• grimacefry@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Jobs’ vision was fundamentally to make technology accessible to the masses. In the same way Henry Ford made cars accessible to everyone. We see this in the Macintosh which brought desktop computing with a GUI that “if you can point, you already know how to use it”. The iPod brought what was a chaotic, fragmented, quagmire of digital music into a form that was accessible to everyone. The iPhone was a mobile experience that through touch and skeuomorphic familiarity brought smartphones to everyone including your grandma.

    He succeeded, but the motivation behind that is more interesting. Was it genuinely for the good of humanity, that is to advance human progress. Or was it because he knew it was the best way to create a captive market which he could then manipulate and control, and profit off?

    As for Apple today, if you follow the steps in making tech accessible above, the next frontier is AI. So the question Apple would be looking to solve is how to make AI accessible to everyone. What form that takes and how it comes to life is the mystery. It’s not going to be a chat interface.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Jobs’ vision was fundamentally to make technology accessible to the masses.

      Bullshit, maybe Woz had that, but Jobs? No way! His goal right from the Mac II was clearly to make money, and maximize it by controlling the tech instead of setting it free.

      Already with Macintosh it was a “walled garden”, with many closed aspects to secure Apple had control. With iPhone it became even worse, and has NOTHING to do with making tech accessible, on the contrary. He made it easy because there’s money in that, he didn’t make it accessible, the price structure alone makes that an obviously false statement.

      Jobs had an eye for design, but to call it that he wanted to make it accessible, is like arguing a fashion designer makes expensive designer clothes to make it accessible to people.

      • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The fact that people associate Apple’s early history with Steve Jobs is sad. There were so many extremely talented people who did amazing work. Woz, Bill Atkinson, and Susan Kare are a lot more important. In a lot of ways Jobs just got in the way.

    • Simon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can’t see how that’s ever arguable since Apple has only been about premium high-end products since Jobs took over. That’s literally the opposite of Henry Ford.

      • hollunder@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well kinda both. Got it used from my brother and I think it was the second gen made. It’s dead since a few years tho. The battery died.

  • RavuAlHemio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Great choice of website:

    Independent journalism is made possible by advertising.

    That is the polar opposite of the truth.

    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Either you pay for access like the good old newspaper by gatekeeping the page or run unrelated ads from google AdWords and get paid by people clicking on them.

    • AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      NoteBookCheck is a legit website, what issue do you have with them? I always found their reviews and information and testing to be high quality

      This is like shitting on GamersNexus because they removed some shitty product in every video to make money

        • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This is Lemmy. EVERYONE is either a Linux user, a privacy weirdo or both.

          Source: I’m both

            • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              The dude who wrote the message you responded to is probably a Linux user and privacy weirdo or something.

              I can understand the Linux part not being common.

              But to say privacy is a weird thing is really sad. The average person should go out of their way to be privacy-conscious. In the US, we got people getting arrested for miscarriage, people getting on lists for watching YouTube videos/, and companies now getting people’s ID before they can visit a site.

              Not being privacy-conscious is just being stupid.

              • Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                They should be preaching their privacy thingies to the people in real life, not on the internet 🙄 for maximum reach, like how the evangelists do.

              • Psychadelligoat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                But to say privacy is a weird thing is really sad

                That’s not what was said.

                They said “they’re probably one of those privacy weirdos”, which is different.

                I value privacy and am conscious of it, more so than the average user. I choose, willingly and knowingly, to use certain services that damage my privacy in exchange for their services.

                The “privacy weirdos” are the people who see that statement and go “well you shouldn’t ever be using service x because it’s not secure you stupid dipshit! Just use service y, it’s FOSS and has half the features but it respects privacy so it’s better in every way!”

                Dunno how the person got “I’m a privacy nut” from “ads aren’t good for journalism” tho, that doesn’t track

          • Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I showed up because of the IPO at that one website.

            Me, the laziest person ever, motivated to come here. Truly an accomplishment.

        • Simon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, for some of the stuff I’ve seen here I wouldn’t even necessarily disagree with a comment like this but the OP saying advertising violates journalistic integrity has literally nothing to do with that. That’s just common sense.

    • simple@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      So you think they should just make no money because you’re mildly inconvenienced?

      • hglman@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        No. If you make money from ads your clients are the adversers and your readers are an asset you seek to capitalize. That is in opposition to journalistic integrity.

      • Simon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        In opposition to popular sentiment, good journalism actually does make money. It just doesn’t make as much money. And bad journalism without advertising makes no money.

      • RavuAlHemio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not saying they aren’t allowed to show ads, but I am saying that once they do, they are no longer allowed to refer to themselves as independent.

        No company that wants to advertise on your website is stupid enough to sign away editorial control, i.e. once you agree to display their ads, you are no longer allowed to say anything bad about them. And even if they did, there’s still the looming risk that if you do, they are well within their rights to pull their ads and there goes your income.

        If you’re going to show ads, be honest to your readers about what that means.

    • Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      "People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you.

      You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity.

      Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It’s yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head.

      You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don’t owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don’t even start asking for theirs."

      – Banksy

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    TL;DR: Wahhh apple isn’t jamming enough AI crap in their products.

