PDA

View Full Version : Steve Wozniak on Apple, Leopard and Jailbreaking the iPhone




MacRumors
Oct 31, 2007, 02:01 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple, was interviewed (http://laptopmag.com/Features/The-Way-it-Woz-Steve-Wozniak-on-All-Things-Apple.htm?page=0) by LaptopMag.com about various topics surrounding Apple.

Wozniak provides his insight into Leopard, Mac Marketshare, as well as some disappointment at the direction computers have gone:
Early on with the first Apples, we had these dreams that the computer would let you know what you wanted to do. .... The real dreams of how it will work for someone who knows nothing about the computer have been lost and don't get addressed anymore.

Also of interest, Wozniak is specifically asked about what his opinions are on the iPhone. Woz is clear that he feels that the iPhone should be "more like a computer" and Apple should allow anyone to develop applications for it. Regarding jailbreaking the iPhone for 3rd party applications:
[Apple has] a right to lock [the iPhone]. But I am really for the unlockers, the rebels trying to make it free. I'd really like it to be open to new applications. I'd like to install some nice games. Why in the world can I not install a ringtone that I've made? How would that hurt AT&T's network? Here is Steve Jobs sending letters to the record companies saying [they] should provide music that's unprotected, but here he is taking the opposite approach with the iPhone. I don't know to what extent AT&T is involved in the thinking and direction.

While Apple has announced they are working on a Software Development Kit to be released in February 2008, the details of the restrictions have not yet been announced.

Steve Wozniak co-founded Apple in 1976 along with Steve Jobs.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/31/steve-wozniak-on-apple-leopard-and-jailbreaking-the-iphone/)



synth3tik
Oct 31, 2007, 02:02 AM
I read the interview yesterday. I always really enjoy reading interviews with Woz.:)

JSpence
Oct 31, 2007, 02:03 AM
:) Woz

samh004
Oct 31, 2007, 02:06 AM
How much influence will he have though, speaking about it in his role.

exigentsky
Oct 31, 2007, 02:10 AM
It's always nice to see a legend like Woz candidly speak about these issues. I mostly agree with him, especially on the iPhone. It's ridiculous that it is so locked down in almost every way. He is spot on that you should be able to install new programs and your own ringtones. It's also disgusting that Apple is charging an extra 99c just for using A SONG YOU ALREADY OWN to make a 30 sec ringtone. It's as if I purchase pepper from the store and I have to buy a separate one for every food. I have to buy one for soup, one for steak, etc. Apple shouldn't be allowed to do this; we shouldn't tolerate it.

Shotgun Pete
Oct 31, 2007, 02:11 AM
Its not that he has a lot of pull, so I imagine little or no influence. I think it isjust nice to hear from him being the creative mind that he is.

erockerboy
Oct 31, 2007, 02:13 AM
Woz is the MAN!!!!!!

The iPhone wants to be free. Let it fly, Steve Jobs.

pieman02
Oct 31, 2007, 02:13 AM
Thats what Im talking about Woz! :D

LastZion
Oct 31, 2007, 02:15 AM
WOZ is a legend... always enjoy reading Woz articles, cheers for that.

aznguy2772
Oct 31, 2007, 02:17 AM
Oh, if only Woz could replace Mr. Jobs. That would be the day.

daddywags214
Oct 31, 2007, 02:19 AM
Woz makes valid point. His opinions are often valid, as he has the benefit of being an insider, as well as being removed from the corporate voice of Apple, thus providing wonderful insight into Apple's products and policies.

redAPPLE
Oct 31, 2007, 02:26 AM
It's always nice to see a legend like Woz candidly speak about these issues. I mostly agree with him, especially on the iPhone. It's ridiculous that it is so locked down in almost every way. He is spot on that you should be able to install new programs and your own ringtones. It's also disgusting that Apple is charging an extra 99c just for using A SONG YOU ALREADY OWN to make a 30 sec ringtone. It's as if I purchase pepper from the store and I have to buy a separate one for every food. I have to buy one for soup, one for steak, etc. Apple shouldn't be allowed to do this; we shouldn't tolerate it.

this may have been addressed one time or another but, re: iPhone, apple is partnering with att. don't you think it is att's idea of locking the phone? don't you think it is the riaa's idea of selling the songs again to create ringtones? maybe apple signed an nda to not discuss this. not defending apple, but this is one possibility.

