An editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal argues that Apple’s love of strategy has overclouded its passion for products. Is Holman Jenkins right that Apple is the new Microsoft, and iTunes is the new Windows?
Obviously, the companies are so inherently different both culturally and strategically that it’s easy to dismiss Jenkins’s claim out of hand. But there’s at least one strong point here: Apple’s refusal to incorporate Flash may hamper the iPhone’s capabilities, but it forces users to go to iTunes for content they could otherwise get for free on Hulu. As Jenkins says:
Here’s the bigger worry. Apple may be succumbing to the seductive temptations of “network effects,” in which the all-consuming goal becomes getting its mobile devices into more and more hands simply for the purpose of locking more and more users into iTunes.
But has the focus getting those mobile devices into more and more hands resulted in lower quality products? That’s the real issue, and I think the answer has to be no. Jenkins holds the iPad up as proof of an “increasingly junky” device, but I can’t think of anyone who’s actually had a hands-on with it who didn’t think it had serious potential.
Is there a chance that Apple will fall off like Microsoft did in the past? Sure. They’ve got a closed ecosystem, and they’ve shown a willingness to protect that at the cost of consumer benefit. But until that one example starts showing itself to be a systemic problem, it’s far too early for this comparison to hold water.
Wade Hextell
Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 9:10 AMhehehehe, I was saying just the other day to my work colleagues that Microsoft is Satan, Apple is the new Microsoft and Google is the new Apple, amusing :P
Goose
Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 9:34 AMApple is worse than Microsoft ever was, as far as I’m concerned. Microsoft never controlled the hardware that their operating systems ran on (at least on PC’s and definately not to the extent that Apple does). I don’t own anything Apple, and will not own anything Apple until they stop their stupid policy of not allowing their OS to run on non Apple hardware.
olearymo
Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 11:39 AMIt’ll only take time, Goose. Remember, Microsoft (old Microsoft) got away with a LOT before the EU came down on them.
I for one agree with this equation:
Apple=New MS (Bohemoth)
MS=New Apple (Perceived underdog)
Google=Next Apple
rye
Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 12:54 PMagree there…
Apple=New MS (Bohemoth)
MS=New Apple (Perceived underdog)
Google=Next Apple
matt
Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 11:58 AMI honestly don’t know what is wrong with MS?
what the hell caused all the issues with them in the 90s or whatever?
Apple is way worse, and I can tell you one way it has effected the quality of the product: I don’t care how unibody the ipad is, if it can’t run half the net, then thats poor quality!
I think basically what people are saying here is “hey look! Apple is monopolistic and anti-competitive just like MS was!!” to which I would say “duh, glad you FINALLY realised”
lets break it down now:
MS has the dominant operating system, and while they may have achieved that via anti competitive practices, the fact is you don’t NEED to use it.
DirectX is an anti-competitive move, as is .Net a graphics api and whole range of programming languages that are really only for MS OSs, and forcing us to use them is poor. they have actually got Hardware devs focusing more on the Windows only DirectX than the open standards, thus allowing them do dominate games.
umm, then you have the xbox, with no 3rd party peripherals.
and then pretty much everything else is just copied from Apple’s anti-competitive ways. app stores, zune “syncing” software, so everything is controlled, only programming for zune and probably winmo in .Net, something you can only really use nicely with other MS platforms.
and then Apple:
you can only use Their OS with Their Hardware, they were first to ditch the open “just copy files from where ever to the mp3 player like a usb key” system for the controlled itunes, which is the only way you can copy files to and from ipods, and it has a built in store, which encourages people just to buy direct from the itunes store rather than buying from somewhere else and having to integrate. you can only develop for ipods and stuff on a mac, which may seem fair, but from a professional game developer’s stand point, its not acceptable, windows or maybe linux is the OS we use, just the way it is.
all their iDevices ban flash and would wish to ban any other tech that allows the free and uncontrolled use of software on their devices, otherwise THE ONLY place you can get ANY content for your iDevice is through THEIR store!! Imagine if you could only get windows compatible software from a Microsoft online store!?
and finally books: something I have feared might be the case with itunes in general is the case here: not only do they do everything in their power to “encourage” you to buy content for their devices from their stores (in some case forcing you) now you have it so content from their stores are only compatible with THEIR devices!! stuff like books!
it is clear that any form of compatibility any of there products might offer (such as windows on macs) is just there to get you hooked on one of their products, where you will find you are trapped, unable to escape, everything else you now buy has to come from apple.
so to anyone who might suggest that Apple is as bad as Microsoft, I say “welcome to the 21st century, wait until you catch up to 2010, where Apple is a hell of a lot worse!”
