Tech media turns on Apple: Will iPhone, Mac suffer?
Filed under: Company News, Technology, Goog
Add to them GigaOm founder Om Malik, who ditched his iPhone last February and The New York Times' David Pogue, a true Apple lover, and we seem to have a budding rebellion among elite tech journalists against Apple. That's very bad news for Steve Jobs and company.
Why? In the old days, the truism was simple. Don't pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel. The reference was to newspapers. Today in the digital age, newspapers are dying, but the power of a concentrated handful of tech bloggers and taste makers has never been greater. And here's why this is extremely important for Apple.
Even though the internet is a cacophonous echo chamber, what people like Arrington, Calacanis, and Malik say matters. They are the new newspaper barons of the day, the tastemakers with public followings and high visibility on the Web. As they toss their iPhones over for Blackberry (RIMM) or smart phones running Google's (GOOG) Android operating system, others will start to ask questions.
Uncomfortable questions for Apple, such as, why can't I tether my iPhone to use it as a data modem when other AT&T mobile data subscribers using other handsets can tether? Why is Apple preventing me from making VoIP calls on my phone by shutting out Google Voice? Why must I receive Apple's approval to put an app on my iPhone?
These questions will lead to discussions of other issues that will also work against Apple in the near or mid-term future. iPhone software is written in Objective C is a language that is very difficult to use for other types of software programming. It's hard to port into other programs and it makes developing for iPhone apps expensive. As handsets truly become replacements for PCs, then forcing software houses to develop two sets of code for a PC and an iPhone starts to be very unwieldy.
Another problem is that Apple has staked out turf on the iPhone, telling companies that they should not submit products that replicate core functions that Apple already provides. Unfortunately, that's the case with the Opera Web browsers. Opera makes Web browsers for mobile phones. Opera browsers are faster than Safari on mobile phones. Yet Opera is not even attempting to build a browser for the iPhone after Apple made it clear it did not want competition for Safari.
Maybe Apple will build a better mobile browser. In the meantime, however, Apple's customers (like me) suffer from comparatively slow performance. And yes, I've seen Opera running on a 2.5 EDGE network whip Safari running on an iPhone 3G with a 3G network connection. To me, this situation reeks of arrogance.
I also get the sense that Apple, at this point, is worried about public relations problems. Why else would SVP of global marketing, Phil Schiller, respond with a personal email to a post by Daring Fireball blogger John Gruber which alleged that Apple had forced an iPhone application company to edit its dictionary app (Schiller denied the allegation). Apple *never* allows executives to reply personally to bloggers.
So I imagine there is, right now, an internal conflict going on inside Apple over the future of the iPhone. Schiller, who also advocated for the Google Voice app, is likely pushing behind the scenes for more openness. Some of the blame could likely be laid at the feet of Apple partner AT&T, who has had difficulty keeping up with demand for data services as a result of the voracious appetite for internet access by iPhone owners. But Apple clearly has plenty of responsibility for this state of affairs, with its actions regarding iPhone applications and its refusal to allow a serious rival browser on the phone.
The tech media are angry and they probably won't be sated until there is a major change in Apple's iPhone -- and by extension, corporate -- strategy. Until then, Apple will endure an increasing drumbeat of criticism that will undermine the company's sterling reputation. This criticism will possibly foster the creation of exactly the type of mobile application diversity on Google and Blackberry phones that could lure enough people away from the embrace of the iPhone to help those other handset software makers become true iPhone contenders.
Don't get me wrong. Apple will always have critics and they will always complain about the proprietary nature of Apple's products and ecosystem. But when your former fans become vocal critics and they happen to be media celebrities, you have a problem.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
8-11-2009 @ 8:10PM
coffeeman said...
Most of the restrictions that are talked about here are AT&T's restrictions not apple's.
Reply
8-11-2009 @ 11:04PM
JayBee75 said...
In this particular case, you're wrong. As and AT&T employee in the tech support department, I can say that the restriction mentioned in this article are all from Apple. Because AT&T has an exclusive contract with Apple at this time for the iPhone, the company is bound by the restrictions that Apple has placed on it. Apple decides everything from how much the iPhone costs, to what software can be run, to how many apps you can download at one time to how much AT&T charges for the data plan. Essentially AT&T's hands are tied. And believe me, I am not saying this because I am a loyal AT&T employee. Frankly I hate both companies, but that is the way it is. If AT&T wants to maintain exclusivity for the iPhone, it has to follow the rules set forth by Apple. Plain and Simple.
8-12-2009 @ 12:46PM
zahadum said...
the article is right on the mark - except for one important detail.
the ObjectiveC programming language for osx (mac & mobile) is not "more difficult to use for other types of programming"!
first: objectiveC (and the cocoa fraeworks) are universally praised by newecomers for it's elegance, coherence, and adaptibility - as compared to the nightmare brittleness & opaqueness of C++/activex (windows) and the cumbersome labyrinth of javabeans/java.
second: objectiveC is used as a general purpose language (in fact it is the default!) for all osx apps (mac & iPhone) - so the author's reference to "other types of programming" is unintelligible.