Dublo7
Oct 31, 2007, 02:26 AM
I love Woz.

Marble
Oct 31, 2007, 02:29 AM
He seems perhaps more lucid to me in this interview than in some I've read. His point of view is always refreshing, however.

koobcamuk
Oct 31, 2007, 02:32 AM
Apple shouldn't be allowed to do this; we shouldn't tolerate it.

I didn't tolerate it. Jailbroken and unlocked. Oh well.

reckless_0001
Oct 31, 2007, 02:41 AM
Woz is the bomb! He's awesome! :D

Any one who says bad stuff about him, obviously doesn't know what they are taking about.

ErikGrim
Oct 31, 2007, 02:58 AM
This was actually a pretty good interview. Kudos Laptop mag for not going for the dry played out questions he always seems to answer.

john789
Oct 31, 2007, 02:59 AM
I really think he is a cool guy. I like the way he thinks about computers. MAybe she should take more lead and take Apple a whole new level.....of course i dont think jobs will be too happy about it. :D

Rodimus Prime
Oct 31, 2007, 03:05 AM
Oh, if only Woz could replace Mr. Jobs. That would be the day.

yeah I agree. I think it is getting time for Jobs to step down. While Jobs is a good CEO when the company was in trouble right now with the company doing great I think he is a poor CEO and likes to have to much control. I do agree apple is rather very hypercritical in how they act. I can not stand hypocrites and that is what apple has become. Jobs is leading them down that path and it is getting time for him to step down and let some else take control and lead the company. It needs fresh leadership and some one who is less of a control freak. Apple is a huge control freak of a company.

Evangelion
Oct 31, 2007, 03:21 AM
Oh, if only Woz could replace Mr. Jobs. That would be the day.

Woz is a brilliant engineer. He's also quite insightful on many technical issues. But he's not a brilliant businessman. And the CEO of Apple needs to be a brilliant businessman rather than brilliant engineer.

chr1s60
Oct 31, 2007, 03:37 AM
yeah I agree. I think it is getting time for Jobs to step down. While Jobs is a good CEO when the company was in trouble right now with the company doing great I think he is a poor CEO and likes to have to much control. I do agree apple is rather very hypercritical in how they act. I can not stand hypocrites and that is what apple has become. Jobs is leading them down that path and it is getting time for him to step down and let some else take control and lead the company. It needs fresh leadership and some one who is less of a control freak. Apple is a huge control freak of a company.

I couldn't disagree with you more. While Jobs may be turning into a control freak, I think him stepping down would do much more bad than good.

ikir
Oct 31, 2007, 03:54 AM
Oh, if only Woz could replace Mr. Jobs. That would be the day.

Ah ah ah ah ah.

Ah ah ah ah ah....

Nice reading yes, but stop this no sense :-D

TheBigMac
Oct 31, 2007, 04:07 AM
I remember in the recent Steve Jobs and Bill Gates interview when Jobs was asked about regrets and if he could have done anything different his response was along the lines of " I wish I hadn't been so restrictive with software".

Jobs was also a phone phreaker/hacker back in college. Now like so many successful businessmen, Jobs is more than likely paranoid that all he has built may collapse as he is only to aware of how he started in the first place.

Whilst Apples restrictions may make good short term financial sense, I feel that Steve Wozniak is more accepting that todays hackers and 3rd party developers are tomorrows innovators and need an open platform to experiment with.

Darkroom
Oct 31, 2007, 05:11 AM
i like to think that the steve jobs is actually trying to change the music and cell phone industry, and to do so apple's gotta play the big-business-game full of phony back-pats, cigars and hearty-laughter for a while... woz is a smart man, but he seems a bit... well... naive... :o

boss1
Oct 31, 2007, 05:30 AM
ok ok. Woz............. is in a position............ where he doesn't have to be held accountable for what he says.

