The Mac Sucks!

Steve Jobs isn’t the nicest guy in the world. I think we all know that. He snubbed fan “Violet Blue” who only wanted a picture. He is sometimes described as “a risk-taking, short-tempered tyrant“. He banned the sale (in Apple stores) of all books by the publisher of one that critcized him. Once, he described an employee’s work as a “really lovely cake” with dog excrement for frosting. There are plenty more examples if you look for them.

While I respect Steve’s professional accomplishments (turning Apple around, getting Pixar going, etc.), I have very little respect for the man himself – largely because of his treatment of others. Regardless of that, I wish Jobs no ill will. I do NOT want to see him sick, injured, or dead. It was with a bit of mixed emotion, however, that I read yesterday’s CNET post indicating that Jobs received a liver transplant in Tennessee.

On the one hand, I am pleased to see that Steve is getting the treatment he needs. But there was something in that article that really upset me, and it ought to upset you too. CNET notes that “Steve Jobs, who has been on medical leave from Apple for the past six months, received a liver transplant in Tennessee two months ago, according to a report Friday in the Wall Street Journal. Earlier this year, Apple’s CEO was reported to be relocating from California to Tennessee, which has a shorter waiting list for patients seeking organs, the report noted.”

In other words, Jobs packed up some of his belongings, hopped a plane to Tennessee, and moved into a residence there. He stayed there long enough to qualify as a resident, and receive a transplant. He wasn’t retiring there, relocating Apple there, or planning to stay there permanently. He was there to get an organ.

What Jobs did, as far as I know, is not illegal. People move from state to state all the time, for any reason (or none at all). There’s nothing at all wrong with relocating.

Admittedly, what Jobs did wasn’t as unethical as paying off a third-world person to get a liver. And it wasn’t as bad as paying off the doctors in California to be moved up on the transplant list ahead of other worthy and compatible patients. I realize that. But the net effect of what Jobs did was the same as if he HAD paid off the officials in California. Instead of being at the end of the much-longer California transplant list, he paid money to move himself to Tennessee in order to be on a much shorter list. Someone without his billions wouldn’t have been able to do that. They’d have had to wait their turn and take the chance that they might die before the liver was found. That happens all the time. (Just read the comments on that CNET article.)

To be clear, even though I don’t like the guy, it doesn’t matter that it’s Steve Jobs doing this. I’d be upset if it was William Shatner, Bill Gates, Angelina Jolie, Heidi Klum, Barack Obama, George W. Bush, or any other public figure doing it.

Computerworld’s Scot Finnie published an article entitled “5 ways Steve Jobs’ absence isn’t all bad for Apple” in which he gives 5 reasons he thinks having Jobs out of the way could be good for Apple and its customers. Specifically, Finnie suggests the following benefits of a Steve-free Apple:

1. Apple could deliver a low-cost netbook Mac.
2. Apple can now foster and support third-party software vendors for iPhone and Mac OS X.
3. Apple can be more transparent with the press and customers.
4. Apple can take steps to sell to enterprise customers.
5. Apple could get out of its exclusive iPhone deal with AT&T.

While I’ve argued most of these points in some form or another over the past couple of years, the reality is that Steve Jobs is only temporarily gone from Apple and is still deeply tuned in to the strategic decision-making process there. That means any of the above issues that don’t meet with Steve’s approval are not going to happen until either he changes his mind (highly unlikely) or his health issues become severe enough that he leaves Apple permanently (fairly unlikely).

Most of you have probably already read the recently-released news that Apple’s Steve Jobs does in fact have a health problem.  Statements from Jobs and Apple indicate that the health issue is a “hormonal imbalance” that is causing him to lose weight, one that is being resolved with a “simple and straightforward” remedy.  It’s also been indicated that Jobs’ health explains the reason he isn’t giving the final Apple Macworld keynote this January.

Apple’s stock has made a slight rebound based on the news, which no doubt reassures investors that Jobs will be around for a while longer.

The more-observant readers will recall a recent article here where we discussed the fact that Apple’s 2008 product introductions seemed to indicate less of a “Steve” involvement than was typical in the latter
part of the year, so it’s interesting to note Jobs’ statement that this is a problem that persisted throughout 2008 and became his number one priority late in the year.  Given that Jobs says his doctors expect that it will take “until late this Spring” to reverse the situation, it seems likely that any very dramatic product announcements will be put on hold until Steve is ready to take center stage again.

I’ve seen more than a couple of reports recently indicating that Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ health may be in jeopardy.  The last time we had a rash of these reports, they were traced back to a fake news item submitted on a popular news site.  That little bit of falsehood sent Apple’s stock price plummeting and caused various other issues for the company.  Supposedly, the current crop of rumors comes from “reliable sources” and indicates that Jobs’ failing health is one reason Apple backed out of having Steve Jobs present Apple’s last Macworld Keynote.  While I dismissed the notion at the time that Jobs backed out of the speech for health reasons, I did note that it seemed odd that Jobs would pass up the chance to make a farewell performance at Macworld.  It seemed out of character for him, to me.

Since I have no more first-hand experience or knowledge of Jobs’ health than anyone else outside his circle of friends, I will not speculate here on whether the current rumors are true or not.  There simply isn’t enough concrete evidence available to me to make any sort of statement either confirming or denying the rumors.  But I would like to take the opportunity to speculate on what might happen at Apple, and with its product lines, if something were to happen to Steve.  It might be a little inappropriate, but the basis of the speculations here is merely “what if” rather than any suggestion of “what is”…

If Steve Jobs were to vanish from the Apple “scene” how might things change?  I have some thoughts on that:

Even if all these changes were to come about as a result of a “post-Steve” Apple, I don’t know that it would necessarily be a good thing.  For example, dropping the secrecy might increase competition for new Apple designs.  Subscription content for iTunes might cannibalize existing track/movie sales.  An Apple PDA or netbook might not be profitable or successful.  Maybe the inclusion of battery doors in the iPod/iPhone might lead to batteries that fall out or some other kind of problem.

