Apple is professional, the web is amateur • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#21

Post by rimantas » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 5:32 PM UTC

davidbalbert wrote: post #7

simonsarris wrote: post #2

I think you're correct that Apple is going to have to do things differently get some of their web properties to catch on, but I disagree heavily on your premise. For a counterexample, Facebook is professional-looking and very structured compared to MySpace, which in turn is very amateurish-feeling. There isn't any question which is preferred. Forums are amateurish. Stackoverflow is professional. I know where I'm goin…

My point wasn't that less professional looking websites succeed over more professional looking sites. It's Apple's focus on professional content (the select few) vs amateur content (all of us). I didn't mean to use amateur in a derogative sense. Amateurs are just people who don't get paid for their work. Re: Facebook/MySpace, I think this was a different dynamic. The thing facebook did right was tone down the design…

> My point wasn't that less professional looking websites > succeed over more professional looking sites.

Besides that your point is not true I fail to see how it applies to Apple. Should they remake apple.com to something horribly amateurish, and then they somehow succeed? Are they failing?

And I bet that if some website which looks amateur succeeds over more professionally done the looks is not the key to success.

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#22

Post by bluekeybox » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 5:32 PM UTC

davidbalbert wrote: post #18

bluekeybox wrote: post #4

> If Apple's going to succeed at the web, they have to unlearn a lot of what makes them Apple. No more pixel perfect web apps that feel like desktop apps, no more sites that look like glossy brochures, and embracing chaos and amateurism over order and professionalism Here is yet another argument based on the premise that, in order for Apple to succeed, it must do the same thing as everyone else. We have heard the sam…

I don't think these situations are parallels. Clones were a bad idea because they diluted Apple's brand and cut way into their margins (Apple is a hardware company and makes money from that). As for cheap phones, Apple now sells the 3GS for $49. I don't think this is an example of the naysayers being right, it's just Apple having their cake and eating it too. The point is not that Apple should do the same thing as ev…

> Clones were a bad idea because they diluted Apple's brand and cut way into their margins (Apple is a hardware company and makes money from that).

Well Apple's embracing amateur content may turn out to be a bad idea for all I know -- it would certainly dilute a few things. I stand by my claim that there is a parallel.

> As for cheap phones, Apple now sells the 3GS for $49

Disregarding the actual device cost, I suppose Apple has achieved the goal of having several price tiers, however it did not do so in the way that was recommended by a number of pundits, about whose view (that Apple must design cheap phones otherwise it is dead in the water) I was complaining.

> The point is not that Apple should do the same thing as everyone else to succeed at the web. It's just that they've been trying one thing over and over again with no success. They have to change something.

That may be your personal point (and I would agree with it), but it does not seem to be the point of the author of the article who was more specific about what, in the author's opinion, needs to be changed.

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#23

Post by davidbalbert » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 5:32 PM UTC

jdq wrote: post #12

davidbalbert wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point wasn't that less professional looking websites succeed over more professional looking sites. It's Apple's focus on professional content (the select few) vs amateur content (all of us). I didn't mean to use amateur in a derogative sense. Amateurs are just people who don't get paid for their work. Re: Facebook/MySpace, I think this was a different dynamic. The thing facebook did right was tone down the design…

It's this part that's going to get people disagreeing with you: "No more pixel perfect web apps that feel like desktop apps, no more sites that look like glossy brochures, and embracing chaos and amateurism over order and professionalism. It is going to be very hard."

Yeah, I guess there are a few small leaps in the first two points there. The connection I was trying to make was that Apple's taking it's experience with things they understand (desktop apps, marketing to professionals, making beautiful things, etc) and applying it to a new domain that they don't have a good grasp on.

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#24

Post by masklinn » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 5:33 PM UTC

tobylane wrote: post #11

The one downside to this difference - low quantity. It's not so noticeable with Apple, but someone else with constantly high quality, Daft Punk, have done so little, five albums by my count.

> Daft Punk, have done so little, five albums by my count.

3 studio albums, 1 soundtrack, 2 live albums and 3 remixes. But they also have 17 singles, as many music videos, 2 full-length movies (Interstella 5555 as part of Discovery, and Daft Punk's Electroma which is a bona-fide movie directed by the duo) and they have toured a lot. I don't think Daft Punk is a good example of "doing so little" quantity-wise.

