
Apple at Its Best - mercutio2
https://stratechery.com/2017/apple-at-its-best/
======
norswap
> As we have seen, when the vector of differentiation shifts, market leaders
> tend to fall by the wayside. In the brave new world of AI, Google and Amazon
> have the clear edge over Apple.

Many people seem to believe this meme of AI changing everything. I have
trouble being excited. It seems like Google Translate has improved a bit over
the past few years, but it can't be relied on more than before. Personal
assistant fail to understand very simple queries (they're way beyond Wolfram
Alpha, which is itself cool but far from awe-inspiring).

It seems that with neural networks and what not, you can get really impressive
results from the get-go. But once the low-hanging fruits have been reaped,
it's hard to make quantum leaps.

There is also a lot of conflation. Sure Google Maps and Waze really do change
things. But that's not AI in the sense that is meant today.

~~~
1_2__4
To me, the thing that gives the game away is that every time a company talks
about "AI" both current and near future in general terms it's blue-sky, the-
future-is-robots glorious (not really) automated future. Then when they talk
specifics it's "language translation" which is still pretty awful and "image
processing" which has been the purview of AI for many many years with no
indication it'll be breaking out of that box anytime soon.

Yes I know there's massive advancements in using ML to make things seem more
advanced than they are. But at the end of the day consumer AI today is:
Language recognition and translation and photo recognition and manipulation.
Everything else is snake oil.

So pardon me if I don't start portending Apple's doom because they may have to
spend a little more of their untold billions to buy an AI startup to make
photo enhancements slightly more cool for the next version of IOS. I don't
think there's a game-changing AI breakthrough waiting to happen that the big
companies are all going to have to fight for market space with because I can't
find any evidence of it anywhere.

------
mark_l_watson
For years I was an Android user, loved them. Now I use two iPhones (one is a
corporation phone).

I depend on Google Assistant on both iPhones. Siri is getting better and I
sometimes use it, but I find it convenient enough to tap the Google Assistant
icon on home screen as hit the hardware home button for Siri.

I expect Apple to continue to invest a ton of money in AI, AR, etc. But,
Google has some advantages: when I asked for driving directions to the DMV
yesterday Google Assistant immediately warned me they were closed. I worked at
Google with the Knowledge Graph, and it with superior AI really is a great
competitive advantage.

That said, I am never going back to Android phones; I like iPhones and the
integration with my iPad and MacBook is useful.

Best of both worlds.

~~~
suprfnk
> Google has some advantages [..]

Advantages mainly coming from a far reaching disregard for privacy.

~~~
e1ven
Many of them do come from a disregard for privacy. That bothers me, but some
people are happy to make that trade-off for better services.

~~~
celeritascelery
I would suggest that MOST people are happy to make that trade off. At least
until your personal information is hacked and taken from googles servers.

~~~
pen2l
To be fair, practically speaking, it's more likely that your "personal
information" will be hacked if it is in your possession vs. when in Google's
cloud.

~~~
ferdbold
In my case, it's not that I don't trust Google's cloud security. It's the
unknown third parties they sell my info to's security that bothers me.

------
noncoml
We get these claims with every new release of iPhones, but each time sales are
as good or better.

What does worry me a bit about Apple of today vs Apple before Jobs passed
away, is that they seem to be to quick to compromise design when they are face
with difficult engineering problems.

For example the camera sticking out and the iPhone X screen notch.

~~~
jmull
I don’t know where the idea came from that a featureless rectilinear slab is
somehow the ideal design for a phone.

Of course people are perfectly welcome to their own opinions, but there’s a
deeper design principle here to let an object be what it is.

If all you do with a phone is look at it and tap on it then a plain rectangle
is very good.

But you also hold the phone up to your head to talk into it and hear the
person on the other side. Orientation is important.

It’s also probably the best camera you’ve ever owned, which intrinticly have a
lens and depth. Why try to pretend one of the most important aspects of the
phone doesn’t exist? (There have been some truely great camera designs over
the years... how many of those were featureless, symmetrical rectangles? But
now we think that’s somehow the ideal design??)

And the phone looks back at you, listens to you, and senses your environment.
All key features. So why try to sweep those important sensors under the rug?
Orientation is important here too, so again you _want_ an orientation, not a
symmetric featureless slab.

Sorry to jump on you, but I think your examples aren’t good.

