Steve also said "no one reads books anymore" and then proceeded to launch iBooks. Said no to third-party apps on the original iPhone and then came around. Phones aren't used the same as they were in '07 and his original reasoning on screen size doesn't hold anymore either, and in almost every way besides one-handed use, a larger phone is a better experience, period.
As for a single iWatch model… this ignores the fundamental difference between a gadget you carry and one you wear. Anatomy varies: different sizes are valuable. Taste varies (wildly): different styles are valuable. And all that talk about "human warmth"? Remember the original Mac ad with all the drones dressed exactly the same? Wouldn't a single, stainless steel, one-size-fits-all watch fit right in there? When it comes to something worn, choice and personal expression become very important, very human considerations.
I agree with the author's sentiment here:
The fact that it also contradicts Steve Job's original intent for the iPhone, "No one is going to buy a big phone", squelches the voice of the product and makes it come across muddled and confused.
However, since the data points towards the opposite direction from Steve's original statement, it's reasonable to believe that an opinion like that could have been changed with hard facts. Steve was a businessman, and I'm pretty sure he would have sung a different tune if he saw the sales figures.
It's hard enough to craft desire for a single identity. When asked to think of an Apple Watch, people don't know what to picture. Can you imagine if the original iPhone in 2007 came with sixty customizable skins?
Yeah, because fuck choice and personalization right? The iPhone isn't a wearable device that you'll have on public display at all times, the Apple Watch is. It makes sense to give users a level of customization here since you're essentially buying jewelry...or, you might say, a watch.
It's like picking your future husband or wife from a pool of sixty. Sixty different personalities, hobbies, quirks to learn. Sixty different people to fall in love with, compounded with the anxiety you might choose wrong.
I'm sorry...what? Isn't that the fun part about falling in love? That's like, the entire process in a nutshell.
You'd much rather have just the one. The Perfect One that you know is the best.
Who decided that it's the best? Apple? This mentality is what people have grilled Apple on for years. It's where the (pretty stupid) term "iSheep" came from. Everyone just mindlessly buying what Apple churns out because it's the next thing they told us we needed. Now when they give us actual meaningful choices to make, people flip out? I don't get it.
The rest of this reads like a bad fan-fiction.
Overall, this article is drenched in bias and melodrama. Not quite sure what to make of it.
I agree with the stuff you pointed out, especially the metaphor about choosing a partner. That made no sense haha
I thought the writer imagined a fun scenario that could have been how Steve Jobs could have introduced these products. Very clear, persuasive, and imaginative. Like the explanation of needing a bigger screened iPhone using the fingers and the window metaphor. It’s not a ’what I said a few years ago was a fat lie’, it’s a ’I see the problem in a different way now, and a bigger screen solves that problem’.
Of course that is partly bullshitting and salesmanship, but Apple makes opinionated products. Opinions change, and are partly about the framing and emotion as much as anything else. Steve Jobs was able to use those things in the way he introduced and explained products – in a delightful way like explaining something from the world to a child.
I enjoyed it too, but... Apple fan fiction, lol.
I enjoyed reading that :)
I will admit, the presentation felt a little Microsoft-like where they get through the presentation by riding on a wave of crazed energy. WE DID IT! THIS PRODUCT IS AMAZING! YOU MUST LOVE IT!
Jobs definitely took the much more subtle, confident, and personal approach. Cook kept saying that the Apple Watch is the most personal device that Apple has ever made, but never said why. Leaving this open to imagination shows a lack of confidence in what problem the product is solving, besides growing Apple's already insane revenue.
Of course, every time a post like this comes out, my first reaction is that we should stop asking "what would Jobs do" and instead ask "what could Cook do better." Jobs had a style that worked for Jobs. His style probably won't work for Cook because they are completely different people.
The author did a good job of finding a little bit of Jobs' tone, but the imaginary crowd reactions were absolutely cringeworthy.
The Keynotes themselves can be a little like that anyway! It’s not like they don’t play themselves to the audience.
