Even if he did...and? I'm sure every single kind of idea and course of action was discussed and thrown around when developing the iPhone. Steve Jobs did a shitload of 180s himself. He didn't even want an AppStore. Even if Schiller thought a KB might be best at some point in time, I'm not going to hold that against him or pretend he's unfit for the job because of it.
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
Agreed. It doesn't matter at all but Schiller is a bit prone to impulsive comments. When you have Twitter nearby it doesn't make for a good combination. He should have spoken to Fadell first and Fadell would have told him the conversations were recorded. In that case Schiller should have asked him to retract what he said or, in the case of the claim being true, ride the storm (in a teacup to begin with) or just admit it was true and move on. A physical keyboard (at that time) might have even been a decent idea. It depends on how it is implemented. Saying it was incorrect when, indirectly, someone is supporting the claim and that the claim was recorded, is bound to make things worse.
Something similar surely happened with the new MBP. I'm convinced that internally, Apple was divided on the thinness issue.
Except Schiller has stated that he never wanted a keyboard on the iPhone.
Mechant didn't speak to Schiller; he spoke to Fadell who is denying he said any such thing. So Schiller isn't actually making anything worse because this really doesn't have anything to do with him.
My guess is that Fadell foolishly said it in a moment of grandstanding and now he has to walk it back.
Which is why I said 'indirectly' in the original post. Schiller is making it worse not only by commenting but by denying what was attributed to him. It's not his fault of course but instead of tweeting, the best option would have a 'hey Faddell, clean this thing up' and then wait for the, author to reflect Fadell's correction. The focus would stay on Fadell.
Now the focus is equally on Schiller, Fadell and the author, as people are obviously curious to know what was said and in what context, which could in turn lead to other people (who were privy to the original opinions of those involved) chiming in and things getting even more attention than is really needed.
Even if he did...and? I'm sure every single kind of idea and course of action was discussed and thrown around when developing the iPhone. Steve Jobs did a shitload of 180s himself. He didn't even want an AppStore. Even if Schiller thought a KB might be best at some point in time, I'm not going to hold that against him or pretend he's unfit for the job because of it.
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
Agreed. It doesn't matter at all but Schiller is a bit prone to impulsive comments. When you have Twitter nearby it doesn't make for a good combination. He should have spoken to Fadell first and Fadell would have told him the conversations were recorded. In that case Schiller should have asked him to retract what he said or, in the case of the claim being true, ride the storm (in a teacup to begin with) or just admit it was true and move on. A physical keyboard (at that time) might have even been a decent idea. It depends on how it is implemented. Saying it was incorrect when, indirectly, someone is supporting the claim and that the claim was recorded, is bound to make things worse.
Something similar surely happened with the new MBP. I'm convinced that internally, Apple was divided on the thinness issue.
Except Schiller has stated that he never wanted a keyboard on the iPhone.
Mechant didn't speak to Schiller; he spoke to Fadell who is denying he said any such thing. So Schiller isn't actually making anything worse because this really doesn't have anything to do with him.
My guess is that Fadell foolishly said it in a moment of grandstanding and now he has to walk it back.
Schiller is making it worse not only by commenting but by denying what was attributed to him. It's not his fault of course but instead of tweeting, the best option would have a 'hey Faddell, clean this thing up' and then wait for the, author to reflect Fadell's correction. The focus would stay on Fadell.
Now the focus is equally on Schiller, Fadell and the author, as people are obviously curious to know what was said and in what context, which could in turn lead to other people (who were privy to the original opinions of those involved) chiming in and things getting even more attention than is really needed.
You seem to have the issue muddled in your mind. Schiller probably had no choice but to respond unequivocally once the question was put to him directly on Twitter. He loses no credibility in this whole exchange, unless other ex-Apple sources contradict him; and, even then, people would be more willing to believe Schiller than an ex-employee, who might have an axe to grind.
With Merchant now claiming he has an audio of Tony Fadell making this comment, the focus really is on him and Fadell. I would say it's Fadell's credibility on the line right now, especially if it turns out that he did make the comment in the interview. At least for me, it would make it clear that he was lying through his teeth to Merchant, for God knows what reason, to put it mildly.
Even if he did...and? I'm sure every single kind of idea and course of action was discussed and thrown around when developing the iPhone. Steve Jobs did a shitload of 180s himself. He didn't even want an AppStore. Even if Schiller thought a KB might be best at some point in time, I'm not going to hold that against him or pretend he's unfit for the job because of it.
