...
Strive for clarity. Permit only one idea per sentence. Avoid using too many adjectives for dramatic effect. These suggestions should help you communicate your thoughts more clearly.
With such a patronizing attitude you must be a teacher.
You probably wonder why JK Rowling is so successfull.
my point is fashion/lust/desirability are going to become more and more important for Apple. That's where Jony Ive and Angela Ahrendts come in to play. Make Apple products fashion statements that people want/have to own.
If chamfered edges cut with polycrystalline diamonds is a fashion statement, then it is well placed within the design philosophy of the original iPhone that included, wait for this, a traditionally milled chamfer on the face frame.
Here's another theme. Obrounds. All over the place. Look especially at the Lightning connector; the physical body of the female connector is an obround the fits in another obround machined in the iPhone housing. That gives a high level manufacturing benefit as well as functional benefit that looks appropriate. Would that USB.org could think like that.
Fine patterns of laser cut holes; fashion, utility, manufacturing or all of those?
Apple has been building an evolution of iDevices since the iPod. While there are some design elements, color and surface finish for example, that point to fashion, most of what I see is a continuation of a form and function design philosophy espoused by Jony. This will continue with wearable devices, albeit some ornamental elements will be employed, but I hardly see fashion or ornamentation as driving the design; that's function, materials and manufacturability.
Angela will obviously be included in design sessions, but her primary job is to market those devices to the demographics that Apple appeals to, and even to those that don't. That's what she brings to the table.
Both Google and Amazon stocks are up 58% year-to-date; Microsoft is up 40%. If these companies have had a terrible year it's certainly not reflected in their stock price. Compare that with Apple which is up a paltry 5% year-to-date even though the S&P 500 is up 29% and the Nasdaq is up 38%. How is it that Google and Microsoft stock is up double digits if they had such a bad year?
you have just demonstrated once again how Wall Street is driven by hype, not facts as the conventional wisdom fantasizes (e.g., "analysts"). how else do you think the crash of 2008 was possible?
Then why are they developing apps for iOS? If you are correct then they don't need the Apple ecosystem and, in fact, would be better off without it since then they would not have to give up 30% of their profit.
Did you not read where I wrote Apple needs devs and devs need Apple? But Apple doesn’t pay developers to make apps, they do it on their dime in hopes that they'll earn money in the app store, and even though Apple provides storage and handles the transaction they do nothing to ensure that a developer makes money, that's totally on them and if and when they do Apple makes money from them not for them.
1) Why exactly should Apple release a special dividend? What do you think a special dividend would have done to the stock? Shot it past it's temporary 2012 peak?
2) Stocks fluctuate. If you are an investor you just have to accept that. It's also gambling so you can't simply look at a successful company (like Apple) and expect the stocks to grow because the company is profitable or expect a stock to drop upon hearing about quarterly losses (like BB and Amazon) because there is emotion involved in these decisions. It's not rational but it's a reality.
3) Apple doesn't have product releases for most of the year. They never have. You can't have a new product every week and since Apple only has 4 legs of business — Mac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad — with the first not being a major consideration for the majority, the second dropping each year because of the iOS-based iDevices are dominating it, you really only have 2 categories that the market and media really care about. You can't have a new iPhone and IPhone released every week or even every month or every 3 months. It's unrealistic.
4) The worse thing Apple can do is to over extend themselves and dilute their brand by flooding the market with more product categories for the sake of it. They have the dominate mindshare so everything if already compared to an Apple product if Apple makes something in that category. Let's remember the time between the Mac and iPod and the iPod and iPhone. Just because the iPhone and iPad were only 3 years apart doesn't mean everything else can be this expedited.
5) What does the iPhone 5C have to prove? What did the iPhone 4S, or iPhone 4, or iPhone 4GS all have to prove in their second year? From what I've seen the numbers are impressive and I, anecdotally, see plenty of 5C's in public which is impressive because unlike any flagship product there is no reason for people to run out and get last year's HW.
6) Every time Apple releases a new OS update people complain. Your complaint that it "still needs serious tweaking" says nothing about what is wrong with it, but on this point I agree, because all OSes need serious tweaking. There are bugs to fix and refinements to be made constantly but I see nothing about Mavericks that would make it a bane to Mac users, hurt sales, or the stock price which is what your inclusion of Mavericks suggests.
1) Had Apple issued the Special Dividend it would've demonstrated it was a team player. Wall Street punished Apple for being a prima donna when the SD wasn't issued.