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#25

Post by davidbalbert » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 5:37 PM UTC

rimantas wrote: post #21

davidbalbert wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point wasn't that less professional looking websites succeed over more professional looking sites. It's Apple's focus on professional content (the select few) vs amateur content (all of us). I didn't mean to use amateur in a derogative sense. Amateurs are just people who don't get paid for their work. Re: Facebook/MySpace, I think this was a different dynamic. The thing facebook did right was tone down the design…

> My point wasn't that less professional looking websites > succeed over more professional looking sites. Besides that your point is not true I fail to see how it applies to Apple. Should they remake apple.com to something horribly amateurish, and then they somehow succeed? Are they failing? And I bet that if some website which looks amateur succeeds over more professionally done the looks is not the key to success.

No they're not failing over all at all. They're just failing at web stuff (which they keep trying at). I wouldn't change a thing with their hardware business, and as a result I wouldn't change apple.com. I would change me.com though, because it's not a success by any definition of the term.

Also, my point was not about whether a site is amateur or professionally done. It's whether the focus is on amateur or professional content. Apple is very good at the latter and not so much at the former which is why they have so much trouble with the web.

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#26

Post by davidbalbert » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 5:41 PM UTC

bluekeybox wrote: post #22

davidbalbert wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think these situations are parallels. Clones were a bad idea because they diluted Apple's brand and cut way into their margins (Apple is a hardware company and makes money from that). As for cheap phones, Apple now sells the 3GS for $49. I don't think this is an example of the naysayers being right, it's just Apple having their cake and eating it too. The point is not that Apple should do the same thing as ev…

> Clones were a bad idea because they diluted Apple's brand and cut way into their margins (Apple is a hardware company and makes money from that). Well Apple's embracing amateur content may turn out to be a bad idea for all I know -- it would certainly dilute a few things. I stand by my claim that there is a parallel. > As for cheap phones, Apple now sells the 3GS for $49 Disregarding the actual device cost, I suppo…

I am the author :). It's possible I didn't make my point as clearly as I could have in my post though.

Also re: phone prices, I agree with you. I think the pundits were wrong and pre-judged Apple's path to success on little evidence. I think there's plenty of evidence that their current path on the web is the wrong one.

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#27

Post by ctdonath » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 5:41 PM UTC

jdq wrote: post #12

davidbalbert wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point wasn't that less professional looking websites succeed over more professional looking sites. It's Apple's focus on professional content (the select few) vs amateur content (all of us). I didn't mean to use amateur in a derogative sense. Amateurs are just people who don't get paid for their work. Re: Facebook/MySpace, I think this was a different dynamic. The thing facebook did right was tone down the design…

It's this part that's going to get people disagreeing with you: "No more pixel perfect web apps that feel like desktop apps, no more sites that look like glossy brochures, and embracing chaos and amateurism over order and professionalism. It is going to be very hard."

I just don't see his point. Why go ugly/messy when elegant/perfect is working so well?

OK, so Ping isn't doing well. Seemed a "me too!" gesture in a market saturated with social networking apps, a messy application for a slick product.

No point in changing a paradigm that works, only to garner greater market coverage with subsequent much less penetration. If Apple's gonna "go ugly", they have to compete with "ugly" at 10% the price they're used to.

Why be worse, when you're famous for best?

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#28

Post by bluekeybox » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 5:49 PM UTC

davidbalbert wrote: post #26

bluekeybox wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Clones were a bad idea because they diluted Apple's brand and cut way into their margins (Apple is a hardware company and makes money from that). Well Apple's embracing amateur content may turn out to be a bad idea for all I know -- it would certainly dilute a few things. I stand by my claim that there is a parallel. > As for cheap phones, Apple now sells the 3GS for $49 Disregarding the actual device cost, I suppo…

I am the author :). It's possible I didn't make my point as clearly as I could have in my post though. Also re: phone prices, I agree with you. I think the pundits were wrong and pre-judged Apple's path to success on little evidence. I think there's plenty of evidence that their current path on the web is the wrong one.

Ha, I'm in my usual cycle: code, code, code, refresh HN, read some article with an interesting headline as quickly as I possibly can (being at work and all), completely disregard who is who, post my opinion, code, code, code, refresh HN.

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#29

Post by rglover » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 5:57 PM UTC

I was buying this article until I read the line about Apple dropping everything that constitutes why Apple is "Apple." Pixel-perfect design and a professional ethic are exactly why Apple is recognized as one of the most prolific companies (and brands) in the world. If I want to see loose, ragged, amateur content, I know where to go. There's nothing wrong with sterility if it's done properly and given purpose. In this case, to promote a more professional existence (not a bad thing).

Re: Apple is professional, the web is amateur

#30

Post by zyb09 » Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 6:03 PM UTC

Apple is too professional to get the amateurish web.. pfff what kind of non scene is that? As if web companies like Google, Facebook, Twitter etc. were a bunch of disorganized slackers and that is somehow more successful on the net. Weird associations like that remind me of arguing with high people.