If only we could praise the actual product (iPhone, Macbook Pro, Mac Pro, iMac, etc...) for being amazing an great and not something they dont do (collect user personal data and sell it). It's great Apple takes privacy seriously (as all companies should) it seems like lately Apple is using that all the cherry for the company versus turning out great innovative products that just work (like they used to). If they did both I could get on the Apple bandwagon, right now this is just PR and marketing.
I would agree but Apple has a handful of journalist it 'likes' and get's first shots at a lot of things. Not saying this is the case, and this is a good thing Apple does. I think its just ignoring a important part of the Apple ecosystem, the product itself.
Where I thought you were going with that when I read your first sentence is, I wish people could look at products for the things they do (features they have) rather than for the things they don't do (features they don't have). Regardless of Apple's recent slip in quality, they consistently put out features later than some of their competitors, but also at a higher quality than their competitors. Too often I'll see an article about "Apple introduces TouchID" and the comments say "Samsung has had a fingerprint reader for years!" like that matters or like the various fingerprint reader solutions were any good before TouchID. Or the iPod, we all know it's not the first MP3 player, but it was a very high quality MP3 player with a very high quality user experience, which really does matter.
I felt the same way about Palm (Google was a cooler company, so Android won even though WebOS was a more pure Linux system, friendlier to developers, and HTML/JS was the preferred app architecture followed by standard C++) and Microsoft (they don't have X app, even though the features from X app are built into the core OS). Dropbox was the same way, people hated on it when it was released because a hacked-together rsync solution worked "the same way".
Too often we get hung up on what a product doesn't do or doesn't do uniquely and ignore that execution is often more important. It's possible to launch into a crowded and competitive market and win, as long as you execute better.
Replacing my 3 year old Moto G3 with a 3 year old 6S Plus was one of the best calls I've made in years. It's a weird feeling being current on an older phone, and knowing that it's got at least one more OS update coming. I know it's flagship vs. budget, but the way the Android phone began decaying before it even got here was still inexcusable.
I'd never really used an Apple device before, so it was easy to knock them for this thing or that, but I wouldn't go back after actually seeing how their philosophy works.
I take more photos now that I can just pick the thing up to a powered-on screen--I guess it uses some gyroscope and accelerometer magic--and swipe from the right.
These are bad reasons. Top of the line Android phones generally have better/faster launching cameras than the top of the line iPhone and don't have bluetooth broken.
Even some mid-range Android phones would probably outperform the iPhone X in these two areas.
Valid reasons to switch to an Apple product (in my opinion) are
- Privacy
- Better App Ecosystem (arguably, for both MacOS and iOS)
So I have a pixel 2 XL and I can attest for the camera taking upto 3s to load on average. This has been progressively getting worse with each OS upgrade (no way I am upgrading to the "AI" OS). My iPhone 3GS actually ran for a good 5 years and though "hot" apps werent fast, the default apps were as zippy as they were the day the phone was bought. Somehow Google doesnt seem to care about this!
I'm looking forward to it. It's fast now because it's at least 4x more powerful than my old one (going by benchmarks), but I won't turn down 40% more. Especially if that translates to better battery life doing average CPU-light stuff.
I was of course careful to say had, and obviously this rested on the fact that lollipop was so universally shit for the ui.
Also, of you think about a ui getting faster, a fixed 200 percentage increase peer iteration, means the absolute speed increase gets relatively smaller as they approach zero.
my mind is being blown that this is getting upvoted. this article can be summarized as "other companies are making dumb products, so good for apple for not doing that". what? what the what? is this vapid apple propaganda really worth the read? to me the salient trajectory of apple of the last 10 years has been the absolute decline of their software. people who upvoted this article- why? genuinely curious
Because some people judge companies by metrics other than just the quality of the software they write? It's perfectly possible for Apple to create software of a poor or deteriorating quality while having a more sensible business model than their competitors. The one has little to do with the other.
I'm not sure if it's okay to call the entire Silicon Valley has gone rogue. Satya Nadella's Microsoft is still one company that's not part of these controversies and yet trying to innovate at the same time. What's disheartening is how Apple has become like IBM rather than Amazon. Probably, Always listening on Speaker that can steal couple's conversation wasn't their thing but they failed to capitalize on the love Siri had received!
