Steve Jobs RIP

[thebigfella]

Usability is a big deal

Especially women

http://stephenleahy.net/2008/12/22/electronic-gadgets-fuel-congo-rape-mines/

Coltan is a rare and extremely valuable metal used in cell phones, DVD players, computers, digital cameras, video games, vehicle air bags, and more. It has long been implicated as both the source of funding and primary cause of the ongoing conflict and extraordinary violence against women. "A friend mapped the locations of the mass rapes in the DRC and they correspond to coltan mining regions," she said.
This "blood coltan" — akin to blood diamonds — generates billions of dollars of sales every year for electronics manufacturers in rich countries and brings hundreds of millions of dollars to rebels and others who control the coltan-producing regions. Coltan is also produced in other countries, and the DRC's "blood coltan" is often transported to those countries to give it a sheen of conflict-free provenance.

Foxconn is Apple's outsourcer

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10182824


The deaths at Foxconn are being discussed by everyone here and people are keeping a macabre score of how many young people have leapt to their deaths. It's very sad. Yesterday Foxconn sent a letter to be signed by all employees, removing liability to the company should an employee die. It immunised them against law suits. There was an outcry in the Chinese media and today Foxconn withdrew the letter.

A list of of some of Foxconn's customers

Acer Inc. (Taiwan)
Amazon.com (United States)
Apple Inc. (United States)
Asus (Taiwan)
ASRock (Taiwan)
Intel (United States)
Cisco (United States)
Hewlett-Packard (United States)
Dell (United States)
Nintendo (Japan)
Nokia (Finland)[17]
Microsoft (United States)
MSI (Taiwan)
Motorola (United States)
Sony Ericsson (Japan/Sweden)
Vizio (United States

Not really relevant to the thread 

[Eamonnca1]

You're trying far too hard to justify your own preferences and experiences as that being superior to all.

I don't have to try at all. I'm right. Anyone who disagrees is wrong. Fact.

Apple were one of the first to use a GUI on their computers, but not thee first. So not truly innovative but a development.

They may not have invented all of the technology (they actually did invent a lot of the standard elements of the GUI such as scroll bars and so on) but they were the first to get it to market with a view to enabling "regular people" to use the power of the computer. That's what was innovative.

* Standardised GUI is one that is worth recognising at a time when on other computer platforms standards were very loose. However this was an advantage within a more closed development circle.

What does that mean? Are you saying that they "only" were able to standardise their GUI because of the closed development circle? That's the point I'm making, stricter standards lead to better quality. And third party developers like Adobe and Microsoft (outside the closed development circle) then had to adhere to those standards.

* Product design? Translucency? That's not really innovative, that is evolution of trends that come and go.

Incorrect. Product design is very important. It turned a computer into a fashion item as well as a useful tool. It was no longer the preserve of "geeks". It became a piece of equipment that looked at home in the living room and not like a filing cabinet with a screen that belongs in an office.

Not all phones now try to look like "iPhones" except for cheap Chinese knock offs, same for touch-screen tablets.

OK, then "almost" all. Happy now?

* CD Drive thing? So? Again this was because Apple was a more close knit platform compared to the PC which was vastly more open, where people could decide then if a CD-ROM drive was worth it or not.

Apple demonstrated that it was useful, other PC makers followed suit. And yes, the closed development circle made it possible for them to do it, which is precisely my point.

* The obsolescence of floppy discs? Arguably Apple jumped the gun a little bit, but it was a decision that was of no consequence to them in the long term. In any case electronic developments which required higher read/write times along with capacity meant that the floppy's days were to be soon numbered. It wasn't Apple that killed off floppy discs, but USB pen drives.

This is all completely incorrect. USB pen drives did not become affordable or widespread until long after the first iMac appeared.  Apple decided that networking and the internet would make floppy disks obsolete, and they were right. It was a bold and visionary step that showed a good understanding of where the technology was going and how people were relating to it. The floppy disk persisted in the PC world long after it had been abandoned in the Appleverse.

* Apple had no hand in the development of the USB standard. I'd say you're confusing that with with Firewire.

I didn't mean they developed it any more than they developed the CD. They were the first to adopt it as a standard feature on all of their computers and familiarize the consumer with it. 

* To say that you had to be a computer expert to operate an MP3 player before the first iPod came along is a bit insulting. If in 2000 you had a very basic competency in computer literacy a generic MP3 player was easy enough to work with and not really any more difficult to a CD player.

