Posts Tagged: iphone design

apple news / strategy — 8 Comments
19
Jul 10

Antennagate: the finale?

I wouldn’t exactly put Apple’s Friday press conference on par with cold fusion, but it was something I never really thought I’d see in my lifetime. Who would have imagined Apple could ever get itself into the position where it had to call a press conference on two days’ notice?

So now we’ve had some time to absorb the event. Here are some Monday-morning reactions — hopefully not duplicating what’s been said already:

The feisty factor. At the time, I was a bit surprised at Steve’s demeanor. But I liked it. I’m sure many Apple detractors wished to see Apple’s tail between its legs, and that didn’t happen. Apple’s goal was to explain the situation, not apologize for it, and then set things right. Though Apple was by definition on the defensive, Steve was just being honest that this thing has been “blown out of proportion.” I have to agree — though it’s not like Apple is without blame.

The quick fix. Bumpers make everything okay. Kinda. As stated before, I’ve never had a problem without the bumper, and neither have the vast majority. But the bumper does solve the issue for those who have an issue. The only downside is the perception that it’s necessary for normal functionality. This is what’s out there in the world, and that’s a problem.

The permanent fix. I was surprised that there was none. As the press conference played out, I thought it was all going logically: first the background, then the temporary fix, then the permanent fix. That final step never came. This guarantees that the issue is not fully defused. But wait…

A new theory. There are only two possible reasons why Apple didn’t announce a permanent fix. One is that a fix is not feasible, given the current iPhone 4 design. The other is that Apple simply hasn’t had the time to engineer and test the best possible solution. I buy the latter. This could well be why free bumpers will only be given out until September 30th. By that time, the new iPhones may be modified with something as simple as an antenna coating. If it goes that way, the fix can be announced as an improvement along the way, rather than an emergency response to a crisis situation.

Feel the love. Steve’s badly-kept secret to effective communications is his ability to stick to a theme. He gets the theme out early and repeats it often. The theme for this event was “we love our customers.” By my count, he used the L-word 12 times. It might have seemed too sugary to some, but love being such an emotional word, it allowed Apple to put hard facts in a softer framework.

The new web page. Apple’s new Antenna page is an interesting development too. Gives everyone a chance to see that Apple’s competitors face the same issue. In this case, Apple seems to be of the belief that the best offense is a good defense. Maybe so.

The competitors. Marketing can be a chess game. Steve’s made his move, now his competitors get to make theirs. “Them’s fighting words” for these guys, and they’ve already had some nasty things to say about Apple drawing them into its “self-made debacle.” Careful with this one, boys. You may protesteth too much. More and more stories are beginning to appear confirming that this really is an industry-wide problem, and other phones do suffer from a similar death grip.

The missing fix. Steve pretty much deflected any mention of the iPhone proximity sensor problem (causing some calls to be ended when cheek touches screen) with a quick “we’re working on it.” Honestly, this seems like a more serious problem in everyday use than the antenna. I’m surprised more critics haven’t jumped on this one, and that Apple hasn’t fixed it more quickly.

Idiot alert. Every so often, someone says something so colossally stupid, it merits a mention here. Jeff Bertolucci of PC World wins the honor for his post-press conference article. In a nutshell, he says iPhone 4 is so tainted now, Apple must kill it immediately and remove every trace of it from their stores. I won’t dignify stupidity with a link (seek it out if you must), but it’s scary that articles like this exist. If natural selection hasn’t filtered out people like this by now, I fear we’re all doomed.

Bookmark and Share
apple news / strategy / technology — 11 Comments
15
Jul 10

The great mystery of Apple’s stumble

There are a few reasons I respect Apple as I do.

Corny as it sounds, the biggest one is that they believe in “doing the right thing.” In my experience, other companies believe they share this value, but frequently confuse the right thing with “the most cost-efficient thing” or “the least controversial thing.” Apple focuses on the customer experience and makes decisions accordingly — even when the cost is high.

