2) How many people still care what Woz has to say?
3) iPod will not die until it is replaced. The only product actively replacing it is being produced by Apple, so I'm not sure any point relative to this is even worth bothering with. Music products are evolving and Apple is leading the charge.
The Nova never had >70% market share and patented technology significantly more advanced than its competitors.
Palm is dying. true and self-evident..
Symbian is dying. moderately true.
Windows Mobile is going nowhere quickly. true in that statement, false in scope
Linux is going nowhere slowly. false on countless fronts.
Linux and OS X are the platforms that Windows will mimick, moving forward. OpenSolaris and the rest of the BSDs will all see innovations that the 3 consumer desktops will absorb and choose to leverage in various ways, from the desktop to the enterprise.
As much as I respect Woz for who he Was! I think it's clear why he's retired from the daily grind at Apple. Yes the iPod is mature, but it can and will evolve into what ever the market requires. It's certainly not a 'fad'. How many fads last almost a decade? I have 3 iPods and 2 iPhones between myself and my better half and I'm still tempted by the new Nano. I've had several in the past which I pass on to friends and family as I upgrade and I'll continue to do so.
As for Wozniak's comment about Jobs not knowing what Apple are working on next I think that's a bit harsh. Sour grapes?
Woz is at heart, a geek to the core. Which is why he's an Android type of guy. Mainstream folks don't need to tinker and hence why the iPhone is a success.
With respect to the iPod dying. He's simply suggesting the slow down and saturation point. Nothing people don't already know. Nothing to get riled up about really.
That is definitely an established BS technique, but just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they aren't really out to get you. The fact is that the world has justifiably established a stereotype for mac users as fanatics. Mac fanatics are real, and in the decades between 1984 and now, they made up the most visible, and certainly the noisiest, segment of the user base. That perception will only change as more average, boring people start using macs in average, boring ways. Only when it is observed that people who don't really care ALSO use macs, will the stereotype die. He may be wrong on some or all of the points he was quoted on, but he was definitely right that the vitriol would flow from the fanatics. We see proof in this thread that it has.
I don't disagree that there are zealots out there.
I just disagree with the notion of preemptively trying to paint anyone who disagrees with him as a zealot.
The guy gave an opinion, and people disagree with that opinion. Nothing more.
Is it really impossible for anyone to say something positive about apple, or something negative about those who compete with or disagree with apple?
Really, there's no way an opinion that is on Apple's side can be valid, well reasoned, and unbiased? Smells like that BS technique to me.
And you seem overly paranoid saying the response here is "VITRIOL". With only a couple exceptions, the responses don't seem angry at all - when someone just says "I think he's wrong" and explains why, that's perfectly reasonable.
I don't disagree that there are zealots out there.
I just disagree with the notion of preemptively trying to paint anyone who disagrees with him as a zealot.
The guy gave an opinion, and people disagree with that opinion. Nothing more.
Is it really impossible for anyone to say something positive about apple, or something negative about those who compete with or disagree with apple?
Really, there's no way an opinion that is on Apple's side can be valid, well reasoned, and unbiased? Smells like that BS technique to me.
And you seem overly paranoid saying the response here is "VITRIOL". With only a couple exceptions, the responses don't seem angry at all - when someone just says "I think he's wrong" and explains why, that's perfectly reasonable.
Perhaps vitriol was a poor choice of wording. Rude dismissal might have been a better phrase. The ad hominem attacks are what I'm thinking of. Most of those have been without any support at all. And just to keep things straight, Apple rocks.
Just because we feel justified in whatever opinion we have doesn't mean we aren't biased.
2) How many people still care what Woz has to say?
3) iPod will not die until it is replaced. The only product actively replacing it is being produced by Apple, so I'm not sure any point relative to this is even worth bothering with. Music products are evolving and Apple is leading the charge.
4) He underestimates Jobs' godlike future powers.
5) I pity his child.
On the contrary, I think Woz would be a great Dad. And Woz Jr. would get to love his/her silly name.
It's always worth listening to him even where he is so clearly off-beam. Woz is an incurable gadget geek with great talent (runs on the board &c.)... he's the other side - the Feature Creature side - of the Apple equation from aesthetics, design and simple-to-use functionality.