He may truly mean what he says but I think it's no coincidence the things he says garners support towards him as a 'leader' of the computer/mac movement ;) . It's pretty apparent he has support from people on the boards at least. Awesome politics; that's all I have to say about his interview(s).


I wonder if Steve J. is banging his forehead on the desk while reading his statements.

Cleverboy
Oct 31, 2007, 05:45 AM
yeah I agree. I think it is getting time for Jobs to step down. While Jobs is a good CEO when the company was in trouble right now with the company doing great I think he is a poor CEO and likes to have to much control. I do agree apple is rather very hypercritical in how they act. I can not stand hypocrites and that is what apple has become. Jobs is leading them down that path and it is getting time for him to step down and let some else take control and lead the company. It needs fresh leadership and some one who is less of a control freak. Apple is a huge control freak of a company.Crazy talk in my opinion. You have folks look from the outside in, and say, "I know better, find someone better." Disagree or agree with Apple's decisions, but they clearly know what they're doing and 2007 (yes, this year!) has been the most fantastic year yet. Open? Not being a control freak? Remember when Apple "opened" to clones, and they found their main source of revenue (at the time) quickly deteriorating, even though they had a scheme to have cloners sell outside the U.S.? It was a mess. I still have my StarMax clone in the other room (it was very cool), and I remember the debates at the time... but Apple was going down hill as a company and had no breaks. They're shooting like a rocket to 64bit, and managed a truly impressive transition to a new chipset with a more robust future. Would that have even been possible in a clone world? I love my StarMax, but I want Apple to be around. If they needed 6 months from launch to complete mobile OSX's security and release an SDK, and felt they couldn't make that announcement until they were certain (first things first, get the phone launched)... then, fine with me. Apple listens to customers. They always have. These demands that Apple relinquish "control" and loosen up, seem very "I want to have my cake and eat it too".

Apple along with Google are launching a two pronged attack on the status quo in the mobile industry. Apple with OSX and Google with its gPhone OS. Most people can't seem to understand how Apple is clearly making each network it is on be valued for the strength of the network performance as a whole (coverage, call quality, drops), and NOT for uniqueness of its carrier specific features. This is a HUGE undertaking, especially doing so while trying to produce a revolutionary consumer friendly device.

People wildly slinging their "GOOD/BAD" stamp need to take a step back and look at the larger game being played. Jobs was criticised for Apple's use of DRM, yet they couldn't even play the game without it (and even tried waiting). Now, they're encouraging exactly what the studios never wanted to do, and the pressure is making these studios balk.

I find it personally insulting for someone to say, "when the company's doing poorly, he was a great CEO, but now that [he improved those conditions] he's a poor CEO". What the hell IS that really? Let him work wonders and then kick him out and turn the company into a consumer grab bag? How's that even supposed to make sense? Apple gives consumers what they want. Impatience due to Apple doing such a stellar job, shouldn't be misconstrued as Apple somehow NOT giving consumers what they want. It's just not FAST enough given the apetite they've created. This is nothing to fault Apple or Steve Jobs for.

~ CB

mdriftmeyer
Oct 31, 2007, 05:59 AM
yeah I agree. I think it is getting time for Jobs to step down. While Jobs is a good CEO when the company was in trouble right now with the company doing great I think he is a poor CEO and likes to have to much control. I do agree apple is rather very hypercritical in how they act. I can not stand hypocrites and that is what apple has become. Jobs is leading them down that path and it is getting time for him to step down and let some else take control and lead the company. It needs fresh leadership and some one who is less of a control freak. Apple is a huge control freak of a company.

Go smoke another bowl while you're at it. Steve Wozniak has never been successful in business. He stopped being an intricate part of Apple decades ago.

You want to put Wozniak at the head of the company? Grow up. He's not a visionary nor a business man.

