By SteveJack
I was going to call this article, “What happens when Steve Jobs retires?” or “Apple after Steve Jobs,” in deference to taste, but then I decided that I wanted as many people to read it as possible, so… I succumbed. I just want you to know that I felt a pang of guilt typing that headline on a Mac.
Steve Jobs is Apple. Apple is Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs without Apple still managed to produce the foundation for what Apple became NeXT (after they paid him $400 million) while, in his spare time, heading a movie studio that only produces runaway box office hits. Apple without Steve Jobs produces Performas.
As a very minor Apple stockholder, I get the proxy statements, I check off the “yes” boxes to give Steve jets, millions of options, jet fuel, more options, whatever he wants, and I wonder what in the hell happens if Steve gets hit by a bus biking on over to the Palo Alto Apple Store some Saturday.
Steve Jobs is 48 years old. Reportedly, he is a vegan and in very good health. May he live to be one hundred! May he live forever, but that’s probably unlikely. So, I’m back to the beginning; what happens when Steve Jobs dies? Or, a bit more hopefully, when he doesn’t feel like leading Apple Computer, Inc. anymore and decides to kick back and relax? Since Jobs returned to lead Apple, every Apple shareholder, employee, and avid company watcher has asked themselves this question at some point, “whither Steve Jobs?”
Pixar has John Lasseter and a crop of young, talented directors to carry on post-Steve. But, who will lead Apple? Is Steve grooming someone, yet? Is it too early to worry about it? And what about that bus, God forbid?
I mean, come on, we all lived through the Scully, Spindler, and Amelio years; Apple barely did. On the face of it, the closest Apple has to a successor-in-grooming is Phil Schiller. No offense, Phil, but the RDF hasn’t rubbed off. Leading Apple is a very tricky proposition. Only one man so far has pulled it off successfully. Twice. The key ingredients seem to be a quest for perfection, a passion for the technology and the company, and the ability to relate Apple’s ideas to the world with style. Jobs is truly the charismatic force that propels Apple forward in the face of tremendous odds.
Right now, it looks like Apple’s best hope, and a very good one at that, is Jonathan Ive, Apple’s Vice President of Industrial Design, the London Design Museum’s “2003 Designer of the Year,” and chief designer of the original and current iMacs, iPods, iBooks, PowerBooks, Power Mac G5, and more. He seems to work well with the engineers responsible for the hardware. He is obviously a meticulous genius. And he has “that certain something” which, importantly, comes across on camera and in person. Whether he has the extremely rare “vision thing” that Jobs possesses; well, that’s still an open question.
Watch Ive in the Power Mac G5 intro video. Ive first appears about 40% in, at the 2:50 mark of the 6:33 minute video. Note that he is almost wearing a black mock turtleneck already. Contrast his presentation style and enthusiasm with the other Apple presenters. Can you sense the almost Jobsian, call it Junior Jobsian, aura? Ive has “it” while all of the other Apple employees in the video are just nice people talking about a computer. And Ive should only get better with time. Could we be watching Steve Jobs’ successor, Apple’s future CEO, in the 31-year-old Ive? Watch and see if Ive begins to join Steve on stage during keynotes soon.
Jonathan Ive, Apple Computer CEO circa 2025. It has a pretty nice ring to it, doesn’t it? You heard it here first. I think Mr. Ive could pull it off. And I think Jobs thinks so, too; in about twenty years, bus drivers willing.
SteveJack is a long-time Macintosh user, web designer, multimedia producer and a regular contributor to the MacDailyNews Opinion section.
Die? what do you mean? HE – GASP – could actually die?
1. Man, you can really write.
2. You’re right — compared to the geek stiffs in the video — Ive has a Jobsian quality.
3. Can an industrial designer lead a computer/consumer electronics/music distribution company? Well, what were Jobs’ qualifications when starting out with Woz to create Apple?
“Apple without Steve Jobs produces Performas.” LOL!
Better:
“No offense, Phil, but the RDF hasn’t rubbed off.”
Poor Phil.
“He pulled it off successfully twice.” Jobs nearly killed the company off the first time around. Gifted though he may be in some regards his actual business skills are still in doubt about running the company.
Your article suggests that one ought sell Apple short so as to capitalize upon the drop when he departs the scene. Apple continues to move nearer to irrelevancy. In the mainstream no one really cares what Apple does.
Have you considered writing an article on the opportunities that would open up for Apple in a post Jobs scenario? There are many things which might be done which Jobs would never even consider. Perhaps the focus should be on the corporation rather than the personality. If nothing else a successor might start with a rational advertising campaign.
I’m a huge fan of Mr. Ive. I get the feeling he’s the last of the Jedi or …..maybe there is another.
When I read the headline to this story without reading anything else I started to think…….the first name that came to mind was Jonathon Ive.
He (Ive) just seems to have the Apple concept down pat. I’m not sure he has the charismatic quality of Jobs but they can get a talking head for him.
He will be cremated and then interred.
You’re right — the article’s title is in bad taste. This ploy to increase hits takes away from the contect of the article.
Sorry Steve Jack, but isn’t this REALLY obvious?
Or is it just me?
I was waiting around to find some uptight response like Craig’s. Thanks, Craig for keeping the wait short!
IMHO the article’s title clearly states the content of the piece and is explained within. Rule one of headline writing would be to grab a reader’s attention. It worked. Lighten up, Craig.
Everyone dies at some point, Craig. Physically, at least. It’s okay to talk about it – even though this article is clearly not examining the funeral arrangements.
On topic: I think Mr. Ive has what it would take to transition. No other company and CEO are so intertwined. If Apple makes it past the post-Steve era, they’ll be around for hundreds of years!
I think the success of Jobs is less about his personality and charisma than about the fact that what motivates him — even to this day — is less about profits and marketshare than it is about new, cutting-edge technology. Sure, as the chief steward of Apple as a corporation, he wants the company to be profitable and he wants its market share to grow as well — of course. But that is not his chief motivation. If it were, then he could just as easily have Apple sell coffee mugs and t-shirts. For Jobs — much more than for Gates — it’s about the technology.
What rings Jobs’ bell is to introduce to the industry new and innovative technology. He still gets excited over this — and this excitement is woven into the very fabric of Apple’s corporate culture throughout the ranks. This is what most distinguishes him from all other computer company CEO’s. And if his successor at Apple does not have this same mantra and focus, and if instead it’s more about the balance sheet alone, then no matter how charismatic he might otherwise be, Apple could just as easily succumb to be another assembler, like Dell.
Jonathan Ive as the successor to Steve Jobs? I’m unconvinced. Ive is a superb designer, and unquestionably one of Apple’s assets. But does that also make him CEO material? I’m not sure. There’s a nasty phenomenon in industry whereby talented people get promoted out of their realm of expertise (i.e. top technicians get made managers so they can get management pay levels). The result is a double cost to the company: they aren’t doing the job that they’re good at, and the job they are doing, they do badly. If that happened to Ive, Apple would suffer.
Steve Jobs is a visionary and an autocrat. By all accounts, he’s not a great manager, and not all the decisions he’s taken are good. MacOS X contains plenty of questionable elements that were imposed on it by Jobs against the advice of his experts. But his combination of charisma and commitment has undoubtedly helped Apple more than the plodding moneymen who ran the company before him.
Jobs isn’t irreplaceable, but if he’s replaced by one of the current industry-standard CEOs – who seem to be mostly either corporate looters or box-shifters whose only concern is the share price – then Apple’s doom does indeed look likely. What is clear is that Apple can only survive at this stage on innovation and vision; whoever replaces Jobs will have to have, if not _his_ vision, at least _a_ vision.
To angusm, you make many good points. I agree that Jobs has made a number of bad decisions over the years — though on balance he has nonetheless led (and indeed pushed) Apple forward. But I think people place too much emphasis on Jobs’ charisma in this respect. I think it’s more about his passion for actually MAKING something. After all, between the scenarios of (1) Apple as innovative technology company with small market share and (2) Apple as an ordinary computer company with small market share, which do you think would be better for Apple, its stockholders, and the industry overall?
Good management skills are crucial — absolutely. But equally crucial for Apple is that Jobs’ successor actually care about the technology. If it’s all the same to Apple’s new CEO that the company could make coffee mugs and t-shirts, then — good management skills notwithstanding — Apple will not survive. So BOTH are required.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned Noah Wylie. He did a hell of a job(s) in Pirates of Silicon Valley. And didn’t he appear at the beggining of one of the keynotes with out anyone really noticing the difference?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
This is something I’ve pondered about from time to time and I’m sure it’s been discussed inside Apple … probably under a hush though.
I have to admit that I’ve never considered Ive as a successor, but he does seem to have the same sort of fire and determination that Jobs has (based on the limited exposure we’ve enjoyed).
While we say that he’s not CEO material, this is still being said of Jobs himself. Sometimes the best CEO isn’t baptized traditionally.
