5 ms·

I think you're correct that Apple is going to have to do things differently get some of their web properties to catch on, but I disagree heavily on your premise

I think you're correct that Apple is going to have to do things differently get some of their web properties to catch on, but I disagree heavily on your premise. For a counterexample, Facebook is professional-looking and very structured compared to MySpace, which in turn is very amateurish-feeling. There isn't any question which is preferred. Forums are amateurish. Stackoverflow is professional. I know where I'm going for Q&A. I think there's a lot more to Apple's problems than professionalism vs amateurism, to the point where it is a minor point, if one at all. I'm very wary against sayings like "the web is about amateur content." The web is about a lot of things, and while a lot of the web is about amateur content, a lot of the web is also about providing good structure, order, and execution to that content. In general, it even seems to be that the company that can put the most order unto the all of the content reaps the greatest success.

revscat 15y ago
Honestly, I think you're both right. My feeling is that Apple has not successfully been able to from that successful web platforms have are professional, but "open-ended with a purpose". Your examples of Facebook and Stack Overflow are perfect representations of this: both are professionally implemented, but the content itself is basically open, but purposed. Ping doesn't let you generate anything new, or provide information that is broadly useful.
davidbalbert 15y ago
My point wasn't that less professional looking websites succeed over more professional looking sites. It's Apple's focus on professional content (the select few) vs amateur content (all of us). I didn't mean to use amateur in a derogative sense. Amateurs are just people who don't get paid for their work. Re: Facebook/MySpace, I think this was a different dynamic. The thing facebook did right was tone down the design significantly so that everyone's content became the only important thing on the page. It's still amateur content though. If Apple had done Stack Overflow, I bet they would have had a team of certified experts to answer the questions and I don't think it would have worked very well. In Stack Overflow, there's no separation between who can ask and answer questions (besides a few karma points). That kind of chaos Apple doesn't excel at.
- masklinn 15y ago
  > If Apple had done Stack Overflow, I bet they would have had a team of certified experts to answer the questions and I don't think it would have worked very well. Something like Knol?
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- rimantas 15y ago
  > My point wasn't that less professional looking websites > succeed over more professional looking sites. Besides that your point is not true I fail to see how it applies to Apple. Should they remake apple.com to something horribly amateurish, and then they somehow succeed? Are they failing? And I bet that if some website which looks amateur succeeds over more professionally done the looks is not the key to success.
  - davidbalbert 15y ago
    No they're not failing over all at all. They're just failing at web stuff (which they keep trying at). I wouldn't change a thing with their hardware business, and as a result I wouldn't change apple.com. I would change me.com though, because it's not a success by any definition of the term. Also, my point was not about whether a site is amateur or professionally done. It's whether the focus is on amateur or professional content. Apple is very good at the latter and not so much at the former which is why they have so much trouble with the web.
    - rimantas 15y ago
      I still don't get what are you talking about. What is that "web stuff" that Apple is failing? What has me.com to do with content, professional or amateur? It is not some blogging platform.
- jdq 15y ago
  It's this part that's going to get people disagreeing with you: "No more pixel perfect web apps that feel like desktop apps, no more sites that look like glossy brochures, and embracing chaos and amateurism over order and professionalism. It is going to be very hard."
derleth 15y ago
Craiglist is the most amateur-looking website I've seen in a very long time.

revscat 15y ago

Honestly, I think you're both right. My feeling is that Apple has not successfully been able to from that successful web platforms have are professional, but "open-ended with a purpose". Your examples of Facebook and Stack Overflow are perfect representations of this: both are professionally implemented, but the content itself is basically open, but purposed. Ping doesn't let you generate anything new, or provide information that is broadly useful.

davidbalbert 15y ago

My point wasn't that less professional looking websites succeed over more professional looking sites. It's Apple's focus on professional content (the select few) vs amateur content (all of us). I didn't mean to use amateur in a derogative sense. Amateurs are just people who don't get paid for their work. Re: Facebook/MySpace, I think this was a different dynamic. The thing facebook did right was tone down the design significantly so that everyone's content became the only important thing on the page. It's still amateur content though. If Apple had done Stack Overflow, I bet they would have had a team of certified experts to answer the questions and I don't think it would have worked very well. In Stack Overflow, there's no separation between who can ask and answer questions (besides a few karma points). That kind of chaos Apple doesn't excel at.

masklinn 15y ago
> If Apple had done Stack Overflow, I bet they would have had a team of certified experts to answer the questions and I don't think it would have worked very well. Something like Knol?
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
rimantas 15y ago
> My point wasn't that less professional looking websites > succeed over more professional looking sites. Besides that your point is not true I fail to see how it applies to Apple. Should they remake apple.com to something horribly amateurish, and then they somehow succeed? Are they failing? And I bet that if some website which looks amateur succeeds over more professionally done the looks is not the key to success.
- davidbalbert 15y ago
  No they're not failing over all at all. They're just failing at web stuff (which they keep trying at). I wouldn't change a thing with their hardware business, and as a result I wouldn't change apple.com. I would change me.com though, because it's not a success by any definition of the term. Also, my point was not about whether a site is amateur or professionally done. It's whether the focus is on amateur or professional content. Apple is very good at the latter and not so much at the former which is why they have so much trouble with the web.
  - rimantas 15y ago
    I still don't get what are you talking about. What is that "web stuff" that Apple is failing? What has me.com to do with content, professional or amateur? It is not some blogging platform.
jdq 15y ago
It's this part that's going to get people disagreeing with you: "No more pixel perfect web apps that feel like desktop apps, no more sites that look like glossy brochures, and embracing chaos and amateurism over order and professionalism. It is going to be very hard."

derleth 15y ago

Craiglist is the most amateur-looking website I've seen in a very long time.