Silly iPad Spoilsports
It seems the success of the iPod and iPhone didn’t teach them a thing! Here’s the new list of iPad naysayers, gleaned from Daring Fireball, RoughlyDrafted, AppleInsider, Macalope, and elsewhere.. Enjoy. (To be updated regularly.)
Matthew Miller on ZDNet (February 2009):
“Keep dreaming and hoping, we won’t see an Apple tablet anytime soon”
“[A]n Apple tablet would easily be priced at $700+ I am sure.”
“I am sure there are prototype devices being tested and trialed at Apple, but just because there are prototypes and patents doesn’t mean we will ever see such a device. As a mobile geek, I am sure it would be a very cool device and would sell a few thousand.”
“I suppose Apple could come out with a 4 inch or 5 inch iPod touch to give you a bit better experience, but highly doubt we will see anything larger than that from Apple.”
“We may see a tablet type device running the Android OS because it should be able to be sold for $400 or so down in the iPod touch range.”
Keep dreaming and hoping, Matthew: Apple may fail yet.
Preston Gralla on Computerworld (March 2009):
“Why Apple will have to release a netbook”
“It’s time for Apple to face reality and build a netbook. Apple’s sales are tanking, along with its stock price.”
“[Greg Keizer] quotes other bleak sales figures for Apple — all because of its high-priced hardware. And netbooks are clearly hurting Apple badly.”
“Microsoft, by way of contrast, has finally recgonized that netbooks are here to stay, and has begun a multiple-pronged strategy to take advantage of them.”
“Apple would do well to learn from Microsoft here ...”
Apple’s hurting. Badly. Microsoft is kicking Apple’s ass. Apple should be doing what Microsoft is doing. It was true in the past, it’s true today, and it will be true for all time.
Michael Scalisi in PC World (July 2009):
“Rumored Apple Tablet Is a Train Wreck”
“I’m no Apple hater, and I welcome an Apple device to the (don’t call it a) netbook market, but I’ve got to think this device would be a flop. This concept is such a train wreck from start to finish that I don’t know where to begin.”
“If Apple wants to release something mind-blowing, it could release a clamshell device with two displays and have the bottom one double as a virtual keyboard and multi-touch input device.”
Sounds like a winner.
Stefan Constantinescu on intomobile (August 2009):
“My theory on the Apple Tablet: It doesn’t exist, will never exist, and it is probably a 10 inch laptop”
“A tablet is bullshit for many reasons.”
“There is no Apple Tablet, there never will be an Apple Tablet, and just in case you were wondering: I am a PC.”
Who thought you weren’t?
Scott Moritz of TheStreet.com (November 2009):
“Apple’s got a tough position here. ... What they need is something to succeed where the iPhone and the iPod are starting to slow down, or peak. They’ve chosen the tablet. It’s gonna be tough one. People don’t really go for tablets so much.”
“[T]here just isn’t much of a market to measure tablets by, no existing market, so they have to create one. That’s tough, especially if you’re Apple.”
“I don’t think the tablet’s it ... I don’t think that’s their magic pill that’s gonna solve their problems.”
Translation: We all know Apple has “problems” — they had problems in the ’90s, didn’t they? That’s just who they are: a company with problems. Apple’s in a “tough position” — they were in a tough position in the ’90s, right? That’s just what Apple is: a company in a tough position. Apple’s products are “slowing down” — they were... well, you get the idea. God, I miss the ’90s.
Randall C. Kennedy on InfoWorld (December 2009):
“Why Apple’s rumored iTablet will fail big time”
“Microsoft and its cadre of hardware partners have been trying for years to create a compelling tablet computing experience — and consistently failed. ... [T]o believe that Apple can somehow succeed where all others have failed is to ignore some fundamental realities of tablet computing.
Apple’s enormous successes can’t be reality — can they?
Rob Enderle of the Enderle Group (December 2009):
“Why JooJoo may critically savage the Apple Tablet”
“[T]he jury is still largely out on this [all-touchscreen] format with challenging devices from RIM, Palm, and Google often showcasing that keyboards are necessary.”
“[Steve Jobs] has never, to my knowledge, faced a situation where a nearly identical product has done very badly a few months before his launch.
JooJoo Souring the Well
The JooJoo is therefore problematic because it approaches the market using what should be an unsuccessful path and its messy birth may effectively sour the well for the Apple tablet turning the market against it before Apple can act to set a better impression.”
“In short it [JooJoo] was initially positioned as the first of what was likely to be a series of successful tablet products based around web media services likely capped by the Apple tablet that, even before announcement, many thought would be the most successful of all. But the first of the series would set the tone for those that followed.”
“Apple’s Problem
It would likely be OK if we said that the JooJoo would fail because of bad naming or because of the CrunchGear divorce but once we go negative we tend to get creative and pick on other limitations of the device. These limitations which include the lack of a keyboard, the size of the device, and the price will be shared by every other device in the class including Apple. It will be nearly impossible for someone saying that $500 is too much, a large screen device is too big, and a laptop is better for this use to suddenly reverse themselves for a nearly identical device with an Apple brand.”
At long last, I think I’ve finally figured out Enderle’s MO: (1) Desperately think up some vaguely plausible scenario of near-future Apple failure. (2) Develop this scenario in your head and convince yourself that it’s true, because you can’t bear the thought that it might not be. (3) Enthusiastically describe this scenario in an article, as if it’s practically a forgone conclusion. (4) When your prediction spectacularly fails to occur, forget about it and go back to step 1.
Update: The JooJoo was just cancelled. Whew — now maybe Apple has a chance to sell a million-plus iPads per month. I mean, to continue to do so.
Paul Boutin on VentureBeat (January 2010):
“Tablet computers will fail to become the Next Big Thing”
“[A] combination of high prices plus lack of a must-have application will keep most consumers away from buying a tablet. Here’s a simple way to understand it: If you drop your phone and it breaks, you need to replace it immediately. If you drop your $1,000 Apple tablet and it breaks, will you rush out to buy another?
People shy away from cool technology unless it’s cheap enough to drop and break. Don’t they?
Joe Wilcox on Betanews (January 2010):
“Apple’s rumored tablet computer cannot live up to the hype ...”
“I’ll assert what should be obvious to anyone thinking rationally and not emotionally: Tablet is a nowhere category. For all the hype about an Apple tablet, it is at best a niche product. The world doesn’t need an Apple tablet, no matter what the hype about rumored features or regardless of what actually releases (if anything).”
“[T]ablets cannot succeed in the current market.”
“Tablet is a Niche Product, Period”
“Microsoft has taken three shots at tablets, without much success”
“[The tablet] will remain a niche device, no matter how innovative is Apple’s design or user interface.”
“There is something about the rumored Apple tablet and its timing that is eerily familiar. History tends to repeat, which for companies is their repeating past mistakes. In summer 2000, Apple released the ill-fated Power Mac G4 Cube. ...”
“If the tablet can’t meet the hype, or turns out to fill a niche market, what happens to the price of Apple shares?”
An even better question: What happens to the price of Apple’s shares if investors read Wilcox’s article and decide they better sell fast? We all know the answer to that one.
Niche market: making a modest living writing tech-news articles in which you try to drag down a company you hate.
Non-niche market: making the first tablet computer that doesn’t suck donkey schlong.
Rupert Neate of Telegraph.co.uk (January 2010):
“Microsoft may upstage Apple with new ‘tablet’ handheld computer”
“The device [expected to be announced by Steve Ballmer] could be a major blow to Apple, ...”
As an Apple fan, I’m immensely relieved that HP just cancelled this tablet. Apple dodged a bullet on that one.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (January 2010):
“Shipping in the second half of 2010, [the Lenovo IdeaPad U1] is the device that will make Apple’s supposed tablet look silly.”
Can’t wait! As I write this, 2010 is almost half over. Should be a wicked battle — unless the IdeaPad U1 just knocks over the iPad in a single stroke.
Update: It’s early October, and the second half of 2010 is now itself just past half-over. And the IdeaPad U1 is kicking Apple’s ass! I mean, it will. When it comes out.
Update: There are just four full days left in 2010. And the IdeaPad U1 is putting the iPad out to pasture. I mean, it will. When it becomes available for anyone to purchase.
Update: Third month of ’11 and Apple just announced the iPad 2, to ship in nine days! That means that for at least a week, the non-existent IdeaPad U1 can make the non-existent iPad 2 “look silly.” But then, of course, one of those two tablets will cease to be non-existent. I wonder which one.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (January 2010):
“Exclusive! Microsoft To Announce Tablet PC Before Apple!
The tech industry is tripping over itself to promote Apple’s maybe-it-is-maybe-it-isn’t Tablet computing device, but Microsoft has their number: I can now reveal that Microsoft and its PC maker partners will announce and then deliver their own Tablet PC well before Apple. And I have an exclusive photo of a prototype of this unbelievable, trend-setting, and innovative product ... from 2001. The devices shipped in 2002. Almost eight years ago.
And if you’re really in the mood for some time travelling and reality checking, please go back and read my COMDEX Fall 2001 coverage, where I describe Microsoft’s entry into this market.”
That’s true. You know what else is true? Every single person who’s walked through the doors of COMDEX for the past six years has received a free Microsoft tablet computer. Slick-looking, very polished, and highly functional. I’m not kidding. They really have. All of them.
Bill Snyder in PCWorld (January 2010):
“Apple Tablet Won’t Mean Business”
“[I]f you run a small business and want to avoid wasting money and brain cells on superfluous technology, forget about the iSlate or whatever Apple is going to call its tablet computing device. It’s going to be too expensive, it does things you don’t need to do, and it will add a messy layer of complication to your company’s computing infrastructure.”
“Business technology should contribute to efficiency. A real laptop or netbook does real work that helps a business succeed.”
Unsuccessful business: eking out a living writing tech-news articles preemptively bashing a company you despise.
Successful business: making the first tablet computer that doesn’t blow whale dong.
John Sullivan of the Free Software Foundation (January 2010):
“If Jobs and Apple are actually committed to creativity, freedom, and individuality, they should prove it by eliminating the restrictions that make creativity and freedom illegal.”
Where by “freedom” Sullivan means the freedom of computer owners to rip off whatever apps a small minority of creative software authors are desperate enough to write for a pirate’s-field-day system, and the freedom of the great majority of creative software authors to spend all day in a cubicle processing insurance transactions, so at least they can get a piracy-proof paycheck every two weeks.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (January 2010):
“Apple Drops an iDud”
“I’m astonished this isn’t nicer looking or more interesting.”
“OK, this has to be a joke. ... It’s a joke. It’s gotta be.”
“I can almost hear Apple’s stock price dropping every second this demo goes on.”
“Overall, this is a letdown. I’d be surprised to see anyone try to claim otherwise.”
No, Paul, a letdown is when you thought you were going to like it, and you didn’t. You weren’t let down by the iPad any more than your readers were let down by your reaction to it (assuming they’ve been following your writings since Commodore died).
Peter Smith of ITWorld (January 2010):
“[A] lot of you are underwhelmed by the iPad. But there’s much more to the tablet world than Apple’s latest creation. According to Digitimes (via Engadget), MSI’s 10" tablet is coming during the second half of 2010.”
The second half of 2010 promises to be really awful for the iPad. First the Lenovo IdeaPad U1, now this. Enjoy your iPad while you can!
Alex Payne of Twitter (January 2010):
“If I had to pick one predominant emotion in reaction [to the iPad], it would be ‘disturbed’.”
“The iPad is an attractive, thoughtfully designed, deeply cynical thing.”
“The tragedy of the iPad is that it truly seems to offer a better model of computing for many people — perhaps the majority of people. Gone are the confusing concepts and metaphors of the last thirty years of computing. Gone is the ability to endlessly tweak and twiddle towards no particular gain. The iPad is simple, straightforward, maintenance-free; everything that’s been proven with the success of the iPhone, but more so.”
Hey, you can keep fiddling and maintaining with a Windows laptop to your heart’s content. Or a Commodore 64. I’m sure you can still buy them on the internet. The only thing you can’t do now is get widespread respect and admiration for that fiddling and maintaining. If you want respect, you now need to write a quality, end-user app. Not a hacker tool. Not a funky system mod. Not a programming efficiency widget. A real app. You know. Like Photoshop or something. So get to work; it’s not a weekend project.
Mike Halsey, author of Windows 7 Power Users Guide (January 2010):
“[T]he iPad will fail and help Windows 7 to succeed”
“Quite simply this time Apple have got it wrong.”
“MSI and Dell chose today to release details of their own forthcoming tablet devices, and both look gorgeous, especially the Dell (pictured).”
“They will all undercut Apple considerably and provide tablets for the price of a netbook, the price they should be.
This is excellent news FOR Windows 7.”
“All this will have come about because Apple have done the R&D and released a product that’s been instantly derided as ugly and not what people want. If I were Steve Ballmer today, I’d be splashing out on an extra skiing holiday.”
Actually, assuming he can ski at all, Ballmer can take as many skiing holidays as he likes, even if his company never has another hit besides Windows and Office. Heck, he’s been spending several billion dollars per year on R&D with virtually no ROI, so what’s a few ski vacations? If he can’t be fired for sweat-soaked screaming fits on stage, what’s a few ski vacations?
And Dell’s gonna have a tablet too? On top of MSI and Lenovo? Man, later this year Apple doesn’t stand a chance against three big competitors!
Dan Frommer in Business Insider (January 2010):
“The Truth About Apple’s iPad: It’s A Big Yawn”
“[Jobs] didn’t deliver.”
“Apple fans hoping for the next revolution ... should be disappointed.”
Maybe “Apple fans” were disappointed. But the general electronics-buying public? Not so much.
John Dvorak on MarketWatch (January 2010):
“Apple’s ‘revolutionary’ iPad leaves fans wanting.”
“[P]eople are grousing.”
“It’s not a good sign. Apple is fallible!”
“[I]t’s going to take Apple at least one more, if not two more, iterations to get this right. And that assumes it even wants to get it right.”
“I’m of the opinion and hope that this device is only released as a market test ...”
“Insanely great it is not.”
“Let’s look at the basic flaws people are complaining about. First of all there is no stylus. ... [People] expect a Wacom-like input ...”
“It seems more destined to impact the market for the Sony Portable Playstation than anything else.
The tablet market has only succeeded as a niche market over the years and it was hoped Apple would dream up some new paradigm to change all that. From what I’ve seen and heard, this won’t be it.”
Hey, isn’t Dvorak the guy who said that “Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone?” And that the iPhone would be “passé within three months?” Didn’t he also say, “There is no likelihood that Apple can be successful in a business this competitive,” and, “It should [sell off the iPhone as a reference design] immediately before it’s too late?”
Nah. Couldn’t be the same guy.
Randall C. Kennedy of InfoWorld (January 2010):
“Act now to avoid the Apple tablet apocalypse”
“I hate disruptive technologies. They’re antithetical to all that’s sane and stable in enterprise IT.”
“Assuming a third-quarter ship date, this fruity new wonder could prove to be the hottest item under the Christmas tree. And that means that, come January 2011, IT shops will be inundated with idiot users ...”
“All hell will break loose. First, IT will discover that these first-generation devices are buggy. ... It’ll be a real mess.”
“[C]onsumers will insist on using the new toy as their primary computing environments. ... Basically, it’s a recipe for disaster.
So what can IT do to thwart the coming Apple tablet-pocalypse? First, an outright ban is in order. Use whatever excuse you think carries the most weight. ... Then seek to contain the situation by offering up an alternative tablet solution running the IT-supported and IT-approved Windows 7 operating system.”
“And pay special attention to the higher-profile users in the executive suites. Seed them early on with their own prophylactic, Windows-based tablet alternatives. Because if just one of these individuals manages to pick up Apple’s latest fruity abomination — and brings it into the office — you’ll never be rid of the things.”
Dude, we’re just past four months into 2010, and Apple’s sold a million iPads already. Hope you got your ban in place really fast. And how’re your executives doing with those non-existent Windows 7 tablets? Better make a quick call to Microsoft and tell them to ship you those tablets, pronto. They’ll get right on that, I’m sure.
We all know why you hate Apple, Randall. The typical corporate IT department has had a borderline-corrupt relationship with Microsoft for years and years, in which Microsoft sells lots of shitty products to the IT department, and the IT department makes lots of money providing badly needed support for the users of those products. Apple, which refuses to make shitty, support-ravenous products, threatens to “disrupt” that cozy relationship. Waaaah.
Jeremy A. Kaplan of FOX News (January 2010):
“Has Apple Lost Its Mojo?”
“The company once notorious for its ability to upend conventions and revolutionize markets may no longer have what it takes, worry some technology journalists. Call it the iPad or the iPlod, the message seems clear: Apple may have lost its mojo.”
“So what is it about the iPad that so turned off the public?”
“[O]n the whole, consumers and journalists seem unimpressed with the latest and greatest from Cupertino.”
You might be honestly unaware of this, Jeremy, but the only thing those “technology journalists” are “worried” about is that their latest, greatest, anti-Apple screeds may not be any more effective against the iPad than they were against the iPod or the iPhone.
Harry McCracken on Technologizer (January 2010):
“Whose iPad is It, Anyway?”
“What’s the single most worrisome thing about the iPad? ... It’s Apple’s monopoly on distribution of applications. ... For lots of people, that’s a dealbreaker on both philosophical and practical grounds.”
“Emotionally and rationally, I want the iPhone/iPad platform to be open. I still believe it’ll happen.”
Emphasis on “emotionally” and “believe.”
John Breeden II on GCN (January 2010):
“I’ve been covering and reviewing notebooks and battery technology for the past decade, and I know what the current technology is capable of. There is no way that a 1.5-pound computer is going to be able to drive an IPS display for ten hours as Steve Jobs claims. It just can’t happen. Perhaps if you let the iPad lapse into standby mode, you could squeeze it. But if you are actually using the device, my estimate would be less than three hours of power, and that’s being generous.”