He's a specific task problem solver. He doesn't see the problem and solves it. He is shown the problem and finds a solution.

To the point, he stopped being that "brilliant engineer" decades ago.

Now he's a piece of nostalgia that people keep alive by asking about his opinion on OS X.

Either he contributes to something that he blabs about or shuts the hell up on what it should do or not do and especially what he thinks Apple should or should not do.

The reason Apple works is that everyone knows their place.

Whine about hypocrisy on Apple and blame Steve Jobs. Don't forget you get the operating system you have because of these purported hypocrites of industry.

twoodcc
Oct 31, 2007, 06:03 AM
that was nice to read about Woz. i wish he was still with Apple though

mdriftmeyer
Oct 31, 2007, 06:08 AM
Crazy talk in my opinion. You have folks look from the outside in, and say, "I know better, find someone better." Disagree or agree with Apple's decisions, but they clearly know what they're doing and 2007 (yes, this year!) has been the most fantastic year yet. Open? Not being a control freak? Remember when Apple "opened" to clones, and they found their main source of revenue (at the time) quickly deteriorating, even though they had a scheme to have cloners sell outside the U.S.? It was a mess. I still have my StarMax clone in the other room (it was very cool), and I remember the debates at the time... but Apple was going down hill as a company and had no breaks. They're shooting like a rocket to 64bit, and managed a truly impressive transition to a new chipset with a more robust future. Would that have even been possible in a clone world? I love my StarMax, but I want Apple to be around. If they needed 6 months from launch to complete mobile OSX's security and release an SDK, and felt they couldn't make that announcement until they were certain (first things first, get the phone launched)... then, fine with me. Apple listens to customers. They always have. These demands that Apple relinquish "control" and loosen up, seem very "I want to have my cake and eat it too".

Apple along with Google are launching a two pronged attack on the status quo in the mobile industry. Apple with OSX and Google with its gPhone OS. Most people can't seem to understand how Apple is clearly making each network it is on be valued for the strength of the network performance as a whole (coverage, call quality, drops), and NOT for uniqueness of its carrier specific features. This is a HUGE undertaking, especially doing so while trying to produce a revolutionary consumer friendly device.

People wildly slinging their "GOOD/BAD" stamp need to take a step back and look at the larger game being played. Jobs was criticised for Apple's use of DRM, yet they couldn't even play the game without it (and even tried waiting). Now, they're encouraging exactly what the studios never wanted to do, and the pressure is making these studios balk.

I find it personally insulting for someone to say, "when the company's doing poorly, he was a great CEO, but now that [he improved those conditions] he's a poor CEO". What the hell IS that really? Let him work wonders and then kick him out and turn the company into a consumer grab bag? How's that even supposed to make sense? Apple gives consumers what they want. Impatience due to Apple doing such a stellar job, shouldn't be misconstrued as Apple somehow NOT giving consumers what they want. It's just not FAST enough given the apetite they've created. This is nothing to fault Apple or Steve Jobs for.

~ CB

And 99.9% of these come from folks who never worked under Steve Jobs in any of his companies.

Here is a man whose failure at NeXT was the salvation of Apple. The technologies we had at NeXT were over a decade before it's time. PIXAR pioneered an entire industry. Apple Part II is making the Computing Industry something worth being in once again.

People haven't even seen the stuff the Cocoa Frameworks and more will create for App developers. Most of the software we had in 1996 at NeXT is still cutting edge today.

Leopard finally dumping the Mac Legacy has been long overdue.

Now more than ever this platform solution is truly special.

Linux and OS X continue to expand and influence the industry as a whole, alongside Solaris and the BSDs.

What Woz got right is that most people are so plainly simple minded that they use their computers for a diversion.

Video Games, IM, Video Sex and the ilk. Blogging being hip is proof of how damn narcissistic the average person can be.

Most of the crap on personal blogs are reminiscent of high school clicks where people do nothing but gab about meaningless crap.

Hell, most of the "reviews" on OS X are from people who haven't a clue about the system.

