This was the year of the iPad. For there to be so much success in such a short time indicates that critical mass has been reached. Even though the tablet form factor has been around since the early 90′s, it was not until Apple delivered the iPad that the market really kicked off.
The rate of change seems to be accelerating. With the iPad 2 coming soon, it is clear that Apple will pursue this path for deeper market adoption.
This is the first post that I am writing from an iPad. This would be difficult to do without the bluetooth keyboard. This is acceptable for a user experience. There are some quirks here and there but it is still good.
Steve and Bill have only been seen together around 5 times.
1983 Apple Mac discussion with Dating Game spoof
1991 Fortune magazine interview
1997 MacWorld
2005 D3
2007 D5
The referenced video documents what happened during the first four “meetings”. Actually, they were only together on stage for 1983 and 2007. The 1997 MacWorld event used a video link. The Fortune interview appears to have happened at Steve’s house. At D3, they were on stage separately.
The early 1983 video is probably the most interesting since it reveals a co-dependence between Microsoft and Apple at the time. Bill looked so young then.
I missed this the first time around. I would have listed this first since the video was intended as the prologue.
The limited number of meetings indicate competition but probably also different focus points. The 1997 speech by Steve shows the early acceptance of not trying to stir up Microsoft. At that point things would have been a bit sensitive given the darker years of Apple. There is a great writeup about Steve’s return to Apple on Wikipedia. I did not know that Apple had bought NeXT or that it was the basis for OS X. I also did not know that he is only a $1 a year salary. Not to worry, he does have lots of stock options.
The more I learn about Bill Gates and Steve Jobs the more interesting the stories become. These are certainly not boring people that only know technology. Both have a great deal of savvy that has helped them to become the business leaders they are now.
This is mostly just filler. Watch the video! It is almost guaranteed that you will get a kick out of the “Dating Game” sequence where Steve is the one looking for a date. Bill is one of the candidates.
This kind of material is typically so rare and that is probably why I bothered to post about it in the first place.
This particular video is very inspirational. It is rare that such an event happens and even more rare when all the hype is actually true. Introduction of the Mac was a point of history that continues to be strong. It became the first viable and popular graphical user interface computer. It did not take long for this model to take hold, and as a result, products such as Windows came into being.
I have never seen this launch video before today. It really shows how things can go unnoticed.
Personally I did not use a Mac much. My earliest use would have been around 1986 at a computer rental shop. I had a need to type up a resume for interning at IBM. It was a pleasant experience to use the Mac and it was very well suited for the task of composing documents. The Apple laser printer excelled as well. For me, it was a taste of what was to come.
However, I must admit that the early experience was much simpler and cleaner than any experience I had with word processors later on Windows. It seems that Apple has always embraced the KISS principle whereas Microsoft tends to encourage the inclusion of every option. At the risk of sounding biased, it still seems true today.
Early in Citrix history we considered writing a Mac client for WinFrame. I started buying books about the Mac with the intent of investigating what was needed. The task was just too big for someone like me because of the lack of Mac experience. Luckily Citrix bought Insignia which already had a Mac client for ICA.
At this point in time, the Macintosh model is very mature. Things are always changing but the basic framework is the same as 1984. When I say framework, I mean the elements are very similar. Things have been vastly improved. The fundamentals are still there.
My earliest experience with this idea was in 1983. When I was shopping for a computer, I came across an Apple Lisa in Tucson at an Apple dealer. The sales guy showed me all the bells and whistles and I was truly impressed. It seemed like looking into the mirror and seeing a machine from the future. He told me the price was something like $10,000 which was shocking. However, I could see how this kind of technology was going to change the landscape quickly. In the video, Steve Jobs makes mention of the Lisa and how the Mac is a slimed down version.
This is what it took to make it succeed. Reflecting this to my recent post about Windows XP and Windows Vista, it becomes more obvious that Microsoft needs to do something similar.
I still do not own a Mac. However, I have had to work on Macs more recently. Just within the last few months I needed to resolve an issue with XenDesktop and SpeedScreen Browser Acceleration. This exposure to the most recent version of the Mac shows that Apple is still ahead.
The key point to learn is that being technically superior does not equate to being the most popular. Other factors have a major role. In Apple’s history, this equates to many different “mistakes” that lead to them not getting the upper hand. There are several obvious ones but usually it is the subtle ones that can really make a difference.
