Good morning, readers, and welcome to another exciting edition of Masoni Raves About. Today, in light of the recent poll on the most popular and in-demand content, we'll be discussing a viewpoint that I [unfortunately] hold concerning a subject very close to my heart. I believe that Apple, if it continues on its current course, will become as irrelevant as Microsoft and fail. Yes, I said it: Apple will fail if they don't make some changes. Maybe these flaws are directly attributable to the absence of Steve Jobs for the last few months, and perhaps his safe return will provide Apple with some much-needed direction in the coming years. Regardless, here are a couple of reasons why I think Apple is ruining their brand.Stagnation
Innovation is what Apple is known for, and has been the major draw of the Macintosh and iPod brands for decades (in the case of the iPod it's been for just under a decade, but I digress). The original iPhone was a huge leap for the world of smartphones, reinventing the way people communicate over the telephone and the internet. The first major upgrade to the handset, the iPhone 3G in summer 2008, was another major improvement upon the original, boasting major connection speed improvements, a sleek new design, and an even more appealing new price point. Accompanying all this was iPhone OS 2.0, featuring the revolutionary App Store and hundreds of new features and innovations. Following these two home runs, however, Apple fell into a routine of stagnation and disappointments.
It all started with the iPhone 3GS this summer, which offered nothing more than a 3 megapixel camera with video and voice control, both of them features which even "dumb" phones have had for many years and both of them could have been made available on the 3G through simple software tweaks. What else? Well, a new chip made the S significantly snappier? Oh, and iPhone OS 3.0, which - in all honesty - meant the inclusion of MMS and not much else. In fact, for iPod touch users, 3.0 meant almost exactly nothing more than a bit of eye candy.
What happened? These failings are evident across Apple's product lines: Mac OS 10.6 - while a major upgrade from the programmer's perspective - meant little to the mainstream consumer. The Mac mini hasn't seen a major face-lift since its inception in January 2005! And don't even get me started on their most recent iPod event in September. Actually, yes, get me started.
What changed this September with iPods? Well, the iPod shuffle is available in a few more colors, a move which everyone anticipated. The iPod classic was bumped up to 160GB, a size it was available in at its first release but which Apple had discontinued. The iPod touch is available in a new size as well, and nothing else changed with Apple's new flagship product. And the nano? It got a video camera and a bigger screen. A video camera? While it may yet become a major selling point in the portable media player market, the logical place to put any sort of camera is on the iPod touch, right? Wrong: the iPod nano was the only product to see a major change this September. That and iTunes 9 - but the new iTunes is something different entirely.
In short, Apple has failed to produce anything exciting and interesting in a long time, and this drought of innovation is becoming painful to watch. For years Apple has been far ahead of the pack, but now they're catching up. Hopefully the rumored iMacs will be released sometime soon (maybe today) to alleviate this dearth of improvement, and maybe the fabled Mac tablet will rejuvenate Apple's brand once more, as the iPod and iPhone did in 2001 and 2007, respectively. But should they fail to release anything interesting, and waste January by refreshing the MacBook Air, Apple is surely in for some fiercer competition from the likes of the Zune HD, Android phones, Windows 7, and others.
Abandonment and compromise
I've been a Mac, iPod, and eventually iPhone user for many years now, and among the most frustrating things has been the rapidity with which Apple refreshes their product lines. You might see this as a direct contradiction of the arguments I made in the last section, but believe me that it isn't. Allow me to elaborate.
The iPhone 3G was the ideal, the perfect product for just about every niche user and mainstream consumer possible - it was relatively affordable when compared to the previous generation, featured some new innovations to make it appealing to old users, but the 2.0 software was available to early adopters in all its glory, with the App Store and everything intact. A 2007 iPhone got all the advantages of the 2008 model, save the 3G network connectivity and redesign. Everyone was pleased - who wouldn't be?
Then came the iPhone 3GS in 2009, boasting some significant speed boosts and an impressive new 3 megapixel camera. There wasn't much changed about the physical design, but the prices were fair and the 3G was even more affordable. As for the software? Well, that's where things became ridiculous. The 3GS could shoot video with its new camera, but jailbroken 3G iPhones prove that the function is more dependent upon software than on the hardware camera. And voice control? Purely a software application reserved for the "premium" 3GS models. What gives? They made the software fair for customers who'd dished out their several hundred dollars in 2007 by making 2.0 backwards compatible, but 3.0 left both 2007 and 2008 iPhone users out in the cold (2007 even more so - they didn't even get MMS or Bluetooth tethering).
Additionally, in the Mac line, there is a large disconnect between "consumer" computer prices and "professional" computer prices. Yes, there are quite a few products which fall snugly in between (the 13 inch MacBook Pro springs to mind), but the affordable options like the white polyurethane MacBook and the Mac mini feel underpowered, antiquated and cheap. Apple has begun a trend of offering the last generation technology as the "economical" option, like the 3G at $99, the 2nd-generation iPod shuffle still being sold as an alternative, and the aforementioned white MacBook, something which personally annoys me to no end. Apple has for years been considered the premium option of computer electronics, and, although it makes business sense to expand their market share, Apple should never have to compromise on offering the best possible products simply to attract more users. It's just a pet peeve of mine, a company of Apple's stature balking at their longstanding ideals. Apple, take a tip from Watchmen's Rorschach: never compromise, even in the face of apocalypse.
That's all I've got about Apple today. Maybe (hopefully) these arguments will be rendered irrelevant by the release of new iMacs or Mac minis soon, maybe even today. But until that happens, I hope you've enjoyed reading my beef with Apple's latest trends in providing mankind with increasingly disappointing technology. M.
