Steve Jobs

Tags

Apple, biography, design, jobs, open system, product, Steve Jobs, Walter Isaacson

Recently I have finished a biography of Mr. Steve Jobs, by Walter Isaacson. Now, you may know that I don’t like Apple (or at least I don’t like their approach to customers). Reading that book only convinced me that I am right, but I suppose there will be millions of people out there who will think differently. It’s OK.

I tried very hard not to be biased when reading, but I couldn’t help thinking that Jobs was a… well… how to say it? OK – in my opinion only, from reading this book and not knowing him personally, he was a prick. I would not want to know him as a human being, and I would not really want to work with him, despite all the hype.

The beginning of Apple lies in stealing an idea from Xerox and making it better (as much as the beginning of Windows lie in stealing an idea from Apple). Then this “making things better” strategy coupled with close system approach to business is what made Apple what they are today. Competition with Windows – and later Google – is what shaped the computer business, as those two companies preferred open system strategies.

We can of course draw some lessons from Jobs: attention to detail, fanatic obsession with a product and all things (design, software and hardware) related to it, conviction in decision making and having beliefs which made making those decisions easier and shorter. Consequence in approach and perseverance in getting your idea through to other people. Imagination and freedom to experiment. Ability to see so-called big picture while taking care of small details – and many others. He did, after all, change the shape of music business, created app industry worth billions today – so he was not all that bad. For all those things, he has my respect and admiration. Because of those things, I doubt really if anyone else at Apple now can walk in his shoes. Can this person come up with more products or services in Jobs style? Small hint – you want to know what is coming, check Apple patent filings…

The book though, somewhat indirectly, teaches us something about ourselves. Apple would not be the company it is today if we, as consumers, did not purchase its products. Why do we prefer to be led by our noses instead of having freedom of managing own data, viewing content without limits, or setting or connecting our devices to whatever we want? Are we so lazy or so stupid? Or maybe both?

 

Advertisements

Signs of Decay

Tags

Apple, bad service, cheap stuff, Rimowa, Samsonite

Many European (and not only) companies priding themselves on good service and quality of their product are nothing more than just a balloons full of hot air. We, consumers, are to be mesmerized by the excellent marketing strategies, by blowing up good opinions posted on the net and by targeted ignoring of bad experiences. Those are being buried under tons of whatever crap those companies come up with only to keep the rest of the public unaware. Apple does not repair their stuff, they replace it or force you to buy a replacement. Rimowa, producer of the “better” luggage, delivers faulty merchandise and takes two months to repair it (I am to receive mine next week – two months after I bought it). Manufacturer of whirlpools promises free of charge technician visit only to get it revoked, blaming everything on a “mistake”. Samsonite carry-on bag breaks and takes forever to get it repaired…

Those are just a few examples of a decay in services, which should (seemingly) reflect the price being charged for them. I have a feeling that those are nothing else but part of advertisement: repeat that you have a good service often enough and people will believe it. Just enough people to create a rumour, a legend. Those few who will experience bad service can be then swept under the rug, as the legend will keep them quiet.

This is all my fault. I went against my judgement and I myself became mesmerized by those practices. Some years ago I promised myself not to buy anything accompanied by an aura of “good product”. I broke that promise and now, because of recent experiences, I will definitely come back to it. Buy cheap shit and throw it away when it breaks – at least there will be no disappointments with quality, no hassles with returning the merchandise for repair, no discussions with service men. Throw away bad one and buy new one…

Sorry, I seem to have a bad run 🙂

Apple (couldn’t stop myself…) again

Tags

Apple, customer service, demise, fancy colors, innovation, iPhone, marketing, release

I am happy to report that Apple manages to fulfill my prophecy and is on the best way to disappear in not too distant future. I am talking here about the latest iPhone releases – plural, as this time the old phone will not be made cheaper for customers, which cannot afford newest Apple toy. Instead, it will be made different looking, so that everyone will know about it – new fancy colors will not leave any doubt. As a result, we have a “new” phone and a re-hash of older model. All this packaged as release of two new models.

I find those toys too expensive and marketing approach to them too religious for my taste. Second factor, which I think speaks volumes of the Apple’s demise (it will surely take some time, but it comes) is lack of in-house innovation. Re-hashing of old (or somebody else’s) ideas can surely only work only limited time, even if this is supported by superior design. Thirdly, lack of service or arrogant approach to it cannot be tolerated for much longer by even the most patient buyers.

