[kdcny]

With MWSF quickly approaching and speculations on product announcements appearing at least once a week or so, I thought I'd throw out something for people to chew on:

What do you think is Apple's overall philosophy regarding product (Macs specifically) design?

In the past, they've had a grid that they based their products around: Consumer/Professional/Desktop/Portable. Over the years, though, products have come and gone that don't fit clearly in either of these boxes (the G4 Cube, MacBook Air, eMac, the edu iMac, etc.) Is it simply a case of Apple sometimes breaking down and saying, "Well, we just need a ____ product!", or is it something else?

I've been wondering because people seem to have at least three different opinions of what the Mac mini is supposed to be, who it's targeted at, etc., and I've often tried to discern the logic by which Apple introduced it in the first place. It seemed like a great move, and they're cute little machines, but who is it for? Why does the product exist? Is it for switchers? (Then why let it languish?) Is it for those who want a cheaper, second computer? (Then why not make it more expandable and use even cheaper, more powerful, desktop-size components?) The MacBook Air seems to have the same questions - it's not "cheap", it's not a netbook, but it's also not a full-featured laptop (Let's forget for the moment, as others often do, that it puts up impressive numbers compared with even the first MacBook Pros).

Any thoughts? Has Apple gone away from the old product grid and decided to just make whatever they feel like making?

[PB PM]

Seems more like that all the time, which I guess is good in some ways. The reality is that Apple, since Job's return, has always made what they wanted, but now the line between products is being blurred more.

[atomicbartbeans]

All I know is that the girl across the table from me right now is rocking Dell's new netbook, and it's making my brand new MacBook feel like a fatty.

[Swox]

Originally Posted by atomicbartbeans All I know is that the girl across the table from me right now is rocking Dell's new netbook, and it's making my brand new MacBook feel like a fatty.

Your Macbook is not fat. I think you might have laptop-anorexia. You should see a professional.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by atomicbartbeans All I know is that the girl across the table from me right now is rocking Dell's new netbook, and it's making my brand new MacBook feel like a fatty.

Yeah, but there are probably at least 20 things her "new Dell netbook" can't do that your MacBook can, so relax already. Plus, she's gotta put up with Vista. You're coming out ahead, no matter how you slice it...

Jeez...

[joveblue]

I doubt there's ever been anyone in an Apple office trying to work out where things fit on this grid/matrix. It just so happens that it's more or less natural for their products to align up to this grid, a lot of the time.

[atomicbartbeans]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Yeah, but there are probably at least 20 things her "new Dell netbook" can't do that your MacBook can, so relax already. Plus, she's gotta put up with Vista. You're coming out ahead, no matter how you slice it...

Well of course, but I look at all the netbooks around my school and wonder why Apple doesn't sit down and make something similarly small yet 10 times better.

Since netbooks getting popular in the last year or so, there are lots around my school - they seem to have really taken off. Steve Jobs considers it a "nascent" market, but I think it'd be in Apple's best interest to step in and show everyone else how it's done.

And now, back to your thread...

[scratt]

SJ *knows* that everyone in the world is wrong apart from him.
Therefore everyone should buy a POS MacBook Air, which is the same dimensions as a MacBook, underpowered, and looks awful!

Pfftt.. Who needs a net-Book / 12" MBP. Duh!

Besides Ive can't draw pictures that small.

Apple's philosophy at the moment seems to be to sell as much product as possible, enter as many markets as possible, and bring the product line down to the specs required by the lowest common denominator.

They also seem to be suffering from what I call 'Beta syndrome'. They never quite finish anything... AppleTV, iPhone OS.
Which tends to mean that some software products don't seem to really make sense.. iTunes, should be renamed to iDrug, or something like that.

EDIT : Do I sound bitter?

[AsLan^]

I really think Apple's product lines are based on available inventory and what's cheap.

For example, I believe the Mac mini was created to get rid of the surplus G4 chips they had as they knew they would soon be transitioning to Intel.

I also believe the Apple TV was made as a concession to Intel to allow them to offload all their surplus Pentium Ms that they had sitting around when they released their Core chips.

Back to the Mac mini, they included Core Solo chips which are just defective Core Duos and since the great success of their Core and Atom chips, Intel hasn't really had inventory just lying around that Apple could pick up for cheap and put into the mini, hence no upgraded mini for over a year.

Same sort of thing with iPod hard drives, flash drives, Airport parts, mice, and keyboards too I would think.

I'm sure Apple just looks around the industry, finds or predicts which parts are really cheap or will be in the future and says, what can we do with those parts that will be really cool and creative. The bottom line of course is that they will get those parts at a cheap price be able to sell the final product at great profit.

