Anyone else fed up hearing about apple?

[ProfJohn]

paint white != innovate

edit, to clarify- so you're saying by taking the hard disk MP3 player, crippling it with DRM and horrible software, and charging more, they innovated, right? i think you're the one who doesn't know what that word means.

And Henry Ford did nothing to the automobile but paint it black and make it cheap...

 

[BrokenVisage]

Maximilian killed Steve!

 

[SunnyD]

Steve Jobs was great at one thing: Taking other peoples' innovations and inventions and putting them together in a way that made them popular. Sometimes, all it took to make those innovations and inventions popular was to just slap an Apple logo on it. Sad, but sadly true.

 

[HeXen]

Fed up with apple.....yet the topic is apple"........awesome job

 

[alkemyst]

oh look, angry little men.

 

[CraigRT]

Srsly... fuck apple :\

QFT

 

[SP33Demon]

The products arn't that bad. They are easy to use and are good looking. Their targeted audience isn't the tech people, it is for the rest of the world.

Think of Apple as the McDonalds of tech. They are good at what they are designed to do, they follow a different definition of good then you seem to have.

They have high prices because they seem to be reliable.

Except McD's doesn't charge $5 for a small coffee.

 

[BabaBooey]

I'm fed up with hearing about people being fed up.

Fuck fed up people

This....:thumbsup:


To the OP....

 

[Exterous]

nothing to do with being vested in apple. i just get annoyed when people claim to dislike something so much, yet they will post pages and pages of reasons why they dislike something. typically when i don't like something, i don't waste any time on it.

the vocal minorities hating on apple gets annoying. and it's not just apple. it is ANYTHING that is popular. just like the Transformers 3 thread. i'd say like 90% of the posts in there were from people saying how shitty the movie is going to be or is yet they did not even go see it. but they wanted everyone to know just how much they hate it.

it can get annoying when you are trying to read on a subject that you enjoy and have a real discussion about it, but you only find that content while reading through 90% of the thread bashing said content.

it's not just this forum, it is the internet in general. it is a peeve of mine.

glad you've taken notice, my job is done.

Wait - so you don't waste your time on things you dislike except when you waste time replying to something you dislike?

I know you said 'typically' but maybe thisan atypical response for him too

Steve Jobs was great at one thing: Taking other peoples' innovations and inventions and putting them together in a way that made them popular and then patenting/suing the shit out of everything.

Steve did some great things but I despise the recent business practices of Apple and their diehard fanboys

 

[Ninjahedge]

Skipping skipping skipping......


It is just a bit annoying that someone whose greatest contribution to society would be a "friendlier" cell phone is somehow lauded as a lost hero.

I am not begrudging him his creative and tactical brilliance combined with the people he worked with to make a joining of ergonomics, technology and marketing that made computers a bit less geeky. I respect him for that even when I do not respect the products themselves.

What I do not like, and really feel bad about, is societies need to somehow place roses at the door to a retail store to commemorate the death of a guy who made a slim MP3 player rather than taking that same money and, I don't know, FEEDING someone who needs it.

Just the fact that people are "honoring his memory" in such a way shows the emotional disconnect of today's society. Jobs was not your friend or your relative. Respect his life, but do not feel like he somehow "touched your soul".

And get a better pair of earphones while you are at it. I am tired of listening to the shit you are playing on your Pod while riding the train in the morning.....

 

[HumblePie]

Skipping skipping skipping......


It is just a bit annoying that someone whose greatest contribution to society would be a "friendlier" cell phone is somehow lauded as a lost hero.

I am not begrudging him his creative and tactical brilliance combined with the people he worked with to make a joining of ergonomics, technology and marketing that made computers a bit less geeky. I respect him for that even when I do not respect the products themselves.

What I do not like, and really feel bad about, is societies need to somehow place roses at the door to a retail store to commemorate the death of a guy who made a slim MP3 player rather than taking that same money and, I don't know, FEEDING someone who needs it.

Just the fact that people are "honoring his memory" in such a way shows the emotional disconnect of today's society. Jobs was not your friend or your relative. Respect his life, but do not feel like he somehow "touched your soul".

And get a better pair of earphones while you are at it. I am tired of listening to the shit you are playing on your Pod while riding the train in the morning.....

I agree, but one thing people need to remember, it took decades for Steven Jobs to realize his "genius."