~~~
throwawayjava
I see what you're saying, and agree, but the description you give reminds me
of this:

[http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QNmG5af9rFs/R3ypiFV0XaI/AAAAAAAAAu...](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QNmG5af9rFs/R3ypiFV0XaI/AAAAAAAAAu4/VOYdzb_GeRY/s400/New+Image2.JPG)

Or, to be a bit less flippant about it:

    
    
      * flip phones
      * phones with slideout keyboards
      * blackberries
      * palm pilot stylus
    

The featureless slab beat all of those for a few important reasons, but
probably the most important is aesthetic. Even the iPad Pro, which has a
stylus, is much more aesthetic, and so less nerdy, than the old palm stylus.

So I also understand the ambivalence toward deviating from the featureless
slab.

~~~
badsectoracula
Isn't kind of weird that what is considered good aesthetic is removal of
(visual) features? Why is that considered good looking?

If you take it to its extreme conclusion, the best environment to live in from
an aesthetic perspective would be a big white box with each side being made up
of a material that changes its hardness based on what you want to do (lie down
to sleep and becomes soft, walk on it, becomes hard, sit on a corner and
becomes slightly soft on the floor with very soft walls) and all your
communication and entertainment is done via floating images that materialize
at a comfortable distance from your face so you can talk with your peers,
watch videos, holograms and whatever else. Getting outside would have a part
of the wall disintegrate (we'd call that a door, for historical reasons),
although "outside" would now just be an aesthetically pleasing sea of white
featureless cubes.

~~~
Jtsummers
The removal of visual features may make some things more aesthetically
appealing, but it also allows the objects to be more easily fit into your
particular preferences.

As an example, I have a digital photo frame. It has a large bezel that's
silver/grey with black trim. It does not fit well on my desk. I have a
minimalist style in my home. Removing that bezel would allow the object to sit
on my desk and actually look like it belonged.

On the other hand, my girlfriend's home has a beach/Caribbean thing going on.
Most of her photos and art are in wood frames (with an unfinished look). The
bezel on this digital frame makes putting it inside a wooden frame of that
sort difficult (it would need to be too large, or strategically positioned so
you didn't realize it was just a façade).

Reducing the bezel, for her, would allow the frame to be placed inside of a
wooden frame that fit her styling much better. The object would not stand out,
it would blend into the environment.

My view: A minimalist aesthetic for objects is not desirable because the
minimalist aesthetic is desirable. It is desirable because objects of this
form are more easily placed inside _any_ environment. An object with an
opinionated appearance will stand out unless it fits the rest of your
possessions. This may or may not be desirable. But it should be up to the
owner of the object whether attention is drawn to it, not up to the creators
of the object.

EDIT: Fixed a word or two. This was my 3rd write-up of this because they kept
disappearing so I wrote it rather hastily.

------
ryanmarsh
I don’t understand the premise that “Google (or anybody) is better at AI”.

How can anyone make such an assertion? Because Google or Amazon’s AI efforts
are more visible? Has someone totaled up all the AI innovation (secret and
not) at these companies and scored them? Are we talking PhD head count? What
is the measure?

This reminds me of when I was fighting in Baghdad in ‘04 and everyone back
home was arguing about a war happening on Mars or somewhere. They sure as hell
weren’t arguing about Iraq because nothing they were talking about seemed to
have anything to do with the facts on the ground. Facts that were nearly
impossible for them to obtain.

This is a narrative not an analysis.

------
dmitriid
There's a quote from doom-sayers that I absolutely love:

> Consider Google’s Pixel 2 phone: Driven by AI-based technology, it offers
> unprecedented photo-enhancement features and deeper hardware-software
> integration, such as real-time language translation when used with Google’s
> special headphones…The shifting vector of differentiation to AI and agents
> does not bode well for Apple…

Basically, Pixel's camera is praised for the same capabilities for which it is
dismissed on the iPhone. This will never cease to amaze me

------
diminish
It's no wonder important players are rushing to market premium segment
prestigious smartphones: Notably, Google’s Pixel 2, Samsung S8/Note8, Xiaomi.
In 3Q 2017, iphone got 12.5% flat market share with negligible YoY growth and
runs to $900B valuations thanks to increased ASP price.

I'm curious why Dell/HP and some others aren't chasing the $1000+ smartphone
segment.

~~~
judge2020
Because they're not inclined to produce a super expensive phone with Android
on it. Apple's business model works because the software makes up where the
hardware lacks and give it that premium feel. Depending on how well FUTURE
android pans out, consumers usually don't think Android phones should be that
expensive.

~~~
fhood
>Apple's business model works because the software makes up where the hardware
lacks

Could you clarify? I thought hardware was where Apple had the largest lead
over it's competitors.

~~~
eggpy
Apple devices have almost always been laughably overpriced for the hardware
specs. Android phones are normally more powerful with longer lasting batteries
and better cameras. Windows computers are cheaper with more performance and
are highly customizable. What Apple has is a great UI and near-seamless
interoperability between all their devices. The hardware isn't (historically)
incredible, it's the experience and environment that are great.