The other area they focus on is reduced manufacturing costs, obviously their new notebooks cost less to manufacture (I believe they said as much) and I'm sure all these touch sensitive parts cost a lot less to manufacture too. They are probably more reliable too which will reduce the warranty service costs.

So, in my opinion, Apples current and future lineups will be driven first by parts and manufacturing costs, then the engineers and designers will be asked to innovate and come up with desirable products.

[Mugge]

This thread is both angry and sad.



I remember seeing something along the lines of this, but I can't remember what it was called:

1. Steve thinks something would be cool.
2. Ive makes a drawing of it.
3. China sez "Good quality and service with credibility can make business stand long".
4. Enough people buy it and enough people whine about it.
5. Dvorak predicts Apple's imminent bankruptcy.
6. Microsoft attempts to imitate it.
7. 5 and 6 fails
8. RDF ensures that 1 through 5 never fails.
Repeat from 1.

[nikstar101]

I am not sure that Apple really chooses its porducts on what is cheap at the moment.

Honestly i think they have a huge prototype range covering a load of different products. Such as AppleTV, Mac Book Air, PDAs, Netbooks etc and when they see a trend they put the product into production.

Thats why their R&D is so high. They are covering hardware and software solutions for a whole range of items.

As to the future, i think they need to re-invigourate the Mac side of things. They have got people interested with all these iPhones, iPods etc but they now need to bank these people by offer decent computers.

[Taskiss]

Apple's product philosophy seems to be that it focuses on product sub-categories where they can design something, sell it at good prices (competitive + $100 or so) with the best of that breed, and be recognized as delivering a far superior product. That also makes it difficult where products like the Apple TV come in... there's no recognized competition in that category, so there's nothing for Apple to beat.

The mini is, in my opinion, a perfect example, even though I think it deserves a LOT more apple luvin. Take the best competitor in that category (the Shuttle SYK4800 for instance) and compare the mini to it and in my opinion the mini is the best example of a product in that category.

[Capella]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Plus, she's gotta put up with Vista.

Mini 9's ship with XP or Ubuntu, which either way means no Vista. XP is the best Windows so far (not that it holds a candle to OS X). Ubuntu is definitely not shabby; it's simple, clean, and the default background on a 7.10 install (dunno if it's the same on others) reminds me very very much of the blue swirly initial screen OS X used to have back at, like, 10.1. And Ubuntu is an extremely nice intro to Linux based systems. I'm not saying it's better than OS X, but if I can't have OS X, I want Ubuntu.

Running vista on a netbook is just an awful idea anyway. Do any of them actually do it? The Asus ones were XP/Linux, the Acer Aspire One is XP/Linux, the Mini is XP/Linux, the Wind is XP/Linux. I'd think the hardware is too limited to properly run Vista, even without the graphics fluff.

[Satchmo]

Originally Posted by Mugge 1. Steve thinks something would be cool.

This raises the question. Is there even a head of Product Development that determines what avenues to pursue? Or is it all left to Stevie's personal vision?

[kdcny]

Originally Posted by Satchmo This raises the question. Is there even a head of Product Development that determines what avenues to pursue? Or is it all left to Stevie's personal vision?

I would certainly hope so. Personally, I think there has to be: the way products arrive (the edu iMac) or are implemented, it has to encompass more than just Steve. Take the Apple TV, for example. I think that Steve may have been the impetus, but I doubt he said, "Hey, you know what we need? A 8" square box that's, oh I don't know, about an inch high that has one of those new HDMI ports and wireless and some other things on it so we can stream content from our computers to our TV's."

I think he's much more of the person that said, "We need a way to get our content on people's televisions, because that's where they want to watch it. Now make it happen." And I would bet that they considered lots of options (producing their own HDTV's, a beefed-up Universal Dock, etc.) before settling on what is now the Apple TV.

To be honest, I'm kinda surprised at the cynicism in this thread! Where's some of the Apple idealism?

I might as well stick my neck out there - I think that while there must be some sort of Product Development team, Apple also has some internal guiding principles that they use to determine their product line. Like, the MacBook Air. People knock it for a number of reasons [see scratt's "bitter" response above ], but I think that Apple's looked long and hard at different markets, and determined at least two major qualifications for anything it builds:

1) Nothing less than a full-sized keyboard is acceptable, and
2) The Mac OS X interface isn't as good for the user on anything smaller than a 13" (1280x800) screen. (At least in the last several years, forgetting the 12" PowerBook and 12" iBook)

There's obviously some other components that Apple has deemed important over the years (wireless, Bluetooth, etc), but does anybody remember when the iBooks were introduced? Back then, having full-sized keyboards were a feature, not a given, the iBook had one, and it wasn't something that Apple was going to compromise on. I think that Apple's stuck with that one and decided that the vast majority of consumers will not put up with a non-full-sized keyboard that people have to hunt and peck on.