Regardless, while I don’t wish any illness to Steve Jobs, I do confess that it would be interesting to me to see how (and indeed, “if”) Apple might change in a “post-Jobsian” era.

When I first read CNet’s announcement that Steve Jobs wouldn’t be speaking at the next MacWorld, that he’d given his last keynote there, I was actually stunned.  I know there have been issues between Apple and Macworld in the past, and probably for good reasons on both sides.  Steve doesn’t seem like the easiest guy to get along with, and trade shows in big cities tend to be expensive, unionized affairs of questionable marketing/sales-producing value.  With the economy in the state it’s in, maybe this was simply a cost-cutting move and something Apple’s been thinking about for a while.  As secretive as the company is, probably no one other than Steve’s inner circle knows for sure… and even they may be in the dark.

The media and the stock market seized onto this as evidence that Steve Jobs’ health might be taking a turn for the worse.  Apple says it isn’t, and although they probably have a duty to shareholders not to do anything to jeopardize the stock price, I can’t see them actually telling a blatant lie they could be caught in later.  So Steve is probably OK.

But I have to admit that a little voice inside me said, “What if he’s not?  Suppose that Steve’s health is actually declining.  Wouldn’t there be some evidence of that in Apple’s product introductions, given how intimately Steve is involved in them?”  I thought about that.

If you follow Steve Jobs’ image and history, you know that he’s a very hands-on guy with his companies and products, especially Apple’s.  It’s unlikely that any new product or design goes out the door without Steve having put his own touch or “spin” on it.  If his health really was failing, it seems likely that we’d see evidence in the products Apple puts out.  So, do we really see any such evidence?  Maybe, though I’ll be the first to admit that nothing here is all that conclusive (though it does serve as food for thought):

• In January 2008, we saw the MacBook Air.  It took Apple’s thin notebook line and made it even thinner.  It eliminated or hid as many external ports as possible.  It practically screams “Steve Jobs”.  So clearly he was fine up to that point in 2008.
• In February, Apple added new iPhone and iPod Touch models to the product line.  These included more memory, some updated software, and a couple of new apps.  No major “Steve-like” changes.
• In the next few months, we saw iPod Shuffle price reductions, Aperture 2, XSan 2, some minor MacBook updates, Safari and Aperture updates, expansion of the iPhone 3G into new markets, and various other relatively minor new announcements.  Again, nothing in all that screams “Steve”.
• In October, the “unibody” MacBooks were released, along with a new 24″ display. The unibody machines certainly showed a little of the “Steve Jobs touch”, but not everyone was wow’ed by them.
• Now, in December, we hear Steve won’t be speaking at Macworld and that Apple is pulling out of it completely in the future.
• Early in 2009, it is expected that Apple will release Snow Leopard, which focuses on improvements behind the scenes and isn’t expected to change much visually from Leopard.  That really, really doesn’t sound like Steve.

If we take the pro-Apple/pro-Steve point of view, we see some evolutionary changes in most of the product line in 2008, a major introduction in the form of the MacBook Air, and something pretty new in the unibody MacBooks.  In between, there were incremental changes in various other hardware and software products.  No one would call it an “uneventful” year.

If, on the other hand, we take a neutral or even “anti-Steve” look at the 2008 news, we see a slightly different picture.  We see that pretty much nothing major was introduced from February through October.  The changes in the iPhone line, including the introduction of 3G support, weren’t drastic or Steve-like in the way that the rumored “iPhone Mini” could be considered to be.  The changes in the iPod line were similarly evolution more than revolution.  While the notebook “unibody” changes in October were bigger and more “Steve-like”, the desktop Macs pretty much didn’t change at all.  In fact, the Mac Mini, iMac, and Mac Pro are in most respects an awful lot like the ones we saw in prior years.  They all have the “Steve” touch, but it’s a touch from years past, not today.  The Mac Pro case is a perfect example.  It’s still essentially the same one used for the earliest Intel-based Macs, and the same one used for the G5.  That’s not very “Steve-like” if you think about it.  Taken as an overall picture, it might lend some credence to the thought
that maybe, just maybe, Jobs is getting tired, or isn’t feeling as
well as he did a year ago.

Looking ahead at the expected product introductions in 2009, the most-concrete one is that Apple will release Snow Leopard (OS X 10.6) early in the year.  Instead of being the dramatic (visual) change we saw between Leopard and Tiger, or Tiger and Panther, Apple tells us to expect the improvements to be more behind-the-scenes and performance/quality oriented.  That’s very decidedly un-Steve-like, UNLESS he’s aware that there are significant problems in Leopard that need to be addressed before the OS is taken much further forward.  Given how much trouble people seemed to have early on in the release of Leopard (the first time a “blue screen of death” was associated with a Mac), and trouble being expressed with the 10.5.6 update, perhaps that’s all we’re seeing… Apple recognizing that it’s got some serious work to do and getting down to business with that work. (Or, taking the alternate view, Steve hasn’t the energy to devote to sweeping OS X changes and the engineers are taking this as an opportunity to improve the foundations.)

If you add all that up:  few truly “new” products were introduced in 2008, no major visible features are planned for Snow Leopard, no known plans to re-sculpt the Mac Pro, the Mac Mini getting little or no attention, no real changes in the iMac line, no major changes in the Shuffle, Nano, or Classic iPod lines, you have to wonder… Has the product line just gotten so big that Steve can’t put his touches on it the way he once did?  Has he started to run out of ways to make the products better?  Is he too tired (for health, age, or other reasons) to put the energy into Apple that he did even a couple of years ago?  Or does his pull-out of Macworld signify that he’s maybe getting bored with the whole Apple “thing” and is ready to tackle some new challenge?  Maybe the Macworld keynote is his way of quietly passing the baton on to someone new?

