What's so fantastic about Apple?

[Kid Eager]

I'm not sure that "so many" do.
I did simply because I'm in the advertising and marketing industry, but I really wasn't defending Apple, I was explaining why Apples are different from oranges.

BTW: Sorry, I'm not an "Apple apologist" either.

you're disagreeing, therefore you need to be labelled. Why can't you just agree - don't you see that having an opposing view can't possibly be right?

 

[Stray Cat]

BUT I WAS, and you originally forwarded your "UPS" argument as a rebuttal to my claim that the "Apple v PC" differentiation is a largely spurious one because Apples are made of all the same basic components as other computers.

There's no need to shout. I'm not the one who's not paying attention.

My original USP post was made as a response to this;

The "Mac vs. PC" thing is a false dichotomy promoted through a marketing scheme intended to collectivize and deride all other computer manufacturers.

Which isn't really about components either.

I was pointing out that the difference isn't in the components anymore. But there is still a difference. That's the OS and for the reasons I've already outlined in previous posts.

Of course the marketing department are going to highlight why their product is different from the competition.

That's why you don't ever see ads that say "Buy our product because it's basically the same as our competition"

 

[Stray Cat]

You are the one claiming they (Apple) are special. The burden of proof is yours as to a letter actually making a difference. See, the name of the thread is "What's so fantastic about Apple?". So far the only two answers we seem to be getting is "I luv my iStuff!" and "They don't suck any more than anyone else." If those are the only answers you have, that doesn't sound very convincing.

Perhaps we need to quantify "fantastic"?
Is there an 'International Fantastic Scale we could use?


I'm betting it's a purely subjective quantity.

 

[John Albert]

BTW, 2006, not 2002.

You're absolutely right... I made a mistake there. It was indeed 2006 when Apple started the "Mac vs. PC" ads, the same year they'd switched the Macintosh over to the x86 "PC" hardware platform.

Mac vs PC has been around long before the Get a Mac campaign.

But you're wrong about that part.

While Apple has always used negative advertising, they actually started the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads in 2006, to coincide with the switch over to the x86 "PC" arch. Prior to that, Apple's advertising never actually came out and characterized all non-Mac computers as "a PC" for purposes of tarring them all with the same brush.

While the previous "Switch" ad campaign was negative as well, those ads were not blatant about emphasizing "Mac vs. PC" as a dichotomy. They were more like, "I'm tired of trying to figure out why my computer's not working, so I'm switching to a Mac."

As I said in my previous post, Apple ran the "I'm a Mac" ads because a lot of the Apple faithful were really shocked that they'd dumped their allegedly superior RISC processor architecture for the same old, supposedly inferior architecture of the "PC-compatibles." Apple sought to overcome that impression by airing ads that disingenuously emphasized how "different" they supposedly were.

You know, back when OS X ran on PPC ... and Windows ran on X86. When the two machines were, I don't know, fundamentally different.

The machines were fundamentally different back before the "Mac vs. PC" ads, but they're not now. They haven't been fundamentally different since. Just the OS is different.

Is your contention that they should have dropped that campaign when they switched to X86 ?

I'm generally turned off by all blatant attack advertising. It makes me not want to buy a product, when the only good things the company has to say about it is how much the other companies suck.

But as I already said, Apple switched to x86 before that ad campaign. The switch to x86 was originally announced in June 2005. The "Mac vs. PC" ad campaign started on January 8, 2006, and the first x86 Macs shipped 2 days later, on January 10, 2006.

But since you can only run OS X on an apple computer, isn't that enough of a distinction ?
- Mac (the only machine you can run OS X on)
- and PC (everything else)

You can run Mac OSX on other x86 computers, so long as you buy the components that Apple OSX has drivers for.

Are smartphones, tablets, game consoles, and ebook readers PC's are not ? If no, why not ?

I'd say they're not PC's as such because they're a totally different form factor from desktop or laptop computers, and (especially) because they're not built on the x86 "PC" architecture. I generally tend to reserve the acronym "PC" for machines along the same developmental path as the original IBM PC (for which the acronym "PC" was created). Apple Macintoshes, for example.

But I can also see the reasoning behind your argument that all those things also fit the dictionary definition of personal computers. They're certainly microprocessor-controlled devices made for the consumer market, that can run a multitude of applications. So from that basic definition, they are certainly "personal computers."

So how does that in any way validate your argument that the "Mac vs. PC" dichotomy is not total and complete BS from any realistic standpoint? If anything, it throws the whole "Mac vs. PC" into even sharper contrast. If all those things (including phones and videogames) are also PCs, then Apple is being even more disingenuous for insisting their computers are somehow not PCs, when in fact not only Macs, but iPads, iPhones, iPods, etc. are all PCs.

