How Steve Jobs would’ve introduced iPhone 6 and Apple Watch

“If you felt uneasy through Apple’s keynote, you’re not alone. Something felt off. It wasn’t the features or hardware but the messaging,” Jong-Moon Kim writes for Jiggity. “Let’s review parts of the keynote that felt weak and see if Steve can make it shine.”

“The keynote starts with a real-life Prezi presentation with little substance. The most damning line comes near the beginning: ‘Where other perceive first as valuable, you value the first thing that actually matters,'” Kim writes. “Assuring people that ‘It’s not about being first, but being ‘first with meaning” reeks of being defensive,” Kim writes. “Even with companies we respect confidence—not insecurity. A Jobsian Apple would have never said something so weak.”

“There should have been one obvious, visceral reason to buy an iPhone 6. A larger screen size alone is a weak proposition for the company’s flagship product. It’s derivative of existing products and doesn’t say anything differentiated from its competition,” Kim writes. “The trouble now is that the iPhone 6 must depend on its host of secondary features to make the sale… This happens when product creators play it safe. There’s a chance the single X might be wrong. The obvious solution is to be add enough features until there’s Something for Everyone. With Steve Jobs, there was no fear. There was an unassailable, almost divine level of confidence that he had something you will love. We had a crisp, singular exactness to why we’ll be marching to the Apple Store after the keynote and buying that phone.

“Apple iWatch: Messy. Too many options. This is such a huge blunder,” Kim writes. “Instead of a single, perfect product, we got a jumble of features and choices. There should have been just The One that people call ‘The Jesus Watch’ like the second coming. It’s easy to fall in love with The One. The iPod launched with The One. The iPhone launched with The One. The Apple Watch launched with The Sixty.”

Kim writes, “Without further ado, let’s join Steve Jobs as he introduces the new iPhone and the rumored new wearable.”

Check out Kim’s imagined Steve Jobs’ September 9, 2014 special event keynote, in which Jobs unveils only one, 4.5-inch iPhone 6, here.

Jong-Moon Kim writes about the intersection of psychology, technology and artistry. He graduated from MIT in 2010 with an B.S. and M.S. in computer science. He was the winner of the MIT Web Programming Competition in 2010. He is a Y Combinator alumnus. He is currently working as a founder at an unannounced startup.

MacDailyNews Take: There are parts of this essay that ring true and work so well (the “heartbeat” section, for example) that Apple would do well to have their keynote writers read it and incorporate some of Kim’s ideas going forward.

Other ideas, such as having only one “iWatch” (not “Apple Watch”), not so much.

[Attribution: Cult of Mac. Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Lynn Weiler” for the heads up.]


        1. Absolutely so. Hines change the watch would never work in the way he suggests far too limiting because it has no prime function to promote Apples new products have to be far more nuanced and expansive now. At the end of the day this guy is a geek and what makes Apple products superior is that they are designed and made for humans not insular geeks. Jobs saw that Apple had to change in this new world which is as different as they themselves have become. Companies die by doing what they always do so Jobs chose Cook to ensure that did not happen while not having a guy who wanted to impose his own vane vision. That doesn’t work twice and you need a genius to make it work even once. As soon as someone states what Jobs would have done he is starting from the wrong starting point unless his contribution is for entertainment value only.

        1. I agree. Kim Jung Il clearly watched a different Keynote than we did. He also has been living in a cave for the last few months because all you have heard recently is how many people are going to buy an iPhone 6 because of its larger size.

          1. “Apple iWatch: Messy. Too many options. This is such a huge blunder,”

            Ohhhh, just sod off, you arrogant little twerp.
            I am constantly amazed by these people who declare, with such utter certitude, what Apple should be doing or should have done.

  1. did she watch the same speech as me? the iPhone had more improvements than the screen (camera, processor, more ram, shape, thinness…). a watch is jewelry first. you wear it, people see it on you. it must be customizable.

    1. The watch as this guy presents it looks masculine. . . nothing for women, nothing for kids, nothing for those who want a statement watch. He’s an idiot. It IS one Apple Watch, that users can customize to make their own.

  2. Don’t agree with the just one …. I believe Apple watch and options will make it a huge success ….. original iMac came in many colors …

    I also think U2 album giveaway is a nice PR move …..

    We miss Jobs but Cook for sure has leadership and vision!

  3. Disagree. iPhone 6/6+ looks awesome compared to competing bigger phones, and the camera is going to further change filmmaking. As for the Watch, choice here is brilliant. I was wondering how Apple was going to pull it off. It’s been one of the problems with other smart watches. They’re ugly and you have no choice. If people are going to wear this thing 365, then they have to like it personally. Unless, of course, you thought Swatch was a failure for having many choices.

  4. This article is what’s weak. It’s true that the tone of Apple has shifted slightly toward talking about building “meaningful” products, but what’s wrong with that? It’s Samsung and Microsoft who are on the defensive by being offensive toward Apple, its products, and its customers. Those insanely stupid commercials where they take swipes at iPhones, iPads, and MacBook Airs are just stupid. It shows that they fear Apple’s products. This is just another article among many that you’ll see after has a product announcement. There’s always someone who bitches and moans about what Apple announced without ever having used the new products.

    1. This essay isn’t only weak it is the worst kind of criticism. Where they compare reality to fantasy and alluded that a mythic figure, no longer with us, could have made fantasy reality. For example, stated that iPhione 6 should have had one X thing. They don’t offer what that could have been but say there is one thing that everyone would have wanted and be killer.

  5. Steve Jobs’ Apple might’ve gone with one iPhone 6.

    Tim Cook’s Apple will sell significantly more iPhone 6/Plus units than Steve Jobs’ Apple would have sold.

    As for iWatch and certain presentation elements, styles, and verbiage, Kim has some excellent ideas, but MacDailyNews’ SteveJack’s idea of why there are so many Apple Watch options make too much sense:

    I believe that Apple figured they needed to go “all in” to prove they’re totally committed to Watch and, with their enormous cash reserves, they’ll simply take the hit on whatever inventory management issues come their way. When entering a new market, with Apple’s resources, it’s preferable to spend rather than look like they’re just tentatively dipping a toe in by offering just one or two Watch options.

    Further, and even more importantly, the huge range of Apple Watch options (sizes, finishes, materials, bands) makes it really difficult, if not impossible, for Samsung, Xiaomi, and the rest of the knockoff peddlers to come up with so many well-designed options. Sure, they can come up with a bunch of colored watch bands, but are they going to look, feel, and work like all of those already painstakingly designed by Jony Ive and Marc Newson? No, of course not. Just like iPhone knockoffs, they won’t come remotely close to the full experience that only Apple offers to their customers. The inventory management alone, of which Tim Cook is the world’s preeminent expert, would kill the likes of Samsung and Xiaomi et al.

    Apple is focused on doing things for customers that no other company on earth can do. If patents and the law won’t protect Apple’s ideas, creating and accomplishing things that are impossible to replicate is the only true method of protection that exists for Apple’s IP (hence the huge sapphire investment, the Liquidmetal licensing, etc.)

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.