Hacker News Reader

Comment by bad_user | Hacker News Reader

Oh yes it will.

Apple nearly went bankrupted, mostly because even if the hardware was good, their Mac OS was a piece of shit that started paling in comparison to Windows NT, OS/2 or even newcomers like BeOS, while Win 95 gave you approximately the same value but with increased compatibility with older / current apps.

They can't keep their premium market if you can get the same quality for a lower price and a lot more freedom to tinker. Google coupled with HTC/Motorola can deliver that quality.

Their only option is to keep innovating and keep infusing mass-media with Stevey-juice ... but that's not sustainable.

I don't get why they haven't learned anything from their past mistakes. Lock-down, patent threats (it was copyright in the old days) ... do they really think these will work?

View on HN

"same quality" would be the key word there. Google has yet to show that they can deliver anywhere near the quality of the iPhone OS as far as user experience is concerned.

Yeah, but Google is not know for poor quality of its software. And as far as hardware quality goes ... there are mobile manufacturers that can deliver it (HTC, Motorola, Samsung, Nokia).

Surely Apple has control of the full stack, but it's not like history isn't repeating itself :-)

Google isn't known for any quality of it's software. Google is known for their search engine. Yes, people on this site might tout the glories of Chrome, but to the average user, all they see is a search engine and email when they are on the web, and a slew of mobile devices that still aren't as clean and polished as the iPhone.

Anybody can polish a device that has intentionally-limited functionality.

Very true. And yet we still have so many feature rich yet experience poor devices, programs, and services out there. It's almost as if most people don't get the idea of quality over quantity...

Yes, and if there's a better recipe for success in consumer electronics, I can't begin to imagine what it might be.

One reason why Android is beginning to scare Apple is because the cell-phone carriers that aren't AT&T are marketing their Android-based phones against the iPhone with the good-old feature checklist. The iPhone gets one check "can receive phone calls", while the Android phone gets checks for things like "can play Pandora streams while you browse the web" or whatever.

People paying money for things like features.

Conventional wisdom has it that Android isn't so much scaring Apple as pissing off Jobs personally.

If Android is starting to scare Apple is because Google is doing ad revenue shares with carriers and device makers.

As for your example, first, it's requires too much qualification to really work on a feature matrix. Second, you really think that Apple can't/won't support app backgrounding or a more open app store if their current offering really starts hurting them?

Your assertion is debatable, but even accepting it: can just anyone figure out what functionality to leave out, and what functionality to polish?

What on earth are you talking about?

Apple nearly went bankrupt until Steve Jobs came on board again.

Yes Steve Jobs will eventually quit and yes that might be a challenge that might even lead to their demise.

But Steve Jobs will be leaving something very valuable behind.

A rock solid digital ecosystem that is only starting to show it's strength.

This is getting ridiculous.

Apple was quite successful in the late eighties / early nineties, when Jobs wasn't even on board. Notable product from that time is the Macintosh portable (a friend got a hold of one, and it's pretty sweet :)). Later, their strategy on licensing Mac OS to third parties was actually profitable, but it wasn't enough (too little, too late).

I know you love Steve, he was a part of the rebirth. But let's focus on facts, shall we? ... I see far fewer appraisals for the engineers behind their miracle ;)

Really, you consider the Portable a successful product? While it's a cute bit of nostalgia, the PowerBook 100 is a far better example of innovation in that time period.

Who goes bankrupt with 9 bil in the bank?

It is not 9, but 7,5. And it is not in the bank, it is cash & equivalent (if they have it in the bank, the shareholders should be unhappy - the company does not know what to do with the money).

They have also 26b in retained earnings. Do their shareholders get enough return on capital gain? (to answer myself: if you bought it 1 year ago, then yes; 2 years ago - no).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com