The Swing Of Things

Macjournals claims the sticker-question is a legitimate one. At least no less than the other questions. They’re right on the last part. It is of course a waste of time that Apple allows a Q&A at events like these, because they will never answer interesting questions anyway.

Apart from that, Macjournals are totally off mark on about everything. Comparing the “obvious” product non-evolvements to the “obviousness” of Apple not putting stickers on the Mac is ridiculous. Apple histiorically never talk about product enhancement, but they never let the smokescreens they create get in the way of their products. Never. Whatever they’ve said, and whatever people think or believe doesn’t matter. If Apple thinks the product will benefit they’ll introduce whatever technology needed. Hell, they’d sell the Mac with Windows if they’d really thought it beneficiary. What they will never ever do, is dillute the brand. At least not with Jobs and Ive at the helm.

“Obvious” is in the eye of the beholder, and we still say that if you think the answer to “why aren’t you taking free money after announcing lower margins” is obvious, you need to do more beholding.

Intel could probably offer to pay Apple to use their processors and still not get the sticker on. As already said; Apples brand awareness is just too high, and the benefits for Apple not to include the stickers are way to obvious. Macjournals assumption that Apples margin would be higher if they include the sticker is simply false. They can start with looking at other PC companies margins for the last 8 years. Next they may check on development of the stocks and brand awareness.

Rarely does one single question get as much attention as now infamous journalist Bob Keefe’s at the latest Apple event. Not because it was interesting, but because of claims that it was utterly stupid. However, questions can’t be stupid. The people asking them is another thing entirely.

So why was it stupid to ask this particular question? Not so much the fact that Apple never puts stickers of any kind on their computers. Remember that the a large part of the Mac-community itself was quite excited to see if there would be any Intel promostickers on the new Macs. The simple answer is partly in what Steve Jobs himself replied:

We love working with Intel. We’re proud to ship Intel products in Macs. They’re screamers, and combined with our OS, we’ve tuned them well. It’s just that everyone knows we use Intel processors. We’d rather not tell them about the product that’s inside the box

People that care about such knows there are Intel processors inside, and what kind. Steve Jobs knows very well that the first thing his customers will do is peel off that sticker - if it was there. He also knows it will irritate them. Of course he also knows that no one is buying Macs because there are Intel processors in them. In fact most people could care less for what is inside that box - including the processor. People buy Macs because they like them and has taken a distinct choice both for the Apple brand of hardware and operating system. No small choice in a world where 90% runs flavors of Windows.

Actually the same goes for Apple. Apple does not sell Intel processors. They sell Mac’s - and will never do anything to take peoples attention from that fact. They use Intel processors now, because at the moment they offers the better price/performance/versatility. But remember - Apples stuff runs on at least three kinds of architecures.

So the good question in this matter is not why Apple is not promoting Intel processors, but rather: why does almost everyone else do? Why on earth is everyone willing to deteriorate they’re own brand in this obvious way? I can not think of any other tech product at all that is promoting any component inside like the PC-business is promoting Intel and Windows. In fact I honestly can think of no brand at all that does this.

Bob Keefe himself argues that his is a good question because Apple is saying no to millions at the cost of the shareholders. That is ignorant at best. Look no further than to Apples market cap and results compared to the competition. Even if revenue and unit shipment is far behind for example Dell, Apple’s market value is almost double. One of the major reasons for this is that Apple is very conscious about their brand. They let nothing disturb it. Most certainly not third party components. Intel’s processors are no more or less important than any other - hence they get no special treatment. I believe the shareholders are quite happy with this arrangement.

At least there is no little satisfaction to watch a journalist getting the heat himself and feeling oh, so hurt. Should make him think, really.

With wednesdays glorious Nine Inch Nails gig still lingering somewhere in the spine, the excitement for thursdays rare norwegian appearance of Tool was electrifying. Maynard and the boys delivered for sure. There is only one thing to comment on a totally perfect show - it was half an hour short. Like NIN, it was hardly Tools fault… Since this is happening in the midst of the city sort of, they have to call it quits at 23:00. Oh well. Good thing is, then I am not totally destroyed at work today, but I think my hearing is temporarily impaired…

Trent Reznor is a genius! Nuf said.

I have to see these things live I suppose. But - does it now look a bit odd with the white plastic keys on the new alu-keyboard, white cables and the white plastic mouse - alongside all this aluminum and even what appears to be black on the back of those iMac’s? I know we have white mouse/keyboard with the Mac Pro - but the box is under my desk, and the display also has white plastic insets.

Gallery at AppleInsider for better look.

At last - along with the new iMac’s - the norwegian Apple site is also launched in the new design Apple implemented with the iPhone in June. I really like this design. A lot of companies should learn more from Apple about how to present themselves and their products.

Notice how your choices always are narrowed and relevant and concise. You never have to wonder where to click - for the most part you are very much held in hand through the site and can make your perfect decision of where to go at all times. Also the consistancy throughout the site is great (except for some weird changes between black and white background). Everything is built so it is easy for you to make your choice and buy the product. It actually invites you to explore the site and products, giving you confidence that you can easily find your way. In my opinion Apple’s site is a classbook example of excellent web-structure.
Whereas at Microsoft (who has cleaned up a lot) and Dell for example you really have to make a thinking where you want to go next.