Arstechnica's review is nice, but unfortunately should have taken more than 2 days after Leopard's release to be thorough.

I'll stop.

Most of these people weren't even born when Wozniak left Apple, let alone helped found it.

aliquis-
Oct 31, 2007, 06:26 AM
"the computer would let you know what you wanted to do."

RSS porn?

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 06:28 AM
Its a shame Woz hasn't got any influence, he has his head screwed on. I suppose its far easier being an observer though.

--

this may have been addressed one time or another but, re: iPhone, apple is partnering with att. don't you think it is att's idea of locking the phone? don't you think it is the riaa's idea of selling the songs again to create ringtones? maybe apple signed an nda to not discuss this. not defending apple, but this is one possibility.

As usual, its never Apple fault.... :\

RIAA would be going after Nokia , SE et al if this was the case since their phone sales make iPhone look like a drop in the ocean. But they ( RIAA ) aren't.

iPhone must be about the only phone that you can't upload ring tones to.

Cloudane
Oct 31, 2007, 06:41 AM
Hah, I know Steve's game. "3rd party applications" are being held back because they'll be a major touted feature for the iPhone2, he will announce it at one of the special events and everyone will cheer and do a standing ovation - result: it looks like a major new feature :)

Edit: obviously by Steve here I mean Jobs!

YoungCreative
Oct 31, 2007, 07:08 AM
Woz is definitely a Mac minded person. He's all for the end user and has heart without an eye on the $$$. On the other hand, Steve Jobs is definitely the reason Apple has made so much money.

Apple needed both of them to become what it is today. Too bad Woz is not still there...but Steve and Woz would probably never be able to coexist in the same office anymore.

Sayer
Oct 31, 2007, 07:18 AM
The 60's/70's are over, hippy. Reality is that computerized devices are tools to perform specific tasks in lieu of doing things manually (and hopefully the computer is better/smarter at it).

If Woz was so concerned he would have not given up designing computer systems to indoctrinating young heads full of mush into the State School system in the People's Republic of California.

He basically sounds like a jilted ex-lover of Steve Jobs, bitter with betrayal all those years ago when Jobs dared to try make profit (and thus make a living, and provide a living to millions of people in the information age) off of some Utopian pie-in-the-sky idea of a computer thought up by Woz.

Go back to dating that moronic convergence of a red-head Woz, the world has moved on - so should you.

Rodimus Prime
Oct 31, 2007, 07:25 AM
Crazy talk in my opinion. You have folks look from the outside in, and say, "I know better, find someone better." Disagree or agree with Apple's decisions, but they clearly know what they're doing and 2007 (yes, this year!) has been the most fantastic year yet. Open? Not being a control freak? Remember when Apple "opened" to clones, and they found their main source of revenue (at the time) quickly deteriorating, even though they had a scheme to have cloners sell outside the U.S.? It was a mess. I still have my StarMax clone in the other room (it was very cool), and I remember the debates at the time... but Apple was going down hill as a company and had no breaks. They're shooting like a rocket to 64bit, and managed a truly impressive transition to a new chipset with a more robust future. Would that have even been possible in a clone world? I love my StarMax, but I want Apple to be around. If they needed 6 months from launch to complete mobile OSX's security and release an SDK, and felt they couldn't make that announcement until they were certain (first things first, get the phone launched)... then, fine with me. Apple listens to customers. They always have. These demands that Apple relinquish "control" and loosen up, seem very "I want to have my cake and eat it too".

Apple along with Google are launching a two pronged attack on the status quo in the mobile industry. Apple with OSX and Google with its gPhone OS. Most people can't seem to understand how Apple is clearly making each network it is on be valued for the strength of the network performance as a whole (coverage, call quality, drops), and NOT for uniqueness of its carrier specific features. This is a HUGE undertaking, especially doing so while trying to produce a revolutionary consumer friendly device.

People wildly slinging their "GOOD/BAD" stamp need to take a step back and look at the larger game being played. Jobs was criticised for Apple's use of DRM, yet they couldn't even play the game without it (and even tried waiting). Now, they're encouraging exactly what the studios never wanted to do, and the pressure is making these studios balk.