Apple was a company at one point going under. They did the stupid shit in the computer industry for decades. The difference is that with computers there was too much competition. They never had a "superior" computer product. Ever.

The iPod changed everything for them because the market was a completely different dynamic from the computer industry. There was so much crappy junk out there in the MP3 player market when the iPod was introduced, that when Apple put out a decent product and tied it into some OK software, people took notice. With the computer industry their super proprietary bullshit couldn't fly. Why? Any company, or hell most people, could buy the parts for a good computer and put one together. The same was not true for MP3 players. It also helped that at the time of the iPod's inception that there was a dearth of good MP3 player products. They all sucked. Apple's iPod just sucked a little less. It was also a gamble for Apple to try that new market segment. They diversified in an attempt to keep from going under. They were on the edge of bankruptcy for stupid decisions over the decades.

They then looked to other burgeoning markets that were similar in nature to the MP3 player market. Smart phones and eventually tablets are/were similar markets. Neither market was new when Apple came along. Apple just saw similar market that gave them success with their iPod and created products for those markets using the same methodology. Strangely enough, sales from those markets gave them bigger brand name recognition to boost sales for their computer market. Not enough, but that part of their company is no longer sinking at least.



So what methodology does Apple use? They have decent hardware products for a given market with decent software. The prices are usually a bit above comparable hardware products, but they package their products with fairly user friendly interfaces. When the iPod was released you had other MP3 players that had decent hardware and were even pricier, or decent hardware with crappy software, or crappy user interfaces, or other problems. Not everyone could get into the market on a whim to drive more competition either. In the computer world that same methodology just didn't work. Not when anyone could offer better hardware, at cheaper prices, and still provide good software with a good user interface. They just repeated that method in the smart phone and tablet market. After those two markets though I don't think there are any other markets that are in a similar shape that Apple's methodology would work in.

 

[Fritzo]

Steve Jobs was great at one thing: Taking other peoples' innovations and inventions and putting them together in a way that made them popular. Sometimes, all it took to make those innovations and inventions popular was to just slap an Apple logo on it. Sad, but sadly true.

Not really. He was good at taking raw ideas, polishing them, and making them exactly what people want. That is the difference between an inventor and a visionary.

 

[Ns1]

Not really. He was good at taking raw ideas, polishing them, and making them exactly what people want. That is the difference between an inventor and a visionary.

this

 

[HumblePie]

Not really. He was good at taking raw ideas, polishing them, and making them exactly what people want. That is the difference between an inventor and a visionary.

Actually, he didn't even do that.

They never changed their methodology from the computer market to other markets at all. Let's see what they did in all 4 markets (computers, MP3 players, smart phones, and tablets).

Proprietary hardware? check
Decent, but not the best hardware solution for that market? check
Proprietary OS? check
Clever OS tricks to make the slightly less performing hardware not as noticeable? check
User friendly interface? check
Locked down software development/releases? check
Slightly over priced? check
Offbeat hardware design? check
Slick new-age marketing scheme that appeals to late teens and young adults? check

This method failed hardcore for one market and worked splendidly well for the other 3. They didn't change a single way they did business in any of those markets at all.

I stated above why it worked for three market segments and failed for the fourth. It's not all that hard to figure out why either. I'm not saying Apple didn't create good products for any of the four markets either. But they haven't really done anything different in decades.

 

[GrumpyMan]

I wonder if the Apple employees ever get mad because it wasn't Jobs staying up late at night drawing and testing these inventions and coming up with new ideas working 24/7. All he did was market them and approve or dis-approve new designs made by his employees, and he gets all the accolades. Any Apple employees out there? How do you really feel about all this?

 

[Ninjahedge]

Not really. He was good at taking raw ideas, polishing them, and making them exactly what people want. That is the difference between an inventor and a visionary.

You guys just said the exact same things but used different words to do so.

Taking "raw ideas" does not count when someone has done more than put them on a brainstorming chalkboard.

They may not have been finished products, but they were not random "raw" ideas either.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Here's the thing.

A good idea doesn't mean squat if you need three arms to operate it.

The problem is, as soon as you say Jobs was anything less than a Diety in the tech-world you get people going "nuh-uh".

He took other people's ideas, a bit more legally that the original Windows crew, I might add, and put a twist on them.