Your definition of "basic competency in computer literacy" seems to be a lot different from what the market thought, CD players were still the device of choice at the time of the iPod's launch and everyone wondered what Apple was playing at. If contemporary MP3 players were as easy to use as you claim then that market would have been a whole lot bigger at the time. It took Apple's knack for making things easy to encourage people to start using these devices in such big numbers that the CD became obsolete. 

Let's not forget that there's more to "using" an MP3 player than just finding your song and pressing Play. You have to be able to buy music from somewhere, download it, pay for it, get it into your device, and then navigate to the song you want. Are you seriously telling me that it was easy to do before the iPod? I can assure you it wasn't, and even I didn't bother with it at the time.

* Smartphones? One reason the first iPhone grabbed a lot of attention was that until it was announced and released, most mobile phones in the US market were very much second rate compared to those in Europe and many Americans were importing mobile phones intended for European and Asian markets which was contrary to how technology markets worked for other products. By 2007 Symbian was already well established even on mid-level phones (Mainly Nokia but also Sony Ericsson and Samsung) while RIM Blackberry hasn't changed it's full keyboard design and have had it copied by other manufacturers to this day.

And RM is a roaring success to this day? No, they've been downsizing like crazy. They axed 2000 jobs in July. They're trying to catch up with iPhone look-alikes, same as the rest of the industry. The iPhone was a ground-breaking leap-frog over the contemporary European and Japanese phones of which you speak. You can pick holes in the specific technology and chipsets and materials all you want, it is the user experience and the iPhone's seamless integration into the Appleverse that adds so much value to it. RM does not have the power to do that because it has no control over PC standards or what software gets shipped with every PC. Apple has absolute power to ensure that every Mac ships with software that will automatically synchronise and back up any iPhone or iPod that gets plugged into it.

* Apple made the tablet fashionable. That's a +1 to them.

And making it fashionable makes it popular, making it affordable, making it widely adopted. That is a +15 million to them. They've effectively created the current tablet market and now have over three quarters of it sewn up.

[imtommygunn]

Technology made advances accessible to technological people in 2001 to 2006 though Fionntamhnach - it made advances to the mass market between 2006 - 2011. The reason for this was it's usability and the fact that "the average joe" can use it.

The biggest thing about what apple did, in my opinion, was not the technology they used it was three pronged - marketing, branding and usability which kicked the ass of everything else.

Apple didn't invent 3g, broadband, wifi, mobile internet, touch screens, text messaging,social networking,apps etc etc but they made it much more usable and accessible to people. In the main they harnessed technology - not created it.

In my view apple is overpriced for the brand, they close themselves off from networks thus monopolising the market and driving price up, they break standards here, there and everywhere ,they seem to have created a cult of people who say everything they create is great when it's not and they make small advances in between versions to sell more so to some degree apple stuff irritates me. In saying all that though Jobs has radically changed the face of technology and for that personally I think he has to be admired.

I own an ipod but refuse to own an iphone due to all of the above however the ipad is sorely tempting me...

[Main Street]

I would say in technology terms, 2001 to 2006 seen more advances than 2006 to 2011 where more emphasis has been placed on usability.

Usability is kind of a big deal. I once had an old Samsung phone that could so some things my iPhone 4 can't. I could even read email on it, in theory. But I hated that old Samsung with a passion because of the futery and unfathomable user interface. All the technology and features in the world are useless if the user can't figure out how to get at them. Without usability then there won't be widespread uptake and the cost of such technology won't come down as a result.

You're obviously a technically minded person, and this is something that people like you don't always understand:

People buy benefits, not features.

Clive Sinclair (a British pioneer of consumer electronics and computers) thought he was going to impress the world with the clever features and technology that went into his electric C5 vehicle, but it brought his mighty technology company to its knees because he didn't appreciate the difference between technical ingenuity and the public's need for the product to actually benefit them. Yes it was clever, but nobody wanted it because it was no use to them.

People don't care if the aerial protrudes or not, they don't care how many transistors are crammed into the chips inside, they don't care about how it's put together. They do care if it works and is easy to use.

Ditto on the Samsung phone, talk about hype selling shíte. Thee biggest mistake I ever made re purchase of a consumer item, well I won't talk about the Bose companion speakers I bought, too embarrassed.

But usability is only one feature that has aided Apple in the consumer market, Apple has stood alone clear of all competition, at the top of every credible independent consumer satisfaction survey taken since the mid 90's. The criteria  for that is much wider than just usability.

