Probably just a shot over the bow of the current media companies - if you don't come to the table seriously..... we will go around you.... which has to be taken seriously if you are facing a company of the size of Apple -- even if Apple is not serious.
I think it is nothing more than Apple bringing some of its ad creation and production in-house (which, btw, has not worked out all that great).
At least I hope so. This is the last thing Apple should be diversifying into. This space is crowded, chaotic, and all over the map presently.
I agree. Also, having tried to use Sharing features of Cloud Photos and Apple Pages on the iPhone during my holiday, not to mention the usual issues with Apple Mail and Safari, I think Apple would do better putting their effort into steel-shielding their software and connected services, rather than all these shiny efforts into Apple Radio, that (dead) ridiculous social network for music, or series-making. Frankly, I buy Apple for the high quality of the product, and lately I'm a bit miffed. It feels like the competition is so bad that Apple's not doing their very best, and rather diversifying their efforts into other alleys. Then again, maybe next Keynote will just blow us away.
And that's what I hope for: a service that has access to any streaming service and it not organized by channels. I want to see show xyz I can see it, no matter who originally hosts it. And like with music, I like specific songs, sometimes an album. I don't go out and rent out a genre channel just to hear that one song/album.
It kills me that whenever there is a rumor (or fact) that Apple is diversifying into some new area, anybody who doesn't see a need for that area comes out with ridiculous comments like "Apple needs to focus on...." Do these people not understand that Apple is a very large company and can have different departments, divisions and people working on many completely different things simultaneously?
Apple is not trying to decide what 50 new hires should work on right now. Do people think that the board of directors sits down together and says "Should we start producing our own entertainment content for Apple TV....or should we fix iOS?" It's ludicrous to think that some things aren't being done because Apple has expanded in other areas.
And as for this article..if Apple does get into producing their own content, it will be strictly a financial investment. They're not going to sequester Tim Cook and Jony Ive for 3 months and say "go write a sitcom"! They'll hire a handful of people to shop around and read a few scripts. They'll choose a few scripts then they'll pony up the $ to have the show(s) produced.
Personally, I think that if Apple is going to invest in exclusive content - it should be several live feeds - news and sports - those are the 2 biggest reasons that more people have not cut the cord. I know that it would be expensive and difficult to do this - but in the long run, I think it's a better choice than another crappy sitcom or cop drama.
It kills me that people don't realise that Apple is not in a "let's grow the engineering department tenfold" groove.
Apple has limited human resources, and the current state of software on multiple fronts is deeply disturbing to a lot of faithful users.
Do these people understand that maybe there is a need for other areas, but if it is more important to go into new areas than to maintain quality products... then Apple is not Apple anymore.
(These-people-ing your argument doesn't make it right).
As for the rest of your argument, I agree that Apple would be better served going into a Apple Live thing, similar to Apple Radio than making some Original Content, which is so different from their core business than they could just as well go into oil production.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenly
It kills me that whenever there is a rumor (or fact) that Apple is diversifying into some new area, anybody who doesn't see a need for that area comes out with ridiculous comments like "Apple needs to focus on...." Do these people not understand that Apple is a very large company and can have different departments, divisions and people working on many completely different things simultaneously?
There is no reason that quality of any products has to suffer due to growth and diversification. Nobody laughed louder or longer than I did when I heard the rumor that Apple was going to build a mobile phone. People used all the same arguments that they're using today about phones not being aligned with their core competencies, Apple needing to focus on improving OSX instead of jumping into a mature maker dominated by Nokia, BlackBerry, Motorola, etc.
The part of your reply that doesn't make any sense is your claim that "Apple has limited human resources". Why can't they hire more? And why do you think that quality has to suffer because of growth? Because you saw it happen with other companies??? Well - other companies aren't Apple. With the right new hires, and the right culture - diversification into completely new areas could be extremely profitable and every bit as excellent as their current line up.
I really hope this is just a negotiating tactic on Apple's part. Throw these rumors out there to get better leverage during negotiations with content companies.