Then he sold it to the semi-tech literate that went for ads like "OMFG You have a PC you are SUCH a loser!!!!" (I wish I was exaggerating). IT WORKED. The same things that made it less flexible, like a closed OS and proprietary hardware and interfaces, made it more friendly to the tech-phobic. It also had a side benefit. Adding ergonomic and artistic design to the mix (kind of Ikea-ish actually) they have made a whole line of products that people are willing to replace before they even need to purely on adding a letter to the end of it (4S).

When you appeal to emotion rather than just performance or specs, you get a lot more out of it. Where he did sparingly in the computer market in all but certain sectors (art/design) he did STELLAR in consumer electronics... Although strangely enough he has not done anything in "smart" entertainment centers.....

A good example of this is BOSE. A company that has little to truly offer (less than Apple) but people will buy it because they believe it is somehow better. No stats in their ads, just happy smiling faces. For the majority of people shopping for non-technical devices, a smiling face and a pretty product mean more than an actual powerhouse.

 

[Ns1]

A good example of this is BOSE. A company that has little to truly offer (less than Apple) but people will buy it because they believe it is somehow better. No stats in their ads, just happy smiling faces. For the majority of people shopping for non-technical devices, a smiling face and a pretty product mean more than an actual powerhouse.

sooo how do you explain current and former PC repair/tech guys/IT guys who buy Apple products?

 

[HumblePie]

Here's the thing.

A good idea doesn't mean squat if you need three arms to operate it.

The problem is, as soon as you say Jobs was anything less than a Diety in the tech-world you get people going "nuh-uh".

He took other people's ideas, a bit more legally that the original Windows crew, I might add, and put a twist on them.

Then he sold it to the semi-tech literate that went for ads like "OMFG You have a PC you are SUCH a loser!!!!" (I wish I was exaggerating). IT WORKED. The same things that made it less flexible, like a closed OS and proprietary hardware and interfaces, made it more friendly to the tech-phobic. It also had a side benefit. Adding ergonomic and artistic design to the mix (kind of Ikea-ish actually) they have made a whole line of products that people are willing to replace before they even need to purely on adding a letter to the end of it (4S).

When you appeal to emotion rather than just performance or specs, you get a lot more out of it. Where he did sparingly in the computer market in all but certain sectors (art/design) he did STELLAR in consumer electronics... Although strangely enough he has not done anything in "smart" entertainment centers.....

A good example of this is BOSE. A company that has little to truly offer (less than Apple) but people will buy it because they believe it is somehow better. No stats in their ads, just happy smiling faces. For the majority of people shopping for non-technical devices, a smiling face and a pretty product mean more than an actual powerhouse.

Yes and no. There is merit to this, but if that was all then Apple would have dominated the computer market as well. They didn't They didn't come close. The same tactics that they've been using with iPod, iPhone, and iPad they were using for decades in the computer market. It didn't work there at all. Not to say they didn't make sales or barely stay afloat because they did. But 10 years ago there wasn't an Apple store in every mall that sits now next to giants there like Nordstrom and the Disney store. Both of which do well because they sell an expensive image for the most part to their clientele.

It took taking their method of doing business and branching out to different markets which were better for their business practices. Because of lack of solid competition from those market segments they broke new ground.

They didn't invent anything new. Arguably they didn't even make anything product wise that much better than what was currently out there or at least on the drawing board for those markets (tablet market the exception here). What they did do was put together a full cohesive "packaged" product that the masses could consume. The average consumer doesn't like to piece-mail their technology parts. They like it to be at least "good" and all inclusive. And a slightly higher price tag plus creative marketing makes people feel like they are getting the "best" product out there whether that is true or not. As you mentioned Bose does this and successfully. Their products are crap compared to actual good brands in their price range. But people still flock to them because they started correctly with the "Master's System" which was all inclusive, decent, and had a price tag that wasn't the highest, but no where near the lowest to make people feel like they were buying cheap junk.

As far as inventing or innovating? Hogwash. Apple did nothing of the sort. Not even the method of their marketing is new. Still I'm not knocking their success. They did well to recognize the correct markets and completed product lines for those markets for their business methodology. Their success in doing so spawned plenty of later competition looking to do the same in those markets which only in the end helps all consumers more.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Steve Jobs was great at one thing: Taking other peoples' innovations and inventions and putting them together in a way that made them popular. Sometimes, all it took to make those innovations and inventions popular was to just slap an Apple logo on it. Sad, but sadly true.

