3 ms·

Oh, I don't know. The 2001 Macworld keynote that outlines the "digital hub" is still fascinating: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9046oXrm7f8 http://www.youtub

Oh, I don't know. The 2001 Macworld keynote that outlines the "digital hub" is still fascinating: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9046oXrm7f8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9046oXrm7f8 It's remarkably prescient in a lot of ways. Take this quote: Digital cameras now constitute 15% of all cameras sold in the US. 15% percent. It'll be 50% in a few years. He also makes the point that a hub is necessary because of all these various devices can't talk to the Internet.

patrickaljord 15y ago
> Digital cameras now constitute 15% of all cameras sold in the US. 15% percent. It'll be 50% in a few years. Really? That's the same thought I had the first time I saw a usable digital camera 10 years ago, and I don't think I'm special or that I was the only one...
- sunchild 15y ago
  Do you have a link to your keynote speech? The one where you committed your publicly-traded company to this strategy?
- hammerdr 15y ago
  It's truly remarkable that a $60B company is able to make these sort of bets and execute on them. It's easy for smart individuals to make off hand remarks but it is different for a company to rally and gather around a single idea like this. To be fair, Apple isn't the only company that does this. Google is remarkable, as well. Virgin is another. I'm sure there are many others in many other industries that take big gambles for 'game-changing' or earth shattering results.
- cubicle67 15y ago
  go and read photography magazines from that era. There's was much heated and vehement objection to including articles pertaining to digital photography and cameras. Many photographers at that time were convinced digital cameras were just toys and had no part in 'professional' magazines. of course, some thought the opposite
  - 6ren 15y ago
    Classic disruption. When the new tech isn't very good and gets a foothold in new markets, the professional users (correctly) view it as inferior, rubbish, a toy. The big picture question is whether it could improve enough to be usable by professional users. It's kind of odd that many are oblivious to the obvious trajectory of improvement. EDIT e.g.1 (from Worse is Better) could AI become good enough? A tricky one, since they aren't competing with another product, but with us. OTOH, computers are constantly replacing people for simple tasks - the history of computation is the history of mental automation. e.g.2 could PHP become good enough to replace Java in the Enterprise (apparently their target)? Something that can stall the trajectory is the next wave of disruption breathing on their heels.
ralfd 15y ago
Great presentation foreshadowing the iPod.

patrickaljord 15y ago

> Digital cameras now constitute 15% of all cameras sold in the US. 15% percent. It'll be 50% in a few years. Really? That's the same thought I had the first time I saw a usable digital camera 10 years ago, and I don't think I'm special or that I was the only one...

sunchild 15y ago
Do you have a link to your keynote speech? The one where you committed your publicly-traded company to this strategy?
hammerdr 15y ago
It's truly remarkable that a $60B company is able to make these sort of bets and execute on them. It's easy for smart individuals to make off hand remarks but it is different for a company to rally and gather around a single idea like this. To be fair, Apple isn't the only company that does this. Google is remarkable, as well. Virgin is another. I'm sure there are many others in many other industries that take big gambles for 'game-changing' or earth shattering results.
cubicle67 15y ago
go and read photography magazines from that era. There's was much heated and vehement objection to including articles pertaining to digital photography and cameras. Many photographers at that time were convinced digital cameras were just toys and had no part in 'professional' magazines. of course, some thought the opposite
- 6ren 15y ago
  Classic disruption. When the new tech isn't very good and gets a foothold in new markets, the professional users (correctly) view it as inferior, rubbish, a toy. The big picture question is whether it could improve enough to be usable by professional users. It's kind of odd that many are oblivious to the obvious trajectory of improvement. EDIT e.g.1 (from Worse is Better) could AI become good enough? A tricky one, since they aren't competing with another product, but with us. OTOH, computers are constantly replacing people for simple tasks - the history of computation is the history of mental automation. e.g.2 could PHP become good enough to replace Java in the Enterprise (apparently their target)? Something that can stall the trajectory is the next wave of disruption breathing on their heels.

ralfd 15y ago

Great presentation foreshadowing the iPod.