Microsoft is not a Silicon Valley company and they are very much involved in these 'controversies' - lots of people have serious concerns about Windows 10 and privacy and, of course, Microsoft runs a search engine, a chat/VoIP service among many other things.
Microsoft is no angel, it's just dwarfed by the egregiousness of Facebook, Google, and Amazon. It still does some sketchy data-collecting in Windows unless you opt-out (though it's backed off a bit since that came to light). Microsoft can afford to not fully partake in the skeeviness because a) it's not in the ad business, and b) it is in the enterprise business. Enterprise customers won't put up with that stuff, and they have the money to pay for that privilege. So when Microsoft makes most of their money that way, their business model isn't centered around the other stuff, and customers get partially spared from it by proximity.
Despite the iPhone and business success, I do kind of mourn for the days when their hardware was more reliable. My 2017 Macbook is not nearly as nice as my 2015 model.
Though, as a bit of irony I do like that I can charge my Android phone with my Macbook charger.
My father still use my square white Macbook, it stills work as good as day 1 with the factory battery. I wonder if my 2016 and 2018 MacBook Pro will get the same lifetime, if they does, it's still crazy hardware.
My keyboard broke on my 2017 Macbook and they had to replace the logic board to fix it. I've already broken keycaps on my replacement. I'll be lucky if this thing sees 3 years.
I have family members still happily rocking their 2011 models and I use my 2013 every single day at work. I have no confidence that their latest models will have that type of longevity and will likely switch to Linux when they quit working.
The narrative that it’s marketing or cult thinking that got Apple here always ignores this elephant in the room: what if consumers put a premium on their privacy?
Privacy is itself valuable. Until SV can see this obvious, self-evident truth, the ad-driven models will rule and shrivel with a predictable boom-bust cadence.
I prefer most things Google, but stick with Apple for the privacy. I'll put up with lower quality services, buggy Apple TV, and an expensive phone that arguably not much better than a $200 cheaper Google alternative, just to know some creepy corporation isn't collecting mounds of data on me which will be used who knows how in the future.
It's definitely a niche product. I think in general people would rather have a free product that abuses their data over a paid one that does not. (Anecdotally based off a group of people not generally known to have a ton of money.)
I spent a lot of time a number of years ago making fun of Apple, their technology, and their business models. I have come to the realization that all of my criticisms were wrong. I don't own any Apple products right now, but unless the market changes significantly, my next phone will be my first ever iPhone.
> (But I won’t buy a $1,000 phone; sorry, Mr. Cook.)
Strange that the author correctly dissects the problem with Apple's competitors, i.e. that their products are subsidised by violating their users' privacy and selling their data, but then ends with the conclusion that they still won't pay what Apple is charging. I wish they'd elaborated: Are they arguing that it'd better not to have a smartphone, or better to accept selling your privacy to get a cheaper phone?
I wouldn't call it "subsidizing," the profit margins on the iPhone and other flagships are around ~40%+. It's more like padding profit margins. Google is the the main company that makes money from user data, and that is used to subsidize Android development itself, not the hardware.
I switched to android and am struggling to justify buying a new mac laptop: their whole platform is in the rear view mirror for me after decades of use. I may just get a chrome book to replace the old Air I'm writing this on.
Time for a new platform with some new innovations!
"complex and expensive cashierless stores that won’t deliver much of an improvement to our shopping experience but may cost underprivileged people their jobs"
Cashierless stores are simple and amazing. I won't even comment the part about "underprivileged people", this is straight up dumb.
This is a time when an entire driverless car industry is trying to convince the world that its products are safe before it can even come up with convincing stats -
Nearly 1.3 million people die in road crashes each year, on average 3,287 deaths a day. An additional 20-50 million are injured or disabled. More than half of all road traffic deaths occur among young adults ages 15-44.
THAT is not convincing enough? Autonomous cars are the future and will allow us to focus on other activities during the daily commute or long distance travels. Will decrease deaths, will optimize energy consumption by intelligently setting the right route and speed. Humans are inferior to computers on the road, that's a fact.
Your narrative is a thing which could happen, not the current truth on the ground. The truth is every time a Tesla rams into a stationary object at speed, or an Uber runs down someone crossing the road, the public’s faith in the tech erodes. Every time that happens we edge closer to overburdensome regulation in the “Thanks to 3 mile island & Chernobyl it’s basically impossible to build a new nuclear plant in the US” sense, and farther away from your utopian dream.