It might be useful to go back and look at the Apple press release library for prior years and look at the rate of new model introductions and changes.  I might be wrong, but things seem to me to have slowed down quite a bit these last 3-5 years, especially during the last year.  There could be a lot of different explanations for why that might have happened, if you agree that it has happened, and maybe you don’t.

I don’t think there’s enough information to make any kind of definitive statement about Apple or Jobs from the outside.  Undoubtedly, that’s the way Steve wants it.  I do, however, think there’s enough to at least warrant raising an eyebrow and wondering.

Earlier this week, Bloomberg news mistakenly (or thinking wishfully?)  published the obituary for Apple CEO Steve Jobs.  Keep an obituary on hand for prominent people
like Jobs is a common practice, but releasing draft obituaries on the news wire certainly isn’t.   One wonders what Jobs’ reaction was to the news that he was dead…

Thanks to reader “level_81″ for tipping me off to this information…

The Valleywag.com site posted a list of “the 10 most terrible tyrants of tech” on August 12. First on the list is Steve Jobs of Apple. While this is most likely a humorous piece, based on some of the comments they make, it’s based on the “real” Steve Jobs. They explain that “Steve Jobs’s temper is as notorius as it is well-documented.” That link goes to a CNN Money article entitled “The trouble with Steve”, which is a serious piece that shares quite a few tidbits about Apple’s illustrious CEO:

• “He oozes smug superiority, lacing his public comments with ridicule of Apple’s rivals, which he casts as mediocre, evil, and — worst of all — lacking taste.
• “no CEO is more personally identified with — and controlling of — the day-to-day affairs of his business.”
• “He parks his Mercedes in handicapped spaces, periodically reduces subordinates to tears, and fires employees in angry tantrums.”
• “…it’s often brutal and Jobs hogs the credit”
• “Jobs is notoriously secretive and controlling when it comes to his relationship with the press, and he tries to stifle stories that haven’t received his blessing with threats and cajolery.”
• “Dozens of people who work or have worked with Jobs did agree to extensive interviews, most insisting on not being named (even if praising him) for fear of incurring his anger.”
• “The degree to which people in Silicon Valley are afraid of Jobs is unbelievable. He made people feel terrible; he made people cry…”
• “..it is important to understand the ways in which Jobs’ attempts to manipulate his world pose risks for Apple – and thus its investors… Jobs himself judges the world in binary terms. Products, in his view, are “insanely great” or “sh*t”.

If you have some view of Apple’s CEO as a benevolent dictator who is grounded in reality, you might want to read the CNN article. You’ll find it an eye-opener. And if you actually invest in Apple stock, it should be required reading.

Just
when I think I’ve heard the most obnoxious thing Steve Jobs has
done, he manages to top himself.  The Appletell web site ran an article about Steve Jobs’ reaction to a
comment made by a Microsoft employee about the Zune 2, indicating
that it’s finally a worthy competitor to the Apple iPod.  Did
Jobs say something professional like “I’m sure they’ve made
some improvements, but I wouldn’t say they’re worthy competition
yet.” or did he say “Was he inebriated?  Do you even know
anyone who owns a Zune?” 

If you guessed the second
comment, you’re right.  Rude, arrogant, and highly
unprofessional.

I’ve got some news for you, Steve.  I
know lots of people with media players.  I’ve got a few myself,
and not one of them has an Apple logo on it.  One of them is a
Zune.  My wife also has a Zune.  My stepdaughter has an iPod
Touch.  Most of the people I know who have a media player do NOT
have an Apple product, but some have Zunes.  

The thing is,
Microsoft sold a bunch of Zunes last year.  Gizmodo reports that the
Zune claimed 9% of media player sales in 2006 and 13% of total
dollar volume of sales.  While this is far below the iPod’s 63%
of sales and 72.5% of dollar volume, it put the Zune in the #2 spot for
sales for the year.  More recent figures on Google show that late last year the Zune was
dramatically outselling the iPod based on Google Checkout figures.

Well, Steve, your reality and mine seem to differ quite a
bit.  In my reality, while the iPod may be outselling the Zune,
Microsoft’s product is getting better in each iteration and is
catching up to the iPod in sales… but it has a long way to go before
it “wins” the market.  In your reality, no one uses a
media player other than the iPod.  I can back my reality up with
statistical data and real-world observation.  How about
you?

This reminds me… Why is that when people look at sales
figures for the Macintosh and point out Apple’s relatively low share
of the market, the Mac fanboys cry foul and claim that market share
isn’t a fair comparison criteria, that there are more people using
Macs than market share would indicate, etc., but when it comes to media
players it’s perfectly OK to say that the iPod beats the Zune
because Apple has the most market share?  You can’t have it
both ways.  Either market share is an appropriate comparison
criterion or it isn’t.   

The more I thought about Steve Jobs rebuffing the Apple fan who wanted a picture with him, the more I began to wonder if this might be a symptom of something much more significant about the man.  I’ve heard people describe Jobs as a megalomaniac, so I took a look online to find a description of that mental condition.  Megalomania is apparently another name for “Narcissistic Personality Disorder” (NPD).  The symptoms of that condition, according to PsychCentral, are described as:

Given this definition, is there any evidence available in the media to suggest that Steve Jobs may suffer from NPD?  (At this point it should be made clear that the author of this piece is NOT a psychiatrist, psychologist, or other mental health professional.  What you are reading is strictly an observation and opinion piece based on the definition above and information available on the Internet.  It is intended strictly for entertainment purposes.)