“Unless Apple has also developed some new type of power source, such as nuclear cells or magical hamsters on tiny spinning wheels for the iPad, don’t expect the claims about battery life to hold true. The candle that blazes the brightest is always the first to go out.”
Yep, people tested it, and it turns out it’s not ten hours. More like eleven.
Scott Moritz on TheStreet.com (January 2010):
“Behold: The Apple iFlop”
“[T]he list of iPad’s shortcomings is surprisingly long, especially considering all the years and number of prototypes Jobs and Apple have worked through to get here.”
“Apple, in its characteristically control-freakish way, restricts applications that can be installed and files that can be loaded. In other words, ‘your’ stuff has to go through Apple channels.”
“Bigger issues, like the iPad’s underpowered iPhone OS software, also loom large in the fevered frustrations of free-speaking fans.”
Hey, isn’t Moritz the guy who made up a phony million-unit sales target for the iPhone’s opening weekend? Nah. Couldn’t be the same guy.
David Coursey of PCWorld (January 2010):
“Apple iPad is Just Another DOA”
“Has Steve Jobs’ fabled reality distortion field finally failed its creator?”
“[Y]ou can buy a much more functional notebook or netbook for less.”
“[H]ype is part of Apple’s marketing plan, so it’s unlikely the company will do anything to rein it in.”
“It’s not supposed to be that new products are better liked before launch than after.”
Hey, isn’t Coursey the guy who said that users were ”turning against the iPhone” last August? And that “you might find a more attractive [non-Apple] option in a few months, especially if the iPhone’s downhill slide continues?” Or that “Apple doesn’t care about its customers?”
Nah. Couldn’t be the same guy.
Anders Bylund on The Motley Fool (January 2010):
“The Worst Stocks For 2010: Apple”
“[T]he fact that Apple’s stock appreciated by nearly 150% last year and is cruising at all-time record altitudes could be a classic setup for a fall back to Earth, Icarus-style.”
“[W]e could be looking at a meltdown that would make Massachusetts Democrats blush. Apple is a fine company at heart, and I wouldn’t mind picking up a few shares after the wreck, but at today’s prices, there’s no way I’d buy a ticket to ride this crazy train. ... There’s much that must go right for Apple to keep growing, and I’m not buying into a company that’s reaching terminal velocity.”
Sorry you didn’t go all-in with Apple in January of 2010, Anders. By now you probably could’ve kissed your crummy stock-predicting gig goodbye.
Russ Willcox, CEO of E-Ink (January 2010):
“E-readers will outsell iPads because of the simple economics of the consumer device market.”
When will that happen — five years from now, or ten?
Linen DeFiller on MillionFace (January 2010):
“Apple iPad — failure, joke or fiasco? Pick one”
Comparing with HP Slate:
Multitasking: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
Flash: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
Real PC Apps: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
Real OS: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
USB Port: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
Pen/stylus input: Slate (yes), iPad (no)”
“Apple took a bunch of pre-existing technology and put it into a bastard child that doesn’t have a home anywhere: fail.”
“I just can’t fathom what individual is dumb enough to shell out money for this.”
“This is much more a media player than a productivity tool. It maybe worth using for social media, surfing and watching movies in the airplane.”
“How about the power usage to keep the fancy color slate to lit up for hours?”
“Why on earth will I hold a big slate to my ear when my phone is in my pocket. So, you’re saying that I’ll put another SIM into the iPad? Ridiculous.
It seems Apple is trying too hard to fill some imaginary gap between smartphones and laptops/netbooks.”
“[I]t’s not really a tablet computer.”
“[T]he fact is you’re limited by Apple in every way they can limit you. ... Until you hack it to run Chrome OS, you’re going to be using this thing exactly the way Apple tells you to.”
How’re those HP Slate purchasers liking their acquisition, Linen? Asked any of them lately?
Molly Wood of CNET (January 2010):
“iPad — who is it good for? Absolutely no one. Who needs this thing?”
“I added it up, and like 800 people are gonna buy the iPad.”
“It’s hard to argue the fact that this week’s Apple iPad launch disappointed the tech crowd ...”
“[T]he iPad is hampered by a well-documented string of missing features ...”
“No one should actually buy this iPad — between its inevitable first-generation bugs, fulfillment problems, and buyer’s remorse over added features and price drops, it’s heartbreak waiting to happen. Try to think of the iPad as, like, a proof of concept. A concept car, even. A work in progress, really.”
“[T]he iPad is a product in search of a market. It’s kind of poorly implemented, feature-wise; it’s been poorly articulated, market-wise; and it’s hard to imagine why on earth you’d ever need such a thing at such a price.”
Good thing you got this video out around the beginning of February, Molly. That gave it about two full months to seem possibly credible.
Update: It’s been a year since Molly’s rant, and guess what? About 15 million iPads sold so far. That’s over 18,000 iPads for every one iPad Molly predicted. And I don’t think she was talking about the first year. So we’re still counting.
Mikel Reparaz on GamesRadar (January 2010):
“10 reasons the iPad could fail catastrophically
Excited about Apple’s new toy? Here’s why you should cool your jets”
Excited about the prospect of a big, new, Apple product failing miserably? Here’s why you should wait and see if it really does fail, before making yourself look like a clueless dumb-ass.
Jackson Berger in Tech Talk (January 2010):
“Apple iPad = Failure!”
“Let’s face it: the Apple iPad is a great big failure. I am disappointed. You are disappointed. We all are disappointed.”
“There are many other things Apple has failed to achieve with this embarrassment of a device they call the iPad. I would love to see Microsoft come out with a Windows 7 Tablet and blow this Apple iPad right out of the water.”
“I would love to see Microsoft reap the rewards of Apple’s disappointing flop.”
Brace yourself for more disappointment, Jackson.
fiascoawards.com (January 2010):
“The iPad, winner of the Fiasco Awards 2010”
“The organization is aware that the Fiasco Awards is giving the prize to a product that is not yet on the market ...”
Hey, maybe consumers will discover “fiascoawards.com” before they have a hands-on experience with the iPad at an Apple store. Then maybe they won’t even go into an Apple store. Maybe they’ll tell all their friends and relatives that the iPad sucks and nobody should buy one! And maybe green goblins from Mars will land on Apple’s Cupertino campus and fry everyone in sight with fazer rays. We can dream, can’t we?
Orange County Web Design Blog (January 2010):
“Apple iPad is an iFailure”
“WAY, WAY, WAY over priced.”
“What an utter disappointment and abysmal failure of an Apple product.”
“I’m Completely disappointed and now waiting for Google to do it right and create the same thing, but with all the features people would expect it to have.”
It’s been well over a year — how’re all those non-overpriced Google tablets doin’ for ya?
Adam Frucci on Gizmodo (January 2010):
“8 Things That Suck About the iPad
NO THANKS”
“My god, am I underwhelmed by it. It has some absolutely backbreaking failures that will make buying one the last thing I would want to do.”
“This post does not necessarily reflect the opinions of others at Gizmodo”
What? Your co-workers don’t want to jump off Dumb-Ass Bluff with you, Adam? What ever has become of team unity.
Daniel Nations on About.com (January 2010):
“5 Reasons Why Apple’s iPad Tablet Will Fail”
“I think it has a tough road before it. The iPad isn’t exactly the first tablet computer, and we have yet to see any catch on fire.”
“You only get access to a watered-down Internet.”
“No one really needs an iPad.”
But boy do they want one!
Jason Cross on PCWorld (January 2010):
“Apple’s iPad Mistakes”
“If Apple really wants to change the world with the iPad and popularize a whole new computing category, they may need to do better.”
Oh, they will Jason. It’s called the iPad 2. Then the iPad 3. Then the iPad 4. Etcetera.
Gadget Lab on Wired (January 2010):
“The iPad was supposed to change the face of computing, to be a completely new form of digital experience. But what Steve Jobs showed us yesterday was in fact little more than a giant iPhone. A giant iPhone that doesn’t even make calls.”
It’s a giant iPhone; that’s bad. But it isn’t a giant iPhone; that’s worse. Got it.
Adam Sharp in WealthDaily (January 2010):
“5 Reason The iPad Will Fail
Apple’s Latest is a Bust”
“Apple’s new iPad device is destined to disappoint ... Analysts predicting iPhone-like success are going to be let down.”
“A cheap netbook from Dell has much greater utility (and is a few hundred dollars cheaper).”
Dell’s selling computers for “a few hundred dollars cheaper” than $500? Um, which models are those, exactly, Adam?
Mohan Sawhney of the Kellogg School (January 2010):
“[T]he iPad is aimed squarely at the center — of nowhere.”
“Mr. Jobs, I think you messed up on this one.”
“There is a hole in the market between smartphones and netbooks, and it is a hole for a reason.”
“What’s the outlook for the iPad? There will be long lines on the day it becomes available, because a million or so die-hard Apple fanatics will buy anything Apple puts out, even if it is a brick. Seduction and lust is a powerful emotion and it will drive sales for a while.”
“The iPad won’t be a failure, but Mr. Jobs, this is no iPhone.”
You were right, Mohan — the iPad wasn’t a failure.
John Dvorak on No Agenda Podcast #177 (February 2010):
“I hate to use that term [iPad Killer] since the iPad is probably dead anyway.”
Who said that?
Sarah Perez of The New York Times (February 2010):
“[C]onsumers will have to make a choice: what sort of tablet is the future of computing? Apple’s locked-down and closed ecosystem of apps running on proprietary hardware or Google’s browser-based OS that’s as open as the web itself?”
“Google’s tablet will have one major advantage over Apple’s iPad: it will have an open application platform.
The only problem is getting consumers to understand what being open means...and care.”
So we have to make sure consumers understand that “open” is an advantage, because otherwise — it won’t be an advantage. We have to make sure Google beats Apple because otherwise — they won’t.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (February 2010):
“Jobs isn’t interested in Flash, and not because it’s buggy or performance challenge. Instead, Jobs is interested in control. And Flash isn’t going to make it on his devices.”
“[T]he vast majority of users only have a small handful of apps (5 to 10) on their phone and regularly use even less. So this app ecosystem does benefit a small number of developers greatly, but most of them, of course, make nothing.”
“If sales are down, just invent a ‘new product category.’ The lemmings will wait in line.”
“Apple, as it turns out, isn’t really so benevolent. I’m curious that we’ve got another Google/Microsoft in the making here and that no one seems to have an issue with this. Price fixing in collusion with the publishing industry? Creating a closed, central clearing house for selling other company’s products? Orchestrating products to shut out competition? Doesn’t all this sound kind of familiar?”
It’s probably not the same 5-10 apps on everyone’s iPhone. Anyway, yeah, the majority of iPhone apps won’t make much. But still, 200,000+ apps selling to 85+ million iPhones means a lot of authors are making money. Any successful industry has a long tail of not-very-successful products. Is that a reason to develop for a different phone? Would an unsuccessful iPhone app be a killer app on some other phone? If so, that doesn’t say much for that other phone’s ecosystem...
And: the reason most people don’t have an issue with what Apple’s doing is because (a) it’s working really well, and (b) Apple made it clear from the get-go what they were doing. They didn’t create a wide-open, install-anything system, like Mac OS or Windows or Linux, then later start screwing with third-party products they decided they wanted to take over.
Wendy on Retrevo (February 2010):
“Apple iPad Hoopla Fails to Convince Buyers”
“Not only did Apple fail to convince new buyers, it may have lost many potential buyers who now say they don’t think they need an Apple tablet computer.
Consumers Lose Interest after Announcement”
“Unfortunately for Apple, the number if respondents saying they had heard about the tablet but were not interested in buying one, doubled from 25% before the announcement to over 50% following the announcement.”
“Most Consumers Don’t Think They Need an iPad”
“Whether this device becomes a big hit is anyone’s guess but based on this study it sure looks doubtful.”
Yeah, just a million sold in under a month. Bummer.
Update: Now it’s two million in under two months.
Update: Make that three million in well under three months.
Peter-Paul Koch of QuirksMode.org (February 2010):
“The iPhone obsession”
“Suppose I proposed the following:
1. IE6 is today’s most advanced browser. (Note: this was actually true back in 2000. Please bear with me.)
2. IE6’s market share is about 80%.
3. The other browsers are way worse than IE6, and developing for them is a pain; something we’re not interested in and are a bit afraid of. Therefore we will develop websites exclusively for IE6.
Would you agree with those sentiments, even if we’re back in 2000 and IE6 is really the best browser we have?”
“Warning! iCandy will damage your brain!”
“Nowadays we live in a fantasy world that focuses exclusively on one platform, and does so exclusively for reasons of eye candy.
We laughingly disown every single principle the web standards movement has ever stood for in the past ten years in order to swoon and drool over Apple’s iCandy and happily accept the reality distortion field that emanates from it.
The iPhone has become an obsession.”
“Fucking dimwits.
We’re doing exactly the same as ten years ago. We now say ‘iPhone’ instead of ‘IE6,’ but otherwise nothing’s changed.”
Nothing? So in 2000, IE6 was the one browser on which you could publish content and realistically expect that most everybody who had a computer would have to pay your asking price if they wanted to use your content? They couldn’t get a no-charges copy of your web app from their buddy down the street — but they could if you developed for any other browser? Funny — I don’t remember that.
Galen Gruman of InfoWorld (February 2010):
“[T]here’s less to Apple’s tablet than meets the eye”
“Users have been complaining about the lack of Flash support since the very first iPhone three years ago.”
“The iPad is a natural device for playing back Flash files ... Apple should let Adobe release a Flash Player app and Safari plug-in, and if Adobe screws it up, Adobe gets the blame.”
Yeah. Sure they do.
You know, Galen, Adobe’s been screwing up Flash on Apple hardware for something like a decade now. And now — surprise, surprise — they’re getting the blame: Apple doesn’t want Flash, interpreted or compiled, on its devices. So there it is, just like you said...or by “gets the blame” did you mean some hypothetical scenario, always in the future, that never actually happens? Or doesn’t happen without screwing up Apple’s plans one more time?
Bill Gates, former CEO of Microsoft (February 2010):
“You know, I’m a big believer in touch and digital reading, but I still think that some mixture of voice, the pen and a real keyboard — in other words a netbook — will be the mainstream on that. So, it’s not like I sit there and feel the same way I did with iPhone where I say, ‘Oh my God, Microsoft didn’t aim high enough.’ It’s a nice reader, but there’s nothing on the iPad I look at and say, ‘Oh, I wish Microsoft had done it.’”
Even the iPad’s most reckless doomsayers aren’t predicting it will be beaten by touch netbooks. You might be on your own on this one, Bill.
Holman Jenkins in The Wall Street Journal (February 2010):
“The Microsofting of Apple?”
“[T]his may be the year when Apple’s market cap does the unthinkable and surpasses Microsoft’s. Congratulations will be in order but so will condolences.”
“[I]t’s a fallen world we live in.”
“The iPad may not be the best Web-browsing machine simply because Apple refuses to support Flash, which delivers 75% of the video on the Web.”
“Flash would also allow iPhone and iPad users to consume video and other entertainment without going through iTunes. Flash would let users freely obtain the kinds of features they can only get now at the Apple App Store.
We hasten to add, before the net-neut crazies and antitrusters seek to perp-walk Steve Jobs, that Apple is perfectly within its rights to do so.”
But “we” don’t hasten at all to inform our readers that anyone can sell video, music, e-books, and other entertainment without using either iTunes or Flash. Do iTunes and Flash hold the secret technique by which entertainment can be delivered over the internet? Somebody forgot to tell Amazon — contact them quick, Holman, and tell them they need to shut down their entire internet media business and join your Apple-is-as-bad-as-Microsoft cause instead. I’m sure they’ll do that right away.
Joe Wilcox on BetaNews (February 2010):
“Apple should ban freebees from the iPad App Store”
“The iPad App Store should be stocked full of premium content, meaning no freebees. It’s the right way to help establish iPad as a premium product ... Unfortunately, Apple has little incentive to take this right approach benefiting its developers ... Apple’s business is about selling hardware, using software and services as differentiators.”
“If three-quarters of the apps are paid ones already, why not 100 percent on iPad?”
“If Apple is going to try and breakthrough with tablets, why not freshen the approach: Make the product even more chic by making it more exclusive ... Paid apps, and only paid apps, is one way to do it.”
“People inherently value something more they paid for than what they get for free. ... Free apps are throwaways.”
Somehow, Joe, I don’t think you have Apple’s — or its third-party developers’ — best interests at heart.
John Dvorak on MarketWatch (February 2010):
“The iPad faces industry backlash”
“The Apple iPad is not going to be the company’s next runaway best seller. Not if the industry can help it.”
“[After Apple humiliated the MP3-player industry with the iPod] It’s now trying to humiliate everyone and anyone who ever tried to push a tablet computer and I sense that this time the industry is not going to be taken to the woodshed any more for the Apple spanking. And with the iPad, Apple may have irked it’s somewhat new partner Intel Corp. Intel gets spanked by nobody.”
“So Apple snubs Intel and goes its own way. OK, so Intel decides to find a new partner who holds a grudge and do a deal. Bingo: Nokia.
I’d advise people to look into the history of Nokia. Here is a company, unlike any other in the world, that can change its business model and structure on a dime.”
John, have you been following Enderle’s four-step plan? Tsk, tsk. Word up: If they can’t make a superior product, it doesn’t matter how mad these companies might be that Apple dares to be successful. Look at Microsoft and the ka-billions it spends every year trying to find a way to upstage Apple. What’s come of that?
Randall C. Kennedy of InfoWorld (February 2010):
“iPad, the netbook killer? I think not!
Why the rumor of the netbook’s death has been greatly exaggerated, and why the iPad’s fans are way off base”
“What’s with all of the netbook hate? Apple launches its flawed — and, arguably, disappointing — iPad and suddenly everyone is piling on the anti-netbook bandwagon. The iPad will kill the netbook, says one expert. The netbook’s days are numbered, says another.”
