside from the factories constantly gaming the audits, conditions don’t seem to be improving much and Apple (nor anyone else) seems to be doing anything to fix these problems. For a company that makes such massive profits on the products they sell compared to the rest of the computer industry, they have even less of an excuse to be so lackadaisical about how the people who actually make them are treated. No one has an excuse for this though.

I’ve known about this type of thing before and it does give me pause when I’m thinking what brands of products to buy for myself as I too am a big tech enthusiast. The reality is, this is a consequence of a culture that has been conditioned to expect to buy technology for about half or less the price that it really should cost. People feel bad about 13 year-olds being exposed to neuro-toxins when building their iPad but if the alternative is paying $1,000 for it (and most likely not being able to afford it as a result), it’s easy to rationalise your worries away. I’m not saying we should all stop buying electronics until China becomes a democratic utopia but I think it’s important that we at least consider where the things we enjoy start out before ending up in our hands. Seriously, take an hour and give this show a listen, it’s something every lover of technology needs to listen to.

Business, Computers, Mobile Phones, Politics, Tablets, Technology , , , , , ,

Retail Can’t See the Apples Through the Trees

Leave a Comment Posted by on October 13, 2011

Say what you will about Apple and I can say plenty but if there’s one thing they understand better than anything else, it’s tailoring the user experience. Perhaps nowhere else is this more apparent than in their branded retail stores. Sean Sands from the awesome Gamers With Jobs wrote an interesting piece on this subject. Like myself, he’s a die-hard PC guy but as his wife is in graphic design, she’s a heavy Mac user. After an unfortunate incident involving fruit juice and her MacBook’s keyboard, they were forced to make haste to their local Apple store for assistance. What Sean describes next is what sounds like a blissful masterpiece of customer service design and execution. If you want more of the details, check his article out, it’s a good read.

I’ve never bought anything from an Apple store but I have been in them and seen how they operate and it is very impressive. My employer also does some work for their Canadian locations and I’ve heard our staff comment on how much better customers are treated there. Some say that it depends on the store and that in others, the “Geniuses” are actually anything but overall, I think they definitely aim for a high standard. A few years ago, I worked for another electronics retailer with just a few more locations, Best Buy or more specifically, the Geek Squad. In my two and a half years there, I went through several job titles and sets of responsibilities but through all that, I was in positions where I was interacting directly with customers. I always made a point of being friendly, courteous, knowledgeable and if I couldn’t answer a question, saying so and doing my best to get the information needed. I tried to inspire this behaviour to my co-workers but as I spent more time at the company and learned of its real goals, I knew this was a fleeting pursuit. My morale dove off a cliff shortly thereafter.

In the modern retail world, the stated focus is on great customer service but in reality, the focus is on selling you as much stuff as quickly as possible and trying to provide a good service experience along the way. If you don’t, customers in general have short memories and are being accustomed to expect being treated like cattle so they won’t ultimately mind much. The general corporate mindset of today is “meet your numbers no matter what, we’ll deal with what happens after the quarterly results later” and that reflects in the average retail experience. Apple understands very well that if you treat your customers like gold now, the loyalty and respect you earn from them will provide greater returns in the long run than simply fleecing them as much as possible and shoving them out the door. Apple’s astounding success in recent years is all the proof we need. Granted, there is a lot more to Apple’s image and success than how their retail experience is and many have tried and failed to prove up to now that just “being like Apple” isn’t at all a simple thing to do. It’s also much easier to hit your revenue and profit numbers (make no mistake, Apple stores are as heavily metrics focused as any other) when you’re selling computers that cost several hundred dollars more than they should on average.

With the tsunami of new customers Apple is acquiring in general, other retailers can’t afford to ignore how their experience compares to the Apple store. Not only can people go there for Apple products, they can go there for Apple products instead of another brand they also sell. The key is getting people to shop with you instead and Apple is proving that to many people, the lowest price isn’t necessarily all you need. Retailers do have the means to change their culture to be about putting the customer first and letting the profits flow from that. I can think of a few off the top of my head:

  • Taking away commission sales but also paying a good hourly wage with a strong bonus incentive based on customer feedback and not just sales targets. When you’re paying someone to sell electronics so little that they’ll never be able to afford to buy what they’re selling, it’s rare that you’re going to get an enthusiast who is passionate and knowledgeable about the product.
  • Employee training on how to make customers happy, not on how to just find ways to weave more upsells into the conversation. Make sure they know it’s OK to not know the answer to something and say you need to get more information.
  • An easy to access, fast and current information resource on the products you’re selling and a way to ask for answers if you don’t know something. Being able to access the consumer facing web site on the cashier terminals isn’t good enough. Having a chat-based salesperson support staff with fast research skills would be really good.
  • Better (i.e. not horrible) warranty and return programs. Anyone who has had to have something repaired or replaced under an extended warranty plan knows what I’m talking about. The experience is horrendous and only because it’s cheaper for it to be that way. Your margins are already very high on these programs, accept a little bit less and get properly trained people and a consistent, reliable and fast service pipeline.
  • Make the salespeople and techs partners, if not the same job. At Best Buy, the techs hated the salespeople because they always overpromised and created unfair burdens on them and the salespeople hated the techs because they were often rude to customers (due to being stressed out) and never got things done quick enough. The culture needs to change so that both types are taught to work together and that one’s actions affect the other’s. Ideally, the entire staff should be skilled in both trades so they can interchange easily but that’s a tough undertaking.
  • Sell them the product first and all the other stuff after. The biggest problem at big box retail is that the experience has not become about selling you the product you need but all the overpriced accessories, warranties and setup services to accompany it. That’s because the profit margins on these additions is often orders of magnitude greater than that on the product itself. One of my old Best Buy managers used to say “If you don’t sell something else with this computer, it cost us more to pay you to complete the sale than we made from it.” This needs to stop. There’s nothing wrong with recommending stuff the client might need but if you make that the focus of your sale rather than getting them the right product, you’re burning potential loyalty.
There is of course one major problem that all of these issues share: They’ll cost a bunch of money to fix. In the current business climate of “next quarter is all that matters”, this is a hard step to take. Nonetheless, it’s what Apple does and they’re one of the biggest companies in the world so haven’t they already proven there’s merit in it? Fixing systemic problems sometimes requires some hurt up front but in the end, I think a strategy like this is better for the customer and ultimately, better for the company. Simply put retailers, you’re not beating Apple so you’d best join them while you still have a chance. I don’t see anything that’s going to make me switch to Mac any time soon but if I was, you’d be damn sure I’d be buying it from an Apple store and not from Best Buy.
Business, Computers, Technology , , , , , ,

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 369 other followers