Not a hater, but a realist
I recently had a discussion with a number of people about how Apple is not the awesome-est awesome that ever awesomed. Of course, I had to mention that I did indeed own an Apple computer (a Mac mini, I call him Sergio) and an iPod nano. I stated that I liked them both very much, and although each has caused me consternation at one time or another, I see no reason to replace them as this moment.
I have to say this because, otherwise, I'm just a hater and all my opinions void. Here's the thing. I don't think Apple is evil, but I don't think Microsoft is either. I think they're both corporations that do fairly "corporate" things, many of which have a negative effect on the consumer and our society. They're not all bad, mind you. They're just ... corporations. Which means profits are their goal, not costumer satisfaction. One would think that in this day and age, most corporations would not assume that those two perspectives were antithetical, but I'm digressing.
However, what I've noticed for some time, and I know I'm not alone in this, is that Microsoft gets all the heat and derision, and Apple gets treated like a pin-up girl for the soldier long from home. In the end, I don't care what you personally choose to use, but please don't tell me that Apple is Great! while ignoring its problems and hypocrisy. Again, it's a corporation, so why the assumption that it can do no wrong?
Here's why I find fault with Apple?
1. Your products are prohibitively expensive, but you claim to be the technology juggernaut that everyone should be using. (see "I'm a Mac" commercials for examples.)
2. You feed into the Constant Consumption Mentality that tells Americans that their lives should be defined by what they own, not who they are. Case in point: You invent a sleek new iPod nano (3rd gen) with a tiny screen to view films, videos and the like, but then turn around 6 months later and release the iPod nano (4th gen) which offers 3 new hip colors & the option to shake it from side to side to start the shuffle function. Why? Because heaven forfend the user take 12 seconds to push the menu button 3 times and SELECT the shuffle option.
As a buddy of mine mentioned, yes, you can recycle your old Apple products, but that does nothing to combat issue #2. It only helps feed into it. First, you can recycle all electronic products produced by similar manufacturers. Apple simply says, "bring your old [insert tech] in to us and we'll recycle it for you. ... But hey, while you're here, why don't you replace that piece of old tech with some shiny new tech that will cost you $80-$1,800?"
3. You claim you never crash. This is a lie. You crash plenty. No, not as much as my old rickety PC that I had for 6 years. But you crash. And not because of Flash. Or maybe so ... does your iTunes program use Flash or iWeb or iPhoto or Pages?
4. You imply that viruses are rarely a problem for Macs. Again, not true. You simply release a security patch to your registered users like Microsoft and draw less attention to the problem than Windows PC owners. That, and since you use a closed platform, the lack of plentiful viruses is merely a fortunate happenstance. Not a product of ingenuity.
5. You are innovative as far as marketing and as long as the Western world's knowledge of Eastern technology remains limited. Everything you produce -- which by the way is assembled in China for what I'm sure is due to cheap labor costs -- is 6 - 8 years behind everything coming out of Japan. But since Japanese manufacturers are not designing with the Western audience in mind, you'll forever be considered ahead of your time, when in fact, you're only 5 minutes ahead.
6. You sided with the wrong guys on the DRM issue. Period.
7. You got in bed with AT&T.
8. Did I mention you were prohibitively expensive? I guess that's why the majority of your product owners are wealthy and white. Clearly you like it that way.
~~~
So imagine my joy when a noted developer called out Steve Jobs about his letter to Adobe and Apple's decision not to include Flash as a part of it's iPad platform. Someone far more adept than I on these issues of competitive tech and the details of what goes on behind closed doors of major technology giants has taken upon himself to call out Jobs on his lies, misinformation and slight of hand regarding whether or not Flash is "worthy" of the iPad.
Personally, I immediately knew Jobs was blowing smoke and this was all a bit of blustering between men and their egos. Also, it seems obvious that if I'm going to shell out $300 for a new tech device, I want it to be able to load sites that use Flash today (regardless of its waning success) instead of being prohibited to see websites that may use CSS/HTML5 in the future ... some time later ... maybe a year or two or three from now as it slowly becomes the standard. I'm not buying it in 2012, I'm buying it now. Seems like a pretty obvious argument on the part of the consumer. ::shrug::
Or, as a number of people have stated, why can't the consumer have the option to choose whether to use Flash or not?
Anyway, Jamie's entry, "Apple's attack on Adobe Flash, it's all about online video," is detailed, but worth it. Granted, it's written from the perspective of a developer, but that doesn't make the points made any less significant. The consumer is being lied to for the sake of profits. I don't expect companies NOT to lie to me, but I don't want to hear my fellow consumers tell me I'm just a hater for not buying into the lie as quickly as Jobs would have me to.
Some excerpts from Jamie's blog entry:
"The issue here is not the openness of the web, but the tools and costs to get you to this open web. For Apple you have to purchase expensive iTenchnology. For Adobe, you get a free Flash Player."
"Has anyone bothered to tell Steve that HTML5 is a “developing standard” and is not slated to be completely ratified until 2012? HTML5 is by no means a technology we should be putting out there on a large scale yet as the standard is likely to change. "
"I recommend you have a look at “HTML5 versus Flash: Animation Benchmarking” (See video explanation Comparison of performance of Flash Player 10.1 and HTML 5 on Mobile Devices) in which Flash is 200-500% more efficient then HTML5 running on webkit on an android phone. Meaning it would use less power then HTML5. Ie, Steve Jobs’ suggestion that HTML5 has better performance is misleading and obviously not true."