“Those of you who follow this blog know that I’m a huge netbook fan.”
I noticed. And I don’t follow your blog.
Donovan Colbert on TechRepublic (February 2010):
“Why the iPad will fail to win significant market share”
“There’s no doubt that the iPad is a slick, sexy device, but I don’t think it will be an overwhelming success.”
“I’m struck by the number of Apple users who are now voicing their opinions in forums that they can’t wait to jump to Android and, more surprisingly, Windows 7 mobile, both of which look to offer very strong competition.
In the end, I think that the iPad will eventually be regarded much like Apple TV — a product that Jobs should have left on the drawing boards.”
Actually, Apple TV is doing pretty well too.
Jon Stokes on Ars Technica (March 2010):
“Why has Apple been so secretive about the A4?”
“Steve Jobs just loves secrets. The A4 no doubt gives him that special, ‘I have my very own custom SoC that you don’t know anything about’ feeling ...”
“[The] most likely reason behind Apple’s silence, is that the A4 just isn’t anything to write home about ...”
Apple doesn’t publish a lot of their OS/app sourcecode, either. Next time you’re bored, why don’t you throw a fit about that? Just an idea.
Galen Gruman on InfoWorld (March 2010):
“Only a fool would pre-order an iPad
This morning, the fool’s parade gets started.”
“[T]he first-generation iPad is particularly likely to have disappointments ...”
“[B]uy one when you know it really is magic — after people not employed by Apple have had a chance to really use it and put it through its paces. Until then, why send Apple your money until you know for sure? Doing so would be, well, foolish.”
“A fool and his money are soon parted, the saying goes.”
Hint: By “people not employed by Apple” Gruman means “Enderle-esque Apple loathers who will find any reason to deem the iPad a bad buy.”
Anders Bylund on The Motley Fool (March 2010):
“HP and Friends Will Kill the iPad”
“[T]he Apple iPad is not unique, nor necessarily the best of breed in the media tablet sector it is spearheading. And it ain’t gonna help Apple shareholders any.”
“[T]here’s a flash flood of competing products coming up ...”
“[T]he iPad will join the Apple TV in the footnotes of Apple’s history.”
Kind-of like the flash flood of iPod killers about five years ago? Should be good. When it starts, that is — HP just ”killed” a tablet alright: their own.
Update: 15 million iPads in 9 months, Anders. And more good news: Apple TV is starting to sell well too!
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes of ZDNet (March 2010):
“iPad: Perfectly flawed”
“[S]ince I’m not obsessed by having a particular logo on my hardware, I try to make rational decisions when it comes to spending my cash.”
“[T]he device is one big lock into the Apple ecosystem. Sure, there’ll be jailbreaks I’m sure, but that puts my device in the middle of a tug-of-war between Apple and the jailbreakers.”
“[W]eb minus Flash is a pretty poor web experience.”
“Yes, I still hate the built-in battery.”
“I think I’ll be holding onto my money for a little while...maybe anothe rvendor will come out with a tablet that offers most of the upsides but without so many downsides.”
Maybe. Hey, I hear Linen DeFiller’s hyped about the HP Slate — give him a buzz and see if he’ll let you try it out for a few minutes.
Scott Moritz on TheStreet.com (March 2010):
“Apple: Sell Before the Fall”
“While hard to picture now, Jobs and company will one day, maybe soon, fall out of step with fashion. Growth will stall. Fair-weather investors will flee to sunnier stocks. Loyal fans will become embittered. Smelling blood, critics will get even nastier.
It’s inevitable. The life cycle of tech giants is brilliant and brutally short. Today’s consumer electronics leaders are tomorrow’s fossils.”
“[E]ven the sweetest empires fall.”
“Apple has a history of making bold attacks on humble devices ...”
“The third year is a charm. The fourth year will wear thin. Apple’s 4th version of the iPhone — not to be confused with a 4G iPhone — is due this summer, and it’s not likely to be any different than the past three. Meanwhile, thinner phones have arrived like Google’s Nexus One, and bigger, brighter screens from the Motorola Droid have beaten Apple at its own game.”
“The revolutionary iPhone is getting stale. No fresh market, no fresh phone. Androids are looking like an Apple antidote.”
“The iPad is a not so ‘magical’ e-reader. Expect to hear a lot of: ‘I spent a cold night in line for this?’”
“Investors like to call [Apple’s] stock’s premium valuation ‘the Apple tax.’ It might be time for your refund.”
This article, of course, isn’t meant to be taken seriously by the general public — Scott’s just appealing to the judging board of the Enderle Awards with this one.
Don Tennant on IT Business Edge (March 2010):
“With All the iDol Worship, I’m Already Sick of the iPad”
“They should have called it the ‘iDol,’ because it’s a false god if ever there was one.”
“I can just picture Jobs cackling in delight, as once again we’ve come under the spell of a product that we desperately hope will change our sad, pathetic lives.”
Speak for yourself, Don.
Alex Cook on Frontier Outlook (April 2010):
“[T]he iPad will flop”
“The iPad hype machine has been in full effect this week, and I still think it’s just that — hype.”
“Steve Jobs has been wrong before. ... [The 1983 Lisa] was horribly expensive and ended up as a commercial flop. The iPad could be even worse. At least the Lisa was ahead of its time. The iPad isn’t ahead of anything ...”
“[T]ablets try to fill a niche that doesn’t exist.”
Fifteen million iPads in nine months? You’re right, Alex — that’s no niche.
Gina Trapani on Fast Company (April 2010):
“Why You Shouldn’t Buy an iPad (Yet)”
“First-generation Apple products are for suckers. Only lemmings with no self-control and excessive disposable income buy first generation Apple products, especially in a new gadget category.”
“Don’t be the guy who bought the first-gen iPad when Apple slashes the 2011 iPad price in half. Next year’s iPad will be faster, cheaper, less buggy, and have better apps ...”
Don’t buy an iPad...“yet?” So sometime in the near future you’re going to be telling your readers, “OK, buy one now?” Mmm-hmm.
Update: Great news, Gina! Apple’s now selling the much-improved iPad 2, as fast as they can make ’em. Now you can tell all your smart readers who waited that it’s time to pop open their pocketbooks and buy one. You know. If you’re so inclined.
Cory Doctorow on Boing Boing (April 2010):
“I’m completely uninterested in buying an iPad ...”
“[O]pen platforms and experimental amateurs ... eventually beat out the spendy, slick pros.”
“If I had a share of AOL for every time someone told me that the web would die because AOL was so easy and the web was full of garbage, I’d have a lot of AOL shares. And they wouldn’t be worth much.”
“Infantalizing hardware”
“[T]here’s also a palpable contempt for the owner. ... [I]f you can’t open it, you don’t own it. Screws not glue. The original Apple ][+ came with schematics for the circuit boards ...”
Oooh. I don’t want an “AOL” device made for ”infants,” that I can’t literally unscrew and disassemble — I better not buy an iPad. Whew; that was a close one. Thanks for the heads-up, Cory. I’m logging onto eBay right now to find me an Apple “][”+. Information age, here I come!
Update: It’s been a year, Cory. I guess open platforms and experimental amateurs eventually beat out spendy, slick pros — but “eventually” must mean a lot more than a year. Not even a sign that it’s starting yet.
Jeff Jarvis on Business Insider (April 2010):
“I’m Really Worried About What Apple Is Trying To Do With The iPad”
“[The iPad is] sweet and pretty but shallow and vapid.’
“The iPad is retrograde. It tries to turn us back into an audience again.”
“I might well rebox and return it; I don’t have $500 to throw away.”
Write a great app for the iPad and maybe you will. (Or are you just an audience member?)
Don Reisinger on eWEEK (April 2010):
“10 Reasons Why an iPad Is Not for You”
Hey, isn’t Reisinger the guy who said that the BlackBerry Storm had Apple executives “running scared?” And that “RIM just one-upped the founders, and Apple knows that?” Or that thanks to the Storm, “The iPhone was cool, up until yesterday?”
Nah — couldn’t be the same guy.
Jack Shafer in Slate (April 2010):
“Apple Wants To Own You
Welcome to our velvet prison, say the boys and girls from Cupertino.”
“Steve Jobs has gone from producing a computer — the original Macintosh — that he called “insanely great” to producing a computer — the iPad — that is totally insane.”
“What’s insane is the perimeter mines, tank traps, revetments, and glacis he’s deployed around these shiny devices to slow software developers to a crawl ...”
“Apple wants to play gatekeeper so it can establish itself as toll-taker. Seeing through this ruse are Frédéric Filloux, Jim Stogdill, and Cory Doctorow, whose dispatches have broadened my understanding of what sort of game Apple is playing.”
Yeah, those guys represent a broad perspective of Apple. Not a narrow one. Not a very, very narrow one.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (April 2010):
“[I]f you’re looking to copy Apple’s success — and you are [Microsoft] — then at least do it right. It’s not about the products at all. What Apple does right is marketing. It’s form over function, plain and simple.”
You’re preaching to the choir, Paul. Microsoft completely agrees with you, and has been trying to beat Apple with that exact strategy for several years now. Make some junk, then try to market the hell out of it.
Ty Dunitz on TECHi (May 2010):
“iPad Turns 1 Million Users Into Zombies”
“With the market still poised to be flooded by competing devices — including Microsoft’s imminent Courier — Jobs’d better have a few more ‘magical’ tricks up his sleeve.”
He does, Ty; not to worry. And how’s that Courier workin’ out for ya?
Nick Farrell on TheInquirer.net (May 2010):
“Why Apple might regret the Ipad”
“THE IPAD HAS DOOMED Apple, according to market anlaysts that are expecting the tablet to spell trouble for its maker.”
“Rather than killing off the netbook, the Ipad is harming sales of the Ipod and Macbooks. It seems the buyers of Ipads would normally have got a more expensive Macbook or an Ipod Touch and apparently are clever enough not to do both.”
“Where Steve Jobs made his mistake was that he marketed the Ipad as a utopian device that can do everything that all his other products can. This is dangerous for Apple because if the Ipad can be a laptop, an Iphone, a e-reader and a music player then you do not really need any of those devices.”
You can tell Nick is impartial and objective by the way he miscapitalizes iPad, iPod, and iPhone. Anyone who insists on writing those Apple product names the way Apple does is probably an irrational Apple fanatic.
Paul Thurrott on Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (May 2010):
“Sorry, But the iPad is Not ‘Killing’ Netbook Sales”
“IDC is now forecasting that ‘mininotebook’ (i.e. netbooks and sub-12-inch machines) will sell 45.6 million units in 2011 and 60.3 million in 2013. If I remember the numbers from 2009, they were 10 percent of all PCs, or about 30 million units. Explain again how the iPad will beat that. Please. Even the craziest iPad sales predictions are a small percentage of that.”
Let’s check the data in late ’11 or early ’12 and see who needs to “explain” their position from May ’10. (Not that they will, of course.)
Brian X. Chen on Gadget Lab (May 2010):
“5 Things Apple Must Do to Look Less Evil”
“It’s appropriate that the Apple logo on the iPad is black. The Cupertino, California, company’s image is taking on some awfully sinister tones lately.”
Getting kinda hard to criticize Apple on the quality and success of its products, huh?
Update: It’s been a year since you burped this up, Brian — do you still think Apple looks evil? Wait, let me rephrase that: Do you have any evidence that a sizable percentage of the computer-buying public thinks Apple is evil? Yeah, I didn’t think so.
Adobe’s open statement about Flash and Creative Freedom (May 2010):
“At Adobe, we believe that the open flow of creativity, ideas, and information should be limited only by the imagination.”
At Adobe, we believe that what we are permitted to do with another company’s products should be limited only by our imagination.
Paul Graham of Y Combinator (May 2010):
“I’m very afraid of a world in which we are all Steve Jobs’s slaves. If anything can save us, it might be Chrome.”
If you want an iPhone-esque explosion of apps to choose from (or make good money from, if you’re the author of a few of them), then you’re going to have to be somebody’s “slave.” A world of total freedom is a world where only deluded chumps spend serious time and effort writing cool apps.
Vic Gundotra of Google (May 2010):
“If we did not act [to create Android], we faced a draconian future where one man, one phone, one carrier was the future. That’s a future we don’t want.”
Translation: We bought Android a couple years before anyone ever heard of iPhone. And we had it ready to deploy on phones before anyone heard of iPhone. But when Microsoft’s plans to lock us out of mobile search were ruined by iPhone (which was very Google-friendly) then we found ourselves sitting on a big project that we didn’t need. And rather than mothballing it and moving on with our profitable relationship with Apple, we felt we had to use it because we’d put so much money into it — kind-of the same way Adobe feels it has to turn Flash into a modern development system because they payed so much for Macromedia. So we used Android to attack Apple. Because that’s all it was good for. Oh yeah — don’t be evil.
Update: It’s been nine months, Vic, and I’ve got some great news — Apple just signed up Verizon to sell the iPhone! Breathe easy; your “one carrier” nightmare is over. You should be really happy about that — right? Vic?
Paul Thurrott, winsupersite.com (May 2010):
“[I]t’s tempting to position the iPad as a netbook competitor.”
“But it is the iPad’s lack of true PC capabilities that, I think, dooms this comparison.”
“[W]hen you use an iPad, you’re typically not contributing to anything, as you can on a PC. Instead, you’re simply consuming. And this is how I think the iPad should be compared to the PC: Consumption vs. contribution.”
“When you go out and about with just an iPad, you’re sending a message that you’re not going to contribute.”
“The iPad is not a competitor to Tablet PCs either. ... The Tablet PC is a contribution device. The iPad is about consumption only.”
The Tablet what?
David Gewirtz On ZDNet (June 2010):
“[D]espite their old marketing campaign, Apple is not the company ‘for the rest of us.’ Apple’s primary goal is meeting Apple’s goals, often without regard to who is hurt along the way.”
“Weirdly, Apple seems to be almost purposely searching out segments of the tech industry to destroy. Whether it’s Apple’s war against Flash, its completely capricious application review and denial process, the way its terms of service intend to lock out third-party ad companies like AdMob, its option to remove of all Web-based advertising from Safari, its lock-out of any language besides Objective-C, or even the company’s complete lack of acknowledgment of Mac developers at its recent World-Wide Developer’s Conference, Apple seems determined to undermine developers and their ability to make a living.”
“The pain Apple is causing developers”
“By blasting Flash and Adobe, the collateral damage is to all those little development companies and all those developers, many of whom may find themselves without an income stream.”
“I’ve documented six ways in which Apple seems to be trying to kill off developers and their means of income.”
“We’re in the middle of a deep recession and this is a bad time to put people out of work.”
“What’s disturbing is the apparent gusto Apple as a company, and Steve Jobs as its leader, seem to have for disrupting the lives of its partners.
There’s just something deeply disturbing about a guy with a personal net worth of $5.5 billion dollars seeming to take such joy in throwing developers out onto the street.”
So developers who switch from Flash to Xcode, so they can sell to the already-huge-and-growing-fast iPhone and iPad markets, are...out of work? Huh?
Steve Ballmer of Microsoft (July 2010):
“This year one of the most important things that we will do in the smart device category is really push forward with Windows 7-based slates and Windows 7 phones. We want to give you a great consumer-oriented device, but a device that fits and is manageable with today’s enterprise IT solutions. ... [T]hey will all run Windows 7 ... They will run Windows 7 applications. They will run Office.”
Translation: In the 1990s, leveraging current dominance into new dominance worked really well for us. So even though it stopped working about ten years ago, we’re going to keep trying it. Actually, it’s the only strategy we know.
Don Reisinger on Channel Insider (August 2010):
“Apple’s Tablet Won’t Be A Long-Term Success”
“Tablets appeal to corporate customers. But as more tablets come to the enterprise market, one will stand above the others: Cisco’s Cius.”
“Apple’s tablet might do well for now, but as companies start realizing there are better alternatives that don’t force them into a corner, they will opt for those.”
“RIM is delivering BlackBerry 6 in the coming days and there is rampant speculation that a BlackBerry tablet is coming soon after. If so, all plans to buy an iPad should be put on hold.”
Let me get this straight, Don: You had plans to buy an iPad, but you put them on hold? Yeah. Sure you did.
Update: It’s been a year. BlackBerry’s tablet was a disaster. Haven’t heard anything about Cius. iPad is totally kicking ass.
Rob Enderle on TGDaily (August 2010):
“Steve Jobs was fired once and likely came close to being fired again for infractions that seemed far less damaging than what took out [HP’s] Mark Hurd ...”
“If Hurd can be fired in this new world could Larry and Steve be next?”
“CEOs are likely the closest thing we have to royalty in this age and, as a result, their temptations are also unprecedented.”
“[B]oth Apple and Oracle were founded with the idea that the Steve and Larry were special. While that didn’t initially protect Steve initially, once Apple was reborn under him that special nature was both strengthened and enhanced. In short, their respective companies accept that rules are different for their top executives who are not expected to adhere to them.”
“Given Steve Jobs, for instance, is critical to Apple’s success is there anything short of eating live babies on national TV that he should be fired for? Where would you draw that line or should he be held to the same rules and laws that the rest of us are held to?
Most CEOs are not but is a little corruption OK or should they be satisfied with simply getting paid a massive amount of money and being surrounded by luxuries and perks the rest of us can’t even imagine?”
Perks...hmm. What’s a perk? Is that anything like, say, “consulting fees” from Microsoft? That you got but the rest of us didn’t? That aren’t gonna happen so much any more as Microsoft slips into irrelevance? That will never be paid to you by Apple because — though they may eat babies on TV — they don’t pay guys like you to promote them with your “analysis,” and never will?
(Readers: I wasn’t sure whether to file this one under iPhone Party Poopers or iPad Spoilsports, so I put it here. Rob doesn’t seem to know which kick-ass-successful Apple product to bad-mouth, so he’s just nakedly attacking the company in general.)