A good starting point for analysis is the man’s own words.  BrainyQuote.com has a collection of Steve Jobs quotes from which the following are taken:

A collection on Wired’s web site provides additional information:

From Wikiquote:

From ThinkExist.com:

From refspace.com, we see how Steve Jobs motivates his employees:

The above is further echoed on Wikipedia, in a quote attributed to Larry Tesler about Steve Jobs leaving Apple:

From an article on Engadget:

You probably get the point by now.  So what’s the scorecard?  To be considered to have NPD, Steve Jobs would have to exhibit at least 5 of the 9 behaviors.  The above show 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9…

That leaves us only with #4, “requires excessive admiration”.  The Wikipedia article on Jobs seems to imply that he expects his employees to worship him:

Is it because the book’s title refers to him as “the greatest second act in the history of business”?  It’s interesting when you consider that editorial reviews on Amazon.com say that “the doting praise heaped on the entrepreneur is excessive” in this book.  As one reviewer on that site put it, “On one side, we see an individual characterized by brashness, but worse than that, a nasty side that will lash out at anything that so much as grazes his name.” Does that sound a bit like someone who needs “excessive admiration”?

Hmmm….  I wonder what a mental health professional would think if they were to analyze Apple’s CEO?

If you’re thinking about a switch to the Macintosh, or picking up
the hyped iPhone, or getting an iPod, you might want to take a quick
look at the
Forbes article about what bothers Apple’s fans about the company and
its products.  It might give you some pause to
reconsider.

We won’t re-hash the entire article here, but the
complaints center on Apple’s tendency to design products around
looks rather than real-world usability, specifically their tendency to
design the iPhone and iPod without user-replaceable batteries. 
People who use either product for an extended period of time away from
an AC outlet find that the inability to pop in a fresh battery and keep
going (as they could with many other media players or cell phones) is
rather frustrating and short-sighted of Apple.  This probably stems
from Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ desire to have products that are
practically hermetically sealed with no visible buttons on them. 
Having a switchable battery would require a “battery door” or
some other “unsightly” visual feature that we suspect would
turn Jobs’ stomach.

Another complaint was shared by an Apple
fan and blogger.  She touched Steve Jobs lightly on the arm and
asked for a photo with him, as she was a big fan.  Not only did he
refuse to take a photo with her:  “He told me curtly, flatly
that I was rude. And turned his back to me. The small circle of people
around him sniggered,” Blue wrote on her blog, Tiny Nibbles.
“That’s the first time I’ve ever “fangirled”
anyone. And it’ll be my last.”  

That last
remark may be the most telling comment we’ve ever read about the
much-deified Steve Jobs.  This was a polite request, from someone
who has purchased many of Apple’s products, in a public place, where
ostensibly he’s there to show customers how Apple has been listening
to them and taking their comments to heart in its product designs. 
He couldn’t take a second out for a photo?  Couldn’t tell
her, “I’m sorry, miss, but I simply can’t spare a moment
right now.”?  Couldn’t do more than be curt, call her
rude, and snicker with his cronies about publicly humiliating her? 
What a guy.

Think this is commonplace among technology CEOs? 
Maybe.  If it is, we shouldn’t be able to find any more photos
of people with, say, Bill Gates of Microsoft or Linus Torvalds of Linux
than we do of Steve Jobs with Apple fans.  

Did we find any
pictures of Bill Gates with his fans?  Have a
look:

• Check out how nice Bill is to the
  people in this YouTube video . He’s smiling, shaking hands,
  etc.  You don’t see him telling anyone they’re rude and
  sending them away.
• A cute
  young girl posing with Bill Gates at an event where he is actually,
  intentionally posing with his customers and fans.  (When was the
  last time Steve Jobs did that?)
• A young man with
  Bill at the same event as above
• MIT
  student with Bill Gates and Stephen Hawking
• Bill Gates
  playing Guitar Hero at CES
• Bill Gates
  praising the Macintosh years ago

Even if
you have an irrational hatred of Microsoft and Bill Gates, the fact is
that the guy seems to be pretty approachable and is willing to be seen
with his fans. 

How about Linus
Torvalds?

• Here’s one of Linus with a Linux fan in August 2006
• Here’s a practically naked Linus Torvalds surrounded by Linux
  fans . (Can you imagine Steve Jobs doing this with Mac
  fanatics?)
• Linus Torvalds surrounded by Linux fans
• Linus hanging out with other Linux notables and
  fans
• Linus with a Linux User Group
• Linus with another Linux fan

 Looks like one pretty personable,
approachable guy, huh?

 By way of comparison, we did the same
searches for Steve Jobs that we did for Bill and Linus.  We found
plenty of pictures of Steve giving keynotes , posing with Apple products , even sitting with Bill Gates .  At first glance, this photo looked like it might be comparable , but
when you read the caption you see that it’s a bunch of his old
friends, not a group of random fans.  Even this photo , which at first looks similar to
some of the Linus and Bill pictures, is another publicity shot and not
Steve with his fans.  After searching through literally hundreds of
Steve Jobs photos on Google Images, we couldn’t find a single one
with Steve Jobs posing with a Mac fanatic.  (Not even a
Photoshopped fake.) 

So, what gives?  Is Steve Jobs so
much more important than Bill Gates or Linus Torvalds or any other
“celebrity” that he can’t be bothered to take a moment to
be photographed with his fans?  Is it really so “rude”
for an Apple fan to want a picture of themselves with Steve Jobs?
 

Personally, we don’t think so.  

The folks at Forbes.com visited MacWorld in January 2008 to see what bothers Apple’s fans about the company and
its products.  For those of you considering the purchase of an
Apple product, the observations may be
enlightening:

Steve Jobs can be rude to Apple
customers.  When a blogger approached him to ask for a picture with
her, Forbes tells us that:  “He told me curtly, flatly that I
was rude. And turned his back to me. The small circle of people around
him sniggered,” Blue wrote on her blog, Tiny Nibbles.
“That’s the first time I’ve ever “fangirled”
anyone. And it’ll be my last.”