I think that there would be a lot of tension if Ive rose above the likes of Phil and Avie, who both seem like logical choices on paper (if Apple decided to choose internally), but Ive would probably better connect with the “mac faithful”.
Just like the president, you can always build a support team to handle the details.
Read the book “Good to Great”.
No company in the last 50 years that has brought someone on board as a savior has ever ended up being overly successful. In fact most fail. Instead, all the above average successful companies that have made CEO changes have promoted from within, the CEO was not groomed to be so, and the CEO were people with great passion for not only their field but for their company.
Ive seems to me to fit in here in some ways. I can’t say wether I think he’d be a good CEO or not because I have never met him and would simply be going off what I’ve seen on TV and Quicktime clips, and that’s really not enough content to draw such a conclusion.
The bottom line, no matter who replaces Jobs, the personal must be equally charismatic and driven to lead not only the company but the industry. I just don’t see that being the case. Certainly the next CEO may be successful, but to follow up Jobs with another Jobsian CEO seems like a galactic longshot.
Here’s hoping.
Replace him with a program that says “You are an idiot, make it better” to underlings during meetings.
Whoever ends up being the next CEO is going to be constantly compared to Jobs, and thus will never stack up.
What happens when any of us die? Life goes on. Yes, the article title is a bit scary butperhaps, Steve Jack could take over the position when Steve Jobs is gone, at least the monograms could all remain!
Dust In The Wind
Pickled Meat In A Can
Frozen Meat In A Can
and other variations
but please not
Pickled Meat In A Jar
like Lenin
Always two there are. A Master and an apprentice.
i’ve thought of this “problem” many times before… steve is really the entire “pc” industry’s “vision” … so his passing would effect more than just Apple. My feeling is he’s basically mid point in his career. Barring a Bus or Jet accident… him leaving in 40+ more years will be considered a “full life” of great achievement. Granted if his Jet blows a gasket flying to Paris, he will become a legend, and probably have a longer mark on history than if he lives until 90. People have said, he’s really an Artist and the PC is his Canvas. It’s easy to see the effects he’s had the world over by bringing easy to use computing to the masses, so even if he did leave tomorrow, he’s done more than 20 million normal men do in a life time. Anyway… I wonder if he’ll read this article and all these messages… If so, Hi Steve, stay with us for as long as possible! you’re making life on this planet quite a bit more fun. GR
Mercedes benz is still doing very well, even though the both founders died when they are very old.
I agree with greenscreen, the Colonel is dead but we still have the chicken!
Even though Steve runs Apple part time (he has been spending half his time at Pixar for a long time now), and there are thousands of brilliant people at the company that do the real work, perception is everything.
Even if it was announced he was cutting back his Apple commitment to two days a week to spend more time at Pixar, the world press (and especially the Mercury News) would go berserk with sky-is-falling articles… Even preparatory spin control would be hazardous. What to do?
Perhaps they are working on the Emergency CEO Hologram. “Please state the nature of the corporate emergency! You’re sh*t! F*ck!”
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
If Steve succumbs to that great hard drive in the sky, he will be replaced by Walt Disney.
Here is the thing, which you appleficianados always miss. It does not matter that the products, or the head of the company, or the commercials, make YOU feel good. The vast unwashed of pc users and those who are not yet using computers are the people who have to be appealed to. Apple has to improve its market share in the US and take advantage of the HUGE yet to be developed markets overseas. If it does not either the products are not as good as you think, or, more likely, the way apple advertises sucks. I have always thought that Jobs is much more interested in being a player, hanging out with Yao Ming and Minime, winning awards for ads and case design, and enjoying the above mentioned perks, than he is in running a business that competes. He has created a cult that supports his lifestyle nicely, while demanding little of him. Things would be different without Steve, and they might be a lot better. It might be worth trying (again) before Apple becomes insignificant.
I think that this article takes on a lot of points, some obvious and some needed to be thought about.
Now we all know that Steve cannot die, but just incase this can happen here is my take on it.
I disagree with Greenscreen and Dawn, and for the fact of you compairing chicken to computers, well thats just a really stupid statement.
Chicken, sorry Steve, is food. Kill it, cook it, and eat it. If it was that easy in computers, dont you think that Jobs and McNeal would of had Gates for dinner?
If and when it does happen and all of Steve’s lives are cashed in like a “get out Jail Free” card, someone(s) will never be able to fill those sneakers.
Without Steve there is no innovation. He’s pushing the entire industry. He’s one of the few (maybe the only one) who’s got the ‘vision thing’.
The tech industry better come up with a life conservation plan for him or they’re fried. Geez, M$ couldn’t update any of their products once they cannot try to copy his ideas anymore and the PC industry would simply stop working alltogether. Tablet PCs ?!?!? Puh-leeze!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
But I’m pretty sure TheSteve has all bases covered for the future. His Steveness reinvented himself when Pixar bought Apple (!). He learned from his old mistakes and is firmly on his way to achieve perfection for himself as for Apple.
When I look at what he’s done since then and where Apple is heading I feel quite confident that this guy thinks of EVERYTHING now and he’s got his apprentice somewhere in the wings.
I’ve been following the way of the Mac for ages and have never before had a more intense feeling that the real Mac revolution is just about to start kicking the entire industry up and down the stairs.
When Steve Jobs dies…
… first of all, let’s hope that’s a *long* time in the future. Second, Steve is the best thing that has happened to the computer industry since the microprocessor was invented.
I imagine that what happens depends on when/how steve leaves apple, how long he stays in charge at 1 Infinite Loop, and what market position Apple is in at the time.
If he kicked off today, that would pretty much be it for Apple. If he retires 20 years from now with Apple in a dominant market position, someone else could probably keep it going.
There’s a reasonable chance Steve will outlive me, even though I am much younger than he is. (I don’t exercise, I suffer form severe depression, and I over eat.) I hope he does outlive me – I would be really sad if something happened to him.
Residue on the bus, suggestive of removed colored butterfly stickers, will lead investigators to Washington State, where an “obnoxious bald man” will be found amongst Cheetos crumbs and an abundance of shorted AAPL confirmation slips. A 3-ring binder entitled “Best Viruses to Promote Product Upgrades” is found on the coffee table, stained heavily by an undetermined white fluid. Also a copy of “The Idiots Guide to Borrowing Intellectual Property”. Usama Bin Laden and Sadam Hussien are subsequently found in the bedroom, but further investigation into the bus incident is halted, as the courts cite, “We must ‘protect’ the 95%”
For 2003 and in the near forseeable future, Apple would be in a tough spot.
Steve Jobs is effective because he’s savvy in all the skills required to run such an iconic company.
He’s been a hacker, a geek, a salesman, and arty enough to get respect from the engineers, marketing and design – you know how hard that is? By being a hacker and a geek, a salesman and a design freak – only he has the respect of all three branches of Apple and outside, the most important group, Mac buyers.
And unlike some other Apple CEO’s that were one or maybe two of the above groups, only he is revered by all four groups and thus the respect.
And Pixar’s success only adds to his aura. While he’s always been creative at Apple, the outside world defined him as a pioneer in personal computers but pretty much stopped at that – now along with being a “tech” geek, he has won respect from the entertainment industry and its creators.
you can’t replace a once-in-a-lifetime guy. Look at it this way, Bill Gates does not have all that’s necesssary to run Apple (regardless of how hated he might to Apple engineers). He’s a geek’s geek but he has zero design sense.
Woz could step in for a year to calm the waters but your candidate list of engineers who are marketers who are chrismatic and who has the respect of mac buyers – out of 6 billion people on Earth – pretty short freaking list.
Does anyone remember an interview Steve Jobs gave prior to the release of the original iMac where he joked about including five golden tickets in randomly selected iMac boxes? Each person who discovered one of those tickets would get a 5 year supply of Macs (I guess that meant a new one each year, or something like that), plus a tour of the factory.
I could see Steve doing that.
I can’t believe that nobody’s mentioned Avie Tevanian. Who cares about personal reality distortion fields, what matters is a CEO that is passionate (personally passionate — eloquence is not required) about the product, and who better than the person most responsible for the current OS design? It’s his baby, let him shepherd it. As for Jonathan Ive, I have yet to see his passion or understanding go more than case-deep. What nearly drove Apple into the ground was not the lack of Steve Jobs (though we are obviously way better off with him) … it was Gil Amelio’s totally misreading of the Apple culture and his attempts to apply a cookie-cutter to the Apple business. Read Amelio’s memoir it is absolutely hilarious the way he looks at the creative independence of Apple’s business units and marvels at how any computer company could operate like this, and proceeds, totally blind, to discard all of the innovation value inherent in this kind of culture. My CEO ratings: Jobs1: 3. Sculley: 2. Spindler: 0. Amelio: -5. Jobs2: +5. As long as we don’t get another Amelio, Apple will be just fine.
one of the mental errors within the macintosh community is that “amelio” was somehow a bad manager or bad for apple. that is all, way WRONG… i’ve seen those comments year after year – so MANY people are missing what actually happened. Amelio was brought in to clean up before JOBS could return. SPINDLER is where the problem(s) started, and to a lesser degree Sculley. All Amelio did was CLEAN up the company for JOBS to RETURN. Hardly anyone knows, but JOBS CALLED AMELIO, shortly after he joined the board at Apple… Steve wanted to stop over for a “visit” when Amelio was still head of National Semiconductor. Steve wanted Amelio to shepard his return to “Apple”… Remember this is BEFORE he was CEO of Apple… Months later, Spindler is out, Amelio in… THEN it was time to CLEAN HOUSE. I was there, Amelio did a lot of repair, even though to the outside public it looked liked he was hurting Apple. Not so! It was steve in the background all along, Amelio was just doing the dirty work. – SO… please refrain from bad mouthing Gil… he was the fall guy, plain and simple. Thanks for your attention.
re: ^
no.