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
Agreed. It doesn't matter at all but Schiller is a bit prone to impulsive comments. When you have Twitter nearby it doesn't make for a good combination. He should have spoken to Fadell first and Fadell would have told him the conversations were recorded. In that case Schiller should have asked him to retract what he said or, in the case of the claim being true, ride the storm (in a teacup to begin with) or just admit it was true and move on. A physical keyboard (at that time) might have even been a decent idea. It depends on how it is implemented. Saying it was incorrect when, indirectly, someone is supporting the claim and that the claim was recorded, is bound to make things worse.
Something similar surely happened with the new MBP. I'm convinced that internally, Apple was divided on the thinness issue.
Except Schiller has stated that he never wanted a keyboard on the iPhone.
Mechant didn't speak to Schiller; he spoke to Fadell who is denying he said any such thing. So Schiller isn't actually making anything worse because this really doesn't have anything to do with him.
My guess is that Fadell foolishly said it in a moment of grandstanding and now he has to walk it back.
Schiller is making it worse not only by commenting but by denying what was attributed to him. It's not his fault of course but instead of tweeting, the best option would have a 'hey Faddell, clean this thing up' and then wait for the, author to reflect Fadell's correction. The focus would stay on Fadell.
Now the focus is equally on Schiller, Fadell and the author, as people are obviously curious to know what was said and in what context, which could in turn lead to other people (who were privy to the original opinions of those involved) chiming in and things getting even more attention than is really needed.
You seem to have the issue muddled in your mind. Schiller probably had no choice but to respond unequivocally once the question was put to him directly on Twitter. He loses no credibility in this whole exchange, unless other ex-Apple sources contradict him; and, even then, people would be more willing to believe Schiller than an ex-employee, who might have an axe to grind.
With Merchant now claiming he has an audio of Tony Fadell making this comment, the focus really is on him and Fadell. I would say it's Fadell's credibility on the line right now, especially if it turns out that he did make the comment in the interview. At least for me, it would make it clear that he was lying through his teeth to Merchant, for God knows what reason, to put it mildly.
Schiller had options. If what was claimed was wholly untrue, he could outright refute the claim.
If there is even an inkling of truth in this, he could fill in the blanks or just say nothing.
Having the issue come up (much less on Twitter) doesn't mean you have to make a statement on it.
As a result of his tweet things are where they are now and someone will blink at some point.
Writers need recordings not only as refreshers but also for exactly this kind of situation. If you're going to write something polemic (though for me this has mere curiosity value) you need your reference material to back It up. I will give the benefit of the doubt to the writer here as it's hard to. Imagine he hasn't listened to the recording very closely to make sure the reference is bulletproof. That leaves Schiller and Fadell and it's hard to imagine that both will come up smelling of roses.
When you are unwittingly dragged into something like this, it is unfair but Schiller could have stayed silent long enough for this to be dealt with before gaining critical mass. Not staying silent put him in the spotlight and now people will be asking themsves how much truth there could be in the claims. That's human nature. He's in the clear if no one comes out in support of Faddell and he doesn't stand by the claim but even if someone with a known axe to grind were to throw a hat into the ring the damage will still have been done. In fact even if Fadell retracts his statement there will still be damage (in spite of being in the clear) as some people will doubt anyway.
Of course, if things go in the opposite direction (let's imagine someone leaks a series of Schiller emails defending a physical keyboard) and Schiller eventually says the claims were true, it will hurt his pride but at the end of the day, the nature of the claim itself really has little importance. People would make a meal out of it and double down on him but you just have to get on with things and put them into perspective.
Right now, do I doubt Phil's words? Yep but that opinion - today - is based on what is known and that isn't very much at all. If the transcript is ever released I will reprocess everything but, as I said above, the simple fact that I doubt his words (even if based on so little) is damage enough.
It's unfair but that's how things go. Mountains out of mole hills and all that.
Even if he did...and? I'm sure every single kind of idea and course of action was discussed and thrown around when developing the iPhone. Steve Jobs did a shitload of 180s himself. He didn't even want an AppStore. Even if Schiller thought a KB might be best at some point in time, I'm not going to hold that against him or pretend he's unfit for the job because of it.
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
Agreed. It doesn't matter at all but Schiller is a bit prone to impulsive comments. When you have Twitter nearby it doesn't make for a good combination. He should have spoken to Fadell first and Fadell would have told him the conversations were recorded. In that case Schiller should have asked him to retract what he said or, in the case of the claim being true, ride the storm (in a teacup to begin with) or just admit it was true and move on. A physical keyboard (at that time) might have even been a decent idea. It depends on how it is implemented. Saying it was incorrect when, indirectly, someone is supporting the claim and that the claim was recorded, is bound to make things worse.
