What is particularly sad about it is how over-produced and perfectly scripted and choreographed these are. They feel inhuman, inauthentic, and insincere. They are attempting to evoke a Steve Jobs vibe with an abundance of superfluous adjectives (as if that's what Steve was about). It all feels so artificial. It's like going to Disney's EPCOT Center's World Showcase and thinking that you really traveled the world to those countries. It looks (sorta) real but there's this uneasy, sanitized vibe of superficiality.
Apple needs a new vibe with these. Something not Steve™ and something not this.
Apple, get back to being human and real.
P.S. I do think these recorded "events" are a symptom of Apple's hyper-conservative nature. They want control over every tiny detail of their image in a way that leads to crap like this. They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human.
I couldn't agree more, and yes, it's sad.
Presentations, especially product presentations and keynotes, should be live and with a live audience.
I cringed every time Craig said 'next!'. He just looked unnatural as did most of the people chosen to present something.
It was almost pantomime style energy.
Something was wrong and the musical lead ins were just awful IMO.
Bring back the edge, tension and nerves of truly being up on stage!
Jesus Christ.
Who the fuck do the "nerves" benefit? The stress and anxiety of the entire internet laughing at them if something goes wrong is a good thing? Audio/Video issues? Why should they be subjected to that? There's a ton of other live tech keynotes, I watch them, and they're shittier in every conceivable category. The pros of these polished pre-recorded keynotes which are much more dynamic, visually interesting, polished, and have zero chance of fucking up, far, far outweighs any arbitrary advantages of being "live". It's not a concert. They're never "going back", and that's a good thing. Things change, and this change is in service of the company, the product, and yes, the consumers. Maybe try to adapt instead of cringing. These are by far the least cringe worthy tech keynotes Ive ever seen.
What is particularly sad about it is how over-produced and perfectly scripted and choreographed these are. They feel inhuman, inauthentic, and insincere. They are attempting to evoke a Steve Jobs vibe with an abundance of superfluous adjectives (as if that's what Steve was about). It all feels so artificial. It's like going to Disney's EPCOT Center's World Showcase and thinking that you really traveled the world to those countries. It looks (sorta) real but there's this uneasy, sanitized vibe of superficiality.
Apple needs a new vibe with these. Something not Steve™ and something not this.
Apple, get back to being human and real.
P.S. I do think these recorded "events" are a symptom of Apple's hyper-conservative nature. They want control over every tiny detail of their image in a way that leads to crap like this. They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human.
I couldn't agree more, and yes, it's sad.
Presentations, especially product presentations and keynotes, should be live and with a live audience.
I cringed every time Craig said 'next!'. He just looked unnatural as did most of the people chosen to present something.
It was almost pantomime style energy.
Something was wrong and the musical lead ins were just awful IMO.
Bring back the edge, tension and nerves of truly being up on stage!
Jesus Christ.
Who the fuck do the "nerves" benefit? The stress and anxiety of the entire internet laughing at them if something goes wrong is a good thing? Audio/Video issues? Why should they be subjected to that? There's a ton of other live tech keynotes, I watch them, and they're shittier in every conceivable category. The pros of these polished pre-recorded keynotes which are much more dynamic, visually interesting, polished, and have zero chance of fucking up, far, far outweighs any arbitrary advantages of being "live". It's not a concert. They're never "going back", and that's a good thing. Things change, and this change is in service of the company, the product, and yes, the consumers. Maybe try to adapt instead of cringing. These are by far the least cringe worthy tech keynotes Ive ever seen.
No need to get religious. LOL.
It's simple. It's communication. Live communication. Engagement with your audience. It's real.
Is it nerve wracking? Of course!
When you go to political rally or keynote presentation or anything, do you really want someone to pull down a screen and then have to sit through the Director's Cut?
Can you imagine the same tactics at the Oscars?
It's like Milli Vanilli.
I saw a photo of the audience sat out in the sun at Apple Park watching a screen.
I'd much prefer them in the Jobs Theater watching it live.
It might be ironic but having seen how wooden Craig looked while acting in front of a camera, I'm sure he would have come over as more convincing live on stage.
