And it might actually turn out to bring fantastic projects. Diversity is a boon in most companies, and Apple is/could be expanding into unexpected markets like Watch, car, TV, robots...
It really is kinda creepy. Apple is very powerful and you don't have to have the imagination of a cheesy sci-fi writer to imagine a future nightmare world scenario with Apple under a very different kind of leadership. Scary!
Too many movies fill your head with dread.
Something I'd like to know from adults who use the word "scary." Particularly males. Does it never occur to you that the word is just a little bit infantile, like it belongs in children's' stories?
I come from a time when men didn't talk that way. They didn't eat veggies or drink smoothies, either.
Right now, yes. But it always pays to keep an eye out for tomorrow's creepy company.
The reason that Apple can't become a creepy company (unless you're looking from the point of view of a hater, of course) is the same reason that they make "great products that improve people's lives."
When you focus on the humane goal of maximizing user experience, you immunize yourself against nefarious exploitation of your customers. This is basic Steve Jobs post-psychedelic psychology. It's in the biography.. I'll cite you a page number if you don't remember it.
Something I'd like to know from adults who use the word "scary." Particularly males. Does it never occur to you that the word is just a little bit infantile, like it belongs in children's' stories?
I come from a time when men didn't talk that way. They didn't eat veggies or drink smoothies, either.
Something I'd like to know from adults who use the word "scary." Particularly males. Does it never occur to you that the word is just a little bit infantile, like it belongs in children's' stories?
I come from a time when men didn't talk that way. They didn't eat veggies or drink smoothies, either.
As you know, the English language has many nuances. Scary can mean awful, ugly, unfortunate, wrong, as well as actual fear. I don't think the OP was expressing any terrifying situation.
BTW which time is it that you come from? I'm pretty sure the last sentence needed a sarcasm tag.
The reason that Apple can't become a creepy company (unless you're looking from the point of view of a hater, of course) is the same reason that they make "great products that improve people's lives."
When you focus on the humane goal of maximizing user experience, you immunize yourself against nefarious exploitation of your customers. This is basic Steve Jobs post-psychedelic psychology. It's in the biography.. I'll cite you a page number if you don't remember it.
I'm aware of that.
What if Tim Cook got hit by a bus, and Carl Icahn became CEO in a coup? Would you feel safe then?
It really is kinda creepy. Apple is very powerful and you don't have to have the imagination of a cheesy sci-fi writer to imagine a future nightmare world scenario with Apple under a very different kind of leadership. Scary!
except they wouldn’t be where they are now with a very different kind of leadership, so it’s not scary...
As you know, the English language has many nuances. Scary can mean awful, ugly, unfortunate, wrong, as well as actual fear. I don't think the OP was expressing any terrifying situation.
BTW which time is it that you come from? I'm pretty sure the last sentence needed a sarcasm tag.
From the 1940s and 50s. The time of vegetables and, god help us, blender drinks.
No kidding, Adelle Davis, early California health guru, advocated making a "shake," I think she called it, out of berries, bananas, brewer's yeast and a bunch of other stuff, in the blender, which was the best thing ever to have every day, which I still do since she put it in her book that I read in the 70s. Saved my life, I'm pretty sure. Later such things came to be called "smoothies," and along with "veggies" I made a simple observation that we were being motherized and infantilized beyond all hope in this culture.
i call the concoction "drink." Admittedly, the s-word serves the purpose, since it's descriptive, but that doesn't make it decent.
I'll tell you another one. There was a time when no one used the word "suck" the way it's used today, for a bad experience. It turns out there is no substitute word. You have to use a bunch of words to get the same idea across. But that doesn't make the word decent, so I never use it. The trade-off for living a long life is that you can remember too many perfectly good things that get coarsened and debased. Before Apple and the Internet came along, there wasn't much progress to compensate. It's why I follow the Apple story so closely. Redemption!
What if Tim Cook got hit by a bus, and Carl Icahn became CEO in a coup? Would you feel safe then?
Apple itself would crash and burn in a BlackBerry-like flash, and the threat would evaporate. Of course there would be mass revolt, a world depression, and so on . . .
Something I'd like to know from adults who use the word "scary." Particularly males. Does it never occur to you that the word is just a little bit infantile, like it belongs in children's' stories?
I come from a time when men didn't talk that way. They didn't eat veggies or drink smoothies, either.
Damn modern times! Men eating vegetables and salads! Poofters the lot of them. (That's an old school term, right?) But seriously, you are right in that 'scary' is flippant and if you like, infantile, but on the other hand ... Lighten up a little! I have no problems whatsoever with modern men (or women) using the vocabulary of children's stories. In serious conversations that kind of language will often undermine the points made, whether by men or women, but generally I look for the intended point rather than judge by presentation.
Maybe the cursed word comes from Australia. They put an "-ie" on all kinds of thingies there.