2) Yes, stocks fluctuate on emotion and Wall Street followed though by punishing Apple for the company's perceive arrogance. Apple could've staved off hitting the skids if it staggered its product releases to address the predictable annual new product drought between January and August every year -- but Apple didn't have the foresight to address Wall Street's overreaction.
3) It's time for Apple (and its apologists) to stop living in the past and address the present and the future. Everybody knows Apple's old game. Time for a new game plan re: product releases.
4) I agree and am not suggesting that.
5) I think the 5C has quite a lot to prove and it may well succeed. As an Apple pursuit I ( and many others) consider the design mediocre and the product a transparent grab for a market that may not exist.
6) We can agree on that. Personally I'd like to see some tasteful skeuomorphic elements like the opening user screen integrated back into the OS.
I criticize Apple out of my love for its products and in the belief the company can do better in some instances. Allow me to take this opportunity to wish all my fellow Apple lovers a happy and healthy New Year!
As for independent entrepreneurs, you have a mighty sense of entitlement going on there.
You haven't been following the thread. They are a software company so of course there are in house developers that get paid for Apple to make apps. I was talking those entrepreneur developers that on their own accord make a app to sell in the app store.
Did you not read where I wrote Apple needs devs and devs need Apple? But Apple doesn’t pay developers to make apps, they do it on their dime in hopes that they'll earn money in the app store, and even though Apple provides storage and handles the transaction they do nothing to ensure that a developer makes money, that's totally on them and if and when they do Apple makes money from them not for them.
Apple does nothing except provide large numbers of the most desirable devices, with a demographic that spends more money than any competitor platforms, the developer tools to create the app, and an online store to market that app.
Did you not read where I wrote Apple needs devs and devs need Apple? But Apple doesn’t pay developers to make apps, they do it on their dime in hopes that they'll earn money in the app store, and even though Apple provides storage and handles the transaction they do nothing to ensure that a developer makes money, that's totally on them and if and when they do Apple makes money from them not for them.
This whole argument reminded me of the last boss I ever had.
I was/am a graphic artist/desktop publisher. The guy who headed the company hated the fact that he had to pay the graphics department salaries because, in his opinion, we were a drain on the company's finances; we didn't actually earn any money for the company, per se. In his mind it was the sales people in the company who made the money. He'd come to the back every once in a while and say, "If it wasn't for the sales guys you guys wouldn't have a job."... and he could never get it through his head that without us, the sales guys would have nothing to sell. He just couldn't see it that way.
That's not my point. My point is that developers would make money with or without the walled garden, Apple doesn’t make the money for them.
No they wouldn't. If there were third party stores for iOS Apps nobody would use them over issues like security. Just like Android apologists keep saying "stick with Google Play and avoid third party app stores and you won't get malware."
Or another way to put it: I could install my vending machine at the entrance to Walmart and pay them a cut of sales, or I could put it on a side street somewhere and keep 100%.
If chamfered edges cut with polycrystalline diamonds is a fashion statement, then it is well placed within the design philosophy of the original iPhone that included, wait for this, a traditionally milled chamfer on the face frame.
Here's another theme. Obrounds. All over the place. Look especially at the Lightning connector; the physical body of the female connector is an obround the fits in another obround machined in the iPhone housing. That gives a high level manufacturing benefit as well as functional benefit that looks appropriate. Would that USB.org could think like that.
Fine patterns of laser cut holes; fashion, utility, manufacturing or all of those?
Apple has been building an evolution of iDevices since the iPod. While there are some design elements, color and surface finish for example, that point to fashion, most of what I see is a continuation of a form and function design philosophy espoused by Jony. This will continue with wearable devices, albeit some ornamental elements will be employed, but I hardly see fashion or ornamentation as driving the design; that's function, materials and manufacturability.
Angela will obviously be included in design sessions, but her primary job is to market those devices to the demographics that Apple appeals to, and even to those that don't. That's what she brings to the table.
I'm not suggesting Angela Ahrendts should be sitting in design meetings but I think she's the one who will need to be front and center from a marketing stand point. Joined at the hip with Schiller or maybe even replacing him in some cases.
And what I mean by fashion is making stuff people lust after. Yeah there might be a cheaper alternative but it's Apple's product people want because it looks beautiful, expensive classy, etc.
As to Safari crashing I've noticed in on my 5S and Air on several sites, not just AI. It's a real issue and not something I expect from Apple. I attribute it to the change to 64bit and the growing pains caused by it.
One good thing is I now get to experience Android with the random crashes and force closes.
N
Now you sound like my kids. "I know you are but what am I?"