I miss the live events mostly because a big part of getting caught up in the hype is audience reaction. And that's half the fun.
But what REALLY bugs me about these events, and all Apple events since Steve left the stage, even the previous live events, is how heavily trained everyone has obviously been to speak and even move like Steve did. Hand gestures, inflections, word choices - it's almost animatronic.
There's a difference between theatre and cinema. I value the live events because they are 'of the moment' and it's good to see the real (not filmed) people interacting with an audience, not just speaking their script. It's not about hoping for failure, it's a shared experience and laughing together at adversity is also fine. Sitting here across the pond, I also think the live presentation/live audience is better to watch; why would I want to want a cinema audience watch a film?
I'm also disappointed because a personal trip to WWDC to watch a live keynote is on my bucket list. Perhaps now never to be.
I couldn't disagree more. The pre-recorded demos are so much better. They cram in so much more information and we have no annoying woooooos and endless applause that tended to happen after every sentence during a live keynote...
I miss the live events mostly because a big part of getting caught up in the hype is audience reaction. And that's half the fun.
But what REALLY bugs me about these events, and all Apple events since Steve left the stage, even the previous live events, is how heavily trained everyone has obviously been to speak and even move like Steve did. Hand gestures, inflections, word choices - it's almost animatronic.
Really?! You want a bunch of unrehearsed presenters stumbling over their lines, forgetting words and just getting nervous on stage or in front of a camera? If so, go watch an elementary school play. Presenting on camera or in front of an audience is not a day job for any of these presenters. They all seem to do a good job anyway and that's because they are "trained".
Actually, I prefer these scripted, pre-recorded presentations to the old live events. I think they are able to present a lot more information more clearly and concisely than doing a live event allows. You also avoid wasting time with glitches that have nothing to do with the product or presentation. (Like Craig Federighi's "failed" Face ID demo, which only "failed" because the feature was working as designed and had been disabled because of stage hands handling it and looking at the screen before the demo.) The demos and presentations are also better and more compelling since they don't have the restriction of doing it on a stage in front of a live audience but can be more creative with it.
If one were attending in person, a live event would be more exciting, but how many of us actually ever have the opportunity to attend in person? And, frankly, even the live events were scripted and rehearsed, and the only person who was ever going to go off-script was Steve Jobs, so we aren't really missing anything in that regard. (I was at the WWDC right after Jobs returned to Apple, and I wouldn't have missed the Q&A session he did there for the world (the one where he talked about taking the Newton out back and putting a bullet in it's head, among other topics) but those days are, sadly, long behind us.)
There is some irony, though, that the Steve Jobs Theater was designed and built to host live events and they stopped doing them almost immediately after it was "opened".
In days of MacWorld Expo, a fair number of the hoi polloi public did have a chance to attend the keynotes, if the desire and effort was present. One didn't need to be a member of the media, or an invited guest, just have the willingness to line up early.
I'm not lamenting how what are fundamentally sales pitches are delivered either. What I do miss is the chance to have direct contact with Apple's product managers and other personnel on the show floor, for good and bad. A bug report or feature request in the system will never have the same impact as the direct person-to-person feedback.
Not just for Apple, but any company. For the smaller ones, that interaction went directly to the top, like for a Rich Siegel (BBEdit), or a Thorsten Lemke (GraphicConverter), who anyone could speak to while they were on the show floor.
Now, the minimum to approximate such access would be to a WWDC attendee, and even that has changed.
What I’m reading is that there are really only two reasons to prefer live keynotes: “But…remember when Steve Jobs…” and “embrace the chaos.” Well….
Steve Jobs is dead. If you want another Steve Jobs keynote moment, you are going to have to get another Steve Jobs on stage. Where is he? Is it Tim Cook? No. Is it Craig Federighi? No. Steve Jobs is dead.
”Embrace the chaos” is just a euphemism for “We wanna be there when stuff goes wrong.” Why is that? How does it help? I’m sorry, but “Embrace the chaos” sounds a lot like “Some people are here for the technical team craft of auto racing and all its details, but we are here just in case there’s a car crash.” You really want to be flown out to Apple Park just for that?