To say that personality and charisma doesn’t matter is to say that Apple is Dell. NO! Apple is not a mass market product. Doesn’t appeal to tight wads or people who can’t afford the high touch items that Apple sells. It’s never going to be a mass producer. If that were the case, Apple wouldn’t be Apple anymore.
I say, Jonathan Ive has the vision thing down pat. Now, he just needs a little experience which he is getting plenty of. Long live his Steveness (move over Steve, Ive is here now ; )
My, what a lot of posts.
Beddy byes calls, so I’ve had to skim read them; sorry if someone has said this already.
Ive’s the next Jobs?
NO-‘KIN-WAY.
And I say that as a Brit.
Jobs has done what’s he’s done because (in addition to all his other qualities) he’s extremely articulate (and persuasive) in a networky/presentationy way and also exTEEEEEEEEEmely ruthless when he has to be (or sometimes just for fun!). Now I may not have din-dins with Ive and tuck him in at night, but I still think I’ve seen enough to suggest that this really isn’t him; far too self-effacing and reticent.
Some phenomenally talented people are far, far better (and happier) as henchmen. To me, that’s Ive.
I mean – does he even care about economics/marketting/etc. etc.?
I doubt it. And that is to his credit, clearly.
I really couldn’t see him as CEO of a company like Apple.
However, may I direct you to my own CV…
Brother Mugga
PS: What? Can’t a man dream?
It really doesn’t matter, except to Steve and his friends and family.
Steve hasn’t written a line of code in years, and it is obvious that his attention is elsewhere. How else to explain the dearth of effective advertising, and the dog that osX is? Steve has us all on the edge of our seats, and I predict we will stay there for the next ten years as he dribbles out “breakthroughs”.
I teach in two private schools, and both are on the verge of upgrading their systems, each with a half dozen units. Both are using vintage macs now. The first has decided to flip to pc’s via dell @$800 each with monitor. The second is leaning that way but will probably have a couple parents build them. Neither seriously considered upgrading to macs because of price, because there was no perceived advantage to the Mac platform, and because every single person involved in the dozen workstations uses MS at home. Five years ago I bet half the people involved would have been mac users at home, as it is a counter culture free thinking California group overall. Mac’s market share may be holding steady, according to the statistics, but in reality, I think it is slipping badly.
Johnny for president !
If Steve dies soon, it will be a disaster.. may the Great Lord forbid! But, if it happens, who knows who should be the next person to make sure Apple keeps going. Jonathan Ive is absolutely stunning but I have no idea how much he knows about the intricate functions of Apple’s computers. having said that, maybe it maaters not… a al Ronald Reagan.. in which case you need leader who puts a stunning team together. Is that J.I? I have no idea… but he is stunnig at what he does and maybe he can assume the mantle… none of use knows. Let us pray that Steve goes on for a very long time, knowing not what is to come…
Have no fear, Dave is here. You’ll be seeing a lot more of me in a few years, and trust me, I’ve got this entire situation under control.
When Steve dies, Al Gore will take over. The best part about this is this means that Apple has only one transition to worry about–Jobs to Gore. Since Gore is already lifeless, he himself cannot die. And if he did, he could be replaced with a wood carving and no one would noice.
I nominate David Pogue and Guy Kawasaki. Both have the necessary clout and respect of the Mac community. Both are full of innovative ideas (anybody else read Pogue’s novel, “Hard Drive”?). Kawasaki was in charge of the EvangeList for years. Both exhibit lots of charisma.
Apple does *not* need a businessman in the CEO position. It doesn’t need someone to worry about the stock value, and it doesn’t need someone who tries to cut costs.
The CEO position, for Apple, is the idea man. The keynote headliner. The driving force behind Apple’s strive for perfection.
Let Fred Anderson worry about the stock value. Let Ive decide how the machine looks. Let Tevanian keep working on the software, and let Schiller take charge of the marketing. The CEO needs only to guide the group in a similar vision.
I think Pogue and Kawasaki are excellent candidates.
-Jake
From BR:
” Your article suggests that one ought sell Apple short so as to capitalize upon the drop when he departs the scene. Apple continues to move nearer to irrelevancy. In the mainstream no one really cares what Apple does.”
You are so obviously a PC troll it’s sad. EVERYBODY cares what Apple does in the mainstream, usually because Apple does it right. Why do you think that so many Apple ideas have been stolen (excuse me: BORROWED) from your crowd? What Apple didn’t invent, they implemented correctly. This is something Microsoft still has to work on.
Apple isn’t known as the beta tester for the PC industry for nothing.
“What happens when Steve Jobs dies?”
Well, he will either be buried or cremated……. silly question……
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Only my opinion but John Sculley was by far the greatest CEO that Apple have ever had. The time that Sculley was in charge saw Apple at it’s most innovative period.
During this time we saw, the Newton a product at least three years ahead of the market and for the first time we saw cheap consumer Macintosh’s in the shape of the LC.
Steve Jobs is charesmatic but charisma does not make a great CEO, I don’t think people seem to realise but it’s us the users that make Apple great, we are passionate about the product Steve knows how to use that passion to his advantage for one reason, he shares it with us. But if Steve Job’s is such a great CEO why has it taken us three years since his return to have anything that starts to live with a PC in speeed terms, poor management decisions have caused this delay.
A really great CEO would make the brave decision to break Apple in to two companies (software & hardware), release the x86 port of OSX (which they have) and take advantage of a time when Microsoft is at it’s most vulnerable. Job’s can’t do it because he’s too emotionally attached.
So what will happen to Apple after Steve Job’s… Hmm we’ll probably have no more fantastic Expo keynotes and the bank balance will be a lot better because Apple won’t be paying the largest CEO salary of any US corporation.
Sean,
Holy ****, you know nothing about what makes Apple tick!
1. I fail to see how Apple’s poor management decisions have anything to do with Motorola’s inability to boost clock speed at a reasonable rate. I think the move to IBM for processors over the past few years was a fantastic management decision. For those that don’t know, every G3 since the original iMac has been built by IBM. When was the last time you heard about lagging G3 performance? IBM has kept up easily, held back only by the fact that Apple won’t ship a G3 with a higher clock rate than it’s slowest G4.
2. Break Apple in two? One of the biggest things Apple has going for it is the “we make the whole widget” theme. If Apple controls everything, it comes out working better. Why do you think Apple was the first out the door with Plug-n-Play? It’s very, very easy for Apple to ensure that everything is compatible.
3. Release an x86 port? True, this is simple from an OS perspective. However, I think it is one of the worst moves Apple could ever make, for two reasons:
a. The x86 is a tired design. Intel and their piles of cash have managed to keep it alive this long, and that may continue, but programming for the x86 is difficult and involves lots of tricks and special approaches to problems. The PowerPC is an extremely clean design. It’s easy to write PowerPC code, and the architecture as it stands will support years of innovation without resorting to funky Intel-style optimizations to boost the speed. For instance, did you know that the Pentium 4 has an extra 128 data registers, hidden from the programmer, which it uses to make up for the fact that the x86 instruction set only has 8 data registers?
b. Every OS X application would also need to be ported. Many apps (PhotoShop comes to mind) are optimized for the PowerPC’s vector processing engine, and would lose all of their speed if translated to x86. The lack of compatibility between the old PPC apps and the new x86 apps would draw a line in the sand for all Mac users: jump, or fade away. Many would refuse to jump, and the platform would die off.
*continued next post*
What you have to remember is that Apple is successful as a niche company. There are a relatively small number of us in the world with higher standards for usability, stability, and appearance of our computers, and we choose to use the Mac because it’s better in those aspects. We also pay a fair margin more for the right to do so. Likewise, there are a relatively small number of people in the world with high standards for the way their car drives. These people spend the extra cash to meet their needs by purchasing a BMW, Ferrari, or (insert favorite car make).
As always, the manufacturers outside the niche (GM in the car metaphor, Dell outside the metaphor) constantly copy the innovations inside the niche. Ferrari and BMW have had paddle shifting for years; now you can get it in a Grand Prix. Apple came out with built-in wireless Ethernet in laptops first; now Dell has it. A BMW M3 can help you get the perfect launch; we have yet to see this from GM. Apple has a 17″ laptop; Dell has yet to follow suit.