Preston Gralla on Computerworld.com (August 2010):
“Where are Apple fanbois now? Apple becomes most reviled brand on the Net”
“Brandwatch recently released research that found that Apple is the brand most commonly associated with the term #fail.”
“It’s easy to dismiss a report like this as much ado about nothing. But, in fact, it’s a danger sign for Apple. Apple sells an aura as much as it sells products, and if that aura fades, so will Apple sales.”
Apple sales = “#fail?” Check again, Preston. Hey — didn’t Shakespeare write a play called “Much Ado About Bullshit?” I think he did.
Chang Ma of LG (August 2010):
“Our tablet will be better than the iPad.”
You mean some uncertain number of months from now you’re going to introduce a new tablet that’s better than the current version of the iPad that’s on sale today and has been selling like hotcakes for several months now? Wow. You are gonna kick Apple’s ass.
One-year update: iPad is selling like crazy, its competitors are flopping, and nothing from LG has even surfaced.
Fabrice Grinda on Business Insider (August 2010):
“Apple: Short Term Winner, Long Term Loser
There is no denying Apple has had an incredible run.”
“Apple is currently on top of the world. ... However, Apple and Steve Jobs seem to be repeating a number of strategic mistakes that seem destined to relegate it to a niche player.”
“In 1984, when Apple introduced the Mac in 1984, it was revolutionary. ... However, Steve Jobs’ vertical integration driven by his desire to only have beautiful machines and software limited both innovation and the availability of software.”
“Steve Jobs seems to be repeating the same mistake all over again. ... Apple’s insistence on having a single form factor, on being a premium player at a premium price point (to carriers at least), and its arbitrary decisions with regards to what apps make it in the App Store will eventually make Apple a niche player. Even if Apple keeps innovating and has the best phone on the market, it won’t matter.”
“[W]ith the iPhone Apple has taken vertical integration one step further. It acquired PA Semi for $278 million in April 2008 and Intrinsity in 2010 and now designs its own chips. Both the iPad and the iPhone 4 run on the A4 chip it designed. This means that in addition to competing with Google, all the handset manufacturers in the world and many app makers, it now has to compete with the likes of ARM! It’s extremely hard to be world class in so many product categories and arguably Apple has just made its job of having the best smartphone on the market that much harder.”
“Fast forward 5 to 10 years and it’s not hard to imagine seeing Apple with a small (but probably very profitable) share of the smartphone market. It will be a niche player in the market it revolutionized and could have dominated. History seems bound to repeat itself!”
At first I thought this was just another entry into the tired litany of “Windows-vs-Mac will repeat itself” that first gained popularity around 2004 and has yet to be correct. But when I got to the part about how Apple will be done in by its newfound control over its own chips, I knew I’d found gold.
One-year update: No sign that Grinda was even slightly right about any of this, but he did say “5 to 10 years out,” so I guess I should cut him some slack. Maybe he can see trends developing a year or more before there’s any sign of them in the market. Smart guy!
JR Raphael on Computerworld (August 2010):
“Why the Apple crowd’s completely wrong about Flash”
“Having spent some time using [mobile Flash] and seeing how it performs, I have to say: Stevie J. and his legions of followers couldn’t be more wrong.”
“The arguments against providing [mobile Flash] are getting increasingly silly.”
“Flash on a smartphone may not be ‘magical,’ but it is practical. For those of us living in reality, practicality and the freedom to use our phones the way we want is worth everything.”
The stunning success of iOS isn’t reality. It’s a fantasy in the mind of Steve Jobs.
Stan Shih of Acer as reported by Yen-Shyang Hwang and Joseph Tsai in DigiTimes (September 2010):
“Acer founder Stan Shih, in a talks with reporters on September 8, commented that Apple’s strong popularity is mainly due to its products such as iPad and iPhone, and these products are like mutant viruses, which are difficult to find a cure for in the short-term, but he believes that PC vendors will eventually find a way to isolate Apple and become immune.”
“Apple CEO Steve Jobs has always been looking for revolution, while other PC brands evolved naturally and are developing products in a more solid way, Shih commented. But based on the historical experience, a market that evolves naturally will always turn out to be much stronger, according to Shih.”
“Shih used the example of the competition between Microsoft’s Windows and Apple’s Macintosh OS and noted the Apple has always looked down on Windows and believes it lacks creativity. But Windows’ open platform has attracted the adoption of most PC brands, Shih said adding that, Apple’s PC market has turned out to be limited, with a market share far less than the open Windows platform group. Shih also brought up the example of the competition between video tape formats, pointing out that the open VHS standard won against the closed Betamax format.”
Translation: I founded Acer. Acer sells bargain-basement computers running a kludgy, virus-prone, licensed-from-Microsoft OS. So I sure hope that chanting “licensed systems always win” works some magic against Apple. I hope it works better than it did for PlaysForSure against the Apple iPod. I hope it works better than it did for Windows Mobile against the Apple iPhone. ’Cause we need some wicked-bad magic against that Apple iPad. And we need it, like, yesterday.
Update: It’s January 2011 and Gartner reports that Acer’s unit sales dropped 30% from the year-ago quarter.
Update: Acer’s President and CEO, Gianfranco Lanci, abruptly resigns.
Update: Acer’s profits fall 64%.
Eric Schmidt of Google (September 2010):
“[T]he Apple model is closed. Same hardware, same applications, same store — a so-called vertical stack.”
“All the other vendors want an alternative, and Apple is not going to give it to them.”
“The iPad apps are beautiful but highly restrictive. They’re written in a specific programming language; they’re not Web applications. Over the next few years it should be possible using so-called open technologies to build apps as powerful as those on the iPad but do them on the Web, which means they’ll run everywhere.”
“Ultimately, in the Internet, openness has always won. I cannot imagine that the current competitive environment would reverse that.”
iPad will lose because...it uses the “same applications?” Because Apple doesn’t give its competitors an “alternative?” Because iPad apps are written in a “specific programming language?” Because iPad apps are “restrictive?” Because in a few years, some web-apps may be as good as a huge number of iPad apps are today? Because “vertical stack” sounds kind-of like “vertical market?” And because “openness” always wins?
It really does, I think, take a special kind of genius to be able to advance arguments like that and make them sound sensible. But it’s not the kind of genius you need to create the iPhone and iPad.
Gregg Keizer in ComputerWorld (September 2010):
“Devs bet big on Android over Apple’s iOS”
“A majority of mobile application developers see Google’s Android as the smart bet over the long run even as they vote for Apple’s iOS in the short term, according to a survey published Monday.
The survey, conducted jointly by Appcelerator and IDC, polled more than 2,300 developers who use Appcelerator’s Titanium cross-platform compiler to produce iOS and Android native applications using JavaScript, HTML and CSS.”
Shocking! Say...here’s an idea for a poll: What percentage of mobile app income is earned by apps created by developers who made their apps with “Appcelerator’s Titanium cross-platform compiler?” Or created by developers who have ever used “Appcelerator’s Titanium cross-platform compiler?” Or who have even heard of it?
Nicholas Negroponte of One Laptop Per Child (September 2010):
“Think about it. Turning pages. How ridiculous that is. It’s just unbelievably dumb.”
“[Apple’s] building peripherals for iTunes ... We can’t turn these kids into couch potatoes. Just because you interact doesn’t mean you construct. [We need] learning by doing and learning by making. Learning by being told is only one way.”
“All we have to do is threaten to build the tablet and that may be enough because in the end, we are not hardware makers. ... [This strategy is] a new regime of trying to make things people will copy rather than doing it ourselves.”
Translation: We’ve been threatening to build a really small, cheap, useful computer for a lonnggg time now. It was a lot of fun — but then Apple wrecked it with their mega-successful iPad. They didn’t even hype it for years or anything — they just hauled off and made it! Those assholes are ruining everything.
Paul Thurrott In Paul Thurrott’s Supersite For Windows (October 2010):
“Right off the bat, I’m glad to see that my initial reactions to this thing [the iPad] were accurate. Anyone who believes this thing is a game changer is a tool. I’m sorry, but that’s just the way it is.”
This is what happens when your desire that a certain company fails is stronger than your desire to preserve your own reputation for rationality.
Gene Munster of Piper Jaffray (October 2010):
“For the first year or so, it’s gonna be advantage-Apple, but I think that as some of these Android tablets start to come out and get more optimized, I think that you’re gonna see some very stiff competition. As a category, the tablet is undeniably gonna be the winning category in mobile computing over the next decade. But as far as the market-share wins, ultimately we think that Apple won’t have the majority of the market share. It will probably be with Android-based tablets.”
Darn. And that iPad seemed like it was doing so well! Sorry, Apple. The “global investment” experts have spoken.
One-year update: iPad has almost 90% of tablet sales.
John Martellaro in The Mac Observer (October 2010):
“[Jobs’s philosophy] has some inherent weaknesses that prevent products from becoming populist, and so, to a certain extent, trying to win back the gains that Android has made and will make will be in vain.
There was a time when the Apple community thought: wow, Apple has done it. They’ve finally figured out how to win convincingly and totally instead of lose. Windows was a fluke. Surely, now, it’s been established that under great leadership and a level smartphone playing field, Apple will show its true winning colors in every aspect.
It’s not happening.”
“[I]n the long run, Apple can’t win the smartphone market share battle.”
“[W]e’re back to the same old arguments we used in the Mac world. Market share doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter to BMW. ... Our hopes and rationalizations are all over the Mac Web.”
“Apple is great at creating great products that we love. To keep doing that, Apple has to maintain control. That’s in conflict with the business forces that always apply. Products, like Android, that allow companies to jump in, rather than toil over their own innovation, will always be in demand. There will always be individuals who retain a bad taste in their mouths for Apple. There will always be industry forces that want Apple to fail, lest they look bad and get squeezed out of the game. There will always be Microsoft, wiling to pay a half billion dollars to bend people’s minds around Windows Phone 7. Will it work enough to boost WP7 market share? It probably will.”
“Android lets companies look cool, make products that look like the Apple iPhone, and lets everyone take a shot at a cut of the smartphone pie. It’s exactly what the industry craved, and it’s everything Apple isn’t. That’s the fundamental contradiction of our time.
The bad news is that, in time, it will become clear that millions of customers are willing to settle for something less than the iPhone and don’t care about what the iPhone has to offer in terms of security and compatibility.”
“In the long run, Apple’s belief (or maybe our own belief that we presume on Apple’s part) that its superb products and customer approach can outright win the market share war against Android remains irrational. Once that sinks in with investors, in 2011, there could be problems.
There are emerging signs that the rest of the industry is going to try the same strategy against the iPad.”
Let’s see: None of that hurt the iPod throughout the last decade. It hasn’t hurt the iPhone except in the USA where the iPhone is locked to a single carrier. And Apple’s about to end that situation with the CDMA iPhone. And WP7 isn’t out yet. And the various iPad wannabes aren’t out yet. So, uh, what are you talking about, John?
Jim Balsillie of RIM (October 2010):
“We think many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple.”
“As usual, whether the subject is antennas, Flash or shipments, there is more to the story and sooner or later, even people inside the distortion field will begin to resent being told half a story.”
People are getting really tired of being told that Apple’s products rock. Oh, wait. They do rock.
Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures (October 2010):
“iPhone and iPad have been amazing products that have opened new markets. But I do not think they will own either market in a few years. Android will.”
Is that really what you think, Fred? But please — don’t stop saying it.
Michael Obuchowski of First Empire Asset Management (October 2010):
“Everyone is closing in and it’s a huge question of how they [Apple] are going to respond. I’m really worried about Apple; I’m not convinced that I’m going to hold Apple two years from now.”
You think Apple’s in a bind — so you’re going to sell your stock two years from now?? Why not sell it today, Michael?
Paul Thurrott on Windows IT Pro (October 2010):
“Remember the Nintendo Wii? Nintendo sold millions of them and dominated the video game market for almost four straight years before sales fell off a cliff. But the dark, dirty secret of the Wii is that those sales were pretty much the extent of the platform’s success: Few Wii owners ever purchased more than a game or two, and most Wii consoles are sitting in a corner now, gathering dust — rarely if ever used. Well, it appears that the iPad is following the same trajectory, albeit in a tighter timeline. In the wake of Apple’s quarterly results, in which far fewer iPads were sold than anyone expected, Nielsen reveals that a full third of iPad owners have never installed even a single app on the thing. Not even a free app. Which leads me to believe that the iPad is exactly what I pegged it to be in the beginning: nothing more than a gotta-have-it, trendy, techno-fashion statement, one that people bought to look like they were hip and savvy.”
Confused? Don’t be: When he says, “far less than anyone expected,” Thurrott simply means “a whole heck of a lot of iPads.” When he says, “a third of iPad owners,” he means “less than an eleventh of iPad owners.” And when he says, “gotta-have-it techno-fashion statement,” he means “gotta-have-it tech tool.” Thurrott uses special code phrases when he wants to praise Apple’s success. It’s a nerd thing.
Paul Thurrott on FrugalTech (November 2010):
“Steve Jobs is a huckster.”
“[Apple’s] desktop computing platform has never taken off in any appreciable way, as far as seizing market share.”
“There’s no doubt that — and you just have to follow the way Apple’s done product upgrades over the years — the iPad will turn into a Mac. I mean it’s just going to. It’s gonna have printing, it’s gonna have a keyboard... well, they already have a keyboard. I mean there’ll be all this different stuff that will basically make it as complex as the Macintosh by the time they’re done with it. And then they’ll say, look, we were right. And we’ll say, well, not so much ... you just reinvented the Mac.”
Translation: I’m really missing those wonderful days when Apple had but a single hardware platform, in a miserable niche position. And I’m trying very hard to believe that those days will somehow return.
Kevin Lynch of Adobe (November 2010):
“I just think there’s this negative campaigning going on, and, for whatever reason, Apple is really choosing to incite it, and condone it. I think that’s unfortunate. We don’t think it’s good for the web to have aspects closed off — a blockade of certain types of expression. There’s a decade of content out there that you just can’t view on Apple’s device, and I think that’s not only hurtful to Adobe, but hurtful to everyone that created that content. That’s what upsets me the most. That people put energy into making this stuff, and now some percentage of viewers can’t see it anymore because one company chooses so. That’s just totally counter to our values.”
Especially after we bought Macromedia.
Tim Wu of Columbia Law School (November 2010):
“Steve Jobs has the charisma, vision and instincts of every great information emperor.”
“His vision has an undeniable appeal, but he wants too much control.”
“The man who starts as the great reformer often ends his career by becoming increasingly paranoid and abusive.”
If I publicly likened one of most successful and admired CEOs of our time to a sadistic Roman emperor just because I couldn’t stand his company’s meteoric rise from near-death to supreme fitness, would I be abusive? Or paranoid? Maybe both?
Paul Thurrott on Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (November 2010):
“How Apple Can Fix the iPad in 2011”
“[The iPad is] not a product I can recommend in its current configurations and at its current pricing structure.”
“[Future] devices will be far more like PCs than iPads ...”
“In the meantime, millions of people have foolishly jumped on the iPad bandwagon too soon ...”
“[The iPad’s price] is far too high for a device that is essentially a large-screen iPod touch ...”
“The current iPad is too big and too heavy, and any refresh should use Amazon’s Kindle as a guide ...”
“[A non-glossy screen], combined with a smaller, lighter form factor, would ... make the iPad a truly useful device.”
“Apple’s aversion to ports is cute ...”
“So, do I expect Apple to actually implement any of these ideas? Actually, for the most part, I do not.”
Good thing, too — if they did, you would be in the awkward position of having to explain why you still don’t recommend that people buy it.
Paul Thurrott on Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (November 2010):
“[T]he iPad is boring.”
“[T]here’s no real innovation on the iPad, just a desire to sell stuff from one place in another place.”
What, pray tell, would Paul consider exciting? I know, I know — a second-rate knock-off of the iPad kicking the iPad’s ass and driving Apple into a minuscule, niche share of the tablet market.
Rob Enderle of the Enderle Group (December 2010):
“[Steve Jobs] is not somebody [who] any one of us would want watching our kids, but, in terms of running the company, he’s excellent.”
Translation: I don’t know why so many people are buying Apple’s products. It can’t be because they’re really good. It’s just some sort of marketing mystique, combined with a cult of personality. If I can get some vague impression going that Jobs is really, truly evil, then maybe, just maybe — the Apple mystique will fade, and Microsoft will once again emerge victorious.
Mike Lazaridis of RIM (December 2010):
“Our competitors have taken a smartphone operating system and they’re trying to take it to a tablet computer.”
You mean, they’ve sold ten million iPads in about eight months? Before the holiday rush?
Jim Balsillie of RIM (December 2010):
“I think the PlayBook redefines what a tablet should do. I think we’ve articulated some elements of it, and I think this idea of a proprietary SDK and unnecessary apps — though there’s a huge role for apps — I think is going to shift in the market, and I think it’s going to shift very, very quickly. And I think there’s going to be a strong appetite for web fidelity and tool familiarity. And I think there’s going to be a rapid desire for high performance.”
I think there’s going to be huge demand for the iPad 2.
James Allworth in Harvard Business Review (January 2011):
“The Fall of Wintel and the Rise of Armdroid”
“[T]his year’s CES marks the beginning of the end for Microsoft and Intel.”
“Even more so than Intel, Microsoft has known the tablet was on the way.”
“Both ARM and Android — Armdroid — are providing everything that tablet manufacturers need, and doing it more effectively and at a lower cost than Microsoft and Intel are able to.
We will be able to look back and say that this was the CES that saw Wintel fall and Armdroid rise up.”
Um, James, aren’t you forgetting something? Something like, 90% of the tablet market?
Christopher Williams in The Telegraph (January 2011):
“Google will overturn the Apple iPad’s dominance of the tablet computer within four years, technology industry watchers have predicted.”
“[T]he intensifying battle between [Apple and Google] is reminiscient of the desktop war between Apple’s Macintoshes and IBM-compatible PCs in the 1980s. After taking an early lead, Apple’s machines were surpassed by cheaper PCs running Microsoft Windows, which grew a wider range of software as developers revelled in the control they were allowed.”