Oh - it was the -ie's you were objecting to, not veggies as in vegetables I once saw an interview with Melvyn Bragg where he was speaking about his book on the English language. The one thing I remember was that he credited the strength of the English language with its 'open-ness'. By its ability to absorb virtually anything thrown at it and incorporate new words and phrases over time. He was comparing English to French which is a far more rigid language, always fighting the influences of other languages (English). I never got to read the book but there is a documentary available that I definitely will watch. I imagine you will enjoy it.
From the 1940s and 50s. The time of vegetables and, god help us, blender drinks.
I always love your posts. I was just calling you out for entertainment purposes. Years ago when I was weight training, I drank smoothies all the time with protein and fruit and yogurt and I don't think it made me less a man. Now my idea of blender drinks is more in line with frozen margaritas but nevertheless I hear you, I'm from the same era.
Oh - it was the -ie's you were objecting to, not veggies as in vegetables I once saw an interview with Melvyn Bragg where he was speaking about his book on the English language. The one thing I remember was that he credited the strength of the English language with its 'open-ness'. By its ability to absorb virtually anything thrown at it and incorporate new words and phrases over time. He was comparing English to French which is a far more rigid language, always fighting the influences of other languages (English). I never got to read the book but there is a documentary available that I definitely will watch. I imagine you will enjoy it.
Thanks, I'll check that out. Don't know this Melvyn Bragg.
I always love your posts. I was just calling you out for entertainment purposes. Years ago when I was weight training, I drank smoothies all the time with protein and fruit and yogurt and I don't think it made me less a man. Now my idea of blender drinks is more in line with frozen margaritas but nevertheless I hear you, I'm from the same era.
Yes, the drink I've been doing for 40 plus years, and really with the berries and all, it's kept me alive through various bohemian misadventures, and it is the most delicious thing besides, no?
I just never called it by that word, because that appeared later than the 70s. So it used to drive me crazy when I would describe the drink to someone, and they would say, "Oh, you mean a smoothie!" Grr. Anyway, thanks for the call-out.
One of BBC Radio's most popular music personalities is set to leave the historic British broadcaster in March, and will reportedly move across the pond to take a still-unknown position at Apple.
Zane Lowe, who has helmed BBC Radio 1's widely-praised evening show since 2003, will sign off on March 5, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/31470124">according to</a> the <em>BBC</em>. Lowe is known as a musical tastemaker and is credited with jumpstarting the careers of artists like Adele and Gnarls Barkley by featuring them on his show.
Lowe has won numerous awards as a DJ, and was a 2015 Grammy nominee for his work producing Sam Smith's standout album <em>In the Lonely Hour</em>.
While it is unclear what Lowe will do at Apple, the company has placed a high degree of emphasis on musical curation, especially after acquiring Beats Music and bringing in cofounders Jimmy Iovine and Dr. Dre.
"We get a subscription music service that we believe is the first subscription service that really got it right," Apple chief Tim Cook <a href="http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/05/28/apples-cook-says-beats-buy-provides-head-start-in-subscription-based-music-streaming">said</a> when discussing the deal. "They had the insight early on to know how important human curation is. That technology by itself wasn't enough -- that it was the marriage of the two that would really be great, and produce a feeling in people that we want to produce."
Any news on what it is Apple has up there sleeve ?
Right now, yes. But it always pays to keep an eye out for tomorrow's creepy company.
The reason that Apple can't become a creepy company (unless you're looking from the point of view of a hater, of course) is the same reason that they make "great products that improve people's lives."
When you focus on the humane goal of maximizing user experience, you immunize yourself against nefarious exploitation of your customers. This is basic Steve Jobs post-psychedelic psychology. It's in the biography.. I'll cite you a page number if you don't remember it.
If you believe that tosh you will believe anything. Apple is only a few key board member changes away from being a totally different company.
If you believe that tosh you will believe anything. Apple is only a few key board member changes away from being a totally different company.
Yes, back on topic !
You may or may not be right about the board member changes, it doesn't matter to my point. If Apple becomes that "totally different company," they immediately lose the momentum that's been keeping them progressing since Jobs returned. The good will of their customer base is what they keep inflating the balloon with, and they do that with the evolving products and user experience, so they can take on ever more customers.
In other words, the idea of an evil, "scary" Apple is absurd. At the moment they turn into that dystopian Big Brother company, they lose all their power, the balloon deflates, the thing comes crashing down.
There aren't any precedents for this situation in business history, because the industry that Apple and a few other companies started in the 1980s never existed before. It's been called the Information Industry or Knowledge Revolution, but what it really amounts to is the amplification and extension of the human nervous system, so it doesn't have a proper label yet. Anyway, what it means for the topic here is that Apple floats on a lighter-than-air vapor of psychological acceptance from its customers, because it's our own minds that we're putting into these machines. Tim Cook always talks about how "our customers love our products," and he's right—without that the airship would sink to the ground.
So it's possible that Iovine, Cue and Cook feel they can do some good by "becoming the music business." Two non-evil requirements would have be satisfied, as they were with the first iTunes takeover of the music biz. It has to be better for the users, and it has to be better for the artists and their publishers. Everybody has to be happier or it doesn't work.
If it does work then Apple will deserve to become the leading music business, to take out some of the hyperbole in the original Billboard quote.
