The new Jobs movie hits Friday, August 16th in theaters. And it’s not going to be pretty.
The movie covers the life of the late Apple co-founder and CEO from 1971, before the founding of Apple, to 2001, when Jobs announces the iPod, thus setting the company on the path to glory and dominance.
It feels like Apple is falling way behind. But I don’t think that’s true.
I believe Apple puts enormous brain power and good judgement into envisioning the Next Big Thing. It takes them a long time to get it to market. But once it’s there, they iterate to perfect the original vision.
In the year or two after Apple launches an iPhone or an iPad, everybody falsely believes Apple can do nothing wrong.
But then, as we get further away from the last launch and closer to the next one, everybody falsely believes Apple can do nothing right.
Completely separate and unrelated to false perceptions about Apple, Google lately has been on fire. And lately they’ve been kicking butt not only in their traditional role of algorithm-based Internet services, but also in Apple’s sandboxes—namely design and hardware.
Apple has never been the kind of company that copies out of a lack of vision. Nor have they avoided copying.
What’s great about Apple is that they develop an ultra-clear vision about how to maximize the user experience, then they make that experience happen regardless of whether the solutions have to be invented, copied or—most commonly—Apple’s own unique spin on something invented elsewhere.
There are many ways in which Apple should not copy Google. But there are six ways Apple should copy Google and, in doing so, make Apple a better company with better products.
I’ve written a lot about Apple’s ability to create new markets, which may be among its chief contributions to the world.
In several cases, from media players to multi-touch phones to tablets, others in the industry have tried to get a market going without success.Then Apple came along with a bold, killer information appliance and not only dominated the market, but created it.
I’ve notice a new trend lately: Now markets are being created based substantially on nothing more than the expectation that Apple will enter it with a killer product.
I’ve been exploring for months what the ultimate mobile setup would be — my laptop, tablet, phone and other mobile devices — and now I’m starting to put it together.
There’s no way around it: The Apple, Android and Windows fanboys are all going to hate my conclusions and barbeque my decisions.
Why? Because you’re expected to take sides, for some reason. You’re supposed to be an Apple fanboy and get all your stuff from Apple. Or you’re supposed to be an Apple hater, and denounce everything that the company does.
Objectivity and reason get buried under the vitriol.
I’m not out to help Apple or Google. I’m out to help myself, and get the best mobile experience I possibly can.
My conclusion is that as of right now, no one company can provide the best overall mobile experience by itself anymore — not even Apple. And neither can Google, Samsung or any other company.
So let’s start with the opinions, conclusions and decisions that are going to make the haters hate.
It’s not clear whether this deliberately cagey language is done to comply with the unconstitutional and illegal FISA requirements or whether Apple chose to hide this information for its own purposes, but I suspect the former, and I’ll tell you why.
But first, let’s look at Apple’s constrained, disingenuous statement.
iSpy? Apple’s two-page Wall Street Journal ad timed to coincide with the PRISM statement.
You really had to hope that Apple would be more above board than other companies about who has access to our iData. We love them so much: half of all U.S. households own at least one Apple device. They’ve sold us on documenting our growing kids, cooking for our families and debuting new haircuts with iPhones, iPads and Macs.
Instead, Apple initially denied any involvement in PRISM, the National Security Agency’s massive e-spying program. Then, like Facebook and Microsoft, the Cupertino company issued a statement meant to clear things up but the numbers released by all three companies just confuse and minimize the issue.
So if they all did it, why am I seeing red about Apple? We deserve more from a publicly-traded company that has built its reputation on products that aspire to “enhance the life it touches” as in the above two-page ad timed to appear in the Wall Street Journal the day of the PRISM statement.That statement, headlined “Apple’s Commitment to Customer Privacy,” seems about as phony as this Android iPhone clone.