Based on my own experience with OS/2 during 1989-1992, playing the tech superior path just does not mean much to customers. Microsoft understands that people are not always aware of these things and often will settle for whatever is easiest to get and what is being perceived as being the cheapest. As a key example, Microsoft sells its software to a large array of computer manufacturers. Apple (as far as I know) only has its OS X on its own hardware. In the early battle of Windows versus Mac, the Mac could never compete price wise with the IBM clones.
So does Apple ever really think it will take the market away from Windows? Realistically, probably no. However, it does still want to convert consumers away from the Windows model. There is evidence that Apple has moved on to other battles where it can define the terms of engagement. It is heavily embracing the appliance (post-PC) space and providing specific models that would be very challenging for Microsoft to duplicate. Clearly this kind of space loves “Keep it Simple Stupid”. Once a space is dominated like this, it becomes incredibly hard to knock Apple off the hill. Everybody knows about iTunes/iPod. Very few are familiar with Zune. If all your friends have iPods, most likely you will pick the same.
This gets into a whole discussion about needing to do something disruptive in order to displace an existing company. You have to be willing to tackle things that the other company sees as being not worth doing. You have to be willing to have a lower price based on much lower costs. You need to attract loyal customers over time with introduction of new products and services which consistently undercut the competition.
You would need a serious war chest to attack Windows. It probably does not even make sense to disrupt it. You have to think unconventionally to see what alternatives exist. The obvious contender is Linux based on industry analysis but I would disagree. Linux, like Windows, is an operating system. Disruption is going to happen from somewhere else. Linux has a lower price but it is not a consistent front from a consistent single company. However, Linux could be used in a new form (stripped down and new device type) that could build a disruptive solution. The key is not to focus on a compatible solution but rather a new solution from pieces that are common and small. The best bet for a challenger is something throws the operating system model into history. It is bound to happen sooner or later. More than likely it will come from new research based on duplicating intelligence in nature. The concept is to have small pieces that aren’t that smart individually but collectively form an intelligent whole. This idea comes from emergence theory. This would allow for components and devices to work together based on basic intelligence but also forming a more “living” intelligent system.
I am purposely being vague since I don’t know how this is going to play out. The future does not need fancy theories to do what it does. However, I would predict that the next major wave in computing technology will be much more natural than what any of us are currently use to.
I would recommend reading books from Raymond Kurzweil. A few years ago I read his book entitled “The Age of Spiritual Machines“. Kurzweil provides a framework of believable ideas that show that artificial intelligence is coming and what the implications are. It is both exciting and a bit scary at the same time. His writing convinced me that things are not that far off really and all it will take is some key discoveries to revolutionalize the industry. Perhaps one of the most baffling models uses quantum theory to create a quantum computer. It is nothing like what we know today. Solutions which could take eternity are potentially solved immediately. Currently this many cryptologists wondering how secure our current models will be. Regardless of what any of us do, this is coming.
To wrap up this wandering post, I’ll close by saying that it all starts with a dream. Steve Jobs obviously started with a very big dream which he is still working on today. These dreams end up possessing us and bringing new passion to this world. This video is, in part, evidence that dreams can become real and these dreams can be shared. These thought forms are real and well understood, and always lead to more dreams. It remains true that we should be passionate about what we do. This passion comes from believing that this is the way things are supposed to be.
For the last few days I have been trying to put together a post revolving around a magazine I’ve kept since 1991. The article is called “The Future of the PC” in Fortune Magazine from August 26, 1991. The article tries to sum up the first ten years of the PC (born 1981) and tries to capture what will happen next. The cover shows very young looking Bill Gates and Steve Jobs sitting next to each other on a circular stairway.
At the time, Steve was at NextStep. There was a bit of angst about what was going on with IBM. In general it was a transition time from pre-Internet to Internet era.
Unexpectedly, I discovered a recent video interview of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs at the D5 conference sponsored by the Wall Street Journal. It was filmed in 2007 and most likely many of you have already seen it. If you haven’t, and are interested in the workings of the industry, it is a must watch.
Between the magazine article and the video interview, a pattern begins to emerge. Bill and Steve have a complex relationship based on what is going on but essentially they are friendly rivals. In the video, it seems evident that there is kind of mutual respect. It is obvious to say that they are very different people with different philosophies as well.