Later in the
article:  “It’s a recurring problem in many Apple designs.
You can’t easily replace the batteries in Apple’s iPhone and
iPods. Most users will need expert help to get it done. By contrast,
laptops and smart phones built by Apple’s competitors allow users to
easily pop in a new battery. Of course, they’re not as
pretty.”

Another fan complaint:  “It’s the
downside of one of Apple’s most brilliant moves, namely switching to
Intel  (nasdaq: INTC -  news  -  people )
microprocessors. The switch makes it possible to seamlessly run Windows
applications on Apple’s machines, thanks to software from Parallels
and VMWare. However, users who decide to ditch Windows for Apple quickly
find that they can’t escape the Redmond, Wash.-based software giant.
If they want to run their Windows applications they’ve still got to
have a copy of Windows somewhere on their Mac–and that means plunking
down $200 and up for an edition of Windows
Vista.”

These are three pretty important themes,
when you get down to it.  The fact that Steve Jobs doesn’t
really appreciate the Apple customers (his comments in keynotes aside)
enough to pose momentarily for a photo with one, that Jobs and Apple
choose appearance over functionality (in the form of batteries that
aren’t easily replaceable and more), and that switching to a Mac
doesn’t really give you the independence from Microsoft that
Apple’s commercials might imply, are all reasons to give serious
consideration to your needs and expectations before purchasing an Apple
product.

Would Bill Gates or Linus Torvalds stop to take a photo
with a Microsoft or Linux fan?  Here are a few examples that show a
bit of a difference between these OS “icons” and Apple’s
deified Steve Jobs:

• Here’s a
  YouTube video showing Gates smiling and shaking hands with people,
  not being curt and telling them they’re rude for wanting to meet
  him.
• A young girl posing with Bill Gates on her
  blog.
• A young man posing with Bill Gates on his
  blog.
• A photo of Linux Torvalds shaking hands with a Linux fan in
  1998.
• Linus Torvalds posing for a photo with the New York
  Linux User Group

These were what we found in a
quick web search.  There are lots of other photos of Linus Torvalds
enjoying a beer, sitting around tables with Linux users talking about
the OS, etc.  Similarly, Bill Gates just isn’t known for
randomly brushing off his fans.  Want to see the contrast for
yourself?  Do a Google Image search for (include the quotes)
“me with Steve Jobs”, “me with Bill Gates”, and
“me with Linus”.  You’ll find that the first search
(in spite of the Mac’s much-vaunted ease of putting photos on the
web) yields nothing (as of this writing), the second search yields quite
a few links, and the last yields a couple.  Who’s more
approachable and seems nicer to people in general?  You
decide.

Apple apparently released a statement indicating that they will make
an iPhone and iPod Touch development kit available to developers some
time early next year.   I haven’t read the statement yet, but
BusinessWeek has and they posted an article about it on October 17,
2007.

BusinessWeek says Apple won’t say why it’s made this
sudden change from keeping the iPhone totally locked down, but
developers who spoke to BusinessWeek were encouraged by the turn of
events.

BusiniessWeek tells us that “Jobs said it will take
until February to release the software kit because the company wants to
give developers an open platform and also protect iPhone users from
viruses, malware and privacy attacks.”  I would interpret this
to mean that if they were to let people develop for the iPhone now, it
would be very susceptible to viruses, malware, and privacy
attacks.  In other words, the Michael Mace article we published the
other day might have been right on target for suggesting that Apple is
fighting third-party development to cover up the fact that iPhone
security is relatively weak.

The article also reports that
“Jobs noted that rival Nokia Corp. also does not allow third-party
applications to be loaded onto some of its new phones unless the
applications have a digital signature that can be traced to a known
developer.”  Jobs is said to have indicated that he thought
this was a step in the right direction, implying that Apple wants some
way to track programs back to individual developers and to keep
unapproved code off the iPhone.

Several web sites are reporting what had already been suspected to
happen… Hacked iPhones are turning into useless “bricks”
when the latest firmware update is applied to them.  Even unhacked
phones that happen to just have third party software on them are being
bricked.  So are unhacked and completely “stock”
iPhones.  Ouch!

New York Times blogger Saul
Hansell reports that “The lucky ones see a new icon for a
wireless iTunes Music Store and a host of tweaks to the user interface.
The unlucky ones own a shiny black piece of glass.”  He also
tells us that “There have even been reports
that some phones have been disabled that had no unauthorized software on
them.”

Web site Gizmodo has revised
its recommendation on the iPhone from “wait” to
“don’t buy”.  As we’ve suspected here for a
while, Gizmodo tells us “At Mossberg’s All Things D conference, Jobs
mentioned that the thing Apple wasn’t good at, compared to MSFT, was
the ability to work with partners. Some believe that’s a big part of
why Apple lost the Big OS War back when GI Joe was a Saturday morning
cartoon. So why make the same mistake twice?”  That’s very
clear in how Apple is dealing with its third-party developers on the
iPhone, and probably explains why they are developing competitive
products on OS X to almost every “important” Mac
app.

Gizmodo also reports that “Jack S over at The Guardian
has a article
in response ending with “Now Jobs has finally moved into an
industry where control freakery is the norm, why would you expect him to
give it up?” Worth reading for, you know, a reality check. And Owen
from Valleywag goes further, debating on Apple’s
behalf. Chris Null at Yahoo picked
up the issue, too.”

Owen Thomas at Valleywag did indeed
have some interesting things to say, including “Apple fanboys, apparently, do need some education.
And Steve Jobs is glad to supply it. A software update has, as promised,
made hacked iPhones useless — “bricked” them, in the modern
parlance. Worse yet, the new software has bricked
some unmodified iPhones as well. And people are outraged.
These are, of course, by and large the same saps who overpaid by $200 to
buy their iPhones in June. And you know what? They’re getting what
they deserve.”  He also tells us “People are buying
unproven technology, and some are fiddling with it. And then they’re
shocked when it doesn’t work? Get a Mac, people, and you’ll
learn that not all of Apple’s software updates come out of the lab
fully tested. Same thing goes for the iPhone, naturally, which runs a special version of the same
buggy operating system.” See, Mac fans?  This isn’t the
only site on the Internet that warns you about the bugginess of Apple
products.  Thomas certainly knows what he’s talking
about.

