Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's very likely that their hand was forced by Google's contract renewal.
Doesn't seem to change his point.
It does if you think having an iPhone without a Maps app by default is unacceptable.
The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
61–70 of 87 posts
Re: The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would Google do that? They would be helping another rival platform get market share. Google is releasing iOS apps because there's no way Apple is going away soon.
while google loves android, they live off traffic, if it comes from android, ios, windows, etc they don't care they built google apps for all those platforms
Google doesn't really make Windows Phone apps though, why would they make SamsungOS apps?
Re: The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
#63Only meeting with 2 people and only spending an hour on site. This is probably the best interview process I'll read about in the next few weeks on HN.
Don't get your hopes up. The rest of us grunts still get to spend an entire day in front of a whiteboard at Apple, at least as of about a year ago.
ha! well, it was only an hour w two people for both sides to mutually figure out I wasn't a good fit. Probably would have taken longer if it went forward :-)
Re: The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple is in the position Sun Microsystems was 20 years ago. They supplied finished, working solutions, which were really "just" high-quality versions of what the other guys did. Eventually, services got so widespread (Lintel) that customers got less picky and Sun's peculiar quality didn't matter anymore. However, that won't be how Apple will die out (if they do...), because there is already a huge market of people wi…
Difference between apple and sun is that apple is a consumer product. Companies make cost effective decisions. Consumers emotional factors.
Hah. Those of us who spent the late 90's deploying on Solaris boxes instead of the Linux or BSD hardware we wanted know that's not true. Middle management has the same brand loyalty mania as phone-jealous teenagers. And Sun at the time was the face of Unix and clearly the "best" by every metric management cared to look at.
Re: The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
#65Best post I've read on HN in a while! I think there is a fundamental difference between building hardware+system software vs. building web services and apps. In the former case, you have to get it right and then release. In the latter case, you can afford to iterate for a while as you keep getting better. Some of the hardware I've bought from Google has made me feel like I'm beta testing it. I don't get that feeling…
yup - the Apple way works well on hardware and even on operating systems. My post is more about my own experiences on how they'll either embrace different styles (or not) for software application development.
Re: The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
#66I'm happy that at least one company tries to get it right BEFORE unleashing its products on the public. From my experience, the iterative approach often means that a bunch of casual users are given as much input into a design as the designer who devotes months or even years to trying to solve a problem holistically. Iterative design usually means Frankenstein design, that is, a product with way too many unnecessary features, a lack of cohesion and just plain ugliness. The iPhone could not have been created iteratively, and even if it had been, it certainly wouldn't have had the design impact it did. I don't think Google is even on the same planet as Apple, design-wise.
Re: The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
#67> ...how difficult consumer services were going to continue to be for them if they insisted on perfection before release. I still think of this every time I use Dropbox instead of iCloud... There's a big difference between startups iterating, and giants like Apple. I think we all remember how they were excoriated on the Maps release, which certainly wasn't perfect. Because of their scale, Apple doesn't have the kind…
Apple has a history of only getting one chance. The Newton at the end was great. Maps could turn into the best mapping system ever and it won't matter. As for Microsoft, Bing could start giving the best results and it won't matter. You have to be in shouting distance of perfect in the consumer market.
For a media version take SNL's clumsy portrayal of Pres. Ford after his incident and the reality of his athleticism[1].
Ask Blackberry about how their release with flaws worked.
1) he played linebacker and was actually pretty athletic and not clumsy. Chose your shoes wisely.
Re: The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
#68> I was skeptical ... Namely, I was used to web speed: iterative, launch before perfection, leverage your community. If that's not a one-sentence summary of the iPhone's release history, I don't know what is.
I certainly don't think something that changes once a year is 'iterative' in the way he was referring to.
The original iPhone got better at a very rapid pace, through iOS updates.
Re: The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
#69> ...how difficult consumer services were going to continue to be for them if they insisted on perfection before release. I still think of this every time I use Dropbox instead of iCloud... There's a big difference between startups iterating, and giants like Apple. I think we all remember how they were excoriated on the Maps release, which certainly wasn't perfect. Because of their scale, Apple doesn't have the kind…
Maps might not be a great example. Apple was clearly banking on crowdsourcing to help with its inaccurate maps. They could have just released it as an optional app and fixed it over time, until it became mature and then replaced google maps with it. But it looks like they were caught with their pants down as the google maps contract renewel deadline was looming and they said "fuck it, launch with it, and we'll handle…
Maps is a great example of the difference because, wait for it, Apple never wanted to be in the mapping business. People are comparing Apple and Google and forgetting that the two companies ambitions are completely different.
Google wants the full vampire squid platter. It wants to be your phone OS, your browser, your desktop OS, your search company, your video site, your social network, your office software solution, your maps solution, your knowledge resource, your ISP, etc.
Apple never wanted to make a browser. Apple had to make a browser because the vampire squid company that led the market in browsers gave them a shitty one and used it to malign one of Apple's biggest products.
Similarly, Apple never even wanted to be in the Maps business. Apple had to get in the maps business on relatively short notice because the vampire squid company that led the maps market gave them a shitty one and used it to malign one of Apple's biggest products.
Re: The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple
#70> ...how difficult consumer services were going to continue to be for them if they insisted on perfection before release. I still think of this every time I use Dropbox instead of iCloud... There's a big difference between startups iterating, and giants like Apple. I think we all remember how they were excoriated on the Maps release, which certainly wasn't perfect. Because of their scale, Apple doesn't have the kind…
Isn't the author comparing Google's approach to Apple's? Google has more market share than Apple in just about every software category, so if Google can iterate, than why can't Apple? I think it has more to do with Apple's marketing. Every time they release even the most trivial improvement they tout it as being amazingly innovative. They also charge premium prices. This creates an expectation with their users that e…
"Google has more market share than Apple in just about every software category, so if Google can iterate, than why can't Apple?"
This seems like the wrong way to understand each companies motivations. Google got into the maps market because Google's ambition is to be the worldwide leader in (among other things) mapping software. Apple got into maps because Google maps product for iOS was shitty and that was being held against the iPhone.
Apple doesn't want to be in every software category, much less be the leader. Google does.