Guardian Proxy
Friday, February 12, 2010 at 10:53 AM@Matt – I completely agree with you with a large majority of your points. However, I wouldn’t call Apple evil because they designed a system that makes it more convenient for a user to buy a song and put it into their iTunes – rather than pirating/downloading the song and placing it on a USB mp3 player.
The very concept of making it simpler to pay for content is quite extraordinary, and that’s something that users are clearly paying for – when they know they could get the same content for free if they want to. Are you saying that apple are evil for not letting people steal? Apple are dis-couraging and moving towards restricting people from breaking the law and you declare that a bad thing?
Encouraging people to buy music/movies/books over stealing them from online sources makes publishers, record companies and other stakeholders very happy.
As an iPhone developer, I’m very happy that it’s harder for an iPhone user to pirate my software and that the app store system works in such a way that people are familiar and buy things from the app store and likewise my product.
iTunes is not completely closed off – if you buy a song from another source and add it to your iTunes library (so long as it’s not a proprietary format such as .wma) it will work. Vice versa – you buy a song from iTunes and it will work in WMP, VLC, on a Zune or an iRiver.
On the topic of publishers – the best thing that Apple did (and I was very happy about this) was they used an open e-book (e-pub if my memory serves me correctly) format rather than a proprietary format for their iBook application. This means that – like a song you buy from the store – you can use it on other devices/players/readers – unlike other eBook readers currently on the market which use a proprietary format.
I think people are confusing the word ‘evil’ with ‘closed’. A closed system is not a problem unless it is detrimental to progress and development. Admittedly, the iPhone OS and iPad OS are a closed system (which as a developer has me irked from time to time) – which relies on the iTunes ecosystem to function optimally – but that’s not evil. That’s just closed. Apple are opening up the system slowly once they can guarantee quality to developers and to users. Don’t be fooled by Google Android’s ‘open source’ SDK. They’re just as closed – to quote an online article “Their fence is just a little lower than the iPhone’s”.
Also – flash is a fantastic piece of software. I love adobe and their products… when I’m running Windows. Adobe have been behind the times when releasing products for the Macintosh and now their choice to limit their progress has seen them excluded from the Mobile version of Safari, and Adobe are blaming Apple. Flash is stupidly power hungry (50% CPU on my 2.4Ghz MBP) when attempting simple animation (flash advertisement), and is very inefficient when implemented on all unix platforms. Their exclusion is not a surprise, and although I would love for flash to be on my iPhone – Adobe need to improve their product. Steve Jobs is correct when he said that Safari crashes most when flash is running – even when flash is moved to a completely separate process – it still interrupts my safari browsing (it’s worse on Firefox and Chromium).
matt
Saturday, February 13, 2010 at 1:02 AMyeah, I agree with what you say, did I say evil? I thought I might have stopped short of saying evil this time :), anyway, My sister is the BIGGEST example of what you say about piracy, she used to torrent and limewire, and now since she got her mac, she just gets everything off itunes, because “it’s just easier”.
I too as an iPhone developer secretly love the app store, I would never myself be able to set up the distribution and marketing to get the exposure something gets on the app store (for however briefly), and apple are very unbiased with the way they promote things. but I still can’t help but feel they could STILL have that, but allow open apps as well. but there would be nothing in it for them.
thats the thing with the ‘closed’ system, anti-piracy, streamlined user experience, and control (which leads to ‘anti competitive’, ‘monopolistic’ and MONEY) are all side effects, its just which they are doing it for that is the real question.