My thinking exactly. The content industry is really trying to keep Apple from offering a unified ecosystem (I.e. they want consumers to buy from dozens of providers). The only alternative for Apple, is the threat (and I don't think it's an empty one) of going it alone. Apple's cash stockpile will have the industry very worried. Ideally though, Apple would set-up a subsidiary for this, so as not to get distracted.
Fine with me. Just give me more movies/shows and add multiplayer languages to all. Some stuff simply isn't there.
Which brings up a point: actually what would striking a deal with those content providers give in addition to today's choice? Why not simply add all to iTunes and simply revamp the UI?
The part of your reply that doesn't make any sense is your claim that "Apple has limited human resources". Why can't they hire more? And why do you think that quality has to suffer because of growth? Because you saw it happen with other companies??? Well - other companies aren't Apple. With the right new hires, and the right culture - diversification into completely new areas could be extremely profitable and every bit as excellent as their current line up.
Two things temper that idea:
1- hiring the best means you're pooling from a very limited resource with high competition. Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, Tesla... there are many great company offering great salaries and challenging missions. Hiring is a difficult and long process, even in a domain with high availability. In the IT world, getting team-players with some design sense, an artistic eye and great technical skills is extremely hard, and gets you in competition with content creation companies (video games, movies...) As a person, are you changing the world more by fixing the bugs in Apple Mail or by working on the AI on a game that will shape the minds of a generation, or by extending the software used in a movie that will change the way people perceive a minority, or by helping a new, cleaner car paradigm spread? Hiring excellent people is a challenge, even for Apple.
2- Once hired, those people have to be folded in the company's mindset, and have to learn to work at their best in their new teams, which also takes time.
Apple can indeed hire more people, but Apple cannot hire huge amounts of people in short amounts of time and stay Apple.
Also, software insurance at Apple seems to have some issues, if I judge by some rather high-profile issues we're read here that would have been caught by automated systems if it was banking software...
Eddy Cue was given $3B to create a streaming music service and I would argue what we currently have is not best in class and still needs plenty of work. Before Tim Cook gives him another pile of money to do TV shows or movies how about he first takes care of making Apple Music the best? I don't want Apple to be that company that just throws something out there and then moves onto the next shiny object. It's not like Apple has an overflow of resources just sitting there twiddling their thumbs looking for something to do.
Eddy Cue was given $3B to create a streaming music service and I would argue what we currently have is not best in class and still needs plenty of work. Before Tim Cook gives him another pile of money to do TV shows or movies how about he first takes care of making Apple Music the best? I don't want Apple to be that company that just throws something out there and then moves onto the next shiny object. It's not like Apple has an overflow of resources just sitting there twiddling their thumbs looking for something to do.
Why not? With Google and Samsung failing someone has to take over the leading throw-all-and-see-what-sticks-role
Has Tim Cook forgotten what the word focus means? It seems to me Apple has a pretty full plate right now:
Redesigned iOS and OS X with a ton of new features that needs a lot more polish and bug fixing
Redesigned iWork apps that still need attention and improvement
Apple Watch and watchOS
HealthKit
HomeKit
ResearchKit
CarPlay
ApplePay
Apple News
Apple Music
Proactive
Partnership with IBM
Partnership with Cisco
Partnership with US military in wearables space
Apple Store redesigns (and expansion in China)
Campus 2
New ?TV with SDK
Possible iPad "Pro"
Project Titan
And god knows what else that haven't been rumored about
I think Cook needs to start saying no. When there's too many irons in the fire you end up with a lot of stuff but not a lot of best in class stuff. I don't think Apple needs to get into the content creation business. They just need to be the platform that everybody wants to be on.
But maybe this is just Apple using its cash to buy up exclusives. I'm not really a fan of exclusives but that probably wouldn't be as much of a resource drain as Apple getting into the original content business.
You bring up a great point. When Apple was unfocused they had ok products at best and mediocre to terrible customer service and profits that were not up to expectation. When Jobs brought focus back that is when the magic happened. Today's Apple is making pretty good products, customer support is good but some of the user experience of "it just works" has gone by the wayside in many cases. I am not trying to paint doom and gloom but just wonder if Apple needs to pull in the reigns a little.