    Jobs was once asked about what helped to set Apple apart from other companies. In response, he spoke of his fondness of a quote from ice hockey legend Wayne Gretzky who once said what set him apart as an ice hockey player is that “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been.”

    Yet this is exactly where Apple finds itself right now, especially in relation to generative AI. While it is true Apple has long integrated AI technologies into the iPhone and its other devices in the form of features like computational photography and Siri, it has also trailed in these areas as well.

    Google, conversely, AI from the start, making it a centerpiece of its Pixel smartphone strategy from the moment the original Pixel device shipped over 8 years ago with Google Assistant its heart coupled with computational photography chops. It has been focused on bringing useful and advanced (non-generative) AI-based features to users on a much broader scale than Apple, such as Call Screening, Google Lens, Top Shot, Smart Compose, among many others.

    Pffft. Fuuuuuuuuck that.

  • Vaggumon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The cracks have been visible for a very long time, most fanboys don’t want to see them though.

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Cracks? Cracks! These are not cracks, these are features of our product. Their features of our business! It’s what differentiates us from the fractured Windows and Android communities. You want these crac…err features, you need them because it makes our products better.

      /s

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The cracks in this case are really that governments will no longer support the model that Apple created.

  • Goodie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think people love to hate Steve. The one thing people love more than a great figurehead, is hating one. I think that Steve had a great internal model of how to combine form/function.

    iPhone wasn’t the first smartphone, but it may as well have been. It brought the smartphone to the mass market.

    Part of it was a great advertising campaign, which unlike the smartphones at the time, pitched it as a luxury good as opposed to an executive enterprise one. You owned a blackberry to answer emails wherever and whenever you were, you owned an iphone so you can check Google Maps. A large part of it was redefining both the form factor, and use case of a smartphone.

    • autokludge@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      At the time iPhone 1 didn’t seem like anything smarter than an iPod that could take calls. I was hyped over the Nokia 770 and eager to see what else would come out with Meamo OS. It took till mid 2008 until iPhone 3G and iOS 2 (and app store) were released.

      • Goodie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        An ipod with a much larger screen (320×240 vs 480x320), a camera, and could take phone calls, browse the internet, and do email.

    • Alto@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m pretty sure the main reason people hate Jobs is because by all accounts he was an absolute ass and was objectively a wackadoodle when it came to that homeopathic healing shit and not showering.

      • Goodie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh, he was an absolute asshole. Seems I deleted that sentence. RIP me.

        “I have enabled and ushered in a new age of knowledge access like no other, here’s a cool way to eat that goes against all reasonable nutritionists’ advice. Sounds good to me!” - Really seems like a fitting way to kick off this century IMO.

      • DingoBilly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yep. He was the Elon Musk of those years. Great at marketing but an asshole to work for and likely would have started spreading his insane crap at some point to the masses.

  • anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah but in a person meetings are at an all time high and anonymous sticks of deoderant being left on peoples’ desks is at an all time low.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Behind the Bastards just did a great series on him.

        I’d never really understood how he could have killed himself with his fruitarian nonsense until I listened, but once you get the pattern of behavior all laid out, well.

        RIP, bozo.

        • SmokumJoe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m on the last part of. Some people do not know the depths of how much of a basic garbage human being he was.

      • glimse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I never understood the Steve Jobs worship. We knew he was a shithead bully long before he died

  • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The Apple Car was the hint the wheels fell off, because it was out of scope for Apple’s focus. And the Vision Pro is the next biggest one, because Steve haaaaaaated wearable computing.

    • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      he also hated non-skeuomorphic design, and yet here we are for the better in a world where we’ve moved on from that dated concept

      just because he didn’t like something doesn’t make it wrong for apple to pursue

      • AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It only seems dated because everyone had this shitty flat interface crazy in the early to mid 2010s. Nowadays new, somewhat flat, but also skeuomorphic design languages like Fluent and Material 3 are getting attention

        • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          personally, i can’t stand either fluent or material either - the modern components and design language i keep coming back to is ant.design

          anything skeuomorphic is just a huge waste of space - they add so much detail to the screen that has no function other than signaling “real world” application

    • headroom@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Meh, when you have a chip that powerful and that energy efficient, trying something in wearable computing is a no brainer imo.

      • RatBin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wearable computing does not have to be a VR device, and it can be anything with a sensor, a cpu, gpu and networking features. Apple has at least one succesful wearable computing device, the apple watch. I am not touching vr anyway, it look pointless in nature and gives simulation sickness.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I still don’t know who wants wearable tech. Just using my phone can be painful at times. Notifications after notifications. Enable cookies, mark as read that work email, deal with the emoji in the group chat, ignore that spam call voicemail, ignore that update, dismiss that missed alarm, read the notification from my kid’s school that the PTO meeting was moved…

        Now imagine you can’t just put it down. It is right there screaming for your attention. Just emails alone probably eat 10% or more of my working day. The very last thing I want is the screaming notifications to be on face in my field of vision.

        Plus that thing is going to smell like ass in a month.

  • e8d79@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe Apple will have their Balmer moment but, as much as I would like to see that, I don’t expect it any time soon.

  • randomaside@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Big companies with no vision of the future are often ripe for disruptive tech to harvest. We’ll see what happens. The apple “visio pro”" is not the future of the company.