2 ms·

The problem is when it takes x10 longer is x10 more expensive and sucks. The trick is to align both the short term and the long term. Deliver that short term

by YZF 3y ago

The problem is when it takes x10 longer is x10 more expensive and sucks. The trick is to align both the short term and the long term. Deliver that short term faster, and deliver it in a form that aligns and/or informs the long term. I was curious about the history of the iPod so was reading up on it. Apple took 8 months from zero to announcement and the product was available one month later. That was Nov 2001. The iPod touch still sells today. There's lots of details under that but you don't really see that kind of execution any more IMO.

XorNot 3y ago
The iPod really wasn't a technically complex product though - no more so then anything else at the time. The original iPod was "just" a hard drive with an LCD on it. The big innovation was the wheel interface, and the quality of the plastic packaging/housing. Apple's big value proposition was realizing they could put premium-looking styling on a product and that would then justify the price point to add capability - at the time the whole point of the iPod was "it's got enormous storage". It literally was just a laptop HDD in a housing though. Which is to say: Apple's timeline for that is a pretty standard consumer product timeline. If they'd taken much longer then that you'd have to wonder what they were wasting their time on. EDIT: Like it's worth considering that Apple probably owes a lot of it's success to the specific finish and chemical formulation of the plastic they use, more then any specific technical merits of a lot of their products - building a plastic gadget that felt as good as an iPod did was a heck of an achievement, just not in the area people think.
- YZF 3y ago
  I wouldn't trivialize the iPod effort. Zero to a finished, manufacturable, product. There's software. There was coordination with a bunch of external vendors. And, sure as you say aspects of design and materials. I've seen many software projects of smaller scope that get stuck or lose direction.

by YZF 3y ago

XorNot 3y ago

The iPod really wasn't a technically complex product though - no more so then anything else at the time. The original iPod was "just" a hard drive with an LCD on it. The big innovation was the wheel interface, and the quality of the plastic packaging/housing. Apple's big value proposition was realizing they could put premium-looking styling on a product and that would then justify the price point to add capability - at the time the whole point of the iPod was "it's got enormous storage". It literally was just a laptop HDD in a housing though. Which is to say: Apple's timeline for that is a pretty standard consumer product timeline. If they'd taken much longer then that you'd have to wonder what they were wasting their time on. EDIT: Like it's worth considering that Apple probably owes a lot of it's success to the specific finish and chemical formulation of the plastic they use, more then any specific technical merits of a lot of their products - building a plastic gadget that felt as good as an iPod did was a heck of an achievement, just not in the area people think.

YZF 3y ago
I wouldn't trivialize the iPod effort. Zero to a finished, manufacturable, product. There's software. There was coordination with a bunch of external vendors. And, sure as you say aspects of design and materials. I've seen many software projects of smaller scope that get stuck or lose direction.