If Apple converts itself to just another PC competitor, they will die a quick death amidst too much competition. Apple must continue to fill a niche in order to survive. Nothing wrong with trying to increase the size of the niche; this needs to be done not by making the niche more like the competition, but instead by showing the masses just how nice things are inside the niche. This requires a company with charisma; it requires a CEO with charisma.
By the way, Apple has over four billion dollars in cash assets. That’s a pretty darn good bank balance, if you ask me.
-Jake
While this is an interesting topic to discuss, real life will be totally different:
Before Jobs dies, Apple will be taken over by Sun or Sony or a company that might not even exist yet. Since Jobs wouldn’t accept the idea of being the Man in Second Place, this will be the moment we will lose Steve
Jake,
Why would they die, I wouldn’t stop buying Apple, would you?
Whilst I respect your points, I think they are flawed because they are based on the ethos that growth is a bad thing. Growth doesn’t mean that you lose your ability to innovate, innovation is driven by people with vision and Apple is full of those people.
As I said, Microsoft are very vulnerable at the moment, many Windows users and importantly corporations are looking for something different as is evidenced by the surge in interest in Linux. Unfortunately despite all the hype, Linux just isn’t ready and in my opinion never will be for the mass market, it is far too disjointed and I think Apple is perfectly placed to benefit from this, it is a rare opportunity and one that should be grasped.
Sean
Never did I assume or imply that growth was a bad thing. My arguments are based on the theory that if Apple bails on the things it has going for it (more advanced hardware; “whole widget” philosophy), they will stop being better. These two things are the fuel for the innovation.
The right way for Apple to grow is via recruiting. “Hey, look what we’ve got over here! Look! It’s great!” Get people to come check it out, show them how it’s better. Show them OmniWeb and iTunes. Show them Keynote and iMovie. Show them how beautiful Quartz antialiasing really is.
Again, I am not saying that growth is a bad thing, but I will say it’s not a requirement for a successful company. Apple has reported several profitable quarters as well as increasing sales, all while continuing to lead the industry in innovation both in hardware and in software. It’s far more important to me that Apple continue to innovate than it is that they grow the niche.
The point is, for Apple to survive, they must continue to provide for the niche. The minute they stop, I’ll quit buying Apple. I spend $3000 on a Mac instead of $800 on a PC because I love having a computer that just works right. I can not see any way for Apple to continue to produce a machine that just works right, if they start trying to cater to the masses (whose #1 criteria seems to be cost).
I think the best way for Apple to increase its reach is to branch out into more types of consumer electronics products. The iPod is ridiculously successful. Late onto the scene, and much more expensive that most of the competition, it now is the most common MP3 player in existence, due solely to the fact that it’s incredibly superior to any other MP3 player. You can buy one a Target, for Pete’s sake.
Steve Jobs says PDAs and cell phones are not practical for Apple to try right now. I think he’s right. But I think there are markets out there that Apple can do very well in.
*continued next post (stupid 2500 character limit)*
I don’t know just how vulnerable MS is right now. Most PC users I know aren’t surprised, and are just toughing it out until all these viruses and security holes blow over. They really don’t care that much. No matter how many times I tell them that I’ve never had a virus, nor a virus protection app, they continue to believe that viruses and security holes are par for the course, and that there’s no other way.
Just like my mother doesn’t care that her Saturn L200 placed last in Car & Driver’s comparison of ten family sedans. The Saturn takes her where she needs to go, and she doesn’t give a rat’s ass if the Accord and Camry do a much better job of it.
-Jake
Number one qualification: User Loyalty
I biught a new IIGS just before Scully pulled the rug out from under the Apple II user population and took the Mac off the consumer retail market.
Althouguh Steve has redefined the PC envelope, he has kept an eye on the loyal users who are still on older technology. The upgrades (e.g., G4, G5. OS X) are out there and promise a qualitative improvement as we upgrade, but we still get to enjoy improvements until that time…and we all share the excitement when Steve takes the stage and says “There is one more thing!”
Apple Computer is not about computing; it’s abut the quality of life.
you guys are way off; the next ceo will come up through retail. also, if you don’t understand the southern hemispere strategy you don’t understand the next 5 years and OS 11. sorry
What, pray tell, is the southern hemisphere strategy?
Jake,
Surely the desire to remain a niche product implies little or no growth, this is currently manifesting itself in a constantly shrinking market share. Apple is rapidly looseing it’s core markets especially the education market.
The problem is that we are living in times where margins are constantly shrinking, that coupled to a shrinking user base could potentially signal disaster for Apple, will Apple ever disappear? very unlikely but it could be signifacntly weakened.
We are currently entering what will be looked back on as a purple period for Apple but Moores law dictates that the computers we buy today are going to last us for many years to come which and that could mean that 4 Billion bank balance will start dwindling.
The old bloated Aplle was ill equiped to deal with clones the new streamlined Apple is perfectly poised to license the best OS available to the likes of Dell and HP.
Apparently Apple computers cost less than similar Dell and HP variants so what is there to lose?
Ahh, yes! Let’s get a marketeer with some narrowly-defined strategy.
South American countries are so hobbled by taxes that they can barely afford obsolete technology. I was in business with a Brazilian and worked with financiali web sites from all over Latin America. They live by the “gray” market.
If Apple is to continue to gain market share, it must be in the US, EU, and Pacific Rim. But a Harverd MBA or a salesman will never understand how to fight quantity with quality
I don’t demand that Apple remain a niche product. I demand that they continue to cater to those of us in the niche. If 50% of the market is willing to pay extra for superiority, fantastic. Apple just needs to remain superior.
There’s a problem with the statement that Apple computers cost less than similar HP and Dell variants. The reason is that Apple computers come with lots of things as standard equipment that most users don’t need. I can put together a PC that’s quite fast for $1000, but it won’t have Firewire, Serial ATA, PCI-X, USB 2, digital audio, or any number of other features that bring the Mac’s price up so high. Dual processors is a big one — DP motherboards for PCs are quite expensive.
Similarly equipped, yes, Macs are cheaper than PCs. But most people don’t need all that extra equipment.
Also — I can put together a fully-functional PC for $350, and it’ll be way faster than the cheapest new Mac you can buy today (but it still won’t have Firewire).
-Jake
Sjakelien,
The opposite is probably true in the case of Sun, they have major problems, they are haemoraging money at an alarming rate and trying to reinvent themselves as cheap PC clone manufacturers.
The thing is to be bought out by a large dull corporation would be the worst thing that could happen to Apple. That’s why a split would be ideal before it eventually happens. Apple has one very major stock holder an Arab Sheikh, if he loses interest and decided to dump his stock Apple will be ripe for the picking.
Wearing a black turtleneck polo and having a jobsian aura isn’t enough to lead a company like Apple, so even if Ive has both, he still is a good graphic designer, not yet a CEO. And beign a good graphic designer has really different charachters and qualities than being a good CEO.
Whatver are the post-Steve plans (do you really think there are none?) they aren’t made to know for the public. There is no reason to.
Long live Jobs
(for sure longer than my pile of black turtlenecks..)
Just to clarify — Ive is an Industrial designer, not a graphic designer. He designs hardware.
Yes but 50% of the market don’t want to pay for quality, currently about 2.5% do, Apple quality that is.
The question is how many people who already own a PC and under no circumstances would buy a Mac because they have never bothered to look past the misinformation spread about Apple, would pay $99 for OSX.
Your argument about what PC users buy seems to imply that Apple are using a monopoly to force us to buy machines which are far higher spec than some would ordinarily buy?
The majority of those that don’t buy Apple don’t even know how much better they really are. Most think they are inferior in every way.
That’s a valid implication from my statement. My mother has a 600MHz Snow iMac. It’s about a year old. The Firewire ports have never been used. The VGA mirroring port has never been used. Heck, even the Ethernet port has never been used. My mom paid $800 for her iMac, and doesn’t use $300 worth of features. She uses a Mac because it’s easy (and because I insist).
I’m not complaining personally, because I like to have all of the upgradeability, connectivity, and flexibility brought about by having the latest and greatest everything. I’m actually using both Firewire ports on my G4. I have a second network card, and a 5-port USB 2.0 PCI card. I use all of my G4’s abilities, and I’m willing to pay for all the extras.
But yes, there are lots of people who don’t need all that stuff. To some, the system is superior enough to warrant the extra cost. To others, it’s not.
Note: Last I checked, OS X was $129.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
-Jake
Everyone here is right. The question remains, why can’t apple increase market share with a superior product? My answer is still that Steve doesn’t care, and I think he ought to. Shitcan the fancy ads and saturate the marketplace with thousands of cheap ads, including popups, that simply blow up the most popular misconceptions about macs, re: speed, compatability, and cost. It isn’t that hard…..why not do it?
