Live data from Hacker News

Only Apple

daringfireball.net

51–60 of 182 posts

Re: Only Apple

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I simply don't believe Google has the best interests of anyone at heart except themselves and advertisers. You think Apple has your interests at heart? Or Microsoft? Like Google, they have your cash at heart. Not a thing more.

Not everyone is as cynical as you. I believe the people at Apple genuinely want to make great hardware and software that enhances people's lives. Their world-class accessibility support is proof enough of that.

Come on, you don't get to be the highest valued company in the world by being altruistic. Apple produce great products (I happen to be using one now) but they charge prices that many cannot afford in order to make more money for themselves. That's not being cynical, just realistic.

Re: Only Apple

#52
This is largely true, but it draws the playing field Apple wants you to see. There is a large part of the playing field that is omitted, cloud, the web and the Internet in general. And this playing field alone is as important as all the playing fields Apple is competent in combined.

Apple is second to last in that respect. Google and Amazon both understand the web a whole heck of a lot better than Apple. Only Samsung understands the web less than Apple.

Yes, they have cloud services, but for the most part, Apple's developer community has been generally unhappy about Apple's iCloud offering. This stems from two causes:

(1) first, the competency of Apple's team in this area are not comparable to the competency of Apple's other teams (mainly operating systems devs, app devs, industrial designers, supply chain specialists, etc.). No engineer who is truly competent in these domains (cloud, internet, web) has Apple as top of mind when they think about what company to go work for.

(2) second, Apple doe not only not understand the value of decentralization, but they actively fight it. This works fine for "single-player" experiences, but for "multi-player" experiences this is a disaster. I, as an Apple user, cannot dictate the devices and software my friends, family, colleagues, etc. will use, so any experience that is only truly complete when all these other people are also part of Apple's walled garden, will either never truly succeed or will outright fail.

So yes, only Apple can compete with Apple on it's home turf, but there are other playing fields than the ones Apple likes to talk about.

Lastly, Apple has only succeeded as much as it has with the unified experience, not because it did things better, but because the web (and specifically the browsers and the DOM) have failed to truly acknowledge that the web can't [yet] compete with Apple (and native in general), is that we don't have a feature complete and performant browser-based alternative for the building blocks you actually need to build apps, namely retain-mode scene graphs.

Browsers need to give some really deep thought to creating the equivalent APIs to things like qt, kde, gnome, Core Animation, etc. The DOM just does not cut it. FWIW, it's exactly what we're working on at Famo.us, and we're hoping others take note and some of the ideas we're exploring become co-opted by the browsers for inclusion as an alternative to the DOM, but that still plays nicely with the DOM.

Further proof that Apple has succeeded only because others have stumbled can be seen by comparing iOS to Android as well. Apple was a much better experience for a while before Android caught up. Some of this was because of Apple's big head start, but some of it was due to one technical/product decision made by Android early on, that when reversed made all the difference in Android's ability to compete with Apple: Early on Android settled on immediate mode graphics. This was the main reason Android user experience and performance just felt wrong for a while when Apple's felt right. Once Android embraced retain mode graphics fully, the Android experienced improved dramatically, so much so that I would say that Android, with its developer community, can also do anything Apple can do.

[0] http://famo.us/

[1] http://acko.net/blog/shadow-dom/

Re: Only Apple

#53
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To march out some old tropes: Apple makes money by delighting users so they will continue to buy products. Google makes money by tracking users, forcefully if necessary, and abusing their advertisers. Microsoft makes money out of legacy ties these days—they don't deserve to continue existing.

That comment is just ridiculously biased - you might have a good point, but it's hidden behind the opinion. For example, one could just as legitimately counter with "Apple makes money by developing a desirable brand and overcharging on hardware" but that wouldn't fit your spin, would it?

How is it overcharging? It's true, their devices are more expensive than the rest of the market, but nothing on the market comes close to Apple's quality and usability. Simply said, they have no competition, so they can set their own price - and while the customers are paying it, it's not overcharging.

Re: Only Apple

#54
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That comment is just ridiculously biased - you might have a good point, but it's hidden behind the opinion. For example, one could just as legitimately counter with "Apple makes money by developing a desirable brand and overcharging on hardware" but that wouldn't fit your spin, would it?

How is it overcharging? It's true, their devices are more expensive than the rest of the market, but nothing on the market comes close to Apple's quality and usability. Simply said, they have no competition, so they can set their own price - and while the customers are paying it, it's not overcharging.

RAM?

Re: Only Apple

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

he is an apple-centric blogger writing for his own site. where exactly does journalism ever come in play here? don't think gruber ever claimed to be a "journalist".