Perhaps vitriol was a poor choice of wording. Rude dismissal might have been a better phrase. The ad hominem attacks are what I'm thinking of.
I don't agree with rude or ad hominem for the most part either. Generally the posts here have been simple disagreement with his statement, with reasons given.
You insulted my editor's credentials and suggested he made a poor interpretation of Woz's quotes, which "is why journalists go to school and bloggers are not journalists."
Before this you said/I said gets more unpleasant than Woz's comments, the TRUTH squad is gonna step in (I appointed myself)
ITEM #1:
It's worth noting that Wozniak actually says nothing of the sort in the article.
THE RULING: Yeah, really he did say something "of the sort," if not precisely. "Nothing of the sort is not accurate. Decision: to K.
ITEM #2:
This is why journalists go to school and bloggers are not journalists.
THE RULING: Note these statements need not be mutually exclusive. But yes, journalists go to school because that's where they're taught how to stick to the facts, to write clearly and accurately, how to attribute quotes, to distinguish fact from opinion, and so on, (sometimes) ad nauseum. Bloggers need not be journalists. Usually aren't. But the best of them can practice the same skill set. Decision: First half of statement: TRUE; second half: split decision.
ITEM #3:
K says poster said K's editor made a "poor interpretation". Poster DID argue interpretation was wrong, which could be interpreted (uh-oh!) as saying it was poorly done. THE RULING: poster's misuse of "imply" undermines his credentials for making such a judgement. Decision: True, but inocuous.
It occurs to me that the same obsessiveness that has K pursuing the defense of his editor is also an asset when applied to getting facts right. So that's a good thing.
Can we now all shake keyboards and just get along?
Why do you think Jobs declined to write the forward to Woz's last book?
I figured a lot of it was that it discussed parts of the past that he didn't want repeated. Like when Jobs duped Woz out of his share of the profits for a program by lying about how much they were getting paid.
Quote:
He is still technically an Apple employee and yet he criticizes it's management regularly in the press.
If he's still taking money, then maybe that's not a good idea. But I just don't see that kind of tone that you suggest is there. I do see an honest difference of opinion, but nothing that I hear or read in the tone of what he says suggests that he wants to hurt Apple or its management.
While I thank Steve Wozniak for helping to start Apple, I really wish he would shut up. I don't think that he says anything really useful these days.
I thought this exact thing before even reading this story. He seems to just spout random obvious things every once in a while. Who the hell is even asking for his opinion anyway? Does he have a friend of his "interview" him occasionally, then forward it to various news sites?
This is why journalists go to school and bloggers are not journalists.
Journalists of today are not journalists! I would love to see the grades of these "journalists" this school is producing?!
Especially when you hear about news like the AP reporter that took a story from a blogger on a leftist website and ran with it - mistake and all!
Most of todays journalists don't report, but rather gather what information they need that allows them to skew what they know to their advantage and apply to their agenda by "reporting" a story with the facts the journalist only wants you to know.
That is why I do not trust the main stream media of today on stories of a political and national security nature without also reviewing a similar write up from the other side to get the other half of the story that todays reporters conveniently leave out. Can anyone say New York Times?!
Let's not forget how photos have been "Photoshopped" for effect to aid a reporters story.
I think that Woz should address his critics and post ten creative ideas right here. But nothing we've heard before, like the old open platform comment. He wants Apple to be challenged - let's see what he's got. Isn't there a saying "put up or shut up"?
I really do not follow the analogy comparing Woz to Bill Clinton. Clearly, Bill Clinton 1) had to be nice to Obama (a fellow democrat), and 2) still had to talk bad about Obama because he was trying to get his wife elected. Who knows what motivates Woz.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugsnw
Woz was a world class hardware engineer. And maybe that's as broad as his talents reach. He needs to stop commenting on all-things Apple as they make me cringe.
Woz is to Apple what Bill Clinton is to Obama. The good news is he's goofy enough and nice enough that we all give him a pass. We can all just chuckle about it and remind ourselves that he rides a segway.