Example:
You want a new computer. At Apple you are (pt) presented with 4 choices of what to do; 1. click the Store (obvious if you want what to buy), 2, click Mac (if you want to compare the various versions of computers they offer - or 3./4. click on iMac or Mac mini promos to check out those specific machines. All of them offer intuitive links to the Store and information on other models. You can’t go wrong.

Dell does not offer you a direct path to buy anything. The company claiming to have invented the direct sale model for computers does not have a link directly to their store on the front page. They do offer some product categories though. Ok, so I want a new desktop… but hey, mouseover and I have to choose if I have a home office, small office, medium office… So - a choice to make. Why do they make me think about this, and why can’t I easily see a lineup of all desktop offerings? Oh, yes - there is a link on the side there - solutions for different kinds of businesses. Maybe that’ll offer some clue on what I am looking for. Right? Wrong. Now the categories changed names, the “icons” are replaced and I have to decide if I want a desktop or a workstation. So, what is really the difference here? Do I need a workstation or just a regular desktop? So turns out I get the workstation choice again when choosing desktop, with three different other alternatives. All this while I am still uncertain if I should have clicked small or medium business in the beginning.

Try it for yourself - you have to dig down 4 clicks to get to some hard facts on any product - on Apple you are down to it on maximum 2, and with everything else just 1 click away at all times. That aside from the fact that Dell’s site alter it’s appearance on any click, changing width and with all kinds of menustyles ever invented. If you click one level deep, you are presented with a site using a tabbed menu with dropdowns at the top , a sidebar menu with some slightly different tactics and menuchoices, a Flash banner with a built in dropdown menu, a main area with tabbed menu and some links at the bottom. I think there is an engineering degree needed to shop anything from this site. At least it is essential that you know precisly what you need and for what befor starting - otherwise you just end up with more quetions than there are answers on this site.

There are some mixed reactions to the revelation of Fake Steve - but in the end it was inevitable. Probably mr. Lyons is quite on spot when he claims he was surprised how long it took. Still, it was fun. But is the fun necessarily gone?

Gruber at Daring Fireball doesn’t seem to think so. Even if I agree with a lot - mr. Lyons has done some great pieces - I think it is a little naive to say that the “mystery” didn’t account for a huge part of the fun. One should not underestimate the power of deception.
The other claim he makes is (with reference to Saturday Night Live) that the biting satire of the blog can live on:

The obvious fear is that without the mask of anonymity, Lyons will be unable to perform with the same ferociousness. But the opposite is just as possible. Now that his identity has been revealed, he’s got nothing to lose.

It will be far fetched to say he already has lost it. But - as everyone knows - writing anonymously does something with people. Would mr. Lyons have come up with the terms he used for prominent figures writing under his full name? Now that everyone knows, will he be able to keep up the mocking of other newsoutlets and not Forbes? Will he really go that extra inch in his writing or be a little more thoughtful, so much that he looses the edge. It is a real fine line of satire being interesting and just plain pathetic.

I guess only time will tell if he keeps up somehow - but one thing is certain: Fake Steve is dead. He will not be the same ever again. Now it remains to see if there is a long live Fake Steve as well. I’m anyway thankful for the moments.

Apple announced new, thinner iMac’s today. Personally I wasn’t that fond of the last incarnation - but this one looks gorgeous. Can’t wait to see it “live”. Simple and elegant. The keyboard, however, I am not so sure of. Looks nice of course, but somehow it doesn’t really invite for typing - at least not from the graphics. Will be interesting to feel it.

New iLife and iWork also - I’m going to buy both. Having wanted Keynote for a long time, Numbers is a great bonus to the suite. The new iMovie app looks really promising as well.

There has been some rumbling - again - about that Google phone thingie. Strong consensus amongst certain people that it is really on it’s way. Might of course be, but is it likely that Google will join that hardware business all of a sudden?

First; I should think that Google is working a lot with mobile stuff. See no longer than to Apple’s iPhone for proof of that, and that is obviously only the beginning. Actually anyone NOT working a lot with mobile stuff these days will probably find themselves buried in a few years.
But hardware is not Google’s way of doing business. Furthermore, there is no good reason they should even bother. Hardware in itself is a marginal business. What makes hardware stand out is software. That is why Apple reap close to 15% profit where pure hardware manufacturers work hard to operate with closer to 5% - even with 6 times the sales.
Google is most certainly working on a “phone” - but the Google mobile is probably no one specific mobile. Remember all the talk about Google making an operating system a while back? Well, this might actually be it. They’ll make an OS allright - but not for the old fashioned PCs mind you. They’ll make a lightweight incarnation that will install on ANY phone or mobile device out there. Fast, versatile and free - rich with apps and practical tools. And it will create an insane cashflow for Google from virtual peanuts. Yes it will most probably debut in some special made hardware - but not from Google itself.
That’s also why “Apple” is worried about it - they know the power of software.

Seems like Fake Steve got busted by this NYT guy… so much for that fun.