Has Tim Cook forgotten what the word focus means? It seems to me Apple has a pretty full plate right now:
Redesigned iOS and OS X with a ton of new features that needs a lot more polish and bug fixing
Redesigned iWork apps that still need attention and improvement
Apple Watch and watchOS
HealthKit
HomeKit
ResearchKit
CarPlay
ApplePay
Apple News
Apple Music
Proactive
Partnership with IBM
Partnership with Cisco
Partnership with US military in wearables space
Apple Store redesigns (and expansion in China)
Campus 2
New ?TV with SDK
Possible iPad "Pro"
Project Titan
And god knows what else that haven't been rumored about
I think Cook needs to start saying no. When there's too many irons in the fire you end up with a lot of stuff but not a lot of best in class stuff. I don't think Apple needs to get into the content creation business. They just need to be the platform that everybody wants to be on.
But maybe this is just Apple using its cash to buy up exclusives. I'm not really a fan of exclusives but that probably wouldn't be as much of a resource drain as Apple getting into the original content business.
A lot of this is expanding existing technologies by plopping new circles on the Venn diagram, which is smart I think...new ways to expand depth and breadth of core technologies, to improve user experience and of course, sales.
Project Titan, if really a car, is different, and is pushing boundaries at a time when Apple has almost unlimited cash.
But I think they do need a strong focus on usability, and the executives really better eat their own dog feed like Steve did. The new Music app and the Apple Music service, for example, would likely have been screamed back into development by Steve.
Quantitatively they have the resources to move into many different areas and I don't have an issue with that. Qualitatively, they still need to know when to say no. The bar feels like it has been lowering a little bit...
Nothing is more pathetic than someone speaking for a dead man.
Other than perhaps responding to that person?
I'm speaking about SJ's well documented insanity for getting the details right, and the general feeling is the new Music app and Apple Music service have many details, and even more fundamental things, wrong...its not a stretch at all to think it would not have been released in this form under Jobs.
So really all I'm saying is the current executive team needs to have a very similar mindset, actually even moreso, as they expand the ecosystem. As they add more interoperability, they are adding more layers of complexity which requires even greater care to get right.
Who gives you the right to speak for someone who's dead.
Total disrespect for Steve and his family. Stop hiding behind Steve's tombstone and stand up on your own.
Go make your comments on YOUR OWN. Stop dragging Steve into your crap pit. Pathetic.
And by the way Steve did release the Lisa and Newton. He made his share of mistakes also.
IMO, any one who says "well Steve would have....." should be banned immediately
Stop with the disrespect nonsense. Steve, his actions, his decisions, are integral to the company history. Are you saying it's never wise to look at history to help inform the right decisions for the future? There isn't a category I know iPod where smart people don't look at what came before them to understand things better.
Anyway, I really rarely invoke his name, as the opinions are my own. I did in this case because I was making parallels to the current executive team and how my felling is they don't apply, often enough, the same stringent test for usability and quality that is in their historical DNA, if you prefer that phrase.
If you have a point say it. Don't be dragging a dead person who can't defend his name or reputation along with it.
Oh, Steve would do this.
Oh, Steve would never do this.
STFU. You don't know what Steve would have done.
The only people who could say this is Steve's family and those who knew him for decades.
STFU?
Cogent discussion...
If you can't see the contrast being made regarding the topic at hand can't help you. There is no disrespect to anyone to look back at history for a comparative analysis.
Comments
Probably just a shot over the bow of the current media companies - if you don't come to the table seriously..... we will go around you.... which has to be taken seriously if you are facing a company of the size of Apple -- even if Apple is not serious.
I think it is nothing more than Apple bringing some of its ad creation and production in-house (which, btw, has not worked out all that great).
At least I hope so. This is the last thing Apple should be diversifying into. This space is crowded, chaotic, and all over the map presently.