I find it personally insulting for someone to say, "when the company's doing poorly, he was a great CEO, but now that [he improved those conditions] he's a poor CEO". What the hell IS that really? Let him work wonders and then kick him out and turn the company into a consumer grab bag? How's that even supposed to make sense? Apple gives consumers what they want. Impatience due to Apple doing such a stellar job, shouldn't be misconstrued as Apple somehow NOT giving consumers what they want. It's just not FAST enough given the apetite they've created. This is nothing to fault Apple or Steve Jobs for.

~ CB

in the end I still think it is getting time for Steve Jobs to step down. Apple in the past went from being a great company to about ot go under. Steve Jobs was the one who made this mistakes early on that set them down that direction and even Steve Jobs agrees when he was fired from apple it needed to happen. He came back and really help out Apple but I can see him making the same mistakes again. Steve Jobs is a very very argogent man and that will be his undoing. Apple wants openness but refuses them selves to be that way. OSX can stay on just macs but they need to be more opens. I love how people bring up the mac clones being a mistake and it should never be tried again. Part fo the problem was how they did the cloning. At some point apple is going to have no choice. Apple already is having supply problems and their growth is going to really start being hurt by that.

I just think it getting time for Steve Jobs to step down. I think what needs to happen is he needs to make an announcement that he is planning on doing it and bring out the person who will replace him. Give it a year between the announcement and when he does it to give everyone time to adjust. It would be better than him being fired or all of a sudden doing it. It would be controlled change. Now if it Woz or some one else it does not matter but it is getting time for a change.

Yateball
Oct 31, 2007, 07:33 AM
Somebody already said this but I agree in that Woz is ONLY saying this because he doesn't have to deal with ANYTHING that he says.

He can make himself out to be such a good guy, and a hero to the people... but it's because he doesn't have to back anything up.

Hey everyone... I think war is stupid and if I had the power... everyone would live in peace and be rich and live forever!!!! Who likes what I said? Anyone? Must mean I'd make a great world leader.

godrifle
Oct 31, 2007, 07:49 AM
Either he contributes to something that he blabs about or shuts the hell up on what it should do or not do and especially what he thinks Apple should or should not do.

If you follow the rules you've set up for Woz, you'd now have to 'shut the hell up' yourself. Me too. Hey, MacRumors. Shut down the forums and the rest of the site. :rolleyes:

tny
Oct 31, 2007, 08:04 AM
yeah I agree. I think it is getting time for Jobs to step down. While Jobs is a good CEO when the company was in trouble right now with the company doing great I think he is a poor CEO and likes to have to much control. I do agree apple is rather very hypercritical in how they act. I can not stand hypocrites and that is what apple has become. Jobs is leading them down that path and it is getting time for him to step down and let some else take control and lead the company. It needs fresh leadership and some one who is less of a control freak. Apple is a huge control freak of a company.

If you think Steve Wozniak would make a better CEO than Steve Jobs, I suggest that you google "Wheels of Zeus".

rockosmodurnlif
Oct 31, 2007, 08:05 AM
I wonder if Steve J. is banging his forehead on the desk while reading his statements.

No, he's counting his money. Woz is too. Don't they both own AAPL stock?

MikeTheC
Oct 31, 2007, 08:21 AM
I totally agree with Cleverboy and mdriftmeyer on their points.

Apple is what you get when you have someone like Steve Jobs at the helm.

Sony and Home Depot are what you get when you don't. Period.

It amazes me how absolutely stupid some of the people on this board can be.

cheese1113
Oct 31, 2007, 08:31 AM
ok ok. Woz............. is in a position............ where he doesn't have to be held accountable for what he says.

He may truly mean what he says but I think it's no coincidence the things he says garners support towards him as a 'leader' of the computer/mac movement ;) . It's pretty apparent he has support from people on the boards at least. Awesome politics; that's all I have to say about his interview(s).