I don't see a lot of Model Ts driving around and Ford really saturated that market good. Turns out people buy new technology. So Apple's goal is to keep innovating. I will buy thousands of computers and iPods and gadgets in my lifetime. Just for the fun of it.
Comments
2) How many people still care what Woz has to say?
3) iPod will not die until it is replaced. The only product actively replacing it is being produced by Apple, so I'm not sure any point relative to this is even worth bothering with. Music products are evolving and Apple is leading the charge.
4) He underestimates Jobs' godlike future powers.
5) I pity his child.
The Nova never had >70% market share and patented technology significantly more advanced than its competitors.
Palm is dying. true and self-evident..
Symbian is dying. moderately true.
Windows Mobile is going nowhere quickly. true in that statement, false in scope
Linux is going nowhere slowly. false on countless fronts.
Linux and OS X are the platforms that Windows will mimick, moving forward. OpenSolaris and the rest of the BSDs will all see innovations that the 3 consumer desktops will absorb and choose to leverage in various ways, from the desktop to the enterprise.
As for Wozniak's comment about Jobs not knowing what Apple are working on next I think that's a bit harsh. Sour grapes?
What bridges, specifically?
Why do you think Jobs declined to write the forward to Woz's last book?
He is still technically an Apple employee and yet he criticizes it's management regularly in the press.
With respect to the iPod dying. He's simply suggesting the slow down and saturation point. Nothing people don't already know. Nothing to get riled up about really.
That is definitely an established BS technique, but just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they aren't really out to get you. The fact is that the world has justifiably established a stereotype for mac users as fanatics. Mac fanatics are real, and in the decades between 1984 and now, they made up the most visible, and certainly the noisiest, segment of the user base. That perception will only change as more average, boring people start using macs in average, boring ways. Only when it is observed that people who don't really care ALSO use macs, will the stereotype die. He may be wrong on some or all of the points he was quoted on, but he was definitely right that the vitriol would flow from the fanatics. We see proof in this thread that it has.
I don't disagree that there are zealots out there.
I just disagree with the notion of preemptively trying to paint anyone who disagrees with him as a zealot.
The guy gave an opinion, and people disagree with that opinion. Nothing more.
Is it really impossible for anyone to say something positive about apple, or something negative about those who compete with or disagree with apple?
Really, there's no way an opinion that is on Apple's side can be valid, well reasoned, and unbiased? Smells like that BS technique to me.
And you seem overly paranoid saying the response here is "VITRIOL". With only a couple exceptions, the responses don't seem angry at all - when someone just says "I think he's wrong" and explains why, that's perfectly reasonable.
I have a slide rule AND an abacus. The abacus is on my iPod. What's your point?
I'd guess then that you have a sun dial on your iPod too?
C
I love the idea of the next big thing just arriving on Steve's desk without him having been aware of it being developed!
I don't disagree that there are zealots out there.
I just disagree with the notion of preemptively trying to paint anyone who disagrees with him as a zealot.
The guy gave an opinion, and people disagree with that opinion. Nothing more.
Is it really impossible for anyone to say something positive about apple, or something negative about those who compete with or disagree with apple?
Really, there's no way an opinion that is on Apple's side can be valid, well reasoned, and unbiased? Smells like that BS technique to me.
And you seem overly paranoid saying the response here is "VITRIOL". With only a couple exceptions, the responses don't seem angry at all - when someone just says "I think he's wrong" and explains why, that's perfectly reasonable.
Perhaps vitriol was a poor choice of wording. Rude dismissal might have been a better phrase. The ad hominem attacks are what I'm thinking of. Most of those have been without any support at all. And just to keep things straight, Apple rocks.
Just because we feel justified in whatever opinion we have doesn't mean we aren't biased.
He backed away twenty years ago and essentially rendered himself irrelevant.
1) I pity his child.
2) How many people still care what Woz has to say?
3) iPod will not die until it is replaced. The only product actively replacing it is being produced by Apple, so I'm not sure any point relative to this is even worth bothering with. Music products are evolving and Apple is leading the charge.
4) He underestimates Jobs' godlike future powers.
5) I pity his child.
