[Chinney]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 I need to clarify...this has nothing to do with their performance, relevance, etc. I DO NOT think "they're in trouble", or anything like that. I just think some new things - or major updates to existing to existing products - will miss the razzle-dazzle and showmanship of some of this famous unveilings over the past 10 or so years. Like I said, it'll just be different. Not a decrease in quality or value, but without those demos and RDF-drenched intros, it going to feel a bit "less than" in some ways, that's all. That was always a big, fun part of this stuff...watching him work the room and making even the most pedestrian, expected feature seem so much more. I'm not making any "they're doomed!" statements here, I promise.

I have to admit I have never watched an Apple product introduction, so the showmanship, reality-distortion aspect of SJ is not something with which I have familiarity. Having just finished reading his biography though, my conclusion on the guy is that I do think that he will really be missed. Sometimes one person can make a big difference, and he did (even if he was, as I think he himself realized, sometimes quite an a-hole while doing it - but 'all progress depends on the unreasonable person').

One of the last comments of his recorded in the biography is his statement of confidence that he had managed to infuse his own approach throughout the company. I hope that is true. Certainly Apple is a vast enterprise and its success has depended on a lot more than SJ.

So I am not less excited about Apple now than I was before his passing, but I am a bit apprehensive about whether his departure will eventually make the magic stop, despite his best efforts otherwise. I am optimistic, but only cautiously.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by El Gallo No worries man. You remember that guy at everyone's parties in 2007 that was telling them their house was going to be worth half of what it was then in a few short years. That guy was me, so I got that look a lot when we were all celebrating the new pool and backyard bbq's put in with those amazing second mortgages.

Well then here it is again:

I'm not sure why all that's relevant. You saw a large-scale economic meltdown coming, so you're prescient about Apple's future? Is that what you're saying?

Apple more or less defied the economic meltdown, though, didn't they?

Also, you must have been such a hit at those 2007 parties.

Originally Posted by El Gallo iTunes U was already there and so was iBooks 2.0.

Well, you were talking about how "their software apps simply aren't being updated," not about how they're not introducing new apps. Although they are, iTunes U actually is an entirely new app (it was previously merely a feature in iTunes).

Originally Posted by El Gallo The bumps on them just aren't that big a deal.

I emphatically disagree. I think what Apple's doing with (to?) the textbook market is huge.

Originally Posted by El Gallo Folks in these forums are the types that are saying "Well I can't afford a $2500-3000 Mac tower so I'll hackintosh that, but at least I'll go true Mac with the MBA since it is a great value." Apple lost the tower money from said customers and now might have to eat profit margins or marketshare on the remaining great products if they do not improve.

How much tower money is that, really? Apple's not stupid, they actually have the figures to base these decisions on, and based on their financial success I'm willing to bet they're deciding correctly. By the way, I think a lot of people would still build hackintoshes even if Apple offered a $1500 tower, because the tower wouldn't be just right, or Apple's would be still overpriced, or whatever.

Originally Posted by El Gallo Given the margins and pricing on their AppleTV and on most TV's, I'd say go sport oriented iPod.

Well, I'm glad you're not running Apple, then.

Originally Posted by El Gallo It isn't something foreign from what they are doing now. It is complementary. The reasoning you are using is like those who said "iPad, but it's just a big iPod Touch."

Huh? How is anything I'm saying anything like that reasoning at all?

I never purchased an iPod touch. I bought an iPad instantly. I certainly didn't think they were too similar, or whatever.

Originally Posted by El Gallo They already make an iPod Nano. The stripped it down and focused it by making is smaller and touch. They could add a feature or two more to it and keep the margins rather than dropping the price.

Exactly: they stripped it down and focused it, because that was the way to keep it relevant alongside the do-all iPod touch. They got rid of the camera and video playback and brought it back to being a pure-play music player, and they dropped the price. I think that does more to keep the iPod nano relevant than adding features only a small fraction of purchasers will use. It's not like Apple doesn't sell other portable products with GPS and app capabilities.