Third: objecticeC (and the Xcode toolchain that is used to build apps) is not a more expensive environment to program in! In fact it saves time & money precisely because of it's superior technical properties!
I suspect that this canard about objectivec is just second-hand FUD from someone who has no actual knowledge of how programming languages are designed or used in the real world.
(the implication about dual code bases, of course, is the insinuation that apple would be better off re-designing the best platform on the market -osx- so that it was just an (improved) extension of windows! --- this is probably one of the top 5 stupidiest ideas for apple that I have ever encountered!).
PS: as for your misleading comparison of browser performance, another poster has already pointed out that opera does not in fact ship a native renderer for mobile platforms: they are just relaying web pages that have been
rendered -and then compressed- on their servers. Nonetheless, it is true that the speed of mobile safari has been painfully slow until the 3GS; now things move along quite crisply (finally!).
8-12-2009 @ 2:56PM
gossip20120000 said...
hello,everyone!!
My friend recommended me a very interesting place______Wealthyloving.com_____.
The best dating club for seeking the rich singles, sexy beauties and even hot celebs..
what's the most important is that you dont have to be a millionaire.but you can meet one.
I think everyone need to meet some miracle after all the terrible stuff in the news and the economy .You should check it out!!!
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8-12-2009 @ 7:54AM
tom Williams said...
8-11-2009 @ 11:04PM
JayBee75 said...
In this particular case, you're wrong. As and AT&T employee in the tech support department, I can say that the restriction mentioned in this article are all from Apple. Because AT&T has an exclusive contract with Apple at this time for the iPhone, the company is bound by the restrictions that Apple has placed on it. Apple decides everything from how much the iPhone costs, to what software can be run, to how many apps you can download at one time to how much AT&T charges for the data plan. Essentially AT&T's hands are tied. And believe me, I am not saying this because I am a loyal AT&T employee. Frankly I hate both companies, but that is the way it is. If AT&T wants to maintain exclusivity for the iPhone, it has to follow the rules set forth by Apple. Plain and Simple. **************** ATT still has crappy coverage, and less network quality, with or without iPhone.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 11:33AM
xultar said...
Seriously, I used to work @ AT&T too and well, the price of the phone, yes Apple decides
Apple did NOT decide what the data plan price was, they may have had a hand in it saying not above a certain amount. I don't think apple would have cared if it was lower than $30.
Seriously, don't lie to these folks.
8-12-2009 @ 8:31AM
iphonerulez said...
Having detractors are just par for the course. No matter how much humans have, they tend to focus on the things they don't have. Apple App store has a sum total of 70,000 apps now and, of course, the bloggers and tech-head users are going to start badmouthing Apple about the one or two apps that are not allowed (at this point in time). Long forgotten is the fact that Apple practically rejuvenated the smartphone industry and that smartphones are the one area where some companies and developers are making money in a bad economy.
Every developer that started working with Apple knew that Apple had the right to reject any app they wanted to even though the guidelines are apparently vague. I'd be willing to bet that less than 98% of apps submitted are approved. But, hell no. Some of the vocal minority is saying that Apple is supposedly now ruining the whole smartphone industry and itself by rejecting one particular app. Truthfully, most of the iPhone owners I know don't even have a clue about Google Voice or tethering. They just know they like the iPhone and their kids like playing with them.
I really wish these people with grievances that are not developers would just buy another cellphone instead of trying to defame a company that has probably done very well for most it's customers (very high customer ratings) and the majority of developers. The iPhone apps platform is a little over a year old and is still in the early stages of development and yet these certain loudmouths don't take that into consideration. It really doesn't matter because it is not going to stop iPhone sales.
Google will likely find a way around the GV problem and within a month Google will no doubt have a working solution for the iPhone. And then what? Somebody will find some other grievance over another app that is rejected and again the downfall of Apple will be predicted. It's just useless, bitter talk. Both Palm and Windows Mobile platforms stagnated for years and both suffered significant market share loss and it shows. Platforms where developers could do anything they wanted and run any app they wanted, but did that really help? Hell no.
Being able to do everything on a platform does not guarantee that makes it the best. Just like raising a growing child, you don't just let them do anything they please. They need to be controlled and guided with a specific goal in mind. That's how I view Apple's restrictions. It's their store, they do what they feel is best for them and the iPhone community at large. They may make mistakes, but no company is perfect.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 9:57AM
JERiv said...
Sort of a funny comment.
Nobody really cares how your company does business when you're the little guy. Apple is the "big boy" now in smartphones. The limelight is shining on Apple. What it's illuminating may or may not be pretty, but they now have to deal with it.
You know, in your comment, you can probably change the words "Apple" for "Microsoft", and maybe "iPhone/smart phone" for "Windows", date it 10 years ago, and you may not even notice the difference.
Apple should be happy though, right? Isn't this where they wanted to be?
Time has gone by, the tables have turned, and now Apple's a "bad guy". It's not so much fun when you're the guy everyone's gunning for, though. Gotta love the irony, though! :-D
Like I said, funny post. ;-)
8-12-2009 @ 12:21PM
Fedora Fan said...