The live events aren’t any more human than the recorded ones, because the live ones were so tightly scripted. Has anyone looked at how much more time we saved by not having to sit through all the applause and breaks when people walk on and off stage?
So, for those of us sitting at home watching, the high production value presentation was... fine.
But if I actually went to the trouble of going in person to see a keynote? I'd have been PISSED.
If that's all they're going to do for keynotes from now on, just cancel the in person WWDC permanently. There's no need for anybody to be there any more. If developers need access to Apple engineers, they'd get more from a FaceTime call than from this. Stream the fancy presentation and be done with it.
What is particularly sad about it is how over-produced and perfectly scripted and choreographed these are. They feel inhuman, inauthentic, and insincere. They are attempting to evoke a Steve Jobs vibe with an abundance of superfluous adjectives (as if that's what Steve was about). It all feels so artificial. It's like going to Disney's EPCOT Center's World Showcase and thinking that you really traveled the world to those countries. It looks (sorta) real but there's this uneasy, sanitized vibe of superficiality.
Apple needs a new vibe with these. Something not Steve™ and something not this.
Apple, get back to being human and real.
P.S. I do think these recorded "events" are a symptom of Apple's hyper-conservative nature. They want control over every tiny detail of their image in a way that leads to crap like this. They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human.
I couldn't agree more, and yes, it's sad.
Presentations, especially product presentations and keynotes, should be live and with a live audience.
I cringed every time Craig said 'next!'. He just looked unnatural as did most of the people chosen to present something.
It was almost pantomime style energy.
Something was wrong and the musical lead ins were just awful IMO.
Bring back the edge, tension and nerves of truly being up on stage!
Jesus Christ.
Who the fuck do the "nerves" benefit? The stress and anxiety of the entire internet laughing at them if something goes wrong is a good thing? Audio/Video issues? Why should they be subjected to that? There's a ton of other live tech keynotes, I watch them, and they're shittier in every conceivable category. The pros of these polished pre-recorded keynotes which are much more dynamic, visually interesting, polished, and have zero chance of fucking up, far, far outweighs any arbitrary advantages of being "live". It's not a concert. They're never "going back", and that's a good thing. Things change, and this change is in service of the company, the product, and yes, the consumers. Maybe try to adapt instead of cringing. These are by far the least cringe worthy tech keynotes Ive ever seen.
Elon Musk does live and mostly unscripted. It's awkward, and works only because of his genius, sincerity and genuinely awkward persona. There's only a handful of folks like that doing big things in the world that warrant keynotes. All others should be highly scripted, pre-packaged video presentations.
Let's face it: It's a sign of the 'new' (new as in after Steve Jobs) leadership at Apple.
Tim is a numbers guy not a product/founder guy as Steve was. Steve eat, slept and drank the new things Apple provided and I've read the backend story on e.g. how long it took for the iPhone demo to perfect (month of daily hours long preparation directly with Steve together including several test runs). Steve did care about this products and left the numbers stuff to his minions (including Tim Cook at the time).
On the other end quite often your read that Tim doesn't care about the product or product demos in the development time.
So it makes sense that somebody prepares a script for Tim, that he then reads on camera for a little demo film.
It's also quite obvious with the current Apple Vision Pro. Have you seen a single senior executive actually wearing this new device? It's even forbidden to take photos on the hands on tests.
Personally I find these highly polished demos boring as any other marketing movies. Those small failures on stage made it real and exciting.
What is particularly sad about it is how over-produced and perfectly scripted and choreographed these are. They feel inhuman, inauthentic, and insincere. They are attempting to evoke a Steve Jobs vibe with an abundance of superfluous adjectives (as if that's what Steve was about). It all feels so artificial. It's like going to Disney's EPCOT Center's World Showcase and thinking that you really traveled the world to those countries. It looks (sorta) real but there's this uneasy, sanitized vibe of superficiality.
Apple needs a new vibe with these. Something not Steve™ and something not this.