As reported in the Silicon Valley Insider (as
well as other web sites), Steve Jobs has been subpoenaed to testify in the
stock-option backdating case against Apple’s former general counsel
Nancy Heinen. Writer Henry Blodget says that “Jobs’ lawyers
will no doubt brush this news aside as immaterial, but it’s a
dangerous situation for him (and, thereby, Apple shareholders).”

Why is it dangerous? Blodget tells us “Jobs has skated
untouched through Apple’s backdating mess, despite findings that he
helped select the dates chosen. Jobs’ defenders say he did nothing
wrong because he ‘didn’t appreciate the accounting
implications’ of backdating (WSJ). Apple’s former CFO, Fred
Anderson, meanwhile, said publicly that Jobs misled him about board
actions on stock-option grants. So one of Jobs’ former
lieutenants is accusing him of dishonesty on this issue, and the
company’s official investigation pardoned him only because of his
mindset about what he did (instead of, say, denying that he did
it).”

That’s a very tenuous position, legally.
The Silicon Valley Insider article tells us that this puts Steve Jobs in
a very tricky situation. If he testifies, and his statements aren’t
precise and exactly consistent with previous statements and known facts
about the situation, they say he could be subjected to
“reputational damage, perjury charges, or even a reassessmany by
regulators of his own conduct in the matter.”

If
you’re a long-time reader of this site, you know that we’ve
predicted that Steve Jobs will be fined for his actions related to the
options backdating scandal. The Silicon Valley Insider reminds us that
Jobs has been cleared of wrongdoing by Apple, not necessarily by the
SEC, and that his being “cleared” is based on his state of
mind rather than his actual actions. It would seem to be difficult to
defend your “state of mind” in a situation like this (since we
don’t have telepaths to probe our thoughts and confirm our state of
mind), especially when your actions appear to indicate some level of
guilt.

Although it seems unlikely that Jobs will testify
in person, under cross-examination, it certainly could happen. If it
does, the outcome of the cross-examination should be very interesting to
Apple fans, Apple detractors, and the media.

Today (September 21, 2007), Woot.com is offering a
Microsoft Zune media player for $129.99. Recently, they’ve
offered the same player at a slightly higher price. In a past podcast,
they poked fun at Mac
users for constantly asking them if almost everything they sell is
Mac-compatible. This time, they’re having a bit of fun with the
iPhone “rebate” fiasco at Apple, saying in the Zune product
description:

An Emergency Open
Letter

To all Woot customers:

I have
received more than three emails from Zune buyers who are upset about
Woot dropping the price of the Zune by $20 one month after it went on
sale the first time. After reading every one of these emails, or at
least scanning their subject lines, I have some observations and
conclusions.

First, I need to make a better effort to hide my
email address.

Second, I am sure that we are making the correct
decision to lower the price of the 30GB Zune from $149.99 to $129.99.
This confidence is based on more than the holy doctrine of corporate
infallibility. The Zune is a breakthrough product, and we have the
chance to “ride the lightning” and “shoot the
curl” this holiday season, not to mention “kill the
messenger” and “rock the vote”, further enabling us to
“pay the rent” and “keep the lights on”. It
benefits both Woot and every Zune user (but especially Woot) to drag as
many new victims as possible into the Zune “dungeon”. We
strongly believe that misery loves company this holiday season.

Third,
being in technology for 1+ years, give or take a year, I can attest to
the fact that the technology road is bumpy. There is always some idiot
changing lanes without signaling, and the potholes never seem to get
fixed. If you always wait for the next price cut or to buy the new
improved model, you’ll never buy any technology product. I mean,
why should you? Truth is, you don’t really need any of this junk.
We’re afraid you’ll catch on to that fact and overpaid
frauds like me will have to go back into fields like telemarketing and
burrito construction. Fortunately, most of you continue to languish in a
consumerist stupor, wallets spread wide for us to plunder as we please.
The bad news for us is that if you buy products from companies that
support them well, you will receive years of useful and satisfying
service. But we’re hoping you’ll buy from Woot instead.

Third-and-a-half, even though we are making the right decision to
lower the price of the Zune, and even though the technology road is,
like, this total Deathrace 2000-type scene, we need to do a better job
taking care of our early Zune customers, at least until we find a
private security firm we can afford. For some reason, our early
customers trusted us. We must live up to that trust with our actions in
moments like these, lest you turn off the money spigot that maintains
our decadent lifestyles. These peacock-egg omelets and mink-lined
Jacuzzis don’t pay for themselves, you know.

Therefore,
we have decided to offer every Woot customer who purchased a
Zune from us on August 22, 2007 (or in the last Woot-Off) a $10 Woot
credit towards any Woot order of $40 or more, before shipping.
If that’s you, just enter the coupon code
BUMPYROAD while making your purchase, and boo-yah:
you’re mayor of Discount City. This discount applies to any Woot
site, including Woot.com, Shirt.Woot, Wine.Woot, Sellout.Woot, and Beets.Woot. It doesn’t expire, so feel free to
check back everyday ’til you find something that will temporarily
fill the void in your soul. You may use the coupon as many times as you
bought Zunes. So, if you bought one Zune from us back in August, you can
use BUMPYROAD once; if you bought two, you can use it twice; and so
forth and so on and what-have-you. But you can only use the discount
once on any one order. We make this decision with every confidence that
most of you will never want any of the crap we sell anyway.

We want to
convincingly pretend to do the right thing for our valued Zune
customers. We’d apologize for disappointing some of you, but we
long ago lost the capacity for sincere remorse. We will continue to do
our best to trick you into having high expectations of Woot.

