Apple has been doing the right thing all along. Because the very thing that enabled Apple to rise from near bankruptcy to just about the most profitable company in the history of capitalism is providing and controlling an integrated, soup-to-nuts hardware and software ecosystem. A big part of the reason why Android still feels so janky is that it has to cater to multiple hardware vendors and other stakeholders (carriers), as well as Google's advertising business, with the end user a secondary concern. Apple's total control enables it to make the user the highest priority.
The jankiest thing about Android (well, aside from crappy manufacturer skins and undeletable carrier spamware) is the pauses and delays in user response. Those all come from the disastrous choice to use Java as a programming language. User facing software always feels slow when it's subject to the performance losses of automatic memory management. Java is inherently garbage collected and low power mobile devices just multiply the performance failures inherent in that design.
Garbage collection is actually better for performance where instant response isn't important, such as in servers. In UI and realtime it always seems janky and slow.
But even the choice of Java is related to multiple hardware vendors. There was some idea initially that Android might run on non-ARM platforms. That hasn't turned out to be an important use of Android, but it probably helped push Android to Java initially.
The right thing that Apple did was build an manufacturer customized version of Unix (i.e. OSX) because Mac OS7, 8 and 9 had fallen behind the competition. Apple could very well succeed by forking/building on Android
The company that really disappointed everyone is Sony. Sony was Apple when Apple was beige boxes, and then Sony turned into just another commodity vendor when it comes to non-playstation hardware.
The new Xperia products give the hint that Sony is crawling out of that hole, but they have a long way to go.
Too true. I remember some of the razor thin VAIO's from many years before the Air was every a prototype. And that from a company that was a leading maker of floppy disks no less.
If it wasn't for that quote from Woz, pretty much everyone would go 'well that's ridiculous'. And it is, it is ridiculous, Apple would still want a hardware premium because that's the business model, so they wouldn't be able to try and out price the other manufacturers. They'd gain nothing from it. People that want an iPhone want it for the hardware software combination.
> People that want an iPhone want it for the hardware software combination.
I'm not so certain that's case. Today the iPhone is at least feature comparative to Android (turn by turn navigation, LTE, decent google integration and hangouts) - but Android still doesn't have as nice hardware as Apple.
I really wanted Nokia to start making Android devices because they do make beautiful hardware, but unfortunately they went to Windows phone. I'd imagine many android users would switch to apple made hardware if it was available.
Then apple would likely dominate the hardware market for both operating systems - which would be interesting.
Everyone's boring opinions always appear to themselves as common sense. You see this all the time in politics too, and I'm becoming more and more suspicious every time someone uses it in an argument. If you have a good case, your best foot forward shouldn't be that it's popular and makes sense to you. Show, don't tell.
All the article really needed to say was "but then Apple fans would try an Android phone, realise the software is better (and likely start experimenting with having root access to their own hardware, which apple certainly dislike), then get an Android phone comparably specced to and cheaper than the iphone 6 instead of one come upgrade time".
>People like the precious looks of stylings and manufacturing that we do in our product compared to the other Android offerings.
Is he essentially saying, people who admire the iPhone hardware, do not really admire iOS? Or Am I missing something. Taking into account the premise of Steve, Apple should make Windows Laptops too?
They do make Windows Laptops. All you have to do is provide a copy of Windows.
That being said, few people would buy an Apple phone without getting the iOS.
Samsung has pretty much captured the market for Android phones for people who admire iPhone hardware, so Woz isn't completely misguided.
I just don't see the upside for Apple. Does he think Apple can gobble up the Android market with well-made, high-quality Android handsets? It's not worth using your resources to manufacture lower-margin equipment when it could be used to make/sell higher-margin equipment.
"And Android is outpacing Apple in the cheaper markets that are gaining importance, so there’s a sort of intuitive sense in the move, if you’re willing to twist the logic into uncomfortable directions."
s/Android/Windows/, move it back ten years, and then count how many PC OEMs are still in the business today.
Did I miss the part where "Businessweek" became a "how to light your money on fire" journal?
Instead of making an Android phone Apple should offer Bootcamp for iOS devices so any OS can run there. This works on Macs so why not offer it on iOS devices?
bitwize|12 years ago
WildUtah|12 years ago
Garbage collection is actually better for performance where instant response isn't important, such as in servers. In UI and realtime it always seems janky and slow.
But even the choice of Java is related to multiple hardware vendors. There was some idea initially that Android might run on non-ARM platforms. That hasn't turned out to be an important use of Android, but it probably helped push Android to Java initially.
Tarang|12 years ago
Adjusted for inflation I think that title still belongs to IBM through the 70s.
stillbirthed|12 years ago
blueskin_|12 years ago
Pxtl|12 years ago
The new Xperia products give the hint that Sony is crawling out of that hole, but they have a long way to go.
twistedpair|12 years ago
nicholassmith|12 years ago
gonehome|12 years ago
I'm not so certain that's case. Today the iPhone is at least feature comparative to Android (turn by turn navigation, LTE, decent google integration and hangouts) - but Android still doesn't have as nice hardware as Apple.
I really wanted Nokia to start making Android devices because they do make beautiful hardware, but unfortunately they went to Windows phone. I'd imagine many android users would switch to apple made hardware if it was available.
Then apple would likely dominate the hardware market for both operating systems - which would be interesting.
forgottenpass|12 years ago
blueskin_|12 years ago
mark_integerdsv|12 years ago
At the risk of noshing down some trollbait, could you perhaps qualify this statement or are you just going to go with your subjectiuve view as fact?
robotic|12 years ago
frade33|12 years ago
Is he essentially saying, people who admire the iPhone hardware, do not really admire iOS? Or Am I missing something. Taking into account the premise of Steve, Apple should make Windows Laptops too?
officemonkey|12 years ago
That being said, few people would buy an Apple phone without getting the iOS.
Samsung has pretty much captured the market for Android phones for people who admire iPhone hardware, so Woz isn't completely misguided.
I just don't see the upside for Apple. Does he think Apple can gobble up the Android market with well-made, high-quality Android handsets? It's not worth using your resources to manufacture lower-margin equipment when it could be used to make/sell higher-margin equipment.
al2o3cr|12 years ago
s/Android/Windows/, move it back ten years, and then count how many PC OEMs are still in the business today.
Did I miss the part where "Businessweek" became a "how to light your money on fire" journal?
greenwalls|12 years ago
blueskin_|12 years ago