Accidents will happen, that is inevitable. Autonomous cars don't have to be perfect - they only have to be better than humans and that bar is not set very high.
There are very little examples of autonomous cars causing trouble on the road and plenty of them preventing accidents - an example would be videos on youtube showing Teslas predicting accidents in advance and taking action.
> they only have to be better than humans and that bar is not set very high
Not to rehash this discussion, but: the bar is actually set very high, and current self-driving tests are seemingly not meeting it. There's a lot of deaths because there's a whole lot of driving.
Meanwhile, those are the reasons I applaud Apple. I don't want to be responsible for repairing my own device. I don't want to deal with drivers and compatibility issues. I don't want to deal with virus scanners and third-party payment systems and the stuff that comes with an uncontrolled app store. The only one I kind of agree with is developing iOS apps on Macs, but only as far as I wish the iPad Pro had the capabilities to run XCode as well.
I can completely understand why other people want those things, and I'm glad they have a choice that fits their needs. For my needs, I'm really glad I have Apple.
Like Steve Jobs said: "people who are really serious about software should make their own hardware". I heard that a lot and never thought about it. But it started to grow in me and now I can see it wasn't just a cool sentence but rather a real mean to make the best products ever to have the best experience. Even if it was challenging and he had to go against the flow.
My secret hope for Apple is that they buy an ISP / Telecom like Comcast.
It curdles my blood that ISPs are not only logging so-called advertising data, but are permissibly collecting and storing http requests, building full browser profiles etc, and of course are not being transparent with any of it.
Apple's message around privacy as a Human Right, along with the natural business model fit around content, wireless, telecom, etc gives me some hope that they could pull this off.
Ah man. Tim is a cool guy and Apple's products are quite solid, but their arrogance just isn't quite gone yet.
I don't want to charge through a weird port, need a dongle for everything and be prevented from installing/using proper apps that can even do what theirs can.
That's your list of priorities: great! I understand your decision. However I accept all of these inconveniences since my list is different: Privacy
Tom Cook's words:
> If you look at our model, if we can convince you to buy an iPhone or an iPad, we'll make a little bit of money. You're not our product.
Not to mention that I love the years long consistent updates of all my iPhones / Macs.
Why is everyone here talking about iphone and mac products ? I thought the article was about how the Apple’s philosophy has remained true to the customers vs rest of the big sv companies
“We view that privacy is a fundamental human right and that it's an extremely complex situation if you're a user to understand a lot of the user agreements and so forth. And we've always viewed that part of our role was to sort of make things as simple as possible for the user and provide them a level of privacy and security. And so that's how we look at it.”
Is he actually making the case for stagnation? There are serious issues in tech these days - from surveillance to censorship. His argument seems to be that we can't be trusted to innovate and that Apple has essentially stopped doing so.
66 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 114 ms ] thread> If you look at our model, if we can convince you to buy an iPhone or an iPad, we'll make a little bit of money. You're not our product.
What’s wrong with the iPhone though? That’s the product that seems to work better than any of the others. How have the last few years not been great?
Im not looking for some small personal preference thing, like the lack of the headphone jack.
The MBPs lost useful ports for a flakey ecosystem, have keyboard problems, lowered their battery life for real work, and got hotter.
The Mac Pro... is from 2013. Enough said.
What problems of any similar caliber exist for the iPhone?
I felt the same way about Palm (Google was a cooler company, so Android won even though WebOS was a more pure Linux system, friendlier to developers, and HTML/JS was the preferred app architecture followed by standard C++) and Microsoft (they don't have X app, even though the features from X app are built into the core OS). Dropbox was the same way, people hated on it when it was released because a hacked-together rsync solution worked "the same way".
Too often we get hung up on what a product doesn't do or doesn't do uniquely and ignore that execution is often more important. It's possible to launch into a crowded and competitive market and win, as long as you execute better.
I'd never really used an Apple device before, so it was easy to knock them for this thing or that, but I wouldn't go back after actually seeing how their philosophy works.
- My Bluetooth audio has been broken for years. There's a discussion forum topic about this, but Google doesn't listen.
- Starting the camera app takes about 3-5 seconds. In most cases, this is enough time to spoil the entire photo-moment.
Edit: it's also the fact that Google allowed these problems to exist in the first place.
Even some mid-range Android phones would probably outperform the iPhone X in these two areas.
