3 ms·

> It's strange because they have clearly spent a LOT of time pushing partner channel development and certification. But the software side, the part that the use

> It's strange because they have clearly spent a LOT of time pushing partner channel development and certification. But the software side, the part that the user actually interacts with, seems so under thought. This is usually a sign that the MBAs are taking over and playing software developers via spec driven development, the actual software artisans having been reduced to a transpiling transfer function. I don't have any contacts inside of Apple these days; it would be interesting to hear whether developers on the inside are feeling this is the case.

wronglebowski 5y ago
Wouldn't they just be pushing the channel to get the fees from certification? Like the made for iPod/iPhone program? The way I see it Apple believes they are entitled to a percentage of all things in life. They can't sell Home automation as a service yet but they can certainly make up some of the cost by gouging their partners to join the ecosystem.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
KarlKemp 5y ago
That’s a good example of self-reinforcing stereotypes or, maybe, correlation without causation. Apple projects get a big team, launch, and then tend to languish because the team moved on to the next thing. “Business types” have little to do with it: as far as we can tell, more or less nothing is happening. That’s not the outcome of a bad strategy, which tends more towards lots of activity with little usefulness. The possible correlation could come from the fact that when development is more or less suspended, the tech people hand over to business because that’s all that is supposed to happen from here on. HomeKit has -art era and customers just like iTunes or the App Store, so it often operates like an ongoing business rather than a software project. There have also been several instances of projects languishing where we know tech people were still in control: Scott Forstall alone ran Siri, Maps, the App Store and iTunes at times where they each saw stagnation at best.

wronglebowski 5y ago

Wouldn't they just be pushing the channel to get the fees from certification? Like the made for iPod/iPhone program? The way I see it Apple believes they are entitled to a percentage of all things in life. They can't sell Home automation as a service yet but they can certainly make up some of the cost by gouging their partners to join the ecosystem.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

KarlKemp 5y ago

That’s a good example of self-reinforcing stereotypes or, maybe, correlation without causation. Apple projects get a big team, launch, and then tend to languish because the team moved on to the next thing. “Business types” have little to do with it: as far as we can tell, more or less nothing is happening. That’s not the outcome of a bad strategy, which tends more towards lots of activity with little usefulness. The possible correlation could come from the fact that when development is more or less suspended, the tech people hand over to business because that’s all that is supposed to happen from here on. HomeKit has -art era and customers just like iTunes or the App Store, so it often operates like an ongoing business rather than a software project. There have also been several instances of projects languishing where we know tech people were still in control: Scott Forstall alone ran Siri, Maps, the App Store and iTunes at times where they each saw stagnation at best.