Something similar surely happened with the new MBP. I'm convinced that internally, Apple was divided on the thinness issue.
Except Schiller has stated that he never wanted a keyboard on the iPhone.
Mechant didn't speak to Schiller; he spoke to Fadell who is denying he said any such thing. So Schiller isn't actually making anything worse because this really doesn't have anything to do with him.
My guess is that Fadell foolishly said it in a moment of grandstanding and now he has to walk it back.
Personally I too disbelieve Fadell. I don't think his position on the iPhone is revisionist history. He was the iPod guy, his vision for the iPhone was limited and not really acted on, and yet the history has been rewritten.
I don't see how the author sticks by this despite a denial from both horses' mouths. Questioning why Fadell would deny it now and claiming there is audio is bad form. I wonder why it hasn't occurred to him that it may have been a misunderstanding of some kind. A throw away line? A joke? Someone just forgot or remembered incorrectly? Sticking by it now just doesn't make sense. Either release the audio, a transcript or what not or retract. Otherwise you look like you're trying to gin up controversy to sell the book, or you're just dishonest.
Even if he did...and? I'm sure every single kind of idea and course of action was discussed and thrown around when developing the iPhone. Steve Jobs did a shitload of 180s himself. He didn't even want an AppStore. Even if Schiller thought a KB might be best at some point in time, I'm not going to hold that against him or pretend he's unfit for the job because of it.
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
Something similar surely happened with the new MBP. I'm convinced that internally, Apple was divided on the thinness issue.
What possible evidence do you have of that? Sounds like wishful thinking.
I don't see how the author sticks by this despite a denial from both horses' mouths. Questioning why Fadell would deny it now and claiming there is audio is bad form. I wonder why it hasn't occurred to him that it may have been a misunderstanding of some kind. A throw away line? A joke? Someone just forgot or remembered incorrectly? Sticking by it now just doesn't make sense. Either release the audio, a transcript or what not or retract. Otherwise you look like you're trying to gin up controversy to sell the book, or you're just dishonest.
This is exactly why publications like to get two sources, not one. One guy could just be lying or misremembering, two or more an it's much less likely to be bogus.
Merchant screwed up by not getting another source.
I don't see how the author sticks by this despite a denial from both horses' mouths. Questioning why Fadell would deny it now and claiming there is audio is bad form. I wonder why it hasn't occurred to him that it may have been a misunderstanding of some kind. A throw away line? A joke? Someone just forgot or remembered incorrectly? Sticking by it now just doesn't make sense. Either release the audio, a transcript or what not or retract. Otherwise you look like you're trying to gin up controversy to sell the book, or you're just dishonest.
This is exactly why publications like to get two sources, not one. One guy could just be lying or misremembering, two or more an it's much less likely to be bogus.
Merchant screwed up by not getting another source.
I don't believe the author said there was no one else interviewed. It might be a good assumption (or maybe not) but I wouldn't hang your hat on it being a fact nobody else with an inside at the time wasn't asked and backed it up. AFAIK it hasn't gotten as far as discussing all the sources, and this particular issue won't go any further now as I expect all the players to clam up. Could be wrong of course.
Anyone is Canada can get the book now at www.indigo.ca. It's not a SOS (strict on sale) book! Writing style is OK. Haven't gotten to the juicy bits yet.
Even if he did...and? I'm sure every single kind of idea and course of action was discussed and thrown around when developing the iPhone. Steve Jobs did a shitload of 180s himself. He didn't even want an AppStore. Even if Schiller thought a KB might be best at some point in time, I'm not going to hold that against him or pretend he's unfit for the job because of it.
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
Something similar surely happened with the new MBP. I'm convinced that internally, Apple was divided on the thinness issue.
What possible evidence do you have of that? Sounds like wishful thinking.
Evidence is not required.
However, judging by the content of this article, we'll have to wait around 10 years for someone to spill the beans on what really happened during the design phase of the new MBPs and how it passed through executive approval.
Perhaps we will see the Jony Ive unauthorized biography at some point.
We already have rumours of competing MBP designs at Apple (fighter vs bomber) and supposing those rumours have some truth in them, it is very reasonable to suspect that the 'thin at any cost' design is far from universally backed at the company. Then we have someone from HP going on record last year (during the backlash) and claiming that they carried out a lot of research and found that a lot of people preferred thin without compromises. As a result, HP is trying to cater to both markets. I doubt Apple's own research brought back differing results. The difference is on the executive side. A decision was taken and they had to run with it. Apple is not a company of options. Look how long it took them to finally release a large screen iPhone.
