If the first sentence is a complete lie, what does that say about the rest of the article?
Don't even get me started with:
If you think the article states that Apple has a monopoly in phones, you need to work on your reading comprehension skills. It says the opposite. The market is open and competitive, it's just that Apple is earning 73% of all hardware profits and 74% of apps revenue.
And if Android doesn't exist entirely to funnel Apple's IP for free to China and Korea to improve their products at the expense of Apple, what function does it serve?
But is Apple reinvesting its profits? Or just sitting on a lot of cash?
Apple allocated $10B capex on equipment and retail this year, and developed more OS software than Google and Microsoft combined. It's platform is selling all the apps.
Apple doesn't have to blow $8B to $12.5B on dubious acquisitions to keep up with MS&GOOG. it does still have more money than ever though, because it is making money faster than it can spend.
Spending money poorly is not better than sitting on it, even when you have some minor inflation going on.
If iOS 7 is playing catchup what the hell was iOS 6? All the things people are bitching about that iOS 7 doesn't have or doesn't do, they didn't get any of that under Jobs & Forstall.
I base my comments on functionality. Siri & Google Now, those are my main concerns.
iOS 6 was pre-Google Now. I had hoped Apple would answer Google Now by opening Siri to devs. Instead they decided to slap lipstick on the os and call it a day.
Again, I bet iOS 8 will be great, but I have no plans to put iOS 7 on my iPads. I hope it improves by Oct.
IMO, Scott simply had to go. Ios6 just plain stank (I feel it was the weakest release in ios history), and he was reportedly a roadblock preventing the other departments from working effectively together.
Take a look at Windows Phone fonts, especially headlines, where the end portion of a words always floats out of the screen.
The moment you actually use a Windows Phone, you realize that the text going off the screen is an elegant and minimalist way of indicating that there is more content in that direction, reachable by scrolling towards it.
From its minimalism to its typography to its active tiles, I often think of Windows Phone UI's innovations as being more like what one would've expected from Apple.
--
As for iOS7, it's basically the same iOS with different colors and a few additions tacked on. It's not a core redesign like Windows Phone was, coming from Windows Mobile.
Of course, one would not expect Apple to make a massive UI change at this point, due to the need for legacy app and customer support.
As the article noted (and I've said many times), taking a big UI leap is a luxury that only a new smartphone entrant (as Apple was when they entered the market), or an old one with falling sales (e.g. Palm, Microsoft, RIM) can afford to take.
The iOS 7 interface is great imo, it reminds me of start trek next generation interface, which is neat and optimize for functions over looks.
But Apple is absolutely NOT leading anything with it, its just FOLLOWING the flat interface trend. There is some minor innovations and despite a lot of elements being taking out of various other OS's, the final product is still unique.
This OS will be good enough to drive existing and new products for the next few years, but Apple problem doesn't lie on the software side imo, its on the hardware side. I want more choice withing existing products and for the love the god MORE product categories.
I base my comments on functionality. Siri & Google Now, those are my main concerns.
iOS 6 was pre-Google Now. I had hoped Apple would answer Google Now by opening Siri to devs. Instead they decided to slap lipstick on the os and call it a day.
Again, I bet iOS 8 will be great, but I have no plans to put iOS 7 on my iPads. I hope it improves by Oct.
I'd be curious if developers think iOS 7 is just lipstick on the OS and nothing more. At WWDC Craig Federighi mentioned 1,500 new APIs. Is that just lipstick?
The iOS 7 interface is great imo, it reminds me of start trek next generation interface, which is neat and optimize for functions over looks.
But Apple is absolutely NOT leading anything with it, its just FOLLOWING the flat interface trend. There is some minor innovations and despite a lot of elements being taking out of various other OS's, the final product is still unique.
This OS will be good enough to drive existing and new products for the next few years, but Apple problem doesn't lie on the software side imo, its on the hardware side. I want more choice withing existing products and for the love the god MORE product categories.
It's funny you say Apple's problem is hardware as so many say its software and services. If you want Apple to become Samsung (they certainly have plenty of product categories!) I think you'll be waiting a long time. Apple didn't get to where they are by an abundance of product types. I can't see them changing their core philosophy now.
Here's what's going on: When it comes to highly complex, mass market consumer products, integrated manufacturing and design will eventually beat the non-integrated (or 'diffused' for lack of a better term) model EXCEPT when overwhelming market power is able to blunt the advantages of the integrated approach.
When competition is so intense that manufacturers are forced to eke out the last ounce of performance and efficiency out of their products, they will pour more and more effort into optimizing and fine tuning the product and its components to eliminate every last bit of inefficiency, whether engineering or economic. An automaker can't do this if it is using an engine that is designed by the engine maker to be sold to several auto companies. A smartphone company likewise is hampered if its OS is designed to be a one-size-fits-all solution. Sure, early on, the auto industry, as the outgrowth of the carriage industry, had independent engine, chassis, and coach builders. But in the beginning, autos were not a mass market and competition wasn't that intense. Today, all auto companies and their products are highly integrated. The ones outsourcing their engines are low volume specialty shops selling tremendously expensive product.