Surely the customers are not that stupid to support such business model for much longer. Or are they?

Rampant Improvement

Tags

Apple, improvement, innovation, technology

I have read the following blog post recently and it got me thinking (the article is here) – how can we apply this question to more areas than just music? Can we do this at all? I think that the answer is yes and that we can extrapolate from that idea to more important issues, with the one underlying it all – the innovation.

If we start from music, it has been, long time ago, created by maybe many but was heard by few. Early works reached small audience, which needed certain sophistication in order to appreciate music at all. This “sophistication” often meant social class, or income level, or both. In small numbers of people who could afford to listen to music lies the reason why not many musicians were appreciated during their lifetimes. Here also lies the reason why many found their fame after their deaths –  later the general audience has become bigger, and bigger were the chances that someone (even a dead composer) would find enough followers to become famous. The “fame” or its demise lied (and still lies) in numbers. Then, as well as now, one needed enough people to create a snowball effect, or reach a “tipping point” number pushing you over to fame.

Today though the problem with fame (and money, which usually follows) is what constitutes a popular product (music, book, film, service, etc). The size of potential audience or potential consumers has become so large, that previous meaning of “sophistication” has lost its meaning. Now we are dealing with something I will call “rampant improvement era”. In the days, where recipient of a product (music, machine, computer, innovation in general) was in small numbers, you needed to convince that recipient that your product is innovative almost in person, you needed to win your consumers over almost one by one – the relationship of innovator with recipient was much closer and personal. The features were aimed at few that knew what the product is all about and could understand its advantages and afford it. Now the product aims and “general population”, which is to say, is aimed at everyone (or no one in particular). Everyone does not know much, is not intelligent, is easily bored and is susceptible to whims, moods and fads. Enter a product which is in its mass approach simply stupid in its simplicity – it fulfills many wishes, not really fulfilling any special task perfectly.

The article I mentioned above I think arrives at a wrong conclusion – it has become easier to produce and record music, same as it has become easier to produce and distribute many other products. But the “general recipient” is stupid – and so the quality of the product provided must be so adapted in order to sell. We produce things for different audience now to what humans did fifty years ago. A knowledgeable music audience only would not accept stupid pop music and such would die natural death.

Today the successful product is judged by the numbers it sells, not by its particular value. BlackBerry is a better business phone than iPhone, but it lost its battle because it was not a mass product, offering little of everything. Instead, it offered good features in one or two areas. Too narrow consumer base put RIM in trouble. Many products follow that path, and Apple become master in taking some idea and making it main stream. Not an innovation, rampant improvement.

Downside of this is, that specialist products are as expensive as those are rare. It simply does not make sense to innovate in the true sense of this word – bringing something new to the world, as this will not sell.

Apple A Day Keeps Everything Away

Tags

Apple, customers, iPhone 5, iSheep, maps, service, technology

Popular Science, a magazine I like although I am neither Scientific nor I am that much Popular, had at least two articles recently which I found rewarding. Both of them are about botched iPhone 5 release, especially about the botched map function on that phone. One is here, nicely picturing Berlin right smack in the middle of Antarctic. The other one is here, that one shows a park in Dublin, called Airfield, which iPhone decided is an airport. I laughed. And laughed again.

Am I allowed? Sure I am. Great Apple finally botched something important to users of their rehashed ideas, so that finally many people see that they are not infallible. Maybe this will serve as an eye opener to all the other things Apple does because. Yeah, just because. We are Apple, you are iSheep. Just make sure you read that correctly.

My company stuffed an iPhone 4 down my throat, even though I didn’t want it (I find it a nice toy, nothing else – and I wanted a phone). Now at least I have a reason not to want it even more. But maybe this time I will be heard. Oh, I sure hope so. And I don’t really care what phone I will get in return, as far as it will be a phone. Not a toy, which puts Berlin on the South Pole (or was it a North Pole?) and confuses Airfield with an airport. And does lots of other funny things. I haven’t been a fan for quite a while, now I am even less. Apple should know that things can turn sour and treating customers like sheep (just read it correctly) will eventually bite them.