Originally Posted by El Gallo Apple also has a history of getting too isolated. We are seeing that in a few threads in here as well. USB3 vs Thunderport, no Blueray, etc. I noted no iSync in SL as another example. Apple made iTunes and Quicktime cross compatible but not iWork. I guess those Windows folks don't need to buy those apps for their iPhones and iPads.

You're all over the place, here. Apple's goal isn't to sell more software to Windows folks, it's to make those Windows folks iPad folks.

Originally Posted by El Gallo I'm just going off what I see. About 18 months ago I gave both my sons new iPods and I used to see iPod Touches everywhere. My kids would pull their iPods out and the other kids would do the same and all would be happy in kidland. Increasing the kids are pulling out Dad's old Android or lately I've seen a couple Kindle Fire's. The dynamics are changing a bit. That doesn't mean Apple dies. It doesn't mean Apple gets trampled. It means Apple becomes stodgy and milks what they do for regular cashflow. Again that isn't exciting.

I don't see how having competition necessarily means Apple will become stodgy and milk what they do for regular cashflow. The basic principles of competition would suggest the opposite, no?

Originally Posted by El Gallo Apple is crushed on affordable prosumer towers obviously.

No, Apple doesn't make affordable prosumer towers. Again, Apple not making Product X is not necessarily a strike against them.

Originally Posted by El Gallo Kindle Fire and others are offering more than Apple is in the iPod Touch.

I disagree.

Originally Posted by El Gallo My personal example was this Christmas we bought the boys these laptops. I wanted very much to get them Apple products but I'm not going to give a 10 and 12 year old boy a thousand dollar laptop and that was what Apple offers. Is it as awesome as the Apple solution? Of course not but the Apple solution is indeed 300% more in cost.

OK, Apple doesn't make cheap laptops for ten-year-olds. I'm not sure what your point is? Again, Apple not making Product X is not necessarily a strike against them.

Originally Posted by El Gallo Apple does seem like Microsoft in that they are looking more inward and appearing to endorse only their own solutions instead of growing the pool of money for everyone while merely taking the biggest cut. Apps with no links to their own content or their own stores is an example of this.

Funny, "growing the pool of money for everyone" seems to me like exactly what Apple did with the mobile app market. Only they don't take the biggest cut, they take 30%.

I also think that it's funny that you're critiquing Apple for allegedly becoming more like Microsoft when that's exactly what you're saying Apple should do. You know who does makes tons of products for every conceivable market, margins be damned? Microsoft. You know who gladly puts their software on cheap laptops for ten-year-olds? Microsoft. You know who did make a fancy computer watch that nobody wanted? Microsoft.

Originally Posted by El Gallo Innovative for Apple has often meant adding what everyone suddenly realized they wanted. Does everyone really need a iPod Nano that does all that? See how quick the network effects would organize around and amplify the effect of Apple saying yes there.

I think this is where you're mistaken. You seem to think that Apple can tell consumers to want something and they'll have to listen — that Apple can, by sheer force of will, make even couch potatoes want an iPod nano sport-tracking watch thing. In reality, Apple is just really good at figuring out what people actually want and making it. The only reason it seems like Apple can tell people what they want is because they've made so few missteps — but the G4 Cube, iPod Hi-Fi, and first-gen Apple TV all prove that Apple saying people should want something does not make it so.

Originally Posted by El Gallo Sitting on their butts and introducing "white" is a strike against them.

Again, how the hell is Apple sitting on their butts? Because they're not introducing a sport-tracking watch, they're sitting on their butts?

Originally Posted by El Gallo How many people are buying $40 iPod shuffles and $300 Garmin watches who could instead be giving that money to Apple for merely innovating in an existing product line.

To be perfectly blunt, there aren't that many people buying $300 Garmin watches.