I started my argument with OSX only on apple hardware, but I fully understand that. it streamlines performance and user experience. but at the same time if apple were to make a piece of software that you wanted, they could very easily make it OSX only, and thus you need their OS, which means you need their hardware too! (as is the case with iphone dev for example) this of course means more money for them. So is their choice to make OSX mac only for the former? or latter? A bit of both realistically.
its things like the set up process for testing an iphone app on a device, the most convoluted process IN THE WORLD, for what? just so you have to pay them to develop? that process certainly doesn’t improve my user experience!!
And then the real sticky issue of flash, which has finally pushed this whole issue of “Apple closed: good or bad?” to the spotlight. I would have to agree with what Adobe said earlier, it’s not all THEIR fault that flash is slower on non windows. Microsoft make Programming tools, its deep down, what they do. so really intensive stuff that needs a good compiler, and a good api that allows quick and direct access to stuff are essential, this is where MS being involved with games has really helped, because games need all these things too.
I struggle to believe that flash being any buggier on Mac platforms is all Adobe’s fault either, the code would be quite platform independent. and if the iPhone sdk, easily the dodgiest I have ever used (done PSP, DS, Xbox360, PC), is anything to go by, I can understand why they might be having issue.
the simple fact of the matter is this:
the main bullet point for the iPad is “the best browsing experience ever” without flash at the moment, that is laughable, and if all that was standing in the way of the addition of flash was a buggy, slow player, you can bet they’d give adobe all the help they needed in making one.
Did you know: the flash movie format and the general implementation instructions for a player are completely free for use for any means, i.e. Apple could THEM SELVES make a flash plugin for the ipad, Adobe in fact encourage people to implement it everywhere, so more people buy flash studio to make content.
that for me is the clincher, Apple can’t blame Adobe for making a dodge player, because they could just as easily make one them selves! and if it was all adobe’s fault for the crappiness of flash on macs, Apple could easily fix it themselves.
but they don’t. why? to improve user experience by keeping out slowness and buggyness? surely not, I have never had a problem with it on windows, and Apple could make one just as good if they wanted. to stop piracy? how do you pirate something freely available on the net? hmm, really is hard to see any excuse other than control. they would gladly let the mandate of “the best browsing experience ever” fail just so they can have their control. their monopoly. their money.
thats just how I see it.
boc
Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 12:35 PMApple is the same as Microsoft in the sense that both are trying to lock in their respective users. Microsoft owns the PC market while Apple owns the mobile market.
If Desktop PCs didn’t exist (that rules out Microsoft) you would have a technology landscape dominated by an effective Apple monopoly.
Apple is lucky that Microsoft exists so they don’t get labeled a monopolist. You should remember though that both companies are bad.
Also, the fact that you (and others?) mention that the iPad has serious potential is a admission that the iPad in it’s current form is lacking that justifies Jenkins claim that it is a junky device.
Goose
Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 1:40 PMTo be honest I’m suprised that Apple hasn’t instituted a App store for their PC’s yet. God forbid some one should run an unapproved program on their faulty 27″ iMac.
I believe Apple have alienated a lot of users with their os/hardware policy. I cut my teeth on Mac’s back in the day with the Macs we had at school (we only had an old 286 (maybe, I can’t remember) at home). Having used OSx a few times at uni and other places I found that it isn’t all that bad, and if I’m honest I would recommend it to people with limited computer experience. It was, in my limited experience with it, more user friendly than Windows. The simple lack of choice and customisation in hardware is what stops me every time. That and the fanboys.
At present, Google’s only saving grace is that Android is open source and that it is starting to fight back against censorship imposed on it by China and as of last night/today our old friend Steven Conroy. Google has a scary amount of power in the world, but I’m yet to see them do anything to evil with it.
Microsoft have been naughty in the past, their products are often rubbish, but at least you get some choice.
So at present my list of Evil, in decreasing order of Evilness, goes:
Apple
Microsoft
Google
Rob
Friday, February 12, 2010 at 1:48 PMApple is worse than MS has ever been. MS has never tried to conceal it’s evil whereas Apple does. I really hope the iPad is one of the nails in Apple’s coffin.