That’s the Apple I know. It’s also the Apple that, for reasons unknown, has taken the last few weeks off.

The good news is, there is now a press conference set for Friday morning. We can safely assume Steve will explain what’s happened and tell us how Apple is going to set things straight. It’s important to note that this is being billed as a press conference, which is something I’ve never seen Apple do before. That means they’ll be taking questions from the assembled press, and those questions are sure to be pointed. This is brave, but also necessary. By their own action and inaction, Apple’s “got some splainin’ to do.”

I’m confident that sanity will be restored. The bigger question is, how did sanity slip away in the first place?

Personally, I cannot imagine that Apple — or any company — could possibly design antennae in such a radical way without being aware of what happens when a human hand bridges the gap.

My theory is that Apple did what they’ve always done so well in the past. They looked at the total product design and made the tradeoffs necessary to create the best possible iPhone. What they gained by this design — a 24% thinner phone that gives most users better reception — seemed like a good tradeoff.

In hindsight, of course, that seems terribly naive. Apple attracts way too much scrutiny for such things to go unnoticed. They created a lose-lose situation for themselves. It appeared that they either didn’t have a clue about antenna engineering or they tried to slip one past us. This wasn’t just an opening for the anti-Apple crowd — it was a disappointment for Apple customers used to the pursuit of perfection.

Anyone looking for evidence that Apple knew about the flaw from the start would point to Exhibit A: the bumper. A few designer cases aside, Apple hasn’t dabbled too much in cases before, yet bumpers were a part of iPhone 4 from the start. This could be perfectly innocent — it just looks suspicious given what’s happened.

So why didn’t Apple handle this better? Why would their response be an open letter (not written by Steve) that reeked of a company avoiding responsibility? For those experiencing dropped calls, the display of bars is hardly the issue. A software fix alone seemed laughably inadequate, and terribly un-Apple.

Why didn’t Apple do what they’ve done before? Steve personally responded to the original iPhone pricing fiasco by offering $100 gift cards to those who overpaid in the first three months. Why didn’t they offer iPhone 4 buyers something as substantial?

Personally, I believe lack of “substantial” has been the hold-up. That iPhone 4 open letter was their attempt to calm the torch-carrying masses at a time when they literally had nothing substantial to offer. The engineers hadn’t yet solved the design issue for future iPhones. Bumpers were back-ordered, so Apple couldn’t even reasonably suggest them as a fix. They may well have gotten themselves into a situation where there wasn’t a viable “right thing to do.”

But Steve has one power that few CEOs have. He can make things happen, even if they don’t seem possible. So I believe all the pieces are now in place for Apple to respond as we wished they would have responded earlier. I expect them to get back into to the right-thing business on Friday. It will be expensive, probably involving $50 gift cards or free bumpers to those who’ve already bought — and a no-questions return policy for those about to buy. Obviously it will also involve a plan to address the design flaw in manufacturing.

The great shame of this is that iPhone 4 is an amazing bit of technology. I have experienced no reception issues with mine. It’s one of those devices that makes me happier every day. Despite the feeding frenzy in the mainstream press and blogosphere, there is no iPhone 4 user revolt. People aren’t flooding the Apple Stores to get their money back. What we have is a huge number of happy customers being bombarded by stories telling them they shouldn’t be so happy. I’m not sure there’s any parallel in consumer product history.

I don’t mean to downplay this. The iPhone antenna issue is a problem that needed fixing yesterday. But there is an art to turning negatives into positives, and Apple is pretty good at it. I hope Apple sees this as another opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to customer satisfaction — and another opportunity to do the right thing.

Bookmark and Share
advertising / creative / strategy — 5 Comments
9
Dec 09

AT&T takes Verizon head-on

[Sorry, the commercial referenced here has disappeared from YouTube]

Droid vs. iPhone. Verizon vs. AT&T. To the spectators’ delight, we have a war on two fronts. And now we have AT&T lobbing a new grenade over the fence.