$300 Garmin watches don't sell in iPod numbers, and Apple's only interested in things that can sell in iPod numbers, because there's still enough of those things out there for Apple to focus on. Apple's a very focused company. They could easily use their horde of cash to be like Samsung and make everything from washing machines to cars, and do sort of okay at each, but that's just not in their DNA. They'd rather do a few things really well, so they can knock it out of the park every time. Because right now, they're expected to. Every new Apple product is expected to light the world on fire, and a $300 sport-tracking watch just wouldn't, sorry. It doesn't have broad enough appeal.

Now would actually be the single worst time for Apple to expand into less profitable niches. The media would take one look at the sales and conclude that Steve's magic was gone and that Apple had totally lost their touch. And they'd be right. I'd rather Apple stay focused on making a few things really well.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Chinney I have to admit I have never watched an Apple product introduction, so the showmanship, reality-distortion aspect of SJ is not something with which I have familiarity.

I would recommend watching one sometime.

To me, it's not that Steve had some magical reality-distortion power, or anything like that. It's just that most companies (and especially most large companies) are actually absolutely pathetic at communicating, and Steve wasn't and Apple isn't. Have you tried to sit through a non-Apple product introduction? They're almost universally horrible. Half the words don't mean anything, for starters. And it always seems like they didn't rehearse the presentation at all.

Apple does. They rehearse and rehearse and rehearse. They work with the guests to make sure they sound just right. And it shows.

What it really boils down to is that Apple cares about their presentations, and most of the other guys don't seem to. I'm not sure why somebody wouldn't care about making a product introduction as pitch-perfect as possible, but then again I'm surprised by the lack of care apparent in lots of other byproducts of big non-Apple businesses.

What everyone should be learning from Apple is that details matter. The little things — the exact words on a presentation slide, the exact way a product is unboxed — all add up.

[billybobsky]

I think pc manufacturers have entered into utility company territory -- nothing that they are going to build is going to be must have, but everyone is going to need it.

There are few if any consumer electronics gadgets that apple has any room for expansion into (TV, gaming consoles, and watches being the only three I can see). Apple isn't a company creating new classes of consumer electronics (at least not the successful ones, anyway). They always follow founder species into a market and do it better. Much better. We have, however, run out of things they can build.

I interact with at most two types of electronic devices every day (it would be 3 if i listened to music): PCs and cell phones. Apple has those covered. If the TV happens that will be covered as well. And that's it. You hit 99.9% of the electronic devices (needing cpus) the average person encounters with those three (four) things. It is done. This is not to say that Apple will not continue to innovate and improve what they make, just don't expect to see apple leaping in to make x device better, because x device doesn't exist. This is why apple's forays into content delivery are interesting if not a perfectly reasonable segue for an electronics company.

I haven't been excited about apple products since they introduced LED lit screens for their laptops. I haven't seen enough to justify an iPhone purchase but will grudgingly buy one since the options for 'just a phone, please' are becoming rarer and rarer. I hate (HATE) what has happened to social interactions because of the presence of digital music players and always connected cell phones. And with that hatred comes the recognition that it is partially Apple's role in making relatively affordable, desirable music players and phones that led to this. But whatever. Apple will be ok. Not great. Not the innovator of old. But ok. Like Sony.

[drewprops]

I'm late to this thread but my answer is a simple "yes".


...

[turtle]

Me too, I'm late.

Actually no, mine hasn't though. I'm about the same. While I enjoyed SteveNotes, I didn't make my mind up about products from those.

[Eugene]

Not since Jobs's death, but since 2004 or so when I replaced my Quicksilver 2002 with a Windows PC. I own cut-down Macs like the mini and MacBook Air now since I no longer use them for much work or play. My Macs are glorified browsers and media players.

[Chinney]

Originally Posted by Robo I would recommend watching one sometime.

It is not that I have not been interested in the actual new releases. I have followed them closely over the years and own a fair number of them. It is just that I have preferred to follow the analysis of and reaction to releases, rather than the releases themselves. I actually find it more informative. I have loved reading AN release day threads and I look forward to more.