Warning: Jamie's entry gets a little typo-heavy towards the end. I imagine he was exhausted by the time he finished it, but that doesn't excuse the lack of spell check.
I have to say this because, otherwise, I'm just a hater and all my opinions void. Here's the thing. I don't think Apple is evil, but I don't think Microsoft is either. I think they're both corporations that do fairly "corporate" things, many of which have a negative effect on the consumer and our society. They're not all bad, mind you. They're just ... corporations. Which means profits are their goal, not costumer satisfaction. One would think that in this day and age, most corporations would not assume that those two perspectives were antithetical, but I'm digressing.
However, what I've noticed for some time, and I know I'm not alone in this, is that Microsoft gets all the heat and derision, and Apple gets treated like a pin-up girl for the soldier long from home. In the end, I don't care what you personally choose to use, but please don't tell me that Apple is Great! while ignoring its problems and hypocrisy. Again, it's a corporation, so why the assumption that it can do no wrong?
Here's why I find fault with Apple?
1. Your products are prohibitively expensive, but you claim to be the technology juggernaut that everyone should be using. (see "I'm a Mac" commercials for examples.)
2. You feed into the Constant Consumption Mentality that tells Americans that their lives should be defined by what they own, not who they are. Case in point: You invent a sleek new iPod nano (3rd gen) with a tiny screen to view films, videos and the like, but then turn around 6 months later and release the iPod nano (4th gen) which offers 3 new hip colors & the option to shake it from side to side to start the shuffle function. Why? Because heaven forfend the user take 12 seconds to push the menu button 3 times and SELECT the shuffle option.
As a buddy of mine mentioned, yes, you can recycle your old Apple products, but that does nothing to combat issue #2. It only helps feed into it. First, you can recycle all electronic products produced by similar manufacturers. Apple simply says, "bring your old [insert tech] in to us and we'll recycle it for you. ... But hey, while you're here, why don't you replace that piece of old tech with some shiny new tech that will cost you $80-$1,800?"
3. You claim you never crash. This is a lie. You crash plenty. No, not as much as my old rickety PC that I had for 6 years. But you crash. And not because of Flash. Or maybe so ... does your iTunes program use Flash or iWeb or iPhoto or Pages?
4. You imply that viruses are rarely a problem for Macs. Again, not true. You simply release a security patch to your registered users like Microsoft and draw less attention to the problem than Windows PC owners. That, and since you use a closed platform, the lack of plentiful viruses is merely a fortunate happenstance. Not a product of ingenuity.
5. You are innovative as far as marketing and as long as the Western world's knowledge of Eastern technology remains limited. Everything you produce -- which by the way is assembled in China for what I'm sure is due to cheap labor costs -- is 6 - 8 years behind everything coming out of Japan. But since Japanese manufacturers are not designing with the Western audience in mind, you'll forever be considered ahead of your time, when in fact, you're only 5 minutes ahead.
6. You sided with the wrong guys on the DRM issue. Period.
7. You got in bed with AT&T.
8. Did I mention you were prohibitively expensive? I guess that's why the majority of your product owners are wealthy and white. Clearly you like it that way.
~~~
So imagine my joy when a noted developer called out Steve Jobs about his letter to Adobe and Apple's decision not to include Flash as a part of it's iPad platform. Someone far more adept than I on these issues of competitive tech and the details of what goes on behind closed doors of major technology giants has taken upon himself to call out Jobs on his lies, misinformation and slight of hand regarding whether or not Flash is "worthy" of the iPad.
Personally, I immediately knew Jobs was blowing smoke and this was all a bit of blustering between men and their egos. Also, it seems obvious that if I'm going to shell out $300 for a new tech device, I want it to be able to load sites that use Flash today (regardless of its waning success) instead of being prohibited to see websites that may use CSS/HTML5 in the future ... some time later ... maybe a year or two or three from now as it slowly becomes the standard. I'm not buying it in 2012, I'm buying it now. Seems like a pretty obvious argument on the part of the consumer. ::shrug::
Or, as a number of people have stated, why can't the consumer have the option to choose whether to use Flash or not?
Anyway, Jamie's entry, "Apple's attack on Adobe Flash, it's all about online video," is detailed, but worth it. Granted, it's written from the perspective of a developer, but that doesn't make the points made any less significant. The consumer is being lied to for the sake of profits. I don't expect companies NOT to lie to me, but I don't want to hear my fellow consumers tell me I'm just a hater for not buying into the lie as quickly as Jobs would have me to.
Some excerpts from Jamie's blog entry:
"The issue here is not the openness of the web, but the tools and costs to get you to this open web. For Apple you have to purchase expensive iTenchnology. For Adobe, you get a free Flash Player."
"Has anyone bothered to tell Steve that HTML5 is a “developing standard” and is not slated to be completely ratified until 2012? HTML5 is by no means a technology we should be putting out there on a large scale yet as the standard is likely to change. "
"I recommend you have a look at “HTML5 versus Flash: Animation Benchmarking” (See video explanation Comparison of performance of Flash Player 10.1 and HTML 5 on Mobile Devices) in which Flash is 200-500% more efficient then HTML5 running on webkit on an android phone. Meaning it would use less power then HTML5. Ie, Steve Jobs’ suggestion that HTML5 has better performance is misleading and obviously not true."
Warning: Jamie's entry gets a little typo-heavy towards the end. I imagine he was exhausted by the time he finished it, but that doesn't excuse the lack of spell check.