With desktops, the Macpro though is overkill for the consumer market, the lowest end MacPro sells for about $2500 but it includes a server processor which costs about $1200 to purchase as a separate.
There is nothing available between that and the MacMini and that's a big gap in the market.
If I were running things  there, I´d do a better job 

[Mike Tyson]

Technology made advances accessible to technological people in 2001 to 2006 though Fionntamhnach - it made advances to the mass market between 2006 - 2011. The reason for this was it's usability and the fact that "the average joe" can use it.

The biggest thing about what apple did, in my opinion, was not the technology they used it was three pronged - marketing, branding and usability which kicked the ass of everything else.

Apple didn't invent 3g, broadband, wifi, mobile internet, touch screens, text messaging,social networking,apps etc etc but they made it much more usable and accessible to people. In the main they harnessed technology - not created it.

In my view apple is overpriced for the brand, they close themselves off from networks thus monopolising the market and driving price up, they break standards here, there and everywhere ,they seem to have created a cult of people who say everything they create is great when it's not and they make small advances in between versions to sell more so to some degree apple stuff irritates me. In saying all that though Jobs has radically changed the face of technology and for that personally I think he has to be admired.

I own an ipod but refuse to own an iphone due to all of the above however the ipad is sorely tempting me...

That really pisses me off. Anyone I know who had an iPhone 3 were singing its praises saying it would spell the end for any other type of phone, the same with the iPhone 4 and now again the same with the 4s. Is there really that much difference between each model?

Probably the wrong thread, but what makes the iPad so attractive?

[Eamonnca1]

With desktops, the Macpro though is overkill for the consumer market, the lowest end MacPro sells for about $2500 but it includes a server processor which costs about $1200 to purchase as a separate.
There is nothing available between that and the MacMini and that's a big gap in the market.

You can get a lot of processing power with an iMac like the one I just got.  I got it to replace my laptop. I actually hated my Macbook for as long as I owned it. The hardware quality was crap, it actually fell apart. It had sharp edges that cut the shite out of my wrists when using it, I ended up filing one of them down to smooth it out. But then the plastic actually cracked and broke off. Eventually the hard disk kept filling up despite my best efforts to clear stuff out.

I was going to just get another laptop, but then I realised that since I got the iPhone and later the iPhone 4 my laptop has seldom moved from my desk since I do all my casual web surfing and emailing from the phone now.  Might as well pay the same money but get twice the power if you're going to be sitting at the desk anyway.

[Eamonnca1]

Probably the wrong thread, but what makes the iPad so attractive?

Go to an Apple store, pick one up, and play with it for a few minutes. You'll see. There's just something about the user experience that's hard to explain. I always get sorely tempted to buy every time I play with one and I have to set it down and leave.

[imtommygunn]

Technology made advances accessible to technological people in 2001 to 2006 though Fionntamhnach - it made advances to the mass market between 2006 - 2011. The reason for this was it's usability and the fact that "the average joe" can use it.

The biggest thing about what apple did, in my opinion, was not the technology they used it was three pronged - marketing, branding and usability which kicked the ass of everything else.

Apple didn't invent 3g, broadband, wifi, mobile internet, touch screens, text messaging,social networking,apps etc etc but they made it much more usable and accessible to people. In the main they harnessed technology - not created it.

In my view apple is overpriced for the brand, they close themselves off from networks thus monopolising the market and driving price up, they break standards here, there and everywhere ,they seem to have created a cult of people who say everything they create is great when it's not and they make small advances in between versions to sell more so to some degree apple stuff irritates me. In saying all that though Jobs has radically changed the face of technology and for that personally I think he has to be admired.

I own an ipod but refuse to own an iphone due to all of the above however the ipad is sorely tempting me...

That really pisses me off. Anyone I know who had an iPhone 3 were singing its praises saying it would spell the end for any other type of phone, the same with the iPhone 4 and now again the same with the 4s. Is there really that much difference between each model?

Probably the wrong thread, but what makes the iPad so attractive?

There are subtle differences between each - some of which are very good but there is crap like going from a high powered and spec camera to an even higher powered one which won't be that different to people.

iPad is a fairly slick piece of kit. Maybe I've just been sucked in too but a few things about it impress me.