With a massive marketing and advertising budget, Samsung was able to give the illusion that its product is as good and as refined as the iPhone. Well, latest news is that Samsung has cut back smartphone component orders significantly and the stock market has responded. As this relentless drive to optimize, refine, and perfect smartphones continues, the distance between iOS and Android will get wider and wider. We see it now in the vast difference in energy efficiency. There is no magic bullet in extending battery up time per charge, it's all hard painstaking work designing all your components including the OS to operate efficiently by itself and in concert.
The exception of course is the Windows PC but that's because Microsoft's monopoly was able to neutralize all competition and so there was no need to put any effort into optimizing, fine tuning and perfecting. Without any meaningful competition, we thought we should be happy enough just to know that when Windows starts to get bogged down, we can always reboot, and when the arterial clogging becomes unbearable, we reinstall. What foolish dolts we mortals were.
All of Apple's smartphone competitors know that they have to integrate or die. But unlike Apple, none of them has the breadth and depth of hardware and software skills and knowhow that are required to run a successful mobile computing company.
Good comparison with the auto industry (surprisingly an industry that compares well with the computer industry on a number of levels). Also a reason why you'll see Samsung start making its own "engine" soon.
Also why Google bought Moto; have to hedge their bets when the inevitable happen. There's no love between OEMs and Google... Android was just a convenient way to stay in the game until they could catch up with Apple, not to mention it's easy to fork ala Amazon.
Very, very insightful! After Job's death only Scott Forstall could stand up to Ive's boundless "essentiality."<span style="line-height:1.231;"> But Tim Cook fired him. So we will continue to see Sir Ive "</span>
<span style="line-height:1.231;">ruthlessly stripping" iOS... Sad. </span>
Pretty sure it was Jobs who gave Ive more power than anyone not the CEO or named Jobs.
I don't get all this love for Forstall. I guess because a few (even AppleInsider) wanted to anoint him the "next Steve". Look, it didn't happen. It's ok.
For a company as cohesive (on the outside) as Apple, it makes much more sense to have hardware and software working together, which wasn't happening under Scott. I mean, that's what Apple is all about.
As a developer, minimalist non-skew apps will be much easier to do. I don't have to be a graphic artist. I don't have to mimic the real world. This will lead to more consistency (= ease of use) in apps. It's a big win.
Daniel Eran Dilger (DED) - a known cheerleader of Cook's misguided leadership - goes overboard in verbosity trying to hide the obvious - Cook's policies led to one of the largest shareholder losses in the history and.... And Cook is not done yet. Soon AAPL price will fall under $400 and will have $3XX prices tag.
DED uses every tactic under the sun - from the decade old failings of Wintel to the unquestionably gloried and revolutionary accomplishments of Apple during Job's era - to cover up Cook's recent losses and portray iOS as the best thing in mobile platforms.... Gimme a break!
Cook - an undisputed chain-supply guru and a spreadsheet genius - coasted on Job's vision for a year, which got AAPL above $700. Having no guts to make radical changes - like increasing iPhone screen size above 4" or fixing unreliable iCloud - Cook just continues to coast while AAPL tumbles to $600 to $500 to $400 to... over $250 billion lost and counting.... I guess the next DED piece will be even more prolix and defensive.
Good to see the anti-Cook brigade back in force.
Also good that Apple's shares never tumbled during Jobs' tenure, or that the market isn't irrational or anything like that.
<span style="line-height:1.231;">The moment you actually use a Windows Phone, you realize that the text going off the screen is an elegant and minimalist way of indicating that there is more content in that direction, reachable by scrolling towards it.</span>
From its minimalism to its typography to its active tiles, <span style="line-height:1.231;">I often think of Windows Phone UI's innovations as being more like what one would've expected from Apple.</span>
<span style="line-height:1.231;">--</span>
<span style="line-height:1.231;">As for iOS7, it's basically the same iOS with different colors and a few additions tacked on. It's not a core redesign like Windows Phone was, coming from Windows Mobile.</span>
Of course, one would not expect Apple to make a massive UI change at this point, due to the need for legacy app and customer support.
As the article noted (and I've said many times), taking a big UI leap is a luxury that only a new smartphone entrant (as Apple was when they entered the market), or an old one with falling sales (e.g. Palm, Microsoft, RIM) can afford to take.