Absolutely impossible to believe. The whole raison d'être of the iPhone was predicated on two things, 1. a proper OS and 2. no keyboard.
yes, but there is no reason not to believe that there was a massive internal struggle getting to those two things. There is the possibility that Schiller did take the devil's advocate position (he had to market the thing against the blackberry, taking the adversarial position to have the engineers and designers 'sell him' on an touch screen solution, so he could sell investors, set marketing themes, etc.)
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
One thing pointed out is that Fadell's denial is also a non-denial (from twitter and @daringfireball) ... Fadell is not denying he told Merchant FALSE story (and is now asking Merchant to change the story to the truth), Fadell could be stating that he told a false story [thinking he would not be quoted verbatim] and has been caught [and is now under legal threat from Apple/Schiller] and is asking Merchant to change it.
Don't believe anyone at Apple was stuck with the idea of a physical keyboard for the iPhone. As I recall an iPad like device was developed first with touch implementation. Then they decided those features would be ideal for a phone, a move that would make great market sense. So at the time the first iPhone was in development, a touch keyboard was a prerequisite.
Even if he did...and? I'm sure every single kind of idea and course of action was discussed and thrown around when developing the iPhone. Steve Jobs did a shitload of 180s himself. He didn't even want an AppStore. Even if Schiller thought a KB might be best at some point in time, I'm not going to hold that against him or pretend he's unfit for the job because of it.
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
I've seen a couple of design teams go off the rails because everyone just agree it was great idea and lost focus. Every good implimentation has a team member(s) that doesn't believe the hype.
Even if he did...and? I'm sure every single kind of idea and course of action was discussed and thrown around when developing the iPhone. Steve Jobs did a shitload of 180s himself. He didn't even want an AppStore. Even if Schiller thought a KB might be best at some point in time, I'm not going to hold that against him or pretend he's unfit for the job because of it.
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
Something similar surely happened with the new MBP. I'm convinced that internally, Apple was divided on the thinness issue.
What possible evidence do you have of that? Sounds like wishful thinking.
Evidence is not required.
However, judging by the content of this article, we'll have to wait around 10 years for someone to spill the beans on what really happened during the design phase of the new MBPs and how it passed through executive approval.
Perhaps we will see the Jony Ive unauthorized biography at some point.
We already have rumours of competing MBP designs at Apple (fighter vs bomber) and supposing those rumours have some truth in them, it is very reasonable to suspect that the 'thin at any cost' design is far from universally backed at the company. Then we have someone from HP going on record last year (during the backlash) and claiming that they carried out a lot of research and found that a lot of people preferred thin without compromises. As a result, HP is trying to cater to both markets. I doubt Apple's own research brought back differing results. The difference is on the executive side. A decision was taken and they had to run with it. Apple is not a company of options. Look how long it took them to finally release a large screen iPhone.
I mean no disrespect when I say you're still full of it on this issue. You are not thinking of the larger picture on Apple's design mandates.
In the case of the larger-screened phone, it was the lack of production capacity for making LTPS screens in enough quantity to supply Apple's needs for the 6 and 6 Plus, up until the time they finally could introduce them. Look it up. Apple was already using 70-75 percent of the world's capacity of LTPS screens before the larger screens arrived. The myth that it was a design choice to resist larger screens was fostered by Apple's PR on one-handed use being ideal, but you don't have to believe and parrot this narrow interim spin from marketing-think. The real reason was production determined.
In the case of the thin MacBook Pro, you are not thinking largely enough about the cluster of mandates that came available with the availability of sufficient production of oxide-backed (IGZO) screens. The energy savings from the IGZO backplane allowed for less backlghting and more efficient heat management. These, along with the availability of USB 3, allowed for the shrinkage in all dimensions. No self-respecting, honest engineer would throw away—waste—these space savings just to accomodate the antiquated, oversized USB legacy port.
If there was any argument from retrograde thinkers on the engineering/design team, as you imagine, you're going to have to produce evidence to be taken seriously. Or even from the marketing side, but that would be still easy to dismiss as retrograde thinking.
Comments
Now the focus is equally on Schiller, Fadell and the author, as people are obviously curious to know what was said and in what context, which could in turn lead to other people (who were privy to the original opinions of those involved) chiming in and things getting even more attention than is really needed.