The Iphone revolutionised mobile technology however as Fionn said the android is starting to take over. To me it made mobile technology easier to use for people and now a lot of them know how to use it because the others are cheaper, and are also very usable, they'll move over. It will die down a lot in the next few years in my view but iTunes, macbooks and ipads are still highly sought after. Closing itunes the way they did to the non jailbroken ipod was very clever. (very annoying too as it made it a closed shop...)

[Main Street]

With desktops, the Macpro though is overkill for the consumer market, the lowest end MacPro sells for about $2500 but it includes a server processor which costs about $1200 to purchase as a separate.
There is nothing available between that and the MacMini and that's a big gap in the market.

You can get a lot of processing power with an iMac like the one I just got.  I got it to replace my laptop.

The iMac is an all in one.
If you already have a decent 22" lcd screen, then you are buying something you don't need.
Of course there is the Macmini  but there is nothing between the Macmini and the MacPro
that's a gap between  the $900 to $2,500 price range and a gap in available technology which many users want and they don't get in the Macmini

I could put together a very potent desktop configuration for $1100 which would give the same user experience as the Macpro which goes for $2,500. The Macpro is configured to be a server with expensive stable long lasting  server components.



i

[Eamonnca1]

If you already have a decent 22" lcd screen, then you are buying something you don't need.

I haven't owned a monitor for years, so the iMac makes sense for me.

[Main Street]

If you already have a decent 22" lcd screen, then you are buying something you don't need.

I haven't owned a monitor for years, so the iMac makes sense for me.

Yes I know you exist, I acknowledge that you exist
but most probably there are a million out there who already have a monitor who would buy my configured desktop.
Wouldn't you if you had a decent monitor?

[Eamonnca1]

Yes I know you exist, I acknowledge that you exist
but most probably there are a million out there who already have a monitor who would buy my configured desktop.
Wouldn't you if you had a decent monitor?

Yes.

[imtommygunn]

Technology made advances accessible to technological people in 2001 to 2006 though Fionntamhnach - it made advances to the mass market between 2006 - 2011. The reason for this was it's usability and the fact that "the average joe" can use it.

The only problem is that Joe doesn't really exist. There are focus groups that those involved in marketing and advertising look upon for their products. Apple have done this well though, but that would ignore the usability that Nokia and to a similar extent Sony Ericsson made in the first half of that decade themselves.

The biggest thing about what apple did, in my opinion, was not the technology they used it was three pronged - marketing, branding and usability which kicked the ass of everything else.

Very much the case. The only downside to it is, and I really don't like using this word, is that Apple drove up to hyper levels the meaning of the word "fanboys". Now that I've said it, I won't say it again.

Apple didn't invent 3g, broadband, wifi, mobile internet, touch screens, text messaging,social networking,apps etc etc but they made it much more usable and accessible to people. In the main they harnessed technology - not created it.

I already said that Jobs had the knack of putting pieces together that worked very well, but it would ridiculous to say that they had no contemporaries that also pushed it the same way.

In my view apple is overpriced for the brand, they close themselves off from networks thus monopolising the market and driving price up, they break standards here, there and everywhere ,they seem to have created a cult of people who say everything they create is great when it's not and they make small advances in between versions to sell more so to some degree apple stuff irritates me. In saying all that though Jobs has radically changed the face of technology and for that personally I think he has to be admired.

Like him or loathe him I agree that Jobs has left an almighty impact on technology in the 21st century. I was never annoyed by him unlike some people, he was very good at what he did but what I saw him do best was be a businessman, not an artist.

I would agree with pretty much all of what you say there - businessman more than technological genius.

The "average joe" thing was perhaps a little misguided. The mass market, in my view, had been won over by the marketing of the ipod and the iphone was just building on that. It still had to be done well though and it was.

[ONeill]

It's odd the way some people choose to deride those who use Apple products.

I use both. I use a Macbook and a standard Compaq laptop. At work it's a similar story. I also own an iPhone and use my wife's Blackberry as well as another crappyish Nokia. For simplicity of use I find Apple products appealing. It's just a personal choice. I know the likes of Photoshop or basic Word should not really differ over both platforms yet for some reason I prefer using both on the Macbook. Keyboard? Visual appeal? I don't know. It just does it for me.

[muppet]

If Jobs was still here and announced that tomorrow Apple would be launching the iCar. Would you:

a) ignore it;
b) research it with an open mind;
c) find out how to book one immediately;

In the 1990s it was alway a). From 2000 to 2006 I became a b). Now I am probably closer to c).