Apple isn't making a huge UI change because what they introduced in 2007 still works. No one has demonstrated that the grid of icons no longer works or something else is much better. With Windows 8 and its live tiles how much can you really glean staring at the screen? I look at the screen below and it takes me a while to get oriented to all the different components on screen vying for my attention. It's almost as if Microsoft built it with this enterprise mindset; it reminds me a bit like a corporate dashboard for some operations manager. Also, how much time do people spend staring at their home screen/desktop. iOS has always been a springboard for apps. I think Apple has more work to do in terms of app organization and app curation but I don't see iOS changing its focus away from being a springboard to great apps. I think Apple's priority is ensuring iOS always has the best apps and developers develop for iOS first and are most rewarded developing for iOS platform.
Pretty sure it was Jobs who gave Ive more power than anyone not the CEO or named Jobs.
I don't get all this love for Forstall. I guess because a few (even AppleInsider) wanted to anoint him the "next Steve". Look, it didn't happen. It's ok.
For a company as cohesive (on the outside) as Apple, it makes much more sense to have hardware and software working together, which wasn't happening under Scott. I mean, that's what Apple is all about.
Here's what Steve said about Ive to Walter Isaacson:
The difference that Jony has made, not only at Apple but in the world, is huge. He is a wickedly intelligent person in all ways. He understands business concepts, marketing concepts. He picks stuff up just like that, click. He understands what we do at our core better than anyone. If I had a spiritual partner at Apple, it’s Jony. Jony and I think up most of the products together and then pull others in and say, “Hey, what do you think about this?” He gets the big picture as well as the most infinitesimal details about each product. And he understands that Apple is a product company. He’s not just a designer. That’s why he works directly for me. He has more operational power than anyone else at Apple except me. There’s no one who can tell him what to do, or to butt out. That’s the way I set it up.
If some people think Ive has too much power at Apple then Steve is the one they need to blame. Not Tim Cook.
I fully expect the Galaxy S5 to run the "GalaxyOS". Either a forked version of Android or Tizen that is compatible with Android apps but runs its own Samsung Galaxy Store apps too.
Maybe, but I don't think it's likely. Like most hardware manufacturers like HTC, Motorola, LG, etc., they don't appreciate software, not in the way Apple, Microsoft, and Google do. They're handset makers and that's their goal. The last thing they want to do is have their own developer conferences and APIs. It's still cheaper for them to let Google do most of the OS and API work and the manufacturers only provide a custom shell or launcher or skin. The fact that Samsung got this big without a custom fork of Android would support the idea that they don't need to "own their own OS".
Maybe, but I don't think it's likely. Like most hardware manufacturers like HTC, Motorola, LG, etc., they don't appreciate software, not in the way Apple, Microsoft, and Google do. They're handset makers and that's their goal. The last thing they want to do is have their own developer conferences and APIs. It's still cheaper for them to let Google do most of the OS and API work and the manufacturers only provide a custom shell or launcher or skin. The fact that Samsung got this big without a custom fork of Android would support the idea that they don't need to "own their own OS".
You can't compare Samsung to the other OEMs, as they've pretty much been the ONLY one to succeed with Android. Hate them all you want, but Samsung is smart and knows who to copy. They've been one of the few who understand why Apple succeeds and have blatantly tried to copy that formula. The next steps are better materials (rumored) and complete vertical integration of hardware and software.
You can't compare Samsung to the other OEMs, as they've pretty much been the ONLY one to succeed with Android. Hate them all you want, but Samsung is smart and knows who to copy. They've been one of the few who understand why Apple succeeds and have blatantly tried to copy that formula. The next steps are better materials (rumored) and complete vertical integration of hardware and software.
I agree. Samsung has created their own ecosystem:
Samsung Apps
Samsung Hub
Game Hub
Media Hub (US only)
Learning Hub / Music Hub / Video Hub
S Beam
Samsung AllShare Play & Control
Samsung AllShare Cast (WiFi Display)
Mirroring & Extention
Samsung AllShare Framework
Samsung S Suggest
S Translator
S Health
S Voice Drive
S Pen Experience
S Note
S Planner
ChatOn
WatchOn electronic program guide
Story Album
Many people fail to mention, however, that Samsung doesn't ship a Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone. The Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone is actually an entire product line of more than one dozen models.
Many people also like to mention the importance of choice. If choice were so important then why does only one company really compete well with the Apple iPhone.
Samsung is an existential threat to the future of Google Android.
Comments
If you think the article states that Apple has a monopoly in phones, you need to work on your reading comprehension skills. It says the opposite. The market is open and competitive, it's just that Apple is earning 73% of all hardware profits and 74% of apps revenue.
And if Android doesn't exist entirely to funnel Apple's IP for free to China and Korea to improve their products at the expense of Apple, what function does it serve?
Apple allocated $10B capex on equipment and retail this year, and developed more OS software than Google and Microsoft combined. It's platform is selling all the apps.