He was our generation's Thomas Edison. He was a moderately successful inventor who took better inventions from other people, made small modifications and patented the shit out of them. Next century, people will be crediting Jobs with the invention of the mp3 player the same way Edison gets credited with inventing the light bulb. Really, it's a combination of being able to identify good inventions and having tremendous business acumen.

 

[HumblePie]

He was our generation's Thomas Edison. He was a moderately successful inventor who took better inventions from other people, made small modifications and patented the shit out of them. Next century, people will be crediting Jobs with the invention of the mp3 player the same way Edison gets credited with inventing the light bulb. Really, it's a combination of being able to identify good inventions and having tremendous business acumen.

Pretty much this. Edison took the idea of making light by passing electricity through a filament from many of those before him. Which was actually done first by an inventor named Humphry Davy in 1801. It last a few minutes then burned out. Others came later that improved upon the design. Edison just made more improvements AND packages it all better. Then he sold it better by teaming up with some big wigs that had major financial backing like the Vanderbilts. He also stole quite a few ideas and lost some legal battles with Telsa and others. But school history books still give him the acclaim for being the "inventor" although he was no where near that. What he did do was SELL the lightbulb and electricity better than anyone else.

Jobs did the same thing. Probably in 100 years from now you'll have idiot high schoolers thinking Jobs invented the digital music industry and small form factor touch based devices all by himself.

 

[Fritzo]

You guys just said the exact same things but used different words to do so.

Taking "raw ideas" does not count when someone has done more than put them on a brainstorming chalkboard.

They may not have been finished products, but they were not random "raw" ideas either.

You know what I hate about ATOT? The fact that everyone has to nitpick into irrelevant pieces of information and make them seem important just to prove they're right.

I'm going to give an example of how Jobs was amazing. MP3 players were around for years before the iPod. They were fairly inexpensive, some were well designed (I loved my Creative Nomad), but they were hard to use for the average person:

- you had to create your own MP3 files
- you had to fill out the tags on the songs yourself
- you had to transfer those files to the player one by one

I don't know if you've ever worked with the average 40 year old, but if you told them to copy a file to a drive, they will look at you cross-eyed. Steve saw an opportunity there. He wanted the technology to do the work, and have the device be as simple as turning on a light switch. The interface had to be simple, limited controls, and as automatic as possible. Around the automation he set up a reoccurring revenue system...with Apple in full control over hardware, distribution, and content. This model didn't work with PC's due to the high costs and footholds in the market, but Steve was convinced it is a legitimate business model.

Full control over every aspect of a product ensures consistency. You have one platform, one OS, one software outlet, and it ensures everything works according to the direction of one person. Steve was to make his model work with the iPad, and it worked wonderfully. It also got people used to the environment, which allowed him to apply the model to previously failed areas using Apple's product clout.

Love or hate Apple, without them we would not be using cheap smartphones, MP3 players would still be for geeks, tablets would be $2000 toys that nobody buys, and electronics wouldn't be pushing as much for thinner, sleek designs that we all love so much.

This was all under Steve's direction, and it worked because he was an insistent, picky, and artistic bastard. There's not very many people that could have pulled this off, but he did it very well.

 

[Ninjahedge]

sooo how do you explain current and former PC repair/tech guys/IT guys who buy Apple products?

There are some in every crowd.

Are you saying that all people are forced to do only one thing because of the job they held?

 

[Gibson486]

LOL...stop the hate.

The audio industry is a numbers game. If you buy stuff based on specs in the industry, you are an idiot. There is no industry standard for companies to test in audio. That wide dynamic range you see could have been done a way that another audio manufacture would laugh at. Anyways, audio is subjective. Some people prefer Bose, some prefer Polk, some prefer some brand that is not sold at Best Buy.

SO, stop all the bashing. If people feel comfy buying something that you do not approve, get over it.

 

[Gibson486]

I wonder if the Apple employees ever get mad because it wasn't Jobs staying up late at night drawing and testing these inventions and coming up with new ideas working 24/7. All he did was market them and approve or dis-approve new designs made by his employees, and he gets all the accolades. Any Apple employees out there? How do you really feel about all this?

you can say the same thing about any other company...even Microsoft or Intel.