Apple had an “early lead” with the 1980s Mac at 9% peak market share? Which is reminiscent of their current 90% lead in tablets? Hey, they both start with “9” — maybe you’re on to something there, Christopher.
Patrick Lo, CEO of Netgear (January 2011):
“Once Steve Jobs goes away, which is probably not far away, then Apple will have to make a strategic decision on whether to open up the platform.”
“Ultimately a closed system just can’t go that far ... If they continue to close it and let Android continue to creep up then it’s pretty difficult as I see it.”
“[The tech industry has] seen this movie play several times.”
“Right now the closed platform has been successful for Apple because they’ve been so far ahead as thought leaders because of Steve Jobs.”
“Eventually they’ve got to find a way to open up iTunes without giving too much away on their revenue generation model.”
“Steve Jobs wants to suffocate the distribution so even though he doesn’t own the content he could basically demand a ransom.”
“What’s the reason for him to trash Flash? There’s no reason other than ego.”
“[I would relay these concerns to Apple but] Steve Jobs doesn’t give me a minute!”
Gee, I wonder why. Could it be because you’re the fiftieth techie to cover a song that first released in 2004 and hasn’t been a hit yet? Nah, that can’t be it. Must be Jobs’s crazy ego.
Jason Kincaid on TechCrunch (February 2011):
“Why Are You People Defending Apple?”
“Apple takes a 30% cut of all subscriptions. ... I’m still having a hard time swallowing it.”
“I think that many who consider themselves technophiles are completely dropping the ball by rationalizing what Apple has done.”
“I really don’t think it’s worth considering whether Apple has the right to impose a 30% fee on applications ...”
“I don’t take issue with Apple demanding a small processing fee to handle credit card transactions, but 30% is too much ...”
That’s all Apple does: process credit card transactions. Apple’s just a credit card transaction processing company. Didn’t you know that?
Matt Buchanan on Gizmodo (February 2011):
“Apple’s New Subscription Model Is Evil”
“Apple takes a 30 percent cut of every transaction. In other words, Apple is eating the people that provide the things that make the iPad special.”
“Publishers can’t use the allure of a lower price to entice people to put up with the extra step of registering with their computer, because Apple explicitly restricts it. Unless a user was very determined that the New York Times get 100-percent of their money, these subscriptions are going to go through Apple. Very few people care that much though, and fewer still will understand the difference.”
Could that be because, uh, very few people are disgruntled, anti-Apple pundits?
Jon Stokes on ars technica (February 2011):
“Why I don’t care very much about tablets anymore
I’ve realized recently that I’m just not very excited about tablets — anybody’s tablets, no matter the OS or maker.”
You mean, Apple’s iOS iPad is almost the entire tablet market, and you don’t see that changing any time soon?
Pete Mortensen on Cult of Mac (February 2011):
“App Store Subscription Plan Demolishes the Appeal of iOS”
“Apple’s new App Store subscription guidelines ... could end up being the single-worst business decision the Cupertino Colossus has made in the last decade ...”
“Think about it. If you’re an average consumer and you’re trying to decide between an iPad and one of the many Android Honeycomb tablets scheduled to ship in the next few months, the ability to put your existing content on that tablet would likely be a key decision in that process.”
“Since Apple won’t be footing the bandwidth to deliver the content for [non-iOS-only] subscriptions, there is no possible justification for taking a cut of the revenue from them other than greed.”
“The entire purpose of the App Store and iTunes is to make Apple’s hardware more attractive to users. ... Apps are there to increase [iPad sales], not try to turn app sales into a meaningful business.”
“I continue to watch in horror as ever-more respected apps announce that they have run afoul of the new guidelines. This is a dumb decision on Apple’s part, and there are no excuses that make it sensible ... Some charges just make you into a jerk.”
Hey, Pete. Check out this Apple shareholder meeting. The App Store barely breaks even. Just like you said: not a meaningful business. So, uh, what’s that about “greed?” What do they have to do — take massive, Microsoft-Xbox-esque losses? If it’s that or be called greedy, I’d choose being called greedy every time.
Don Reisinger on eWEEK (February 2011):
“Motorola Xoom Is the Perfect iPad Competitor: 10 Reasons Why”
“[T]he tablet space is going to be crowded. But as all the tablets hit store shelves, there will likely only be one device that will be a top competitor to Apple’s iPad in the minds of consumers: the Motorola Xoom.”
The Galaxy Tab was the all-that iPad killer last month. Now it’s the XOOM. Not sure what it will be tomorrow...
Update: Will it be the TouchPad? Maybe the PlayBook? Or the Galaxy Player? The Galaxy Tab 8.9 or 10.1? The Streak 5 or 7? The Dell Windows Slate? The HP Windows Slate? The EeePad EP101TC? The EeePC EP121? The Iconia Tab A500, A501, A100, or Iconia Touchbook? The Flyer? The EVO View? The Slate? The G-Slate? The Cius? The Nexus? The Optimus Pad? The Archos 5, or 7, or 70, or 80, or 101? The Transformer TC101? The Slider? The JooJoo? The MeMO? The Universe M-150? The ViewPad 7 or G? The Adam? The Vega? The IDEOS S7? The Inspiron Duo? The Thrive? The WindPad? The Padfone? The Puccini? The TouchSmart? The Impression 10? The Peju? The Sony S1 or S2? The IdeaPad K1 or P1? The Streak 10? The Grid10? The EnTourage eDGe? The Thinkpad Tablet? The Sony Reader PRS-T1? The Jetstream? The Galaxy Note? The Sony Tablet S or P? The Galaxy Tab 7.7? The Stylistic Q550? The Galapagos? The VIERA? The TX100? The PS Vita? The PlayBook 2.0? The Kindle Fire? The Kyros? The Archos 80 G9? The SpringBoard? The Nook Color? The Micro Cruz T408? The Gentouch 78? The Rocketfish? The Sliding PC 7? The ExoPC Slate? The Fujitsu Windows Slate? The PalmPad? The Transformer 2 or Prime? The Vizio Tablet? The Latitude ST? The XOOM 2, or XOOM 2 Media Edition? The Slate 2? The Toughpad A1 or B1? The Netronics Tablet? The EeePad Slider or Transformer? The Iconia Tab A200 or A700? The VTAB1008? The Novo7? The XYBoard 8.2 or 10.1? The Viliv X70? The TouchPad Go? The OLPC XO 3.0? The OpenPeak Tablet 10? The Galaxy Tab 7.0N? The M-Pad? The LePad Slate? The Kyrus? The M7 Multipad? The NID-7001? The IdeaPad U1 or Yoga? The Asus T700? The Memo 171 or 370T? The Spark?
Christopher Dawson on ZDNet (February 2011):
“[W]hen will Apple finally jump on the [Adobe Flash] train?”
“I give Apple a year until they cave.”
In case you hadn’t noticed, Christopher, this issue has already been hot and heavy for well over a year. Shouldn’t they be caving, like, any second now?
Update: It’s been just nine months, and somebody caved, alright. Only it wasn’t Apple.
Preston Gralla on Computerworld (March 2011):
“Eight reasons the Motorola Xoom beats the iPad”
“I bought the Motorola Xoom the day it came out, and have been using it ever since. It’s a spectacular tablet and superior to the iPad.”
“Update: For all the reasons the Xoom beats the iPad 2, check out my blog post, Motorola Xoom versus the iPad 2: The Xoom is a clear winner.”
Translation: XOOM is the only tablet that looks like it even might be able to upset the iPad, so I’m endorsing it to the hilt.
Satoru Iwata of Nintendo (March 2011):
“The value of games does not matter to [developers of cheap mobile games]. The fact is, what we produce is value, and we should protect it.”
The value? Or the price?
John Martellaro on The Mac Observer (March 2011):
“iPad 2 Specs Are a Disappointment”
“What’s notable is that the Xoom has a million pixel display while the iPad 2 has 786K pixels.”
“Apple likes to skimp on RAM to force the developers to write lean, clean code.
The Xoom has stereo speakers, not just stereo on the headphone jack. The Xoom has HFMI 1.4 built in; for Apple it seemed like an emergency afterthought.”
“I’m just mildly surprised that, given a year’s head start, Apple didn’t produce an iPad that’s not only better than a lot of the competition, but also didn’t virtually shut down the competition and dismay them.”
That remains to be seen, doesn’t it? Let’s check the sales figures in six months or a year, John. You might be more than mildly surprised.
Seth Weintraub on Fortune (March 2011):
“Steve Jobs’ reality distortion takes its toll on truth
Apple twisted facts and used an erroneous quotation to try to convince crowds that all other tablets had no shot at de-throning the iPad in 2011.”
Translation: I really, really want a tablet — any tablet — to de-throne the iPad. Just so long as it’s not the iPad 2.
Paul Thurrott on Paul Thurrott’s Supersite for Windows (March 2011):
“Apple Offers Surprisingly Tepid IPad 2 Release
Apple introduced the iPad 2 as expected on Wednesday, and that’s the problem: There were absolutely no surprises at all ...”
“Despite looking almost identical to the first iPad, Jobs repeatedly described the device as ‘an all-new design.’”
“There are an incredible 18 different models of iPad 2, which comes in 16GB, 32GB, and 64GB variants, as before, and in models that work with Wi-Fi only, AT&T 3G wireless networks, and Verizon Wireless 3G. Good luck figuring out which one you want.”
Translation: I’m going to spend the rest of my life trying to spin everything Apple does as a failure or disappointment. And I don’t care who knows it.
John Naughton in The Guardian (March 2011):
“[I]t’s Apple that is turning into the evil empire”
“You may think you own your lovely, shiny new iPhone or iPad, but in reality an invisible virtual string links it back to Apple HQ at One Infinite Loop, Cupertino. You can’t install anything on it that hasn’t had the prior approval of Mr Jobs and his subordinates.”
“Apple now controls the commanding heights of the online content business and it looks like doing the same to the mobile phone business. At the moment, it looks as though nobody has a good idea of how to stop it.”
Because Apple should be stopped.
Brett Arends in The Wall Street Journal (March 2011):
“Move Over, Apple! My Tablet Cost $200”
“No kidding.”
“I bought a Barnes & Noble Nook Color tablet ... And then I downloaded a very simple, perfectly legal software fix from the Internet that turned it into a fully functioning tablet running on Google’s Android platform.”
“If Barnes & Noble can do it, anyone can.”
Getting desperate for those cheap iPad knockoffs that were supposed to blow Apple away, huh? If it’s not happening, maybe you can make it happen. Right, Brett?
Tom Dunlap of PCWorld (March 2011):
“My $200 Laptop Can Beat Your $500 Tablet”
“If you’re willing to take a chance on used equipment, Craigslist fans have the opportunity to find slightly older laptops starting at about $200.”
“I think my used ThinkPad [X30] — which I paid about $200 for — crushes your iPad 2, which new, starts at $499 and can run more than $800, depending on the configuration.”
Wait — you mean to tell me that a used, corporate laptop from 2002 costs way less than a brand new, just-released 2011 iPad 2? Thanks for the tip, Tom.
Reggie Fils-Aime of Nintendo (March 2011):
“[W]e are not looking to do business today with the garage developer. In our view, that’s not a business we want to pursue.”
Translation: We couldn’t make our system attractive to the indie game developer if we tried.
Katherine Noyes of PCWorld (March 2011):
“Why the iPad 2 Leaves Me Cold”
“I can’t for the life of me see what there is to be excited about in Apple’s new iPad.”
“The iPad 2 leaves me cold, particularly when you compare it with Android-based competitors like the Motorola Xoom.”
“The iPad 2 may have a few, minor advantages over competitors like the Xoom for now, but they won’t last long.”
“[Y]ou have to do things the way Apple tells you to do them — and like it. If there are problems, you’d better get used to waiting for help. Apple, and only Apple, is in charge of the entire ecosystem. Nothing like a monopoly for good service, right? Hah, not so much.”
“[iOS] can’t hold a candle to Android 3.0, or Honeycomb, particularly for tablet purposes.”
“No way can Apple’s limited staff protect you [from malware] better than legions of open source users around the globe ...”
“In a Retrevo survey published about a year ago, the majority of consumers said they didn’t really want an iPad.”
“[P]otential purchasers of the iPad 2 need to separate themselves as much as possible from the hype. Sit down and take a cold, rational look at the device and its competitors — particularly the Xoom — and you’ll see why Apple just hasn’t delivered all that much, except another snazzy performance.”
Say, could there possibly be such a thing as irrational anti-Apple hype? And if there was, where would I go to find it? Anyone? Anyone?
Katherine Noyes of PCWorld (March 2011):
“Why Tablets Are Just a Fad”
“[S]trong sales are backing up the hype — at least for now — suggesting something about the devices has caught on with consumers.
What is that mysterious ‘something’? Purely marketing, I believe. Apple is nothing if not master of the glitzy sales pitch, and there’s never been better proof of that than the iPad’s current success.
Mark my words: The device — and all the others of its ilk that have sprung up for a piece of the action — are nothing more than a passing fad, at least in the mainstream.”
“[T]he release of the iPad 2 made it clear that excitement with the devices is already fading. Reviews of Apple’s new tablet were generally mixed, suggesting that reality is beginning to sink in.”
“It’s no secret that I am not an Apple fan ...”
“I see no reason to own a tablet, and fully expect them to fade out of the mainstream over the next few years.”
Mark my words: I fully expect that if, a few years from now, Apple’s products are doing even better than they are today, Katherine Noyes will still be predicting their imminent failure.
Stephen DeWitt of HP (March 2011):
“Apple’s relationship with partners is transactional, completely. Apple doesn’t have an inclusive philosophy of partner capabilities, and that’s just absurd.”
Apple also doesn’t instantiate proactive synergies. Even more absurd.
Andy Lark of Dell (March 2011):
“I couldn’t be happier that Apple has created a market and built up enthusiasm but longer term, open, capable and affordable will win, not closed, high price and proprietary.”
“[Apple has] done a really nice job, they’ve got a great product, but the challenge they’ve got is that already Android is outpacing them.”
“Apple is great if you’ve got a lot of money and live on an island. It’s not so great if you have to exist in a diverse, open, connected enterprise; simple things become quite complex.”
“An iPad with a keyboard, a mouse and a case [means] you’ll be at $1500 or $1600; that’s double of what you’re paying. That’s not feasible.”
Pssst. Andy. Don’t look now, but a lot of businesses are buying iPads. And they’re not buying all that junk to go with them. And the iPad has overwhelming majority market share; it’s not being outpaced by anything. And Apple hasn’t created a tablet market; they’ve created an iPad market. And I could go on, but I think maybe I’ve already lost you. Just keep selling those clunky, ’90s, Windows PCs. You’ll do fine.
Craig Mundie of Microsoft (March 2011):
“Mobile is something that you want to use while you’re moving, and portable is something that you move and then use.
These are going to bump into one another a little bit and so today you can see tablets and pads and other things that are starting to live in the space in between. Personally I don’t know whether that space will be a persistent one or not.”
“I don’t know whether the big screen tablet pad category is going to remain with us or not.”
I do.
Brett Arends in The Wall Street Journal (March 2011):
“Is That iPad 2 Really Worth $2,000?”
“If I don’t spend that $500 [on an iPad], I’ll invest it.”
“At [average historical rates], in 10 years’ time my $500 will have grown to about $800. ... In 15 years it’ll be about $1,000, and in 30 years, $2,000.”
Wait — you mean to tell me that if I don’t buy an iPad, or any other computer instead, I’ll have an extra $2,000 when I’m sixty years old? Assuming I’m only thirty today? Thanks for the tip, Brett.
And thanks for providing us with a virtually identical tip, just after the iPhone came out in ’07, about how we could have an extra $17,670 if we do without the iPhone or any other smartphone, or any other phone, for 35 years. That was really helpful. Those people who took your advice have only 31 more years to go, phoneless, before they get their hands on that $17K. Sure wish I was one of them.
Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures (April 2011):
“I believe the mobile OS market will play out very similarly to Windows and Macintosh, with Android in the role of Windows. And so if you want to be in front of the largest number of users, you need to be on Android.”
Who cares if you make any money, right? Oh yeah: developers. That’s who.
Update: Oh, and sorry to hear you sold your Apple stock just before it climbed steadily over the past couple years to 3.7 times your selling price. Bummer.
Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry on Business Insider (April 2011):
“Apple is suing Samsung for allegedly ripping off the look and feel of its iPhone and iPad. Here’s the problem: it’s not clear that anyone has ever won a ‘look and feel’ lawsuit. ... Nor should they. Fast-following and imitating is a big part of what makes free markets work. It helps competition and helps bring innovations to consumers faster.”
Letting Samsung flagrantly rip off Apple’s designs helps Samsung get innovations to consumers faster. Got it.
Jason Perlow on ZDNet (May 2011):
“Flash runs sucky on mobile hardware and on the Mac only because Apple refuses to spend the time and due diligence with Adobe to fully optimize it correctly.”
Let me get this straight, Jason. Not only is it “only” Apple’s fault that Flash has sucked on the Mac for over a decade — but it’s also Apple’s fault that Flash “runs sucky on mobile hardware?” Uhh...what Flash-sucky mobile hardware are you talking about? Samsung’s Galaxy Tab? Apple’s fault. Motorola’s XOOM? Apple’s fault. RIM’s PlayBook? Apple’s fault!
OK, here’s the straight dope, Jason, but promise you won’t tell anybody: It really is Apple’s fault that Flash doesn’t run at all on the iPhone and iPad. Shhh — try to keep it under your hat.
Peter Cohen on The Tech Night Owl With Gene Steinberg (May 2011):
“I think [Apple] can [screw up]. I think it’s an inevitability. And I don’t know that they can screw it up as much as just, you know, popular taste will no longer demand Apple products, eventually. I think inevitably they’re gonna get knocked off the pedestal.”