Jake,
Currently PC users have a choice, buy a Mac to run OSX or buy a PC. To try OSX they would have to sell the thing they are comforatble with and spend $1100 minimum for a Macintosh. That is unacceptable for most people. I realise that porting app’s to x86 is potentially difficult but people like Adobe would be able to use a lot of x86 optomised code for OSX apps (what is YellowBox or BlueBox or whatever it was called) but if someone could go and buy and x86 version of OSX for $129, their risk is reduced exponentially.
The other thing is that if you and I evangelise to someone about Mac’s we do so as Mac users, we are seen (by many) as biassed and maybe even dilussional or ill informed. Now if PC users start telling people how they bought OSX for $129 and it has transformed their computing experience the potential for “Switchers” is then massive.
Fortune favors the brave as they say.
Jon,
He can’t do it because he isn’t a great CEO, he’s a great Marketing director, that is why Sculley ousted him, his heart rules his head and you can’t run a business that way.
These forums are the wrong place to get answers because for the most part, people who passionate about computing hang around them, like Jake says though, most people aren’t passionate about their computer they just use it as a tool. They need to experience OSX and we can tell them till we’re blue in the face how great OSX is but if they don’t experience it for longer than 2 minutes in an elecronics store where the sales people are telling that PC’s are better, they’ll never switch.
Apple’s board have a decision that needs to be made within the next 6 months, grasp a time where MS is at it’s weakest and make the brave decision to release the x86 or remain a niche company where they experience 18 months of bouyant sales while we buy G5’s and faster PB’s but where they wuill then suffer three to four years of flat sales and dwindling bank balances.
If Apple’s future also lies in consumer electronics then that just reinforces a case to split the company into two divisions.
Why doesn’t anyone ever clamor about BMW needing to increase their market share? It’s similar to Apple’s. It’s a superior product, with more bells and whistles than your average Pontiac. The controls are all in well-thought-out places. It will last longer. It drives better than most anything else you can buy. It looks great. And it costs more too. The only complaints I ever hear about BMW are:
1. I want one, but I can’t afford it
2. They win in magazine comparisons too often; magazines are biased
BMW is doing fine financially. They are an innovator, and other manufactures strive to match their products. They don’t have the whole market, but they have a consistent portion that varies by a percent or two occasionally, but they have a group of die-hards that will never buy anything else.
Sound familiar?
If people accuse me of being biased, I tell them I’m biased for a reason. Most people I know see me as a reasonable person with high standards for everything, so they usually listen at least a little.
-Jake
The thing is that in order to increase market share BMW would have to reduce the cost of the product and that would more than likely mean cheaper components and perhaps reduced quality which would affect sales and that would have the opposite impact to the desired one.
You seem to like using the motor industry as an analogy so let me put this to you. As a group, VW Audi have a diverse line of vehicles, but they leverage the most from their components in order to generate the greatest revenue. As an example, the chassis from the bland VW Golf is used in the exciting Audi TT and the steady SEAT Ibiza. Revenue streams are important for all companies and Apple doesn’t have to reduce the quality of their hardware in order to increase revenue, they port their OS. It will have neglible impact on their hardware sales and if it does they should get more competitive, they have it too easy at the moment because we as users are passionate, they take us for granted in my opinion.
I use the auto industry because I know it well, and because BMW makes a nice analogy.
You’ve got it backwards! VW shares the Golf/TT/Ibiza platform because it’s GOOD hardware.
First, I’d like to say that VW is a HUGE company. Audi, Porsche, Lamborghini, Bentley, Bugatti, SEAT, Skoda. They have amazing resources, and tons of money. In that regard, it’s not the best comparison. But I’ll run with it for now.
If Apple were to try to emulate this business model, they would need to instate a new brand. Macintosh would be the luxury brand, so to speak, and the new brand would be the non-luxury. They would then sell machines under the new name without all the bells and whistles, but still built around the PPC architecture, with all the inherent advantages therein.
If Apple resorted to selling machines based only on x86 hardware, that would be like VW deciding that from now on all Porsches would be powered by the 2.2L ECOTEC engine, simply because they’re cheap, and Cavaliers sell tons more than 911’s.
Personally, if I were a Porsche customer (which I one day hope to be), I would drop out and look elsewhere if they pulled something like that.
Let’s be clear. Apple, to me, is a luxury brand. They use superior components, and charge more for them. You’ll never get everyone in the world to drive Porsches and BMWs. Some people don’t care enough about their cars. But if you can find someone that (a) cares about their driving experience, and (b) can afford the luxury, they’re likely to be driving one.
The equivalent applies to the Mac.
We’ll never convert everyone. I don’t expect to. But I will tell everyone that asks me about my computer that it’s a luxury computer, and it’s worth every penny to me.
-Jake
If jobs does pop his clogs theres only 1 thing we can do.. we can rebuild him into a super intelligent robot where the G10 powers his body and mind to run things. Also instead of apple paying for his jets, they can save on the cash and keep him stored in a cupboard where hes hooked up to a plentiful supply of energon cubes
silvergun
And we can then argue whether his benchmarks are any better than the original Steve Jobs.
LOL nice 1
Jake,
You’re starting to sound like an eliteist here
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Seriously, I wasn’t for one moment suggesting that Apple start producing x86 hardware, the new IBM chip seems to have massive potential. What I suggest is that Apple port their OS to x86 to give Windows and Linux users a real feel for what they’re missing.
If you’re telling me that the Golf chassis is the best thing that Audi could have used for the TT I think you are wrong and I think you know that this isn’t the case and Porsche have done exactly what you say with the low end Boxter. The thing is it still has a Porsche badge on it and with it’s lower price tag a whole new client is able to purchase.
A brit in charge of a huge american company? sounds great to me. He can give apple that touch of class and sophistication we brits have. If any.
Either that or Apple staff will become a load of p***heads like most Brits abroad seem to be these days
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Nice work on the benchmark jab.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
elitism:
1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
2. a. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class.
b. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.
Entitlement? Deserve favored treatment? I never said or implied anything of the sort. Note carefully that elitism is not just the belief that a particular item/class is superior, but also that said group has rights given them because of the superiority. I have not suggested that Apple receive special treatment in any way. They are undeniably unique in the PC industry, and in many ways are superior (I was going to say undeniably superior, but many people deny it, so that would be wrong).
To be clear, however, I have a strong belief that Macs are superior machines in most ways. Not because they are Macs, mind you, but because they are actually better. I spend 40 hours each week with Windows XP, so don’t think I don’t know what the Wintel world has to offer. If ever my experience at work improves beyond my Mac at home, I’ll switch in a heartbeat.
The Boxster S is powered by a 3.2L flat six producing 260 horsepower. That’s no ECOTEC. Even the plain Boxster has a 2.7L flat six making 228 horsepower. Both are genuine Porsche engines that exhibit all of the characteristics expected from a Porsche engine. Even the supercharged ECOTEC (~190hp, due next year) can’t match it for power or refinement. Certainly, it doesn’t perform as well as any current 911, but it’s not “low end” by any standards. In the luxury roadster class, the Boxster is an excellent competitor.
Back to my analogy, I’d equate the Boxster to the iBook. Smaller, less powerful, but no less refined. Still gets the job done, and in style! Nothing wrong with that. Many other luxury makes do something similar. Case in point — the BMW 318, the Mercedes CLK230, the Lexus ES300. I’ve driven all three (and a Boxster too), and each is in every way deserving of the luxury marque it wears.
-Jake
Silvergun — Don’t you think that by designing the appearance of every piece of Apple hardware, he already has given Apple the touch of class and sophistication of which you speak?
I want a G10-powered superbot to do my bidding. Can I have one? Also, these energon cubes sound pretty sweet. I heard the PowerBook revisions due next week will use them, giving us about 10,000 hours of usable power between cube changes.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
-Jake
Sean,
I have no argument that, if it could be done, a pure Mac experience on x86 hardware would be a godsend for Apple’s market share.
Problem is, it just wouldn’t work. PC apps wouldn’t work on OSX-x86, because OS calls wouldn’t match up. Mac apps wouldn’t work either, because they’re compiled for PPC.
To pull it off, Apple would have to make a “Classic” environment that ran PPC apps in emulation on the x86. Performance would suck for emulated apps. I’m confident saying that none of us want to bring Classic back, especially if it ran at a fraction of the speed.
So let’s say we get that far. Apple converts OS X, and all of the software developers start converting. Meanwhile, we’re running *everything* in emulation. What happens next?
Apple discovers that, just like Microsoft, it must now support untold billions of different hardware configurations (the Win98 approach), or it must certify particular models of each type of hardware as OSX-x86 compatible, and require that all OSX-x86 users use only hardware found in that set (the WinNT approach).
In order to play nice with all the hardware, Apple has two options. Don’t optimize anything, so the entire OS is high-level, slow code that’s guaranteed to work on lots of hardware. Or, optimize for every item possible, and leave the high-level code around in case some hardware component shows up that doesn’t have optimized drivers. Option 1 gives us a slow OS. Don’t need that! Option 2 gives us an expensive OS that (a) takes forever to complete or (b) has lots of bugs in it.
