\
On Jun 16, 2016, at 1:44 AM, David Smith david.smith.14916@gmail.com [iPad] <iPad@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2016, at 3:42 AM, Tony tdale@xtra.co.nz [iPad] <iPad@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
> SJ created interest when there was no real comparison. There is now. You can pick many phones that outstrip Apple, hardware wise. And Apple continues to add old Android features. Soon, maybe now, the featureset will be close, and the perceived Apple quality advantage will push forward.
But the plastic-and-glass rectangle is old and inadequate. It has never been the ideal size and shape for a phone, or even for a tiny computer. But it's all that Apple, now far too big a company not to be strongly averse to major innovation, can give. Milk that plastic slab for every possible ounce of cash. Discard it only when it's dry. Or when the FCC condemns it because it's causing a cancer epidemic.
Maybe the sad truth is that technology is stuck. Everything it can give the consumer in the way of plastic gadgets has already been designed and oversold. Consumer hardware has nowhere to go, as you said earlier. VR is promising, but, like the Apple Watch, it's klutzy and way, way underpowered. No more little miracles, at least for many years. Just more and more of the same.
High quality matters to a smallish percent of buyers. Apple will continue to feed them, will continue to survive and thrive modestly on both high-quality build and a software infrastructure that ties them together and transcends the lifetime of any one of them. But that's all. Innovation, daring design, fun, iconoclasm will have to come from elsewhere. The stockholders will demand that.
That's OK, and it's good, but it's not the stuff that inspires enthusiasm. Which is probably why the office workers don't much care. Steve would have seen that and hated it and blown it up. Maybe. No telling.
Posted by: Alice Saunders <lwr32@mac.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (43) |