I don't know, this is cringe-fiction for me:
"We realized we could use our design to build great experiences. (Crescendo in cheers)"
"Today marks the day Apple becomes the personal universe company. (Auditorium is deafening)"
Maybe (Auditorium is deafening) was referring to a thousand dry retches?
This felt creepy but also very neat. Loved it.
Is this a joke? If not, I really can't believe someone had the time to write this —not only one piece— series of fan-fiction (see the iPen one). I'm struggling to take this seriously. This is so awkward.
That imaginary keynote was fun to read, but there were a few things I had an issue with:
He mentions the Apple "engineers" a few times and gives them credit for coming up with the new iPhone size. Steve would never say it like that. Instead of saying, "Our team of smart engineers have come up with the perfect size," he would just say "WE have come up with the perfect size."
He says that with the new, bigger phone you wouldn't have to strain your eyes looking at a webpage in Safari anymore. Steve wouldn't blatantly admit that the previous version was inferior.
The "one more thing" is in the middle of the keynote. This goes at the end!
I especially chuckled at the "Are you getting this? Do you get it?" part, though. Overall, it was a fun read and I agreed with many of the author's points.
He lost my respect when he said "Jobsian Apple".
Some points were okay, but most were bullshit. Especially the re-enactment part. (cheers)
[deleted] Somehow I posted in the wrong thread...
Nicely turned. I particularly like the fact that "Steve" didn't find it necessary to include U2 into the mix.
The page is down. Can anyone send me a working link please?
This was a great read.
I couldn't agree more about the 1 phone and 1 watch (and calling it the iWatch). I don't agree that the stainless steel design is the way to go - because as someone pointed out, a woman isn't going to rock that on her wrist. But I would've understood a choice of 2 straps, or a more unisex design.
Choice is a bad thing.
People don't like choice. They fear making the wrong one more than they enjoy the process.
So you either present them with the illusion of choice (iPhone 5s - where effectively you can't make a 'wrong' decision) or you present them with no choice at all (all "i" devices until 5s).
I think the writer of this piece makes some superb points, and whilst it's a bit cringeworthy in parts it makes for great reading.
People fear choice in products they consider appliances: computers, phones, cars, washing machines. They want "the best" and that's all, because they don't know and don't want to know the intricacies behind the curtain.
Fashion is fundamentally different, and choice is central to it… and what's really cool is that once again, Apple is the only company to really understand a key piece of a nascent market.
Also, everyone seems to be missing this bit: the tech part of the watch is singular. There's only one Apple Watch, really… no one has to pore over spec lists to select the watch they like. They can just choose which one looks good on them and buy it.
This was good reading and i felt the choices the author made about releasing just ONE iPhone 6, calling it the iWatch and only releasing ONE version (After the release they could give folks the ability to buy extra straps if they want to) was the right way.
I agree to The One is important to apple and to preserve the simplicity and ease of use.
Can you honestly see a single stylish woman wearing that very masculine, overly large watch he picked as "the One"? That looks like no woman's watch ever.
Well.. style is relative, but i see your point. I think the reason he picked that specific band, is because it seamlessly match the watch. Looks great.
So the Sport Band (low price) or the Milanese Loop (uni-sex) - Would have been better? http://www.apple.com/watch/gallery/
I think it is important to have a "default" that apple thinks look the best according to their brand. Right now i don't know which one it is.
…because there isn't one. Fashion doesn't work that way.
Often Apple release the One product initially and brand into multiple choices as time goes on.
First iPhone was available in one design, then a choice of black and white, then also gold. Now we have two screen sizes. iPad is now available in two sizes. iPods branched into the classic, nano, and shuffle.
The Apple Watch is first available in three sub-brands in a number of materials and straps and two sizes. I think this is because it is not such a neutral product as a phone, where just the sole option of glass or aluminium can be given, materials you could say raised the bar over other phones, tablets, and music players.
People and the industry have existing tastes and desires for a watch. So Apple is meeting that bar this time.