Microsoft has taken Option 2b. $300 for XP? Sheesh. I don’t know a single person that bought a copy of Windows XP (unless it came bundled with their Dell).
Meanwhile, all of the Mac developers get pissed, because it really hasn’t been that long since we made the 680×0 -> PPC migration. x86 ISA was a kludge then, and it’s only gotten worse.
I think that covers everything. Apple, of sound mind, will never move to x86. It is simply not reasonable.
-Jake
Those auto analogies are flawed. A huge number of computer users and potential computer users incorrectly think that Macs cannot suit their needs. That is as if BMW’s are not bought because potential owners think that the car cannot be run on public highways, or use a rare fuel. BMW would quickly put the kibosh on those perceptions. I think John Ross is right, Apple could easily, put does not seem to want to end the misperceptions about macs.
It might be that the company is less sure about competing with frontline pc’s than the most rabid mac fans are. OS X, for all it’s fanfare, has glitches, and is just another stepping stone to a hopefully flawless OS. 99% of power users can get tasks done just as fast with M$ xp and 2000 as with OS X. I say that based on my experience with X at home and 2000 at work…….I know that is sacrilege, but any foamy mouth mac lover that disagrees, I think, has not spent enough time with the mS offerings on modern hardware.
Jake,
I bought a dual 867 G4 last year and the noise became so incredible I decided I couldn’t live with it, so I sold it (before the fan fix). I had a 667mhz PB which was meant to put me on until the G5 appeared but that suddenly went through an incredible series of about 12 repairs it eventually came back from Apple mint so I decided to cut my losses and sell it (I never felt comforatble with the Ti book, it seemed flimsy compared to my previous Pismo PB), that left me with the childrens G4 iMac (700mhz) but I found that incredibly slow (I feel it is so slow that it maybe faulty, the PB walked all over it) for the tasks that I use it for so I decided with a heavy heart that I would buy a cheap PC until the G5 arrived. So I’m currently sat using a 2.4ghz Compaq P4 running 2000 Pro because it cost me around $1100 with a Compaq 18″ TFT display and 3 year next day on site warranty (that’s a bargain).
I hate the machine with a passion and using Windows is the most dull and tedious computing experience I have ever endured BUT boy does it fly which means I achieve everything I did on the Mac extremely quickly, I go on the iMac to keep myself sain occasionaly but it is embarrasingly slow in comparison.
My point is that if I had come from a Windows background, sold a cheap PC and bought an expensive iMac (ours cost $1650) I would have been totally disappointed, gutted even at the performance difference. As it is I’ve always used a Macintosh and I know that this is a transitional period for Apple hardware so I can excuse them because I know that things will get better.
I hope to be the proud owner of a new G5 any week soon but to perhaps help back-up you’re argument, if I could run OSX on this Compaq box perhaps I wouldn’t buy the shiny new Apple.
Anyway I think we will have to agree to disagree on this but I’ve enjoyed our discussion, it makes a change to get informed debate rather than the usual flaming that these usually degenerate into.
Chuck,
I was waiting for someone to bring this up. It is a valid point, but keep in mind that an analogy doesn’t require a perfect parallel on every point. Many BMW’s (the ones I would buy, in particular) require premium fuel. It is readily available, but more expensive. Mac software is readily available, sometimes more expensive. You just have to buy from the right outlets (pump your gas from the premium pump). Anyone with an Internet connection has access to all the latest Mac software, via the online catalogs, eBay, direct sales, etc.
There are also a lot of people (not nearly as many as those that think Macs can’t suit their needs) who have been exposed to the Mac, and would like to own one, but can’t afford it.
And there are lots of drivers who have no idea what makes a BMW better (how many times can I bring up my mother in a discussion about computers and cars?).
That said, it’s very true that many people have no idea how compatible Macs are. Going back to what the article is about, certainly an Apple ad that flaunted the compatibility factor could help.
I am a power user of both Mac and Windows, all versions in the last 8-10 years. I find myself infinitely more productive on the Mac. Not because individual tasks are completed faster, but because of superior workflow. Fewer clicks. Intuitiveness still plays a small factor, even after years on both OSs. My three-year-old G4 (Jaguar) is more stable under load (lots of apps running actively) than my one-year-old Compaq (WinXP) under half the load. By “stable”, I refer primarily to application level stability — neither OS crashes often enough for me to care. Also, running under heavy load seems to cause the Windows system’s performance to degrade relatively quickly. I restart the XP machine daily to get around the degradation.
Oh yeah. I might be the only one that cares, but the Java Virtual Machine for Windows is garbage compared to the one for Mac. Garbage!
-Jake
Sean,
Agreed, I enjoyed the discussion. Good timing, too, because I have to leave soon.
Sounds like you had an unfortunate string of faulty computers. I’ve been lucky enough never to have such a problem.
-Jake
Dominique Trempont, Next co-ceo is a man with with an equally great
vision as Steve Jobs. He won’t need a wigi board connected to SJ soul in order to implement his vision.
Dominic is a man educated in Paris and has fantastic taste to understand design at it’s highest and most refined level, at both technical and esthetic level.
He could take over right now…………
I’ve never heard of Trempont. Where did he come from?
Apple designs do have a great quality and sophistication about them, but a british spokes person could do well for international relations..unless hes chased out by a gang of angry pro american democrats
Who said the Golf is bland?
I think its a good-looking car, it just has a more working-class aesthetic. And It sells for over $15,000, so I wouldn’t call it a cheap car. It’s just not expensive either. Kind of like an eMac, not cheap, but not expensive.
Robb needs to check the meaning of the word “infinitely”. It is hyperbole like that which makes some mac users sound like they are 3 bricks short of a load.
And, about analogies: They are by definition similar, not exact. However, nearly anyone who drives (Robb’s mom excluded) appreciates bmw’s or at least is impressed by their pricetag. The percentage of computer users similarly excited about macs is “infinitely” small.
Finally, Robb, do a search for “xp slowdown” and you will find quite a discussion of it, and several fixes for possible causes. Or, you can continue to complain about it, works for me either way.
IF STEVE BLOBS dies who cares. Their are plenty of guys that can run Apple better than that egomaniac, the problem is the Apple board always wants to get som stuffed shirt. If Blobs is a visionary I’m Jesus Christ, read the back ground of this psycho! All you apple faithful that haven’t done your homework on Blobs.
At least he doesn’t F**** his customers with garbage unlike Bill “We need to copy that Apple idea” Gates.
To P. Sorenson,
1. My name is Jake.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
2. Thanks for repeating what I said about analogies.
3. I know quite well the meaning of “infinitely”; after all, I minored in math. I used it once, to describe my productivity on the Mac as compared to Windows. True, it was hyperbole, and by the very definition of the word was extreme hyperbole. However, my meaning was clear. No need to nitpick my choice of words.
4. Lots of people appreciate that BMWs are nice, expensive cars. Most people do not appreciate the superiority of the driving experience itself. Every BMW I’ve encountered exhibits excellent shifts, throttle response. handling, tractability, driver position, and everything else that’s so important to a driving enthusiast, but that escapes the notice of most drivers. BMW calls themselves the Ultimate Driving Machine. I wouldn’t call them ultimate (I nominate Ferrari), but they are definitely excellent in this regard. It is of that aspect that I claim most people are unaware.
I’ll look into this XP Slowdown thing. I use enough memory in my daily routine that I had always assumed that it was just a poor virtual memory implementation — something Windows has never been good at. Thanks for the tip!
-Jake
Jonathan is a great designer. He is not a Steve Jobs replacement. If Apple were Prada, then possibly. But they’re not.
He features in videos because he is a literate individual with an English accent – as you may be aware, North Americans perceive English accents as authoritative and adding gravitas, which is why they’re used pervasively in television and radio advertising.
Hey guys, don’t care about this problem. I’m gonna be the neXt one.
Thanx Steve.
besides that Ive is a pretty face to look at ?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” /> more more more more of him but dont wait another 20 years for that hahaha
perseus
Saint Jobs
What? Gil just a fall guy with ties to Jobs when he started? No way. Gil was pissed when jobs threw him out. Gil had no clue how to deal with a computer company with creative people. Jobs understood that. Jobs cleaned house when he came to Apple. He destroyed everything his nemesis started (Sculley) because he could not believe that anything sculley started could be of use at all. It was out of spite. Jobs hated Gil’s elitism so much he refused to use the office that Gil was having made for him on the top floor of Building 1 (Infinite Loop has 6 buildings). Instead, Jobs made an office of what was going to be Gil’s dressing room and bathroom. Sheesh! A dressing room! Gil was shepherding Apple into oblivion, not cleaning house.
Jobs is very tough on everyone– there used to be a saying (and probably still is) that people wanted to stay under the Steve radar else they may attract too much attention. if you want a good idea of how Jobs works, pick up that book on the creating of the Segway (Code Name Ginger), where there is a big meeting in SF which included Jobs and Jeff Bezos. Jobs has brilliant insight and does not pull his punches.