But first, a recap:

Apple planted the seed for this fight when they chose AT&T as iPhone’s exclusive carrier in the US. That put the nation’s most loved phone on the nation’s least loved network. It also gave Verizon an opening, assuming they might one day find another hot phone to hawk — which they did in Droid.

Then the fun started. Verizon slapped AT&T with its “there’s a map for that” stuff. They got silly with misfit toys. AT&T threw half a punch back with some lame Luke Wilson spots. Apple tried to speak rationally about the differences between networks while Droid burst in chainsawing bananas.

After whining to the courts and getting nowhere (Judge Droid?), AT&T is back at it with this new Luke Wilson spot. Creatively, it’s fairly harmless. But it’s all part of the chess game, and that’s what makes it fun to watch. (War, boxing, chess — have I exceeded the metaphor limit yet?)

To their credit, AT&T is presenting a simple argument: we’ve got a faster network. (It’s actually more clear than Apple’s attempted Verizon-bashing.) Verizon has their simple argument: we’ve got a bigger network. That would be a tough choice for most people.

So who wins the big fight? Nobody. And who wins the customer? AT&T. Because when the heavyweight match ends in a draw, all you can do is go with the best phone. And you know what that is.

Bookmark and Share
advertising / strategy — 13 Comments
10
Aug 09

Apple reveals its deep, dark secret

Apple's Jonathan Ive and one of his many children

Apple's Jonathan Ive and one of his many children

Apple’s chief designer Jonathan Ive recently made a public appearance in London with the rector of the Royal College of Art. Jony, as most know, is responsible for Apple’s amazing design aesthetic, from iMac to iPod to iPhone. It was with great interest that I read the coverage of Jony’s chat, because he touches on the reasons why Apple is Apple, and by inference, why no other company is Apple. Asked what any executive could do to copy Apple’s success, Ives’ response was: “Don’t.” He went on to explain that every company needs its own raison d’etre, and that this should drive the actions of every employee from the C-suite down. That’s when he also delivered what I think is his most brilliant insight: “Apple’s goal isn’t to make money. Our goal is to design and develop and bring to market good products. We trust that as a consequence of that, we’ll make some money. But we’re really clear what our goals are.”

Damn, I love that. I have a feeling that many out there don’t believe for a second that Apple’s goal isn’t to make money. Having worked intimately with those guys for many years, I can tell you that they absolutely do want to make money, but as Jony says, this is not their goal. Make no mistake: this is a giant, flashing-neon, ultra-critical difference between Apple and most other technology companies. Apple fundamentally believes that you don’t aim for money, you aim for excellence — and money is the result. I’m sure this is just way too idealistic for some, because the real world can’t possibly work this way. Thankfully, Apple is proof that it does. Or at least that it can.

Now let’s get back to Jony’s comment that other companies shouldn’t copy Apple. I’ll agree that every company needs its own vision, but a lot of what Apple does is a blueprint for success for any company. And there’s nothing wrong with copying that. In fact, Apple has practically published a how-to manual for over-achievement: never stop innovating, worship good design, never compromise on quality, make long-term investments in the brand and keep things simple — not just the products, but the marketing as well. Many companies set out with the same values, but are easily sidetracked by money issues, timing issues, marketing issues and idiot issues. At Apple, they will sacrifice investments already made, blow up schedules, kill their #1 products, do whatever it takes to make a better product. They understand that in the end, they will only succeed if they “do the right thing.”

In operating this way, Apple makes it clear what’s wrong with most technology companies. They want Apple’s success, but are unwilling to commit their every resource to it. They play lip service to caring about design by building a beautiful shell around a product that just sucks inside. They demand of their ad agencies a campaign that creates “a buzz like iPhone,” without understanding that Apple’s “overnight success” came only after years of being true to their core belief. As much as I love Apple, I really hope that other companies will wake up to this. I’ll buy cool stuff from anyone. What I don’t get is why, when Apple’s means of success is so visible, other technology companies don’t seem to pick it up.

Bookmark and Share