And a BMW is a Yugo because there is no fundamental difference - it's just a fancier design with a higher price tag, yes ?

That entire analogy makes no sense.

What is it you are trying to demonstrate ?

That the "Mac vs. PC" thing is a false dichotomy, just a lot of marketing B.S.

I never said that Apple was "evil" or that their products are junk or anything like that. I just said that they use exceptionally deceptive marketing practices, and engineering practices that are restrictive of their customers' freedom of choice.

 

[John Albert]

There's no need to shout. I'm not the one who's not paying attention.

You shouted, and I shouted too so I could be heard over your shouting.

My original USP post was made as a response to this;

The "Mac vs. PC" thing is a false dichotomy promoted through a marketing scheme intended to collectivize and deride all other computer manufacturers.

Which isn't really about components either.

But the physical hardware itself is fundamental to any discussion of relative value judgments of computers, and I'm arguing that there's fundamentally very little difference. The basic facts support my position.

In the post above, you addressed my point about the "Mac vs. PC" debate, but totally ignored my argument which supported that point, instead veering off onto a tangent about Apple's marketing strategy.

I wasn't talking about marketing strategies, critical reviews, customer satisfaction ratings, or any other subjective models intended to impose extrinsic value to the physical products. I was talking about the physical reality of the products themselves: the actual components that the machines are constructed from.

For some reason you Apple guys keep on approaching this question by quoting marketing terminology instead of quantifiable facts. Why is that?

I was pointing out that the difference isn't in the components anymore.

You did not point that out. I initially pointed that out to you, way back on page 7 of this thread.

But there is still a difference. That's the OS and for the reasons I've already outlined in previous posts.

I'm saying the OS and other cosmetic factors like case design are the only legitimate differences. The other reasons you pointed out (eg. Apple's marketing strategy) are irrelevant to the objective facts about the machines that Apple sells.

Of course the marketing department are going to highlight why their product is different from the competition.

Agreed.

That's why you don't ever see ads that say "Buy our product because it's basically the same as our competition"

Not unless it's a store brand.

But yeah, instead of seeing ads that say "buy our product because it's basically the same as our competition," you usually see ads that lie. But in most cases the companies' lies are not quite so bald-faced as those of the Apple Corporation, and most people don't believe the other companies' hype to the same absurd extent that they appear to believe the Apple hype.

 

[Zelenius]

Since there is no escaping the fact that the key difference between Apple devices and PCs is the operating system, I think the question should be rephrased "what's so fantastic about OS X and iOS?". And itunes, for that matter.

If the question was "what is so fantastic about Linux?", we all could have skipped over any hardware talk since it is well understood that Linux runs on the same exact hardware as PCs that run Windows. But then again, so does the Apple OS X. Sure there are the issues of batteries you can't replace yourself on Apple devices, Apple's own USB connections, among a few other annoying things, but the hardware is still essentially identical to what runs Windows and Linux these days.

So what is it that makes the Unix-based OS X and its offspring fantastic? It may be "fantastic" if you are used to it, but what makes it so much better than Windows? Or Linux for that matter?

 

[Kid Eager]

. I just said that they use exceptionally deceptive marketing practices, and engineering practices that are restrictive of their customers' freedom of choice.

What do you mean by that?

 

[BobTheDonkey]

There's no need to shout. I'm not the one who's not paying attention.

My original USP post was made as a response to this;

Which isn't really about components either.

I was pointing out that the difference isn't in the components anymore. But there is still a difference. That's the OS and for the reasons I've already outlined in previous posts.

Of course the marketing department are going to highlight why their product is different from the competition.

That's why you don't ever see ads that say "Buy our product because it's basically the same as our competition"

Yes, but the OS is nothing like the engine of your Toyota or Ford. Rather, that's the Intel vs AMD debate.

Rather, as was pointed out by various people you subsequently yelled at, the difference between the Mac and a Windows computer is whether the speedometer reads in MPH or KPH. Or whether the Odometer reads in Mi or Km. Or whether the in-dash navigation system uses Navigon or Garmin software. Or the color of the gauges. Or the location of the gear shift, or turn indicator stalk, etc. Or what gauges are being displayed (In the case of Mac, just a big "Your car is doing what we designed it to do" vs Windows "Here's your speed, and how much fuel you have, and how fast you're going, etc").

Not at all the differences that your analogy attempted to make them out to be.

 

[Chris L]

Perhaps we need to quantify "fantastic"?
Is there an 'International Fantastic Scale we could use?


I'm betting it's a purely subjective quantity.