When he came to Apple he made a lot of changes– but readjusted readily when things were not working out. He focused the company and made it work again.
Who could replace him? Not a geek. Jobs never has been one of those and it won’t fit. Not a traditional business CEO. The CEO types just do not have the insight and intution to do something great. The space that Jobs is in is a eclectic one that contains a whole lot of ego and marketing savvy. Do not discount Ive because he works on industrial design– I have no idea if he has anything like what it would take– but he does have a creative spark that Apple has bet their farm on more than a few times.
Can’t you find something better to write about? Look pal when I die
be it tomorrow “walking to the Palo Alto store” and getting hit by a truck crossing the street – or in 60 years. Apple and the Mac community will live on – just as the light bulb and telephone did after Edisons demise. Now please – go write an article on one of our many great products.
Ah, fraud. The Internet’s #1 felony.
Sweet.
-Jake
Well, I aw the word clones mentioned, but not in the context I think it should be in this case. Why don’t we get the effort and research done to clone Steve? Problem solved. Continuous RDF for centuries to come.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Actually, if you look for it, you’ll see mention of an attempt to build a G10-powered SteveJobsBot.
-Jake
I think that he will have one of his kids take over the company.
Jonathon Ive. Of Course. Apple lives because its buyers want the extreme in design, in power and in attitude in their digital world. This does need a personality to lead it through constant detractors that wait for the platform to die.
Jonathon Ive if backed with equally agressive and creative market growth experts, can pull it off.
Are you listening Apple?
Quality design, 100% compatibility in any networked managed environment and core majority apps are fundamental, but price must be easy for the accounting mug executive to say, lets go Apple this round of replacements.
K
Jonathon Ive. Of Course. Apple lives because its buyers want the extreme in design, in power and in attitude in their digital world. This does need a personality to lead it through constant detractors that wait for the platform to die.
Jonathon Ive if backed with equally agressive and creative market growth experts, can pull it off.
Are you listening Apple?
Quality design, 100% compatibility in any networked managed environment and core majority apps are fundamental, but price must be easy for the accounting mug executive to say, lets go Apple this round of replacements.
K
Apple is a game SJ started. If the King is gone, the game will end.
Nah, if Steve dies, then Apple dies. Once Apple the company dies, the computer itself will live on.
Just look at Amiga users! They still have ‘user groups’ and ‘trade shows’ for the ages old (and might I mention DEAD) Amiga platform! They even tried to get some extra life out of it by getting certain Amiga computers to run OS 8 being they had similar processors and logic board architectures to the Macintosh Quadra series.
huh?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” /> That’s when Steve will “phone home” and ask GOD to take us back to Heaven, telling Him: “You created me, I created the Apple and Jesus saved our sins! Get us out of here! now! amin” …
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
1. Don’t delude yourselves! There won’t be any other Apple’s CEO. And
2. don’t think too far into the future!
… or something like that
Jake,
you say several posts up, “The majority of those that don’t buy Apple don’t even know how much better they really are. Most think they are inferior in every way.”
I don’t think that’s true. From my personal experience (which of course may be limited) I’d say that the majority of PC users have a fairly good opinion of Apple.
The situation has been improving in the past year or three. I don’t have the resources to verify my suspicion, but I suspect that a slight majority are still oblivious.
-Jake
Um, I don’t know if “oblivious” is the right word. I don’t think it has a lot to do with knowledge. I thought of a friend of mine, who once said: “Then there are those Apples, they are supposed to be better.” In my experience, this pretty much sums up what the average PC user thinks about the Macintosh.
I tried to come up with a better word, but I settled on that one. You’re completely right that there are lots of people who know enough to say “they are supposed to be better.” But is that enough? Supposed to be better?
I’d say we could break the population down into the following main categories (I’ve estimated the sizes of these categories based on people I know):
1. I use a Mac (3%)
2. I’d like a Mac, I know what they can do (5%)
3. I’ve heard that Macs are better (20%)
4. I’ve know someone that uses a Mac, but I don’t know anything about it. (40%)
5. Macs suck / Macs can’t do what I need to do. (30%)
Note again that the percentages are my ESTIMATES based on people I know. Feel free to add categories or suggest different percentages.
I find that Linux users make up a good portion of group #2. Lots of members of #2 would get a Mac in a heartbeat if they didn’t cost so much.
Group #5 used to be much bigger than #3 and #4 — this is the improvement I mentioned.
-Jake
Personally, I’ve never met anyone from 2, and hardly from five (in person, I mean), except maybe one lady who was convinced that Macs couldn’t display a folder in list view, and she hated those icons.
Actual statements I remember, some of them heavily summarized:
“Ah, those Apples, do they still exist?”
“Then there are those Apples, they are supposed to be better.”
“Macintoshs were my first computer experience in 1990,
it’s a fond memory.”
“I was an Atari user, so it would have been natural to switch to a Mac when they ceased to exist. But I was really disgusted at their high-price policy, and found that Winows 3.1 had everything I needed.”
I’ve seen a whole newsgroup dedicated to old (and I mean really old) PC software suddenly get into an old Mac frenzy. One of the regulars got an old Mac, and requested something in a by-group reserved for such off-topic things. Suddenly all the other regulars followed suit, and that by-group was full of ancient Mac software.
And I noticed that websites dedicated to old Mac games are often run by PC people.
As for your categories, I guess I’d agree to the numbers for the first two, set the last to far less, maybe 5-10%,
and divide the rest evenly or maybe 20-40-20 between
“heard they are better”, “don’t know and don’t care”, and “Apple? What’s that?”
Plenty of intelligent pc users know that macs are quite useful, somewhat more reliable, and offer a more pleasing experience. They just don’t want to bother with the higher price, incompatability with software they already own, and the stigma of owning one. Call it catagory 6 or whatever, and make a guess at the percentage of people in the catagory, but do realise that they are the people with money to throw down on new machines……..and don’t switch. Really, why bother when you can do what you need to with a pc at a third the price. At least when you drive a BMW you are outside showing it off!
I think a very big difference between Mac users and PC users is that the latter usually don’t have loyalties of any kind. Many, at least in my generation, have precious experiences with and fond memories of other systems (which may well include the Macintosh), and many see themselves as PC users by chance rather than by choice. And when buying new hardware, the argument “I’m using brand X now, and made good experiences, so I’ll buy it again” is the least likely to make the decision. There is a high probability that it will not turn up at all.
All this could be fertile ground for a switch campaign, but there are lots of obstacles:
– Macs are sold in seperate shops. First-time buyers will rarely go to dedicated computer stores, and it does not necessarily inspire trust in PC users who are used to brand-independent dealers.
– No double-booting with Windows. I am well aware of the technical issues, but there were double-booting Macs years ago, and alone buying VPC, insuring that it runs smoothly and with the least performance drop possible, and bundling it with a dedicated “switch machine” might have helped a lot.
– Macintosh advocacy pages that are designed more to scare away than to encourage potential switchers. I can tell you from experience that it takes a lot of determination to wade through all these insults and empty phrases to get to a few bare facts. And being told that everything that annoys you in Windows is really an Apple invention isn’t all that encouraging either.
– Apple advertising that seems to be targeted mainly at the existing user base as well and never adresses those issues that really bother PC users. For example, as far as I know Apple is not a member of the TCPA, but they never exploit this fact in their advertising.
Jon,
about the stigma, who is really still stigmatizing Mac owners? The Unix hackers are all mollified by OS X and Darwin, and those script kiddies and 133+ H4X0R types – I mean, who takes them serious?
Speculative nonsense. Henry Ford is dead, Edison is dead and Steve will die. It is likely he will take his fortune and kick back long before then. So that begs the question…so what? I praise Apple and Mr. Jobs for not inflicting the crap Gates has on my computing experience. Can Apple move forward should he go? If they continue to inovate and respect their consumers; I suppose they will. As long as they continue to adopt this policy with their products and continue to inovate thoughtfully, they will always have a sale here.
Hi Theodor, the stigma I was referring to, and remember I am talking about intelligent pc users, is the one mac owners take on when they shell out 3 or 4 times more than they need to to buy an equivelent speed/functionality pc. It seems rationalizing is a nearly inevitable consequence, ala Jake’s endless, but uncompelling, BMW comparison.
Excellent point about Apple’s advertising btw……..it really does seem to be aimed at the converts instead of the potential switchers. Personally I think that Steve has another, more personal, agenda, and that raising market share really does not matter. That is one logical conclusion to Apple’s hit and miss, ignore the obvious, marketing plan.
Jon,
I think you have an excellent point here. The more I think about it the more I come to the conclusion that Apple has little to gain and a lot to lose by leaving its niche and becoming mainstream.
Ten years ago there may have been a real struggle for market domination, but after all, it was mainly about who would compromise the integrity of their platform first. The PC got the market, but the Mac remained Mac.
Apple’s customer base may be small, but it is loyal and devout to an extent that is nearly unheard-of in the industry. Only the Amiga comes to mind.