Comments
Unquestionably.
Too many movies fill your head with dread.
Something I'd like to know from adults who use the word "scary." Particularly males. Does it never occur to you that the word is just a little bit infantile, like it belongs in children's' stories?
I come from a time when men didn't talk that way. They didn't eat veggies or drink smoothies, either.
The reason that Apple can't become a creepy company (unless you're looking from the point of view of a hater, of course) is the same reason that they make "great products that improve people's lives."
When you focus on the humane goal of maximizing user experience, you immunize yourself against nefarious exploitation of your customers. This is basic Steve Jobs post-psychedelic psychology. It's in the biography.. I'll cite you a page number if you don't remember it.
Damn, I was with you until smoothies ...
I come from a time when men didn't talk that way. They didn't eat veggies or drink smoothies, either.
As you know, the English language has many nuances. Scary can mean awful, ugly, unfortunate, wrong, as well as actual fear. I don't think the OP was expressing any terrifying situation.
BTW which time is it that you come from? I'm pretty sure the last sentence needed a sarcasm tag.
I'm aware of that.
What if Tim Cook got hit by a bus, and Carl Icahn became CEO in a coup? Would you feel safe then?
It really is kinda creepy. Apple is very powerful and you don't have to have the imagination of a cheesy sci-fi writer to imagine a future nightmare world scenario with Apple under a very different kind of leadership. Scary!
except they wouldn’t be where they are now with a very different kind of leadership, so it’s not scary...
From the 1940s and 50s. The time of vegetables and, god help us, blender drinks.
No kidding, Adelle Davis, early California health guru, advocated making a "shake," I think she called it, out of berries, bananas, brewer's yeast and a bunch of other stuff, in the blender, which was the best thing ever to have every day, which I still do since she put it in her book that I read in the 70s. Saved my life, I'm pretty sure. Later such things came to be called "smoothies," and along with "veggies" I made a simple observation that we were being motherized and infantilized beyond all hope in this culture.
i call the concoction "drink." Admittedly, the s-word serves the purpose, since it's descriptive, but that doesn't make it decent.
I'll tell you another one. There was a time when no one used the word "suck" the way it's used today, for a bad experience. It turns out there is no substitute word. You have to use a bunch of words to get the same idea across. But that doesn't make the word decent, so I never use it. The trade-off for living a long life is that you can remember too many perfectly good things that get coarsened and debased. Before Apple and the Internet came along, there wasn't much progress to compensate. It's why I follow the Apple story so closely. Redemption!
Apple itself would crash and burn in a BlackBerry-like flash, and the threat would evaporate. Of course there would be mass revolt, a world depression, and so on . . .
Maybe the cursed word comes from Australia. They put an "-ie" on all kinds of thingies there.
From the 1940s and 50s. The time of vegetables and, god help us, blender drinks.
I always love your posts. I was just calling you out for entertainment purposes. Years ago when I was weight training, I drank smoothies all the time with protein and fruit and yogurt and I don't think it made me less a man. Now my idea of blender drinks is more in line with frozen margaritas but nevertheless I hear you, I'm from the same era.
Thanks, I'll check that out. Don't know this Melvyn Bragg.
Yes, the drink I've been doing for 40 plus years, and really with the berries and all, it's kept me alive through various bohemian misadventures, and it is the most delicious thing besides, no?
I just never called it by that word, because that appeared later than the 70s. So it used to drive me crazy when I would describe the drink to someone, and they would say, "Oh, you mean a smoothie!" Grr. Anyway, thanks for the call-out.
Yes, back on topic !
You may or may not be right about the board member changes, it doesn't matter to my point. If Apple becomes that "totally different company," they immediately lose the momentum that's been keeping them progressing since Jobs returned. The good will of their customer base is what they keep inflating the balloon with, and they do that with the evolving products and user experience, so they can take on ever more customers.
In other words, the idea of an evil, "scary" Apple is absurd. At the moment they turn into that dystopian Big Brother company, they lose all their power, the balloon deflates, the thing comes crashing down.
There aren't any precedents for this situation in business history, because the industry that Apple and a few other companies started in the 1980s never existed before. It's been called the Information Industry or Knowledge Revolution, but what it really amounts to is the amplification and extension of the human nervous system, so it doesn't have a proper label yet. Anyway, what it means for the topic here is that Apple floats on a lighter-than-air vapor of psychological acceptance from its customers, because it's our own minds that we're putting into these machines. Tim Cook always talks about how "our customers love our products," and he's right—without that the airship would sink to the ground.
So it's possible that Iovine, Cue and Cook feel they can do some good by "becoming the music business." Two non-evil requirements would have be satisfied, as they were with the first iTunes takeover of the music biz. It has to be better for the users, and it has to be better for the artists and their publishers. Everybody has to be happier or it doesn't work.
If it does work then Apple will deserve to become the leading music business, to take out some of the hyperbole in the original Billboard quote.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/23/shape-things-come
Truly an excellent (and extensive!) article. A must read.
Good find, just in time. Reading it now.