I agree. Also, having tried to use Sharing features of Cloud Photos and Apple Pages on the iPhone during my holiday, not to mention the usual issues with Apple Mail and Safari, I think Apple would do better putting their effort into steel-shielding their software and connected services, rather than all these shiny efforts into Apple Radio, that (dead) ridiculous social network for music, or series-making. Frankly, I buy Apple for the high quality of the product, and lately I'm a bit miffed. It feels like the competition is so bad that Apple's not doing their very best, and rather diversifying their efforts into other alleys. Then again, maybe next Keynote will just blow us away.
And that's what I hope for: a service that has access to any streaming service and it not organized by channels. I want to see show xyz I can see it, no matter who originally hosts it. And like with music, I like specific songs, sometimes an album. I don't go out and rent out a genre channel just to hear that one song/album.
"iTunes".
Apple is not trying to decide what 50 new hires should work on right now. Do people think that the board of directors sits down together and says "Should we start producing our own entertainment content for Apple TV....or should we fix iOS?" It's ludicrous to think that some things aren't being done because Apple has expanded in other areas.
And as for this article..if Apple does get into producing their own content, it will be strictly a financial investment. They're not going to sequester Tim Cook and Jony Ive for 3 months and say "go write a sitcom"! They'll hire a handful of people to shop around and read a few scripts. They'll choose a few scripts then they'll pony up the $ to have the show(s) produced.
Personally, I think that if Apple is going to invest in exclusive content - it should be several live feeds - news and sports - those are the 2 biggest reasons that more people have not cut the cord. I know that it would be expensive and difficult to do this - but in the long run, I think it's a better choice than another crappy sitcom or cop drama.
It kills me that people don't realise that Apple is not in a "let's grow the engineering department tenfold" groove.
Apple has limited human resources, and the current state of software on multiple fronts is deeply disturbing to a lot of faithful users.
Do these people understand that maybe there is a need for other areas, but if it is more important to go into new areas than to maintain quality products... then Apple is not Apple anymore.
(These-people-ing your argument doesn't make it right).
As for the rest of your argument, I agree that Apple would be better served going into a Apple Live thing, similar to Apple Radio than making some Original Content, which is so different from their core business than they could just as well go into oil production.
Quote:
It kills me that whenever there is a rumor (or fact) that Apple is diversifying into some new area, anybody who doesn't see a need for that area comes out with ridiculous comments like "Apple needs to focus on...." Do these people not understand that Apple is a very large company and can have different departments, divisions and people working on many completely different things simultaneously?
The part of your reply that doesn't make any sense is your claim that "Apple has limited human resources". Why can't they hire more? And why do you think that quality has to suffer because of growth? Because you saw it happen with other companies??? Well - other companies aren't Apple. With the right new hires, and the right culture - diversification into completely new areas could be extremely profitable and every bit as excellent as their current line up.
My thinking exactly. The content industry is really trying to keep Apple from offering a unified ecosystem (I.e. they want consumers to buy from dozens of providers). The only alternative for Apple, is the threat (and I don't think it's an empty one) of going it alone. Apple's cash stockpile will have the industry very worried. Ideally though, Apple would set-up a subsidiary for this, so as not to get distracted.
Fine with me. Just give me more movies/shows and add multiplayer languages to all. Some stuff simply isn't there.
Which brings up a point: actually what would striking a deal with those content providers give in addition to today's choice? Why not simply add all to iTunes and simply revamp the UI?
The part of your reply that doesn't make any sense is your claim that "Apple has limited human resources". Why can't they hire more? And why do you think that quality has to suffer because of growth? Because you saw it happen with other companies??? Well - other companies aren't Apple. With the right new hires, and the right culture - diversification into completely new areas could be extremely profitable and every bit as excellent as their current line up.
Two things temper that idea:
1- hiring the best means you're pooling from a very limited resource with high competition. Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, Tesla... there are many great company offering great salaries and challenging missions. Hiring is a difficult and long process, even in a domain with high availability. In the IT world, getting team-players with some design sense, an artistic eye and great technical skills is extremely hard, and gets you in competition with content creation companies (video games, movies...) As a person, are you changing the world more by fixing the bugs in Apple Mail or by working on the AI on a game that will shape the minds of a generation, or by extending the software used in a movie that will change the way people perceive a minority, or by helping a new, cleaner car paradigm spread? Hiring excellent people is a challenge, even for Apple.