So Apple probably does well in targeting their ads mainly at their existing user base. And if these ads occasionally piss off PC users, which might or might not be potential switchers, it’s not so bad either.
Being a persecuted but superior minority is part of the Macintosh identity. Persecuted minorities tend to stick together, and they tend to stick to their leaders, a fact which must be welcome to Steve Jobs both from an economic as from a personal point of view.
So it might be well in Apple’s best interest not to let opinion become too good in the general public.
Theodor,
I agree on almost all counts. However, I would argue that if 50% (or 90%, or whatever) of computer buyers suddenly decided that buying a Mac was the right idea, feeling that the superiority (real or perceived) was worth the extra cost, this is not against Apple’s best interests. Seems to me like it would just provide an even larger cash flow for them to dump into R&D, to stay even further ahead of the PC game.
The important thing is, if Apple does try to increase market share, that it does not alienate the people in the niche in doing so. For instance, if they started using cheap parts to decrease costs, in an effort to become price competitive with PCs, that would alienate many Mac fans, while some PC users might be attracted to a lower-cost Mac. But if they decide to start advertising differently, in an effort to get more attention from PC users, I doubt that any existing Mac fans would feel alienated.
-Jake
Jake,
an avalanche like this would kill Apple on the spot. It would kill any company. Even if just five million people worldwide decided they want a Mac, and they want it now (as the result of a real good ad campaign maybe), it might cause Apple more chagrin then gain. To satisfy this demand within a reasonable time, they would have to double or better treble their capacity: an enormous investment. Suppliers might take advantage of Apple’s plight and raise their prices, and if Apple followed suit, which would be entirely justified from the point of view of market mechanics, they *would* alienate their existing user base.
No, as a manufacturer you want slow, steady increases, not sudden booms; sudden booms spell trouble.
But there is another aspect: Now, being a Mac user means membership in an exclusive club. Open the doors too wide, and you might not like what comes in. Compare Steve Jack’s column on Mac users and Mac whiners from October last year. In the above example, how many of those five million would probably be in the whiner category?
Gaining new market shares without alienating the existing customer base is often difficult. The PC industry decided long ago they didn’t care. For them, it worked out well, though they still care more about their customers than meets Bill Gates’ approval.
As for the ads, I think they fulfill their function. They reassure the existing user base, inspire new faith, while leaving the recruiting mainly to word of mouth. This may seem unorthodox, but it’s what made MLM great.
Despite the fact that I said “suddenly”, I didn’t mean that everyone would change their mind and order a new Mac at the same time. Agreed, that would cause all kinds of manufacturing problems.
-Jake
So macs are better, but they can’t be built fast enough, so the advertising is deliberately underachieving, yet Apple’s recent path is to lower prices while improving speed, obviously to compete with pc’s.
You guys are worried about Steve dying? How could it get worse?
Apple hasn’t done much to change CPU prices in a couple years. They’ve been just releasing new models at the same prices for a long time. The G5’s have stepped up the prices a bit — the entry level model is now $1999, whereas a few months ago the entry level Power Mac G4 was $1699. Their displays have become a lot cheaper (the 23″ Cinema HD started out at $3499!), but that’s about it.
Apple isn’t having any problems keeping up with current demand. The G5 has been a bit slow to ramp up, but there’s no surprise there. The production difficulties were a hypothetical situation (brought up by mistake, actually) in which the majority of the world would decide that they wanted Macs all at once, and overwhelm Apple with a quarter billion orders all at once.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
-Jake
Somehow this all reminds me of a joke we had here in Austria twenty years ago:
“The government party is working hard on losing the next election. But the opposition will thwart their plans.”
For years now, Microsoft has ensured that each new product is more obnoxious and annoying than the previous one. To a lesser degree, the PC industry has done the same thing to the hardware we can buy.
And all Apple and the Macintosh community have to say to this is “We were obnoxious and annoying first! Wintel is just copying from us!”
Sad, really sad.
BR – this is for you:
Apple irrelevant? No one cares what they do? Pffffffffffffft
Show me ONE “I love my PC” website…
YOU CAN’T so just shut up please.
Well, see, that’s not entirely true. There are lots of sites about PCs, and lots of users that love their PC. Just because I don’t understand them doesn’t mean I’ll deny their existence.
Heck, there’s even a guy that loved his PC so much that he wanted to make it beautiful — he took a Sawtooth G4 case (the blue front) and put his PC in there!
Oh yeah, and BR didn’t say “irrelevant”, he/she said “in the mainstream no one really cares what Apple does.” Since 94% of people use Windows, I would suggest that it’s a valid statement. I wish it weren’t true, but I can’t deny it.
-Jake
Had to try this one out. “I love my PC” gave me 659 results on Google, “I love my Mac” 1910.
That’s interesting, especially when you consider that PC users outnumber Mac users by around 30 to 1. Could the Mac really be NINETY TIMES more lovable than the PC?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
-Jake
Some of these “I love my PC”-pages don’t actually say so, they just quote Bill Gates saying so. So it might even be more than 1:90.
On the other hand, “I love my Computer” gave 5000 results.
Regarding the Prophecyof Steven P Jobs our savior, it simply states:
If he does die then it will be for windows users sins.
He will then rise seven days later and lay waste to all windows users worldwide.
Microsoft facilities and production facilities of the evil shells that carried micorsoft software will be set ablaze and the evil faces of the devils behind the microsoft empire will be revealed to all.
After the evil devils are vanquished – then and only then will peace and brotherhood reign.
Then the prophecy will be complete.
Burp
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2003/08/11/story6.html?page=2
interesting… put macs and pc side by side and see how they do. I wonder if apple can keep up with Best Buy demand if they are successful.
I believe that one of the key important recent decisions that Apple has made was to develop OS X. That is to migrate to UNIX (BSD). This has opened the door to running a great deal of open source software that was previously only available to UNIX users (i.e. Linux). Yes, a lot of open source software has been ported to run under Windows, but not much of it was available to Macintosh.
This was a smart move, but a smarter move would be to take this a step further and incorporate more of the original NeXT Step ideology of having a system that isn’t focused around the hardware architecture. Yes, this means having “fat binaries” (executables that contain both G3/4/5 binary code as well as x86/etc binary code).
Let’s not forget another VERY important question: What happens when Bill Gates dies?
oyyy!
what if Ive dies before Jobs? saying it does (not) makes it so! hope not. let em loong loong lives…
why are you playing god?
ah..well when Bill Gates dies some other idiot like Steve Ballmer or some other fat wierdo will take over Microsoft and make it even worse than it already is.
Steve Jobs Die? Ha! didn’t you ever see the film called Lawn Mower Man? Steve took back command of the company so he could work some of the most insanely progressive deals to increase the level of technology that Apple and IBM currently have to such a zenith that you won’t understand what he is up to until we hear his birth cry of every telephone ringing on the earth at once. The G5 is just a red herring. Yes, this is a great microprocessor, but wait until you see the SJ-02 microprocessor that IBM is working on! This processor is Steve�s secret baby that you and I will never get our hands on. Why? Because it is designed to emulate the synaptic network of Steve’s brain so he can perform a “Bio-Memory backup” of each day so Steve 2.0 can go online as soon as his Steve 1.0 “Wet-ware” version crashes. Steve has purchased a cave in the Rocky Mountains to house the cluster of SJ-02 computers that will be the home of his very being and has cut a deal with Honda to purchase 10,000 ASIMO robots (not the one you have seen dancing, but the one that can build a G5 with one hand and fire a light armor weapon with the other at the same time) to be his eyes and ears. Apple stock prices will go through the roof when it is announced that he has fired his entire computer construction factory and is replacing them with 3000 units of himself to perform all of the work. This plan will only work though as long as Honda can create an ASIMO with a long enough neck to accommodate black turtleneck sweaters.
he stops breathing, i guess
“Steve Jobs is Apple. Apple is Steve Jobs.”
people who spread such rubbish is a criminal, a fraud. what happened to Woz? Steve is just a pretty boy mascot for Apple. Give credit to the real players in the game man!
HEAR HEAR.
Bring back the true innovator of Apple, Wozniak.
Create an artificial intelligence and call it Virtual Steve.
No… call it… Siri
When Steve Jobs dies, his body decomposes and becomes part of the earth.
Apple and the rest of us continue living and enjoying life with our Macs.
What about Mike Matas, the co-founder of Delicious Monster?
Steve is only upset in the above post because he has just found out that he has cancer… your article, Steve Jack, was more pertinent than you realized.
I know it’s cheating to comment on this with ten years of hindsight (and I hadn’t even heard of Steve Jobs back in 2003), but Jony is no CEO. He’s not good enough at public speaking. He’s fine when talking to a camera, but when he had to introduce the aluminium Macbook to a smallish crowd in 2009 he showed the symptoms of stage fright. And whilst the speech he gave at Steve’s funeral was moving, he was clearly just reciting lines.
Jony is best off doing what he already does – hardware design. The jury’s still out on his skills as a software designer, but he’ll never run the company.