"Journalism is a method of inquiry and literary style that aims to provide a service to the public by the dissemination and analysis of news and other information."[1] Is that not what he's doing? Is he just gratifying a need to be heard or something? I don't think so, it looks like he's attempting to perform journalism as described by this paragraph, and he falls short in some ways. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki…

Just because "A is B" doesn't mean that "all B are A." I think it's apparent to most that Gruber isn't a journalist, nor does he pretend to be one.

Re: Only Apple

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I simply don't believe Google has the best interests of anyone at heart except themselves and advertisers. You think Apple has your interests at heart? Or Microsoft? Like Google, they have your cash at heart. Not a thing more.

Not everyone is as cynical as you. I believe the people at Apple genuinely want to make great hardware and software that enhances people's lives. Their world-class accessibility support is proof enough of that.

>the people at Apple genuinely want ... to enhance people's lives

I believe that too. However, I think that's generally true. You could replace Apple by Google or Microsoft there.

People on a whole are generally good (or at least I believe so).

If what you meant to say was "Apple cares about people and wouldn't let profit motives let them make questionable decisions, like including ads or adding DRM to software " then carry on.

If you indeed said what you meant to in your second sentence, then I think it was essentially meaningless since it's so generally true.

Re: Only Apple

#57

I don't get what the significance of this post is, and why it is at the top of HN. Company A does this and Company B does that and these two are a little similar but not really and this other Company wants this but can't get it. Only this Company. Yeah not that Company. See I figured all this out; see how smart I am? Now and then on a lazy sunday morning with a cuppa in hand and the business news in my lap, I sink in…

>I don't get what the significance of this post is, and why it is at the top of HN.

It's a post about how companies operate, and especially about the largest companies in tech, and their methodologies and unique takes on the market.

HN is a social news site about startups and technology, built by a seed accelerator investing in tech startups. That is, by and for the very people that would be interested in the above article. You might "not get it", but all the HN readers that voted it to the top of the front page clearly do.

>Company A does this and Company B does that and these two are a little similar but not really and this other Company wants this but can't get it. Only this Company. Yeah not that Company. See I figured all this out; see how smart I am?

The same BS mocking method can be used to trivialize all topics ("Yeah, so the monkey that's better equiped to live gets to reproduce and so its genes are propagating, and future monkeys tend to have its features, big deal").

I don't get the "see I figured all this out; see how smart I am?" from the article. I do get it from your comment. There's an "I'm clearly above the herd on HN who voted for this. It's trivial, I can write 20 articles like this before breakfast" vibe.

TFA is clearly an insightful piece about how different big players operate. This "Company A does this and Company B does that and these two are a little similar but not really and this other Company wants this but can't get it", is basically high-level market analysis. And it's hard to do well.

Even if a lot of us know those things instictively, it's not easy to put it in words well. And it's amazing how many analysts and pundits get those things wrong (one can argue that this article gets the facts wrong too. But you didn't do that. You just trivialized it, as if what it says is something obvious, which is a different thing).

Re: Only Apple

#58
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

credits Amazon with inventing a button that connects you to live customer service. oh my glob. Willfully misunderstand the world much? He's talking about consumer devices. How many devices in your home that aren't $10,000/month stock terminals have live under-5-second video support?

Maybe he should just learn to write, then, because his statement is totally unqualified. "unique" "no one" and "anything" all appear in this statement. These are words with meanings. "That’s truly remarkable, and a unique Amazon advantage. No one else has anything like this." -- Gruber

The pumps at the local gas station also have such a button. Should he have mentioned those? A reasonable reader understands that "unique", "no one", and "anything" are referring to the market Amazon is selling the device in.

Re: Only Apple

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a question of whose interests align with yours. Do your interests align with advertisers? Mine sure as hell don't.

Do you live in a world where it is impossible for two parties to both benefit from the same thing?

Life is probably easier and cheaper if you embrace advertisers but I can't stand them.

Re: Only Apple

#60
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To march out some old tropes: Apple makes money by delighting users so they will continue to buy products. Google makes money by tracking users, forcefully if necessary, and abusing their advertisers. Microsoft makes money out of legacy ties these days—they don't deserve to continue existing.

That comment is just ridiculously biased - you might have a good point, but it's hidden behind the opinion. For example, one could just as legitimately counter with "Apple makes money by developing a desirable brand and overcharging on hardware" but that wouldn't fit your spin, would it?

The Apple lock-in only works as long as the users are happy with their (maybe limited) choice. Apple needs their customers to upgrade to new devices every few years.
Post reply on HN