Do you have any actual points to make?
Yes and my point is that Apple is not a altruistic company that makes money for others. They provided a platform in which content makers can make money for themselves and Apple. Saying that Apple makes money for them would suggest that Apple has failed those that don't make money
I'm not suggesting Angela Ahrendts should be sitting in design meetings but I think she's the one who will need to be front and center from a marketing stand point. Joined at the hip with Schiller or maybe even replacing him in some cases.
And what I mean by fashion is making stuff people lust after. Yeah there might be a cheaper alternative but it's Apple's product people want because it looks beautiful, expensive classy, etc.
You aren't making your case at all.
Apple is already making beautiful devices, that look expensive without being ostentatious; that have an inherent value, a luxury item without the luxury cost. What more would you have them do, specifically?
Comments
With such a patronizing attitude you must be a teacher.
You probably wonder why JK Rowling is so successfull.
my point is fashion/lust/desirability are going to become more and more important for Apple. That's where Jony Ive and Angela Ahrendts come in to play. Make Apple products fashion statements that people want/have to own.
If chamfered edges cut with polycrystalline diamonds is a fashion statement, then it is well placed within the design philosophy of the original iPhone that included, wait for this, a traditionally milled chamfer on the face frame.
Here's another theme. Obrounds. All over the place. Look especially at the Lightning connector; the physical body of the female connector is an obround the fits in another obround machined in the iPhone housing. That gives a high level manufacturing benefit as well as functional benefit that looks appropriate. Would that USB.org could think like that.
Fine patterns of laser cut holes; fashion, utility, manufacturing or all of those?
Apple has been building an evolution of iDevices since the iPod. While there are some design elements, color and surface finish for example, that point to fashion, most of what I see is a continuation of a form and function design philosophy espoused by Jony. This will continue with wearable devices, albeit some ornamental elements will be employed, but I hardly see fashion or ornamentation as driving the design; that's function, materials and manufacturability.
Angela will obviously be included in design sessions, but her primary job is to market those devices to the demographics that Apple appeals to, and even to those that don't. That's what she brings to the table.
Both Google and Amazon stocks are up 58% year-to-date; Microsoft is up 40%. If these companies have had a terrible year it's certainly not reflected in their stock price. Compare that with Apple which is up a paltry 5% year-to-date even though the S&P 500 is up 29% and the Nasdaq is up 38%. How is it that Google and Microsoft stock is up double digits if they had such a bad year?
you have just demonstrated once again how Wall Street is driven by hype, not facts as the conventional wisdom fantasizes (e.g., "analysts"). how else do you think the crash of 2008 was possible?
or the next one ...
Did you not read where I wrote Apple needs devs and devs need Apple? But Apple doesn’t pay developers to make apps, they do it on their dime in hopes that they'll earn money in the app store, and even though Apple provides storage and handles the transaction they do nothing to ensure that a developer makes money, that's totally on them and if and when they do Apple makes money from them not for them.
1) Why exactly should Apple release a special dividend? What do you think a special dividend would have done to the stock? Shot it past it's temporary 2012 peak?
2) Stocks fluctuate. If you are an investor you just have to accept that. It's also gambling so you can't simply look at a successful company (like Apple) and expect the stocks to grow because the company is profitable or expect a stock to drop upon hearing about quarterly losses (like BB and Amazon) because there is emotion involved in these decisions. It's not rational but it's a reality.
3) Apple doesn't have product releases for most of the year. They never have. You can't have a new product every week and since Apple only has 4 legs of business — Mac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad — with the first not being a major consideration for the majority, the second dropping each year because of the iOS-based iDevices are dominating it, you really only have 2 categories that the market and media really care about. You can't have a new iPhone and IPhone released every week or even every month or every 3 months. It's unrealistic.
4) The worse thing Apple can do is to over extend themselves and dilute their brand by flooding the market with more product categories for the sake of it. They have the dominate mindshare so everything if already compared to an Apple product if Apple makes something in that category. Let's remember the time between the Mac and iPod and the iPod and iPhone. Just because the iPhone and iPad were only 3 years apart doesn't mean everything else can be this expedited.
5) What does the iPhone 5C have to prove? What did the iPhone 4S, or iPhone 4, or iPhone 4GS all have to prove in their second year? From what I've seen the numbers are impressive and I, anecdotally, see plenty of 5C's in public which is impressive because unlike any flagship product there is no reason for people to run out and get last year's HW.