Then why are you arguing as if the fantastic part is an indisputable fact? You love your iToys, fine. You think the company that makes them is just the bees knees, even better. That doesn't mean either your iToys or the company are really fantastic.

 

[Chris L]

Since there is no escaping the fact that the key difference between Apple devices and PCs is the operating system, I think the question should be rephrased "what's so fantastic about OS X and iOS?". And itunes, for that matter.

If the question was "what is so fantastic about Linux?", we all could have skipped over any hardware talk since it is well understood that Linux runs on the same exact hardware as PCs that run Windows. But then again, so does the Apple OS X. Sure there are the issues of batteries you can't replace yourself on Apple devices, Apple's own USB connections, among a few other annoying things, but the hardware is still essentially identical to what runs Windows and Linux these days.

So what is it that makes the Unix-based OS X and its offspring fantastic? It may be "fantastic" if you are used to it, but what makes it so much better than Windows? Or Linux for that matter?

To be fair, the Unix/Linux security model (not an Apple invention by the way) is better on a technical level than the old Windows model. Windows though is catching up with that, and you don't need OSX to get that model in any case.

 

[John Albert]

What do you mean by that?

I mean exactly what I said.

You obviously haven't been following the conversation. I suggest you go back and reread from about page 5 onward.

 

[Kid Eager]

I mean exactly what I said.

You obviously haven't been following the conversation. I suggest you go back and reread from about page 5 onward.

I should have been clearer - I meant the "freedom of choice" bit.

 

[John Albert]

I should have been clearer - I meant the "freedom of choice" bit.

I couldn't have been clearer. Go back and reread from page 5.

 

[Kid Eager]

I couldn't have been clearer. Go back and reread from page 5.

Oh, in that case, you're wrong.

 

[John Albert]

Oh, in that case, you're wrong.

Nah, I don't think so.

I've actually supported my argument with reasoning and evidence. If you want to revisit those same topics again, you can go back and re-read because I'm not going to re-hash it all.

 

[John Albert]

Sure. I'll let adobe address that directly.

A document for Flash/FLEX developers on how to optimize their ActionScript code really does nothing to support your point. Nice try though, posting a techy whitepaper on the expectation that nobody will bother to actually read it.

http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/tech-specs.html

Yes, adobe could not optimize flash enough to actually run on an ARMv6 instruction set. 'Far too underpowered' is an exaggeration because it actually does run on that chipset now, after 5 years of optimization of the flash code. So was the processor underpowered, or mobile flash code a bloated mess ?

Mobile Flash hadn't even been developed yet, in the time of the first iPhone. If it was up to Steve Jobs, it never would have been.

After all, why should a "forward-thinking futurist" like Jobs put any money or effort into helping Adobe establish a cross-platform standard for mobile browser-based apps and games, when he's already busy promoting his own proprietary, closed software ecology based around Objective-C development and Apple supremacy?

Save flash versus no-flash for a different thread

As I said, I don't really care much about Flash as a mobile Web technology. What annoys me is Apple's divisive, anticompetitive "lock-out" approach to development and delivery. In my view it's every bit as bad when Apple does it, as it is when anyone else (Microsoft, Novell, etc.) does.

Google, on the other hand, earned favor with me just for bothering to try and support as many Web technologies as possible, in the interest of providing the user a complete Internet experience on their mobile platform. On general principle, I'll always side with personal freedom on the Internet, instead of having any company dictate to me what I can and cannot see or do with my own devices.

 

[Kid Eager]

Nah, I don't think so.

I've actually supported my argument with reasoning and evidence. If you want to revisit those same topics again, you can go back and re-read because I'm not going to re-hash it all.

This actually made me lol for real, in light of the emotive wording and hyperbole used "from about page 5 onward". But hey, it's the interwebz, so that's fine.

 

[John Albert]

Glad you got a kick out of it. I do aim to please.


If you read what I wrote, and you really thought about it and maybe even researched it a little, but you still don't understand how Apple restricts its users' (and developers') freedom of choice, then I don't have anything more to say on the matter.

 

[Brian-M]

If you read what I wrote, and you really thought about it and maybe even researched it a little, but you still don't understand how Apple restricts its users' (and developers') freedom of choice, then I don't have anything more to say on the matter.

Does this mean the thread is finally over?

Quick... grab a shovel and bury it before it springs back to life...

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Does this mean the thread is finally over?

Quick... grab a shovel and bury it before it springs back to life...

Interestingly, this "Mac vs. PC", and the definitional debate that goes along with it, is quite the meme.

I'm only aware of that from watching my TWIT shows, esp.Tech News Today.

It seems there to be more about stats and bragging rights than marketing, but I still find it interesting how these things spread like viruses.