"Being able to do everything on a platform does not guarantee that makes it the best. Just like raising a growing child, you don't just let them do anything they please. They need to be controlled and guided with a specific goal in mind. That's how I view Apple's restrictions."
I would think that after I buy a phone it wouldn't be Apple's any more. If it's mine after I buy it, why should I be forced to take Apple's "specific goal" into account? I view Apple's restrictions as a ploy for more money (and it's working). Apple is not a nurturing parent, it is a money-grubbing corporation just like Microsoft.
8-12-2009 @ 8:58AM
Luigi said...
lol, comparing Opera Mini to a WebKit based browser like Safari only gives a favorable advantage to Opera in page loading performance because it "cheats" and routes the requests through their own servers so that they can compress the content before sending it to the phone. Mobile Safari has the fasted JavaScript performance of any mobile browser, period (something that is actually important), and has a great user experience. The only real knock against Safari performance wise is that it can be crash prone.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 12:50PM
Victor Agreda Jr said...
Indeed. Seeing another browser that uses a completely different methodology and doesn't provide the same experience (despite speed increases) isn't a fair comparison.
8-12-2009 @ 9:29AM
Robert said...
I have a blackberry curve 8330 with opera web and it is super fast, I try to use my friends I-phone and his conection is really slow.I love by BB.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 9:59AM
Tina said...
Here it is, plain and simple...if the iPhone keeps impressing me with all the things that it can do, I will be kissing it good night along with my children !!!
I am sure there are other people out there just like me, so "uber" blogger Michael Arrington and Jason Calacanis, can suck it.
I make up my own mind what I like and don't like about something!!
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 11:05AM
jeye said...
What gets me with the whole Iphone is that it will cost you a forced upon $30 bucks a month just to have internet access on top of your regular monthly plan. I recently picked up a Samsung Eternity (very much like an Iphone) and on my Family talk plan w/ AT&T only cost me $10 a month for unlimited internet. Thats a difference of $240 on your yearly bill. Think about. Why give steve Jobs and AT&T your hard earned bucks for something that you probably already have access to somewhere else. You are all being had. Get over your tech obsessions and be a little more aware of your finances and you'll forgo all this tech nonsense
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 11:19AM
David Sharp said...
For the love of God! Google voice is *NOT*, I repeat, is *NOT* a VOIP application!
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 11:29AM
xultar said...
Apple is dancing with the devil, errr AT&T and well if you lie down with a dog who has mange and fleas guess what happens.
Apple let AT&T screw their customers. I can't wait till the FCC puts a boot in this struggle. It's been way to long.
Oh, did I mention that the App store is a mess because of AT&T being monopolistic about what apps are allowed. AT&T is banning apps if they think it will cut into their business. I that is the case then there needs to be some sort of independent way of purchasing apps.
The whole thing just stinks. STINKS. Makes me angry that I ever switched from Windows Mobile because the apps were sold from stores independent of the phone manufacturer and carrier. Yes, a FREE MARKET with COMPETITION!!!
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 11:43AM
markgo said...
Re: Objective-C as a barrier to development
The entire paragraph describing Objective-C as "difficult" and "hard to port" is misleading if not flat-out wrong.
Objective-C is simply C with some object oriented extensions bolted on. It has few barriers to entry for any serious software developer. It's Microsoft who has gone the non-standards way, with C# and .NET frameworks that are difficult, if not impossible to reproduce outside the MS ecosystem. Mono (C#/.NET on non-MS platforms) is interesting, but suffers from lack of commercial support, and inability to track the latest developments from Microsoft.
That's not to say that iPhone apps are easy to port, but it has nothing to do with the language. Instead, it's the Cocoa-based UI frameworks, which have far more functionality builtin than comparable frameworks on other mobile platforms. But it's these frameworks which give the user a consistent UI experience across iPhone apps, so complaining about it is essentially complaining that it's difficult to reproduce the iPhone user experience on other platforms. Well, duh.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 12:47PM
jeff said...
THE I-PHONE AND OTHER APPLE PRODUCT ARE OVERRATED!! The I-phone has some nice yuppie apps but it will not use stereo wireless head phones or let us connect to your computer to use as a satellite modem!! For the price you pay for this phone it should do both of these things!! You can buy a newer blackberry for the same price and it will do both of these and more! the I-pod is not half as good as the creative brand players but the media calls everything an ipod instead of an MP3 player and people think they are the best when they really are just average. EVERYTHING APPLE IS OVERPRICED you can buy 2 PCs for the price of ONE MAC and all the APPLE software costs more! IDIOTS PAY MORE TO BE A TRENDY YUPPIE!! Bet they all believed in OBAMA too!
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 1:51PM
ron molino said...
Pride precedes a fall.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 2:04PM
cyn said...
Seriously, how much did Goggle pay him?
If you have an iphone, you know it is not overated.
All those restrictions are just not that important compared to what the other phones CANNOT do.
Seriously, how much did giggle pay him for this article/ad?
Reply