141–150 of 178 posts
I like this - "The first all-new device during his tenure, the Apple Watch, is not yet a mega hit." - as if some day it just is going to be a mega hit.
https://twitter.com/asymco/status/753226197442654208
Puts things into perspective.
PG talked about this in his talk 'before the startup' "Larry Page may seem to have an enviable life, but there are aspects of it that are unenviable. Basically at 25 he started running as fast as he could and it must seem to him that he hasn't stopped to catch his breath since. Every day new shit happens in the Google empire that only the CEO can deal with, and he, as CEO, has to deal with it. If he goes on vacation…
Google is in some ways easier, because there's no real threat to their cash cow, search ads. Apple has to stay ahead of competition in phones. That competition is now quite good, and usually cheaper. As CEO of Apple, Cook is expected to deliver the Next Big Thing. So far, he hasn't, and he's running out of time. (Cars? Tough, low-margin business. VR? Niche market. Watches? Tried that. Robots? Not ready yet. Voice AI?…
It's probably too early to write off watches thus. Technically they're probably in the 'not ready yet' category: another few rounds of improvement in size constraints, battery life and potential independence from a smartphone (especially as putting in more types of radio becomes more viable) could make a big difference. The aWatch really was too early, or at least too early to create Apple's trademark illusion of perfection in a bolt from the blue. The obvious contrast is the iPod, where Apple didn't enter the game until its distinctive strengths in UI/UX and overall quality could be applied to already-existing components (most famously the Toshiba HDD) and concepts ('Palm-Pilot-like sync', 'WinAmp clone' ...) to create such a lightning-bolt with an obvious 'value proposition' for the user. Or maybe some of the aWatch's faults are actually down to UI or design failings which weren't really forced by technical limitations, but those too can be fixed over time, with MS-style release-until-good iteration.
> VR? Niche market.
No wai! VR/AR is also in the 'not ready yet' bucket; and it's not quite ready yet, rather than being another decade away or something. Between stereo cameras on smart devices, eye-tracking hardware for foveated rendering, and continued increase in flatscreen resolutions, in a handful of years VR is going to reach the 'iPod point' where there are no technical or price barriers to Apple putting together a product that's strongly desirable to a mass market. The initial 'system-seller'/'killer app' probably won't be anything very 'natively' 3D but, basically, 2D screens pulled into the VR space, likely with some modest 3D/stereoscopic enhancements. Think 'VR mobile' rather than 'mobile VR', as it were: VR as a way to escape the screen-is-too-damn-small/device-is-too-damn-big/screen-is-too-damn-close curve that box-with-a-screen-on-it mobile devices are trapped on. Likewise the trade-off between staring down, the gorilla arm and messing with a plastic widget. It won't make box-with-a-screen-on-it devices (including clamshells) obsolete, because being blindfolded by a VR screen is unviable or too scary or dangerous in many everyday mobile-device use contexts. (Mobile AR has a much better shot in those situations, but AR screen technology still faces real hurdles on the way to 'iPod point'.) But it doesn't have to: there are enough wealthy US baby boomers who take long journeys by air that Apple could probably have a hit device if it sold the thing only to them. (And remember, they're all farsighted.) Image sharpness won't be "retina" at first, but it will be good enough thanks to continued progress in LED pixel densities, especially for things that people are happy to do on a now-high-res-but-still-small smartphone screen. (And wealthy retirees aren't the most demanding judges of image sharpness.) Foveated rendering will keep the CPU/GPU burden down to within the abilities of a contemporary Appley mobile device. (Especially since you don't need to put the CPU/GPU on the damn headset! Apple can happily run a cable down from the HMD to an iPad-to-iBook-sized device.) Head tracking will be fully positional and good enough.
I like this - "The first all-new device during his tenure, the Apple Watch, is not yet a mega hit." - as if some day it just is going to be a mega hit.