2- Once hired, those people have to be folded in the company's mindset, and have to learn to work at their best in their new teams, which also takes time.
Apple can indeed hire more people, but Apple cannot hire huge amounts of people in short amounts of time and stay Apple.
Also, software insurance at Apple seems to have some issues, if I judge by some rather high-profile issues we're read here that would have been caught by automated systems if it was banking software...
Eddy Cue was given $3B to create a streaming music service and I would argue what we currently have is not best in class and still needs plenty of work. Before Tim Cook gives him another pile of money to do TV shows or movies how about he first takes care of making Apple Music the best? I don't want Apple to be that company that just throws something out there and then moves onto the next shiny object. It's not like Apple has an overflow of resources just sitting there twiddling their thumbs looking for something to do.
Why not? With Google and Samsung failing someone has to take over the leading throw-all-and-see-what-sticks-role
Yeah let it be Amazon not Apple.
Has Tim Cook forgotten what the word focus means? It seems to me Apple has a pretty full plate right now:
I think Cook needs to start saying no. When there's too many irons in the fire you end up with a lot of stuff but not a lot of best in class stuff. I don't think Apple needs to get into the content creation business. They just need to be the platform that everybody wants to be on.
But maybe this is just Apple using its cash to buy up exclusives. I'm not really a fan of exclusives but that probably wouldn't be as much of a resource drain as Apple getting into the original content business.
You bring up a great point. When Apple was unfocused they had ok products at best and mediocre to terrible customer service and profits that were not up to expectation. When Jobs brought focus back that is when the magic happened. Today's Apple is making pretty good products, customer support is good but some of the user experience of "it just works" has gone by the wayside in many cases. I am not trying to paint doom and gloom but just wonder if Apple needs to pull in the reigns a little.
Has Tim Cook forgotten what the word focus means? It seems to me Apple has a pretty full plate right now:
I think Cook needs to start saying no. When there's too many irons in the fire you end up with a lot of stuff but not a lot of best in class stuff. I don't think Apple needs to get into the content creation business. They just need to be the platform that everybody wants to be on.
But maybe this is just Apple using its cash to buy up exclusives. I'm not really a fan of exclusives but that probably wouldn't be as much of a resource drain as Apple getting into the original content business.
A lot of this is expanding existing technologies by plopping new circles on the Venn diagram, which is smart I think...new ways to expand depth and breadth of core technologies, to improve user experience and of course, sales.
Project Titan, if really a car, is different, and is pushing boundaries at a time when Apple has almost unlimited cash.
But I think they do need a strong focus on usability, and the executives really better eat their own dog feed like Steve did. The new Music app and the Apple Music service, for example, would likely have been screamed back into development by Steve.
Quantitatively they have the resources to move into many different areas and I don't have an issue with that. Qualitatively, they still need to know when to say no. The bar feels like it has been lowering a little bit...
Other than perhaps responding to that person?
I'm speaking about SJ's well documented insanity for getting the details right, and the general feeling is the new Music app and Apple Music service have many details, and even more fundamental things, wrong...its not a stretch at all to think it would not have been released in this form under Jobs.
So really all I'm saying is the current executive team needs to have a very similar mindset, actually even moreso, as they expand the ecosystem. As they add more interoperability, they are adding more layers of complexity which requires even greater care to get right.
Stop with the disrespect nonsense. Steve, his actions, his decisions, are integral to the company history. Are you saying it's never wise to look at history to help inform the right decisions for the future? There isn't a category I know iPod where smart people don't look at what came before them to understand things better.
Anyway, I really rarely invoke his name, as the opinions are my own. I did in this case because I was making parallels to the current executive team and how my felling is they don't apply, often enough, the same stringent test for usability and quality that is in their historical DNA, if you prefer that phrase.
STFU?
Cogent discussion...
If you can't see the contrast being made regarding the topic at hand can't help you. There is no disrespect to anyone to look back at history for a comparative analysis.