“Eventually there’s gonna be a flashpoint where people are just burnt-out on Apple products. ... I was in an elevator recently with a couple guys that I didn’t know, and one of them was talking about getting a new smartphone, ’cause his contract was up, and he’s, like, ‘Yeah, I don’t want an iPhone, because they’re just so mainstream.’”
Okey-dokey, Peter. If you say so.
Bill Gates of Microsoft (May 2011):
“I wouldn’t say that [Microsoft has been left behind in the handheld computing revolution]. I’d say there’s companies doing very good work in that area. I think that the phone has become very software-centric. So whereas about three or four years ago, if you look what Microsoft was saying, they were saying the phone would become software-centric, that’s really taken place. And so it’s software approaches that are succeeding there. The idea that reading and media are moving down onto the digital device, that’s good news. And Microsoft has to create the best device for those scenarios.”
Translation: Apple is really, really kicking our ass.
Aaron Holesgrove on Business Insider (June 2011):
“Apple gets too much credit for how it affected its competitors ...”
“Microsoft might definitely have some Apple envy but at the end of the day, they would have still designed the same kind of interface for Windows 8 no matter what happened outside of their own walls.”
“It is common knowledge that [iOS] is a modified version of OS X with a touch centric shell on top.”
“[T]he iPad succeeds because it enables you to read websites whilst sitting on the toilet and play casual games in bed. It’s a toy. You can’t eliminate complexity when there was never any complexity in the first place — Apple went and threw a 10" screen on the iPod Touch and iPhone and called them the iPad and iPad 3G, respectively.”
“iOS IS a touch-based shell covering up Mac OS X — it’s one tenth of the OS and one tenth of the battery consumption.”
“[N]o one could care less about [Apple products] up until about five years ago.”
“Microsoft wants your tablet to be your total solution and just because Apple can’t do it, doesn’t mean that someone else can’t either ... Apple are obsessed with pushing this agenda of crippled iPads being acceptable devices ...”
“Sure some apps in Windows 8 tablets will look ugly but at the end of the day, backwards compatibility with legacy Windows apps isn’t a drawback — it’s a feature, because that’s what the market will demand.”
That’s what the market will demand — just as soon as it gets done demanding Apple’s products, that is. Which is gonna happen, like, any day now. I’m sure.
Seth Sternberg of Meebo (June 2011):
“I think apps are dead in three to five years.”
Funny coincidence: I think Seth Sternberg’s credibility as a tech prognosticator will be dead in three to five years.
Nikolay Grebennikov of Kaspersky (June 2011):
“Apple simply can’t continue with its current closed approach, and in my opinion, to remain competitive it should be looking to open up its platform within a year.”
“The Android platform, which is growing its market share, is much more open than the Apple iOS and it’s easier to create new applications for Android, including security software.”
“Apple is the only protector of its iPhone and iPad users but they don’t know the real situation with threats. It’s not possible to create the products they create, and be a world leader in security too; that expertise is elsewhere.”
Like, um, at Kaspersky, perhaps? Wow, you don’t say.
Robert Scoble on Scobleizer (June 2011):
“I finally had someone explain to me why Android will gain huge marketshare this year in the large-screen tablet wars (aka where iPad is dominant). It took USA’s #1 TV manufacturer, Vizio, to do it.”
“Anyway, here it is: a $350 capable tablet is coming. Coming in July, they told me (and I believe them, they don’t want to piss off the retail chain in the United States because they are #1 in large screen TVs).”
Oops. It’s January 2012, and I haven’t heard anything about a $350 iPad killer from Vizio. Guess that retail chain must be really pissed off by now. Except for Apple retail, of course, which is not pissed off.
Katherine Noyes of PCWorld (June 2011):
“Until recently, it was a commonly held belief in the mainstream computing world that Macs are more secure than Windows PCs are. Then MacDefender happened, and a whole new era began.”
“Rather than jumping to attention with assistance in a timely manner, [Apple] dragged its feet, denied the problem and stonewalled in every manner possible before finally taking action. For a company that prides itself on the safety and protection of its tightly closed ‘walled garden,’ the arrogance of Apple’s reaction was beyond belief.”
“Mac users can no longer rest easy in the ‘security,’ real or perceived, of their walled garden — at least no more than Windows users can on their own platform. If anyone needed further proof that ‘security by obscurity’ doesn’t work, this is it.”
“Even if Apple did care about customer service, the fact remains that no one company can protect you as well as the worldwide community of users can.”
“Regardless of your opinion of Apple and its approach, the fact is that the computing landscape is irrevocably changed in the wake of MacDefender ...”
Believing (hoping?) that one lame phishing scam is the leading tip of a huge Apple-focused malware outbreak = “fact.” Noticing that the typical Apple user doesn’t waste any time or expense on malware protection and no harm comes of it = “opinion.” Got it.
Michael A. Cusumano of MIT as reported by Steve Lohr in The New York Times (June 2011):
“Apple’s product designs, however impressive, will eventually be mimicked and come under price pressure, just as the mainframe did, predicts Michael A. Cusumano, professor at the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In time, he says, Apple may want to borrow a page from I.B.M. and rely increasingly on software and services for its livelihood.”
Good advice, Mike. And I’m sure that just as soon as Apple wants to become a publicly obscured, esoteric research company and component manufacturer, with no mass-market products of their own, they’ll be taking your advice. But not before.
Paul Hochman at Forward with Ford Futuring and Trends Conference (June 2011):
“Apple’s in big trouble. They’re sitting on piles of cash, but they are sitting on a closed system. In biology, in history, a closed system never survives.”
You know how Apple got all that cash, Paul? They snuck into Microsoft in the middle of the night and swiped it. Yes, really.
Daniel Bailey on The Motley Fool (July 2011):
“Is It Time for Apple to Shut Safari Down?”
“When you’re caught in a 5% market share trap, what are your options? Keep surviving or abandon the business?”
“Safari is disconnected from Apple’s iOS platform approach, and it may be a good idea for Apple to simply spin off Reader and shut down Safari ... this would surely be the common-sense approach ...”
“It is somewhat obvious that Safari is an increasingly painful problem for Apple and its users ...”
“Apple may have to make a choice soon: Either accelerate the development of its browser to bring it up to par with the feature set of its other platform products, or turn it into an app and open the App Store to other browsers — or simply shut down Safari, as Chrome is based on the same core engine and is the far better browser today. Doing nothing may be the worst choice.”
Nothing worse than selling several million iOS products each month. Eh, Daniel?
Steve Ballmer of Microsoft (July 2011):
“350 million, 350 million new PCs sold. That might compare with numbers from other guys that are in the 20 million range ... now, 20 is too much, but 350 the last time I checked is a lot more than 20.”
You’re doing great, Ballmer. Keep up the good work. Stay the course.
Grace Lei of HTC (July 2011):
“HTC is disappointed at Apple’s constant attempts at litigations instead of competing fairly in the market.”
Compete fairly = just keep developing more great products for HTC to flagrantly copy. Got it.
Demetrius Mandzych on InformationWeek.com (July 2011):
“A Sobering Look At Apple”
“In all honesty, I don’t know why people buy products from Apple.”
“The genius of Apple is that it has fooled its customers ... Customers then justify their purchases of average to below-average products.”
“Customers — and the tech press at large — needs to stop accepting failure as a matter of course from Apple. Stop acting like you’re lucky to be a part of the failure.”
“Make Apple earn your loyalty, respect, and hard-earned cash with excellent products and service. Otherwise, what is average to sub-average performance will only get worse. Like a spoiled child, Apple will do exactly what you let it get away with. Vote with your dollars.”
Buy, then put up with, frustrating, second-rate rip-offs of Apple products, so as to teach Apple that its products should be better than they currently are? Okay. You do that, Demetrius. And as Apple’s products improve over the coming years, I’ll remember I have you to thank.
Maxwell Wessel in Harvard Business Review (July 2011):
“Why Spotify Will Kill iTunes”
“iTunes as we know it is over. It is walking, talking, and continuing to pretend it’s alive, but Spotify, Europe’s outrageously successful streaming music product, has just shown us the future.”
“[The] iTunes business model is about to be blown up completely and swiftly.”
“To appreciate the truth of this claim, it’s vital to understand one of Clayton Christensen’s theories on marketing and product development: Jobs-to-be-done.”
“[W]e know it’s disruption because it is a business model, fundamentally advantaged in one of the characteristics we value in completing the job-to-be-done. Over time this model will displace iTunes. We’ve seen the future, because that’s what disruptive theory lets us do.”
Hey, as long as that fat, old university keeps paying you to write this stuff, why not keep doing it?
Dan Gillmor of the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication (July 2011):
“Apple gives you permission to use the computers you buy in only the ways Apple considers appropriate. The writing has been on Apple’s wall for some time. It’s aiming for absolute authority over the ecosystem in which all its devices operate. Given the well-chronicled consequences of the company’s control-freakery in the iOS ecosystem, which is being merged with the Mac, that’s unacceptable ...”
“By rejecting its past so thoroughly — a proud history of creating devices that we users could modify for our own purposes with no one’s permission but our own — Apple is forcing me to move on.”
To run all those hundreds of thousands of third-party apps, representing tens of millions of hours of programming effort, I should need no one’s permission but my own.
Cory Doctorow in The Guardian (July 2011):
“[A more open ecosystem is] important to me. After all, a tablet without software is just an inconveniently fragile and poorly reflective mirror, so the thing I want to be sure of when I buy a device is that I don’t have to implicitly trust one corporation’s judgment about what software I should and shouldn’t be using.”
Especially if there’s any chance I might not have paid for it.
Trip Hawkins of Digital Chocolate (August 2011):
“If you look at any institution in history — look at the Roman Empire — anything in history, and what it looks like when it’s peaking. Look at Apple, and how can you say it’s not peaking?”
“The thing is, it may take another year or two before it starts to decline, but it has to — everything does.”
Apple has been growing non-stop for ten or fifteen years, but in the next “year or two” (or less), it will start to decline. Because “everything does.” And because the Roman Empire did. Got it.
David Drummond of Google (August 2011):
“Android’s success has yielded something else: a hostile, organized campaign against Android by Microsoft, Oracle, Apple and other companies, waged through bogus patents.”
“Patents were meant to encourage innovation, but lately they are being used as a weapon to stop it.”
Innovation = just keep making more cool products for us to imitate. Got it.
Anders Bylund on The Motley Fool (August 2011):
“[D]on’t expect them [the iPad killers] to actually kill anything, short of a massive shift in marketing strategy. ... The best device doesn’t always win. The best marketing does.”
Make a poorly thought-out, me-too device that’s six to twelve months newer than Apple’s — so it has six-to-twelve months’ newer components, and is therefore “better” — then market the crap out of it. You’re sure to beat Apple, eventually. So don’t stop.
Kevin C. Tofel on GigaOM (August 2011):
“5 reasons HP TouchPad discounts don’t spell disaster”
“Nothing against these folks and many others that tweeted similar doom and gloom thoughts; I respect their opinions, but I disagree ...”
“HP has become the top PC seller in the world by using these pricing strategies, and there’s no reason it shouldn’t do the same thing where it can in the tablet market.”
Translation: Six months from now, you won’t even remember that there was such a thing as a “TouchPad.”
Update: Did I say six months? I should’ve said less than two weeks.
Frank X. Shaw of Microsoft (August 2011):
“The IBM PC is 30 Years Old — And We’re (All) Just Getting Started”
“[T]he introduction of the IBM PC was a defining moment for our industry. ... Thirty years ago, Microsoft believed that making technology less expensive and more widely available would open up amazing opportunities for people and organizations to achieve their dreams.”
“People sometimes ask me about what Microsoft thinks about the post-PC era (I prefer to think of it as the PC-plus era, since there will be 400 million PCs sold worldwide this coming year, but that’s semantics :) ).”
“[T]he past doesn’t always predict the future, but let’s just say it offers some strong clues. As we look ahead to the next 30 years, we’ll continue to lead the industry forward in bringing technology to the next billion (or 2 billion or 6 billion) people on our planet.”
Hey, here’s a strong clue: For the last ten years, just about every new product from Microsoft has tanked miserably, while Apple released smash hit after smash hit. And Apple left Microsoft’s market cap and profits in the dust months ago. And Apple just passed Exxon Mobil’s market cap, making Apple the #1 company in the world, period. FYI.
Joe Wilcox on betanews (August 2011):
“Apple intimidation drives developer innovation”
“Mark this day — Aug. 10, 2011 — on a calendar, for it may be remembered as a turning point for Apple, when it finally claimed and maintained largest market capitalization and the beginnings of a developer revolt broke iOS mobile apps dominance. What’s that axiom about Rome declining at the height of power and rotting from corruption within?”
“So what is the world’s most valuable company — with $75 billion cash horde — doing with all that power? Bullying competitors with patent and intellectual lawsuits — HTC and Samsung, notably — and development partners with restrictive — and I would say anticompetitive — policies. The restrictions have led to surprising response, all on the same day. Amazon, Financial Times and Vudu released Web apps that sidestep Apple App Store policies and can be consumed in a browser. The significance cannot be understated.”
But it can be overstated, apparently.
Michael Arrington of TechCrunch (August 2011):
“[O]ne thing I was very right on is the huge demand for a less expensive tablet computer, even in today’s iPad world. HP’s [product cancellation] sale of the TouchPad for $100 just confirms this — people will buy millions and millions of these things even if it doesn’t have an Apple logo on it.”
“HP certainly can’t spend $318 to build a TouchPad and then sell it for $100. But HP (or someone) could build a perfectly awesome capacitive touch screen tablet running on decent hardware for less than $200.”
“If HP were to knock the screen quality down just a bit and figure out a cheaper storage solution, the BOM (bill of materials) on their device could be significantly lower than $200. Normally they’d retail that at $400 or more. But if instead they sold it for cost, and sold millions of them, a very robust developer network would pop up around WebOS.”
“I say to HP — KEEP MAKING TOUCHPADS, as fast as you can. See what the demand curve looks like at $200, and watch the app developers suddenly get crazy excited about WebOS again.”
The reason no one has been selling iPad knock-offs at half the price of an iPad is because they were all waiting for Arrington to tell them that it’s a good idea.
Katherine Noyes in PCWorld (August 2011):
“Post-Jobs, Apple Needs to Open Up
There’s no denying that the departure of Steve Jobs as Apple CEO is the end of an era. ... Now that Jobs has stepped down, however, Apple has a great opportunity. Rather than maintain its completely closed and locked-down approach to the technologies it makes, the time is right for Apple to open up. Besides creating a more sustainable strategy for Apple, such a move would perform a great service for consumers, businesses and the world.”
Or at least for the world of feverishly anti-Apple pundits like you, Katherine.
Brooke Crothers on CNet (August 2011):
“iPad met its match in the TouchPad”
“Roger Kay, principal analyst at Endpoint Technologies, believes the TouchPad’s demise should give Apple pause. ... ‘If you were a big company like HP and you were doing a new category product launch, it would not be weird to have a marketing budget in the hundreds of millions ... So, you could have used that money to subsidize the price of the TouchPad and you can flood the market with these devices that are worth way more than you have to pay for them. And get them in everybody’s hands. Get everybody talking about it. That could have been the loss leader entry into the market,’ he said. ‘So, it wasn’t really a product failure, it was a pricing failure.’”
Watch out, Apple. Those big boys with hundreds of millions of dollars of expendable cash might be coming after li’l ol’ Apple with its paltry, uh, what is it now? Oh, yeah, $76 billion.
Matt Marshall on VentureBeat (August 2011):
“Markets will punish Apple for the loss of its master magician
With Steve Jobs stepping down as chief executive of Apple, and his leadership of the company apparently at an end, big clouds are gathering over the company’s future...”
“It’s far from certain that the resignation of Jobs is fatal, or even a major blow to the company.”
Translation: I don’t care if Apple is the most successful company that ever was, I’m going to find a way to say “Apple” and “fatal” in the same sentence. Because I want to. And I’ll swear with my dying breath that I really thought “far from certain” could mean “extremely unlikely.”
Brian Caulfield of Forbes (August 2011):
“Why The Undead $99 TouchPad Might Portend The iPad’s Doom
Is the $99 TouchPad the future of the tablet market?”
“Losing big bucks on hardware is an ugly business model, but it’s not uncommon, and it might just be the future of the tablet market.”
“So is there a future for Apple in the tablet business?”
Let me think about it. I’ve thought about it. Yes. There is.
Julian Lee of the Sydney Morning Herald (August 2011):
“Steve Jobs’s Apple legacy may not be so sweet at the core”
“[Jobs] is guilty, among other things, of bequeathing to us a worldwide cult of technological onanism from which we are unlikely to recover any time soon.”
“An entire generation will only be able to walk into its future so long as Apple holds its hand.”
“[W]e have fallen for it. We have become slaves to Apple’s brand ...”
“[T]here is nothing very cool about the culture of the company Jobs has presided over since he returned as CEO in 1997, after being ousted some years earlier in a boardroom coup. Its ‘my way or the highway’ approach to business has earned it few friends. Apple is one of the few technology companies in the world that has succeeded despite having a closed ecosystem that does not work with any other technology.”
Translation: If Apple was a good company in the mid-’90s, it would have died then, and if it’s a good company today, it will lay down and let its opponents slay it.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott's Supersite For Windows (August 2011):
“Apple is a hugely successful company and its Mac business, even though it trails the wider PC market by a wide margin, is a great business, a very, very successful and desirable business. For Apple. Why anyone would care about that, other than employees of Apple, is unclear to me.”
So Apple has a “great business, a very, very successful and desirable business” selling Macs to, uh, Apple employees? Come again?
Hugo Rufkind, The London Times (August 2011):
“Join the cult if you like — Apple makes me cringe”
“[Apple is] an enormous, all-pervasive company that does its utmost to screw you six times before breakfast ...”