With Merchant now claiming he has an audio of Tony Fadell making this comment, the focus really is on him and Fadell. I would say it's Fadell's credibility on the line right now, especially if it turns out that he did make the comment in the interview. At least for me, it would make it clear that he was lying through his teeth to Merchant, for God knows what reason, to put it mildly.
If there is even an inkling of truth in this, he could fill in the blanks or just say nothing.
Having the issue come up (much less on Twitter) doesn't mean you have to make a statement on it.
As a result of his tweet things are where they are now and someone will blink at some point.
Writers need recordings not only as refreshers but also for exactly this kind of situation. If you're going to write something polemic (though for me this has mere curiosity value) you need your reference material to back It up. I will give the benefit of the doubt to the writer here as it's hard to. Imagine he hasn't listened to the recording very closely to make sure the reference is bulletproof. That leaves Schiller and Fadell and it's hard to imagine that both will come up smelling of roses.
When you are unwittingly dragged into something like this, it is unfair but Schiller could have stayed silent long enough for this to be dealt with before gaining critical mass. Not staying silent put him in the spotlight and now people will be asking themsves how much truth there could be in the claims. That's human nature. He's in the clear if no one comes out in support of Faddell and he doesn't stand by the claim but even if someone with a known axe to grind were to throw a hat into the ring the damage will still have been done. In fact even if Fadell retracts his statement there will still be damage (in spite of being in the clear) as some people will doubt anyway.
Of course, if things go in the opposite direction (let's imagine someone leaks a series of Schiller emails defending a physical keyboard) and Schiller eventually says the claims were true, it will hurt his pride but at the end of the day, the nature of the claim itself really has little importance. People would make a meal out of it and double down on him but you just have to get on with things and put them into perspective.
Right now, do I doubt Phil's words? Yep but that opinion - today - is based on what is known and that isn't very much at all. If the transcript is ever released I will reprocess everything but, as I said above, the simple fact that I doubt his words (even if based on so little) is damage enough.
It's unfair but that's how things go. Mountains out of mole hills and all that.
Merchant screwed up by not getting another source.
Evidence is not required.
However, judging by the content of this article, we'll have to wait around 10 years for someone to spill the beans on what really happened during the design phase of the new MBPs and how it passed through executive approval.
Perhaps we will see the Jony Ive unauthorized biography at some point.
We already have rumours of competing MBP designs at Apple (fighter vs bomber) and supposing those rumours have some truth in them, it is very reasonable to suspect that the 'thin at any cost' design is far from universally backed at the company. Then we have someone from HP going on record last year (during the backlash) and claiming that they carried out a lot of research and found that a lot of people preferred thin without compromises. As a result, HP is trying to cater to both markets. I doubt Apple's own research brought back differing results. The difference is on the executive side. A decision was taken and they had to run with it. Apple is not a company of options. Look how long it took them to finally release a large screen iPhone.
One thing pointed out is that Fadell's denial is also a non-denial (from twitter and @daringfireball) ... Fadell is not denying he told Merchant FALSE story (and is now asking Merchant to change the story to the truth), Fadell could be stating that he told a false story [thinking he would not be quoted verbatim] and has been caught [and is now under legal threat from Apple/Schiller] and is asking Merchant to change it.
All I meant was that, in my perception, once he had been asked directly about it, he could not be either equivocal or silent about it.
In the case of the larger-screened phone, it was the lack of production capacity for making LTPS screens in enough quantity to supply Apple's needs for the 6 and 6 Plus, up until the time they finally could introduce them. Look it up. Apple was already using 70-75 percent of the world's capacity of LTPS screens before the larger screens arrived. The myth that it was a design choice to resist larger screens was fostered by Apple's PR on one-handed use being ideal, but you don't have to believe and parrot this narrow interim spin from marketing-think. The real reason was production determined.
In the case of the thin MacBook Pro, you are not thinking largely enough about the cluster of mandates that came available with the availability of sufficient production of oxide-backed (IGZO) screens. The energy savings from the IGZO backplane allowed for less backlghting and more efficient heat management. These, along with the availability of USB 3, allowed for the shrinkage in all dimensions. No self-respecting, honest engineer would throw away—waste—these space savings just to accomodate the antiquated, oversized USB legacy port.
If there was any argument from retrograde thinkers on the engineering/design team, as you imagine, you're going to have to produce evidence to be taken seriously. Or even from the marketing side, but that would be still easy to dismiss as retrograde thinking.
Hardware rules. Enjoy the progress.