Apple, get back to being human and real.
P.S. I do think these recorded "events" are a symptom of Apple's hyper-conservative nature. They want control over every tiny detail of their image in a way that leads to crap like this. They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human.
"They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human."
That's because they are not, and never will be, Steve Jobs. He had a presentation style that was second to none, not only within Apple but the entirety of business.
You don't think Steve Jobs' presentations were scripted, controlled and polished, and rehearsed over and over? Think again.
He is putting emphasis on Jobs' presentation style. He had that 'charisma' but wasn't perfect in everything, which drew you in even more.
I'm not a fan of Tim Cook giving presentations. He sounds stale but I'd take him over a prerecorded video any day.
Schiller was fun. Craig's mix nerves and fun (not taking himself too seriously) was endearing.
That Jobs was a great presenter has nothing to do with live vs pre-recorded presentations.
What is particularly sad about it is how over-produced and perfectly scripted and choreographed these are. They feel inhuman, inauthentic, and insincere. They are attempting to evoke a Steve Jobs vibe with an abundance of superfluous adjectives (as if that's what Steve was about). It all feels so artificial. It's like going to Disney's EPCOT Center's World Showcase and thinking that you really traveled the world to those countries. It looks (sorta) real but there's this uneasy, sanitized vibe of superficiality.
Apple needs a new vibe with these. Something not Steve™ and something not this.
Apple, get back to being human and real.
P.S. I do think these recorded "events" are a symptom of Apple's hyper-conservative nature. They want control over every tiny detail of their image in a way that leads to crap like this. They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human.
"They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human."
That's because they are not, and never will be, Steve Jobs. He had a presentation style that was second to none, not only within Apple but the entirety of business.
You don't think Steve Jobs' presentations were scripted, controlled and polished, and rehearsed over and over? Think again.
He is putting emphasis on Jobs' presentation style. He had that 'charisma' but wasn't perfect in everything, which drew you in even more.
I'm not a fan of Tim Cook giving presentations. He sounds stale but I'd take him over a prerecorded video any day.
Schiller was fun. Craig's mix nerves and fun (not taking himself too seriously) was endearing.
That Jobs was a great presenter has nothing to do with live vs pre-recorded presentations.
No, it doesn't. I was simply pointing out what he was referring to (Jobs' style) in the reply that you picked up on (which focused on rehearsals and scripting).
Pre-recorded presentations often come over as denaturalised. Being a good presenter doesn't mean you will come over well in a pre-recorded video.
In fact it is also radically different to watching a recording of a live presentation.
Giving a presentation in one live run and having it recorded is one thing.
Being directed (interrupted, script changed, sentences repeated, clothes adjusted, made up etc) sterilises everything and is something completely different.
The feedback during keynotes from the audience made all the difference. While Cook keep saying "thrilled", "profound", "excited" we had Jobs talking real benefits and "I want to show it to you"... and he did. Listen to the reaction at 04:16 when he introduces the product... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iTNWZF2m3o At 13:34 he does a one more thing...and 14:42 we have wireless network... never being tech specs first.
What is particularly sad about it is how over-produced and perfectly scripted and choreographed these are. They feel inhuman, inauthentic, and insincere. They are attempting to evoke a Steve Jobs vibe with an abundance of superfluous adjectives (as if that's what Steve was about). It all feels so artificial. It's like going to Disney's EPCOT Center's World Showcase and thinking that you really traveled the world to those countries. It looks (sorta) real but there's this uneasy, sanitized vibe of superficiality.
Apple needs a new vibe with these. Something not Steve™ and something not this.
Apple, get back to being human and real.
P.S. I do think these recorded "events" are a symptom of Apple's hyper-conservative nature. They want control over every tiny detail of their image in a way that leads to crap like this. They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human.
"They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human."
That's because they are not, and never will be, Steve Jobs. He had a presentation style that was second to none, not only within Apple but the entirety of business.
You don't think Steve Jobs' presentations were scripted, controlled and polished, and rehearsed over and over? Think again.
He is putting emphasis on Jobs' presentation style. He had that 'charisma' but wasn't perfect in everything, which drew you in even more.