Ironically, I think Steve gives people more credit than they're due in this regard: people tolerate all sorts of terrible keyboards on their cell phones, laptops, etc. But I think they feel that just because people have a higher tolerance for crap doesn't mean Apple should feel the need to produce crap for them.

As for the screen size... I don't know. My guess is that Apple thinks that a 7"-10" screen doesn't do the Mac OS X interface justice. I would hazard to say that they feel that a 3"-7" display would be better suited to the iPhone OS. But, ::shrug::... what do I know?

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by kdcny Ironically, I think Steve gives people more credit than they're due in this regard: people tolerate all sorts of terrible keyboards on their cell phones, laptops, etc. But I think they feel that just because people have a higher tolerance for crap doesn't mean Apple should feel the need to produce crap for them.

Whenever I show someone my MacBook Pro, the first thing the always notice is the keyboard. Everyone who's tried my notebook instantly falls in love with the keyboard. Most of them have Dells or HPs of some sort. They even notice the texture of the trackpad.

I agree that people have a high tolerance of crap, but I think it's because they don't realize what quality feels like. They put up with crappy keyboards and so forth because they—I'm guessing—internally assume it's just the way it is.

After I show them the backlight on the keyboard, or my Macally iceKey, it's all over. They want to switch. Just from using the *KEYBOARD*.

[Satchmo]

Originally Posted by kdcny Like, the MacBook Air. People knock it for a number of reasons [see scratt's "bitter" response above ], but I think that Apple's looked long and hard at different markets, and determined at least two major qualifications for anything it builds: 1) Nothing less than a full-sized keyboard is acceptable, and 2) The Mac OS X interface isn't as good for the user on anything smaller than a 13" (1280x800) screen. (At least in the last several years, forgetting the 12" PowerBook and 12" iBook) ....I think that Apple's stuck with that one and decided that the vast majority of consumers will not put up with a non-full-sized keyboard that people have to hunt and peck on.

Jobs' constant claim of not compromising on keyboard size is just a spin on missing out on the netbook revolution. Frankly, I think Apple was just asleep at the wheel. The popularity of netbooks was swift and possibly during production of the MacBook Air.

Plus the size keyboard on the iPhone would certainly be deemed a compromise in the eyes of many. Apple's not perfect in reading the tea leaves. I just hope they have a new smaller netbook or larger touch tablet in the pipeline.

[joveblue]

Apple spent a lot of time designing the Air and they would not have done so without considering that a smaller form-factor might be desirable to many people, especially in the ultra-portable market. They were not neglectful in this at all. But designing computers is a matter of trade-offs.

Yes people would be willing to buy a computer with a smaller keyboard than full-size. But a full-size keyboard is clearly much preferable. Hell, most people with netbooks I've spoken to seem to get fed up with the small-size keyboards after a while. Sure, for the occasional web-browsing you can get buy but these are not really the people in the market Apple had in mind here. Apple is not in the cheap crappy netbook market. The Air is aimed squarely at business people who would presumably be doing a lot of typing.

Secondly, a smaller than 13" screen can be put up with but again it's clearly not ideal for anything more than occasional web-browsing etc. Imagine trying to work with a spreadsheet on a tiny screen!

Thirdly, they realised that the width and depth are not the only important dimensions. In fact, chances are a laptop is going to be put in with some other papers and so forth, so for many people, it wouldn't matter as much as the thinness of the machine, and of course the weight.

Thirdly, "underpowered"? Yes it's missing a few ports and a built-in DVD burner, but it still manages to pack in 1.6-1.8 GHz Core 2 Duo with 2MB RAM. No, its no MacBook Pro. But if you need a MacBook Pro this machine in not for you. It's almost as powerful as a MacBook, despite it's extreme thinness.

So yes, there are a lot of compromises. They could have made some different choices. But no design is going to please everyone. And in the end, they made the smart choice of not compromising the OS X user experience with a tiny screen and a under-sized keyboard.

Yes, there is some influence as to the cost of different parts in Apple's product line-up. For instance the same screens are shared across product lines, as are a whole variety of other parts. Notice how very shortly after the HDD capacity of the Air was bumped up from 80GB to 120GB, the iPod Classic also got bumped up to 120GB, with the 160GB model being dropped (presumably for cost reasons).

But I highly doubt this is a driving force in the overall direction of Apple's product. I'd say it's only considered when the details of the configurations are being drawn up (i.e. What size HDD to use? 23" or 24" screen? etc.)

[Robo]

Originally Posted by joveblue I doubt there's ever been anyone in an Apple office trying to work out where things fit on this grid/matrix. It just so happens that it's more or less natural for their products to align up to this grid, a lot of the time.

Well, idunno. I don't think it just "happens" that Apple has a pro and consumer desktop and a pro and consumer notebook. The core of Apple's product matrix was obviously fairly calculated, and Apple's stuck to it ever since its introduction. They've never not had a pro notebook, for example.

