Report Offensive Message

Hi uaintseenmeuk@...

I think you raised several very good points in an appropriate manner. Having said that what follows in not aimed at you in particular but I would like to hear your comments on it.

At the same time many of the criticisms here of Jobs and Apple really do highlight the man's insight into people and the market place. Is the problem really Jobs or is he just making good calls for Apple?

For the record, I support open source and standardization. At the same time, it is difficult to break a monopoly using nothing but good will and altruism. With open source as the third player there is now a much more open market. Jobs realised he needed to be stylish to establish the pricing to raise the required funds to stay in the game. Users had a choice.

Apple has the share it does because of so many of the points you bring up. If other product consistently falls flat on its face that can hardly be put at Jobs feet in so much that Apple?s success is being accomplished without questionable competitive practices (correction invited?)

Look, we need advanced devices that require a learning curve (Blackberries?) At the same time, we in IT have consistently done very poorly at providing the common folk with reliable easy to use technology that doesn't require a two year diploma at a minimum to get it started and keep it running.

I think it might be a bit unfair to repetitively use the term "dumb" in when we are really talking easy to use. Our challenge in IT is to starting writing some really "dumb" advanced applications. Maybe package them up to look nice. I know, how about green computers made of aluminum and glass?

The arrogance we so often adopt in IT is what nearly killed IBM, now an excellent company in many respects. It could be said that MS set the object oriented example (ie technical concept) for the industry follow. They didn?t event the GUI or drop down menus either (and neither did Lotus 123.) Ms did saw what consumers wanted, there just working out a few of the bugs? still? but that too might be unfair.

Take browsers, like Google Chrome, it is easy to create simplistic software that works, and difficult to create highly complex software that works (anybody like IE8?) Perhaps the model here is FireFox? In OS?s, Linux is now reaching the complexity and robustness of MS?s software, but easily to install, use it, and keep it running? Getting there for sure?

I understand how there are a great deal of things people do not like about Apple. However I was very pleased when MS agreed to let them live That Apple is now a massive success though is because Jobs ?gets it?. He is relating to the average technology user, not the broadly educated graduate that wants to sink their teeth in.

A comment on human nature and Open Source. Asking people to ?donate? is like asking people to be responsible. It works to a degree but not very well. Creating high quality technology quickly requires a great deal of resources that are not going to come into being by appealing to everyone?s better nature. That is why most issues that start off being an appeal to people?s conscience end up as legislation and regulation. How that applies to Open Source I am not really sure.

While I personally have no need for a miniature laptop, I think the market will see it differently and they will do very well. I actually moved towards boat anchor sized laptops that weigh a tone and then plug in a second screen when parked at a desk. The point I?m leading to is I am a member of a niche market, albeit a huge one. There are many such markets and really, more choice is good? even if it can be kind of irritating at times.

Regards,

Dave Horsman