Larry
Stalin

Woot CYA Officer

 

In a ComputerWorld article dated September 18, 2007,
Steve Jobs is quoted as saying “It’s a cat-and-mouse game. We
try to stay ahead. People will try to break in, and it’s our job to
stop them breaking in.” Earth to Steve… People didn’t just
“try” to break in, they actually
DID. Lots of them, apparently, arriving at their
solutions individually. This should be telling you something about your
much-vaunted OS X security.

Later in the article,
ComputerWorld tells us: Keeping unlocking hacks at bay, though, will
probably be impossible, something Jobs tacitly acknowledged when he said
that while it was a cat-and-mouse game between Apple and hackers,
“I’m not sure if we are the cat or the mouse.” “Jobs
said that they would stay a step ahead,” said Milanesi, “but
that will be easier said than done.” (Indeed.)

A Mac
Administrator in Ohio told The Mac Sucks, “You own the
iPhone, so I don’t quite see what Apple’s problem is. It’s
like buying a new Ford, upgrading the exhaust system and intake so it
runs the way you want it to, only to have Ford sneak into your garage
during the night and put the factory parts back on. Why do they
care?”

In the article “Apple is not alone in feeling PR pain” (and its
comments) from the Baltimore Sun web site, there are several interesting
observations made about the recent price drops on the Apple iPhone.
Among them:

“Apple Inc. learned last week how harsh
upset customers can be when it lowered the price of its $599 iPhone by
$200 …[snip]… Bloggers began campaigning against the company as
unfair. Apple fans complained they were duped into buying the much-hyped
phone early. And hundreds of iPhone owners e-mailed Apple chief
executive Steven P. Jobs, saying they were more than disappointed.”

“Some argue that the store credit Jobs is offering
customers really means they just have to buy more Apple products,
helping the company use its mistake to make more money.”
(BINGO!! One of the commenters to the article pointed out that Apple
doesn’t sell much that is priced under $100 except perhaps for some
cables or the iPod Shuffle, neither of which you’ll want or need if
you have an iPhone, so what they’re really doing is trying to
convert some iPhone customers into Macintosh customers… or milk even
more out of those who coughed up the big bucks for the iPhone, which we
here at The Mac Sucks told you was overpriced.)

“While most marketing experts said Apple likely would survive this
episode, they said some customers might question the company’s
future promises. Even Apple’s most loyal customers might think twice
before being the first to buy a new product.” (And in our
opinion at this site, if you’re still a staunchly loyal Apple
customer after buying an iPhone and getting screwed this way, you
clearly aren’t thinking rationally anymore.)

Those of us living outside the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field (RDF)
see this whole iPhone situation differently from those whose brains are
still firmly inside it. When the iPhone was announced, we explained that
it wasn’t the first
phone of its type. We told you it was overhyped. We suspected there might be screen
problems, and there
appear to be. We even predicted that by year-end Apple would
subsidize the phones and/or sell them at a reduced price back in January. So
this latest move by Apple doesn’t surprise us at all, it’s
another example of Steve Jobs turning a huge mistake into an opportunity
for Apple to make more money from its customers.

Wired’s June 12 article about the Apple Worldwide Developer Conference
(WDC) has some interesting iPhone related quotes in it from Macintosh
software developers. If Apple fandom at the developer level seems
unbridled to you, perhaps you’ve missed this article and what it has to
say about the future of Apple and the iPhone:

“It was a letdown to rival the final episode of The Sopranos. As Steve
Jobs tantalized thousands of Apple software programmers…with promises
of something ’sweet’ for the iPhone, you could feel the anticipation of
the crowd…as oversize images splashed up on the stage’s giant screen,
Jobs turned to deliver his curveball: Instead of getting tools to create
stand-alone applications for the iPhone, developers would only be able
to write web apps for the iPhone using the device’s Safari browser.
Suddenly, a sound that’s rarely ever heard in a Jobs keynote welled up
in the giant conference hall. Crickets.” (Ouch!)

“‘We’re a little disappointed,’ said Daniel Waylonis, a software
engineer at Google who was sitting with a large group of Google
programmers. ‘It was not the announcement we were hoping for.’”

“Divergent Media’s Mike Woodword echoed that sentiment. ‘It’s not
that I’m mad about it — it was expected. It’s just the way they went
about it. It was so patronizing.’” (Apple, patronizing? Say it ain’t
so!)

“Using Ajax for the iPhone is [expletive
deleted],” said French programmer Jacques Foucry.

Amusingly, the announcement of Safari on Windows came to
“thunderous applause” and was hailed as exciting and having lots of
potential. We’ll see. The new browser’s first couple of days haven’t
exactly set the world on fire…

Enough time has passed that I think it's time I weighed in on href="http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/">Steve Jobs'
open letter about digital rights management (DRM) and music .
 Before I do that, I'm going to speculate on why I think that
letter was written in the first place.

European government
agencies and consumer groups have been href="http://business.scotsman.com/media.cfm?id=221582007">putting a lot
of pressure on Apple lately about its iPod-exclusive FairPlay DRM.
 They cite Apple's 80% share of the digital music market as
proof that Apple has something of a monopoly on digital music sales, and
its iPod market share among digital music players as proof that this DRM
technology is locking customers into iPods.  These European
agencies want Apple to make its DRM format available to other
manufacturers, a move that threatens the sale of iPods.

Jobs
counters these arguments by stating that only about 3% of the music on
iPods is purchased from iTunes, and that the rest comes from other
sources like retail CDs and artists' web sites.  His point of
view is that the FairPlay DRM in no way prevents customers from moving
to other music players, since it represents such a small portion of a
customer's investment in music content.

