Linked by David Adams on Wed 6th Oct 2010 16:51 UTC
Apple Let me tell you, when what you teach and develop every day has the title "Innovation" attached to it, you reach a point where you tire of hearing about Apple. Without question, nearly everyone believes the equation Apple = Innovation is a fundamental truth--akin to the second law of thermodynamics, Boyle's Law, or Moore's Law. But ask these same people if they understand exactly how Apple comes up with their ideas and what approach the company uses to develop blockbuster products--whether it is a fluky phenomenon or based on a repeatable set of governing principles--and you mostly get a dumbfounded stare. This response is what frustrates me most, because people worship what they don't understand.
Permalink for comment 444290
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by deathshadow on Thu 7th Oct 2010 10:04 UTC
Member since:

Well, I see the RDF is in full swing again. It's funny - people talk about Apple using words like "innovation", "design" or "quality" -- and I honest to god wonder what the hell is in the kool-aid.

In terms of innovation I can't think of one thing they actually came up with. Licensed the GUI from Xerox then claimed it was their own -- lagged five years behind the PC on graphics while claiming to be superior on that front, claim to be this great audio platform when the ONLY way to do it pro quality is using external boxes from other manufacturers (which are drying up faster than a tear in the desert), make all sorts of claims about other companies technologies they claim to help innovate (I'm sure Phillips and Mitsumi might have something to say on the whole computer optical drive thing)... tablets have been tried and failed a dozen times over with NOTHING in their new tablet being the least bit innovative (or even worthy of the patents issued due to prior art). Slapping nextstep atop BSD isn't exactly innovation... I think the only innovative thing was using their gorrilla style leverage to bring the recording industry to the table for iTunes.

In terms of design, I'm not exactly having my skirt blown up with products that have all the artistic appeal of a recently sanitized hospital ward.

In terms of quality, their history of half-assed designs that take a degree in rocket science for even the most mundane of repairs -- proprietary componants manufactured as cheaply as possible under the hood -- Everything they make is like fiberboard with a birch veneer over it. Of course the toxic fumes off the Mac Pro's, piss poor/outright lack of ventilation, underclocking chips so they could stuff them in with ZERO cooling in designs like the G3 iMacs, switching pins on standard interfaces like IDE just so you HAD to use their drives (or solder the two pins together on the plug), selling 262K color displays labelled as 16.7 million, the repeated 'striping' issues with the displays because of cheaping out on the ribbon cable/edge card connections in the displays, cracked hinges on the G4's worse than any Toshiba (that takes talent!), locking the discussions on their forums of anyone daring to point out ANY of these issues... These do not say "quality" in my mind!

Much less model after model of blistering plastic and warping metal from Apple having no clue what the word 'cooling' means. They wouldn't know proper cooling if it stripped naked, painted itself purple and hopped up on a table to sing "Look at what a big cooling fan I am!"

Figure in their absurd markup (hence their absurd margin per sale) and I still have trouble believing ANYONE is DUMB ENOUGH to buy anything Apple makes in the first place - much less believe they have innovation, design or quality.

I swear, they are about as innovative as Thomas Edison. No, that's NOT a compliment. What, you never thought it suspicious that a former patent clerk suddenly had a dozen patents on things it's public knowledge he didn't invent and barely made any changes to? Let's face it, he was the first major industrial patent troll - Just ask Westinghouse.

Edited 2010-10-07 10:06 UTC

Reply Score: 8