Apple doesn't have to blow $8B to $12.5B on dubious acquisitions to keep up with MS&GOOG. it does still have more money than ever though, because it is making money faster than it can spend.
Spending money poorly is not better than sitting on it, even when you have some minor inflation going on.
I base my comments on functionality. Siri & Google Now, those are my main concerns.
iOS 6 was pre-Google Now. I had hoped Apple would answer Google Now by opening Siri to devs. Instead they decided to slap lipstick on the os and call it a day.
Again, I bet iOS 8 will be great, but I have no plans to put iOS 7 on my iPads. I hope it improves by Oct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynic
Take a look at Windows Phone fonts, especially headlines, where the end portion of a words always floats out of the screen.
The moment you actually use a Windows Phone, you realize that the text going off the screen is an elegant and minimalist way of indicating that there is more content in that direction, reachable by scrolling towards it.
From its minimalism to its typography to its active tiles, I often think of Windows Phone UI's innovations as being more like what one would've expected from Apple.
--
As for iOS7, it's basically the same iOS with different colors and a few additions tacked on. It's not a core redesign like Windows Phone was, coming from Windows Mobile.
Of course, one would not expect Apple to make a massive UI change at this point, due to the need for legacy app and customer support.
As the article noted (and I've said many times), taking a big UI leap is a luxury that only a new smartphone entrant (as Apple was when they entered the market), or an old one with falling sales (e.g. Palm, Microsoft, RIM) can afford to take.
The iOS 7 interface is great imo, it reminds me of start trek next generation interface, which is neat and optimize for functions over looks.
But Apple is absolutely NOT leading anything with it, its just FOLLOWING the flat interface trend. There is some minor innovations and despite a lot of elements being taking out of various other OS's, the final product is still unique.
This OS will be good enough to drive existing and new products for the next few years, but Apple problem doesn't lie on the software side imo, its on the hardware side. I want more choice withing existing products and for the love the god MORE product categories.
Good comparison with the auto industry (surprisingly an industry that compares well with the computer industry on a number of levels). Also a reason why you'll see Samsung start making its own "engine" soon.
Also why Google bought Moto; have to hedge their bets when the inevitable happen. There's no love between OEMs and Google... Android was just a convenient way to stay in the game until they could catch up with Apple, not to mention it's easy to fork ala Amazon.
Pretty sure it was Jobs who gave Ive more power than anyone not the CEO or named Jobs.
I don't get all this love for Forstall. I guess because a few (even AppleInsider) wanted to anoint him the "next Steve". Look, it didn't happen. It's ok.
For a company as cohesive (on the outside) as Apple, it makes much more sense to have hardware and software working together, which wasn't happening under Scott. I mean, that's what Apple is all about.
As a developer, minimalist non-skew apps will be much easier to do. I don't have to be a graphic artist. I don't have to mimic the real world. This will lead to more consistency (= ease of use) in apps. It's a big win.
Good to see the anti-Cook brigade back in force.
Also good that Apple's shares never tumbled during Jobs' tenure, or that the market isn't irrational or anything like that.
Here's what Steve said about Ive to Walter Isaacson:
If some people think Ive has too much power at Apple then Steve is the one they need to blame. Not Tim Cook.
Thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
I fully expect the Galaxy S5 to run the "GalaxyOS". Either a forked version of Android or Tizen that is compatible with Android apps but runs its own Samsung Galaxy Store apps too.
Maybe, but I don't think it's likely. Like most hardware manufacturers like HTC, Motorola, LG, etc., they don't appreciate software, not in the way Apple, Microsoft, and Google do. They're handset makers and that's their goal. The last thing they want to do is have their own developer conferences and APIs. It's still cheaper for them to let Google do most of the OS and API work and the manufacturers only provide a custom shell or launcher or skin. The fact that Samsung got this big without a custom fork of Android would support the idea that they don't need to "own their own OS".
Ha, that hits the nail on the head. I always hated those, they were always so poorly designed.
In a way, Windows 8 is the opposite of Ive's minimalist vision.
I hope I wasn't the only one to notice this: "...the media's continued enrapturement with Android..."
Does Dilger know that OSX has a built-in spell checker?
You can't compare Samsung to the other OEMs, as they've pretty much been the ONLY one to succeed with Android. Hate them all you want, but Samsung is smart and knows who to copy. They've been one of the few who understand why Apple succeeds and have blatantly tried to copy that formula. The next steps are better materials (rumored) and complete vertical integration of hardware and software.
I agree. Samsung has created their own ecosystem:
Many people fail to mention, however, that Samsung doesn't ship a Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone. The Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone is actually an entire product line of more than one dozen models.
Many people also like to mention the importance of choice. If choice were so important then why does only one company really compete well with the Apple iPhone.
Samsung is an existential threat to the future of Google Android.