~~~
fhood
I would agree with that for their computers to a degree, but I was under the
impression that their mobile processors are known for how far ahead of the
competition they are.

~~~
eggpy
Hardware is more than just processor though. They have had less storage, less
memory, and worse cameras for many generations. I'd have to do some research
into mobile processors specifically, but this is just broad statements. I'm
not saying anything about the state of Apple today, but over the past 15+
years. In general, Apple hardware has been worse than their competitors
despite costing more.

------
Apocryphon
Technically speaking, how is Face ID different from previous facial detection
security systems?

~~~
byebyetech
What previous facial detection security systems?

Most face recognition systems i've seen are from movies.

~~~
cisanti
Android has had face unlock for ages, but as others commented Apple has
different implementation and safer.

------
rgrau
The fact that with this title and date, neither the article nor the comments
mention the Paradise Papers surprises me.

~~~
JonCox
Did it come as a surprise to you that Apple were aggressively (but technically
legally) minimising their tax bill?

~~~
rgrau
To me? not really. I didn't say it surprised me that Apple appeared in the
papers either.

------
auggierose
> [Apple] has not embraced the open-source and collaborative approach that
> Google and Amazon are pioneering in AI

Oh yes? So where can I download the open-source Alpha Go Zero?

~~~
judge2020
Also, does anyone know where to download swift's source?

~~~
lukeholder
[https://github.com/apple/swift](https://github.com/apple/swift)

------
thisisit
I am no expert in technology analysis but I always thought Apple's strength
lay in superior hardware and/or software created around them.

In which case, the whole FaceId thing feels a bit of downer. The explanation -
"you see how the notification is closed when the screen is off and opens up
when you look at it", is at best a nifty trick for people who are more
technically oriented. Others might not be able to tell the difference at all.

And on the point of:

" The most attractive customers to Google’s advertisers are on the iPhone —
just look at how much Google is willing to pay to acquire them — and while
Google could in theory convince them to switch by keeping its superior
services exclusive, in reality such an approach is untenable."

Isn't this more to do with demographics of an average iPhone user rather than
iPhone as a platform? One might argue that both are related but using this as
a reason seems kind of superfluous.

~~~
samdoidge
> Isn't this more to do with demographics of an average iPhone user rather
> than iPhone as a platform? One might argue that both are related but using
> this as a reason seems kind of superfluous.

Of course they are related. Why does the iPhone have this specific
demographic, if not for the platform?

~~~
theshrike79
iPhone users have been conditioned to pay for stuff, even if it is just $1.
They've had a working App Store from day one.

Google screwed the pooch by not having paid apps on huge parts of the world
for years. People got so used to side-loading their apps that getting them to
pay is an ordeal.

~~~
drewbug
The first iPhone didn't have an app store from day one. For a bit, Cydia was
the only option for third-party apps.

------
bsaul
Apple is notorious for releasing not completely finished "revolutionary"
products. They rush for the first release but get the marketing right, then
they incrementally polish the product in the following years until it's really
good.

I'll probably wait two iteration of the X. And in the meantime if my phone
breaks, i'll take the opportunity to experiment with other brands and OS.

PS : anyone knows if ubuntu or sailfish or any other mobile OS is any good ?

~~~
celeritascelery
No. They are not.

------
dade_
I almost want one, but the product was accelerated, which means rushed, and
that has never been a good thing. I’ll let everyone else be a guinea pig. I
agree that AI is the future for interfaces so I think this screen size
obsession is a distraction from innovation. How many hours has Apple spent to
make yet another fragile phone with a battery life that is too short? Now add
in the rest of the industry because they just making a slightly worse version
of the same thing.

I just got back from Shenzhen where no one is complaining about this. I am
certain I laid eyes on over a million (each) battery packs, replacement
screens, screen protectors, protective cases, and bluetooth earphones.

So it leaves me with a simple desire for a refreshed iPhone SE with wireless
charging and a much better Siri.

One last thing, I picked up a new flip phone for my Dad while I was there. He
can’t find a decent one at the store anymore, but there are still many new
models of candy bar style and flip phones being made and sold so there must
still be a lot of people buying them...

~~~
zimpenfish
> but the product was accelerated, which means rushed

Got credible sources for that?

> yet another fragile phone with a battery life that is too short?

My X has been off charge for 6 hours, with reasonable amounts of use, and I'm
only down at 50% battery - that's with nothing turned off and at least 3
background GPS tracking things running, btw.