There is some
truth to what Jobs says.  After all, it's widely known that
iTunes customers can burn their music to a standard audio CD and
"rip" the content back into an unprotected MP3 (or other)
format.  There are also tools out there (probably available
illegally) that remove the FairPlay DRM from music.  If customers
really wanted to move to another player and keep that 3% of their
collections, they could certainly find some way to do this.
 (Note:  This paragraph is intended to explain my point of
view and is in no way intended to promote the illegal copying of music
or the removal of DRM from protected music.)
/>Realistically, I think the reason customers stick with the
iPod is familiarity.  Originally, they may have heard that
the iPod was easier to use, "better", or more-capable than
other players.  Thus, they bought one.  Now that they've
invested the time in figuring out how the player works, how to download
music to it, how to set up their playlists, etc., they're far less
likely to investigate non-iPod players.  After all, this would mean
learning how the new player works, figuring out a way to get existing
music onto it, possibly creating new playlists, etc.  That's a
lot of effort to go through when you could just pony up the extra money
and buy another iPod… getting the same interface you're already
very familiar with.  This, I think, is where the real
"lock-in" takes place… not the digital content on the device
or the compatibility with a given music store.  Customers
have invested a certain amount of time and effort into learning one way
of doing something and they leverage it for future purposes. />
I do believe that it's hypocritical of the music
industry to require DRM on digital sales and not on physical CD
shipments.  It implies that the kind of person who buys
digital music online will immediately start sharing it if that music
isn't protected in some way, while the person who buys digital music
on a CD won't.  That's a completely nonsensical point of
view.  In fact, I would venture to guess that it would be no easier
or faster to share DRM-free music purchased online than it would to
share DRM-free music purchased on a CD.  In the case of the online
purchase, a user must login to the music store, select the desired
music, purchase that music, download it, then begin "sharing"
it illegally.  In the case of the CD purchase, the user buys the
same music online or through a brick-and-mortar store, rips that music
to a bunch of digital audio files, and begins sharing them illegally.
 It's probably no faster to download an entire CD than to rip
it from the original disk, even over a broadband connection, using a
modern PC or Mac.

It's a short-sighted move by the music
industry as well.  By pushing customers toward DRM-free CDs and
away from online purchases, they are supporting their existing business
model.  However, online stores are far better suited than
brick-and-mortar retailers to help customers who like one artist to
locate others they might also like.  Digital music purchases offer
a greater possibility for music companies to promote artists whose
fanbase may not (yet) justify the release of a physical CD, or artists
whose albums are several years old.  Sticking to the old
physical CD business model hurts the digital music industry and
ultimately the music companies themselves.

So,
although I agree with most of what Steve Jobs had to say in his open
letter, I don't believe that his intentions are quite so noble and
honorable.  I believe the threat of imminent legal action in Europe
and elsewhere was seen as a serious issue by Apple senior management.
 I believe this letter is Jobs' way of trying to
deflect legal action away from Apple and iTunes, and toward the
music industry itself, and to make Apple appear to be the "good
guys" in customers' eyes.  It seems more like
"spin-doctoring" than anything else, and the Europeans seem to
agree.  I believe Apple has a vested interest in keeping FairPlay
alive, if for no other reason than that it is one more obstacle to
migrating from an iPod to another brand of player.  They also have
a vested interest in keeping FairPlay to themselves, because it prevents
another company from plugging itself into Apple's music and video
business.

In our article on predictions for 2007, we speculate that Steve Jobs
will be fined for his involvement in Apple's options backdating
scandal, in spite of Apple's attempts to vindicate him.
 Additional allegations have surfaced that Jobs was involved in the
improper backdating of stock-option grants while he was chairman of
Pixar, the animated movie company.  As href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,128885/article.html">an article
from PC World indicates, "Stock-options backdating is not
illegal, per se, but there are U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) regulations on how they must be accounted for and disclosed to
shareholders."  The same article indicates that "The U.S.
Attorney's Office in San Francisco and the SEC hae been
investigating stock-options backdating actions at Apple and other
companies."  We suspect that they will not spend all that time
investigating and not find something inappropriate going on, but we
could be wrong.

Apple recently announced that the result of their internal
investigation was that there was no wrongdoing on the part of Steve Jobs
in the Apple stock options scandal.  More recently, we're
hearing differently as href="http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/business/16404067.htm">this
San Jose Mercury News article
indicates:

•  Jobs played an important role in
  the company's options practices, not only as the recipient of a
  massive tainted grant, but by recommending favorable grant dates for
  other employees.
• By itself, backdating is not necessarily
  illegal, but securities laws require that the grants be properly
  accounted for and disclosed to shareholders.
• The scandal has
  thus far led to indictments against officials at just two public
  companies, but federal regulators are promising more to
  come.
• “Jobs is this essential part of the Apple
  legend,'' said Alan Deutschman, author of “The Second Coming of
  Steve Jobs.'' “Would people sit through a two-hour presentation
  by some other guy waiting for the big revelation at the
  end?''

  Deutschman added: “Jobs always brings the
  promise that there's another revolution around the corner, and if
  you follow him, you can be part of it. And that has enormous
  appeal.''

• Ironically, the trait that has been such an
  asset for Apple may be a liability for its CEO. Apple has admitted that
  between 1997 and 2002 — at the same time that Jobs was trying to revive
  the company — it backdated options grants to employees, including Jobs.
  By not only being aware, but assisting that process, Jobs may not have
  done anything technically wrong — as Apple's board says — but at
  the very least he and the company were pushing the boundaries of
  accounting rules and corporate ethics.
• For now, Jobs' job is
  secure. Apple's board has defended him, saying he didn't know
  the accounting implications of his actions. But many analysts find that
  hard to square with what they know about Jobs. And regardless of the
  board's judgment, federal regulators may have a different
  view.

If the federal regulators agree that Jobs
knew what was going on, and that it wasn't properly disclosed, he
could find himself in the same jail as a number of other Silicon Valley
hucksters.