On the contrary, I think Woz would be a great Dad. And Woz Jr. would get to love his/her silly name.
It's always worth listening to him even where he is so clearly off-beam. Woz is an incurable gadget geek with great talent (runs on the board &c.)... he's the other side - the Feature Creature side - of the Apple equation from aesthetics, design and simple-to-use functionality.
The rest of your post is self-evidently correct.
Perhaps vitriol was a poor choice of wording. Rude dismissal might have been a better phrase. The ad hominem attacks are what I'm thinking of.
I don't agree with rude or ad hominem for the most part either. Generally the posts here have been simple disagreement with his statement, with reasons given.
You insulted my editor's credentials and suggested he made a poor interpretation of Woz's quotes, which "is why journalists go to school and bloggers are not journalists."
Before this you said/I said gets more unpleasant than Woz's comments, the TRUTH squad is gonna step in (I appointed myself)
ITEM #1:
It's worth noting that Wozniak actually says nothing of the sort in the article.
THE RULING: Yeah, really he did say something "of the sort," if not precisely. "Nothing of the sort is not accurate. Decision: to K.
ITEM #2:
This is why journalists go to school and bloggers are not journalists.
THE RULING: Note these statements need not be mutually exclusive. But yes, journalists go to school because that's where they're taught how to stick to the facts, to write clearly and accurately, how to attribute quotes, to distinguish fact from opinion, and so on, (sometimes) ad nauseum. Bloggers need not be journalists. Usually aren't. But the best of them can practice the same skill set. Decision: First half of statement: TRUE; second half: split decision.
ITEM #3:
K says poster said K's editor made a "poor interpretation". Poster DID argue interpretation was wrong, which could be interpreted (uh-oh!) as saying it was poorly done. THE RULING: poster's misuse of "imply" undermines his credentials for making such a judgement. Decision: True, but inocuous.
It occurs to me that the same obsessiveness that has K pursuing the defense of his editor is also an asset when applied to getting facts right. So that's a good thing.
Can we now all shake keyboards and just get along?
Why do you think Jobs declined to write the forward to Woz's last book?
I figured a lot of it was that it discussed parts of the past that he didn't want repeated. Like when Jobs duped Woz out of his share of the profits for a program by lying about how much they were getting paid.
He is still technically an Apple employee and yet he criticizes it's management regularly in the press.
If he's still taking money, then maybe that's not a good idea. But I just don't see that kind of tone that you suggest is there. I do see an honest difference of opinion, but nothing that I hear or read in the tone of what he says suggests that he wants to hurt Apple or its management.
While I thank Steve Wozniak for helping to start Apple, I really wish he would shut up. I don't think that he says anything really useful these days.
I thought this exact thing before even reading this story. He seems to just spout random obvious things every once in a while. Who the hell is even asking for his opinion anyway? Does he have a friend of his "interview" him occasionally, then forward it to various news sites?
This is why journalists go to school and bloggers are not journalists.
Journalists of today are not journalists! I would love to see the grades of these "journalists" this school is producing?!
Especially when you hear about news like the AP reporter that took a story from a blogger on a leftist website and ran with it - mistake and all!
Most of todays journalists don't report, but rather gather what information they need that allows them to skew what they know to their advantage and apply to their agenda by "reporting" a story with the facts the journalist only wants you to know.
That is why I do not trust the main stream media of today on stories of a political and national security nature without also reviewing a similar write up from the other side to get the other half of the story that todays reporters conveniently leave out. Can anyone say New York Times?!
Let's not forget how photos have been "Photoshopped" for effect to aid a reporters story.
http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/
Woz was a world class hardware engineer. And maybe that's as broad as his talents reach. He needs to stop commenting on all-things Apple as they make me cringe.
Woz is to Apple what Bill Clinton is to Obama. The good news is he's goofy enough and nice enough that we all give him a pass. We can all just chuckle about it and remind ourselves that he rides a segway.
I don't see a lot of Model Ts driving around and Ford really saturated that market good. Turns out people buy new technology. So Apple's goal is to keep innovating. I will buy thousands of computers and iPods and gadgets in my lifetime. Just for the fun of it.