I wonder if Steve J. is banging his forehead on the desk while reading his statements.

You've clearly never met Woz... He is being totally sincere here. It's not politics, he just wants to see an open platform.

rworne
Oct 31, 2007, 08:53 AM
Lots of props to the Woz, but his gripes about the closed nature of the iPhone ring a little hollow to me.

You see, there once was a company he worked for (or may still work for) called Danger, Inc. that made a portable phone called the HipTop. This device was revolutionary for its time - and it was a closed platform.

Oh yeah, there was an SDK released for it and you could release apps provided they were blessed by the OEM.

And it took a year before any of this was possible.

-- Former HipTop owner.

Spades
Oct 31, 2007, 08:57 AM
He's a specific task problem solver. He doesn't see the problem and solves it. He is shown the problem and finds a solution.

You're right that Woz would be a terrible choice for a CEO. He'll be the first to say that Apple and the PC could not have happened without a businessman like Jobs.

But you're way wrong here. Apple and the PC would not have happened without Woz either. He wasn't shown a problem that led him to the creation of the PC. He saw the potential and, just for fun, put it together. It was nothing short of visionary. Just look at all the people that had the chance at the PC, or even had devices already 90% of the way there, and didn't understand how great it was.

You just can't minimize the role of either Woz or Jobs and can't deny they were visionaries, even if they saw different visions. Woz made the PC. Jobs made the PC big.

jazman
Oct 31, 2007, 09:06 AM
Rodimus,

Come on dude. That's idiotic! You sound like your 12 years old. Why would a CEO step down when the company is enjoying this much success? The stock would take a nose dive on news like that. No sensible person would suggest such a thing. That's just really, really stupid.

Consultant
Oct 31, 2007, 09:07 AM
You're right that Woz would be a terrible choice for a CEO. He'll be the first to say that Apple and the PC could not have happened without a businessman like Jobs.

But you're way wrong here. Apple and the PC would not have happened without Woz either. He wasn't shown a problem that led him to the creation of the PC. He saw the potential and, just for fun, put it together. It was nothing short of visionary. Just look at all the people that had the chance at the PC, or even had devices already 90% of the way there, and didn't understand how great it was.

You just can't minimize the role of either Woz or Jobs and can't deny they were visionaries, even if they saw different visions. Woz made the PC. Jobs made the PC big.

Actually, in the beginning, Woz did not see the potential. Steve had to persuade Woz big time.

But yes it is true, without either of them, we probably won't be here right now in term of technology.

abrooks
Oct 31, 2007, 09:14 AM
Arstechnica's review is nice, but unfortunately should have taken more than 2 days after Leopard's release to be thorough.

As far as I'm aware it was being written since the release of the WWDC build, was only touched up in the last few days due to some minor changes.

RIP
Oct 31, 2007, 09:24 AM
I felt inclined to put into writing what most people who know Apple already know.

WOZ is Apple.

"The real dreams of how it will work for someone who knows nothing about the computer have been lost and don't get addressed anymore." -WOZ

EXACTLY! Apple is the best we have today. BeOS and Haiku-OS have/are trying to carry on the tradition but in reality Apple is the closest thing we have to what WOZ was trying to say.

WOZ really needs to be a bit more public.

:apple:

TMay
Oct 31, 2007, 09:25 AM
Not to dis him, but Woz isn't a player.

Kudos to him for what he did 3 decades ago, but what's he done lately?

And this crazy talk about Jobs stepping down and Woz replacing him? Get real. The stock would drop like a rock and Apple would wither on the vine. I don't know whom Apple is grooming to replace Jobs, but only a single person, Akiro Morita, co-founder of Sony, has to date exceeded Jobs leadership, and he passed on quite some time ago.

tom

zephead
Oct 31, 2007, 09:27 AM
It seems like Woz is the only one "thinking different" now. :apple:

Unspeaked
Oct 31, 2007, 09:34 AM
I don't know whom Apple is grooming to replace Jobs, but only a single person, Akiro Morita, co-founder of Sony, has to date exceeded Jobs leadership, and he passed on quite some time ago.