I'm not a fan of Tim Cook giving presentations. He sounds stale but I'd take him over a prerecorded video any day.
Schiller was fun. Craig's mix nerves and fun (not taking himself too seriously) was endearing.
That Jobs was a great presenter has nothing to do with live vs pre-recorded presentations.
No, it doesn't. I was simply pointing out what he was referring to (Jobs' style) in the reply that you picked up on (which focused on rehearsals and scripting).
Pre-recorded presentations often come over as denaturalised. Being a good presenter doesn't mean you will come over well in a pre-recorded video.
In fact it is also radically different to watching a recording of a live presentation.
Giving a presentation in one live run and having it recorded is one thing.
Being directed (interrupted, script changed, sentences repeated, clothes adjusted, made up etc) sterilises everything and is something completely different.
There have, over the years, been plenty of stilted presentations in live Apple Keynotes. As far as, "Being directed (interrupted, script changed, sentences repeated, clothes adjusted, made up etc)," goes, does anyone really think all of this didn't happen during the era of live presentations? Of course it did. The only difference was that you had to do your presentation in one take, with no chance to correct mistakes, except to interrupt yourself and correct on the fly. No pressure, right?
This "preference" for live presentations isn't based on any real advantages, just some sort of nostalgia for the way things used to be.
Live is always better someone in the future who has charisma, if they end up at the top of the pyramid at Apple, you will see a live event again, nothing can compare to someone who has the ability to speak in person, Steve Jobs was just a master of it.
What is particularly sad about it is how over-produced and perfectly scripted and choreographed these are. They feel inhuman, inauthentic, and insincere. They are attempting to evoke a Steve Jobs vibe with an abundance of superfluous adjectives (as if that's what Steve was about). It all feels so artificial. It's like going to Disney's EPCOT Center's World Showcase and thinking that you really traveled the world to those countries. It looks (sorta) real but there's this uneasy, sanitized vibe of superficiality.
Apple needs a new vibe with these. Something not Steve™ and something not this.
Apple, get back to being human and real.
P.S. I do think these recorded "events" are a symptom of Apple's hyper-conservative nature. They want control over every tiny detail of their image in a way that leads to crap like this. They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human.
"They want it scripted and controlled and polished in a way that feels not quite human."
That's because they are not, and never will be, Steve Jobs. He had a presentation style that was second to none, not only within Apple but the entirety of business.
You don't think Steve Jobs' presentations were scripted, controlled and polished, and rehearsed over and over? Think again.
He is putting emphasis on Jobs' presentation style. He had that 'charisma' but wasn't perfect in everything, which drew you in even more.
I'm not a fan of Tim Cook giving presentations. He sounds stale but I'd take him over a prerecorded video any day.
Schiller was fun. Craig's mix nerves and fun (not taking himself too seriously) was endearing.
That Jobs was a great presenter has nothing to do with live vs pre-recorded presentations.
No, it doesn't. I was simply pointing out what he was referring to (Jobs' style) in the reply that you picked up on (which focused on rehearsals and scripting).
Pre-recorded presentations often come over as denaturalised. Being a good presenter doesn't mean you will come over well in a pre-recorded video.
In fact it is also radically different to watching a recording of a live presentation.
Giving a presentation in one live run and having it recorded is one thing.
Being directed (interrupted, script changed, sentences repeated, clothes adjusted, made up etc) sterilises everything and is something completely different.
There have, over the years, been plenty of stilted presentations in live Apple Keynotes. As far as, "Being directed (interrupted, script changed, sentences repeated, clothes adjusted, made up etc)," goes, does anyone really think all of this didn't happen during the era of live presentations? Of course it did. The only difference was that you had to do your presentation in one take, with no chance to correct mistakes, except to interrupt yourself and correct on the fly. No pressure, right?
This "preference" for live presentations isn't based on any real advantages, just some sort of nostalgia for the way things used to be.
In pre-pandemic times, yes, things were rehearsed, and tweaked, but the whole point was that when you started there was no turning back. It was live.
