4 ms·

Largely due to the fact they they are a) playing it safe and b) mostly reactionary when it comes to new product designs/concepts. I have no qualms with the cur

by nhangen 12y ago

Largely due to the fact they they are a) playing it safe and b) mostly reactionary when it comes to new product designs/concepts. I have no qualms with the current product lineup, but I think that Apple, under Cook, has traded vision for certainty. I think that having more of Ive outside of cheeky launch videos would serve them well.

72deluxe 12y ago
Interesting, I had not thought of them playing it safe. But I suppose you are right about the "reactionary" part of it to some extent. But what about software? The new Yosemite look was widely hated on release, as was iOS7 changes. (I myself like Yosemite btw) Would you not see the Apple Watch as a risk? Or a risk in the wrong sort of way?
- TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
  I think it's the wrong kind of risk - it's Apple explicitly trying to operate as an upmarket fashion brand, as opposed to Apple suggesting a fashion brand while appearing to operate as a technology company. Watch is like to trying to sell a gold-plated Mac Pro. Suddenly the gold becomes more important than the computing. All previous Jobs products majored in being useful. If you put an iPod inside a cardboard case with clunky switches instead of a click wheel, you'd still have a very practical music player. The clever design enhances usefulness that's already there. Same with the iPhone. It was the first phone to pull together the phone, map, browser, email, calendar, and other features with maximum user benefit. You could make a case for competing products doing one or two items on the list better, but not for any competitor making everything work together so well as a package. Usefulness again. The point of Watch Edition seems to be conspicuous display of expense, with useful computing thrown in as a free extra. That's a completely different product direction. If Watch has limited basic usability - if the battery life is too short, if it doesn't do something insanely wonderful and useful out of the box - I think success is not guaranteed.
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    Very observant and interesting points, thanks. I had not thought of the prettiness/beautification as a secondary item to the purpose of the products. Thanks.
- nhangen 12y ago
  Yosemite is an upgrade on part with what they were already doing, so more of the same there. The watch, in my eyes, is a huge disappointment. With as much time as they took to prep for the launch, I expected they would have done more thinking about how to innovate in a landscape that has failed to become anything more than mediocre. I think it is the epitome of Apple's failure to innovate post-Jobs, and is the first of more 'meh' to come.
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    But what about drawing hearts to each other on it??? :-) Only kidding. I found the Watch video to be dull and Ives' voiceover to be disappointing and desperately attempting to find highlights in a featureless item. A bit like trying to describe how wonderful a piece of blank A4 piece of paper was. I will wait to see how it fares! No doubt we'll all be shocked if it sells by the billion.

by nhangen 12y ago

72deluxe 12y ago

Interesting, I had not thought of them playing it safe. But I suppose you are right about the "reactionary" part of it to some extent. But what about software? The new Yosemite look was widely hated on release, as was iOS7 changes. (I myself like Yosemite btw) Would you not see the Apple Watch as a risk? Or a risk in the wrong sort of way?

TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
I think it's the wrong kind of risk - it's Apple explicitly trying to operate as an upmarket fashion brand, as opposed to Apple suggesting a fashion brand while appearing to operate as a technology company. Watch is like to trying to sell a gold-plated Mac Pro. Suddenly the gold becomes more important than the computing. All previous Jobs products majored in being useful. If you put an iPod inside a cardboard case with clunky switches instead of a click wheel, you'd still have a very practical music player. The clever design enhances usefulness that's already there. Same with the iPhone. It was the first phone to pull together the phone, map, browser, email, calendar, and other features with maximum user benefit. You could make a case for competing products doing one or two items on the list better, but not for any competitor making everything work together so well as a package. Usefulness again. The point of Watch Edition seems to be conspicuous display of expense, with useful computing thrown in as a free extra. That's a completely different product direction. If Watch has limited basic usability - if the battery life is too short, if it doesn't do something insanely wonderful and useful out of the box - I think success is not guaranteed.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  Very observant and interesting points, thanks. I had not thought of the prettiness/beautification as a secondary item to the purpose of the products. Thanks.
nhangen 12y ago
Yosemite is an upgrade on part with what they were already doing, so more of the same there. The watch, in my eyes, is a huge disappointment. With as much time as they took to prep for the launch, I expected they would have done more thinking about how to innovate in a landscape that has failed to become anything more than mediocre. I think it is the epitome of Apple's failure to innovate post-Jobs, and is the first of more 'meh' to come.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  But what about drawing hearts to each other on it??? :-) Only kidding. I found the Watch video to be dull and Ives' voiceover to be disappointing and desperately attempting to find highlights in a featureless item. A bit like trying to describe how wonderful a piece of blank A4 piece of paper was. I will wait to see how it fares! No doubt we'll all be shocked if it sells by the billion.