6) Every time Apple releases a new OS update people complain. Your complaint that it "still needs serious tweaking" says nothing about what is wrong with it, but on this point I agree, because all OSes need serious tweaking. There are bugs to fix and refinements to be made constantly but I see nothing about Mavericks that would make it a bane to Mac users, hurt sales, or the stock price which is what your inclusion of Mavericks suggests.
1) Had Apple issued the Special Dividend it would've demonstrated it was a team player. Wall Street punished Apple for being a prima donna when the SD wasn't issued.
2) Yes, stocks fluctuate on emotion and Wall Street followed though by punishing Apple for the company's perceive arrogance. Apple could've staved off hitting the skids if it staggered its product releases to address the predictable annual new product drought between January and August every year -- but Apple didn't have the foresight to address Wall Street's overreaction.
3) It's time for Apple (and its apologists) to stop living in the past and address the present and the future. Everybody knows Apple's old game. Time for a new game plan re: product releases.
4) I agree and am not suggesting that.
5) I think the 5C has quite a lot to prove and it may well succeed. As an Apple pursuit I ( and many others) consider the design mediocre and the product a transparent grab for a market that may not exist.
6) We can agree on that. Personally I'd like to see some tasteful skeuomorphic elements like the opening user screen integrated back into the OS.
I criticize Apple out of my love for its products and in the belief the company can do better in some instances. Allow me to take this opportunity to wish all my fellow Apple lovers a happy and healthy New Year!
You haven't been following the thread. They are a software company so of course there are in house developers that get paid for Apple to make apps. I was talking those entrepreneur developers that on their own accord make a app to sell in the app store.
Did you not read where I wrote Apple needs devs and devs need Apple? But Apple doesn’t pay developers to make apps, they do it on their dime in hopes that they'll earn money in the app store, and even though Apple provides storage and handles the transaction they do nothing to ensure that a developer makes money, that's totally on them and if and when they do Apple makes money from them not for them.
Apple does nothing except provide large numbers of the most desirable devices, with a demographic that spends more money than any competitor platforms, the developer tools to create the app, and an online store to market that app.
Apple provides the opportunity.
Did you not read where I wrote Apple needs devs and devs need Apple? But Apple doesn’t pay developers to make apps, they do it on their dime in hopes that they'll earn money in the app store, and even though Apple provides storage and handles the transaction they do nothing to ensure that a developer makes money, that's totally on them and if and when they do Apple makes money from them not for them.
This whole argument reminded me of the last boss I ever had.
I was/am a graphic artist/desktop publisher. The guy who headed the company hated the fact that he had to pay the graphics department salaries because, in his opinion, we were a drain on the company's finances; we didn't actually earn any money for the company, per se. In his mind it was the sales people in the company who made the money. He'd come to the back every once in a while and say, "If it wasn't for the sales guys you guys wouldn't have a job."... and he could never get it through his head that without us, the sales guys would have nothing to sell. He just couldn't see it that way.
There fixed it for you.
I hope that's not a serious question. Safari frequently crashes on the iPad Air. And I'm being being kind to Apple when I use the word frequently.
i just don't have this Safari problem - on any device.
maybe i just don't go to ... those ... websites.
No they wouldn't. If there were third party stores for iOS Apps nobody would use them over issues like security. Just like Android apologists keep saying "stick with Google Play and avoid third party app stores and you won't get malware."
Or another way to put it: I could install my vending machine at the entrance to Walmart and pay them a cut of sales, or I could put it on a side street somewhere and keep 100%.
Do you have any actual points to make?
And what I mean by fashion is making stuff people lust after. Yeah there might be a cheaper alternative but it's Apple's product people want because it looks beautiful, expensive classy, etc.
I've only ever had that issue with 10.9.0.
One good thing is I now get to experience Android with the random crashes and force closes.
Twice just typing this single post from my 5S.
Yes and my point is that Apple is not a altruistic company that makes money for others. They provided a platform in which content makers can make money for themselves and Apple. Saying that Apple makes money for them would suggest that Apple has failed those that don't make money
I'm not suggesting Angela Ahrendts should be sitting in design meetings but I think she's the one who will need to be front and center from a marketing stand point. Joined at the hip with Schiller or maybe even replacing him in some cases.
And what I mean by fashion is making stuff people lust after. Yeah there might be a cheaper alternative but it's Apple's product people want because it looks beautiful, expensive classy, etc.
You aren't making your case at all.
Apple is already making beautiful devices, that look expensive without being ostentatious; that have an inherent value, a luxury item without the luxury cost. What more would you have them do, specifically?