As far as the random other stuff, like the MacBook Air, I don't think it's necessarily them trying to fill holes in that grid (because there are none) as much as it is simply "we think this might be popular." In the MacBook Air's case, it might have been something like this: "We know people want smaller and lighter computers. While we will obviously work to decrease the size and weight of all of our computers over time, we think there is now enough interest to make producing an ultraportable computer a priority. Because we never do things halfway, we want it to be the thinnest notebook in the world. This will boost Apple's brand prestige. It is not possible to make either of our current notebooks the thinnest in the world - this will require an all-new notebook. But we think it will be popular, so we'll build it, product matrix be damned."

[joveblue]

All computer companies serve a variety of customers on a spectrum from basic users right through to pro users. Most of the time Apple has made some sort of distinction between pro and consumer... but they haven't always made one portable and one desktop for each and the lines are often blurred. The current product line-up has the Mini, the iMac and the Mac Pro in desktops. Even the iMac is consumer at one end and professional at the other. In portables the Air throws out the matrix. In the past, they've had the eMac and the Cube to throw the matrix off (possibly others?). So it's natural for them to cover consumers ranging from basic to professional, and since the advent of the laptop, both portables and desktops. But I don't think they've ever been concerned whether a product fits nice and squarely into one of the 4 boxes.

[scratt]

Originally Posted by Roboman "We know people want smaller and lighter computers. While we will obviously work to decrease the size and weight of all of our computers over time, we think there is now enough interest to make producing an ultraportable computer a priority. Because we never do things halfway, we want it to be the thinnest notebook in the world. This will boost Apple's brand prestige. It is not possible to make either of our current notebooks the thinnest in the world - this will require an all-new notebook. But we think it will be popular, so we'll build it, product matrix be damned."

This is my biggest problem with the Air.. Big deal it's thin.. But it still takes up the same space as a 13" MacBook and is bigger than a 12" PB. What I want is a 12" or better still a sub-12" machine from Apple.

They have not produced a sub-portable. They have produced a thing that needs the same space as their current line-ups smallest machines, is overpriced, and underpowered.. I'll take two of the last three if they will only make it sub-portable. It's not.

I don't even mind paying more.. Just make a real sub-portable.
Fitting in a manilla envelope is not really something that floats my boat. Sorry Steve!

There is a reason I have bought a second hand 12", and use a Toshiba ToughBook daily..... The Air will never fit into that gap. It's pretentious, yuppy crap IMO!

EDIT : What is worse is the only reason the Air is big is that it has these crappy angled edges that hold nothing and do nothing except make it slightly bigger than it needs it to be, and dates it like some 70's design! Again IMHO.

[joveblue]

Originally Posted by scratt This is my biggest problem with the Air.. Big deal it's thin.. But it still takes up the same space as a 13" MacBook and is bigger than a 12" PB.

Depends how you carry it.

[Capella]

I don't think it's carrying it that's always the problem. What about small desks, or airplane trays? Those are areas where the same-size footprint can cause problems, and where thinness doesn't matter at home. In most of the Rutgers lecture halls, no laptop fits on a desk. Even a 12" PB hung off the edges slightly!

[scratt]

Originally Posted by Capella I don't think it's carrying it that's always the problem. What about small desks, or airplane trays? Those are areas where the same-size footprint can cause problems, and where thinness doesn't matter at home. In most of the Rutgers lecture halls, no laptop fits on a desk. Even a 12" PB hung off the edges slightly!

Exactly!

[canyon_Carver]

If I had to give a philosophy mission statement for apple

It would be "simple elegant designs that produce a rich-experience between the operator and their personal technology".

They produce environments, experiences, touch, sights...they try to dissolve the line in between a user and an operator. The thought and design of the technology is first produced by the end-experience of the user--not the gadget's technology that drives the experience. Apple thinks--what would a PERSON want to do? Lets design for that. Other companies start with What do we want X to do...lets let the person figure it out.

Apple hit a gold mine with the iPhone. The first company to figure out that cell phones only need one button......thats thinking about the user, not the technology.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by scratt SJ *knows* that everyone in the world is wrong apart from him.

Wow, sounds about like a half-dozen or so folks over in AppleOutsider, in more than a few recent threads.

Originally Posted by Capella Mini 9's ship with XP or Ubuntu, which either way means no Vista.

Oops, my mistake. That's what I get for not knowing - or giving rip - about this particular product category.

[Bryson]

Originally Posted by canyon_Carver The first company to figure out that cell phones only need one button.......

I see four buttons and a switch on my iPhone...

[thegeriatric]

Originally Posted by scratt EDIT : Do I sound bitter?

No. What on earth makes you think that?