Valid reasons to switch to an Apple product (in my opinion) are
- Privacy
- Better App Ecosystem (arguably, for both MacOS and iOS)
- Faster Processors (for iOS)
- Better idle battery life (for both)
- Battery Life in general (for MacOS)
When was the last time a major Android update made five-year-old devices faster?
https://www.apple.com/ios/ios-12-preview/features/
Of course, I don't rely on manufacturer updates.
I was of course careful to say had, and obviously this rested on the fact that lollipop was so universally shit for the ui.
Also, of you think about a ui getting faster, a fixed 200 percentage increase peer iteration, means the absolute speed increase gets relatively smaller as they approach zero.
Apple doesn't innovate anymore.
Written on a Mid 2014 MBP I loathe to replace.
Now he finally sees there is value and merit to the way Apple has chosen to do things.
That’s more than ‘everybody sucks so go Apple!’
Though, as a bit of irony I do like that I can charge my Android phone with my Macbook charger.
Privacy is itself valuable. Until SV can see this obvious, self-evident truth, the ad-driven models will rule and shrivel with a predictable boom-bust cadence.
Strange that the author correctly dissects the problem with Apple's competitors, i.e. that their products are subsidised by violating their users' privacy and selling their data, but then ends with the conclusion that they still won't pay what Apple is charging. I wish they'd elaborated: Are they arguing that it'd better not to have a smartphone, or better to accept selling your privacy to get a cheaper phone?
Much like buying a Windows laptop subsidised with crapware but putting Linux on it.
Unfortunately usually seems to result in a pretty bad experience.
That was all I read into it.
Or better to not support propriety and locked down systems to benefit all consumers in the future?
Android vs Apple is not even remotely close to being a black and white morality issue.
This is a time when an entire driverless car industry is trying to convince the world that its products are safe before it can even come up with convincing stats - Nearly 1.3 million people die in road crashes each year, on average 3,287 deaths a day. An additional 20-50 million are injured or disabled. More than half of all road traffic deaths occur among young adults ages 15-44. THAT is not convincing enough? Autonomous cars are the future and will allow us to focus on other activities during the daily commute or long distance travels. Will decrease deaths, will optimize energy consumption by intelligently setting the right route and speed. Humans are inferior to computers on the road, that's a fact.
Your narrative is a thing which could happen, not the current truth on the ground. The truth is every time a Tesla rams into a stationary object at speed, or an Uber runs down someone crossing the road, the public’s faith in the tech erodes. Every time that happens we edge closer to overburdensome regulation in the “Thanks to 3 mile island & Chernobyl it’s basically impossible to build a new nuclear plant in the US” sense, and farther away from your utopian dream.
There are very little examples of autonomous cars causing trouble on the road and plenty of them preventing accidents - an example would be videos on youtube showing Teslas predicting accidents in advance and taking action.
It’s not, but driverless car manufacturers seem intent on pushing their cars out before even reaching that low bar.
Not to rehash this discussion, but: the bar is actually set very high, and current self-driving tests are seemingly not meeting it. There's a lot of deaths because there's a whole lot of driving.
Give humans credit where it's due.
- OSX must run on Apple-approved hardware
- iOS apps must come from the official app store
- iOS apps must be developed on an Apple-approved device
- Extremely difficult to repair your own devices
- etc.
I can completely understand why other people want those things, and I'm glad they have a choice that fits their needs. For my needs, I'm really glad I have Apple.
It curdles my blood that ISPs are not only logging so-called advertising data, but are permissibly collecting and storing http requests, building full browser profiles etc, and of course are not being transparent with any of it.
Apple's message around privacy as a Human Right, along with the natural business model fit around content, wireless, telecom, etc gives me some hope that they could pull this off.
I don't want to charge through a weird port, need a dongle for everything and be prevented from installing/using proper apps that can even do what theirs can.
Tom Cook's words: > If you look at our model, if we can convince you to buy an iPhone or an iPad, we'll make a little bit of money. You're not our product.
Not to mention that I love the years long consistent updates of all my iPhones / Macs.
“We view that privacy is a fundamental human right and that it's an extremely complex situation if you're a user to understand a lot of the user agreements and so forth. And we've always viewed that part of our role was to sort of make things as simple as possible for the user and provide them a level of privacy and security. And so that's how we look at it.”
This I agree with 100%