Pressure? You bet! It's a show.
People are there to experience everything associated with it. To live the moment with the speakers. The feedback.
As for preference, well yeah, isn't that clear from the whole thread?
Comments
Who the fuck do the "nerves" benefit? The stress and anxiety of the entire internet laughing at them if something goes wrong is a good thing? Audio/Video issues? Why should they be subjected to that? There's a ton of other live tech keynotes, I watch them, and they're shittier in every conceivable category. The pros of these polished pre-recorded keynotes which are much more dynamic, visually interesting, polished, and have zero chance of fucking up, far, far outweighs any arbitrary advantages of being "live". It's not a concert. They're never "going back", and that's a good thing. Things change, and this change is in service of the company, the product, and yes, the consumers. Maybe try to adapt instead of cringing. These are by far the least cringe worthy tech keynotes Ive ever seen.
It's simple. It's communication. Live communication. Engagement with your audience. It's real.
Is it nerve wracking? Of course!
When you go to political rally or keynote presentation or anything, do you really want someone to pull down a screen and then have to sit through the Director's Cut?
Can you imagine the same tactics at the Oscars?
It's like Milli Vanilli.
I saw a photo of the audience sat out in the sun at Apple Park watching a screen.
I'd much prefer them in the Jobs Theater watching it live.
It might be ironic but having seen how wooden Craig looked while acting in front of a camera, I'm sure he would have come over as more convincing live on stage.
I'm also disappointed because a personal trip to WWDC to watch a live keynote is on my bucket list. Perhaps now never to be.
Really?! You want a bunch of unrehearsed presenters stumbling over their lines, forgetting words and just getting nervous on stage or in front of a camera? If so, go watch an elementary school play. Presenting on camera or in front of an audience is not a day job for any of these presenters. They all seem to do a good job anyway and that's because they are "trained".
Steve Jobs is dead. If you want another Steve Jobs keynote moment, you are going to have to get another Steve Jobs on stage. Where is he? Is it Tim Cook? No. Is it Craig Federighi? No. Steve Jobs is dead.
”Embrace the chaos” is just a euphemism for “We wanna be there when stuff goes wrong.” Why is that? How does it help? I’m sorry, but “Embrace the chaos” sounds a lot like “Some people are here for the technical team craft of auto racing and all its details, but we are here just in case there’s a car crash.” You really want to be flown out to Apple Park just for that?
The live events aren’t any more human than the recorded ones, because the live ones were so tightly scripted. Has anyone looked at how much more time we saved by not having to sit through all the applause and breaks when people walk on and off stage?
Tim is a numbers guy not a product/founder guy as Steve was. Steve eat, slept and drank the new things Apple provided and I've read the backend story on e.g. how long it took for the iPhone demo to perfect (month of daily hours long preparation directly with Steve together including several test runs). Steve did care about this products and left the numbers stuff to his minions (including Tim Cook at the time).
On the other end quite often your read that Tim doesn't care about the product or product demos in the development time.
So it makes sense that somebody prepares a script for Tim, that he then reads on camera for a little demo film.
It's also quite obvious with the current Apple Vision Pro. Have you seen a single senior executive actually wearing this new device? It's even forbidden to take photos on the hands on tests.
Personally I find these highly polished demos boring as any other marketing movies. Those small failures on stage made it real and exciting.
Pre-recorded presentations often come over as denaturalised. Being a good presenter doesn't mean you will come over well in a pre-recorded video.
In fact it is also radically different to watching a recording of a live presentation.
Giving a presentation in one live run and having it recorded is one thing.
Being directed (interrupted, script changed, sentences repeated, clothes adjusted, made up etc) sterilises everything and is something completely different.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iTNWZF2m3o At 13:34 he does a one more thing...and 14:42 we have wireless network... never being tech specs first.
This "preference" for live presentations isn't based on any real advantages, just some sort of nostalgia for the way things used to be.
Pressure? You bet! It's a show.
People are there to experience everything associated with it. To live the moment with the speakers. The feedback.
As for preference, well yeah, isn't that clear from the whole thread?