“[Why people think highly of Jobs is] a good question, and the answer isn’t just ‘because people are morons.’”
I’m going to try to explain why [people like Jobs] without sneering, although it’s not going to be easy. I don’t hate Apple. I actually quite like Apple. But I hate people who love Apple.”
I don’t hate Apple. I don’t, I don’t, I don’t!
Eric S. Raymond, “Armed and Dangerous” (August 2011):
“[Steve Jobs’s resignation] could hardly happen at a more difficult juncture — for though Apple’s cash reserves and quarterly profits are eye-popping, the company faces serious challenges in the near future. Its strategic position rests on premises that are now in serious doubt, and it is on the wrong end of a serious example of what Clayton Christensen has called ‘disruption from below’.”
“Android is now putting actual downward pressure on Apple’s market share.”
“The launch of the Nexus Prime could easily leave Apple as far behind on the technology curve as it is now, and with no realistic prospect of recovering for many months more.
Apple’s position in tablets is also weakening.”
“This is a failure mode that, as Clayton Christensen has documented, routinely crashes large and well-run companies at the apparent peak of their success.”
Apple = fail. Got it.
Joe Wilcox on betanews (September 2011):
“I lost my passion for Apple
Earlier this month I sold my 11.6-inch MacBook Air (using Samsung Series 5 Chromebook now) and iPhone 4 (switched back to Google Nexus S). I don’t miss either Apple product. Not the least bit. In reflecting, I realize that the spell is broken. Without Apple Chairman Steve Jobs driving innovation or inspiring passion — the oft-called “reality distortion field” — my Apple enthusiasm is gone. Perhaps it’s return to sanity.”
Joe, this is your eighth entry into my iPhone/iPad poopers lists. Something tells me you lost your “passion for Apple” a long time ago — if you ever had it.
Kyle Smith on Forbes (September 2011):
“Is Steve Jobs A Creative Genius, Or A Tyrant?”
“[I]t turns out that the famous Apple ‘1984’ ad was more prescient than anyone suspected at the time. Except Steve Jobs wasn’t the woman throwing the hammer. He was Big Brother — a high-tech giant revered by slackjawed multitudes from his domineering position on every video screen. And like Big Brother he was a spooky, weird control freak who cultivated not so much fans as thought-slaves.”
Quit beating around the bush, Kyle. Do you like him or not?
Paul Thurrott on Twitter (September 2011):
“Hello, Windows 8? This is iPad. You win.”
So Windows 8 is better than iPad because — you would shut down iPad if you could? I knew it! I knew the iPad sucked.
Zach Epstein on BGR (September 2011):
“Sorry Apple, Windows 8 ushers in the post-post-PC era”
“Apple bloggers were apparently so flustered by [Windows 8] that they resorted to bombarding Twitter with jokes about cooling fans and Silverlight instead of stopping for a moment to realize that Microsoft is showing us the future of computing.”
“[Windows 8:] One platform to rule them all.”
“Apple paved the way but Microsoft will get there first with Windows 8.”
“Debate all you want. Android and iOS apps are dumbed down and infinitely less capable ... and the experience as a whole is severely limited.”
“We are not living in a ‘post-PC’ era today any more than we were on January 26th, 2010, the day before Apple unveiled the magical iPad. Apple would love a post-PC era, of course, since personal computers no longer represent the bulk of the company’s revenue, but Microsoft is showing us that there is a better way. And that better way, as it turns out, is a PC.”
Hasn’t Microsoft been showing us the “future” of computing for, like, the past ten or fifteen years now? Glad to hear it’s finally about to arrive.
Gartner Research (September 2011):
[predicts that Apple will have only about 45% of the “media tablet” market in about four years]
Hey, Gartner guys, I notice that your chart shows sales of 2.5 million Android tablets in 2010. Uh, which Android tablets were those, and to whom were they sold? Just wondering. You know. Because, like, 2010 ended nearly nine months ago, and I haven’t heard anything about Android tablets selling that well to date.
Update: NPD reports that U.S., non-Apple tablet sales in the first ten months of 2011 (which, of course, includes Android) “soared” to more than 1.2 million units.
Don Reisinger on eWEEK (September 2011):
“Apple iPad 3 Might Face Trouble at Launch: 10 Reasons Why”
“Whether it’s made available in October or early next year, the [iPad 3] will face significant challenges that might stymie its chances of dramatically outselling its predecessor. Although Apple might not like to hear it, the tablet space is changing at a torrid pace and the iPad 3’s sales might suffer a bit because of that.”
How do you predict these things so far in advance, Don? There must be some trick to it, but for the life of me I can’t figure out what it is.
Molly Wood on CNet (September 2011):
“Kindle Fire an iPad killer? Yes. It’s the price, stupid
Amazon, not Apple, just mainstreamed the tablet market.”
“The company’s new Kindle Fire tablet, a 7-inch touch-screen device powered by Amazon’s content ecosystem and priced at just $199, may be an orange to Apple’s iPad apple, but I’d argue that it’s an iPad killer all the same.”
“The iPad, in even sideways competition with a Kindle Fire, faces the same problem it’s always had, but it’s a bigger problem now. The problem is that hardly anyone actually needs an iPad.”
I’m sure this can’t be the same Molly Wood who said that Apple would sell only 800 iPads. Can it?
Karl Denninger on Seeking Alpha (September 2011):
“The Upcoming Crash Of Apple And Amazon
I’ll get flamed for this I’m sure, but I don’t care. Apple’s stock price (AAPL) is going to collapse, and Amazon (AMZN) may in fact go bankrupt.”
Now, why would anyone “flame” you for predicting the collapse of Apple’s stock price? How ’bout we check that price a year from now, and then maybe we’ll all have a clue.
C.K. Lu of Gartner as reported by Clare Jim and Miyoung Kim on Reuters (October 2011):
“Apple no longer has a leading edge, its cloud service is even behind (Google’s mobile operating system) Android; it can only sell on brand loyalty now.”
If Apple’s incredible sales figures are a function of brand loyalty, then aren’t all its competitors completely screwed?
Richard M. Stallman of the Free Software Foundation (October 2011):
“Nobody deserves to have to die — not Jobs, not Mr. Bill, not even people guilty of bigger evils than theirs. But we all deserve the end of Jobs’ malign influence on people’s computing.”
If I spend hundreds of hours of my time writing an app, it automatically becomes part of the “people’s computing.” And it should be free. Got it.
Bad news, Richard. Steve Jobs, the person, did die. But what you call his “malign influence” on computing? It’s just getting started. Time to crawl back into your cave.
Robert J. Samuelson in The Washington Post (October 2011):
“In death, [Jobs] has been lionized as the era’s greatest business leader.”
“By history’s measure, Jobs’s achievements are tiny. ... Their ultimate social impact may be less than Facebook’s.”
“A century from now, historians and ordinary Americans will still remember Edison and Ford. Jobs will be a footnote, if that.”
Robert Samuelson, on the other hand, will be well-remembered as a grade-A asshole.
Kyle Smith in Forbes (October 2011):
“Steve Jobs Was A Lousy Role Model”
“Jobs’ Stanford advice is not just trite, misleading and foolish, it’s also a symptom of a deeper problem with Generation Apple. They venerate great individuals without understanding that not everyone is great.”
Quite right, Kyle. Not everyone is great.
Don Reisinger on eWEEK (October 2011):
“Apple iPad’s Reign as Top Tablet Won’t Last Forever”
“[I]t appears that Apple will dominate the tablet space for at least the next year.”
At least.
David Coursey in Forbes (October 2011):
“Steve Jobs was a major, world-class jerk. A friend who knows about these things — but not Steve — wonders if he wasn’t at least a borderline sociopath. If you define that as someone who does evil things and doesn’t feel remorse, the picture of a smirking Steve Jobs does begin to emerge.”
I didn’t have to ask “a friend who knows about these things” to get a really clear picture of what kind of person you are, Dave. I simply read what you wrote.
Jerry Shen of ASUS as reported by Electronista Staff (October 2011):
“Shen is also reportedly optimistic that Windows 8 will ‘completely change’ the tablet market and put Microsoft on top, defeating the iPad.”
Optimism, apparently, is something ASUS is very good at.
Avram Piltch on LAPTOP - The Pulse of Mobile Tech (October 2011):
“The votes have been counted and we have a winner in the 2011 Tablet World Series. Lenovo’s ThinkPad Tablet takes the crown ...”
“[T]he ThinkPad Tablet simply dominated the game this weekend.”
“Could the ThinkPad Tablet’s win herald a new appreciation for productivity and for pen-based input? We’ll just have to see.”
You mean, you’ll have to see, Avram. Most of us already know.
Jack Gold as reported by Nicholas Kolakowski in eWEEK (November 2011):
“By 2014-15 we expect Android tablets to acquire a majority share of the consumer market as the number of vendors and variety of models overwhelm the iPad.”
You know how I know the iPad will be overwhelmed in a few years? Because of the number and variety of industry analysts predicting that it will be.
Steve Ballmer of Microsoft (November 2011):
“We are in the Windows era — we were, we are, and we always will be.”
Hey, as long as I don’t have to see hide nor hair of it, I couldn’t care less if, technically, we’re still in the COBOL era.
NPD Group - Behind Every Business Decision (November 2011):
“U.S. Tablet Sales (excluding Apple) Exceed 1.2 Million Units in First 10 Months of 2011”
“U.S. tablet sales, excluding iPad sales, soared to more than 1.2 million units sold from January through October ...”
“‘If you look at the tablet market without Apple there are a number of high-profile brands vying for that number two spot,’ said Stephen Baker, vice president of industry analysis at NPD. ‘According to NPD’s Consumer Tracking Service, 76 percent of consumers who purchased a non-Apple tablet didn’t even consider the iPad, an indication that a large group of consumers are looking for alternatives, and an opportunity for the rest of the market to grow their business.
PC manufacturers are dominant in the tablet space, as four of the top five tablet brands already have a strong U.S. consumer PC presence.”
Translation: Nine out of every ten tablets sold are Apple iPads.
Zach Epstein in BGR (November 2011):
“iPad demand said to be fading as competition heats up”
“Demand for Apple’s iPad tablet is said to be in decline as competition finally heats up thanks to the $199 Kindle Fire from Amazon, and investors could be in for a disappointing fourth quarter as a result.”
It turned out to be the second-best quarter in any U.S. company’s history, ever. But not the first-best. Disappointing.
David Wilson in Bloomberg (November 2011):
“Apple Stock Slump Shows ‘Hyper-Growth’ Over”
“Anyone who expects Apple Inc.’s growth to rebound after sales and earnings shortfalls last quarter is ‘living in denial,’ according to David Nelson, chief strategist at Belpointe Asset Management LLC.”
“‘This is no longer a hyper-growth company,’ Nelson said yesterday in a telephone interview. Apple’s products are now reaching customers who are less likely to upgrade as newer models are released, he added.”
“‘What Apple’s going through now is really a change in ownership,’ according to Nelson ...”
Steve Jobs died because his company wasn’t doing well. Got it.
Leonid Kanopka on Seeking Alpha (November 2011):
“The Apple Bubble Is Ready To Burst”
“Apple has spiraled out of control for the past several years. ... [T]here has been no ‘cooling’ to the excessive upward trend, and it appears the mighty AAPL is overheating.
The stock is currently trading in the upper $300s and appears to be highly overvalued, but its innovation has blinded the investor. If you left the symbol out and just told an investor that a stock had increased 420% + in the past five years, you would get a general consensus: Sell.
This trend cannot continue, no matter how innovative the company — it’s just the laws of finance and simple economics. I believe a fair price for AAPL is $85, slightly higher than its book value. With a huge selloff, this stock could even go lower — we have seen this panic before: Companies dropped to $0.40 in March 2009, and rebounded to $20.”
“I feel with [Jobs’s] death, Apple’s will only follow. Without leaders, empires crumble. Just like with Iraq, once Saddam Hussein was captured, Iraq was no longer united. With the tragic death of Steve Jobs, the Apple Empire will also falter, and I believe sooner than later.”
“The market is saturated with Apple products.”
“Apple is the largest US corporation by market capitalization, and the law of large numbers means it cannot continue to grow at this blistering growth rate in the future (hence, the stock is overheated).”
“It seems like every day Apple has a new competitor ...”
“From the Dutch tulip bubble of 1637 to the dot-com bubble of 2000, we tend to cling on to momentum.”
“Apple is a great company with wonderful products, but its run is up.”
Did you forget to throw in the Roman Empire, Leonid? What about Icarus? There’s still time; just stick an update on the end of your article!
To any readers who don’t know what “book value” means, let me explain: If you shut down Apple tomorrow, stopped production of all its products, cancelled all its plans, fired all its employees, then sold off its physical assets in the open market, converting everything to cash, payed off its debts (if any), and gave all the cash to the Apple shareholders on a per-share basis — then each share might receive something slightly under $85. Therefore $85 is a “fair price” for AAPL.
Nicholas Kolakowski on eWEEK (November 2011):
“Microsoft’s Windows 8 Tablets Not Too Late”
“Is it truly too late for Windows 8 tablets? The question seems asinine, considering how said tablets won’t hit the market for several quarters.”
“But does that necessarily mean that Windows 8 tablets will arrive on store shelves too late for consumers? No. In the tablet wars, Microsoft has one very powerful tool at its disposal: its wide variety of manufacturing partners. ... OEMs in the tablet and PC arena will have little choice but to embrace Windows 8 as the route forward against Apple’s iPad.”
Can’t they choose not to make a tablet at all? Where is it written that OEMs must blow tons of money on unsuccessful products?
Don Reisinger on eWEEK (November 2011):
“Windows 8 Tablets Will Be a Huge Hit”
“There’s little debating that tablets have become a huge hit and will be a major factor in the future growth of the PC market. People around the globe are flocking to stores to get their hands on everything from Apple’s iPad 2 to the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 to the Amazon Kindle Fire.”
“Easily the most important company yet to make a mark in the tablet market is Microsoft.”
“The only issue is, not everyone believes Windows 8 can be a winner in the tablet space. In fact, they say it will fail miserably. They’re wrong.”
“Windows 8 will likely be a success on the desktop and laptop. ... [T]hat success should also spill over into the tablet market where customers, happy with the experience of using Windows 8, will want to get a slate running the new Windows version as well.”
“Apple’s iPad is the dominant force in the tablet space right now. But how will it be able to hold up against the onslaught of Windows 8 tablets ready to hit store shelves? As noted, several vendors are readying Windows 8 tablets. As long as they follow through on their plans, store shelves might be saturated with those devices. The iPad might outsell individual Windows 8 tablets, but as a whole, it’ll fall short.”
When I want a tablet, I wander into any old store and reach blindly for any tablet that happens to be on the shelf. Since the store has given each model the same shelf space, I’m highly likely to wind up with a non-Apple tablet. And that’s just how it works — on Reisinger’s bizarro fantasy planet.
Ten models don’t make a forceful “onslaught.” Consumers don’t buy tablets on a whim because they happened to walk by a tablet-laden shelf. Tablets don’t even sit on store shelves. And the most popular store at which to buy a tablet — the Apple store — isn’t going to carry any Windows 8 devices. Welcome to Earth, Don.
Jonathan Zittrain of Harvard Law School (November 2011):
“For decades we’ve enjoyed a simple way for people to create software and share or sell it to others. People bought general-purpose computers — PCs, including those that say Mac. Those computers came with operating systems that took care of the basics. Anyone could write and run software for an operating system, and up popped an endless assortment of spreadsheets, word processors, instant messengers, Web browsers, e-mail, and games.”
“Then, in 2008, Apple announced a software development kit for the iPhone. Third-party developers would be welcome to write software for the phone, in just the way they’d done for years with Windows and Mac OS. With one epic exception: users could install software on a phone only if it was offered through Apple’s iPhone App Store. Developers were to be accredited by Apple, and then each individual app was to be vetted ...”
“The original sin behind the Microsoft case was made much worse.”
“Both software developers and users should demand more. Developers should look for ways to reach their users unimpeded, through still-open platforms, or through pressure on the terms imposed by the closed ones. And users should be ready to try ‘off-roading’ with the platforms that still allow it — hewing to the original spirit of the PC ... We need some angry nerds.”
Angry about what — that they can’t pirate all the apps for free, and share them with their grateful friends? What — no mention of piracy in your entire article, Jonathan? Um, why not?
Dave Winer on Scripting News (December 2011):
“Right now [Android is] the only open source mobile OS that has a chance against IOS. If there is no alternative to IOS then Apple will have exclusive control over what makes it to market. That is a future none of us should want to live in.”
None of us? Not even app developers who don’t want to be ravaged by casual piracy? Or typical users who love the enormous selection of iOS apps and don’t mind paying a few bucks for some of them?
And how about a future where the great majority of mobile app development is for iOS, but there’s still a relatively small amount of development for an alternative, open-source platform? Is that a future that would be OK for people to want to live in?
John Martellaro on the Mac Observer (December 2011):
“Apple is Now Forced to Build a 7-inch Tablet
With the success of the Amazon Kindle Fire, Apple can no longer sit idly by and watch this part of the market get gobbled up by a competitor. An avalanche must be averted.”
“When a company comes to dominate a specific market, it’s seen as a failure if another company steps in and finds a weakness. That’s exactly what Amazon has done with the Kindle Fire.”
“What can’t be denied is that Amazon has found a chink in Apple’s armor.”
Time will tell.
John C. Dvorak on MarketWatch (December 2011):
“Apple at the retail crossroads”
“So how much more can Apple grow the retail business?”
“Apple seems so adept at retail that there is no reason to doubt that it could go out and buy a company like Staples to expand in the sector. Why not?
Apple does have more than $75 billion in the bank, and Staples is worth about $10 billion. Do the math on any retail chain. Opportunity lurks.”
It’s been a while since you said something outrageous and moronic about Apple, John. Glad to see you haven’t lost your touch.
