
How Apple Built 3D Touch - coloneltcb
http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-how-apple-built-3d-touch-iphone-6s/
======
acqq
Referenced in the article:

"“The biggest worry for me is, are we getting too locked in a formula?” asks
Schiller. He recalls the 2002 Worldwide Developers Conference, at which Steve
Jobs delivered a eulogy for Mac OS9, complete with cheesy organ music, a smoke
machine, and a casket rising through the middle of the stage. “We haven’t done
anything quite that outlandish in a long time. It may be part of being a
bigger company, not this small upstart. We feel a little uncomfortable being
too strange and getting too far away from ourselves.”"

The video:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1SLCAiGkVQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1SLCAiGkVQ)

~~~
melling
Steve is celebrating having 3000 apps. Apple sure was small in 2002.

------
dmethvin
This kind of philosophy bothers me:

> “There’s a tax that comes with interoperability and what can be seen as
> complexity, which is it can actually be an impediment to innovation.”

Yes, it's possible that standards can become too complicated. Rather than
refusing to participate, as Apple has done with pointer-related designs, why
not join the group and give rational reasons for simplifying the design? Every
thing Apple has reinvented here is already supported by W3C Pointer Events as
far as I can tell.

~~~
huxley
The article is confusing, I believe Ive was talking about Apple and its
product line, not about outside standards. He seems to be saying that keeping
compatibility within a product family can stifle innovation.

------
oralhistory
Those gifs make the article impossible to read

------
revelation
They might try _not_ timing these PR pieces with major Apple announcements. A
week after could provide the necessary plausible deniability.

~~~
supercoder
Plausible deniability about what ?

~~~
kelseydh
The article was clearly written before today's announcement, given its detail.

This means that Apple's PR team is behind this piece, giving this reporter
early access then framing the story around the touch device which is the big
feature of the iPhone 6s launch.

The article may be good, but it puts into question the independence and
neutrality of the article since its an article that was clearly initiated by
Apple's PR team.

~~~
charlesarthur
Yes, the interviews clearly come from prebriefings. What parts of the article
do you think aren't independent or neutral?

~~~
kelseydh
The entire piece reads as a promotion piece for people trying to evaluate
Apple stock, emphasizing how Apple's design team within its corporate
structure has a unique process that allows it to deliver the kind of
innovations that produced the iPhone.

That may well be true, but read the article and there is no hint of a single
criticism or critique of Apple's description of its design team. There is
little external evaluation of the claims that are being made about how they
operate. There is no meaningful 3rd person analysis from the reporter about
the "truthiness" of any of the claims being made here about Apple's design
team.

It's a fascinating article, but the OP has a point in saying this is clearly
an article whose content has been carefully crafted by Apple's PR team. That
doesn't mean it's not informative, but we should be aware still of how an
article like this gets produced. This is precisely the kind of in-depth
coverage that Apple needs for boosting their stock price amongst market
investors. It reassures them that Apple's "still got it" when it comes to
producing big wins into the future.

~~~
blumkvist
I was left with the exact opposite impression (perhaps because I read it till
the end).

"It also means that every few years it has to bet its future on the instincts
of a few people with strong opinions about how things should work [...] its
business plan, basically, is to trust that he and his team are right."

That is extremely harsh criticism in my book and should make all kinds of
bells ringing in the heads of people responsible for putting money in Apple's
stock.