"Apple watch revenues in first year were higher than Tesla revenues in its 13th year (9th year of car production)" https://twitter.com/asymco/status/753226197442654208 Puts things into perspective.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cook has his edges. He's supposed to be a demanding, logical boss. > One day back then, he convened a meeting with his team, and the discussion turned to a particular problem in Asia. “This is really bad,” Cook told the group. “Someone should be in China driving this.” Thirty minutes into that meeting Cook looked at Sabih Khan, a key operations executive, and abruptly asked, without a trace of emotion, “Why are you s…
I find this such a funny example. Because you know, driving immediately to the airport and buying a ticket is really going to make a difference. No- not really. That's not a logical request at all. It's just demanding.
http://www.everysecond.io/apple/
This is how things it is per second for Apple. Even flying with a Rocket to China is simply too slow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google is in some ways easier, because there's no real threat to their cash cow, search ads. Apple has to stay ahead of competition in phones. That competition is now quite good, and usually cheaper. As CEO of Apple, Cook is expected to deliver the Next Big Thing. So far, he hasn't, and he's running out of time. (Cars? Tough, low-margin business. VR? Niche market. Watches? Tried that. Robots? Not ready yet. Voice AI?…
Honestly, what could be the NBT in consumer tech ? I feel we reached cultural and ontological plateau in most areas. If there's a next it probably won't be a big thing.
1. things which would clearly be useful, but couldn't be made yet or which cost too much to be practical. Example: flying cars, tablet computers.
2. things that could be done easily with current technology but hadn't been tried yet. Examples: Uber, Twitter.
A useful subclass of #2 is things which are known to be useful and have just become or are just about to become makeable. A good example is the Motorola Star-Tac, the first flip phone. It's a Star Trek communicator, made real.
Apple is good in that space. The Macintosh was of that type. Good UNIX workstations already existed, as did the Alto and Dorado, they just cost too much. The original 1984 Mac was a severely cost-reduced workstation - tiny screen, no hard drive, floppy disk storage only. It took a few more years to get a hard drive into the product, at which point it became useful.
The iPod was also in that space. It wasn't the first MP3 player. The iPhone wasn't the first smartphone, although it was the first to get rid of the keyboard.
So that's where Apple innovates - at the leading edge of what's commercially possible. They don't do long-term efforts to make a technology work, as RCA did with color TV and IBM did with computers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cook has his edges. He's supposed to be a demanding, logical boss. > One day back then, he convened a meeting with his team, and the discussion turned to a particular problem in Asia. “This is really bad,” Cook told the group. “Someone should be in China driving this.” Thirty minutes into that meeting Cook looked at Sabih Khan, a key operations executive, and abruptly asked, without a trace of emotion, “Why are you s…
I find this such a funny example. Because you know, driving immediately to the airport and buying a ticket is really going to make a difference. No- not really. That's not a logical request at all. It's just demanding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seeing as former Twitter CEO Dick Costolo joined the show as a writer I think this isn't a huge leap.
I don't think he has a writer credit, does he? I thought he was under "script consultant" like Matt Cutts and other industry peeps, who I imagine get calls and say "yeah do that," or "you should include X."
http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/how-silicon-va...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and partly because billionaires get less than zero sympathy if they talk about having difficult lives That quote from the essay reminds me of a Silicon Valley scene [1] where the CEO of the pseudo-Google company in the show gets vilified (rightfully so in the show) for complaining about how hard billionaires have it in this country. I bet the creator's read PG's essay and were inspired by it. [1]: https://www.youtu…
>pseudo-Google company I don't get why people think Hooli is some pseudo-Google company. In the Silicon Valley universe Google clearly exists. Eric Schmidt was in their series premiere and the show's opening intro animation clearly shows Google and YouTube.
I'm a six year iPhone owner who based off of the iPhone 7 rumors it's going to underwhelm in the innovation department and lose this customer. The Note 7 looks awesome due to it being waterproof and other features Apple hasn't bothered to include. Also, Google Now in terms of it understanding me is light years away from Siri, which I have used since 2011. Goigle Now's AI puts Siri to shame! See ya Apple!
PG talked about this in his talk 'before the startup' "Larry Page may seem to have an enviable life, but there are aspects of it that are unenviable. Basically at 25 he started running as fast as he could and it must seem to him that he hasn't stopped to catch his breath since. Every day new shit happens in the Google empire that only the CEO can deal with, and he, as CEO, has to deal with it. If he goes on vacation…
Well, no one force them to do it...