Tom Kaneshige in CIO (December 2011):
“Apple in 2012: 5 Reasons It Will Be a Tough Year”
“[E]xpect an exodus of talent in Cupertino in 2012 and perhaps some internal drama at the top of the Apple organizational chart, say tech analysts.”
“Apple’s extraordinary run over the last few years may begin to show signs of slowing next year — its first year without visionary leader Steve Jobs.”
“But not all is doom and gloom for Apple ...”
Really? You don’t say.
Sue Halpern on The New York Review of Books (December 2011):
“A former girlfriend, who went on to work in the mental health field, thought he had Narcissistic Personality Disorder. John Sculley, who orchestrated Jobs’s expulsion from Apple, wondered if he was bipolar. Jobs himself dismissed his excesses with a single word: artist.”
“[S]omewhere in the third world, poor people are picking through heaps of electronic waste in an effort to recover bits of gold and other metals and maybe make a dollar or two. Piled high and toxic, it is leaking poisons and carcinogens like lead, cadmium, and mercury that leach into their skin, the ground, the air, the water. Such may be the longest-lasting legacy of Steve Jobs’s art.”
The New York Review of Books sure knows how to find an impartial reviewer, don’t they?
Dr. Roy Schestowitz on TechRights (December 2011):
“Should We Organise an Apple Boycott?”
“The cult of Mr. Jobs loves to pretend that it invented the smartphones, CrunchPad-like tablets, and all things shiny.”
“Apple has been working hard to embargo — not just sue — the competition.”
Just because most patent-holders license out their patents for a fee, doesn’t mean everyone has to. If Apple wants to make money off its patents the old-fashioned way — by selling products directly to consumers — what’re they supposed to do if other companies trample all over those patents — whine about it to the press?
Darrell Etherington in Bloomberg Businessweek (December 2011):
“Is It Time for Apple’s Patent War to End? Apple would be smarter, says Kevin Rivette of 3LP Advisors, to cut tech deals that give it inside looks at rivals’ innovative directions”
“The answer [Bloomberg pundits] come up with is that Apple might be better off taking a less extreme approach, and I’m inclined to agree.”
“A SMARTER PATH
The better strategy, Rivette says, is to negotiate deals that would allow Apple an inside look at competitor direction in exchange for the use of current tech. That way, Apple would be able to spot and benefit from any innovation made by others. As it is, Apple is basically forcing innovation on the part of others while doing nothing to ensure any net IP gains for itself.”
Uh.. what if Apple’s competitors don’t have anything very valuable to share? What if nobody can “force” Apple’s competitors to innovate, because innovation just isn’t in their repertoire? And what if the strategy Apple has been on for the past fifteen years has been working really, really well?
Larry Seltzer on InformationWeek’s BYTE Beta (December 2011):
“2012 Will Be the Year of the Android Tablet
At the end of 2011 the tablet market is overwhelmingly an iPad market. ... This will all change in 2012. At CES in Las Vegas the second week of January I expect to be able to walk from one side of the Las Vegas Convention Center to the other stepping only on Android tablets. The place will be full of them.”
Too bad consumers don’t shop at CES. Maybe you could buy a couple dozen of those tablets, Larry. (If they sell them there, that is.)
Peter Bright in ars technica (December 2011):
“A look ahead: 2012 is Microsoft’s turning point”
“2011 for Microsoft was all about telling us what to look forward to. 2012 will be when that talk becomes real. 2012 will be when lots of Microsoft’s talk becomes real.”
“[I]f the gamble pays off, the rewards will be considerable too. Microsoft could take a big chunk out of the tablet and phone markets, a chunk that will only expand as the value offered by its unified platform grows larger. A good 2012 will cement Microsoft’s dominance for another decade.”
You mean, recreate it?
Jared Newman on TIME Techland (December 2011):
“Looking Forward to 2012: Credible iPad Threats
The iPad is a great tablet, but you know what’s even better? Competition.”
You know what’s even better than the iPad 2? The upcoming iPad 3.
Paul Thurrott on Paul Thurrott’s Supersite For Windows (December 2011):
“How Apple Can Fix The IPad In 2012”
“Last year, I wrote about how Apple could fix the iPad in 2011. This type of thing is blasphemy to Apple’s empty-headed fanatics, who believe that everything Apple does is perfect.”
When the company you oppose is more successful than any tech company ever, and the company you advocate has released flop after flop for more than a decade — it might be time to re-assess where you assign the term “empty-headed.”
David H. Freedman in Discover Magazine (December 2011):
“The Man Who Gave Us Less for More”
“I was front row center when Steve Jobs unveiled the Apple Macintosh to the world in 1984 in Boston. While the crowd cheered and clapped and squealed, I was scratching my head. What did this pretty beige box offer that a hundred other computers didn’t already offer, besides a higher price, much less choice in software, and no compatibility with the rest of the world’s devices?”
“[W]hile Jobs has left most of the world with the impression that he was just so brilliantly right about what the world needed, I can’t help pointing out that Jobs actually got a lot of things wrong.”
“[T]here will always be a part of me that resents the fact that he empowered the world to force me to endure prettier, more-expensive technology for what will most likely be the rest of my 150 years.”
There will always be a part of you that resents the fact that everyone doesn’t want exactly the same crap you want, David. But don’t fret — you won’t have to endure such a David-intolerant world for 150 years. Probably not much more than half that.
Ed Oswald in betanews (December 2011):
“[Apple needs to d]ecentralize power and delegate. Steve Jobs was all but a megalomaniac. When it came to running Apple, it was his way or the highway. While he may have thought this was the best way to run a company, we all know it’s not. Tim Cook and company must change the way Apple operates and distribute power out to the rest of its officers.”
We all know Apple didn’t do very well under Jobs’s management style for the past fifteen years. Right, Ed?
Rick Aristotle Munarriz in The Motley Fool (December 2011):
“6 Reasons Apple Won’t Rally in 2012”
“Apple didn’t have Amazon.com selling millions of Kindle Fires at $199 when earlier iPads hit the market.”
“Ouch! Did Apple’s iOS actually lose global market share?”
“Were folks disappointed with the iPhone 4S, or simply disillusioned that Steve Jobs wasn’t there to tell them that they wanted it?”
“Android’s already working on a rival to Siri’s digital assistant. Microsoft is paying handset leader Nokia billions to back the software giant’s fledgling mobile operating system. Apple’s iconic smartphone will get better, but clearly so will everyone else.”
“There’s too much cash snoozing on Apple’s balance sheet, but what else is new. Even if Apple comes through with a dividend announcement, will this really help the stock? If anything, it may signal to the market that the Cupertino giant needs to appeal to income investors because the past few years of heady growth are over.”
Q1 results: Heady growth and then some.
Panos Mourdoukoutas in Forbes (January 2012):
“Why Siri is all hype”
“Recently, Apple came out with this new voice recognition ‘toy’ called Siri, and many consumers are suffering from new toy symptoms. But, once all the hype and excitement surrounding Siri has worn off, people will realize the impractically of such a system ...”
“Siri doesn’t add any extra functionality to the iPhone ... Siri doesn’t add much value to the iPhone 4S. Combined with the fact that the 4S’s tech specs haven’t made significant improvements over the iPhone 4, it may be an indication that Apple’s innovation machine may be running out of steam. This won’t bode well for the Apple’s stock momentum — innovation has been the cornerstone of the company’s sustainable competitive advantage.”
“Siri is all hype. Just like every child gets excited over a new toy and soon forgets about it, Siri will soon be forgotten.”
Apple is running out of steam. In fact, it’s been running out of steam for fifteen years. All the way to highest market valuation in the world.
Robert X. Cringely on I, Cringely (January 2012):
“Prediction #1: A new CEO for Apple”
“If you are wondering when Apple will peak, well we’re about there folks. Yes, there will be more iPhones and cool computers but it is my belief that Apple’s best days have come and gone.”
“Steve Jobs is dead and Tim Cook is no Steve Jobs. He knows that, we know that, and anyone who works directly for him at Apple (those A-players) knows it, too. Following a period of shock, mourning, and pretending to get along, those rocks will start rubbing on each other again only this time there won’t be a founder willing (eager even) to make the hard choices. Chaos will ensue.”
“Insurrection at Apple. I wrote a column last summer when Steve Jobs retired from Apple saying that Tim Cook would not be CEO for long. Though Steve wrote to me (our last-ever communication) to say I was wrong, I think more than ever that I was correct. Apple will get a new CEO in 2012 and while I have a guess who that person might be I think I’ll wait before making that particular prediction.”
Good advice for any fantasy-based prediction.
Robert X. Cringely on I, Cringely (January 2012):
“Prediction #2: Amazon and Bezos supplant Apple and Jobs”
“If Apple gives up its position of industry leadership in 2012 the only company capable of assuming that role is Amazon.com.”
“Amazon is led by its founder, Jeff Bezos, who really wants to assume the Steve Jobs role. ... With another decade or more available to him as CEO, absent some horrible accident, Bezos is unstoppable.”
“Steve Jobs had extraordinary success at Apple, growing the company more than 300X in market cap, but how much more can Apple grow?”
Let’s sit back and find out. Grab some popcorn and Junior Mints!
“[O]ne day a competitor will come along and cut our [Apple’s] core product line out from underneath us. We will need all the cash we can muster to fend them off. When that cash is done, we will mortgage the company. The first several times we may be successful. However, as is always the case, eventually time will get the best of us and we will be unable to meet our creditors demands. We will go bankrupt. Our creditors will seize the equity and the shareholders will be left with nothing and having made zero return on their investment.”
Those UNC students are really getting their money’s worth, aren’t they?
Thomas Claburn in InformationWeek (January 2012):
“Android hasn’t won by knockout: Apple most likely will continue to report strong quarterly results for years to come, but its iOS empire will cease to be the focus of the mobile world. It will shift from being an expansive, imperialist power to a prosperous hermit kingdom, with too few allies and not enough openness to be a vehicle for rapid innovation.”
From Claburn’s Dictionary of Tech Terms:
ally — noun — someone who licenses your OS for use on their products; not someone who manufactures your product or its components, or who writes third-party apps for your platform
openness — adjective — licensing your OS to other companies for use on their products; not just providing a platform for third-party app creators
Thomas H. Kee Jr. in MarketWatch (January 2012):
“Time to sell Apple”
“If a business fails to take care of its customers, its customers will go elsewhere. Every businessman knows this to be true, and for those who are prudently observing the trend in one of our giants, forward risks become a reality.
In the case of Apple, this is happening in front of our eyes, and the risks are therefore very high. Apple has stopped serving their customers well, and unless they start to serve their customers better the company will begin to lose more market share and revenue and earnings projections will come down aggressively.”
“We all know that Apple’s products were revolutionary, but they are not nearly as elite as they were.”
“To any doubters, look at the past growth rates versus current market multiples; Wall Street already sees this coming.”
“The company’s high-growth phase is behind it, and the struggles of the retail market are starting to impair this once seemingly unbreakable retail giant; unbreakable has been the corporate attitude as we know. However, apple’s overly confident and commanding approach may be exactly what is getting it into trouble, because it is asking too much from enterprise-level clients.”
“The iPhones may bring customers in the door, so the carriers won’t ever stop selling them, but once those end users are attentive, the retailers will push other, sometimes even more innovative products ...”
“[R]esellers will look for alternatives [to Apple’s products] and eventually they will find them. Nothing could be clearer.”
Quick, sell your Apple stock! Nothing could be clearer!
Bill Ray in The Register (January 2012):
“Use iBooks Author, only Apple can ever publish the result”
“[T]he point made by Venomous Porridge blogger Dan Wineman (an e-book author who first spotted the restriction) is that he never agreed to make Apple his sole distribution agent, except that he apparently did just by running the software.”
Except that you can make the same book with the same content but using other tools — like, uh, iBook Author literally didn’t exist until yesterday, so where were all these e-books coming from? — and sell it anywhere you’d like without paying Apple a dime.
Say, isn’t this the same Bill Ray who said, just before the iPhone announcement, “[T]he Apple phone will fail, and fail badly ... The only question remaining is if, when the iPod phone fails, it will take the iPod with it.”
Ed Bott in ZDNet (January 2012):
“Apple’s mind-bogglingly greedy and evil license agreement”
“I have never, ever seen a legal document like the one Apple has attached to its new iBooks Author program.”
“I have never seen a EULA as mind-bogglingly greedy and evil as Apple’s EULA for its new ebook authoring program.”
“Imagine if Microsoft said you had to pay them 30% of your speaking fees if you used a PowerPoint deck in a speech.”
Imagine if you could copy/paste the text and images of your PowerPoint presentation into some other presentation app and not pay Microsoft a single cent. Mind-boggling!
Don Reisinger in eWEEK (January 2012):
“Apple iPad 3: 10 Reasons You Shouldn’t Buy It at Launch”
But you should buy it later? Can’t wait to hear about that, Don.
Don Reisinger in eWEEK (January 2012):
“Enterprise Mobility: Apple 2012: 10 Major Challenges to the Company[’]s Product Strategy”
“[W]ith the passing of Jobs, Apple will no longer have its greatest strategist and advocate to lead it through turbulent times.”
“Android is a huge threat to the iPhone.”
“The iPhone 5 Must Be a Major Update — or Else”
“[I]n 2012, as more companies deliver ultrabooks, [the MacBook Air] might be viewed as the overpriced alternative that fewer customers will choose.”
“As Apple continues to sell an ever increasing number of mobile devices, it only presents a more inviting target to cyber-criminals.”
“How Will It Hold Off the Kindle Fire?”
“The iPad 2 was a bit of a disappointment for consumers looking for major improvements over the original iPad. Apple can’t make that mistake again this year.”
“In 2011 Android tablets weren’t much of a concern for Apple. But in 2012, they will be.”
They were going to be in 2011, weren’t they?
Michael French in The Motley Fool (January 2012):
“How Apple Could Fall From Grace”
“With the recent passing of CEO Steve Jobs recently, however, there is a lot of speculation about Apple’s future and whether the company can continue without the tech mogul guiding the ship’s sails.”
“If Cook were to lose any of his key players, it could cause investors to panic. This catalyst could present itself in the form of Jonathan Ive’s departure, which has been speculated in the past.”
“Yet another doomsday scenario for Apple rests in the current incursion between Apple and Google over the smart phone market.”
“If you have a position in Apple, don’t panic.”
Thanks, I was about to.
Ed Bott in ZDNet (January 2012):
“How Apple is sabotaging an open standard for digital books”
“For nearly two years, Apple has wooed digital book publishers and authors with its unconditional support of the open EPUB standard. With last week’s introduction of iBooks 2.0, Apple has deliberately locked out that standard. ... If you read, write, or publish digital books, you should be concerned.”
Here’s why you shouldn’t be: Amazon Kindle, the only other reasonably successful e-books reader, doesn’t use ePub at all.
James Kendrick in ZDNet (January 2012):
“Why the Apple textbook program will never work”
“The Apple textbook initiative announced recently is dead in the water ...”
“[Apple’s plan] will not fly on any level, as it means that purchased textbooks cannot be reused from year to year. They ‘belong’ to the individual student, forever.”
Maybe that’s why they’re all $15 or less. Duh.
Ed Oswald in BetaNews (January 2012):
“Android, not iOS, will win over developers”
“Android will replace iOS as the most important platform to developers within the next 12 months, British analyst firm Ovum says. It also notes an increased interest in Windows Phone and BlackBerry OS, and sees a move towards web standards in development over proprietary technologies.”
Translation: We don’t really know what will win, but somehow, we know for sure that it won’t be iOS.
Brent Rose in Gizmodo (January 2012):
“It’s Time for Apple to Stop Patent Trolling”
“[T]here’s a line between protecting yourself and just trying to kill everybody around you. It’s one Apple has already crossed, and it’s not doing anybody any good. Time to knock it off.”
“[T]he kind of R&D that $100 million [that Apple has spent suing HTC] can buy anybody is mind-boggling. Would that money not be better spent on truly pushing the limits of innovation? Isn’t that a better way to compete?”
Um, not if anything you develop with that money is just going to be ripped off by your competitors.
Jon Talton in The Seattle Times (January 2012):
“‘The speed and flexibility is breathtaking,’ the (Apple) executive said. ‘There’s no American plant that can match that.’ Yes, slave labor does have that advantage. Apple brings in some $400,000 per employee but little of that goes to those working in the suicide-ridden Foxconn factories, whose CEO compares workers to animals. Another choice quote from an Apple exec: ‘We don’t have an obligation to solve America’s problems. Our only obligation is making the best product possible.’ This is the very definition of the sociopath corporation.”
Good thing all those Windows PCs are made in America, right? In America, where everyone loves their job and nobody suicides. Right?
Neil Trevett of Nvidia (January 2012):
“Apple is fabulously successful and I’m sure will continue to be so, but I do think Android will, over time, really dominate the mobile market. It’s nothing to do with who’s better, it’s just you have thousands of companies producing these devices... I think it’s going to be a repeat of the PC/Mac market, with 80% Android and 20% iOS.”
Number of companies!! Again! Yayyyy! Back by popular demand!
Rick Aristotle Munarriz in The Motley Fool (January 2012):
“What Were 15.4 Million Apple Fans Thinking?”
“[W]ould it have hurt these 15.4 million new iPad 2 owners to wait a couple of months for either a better price on their own gadget or at the very least a chance to spend the same amount on something better? I’m not asking iPad buyers to ‘think different’ as much as ‘think,’ period.”
15.4 million people are thoughtless Apple fans? What chance do Apple’s competitors have?
Thomas H. Kee Jr. in MarketWatch (January 2012):
“Sell Apple; growth rate will not last”
“[I]f you are holding AAPL and believe they will be able to repeat the past quarter’s results, be warned by this article.”
Consider me warned.
Strategy Analytics (January 2012):
[says Apple’s share of the tablet market has fallen to 58%]
Still counting shipments of non-iPad tablets as sales? How accurate was that the last time you did it?