Over the years, Bill and Steve have met on stage very few times. In fact, I have only found three instances of public meetings since 1991. The D5 conference last year was the most public and also the most broadcasted on the Internet. From the D5 video you can really get the gist of their relationship.
Intelligence is a key factor. Bill and Steve are always trying to up the ante about what they are working on or what they know to be true. It is important for them to be clear about what their vision is and how it will come true. Thought is always at the forefront.
The past is a common thread. Bill and Steve have worked together in the past on the Macintosh project. In fact, both have fairly good memories from this time. Perhaps this was true due to Microsoft not being in the GUI space around 1984. It is also important for Bill to mention that they have been and continue to be allies. It seems that they agree on this point but there does seem to be tension still. Obviously Apple wants more of the pie. Apple also believes that it was first and that it deserves more credit for the pioneering work done.
If you watch the video, keep in mind that Microsoft and Apple are competitors. Some key messages come across as both try to push their views. Microsoft is trying to be all things to all people. This makes sense from an operating system point of view and even suites like Office. Microsoft thinks that more and more needs to crammed into one device. The philosophy is that more is always better and that more function is key to wider acceptance. Apple, on the other hand, believes in specialization. Apple thinks that the device and software should do one thing really well. This is reflected in new devices like the iPod and iPhone. It could be argued that the iPhone is actually many things in one but the point still remains that the pieces fit well together for what people want instead of the extra baggage they don’t want.
This key difference shows the expression of thought of Bill and Steve. Their beliefs have steered the companies they control. Because of this, it would be hard for either company to think the opposite of what they do now.
Based on the trends in the market, the pattern is towards specialization. Instead of being a general purpose computer, the model will shift to specific implementations that solve specific needs. This is possible due to more focus on customizing software components to work together much like integrated circuits first changed how electronic components were built. In a way, we are seeing a push back from being so general to being more specific again. The real power comes from having common components (hardware and software) to do it. This has been particularly strong with hardware appliances in the networking business but the idea is spreading quickly to consumer markets.
If you don’t need to know how to use a computer to do tasks that are useful, then why not do it? Other benefits come from not being restricted to having a massive hardware requirement for a massive inclusive operating system.
Getting back to the topic of Steve and Bill, towards the end of the video they are asked what aspect they envy of each other. Bill responded that he admired Steve’s ability to build the right teams to build the right products. He essentially also wished he had Steve’s taste in things. Steve, on the other hand, wished that he had Bill’s ability to partner with many different companies to build successful products. Obviously both saw these things as weaknesses in themselves relative to the other.
There was no sign of hostility to each other like might have been seen when they were much younger. They have aged well and certainly are more wise and mellow than before. There were many quick humorous statements meant to target the other but they both just brushed these remarks off and moved on. The are old enough not to just react.
Personally I really enjoyed watching the D5 video because it is a true representation of the history of the industry. These two people have controlled the destiny of two of the most important companies in the computer industry. These are real men with plenty of passion but who also make mistakes from time to time. It is a treat to see this kind of view be so public.
In reference to my previous post about the hypothetical entry of Apple into the enterprise market, I must confess that I do not see Steve Jobs going that direction. The obvious exception is any new devices that he can create that are outside the realm of what is now considered a PC. He calls it a post-PC environment and I believe his secret is that he thinks that the era of PCs is coming to a close. Otherwise it would not make sense that he is investing so heavily in specialized devices built on what was learned from the PC era. I hope this catches the attention of a few people.
He might very well be right (assuming that he thinks this is true in the first place). Every era must come to an end. Something better than the typical PC is bound to show up eventually. Apple has a good shot on taking that on.
The highest chance of success comes from mixing the “Cloud computing” model with the specialized device model. Steve talks about this in relation to Google. It is clear that Steve knows the value of this model and the potential market as well. He gives having maps on the iPhone as an example but it really expands much bigger than that. It is also evident that Bill is more in react mode than innovate mode when it comes to this kind of thinking. In fact, it seemed that Bill is largely staying away from the concept of “Cloud computing” and trying to consolidate the power into the PC as it has been since 1975. Perhaps this is because Bill sees the cloud as a threat and will only invest heavily in things that are known to work well like search.
I would end this post by concluding that Steve and Bill are friendly to each other and have even enjoyed time together but that they are still foes when it comes to the companies that they represent. If you watch the video, you will know what I mean.