Thanks for the chuckle!

joeshell383
Oct 31, 2007, 09:53 AM
Whilst Apples restrictions may make good short term financial sense, I feel that Steve Wozniak is more accepting that todays hackers and 3rd party developers are tomorrows innovators and need an open platform to experiment with.

Think you've got it backwards. Once you open up, you can't revert. I am in favor of Apple testing the waters and slowly allowing third party options.

Virgil-TB2
Oct 31, 2007, 09:53 AM
I remember in the recent Steve Jobs and Bill Gates interview when Jobs was asked about regrets and if he could have done anything different his response was along the lines of " I wish I hadn't been so restrictive with software"....I saw the same interview and I don't remember him saying this or anything like it.

kingtj
Oct 31, 2007, 09:54 AM
I think this is precisely what we're seeing happening with the "new Apple".

Woz is, at the core, a "computer geek"... loved by other like-minded individuals and obviously has insightful commentary to share every once in a while.

BUT - Jobs is working on a larger goal than "the computer". He's turning Apple into a media company, not all that different from Sony (think "Sony Style" retail stores, their complete line of notebook and desktop computers, yet just as known for selling music and video, etc. etc.).

Now, unlike Sony, I think Jobs is staying a little more focused on what I'd call "inter-woven products". If a new product doesn't have a close tie-in to the other core products Apple sells, then it's not going to happen. The Mac will always be at the base of the "pyramid" of products Apple offers, with all other devices building from there. (Your iPhone is tied closely to iTunes, which offers music and video for use on your iPod or AppleTV, all of which sync or pull content from your computer.)

But honestly, a Wozniak is going to keep his thoughts on advancing the "personal computer" itself, without much regard for all the "periphery" which Jobs is growing the business with today.


i like to think that the steve jobs is actually trying to change the music and cell phone industry, and to do so apple's gotta play the big-business-game full of phony back-pats, cigars and hearty-laughter for a while... woz is a smart man, but he seems a bit... well... naive... :o

hayesk
Oct 31, 2007, 10:01 AM
It's also disgusting that Apple is charging an extra 99c just for using A SONG YOU ALREADY OWN to make a 30 sec ringtone. ... Apple shouldn't be allowed to do this; we shouldn't tolerate it.

I think it's amusing how you think that it is Apple that decided this. This is clearly an AT&T concession.

Don't forget that millions of people volutntarily pay for $2 and $3 ringtones every day even though they own the song. And they're not complaining about it either.

Unspeaked
Oct 31, 2007, 10:13 AM
Don't forget that millions of people volutntarily pay for $2 and $3 ringtones every day even though they own the song. And they're not complaining about it either.

Millions of people willingly use Windows on a regular basis, as well...

iQuit
Oct 31, 2007, 10:17 AM
"As the days go by it feels like they are drifting from their original goal and aiming for the goal every other company sets out for."

At least somebody understands where I am coming from. I like the old Apple with the mindset that a Mac didn't need a manual in order to use. Apple is so focused on taking over different markets and not focusing enough on their computers. I really wish Jobs would take to heart what Woz is saying. :apple:

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 10:23 AM
I think it's amusing how you think that it is Apple that decided this. This is clearly an AT&T concession.

Don't forget that millions of people volutntarily pay for $2 and $3 ringtones every day even though they own the song. And they're not complaining about it either.

No, its probably an Apple decision to make more money from iTunes.

AT&T allow other phones to freely upload ring tones.

iliketomac
Oct 31, 2007, 10:25 AM
If anyone from the mothership at Cupertino who is viewing these threads… you should listen and take advice from the Woz, as well as from the others here. Maybe you’ll learn a lesson or two, and not just rely on your infinite wisdom..… :rolleyes:

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 10:26 AM
Either he contributes to something that he blabs about or shuts the hell up on what it should do or not do and especially what he thinks Apple should or should not do.


Its a shame some users can't accept criticism towards Apple.

Woz is entitled to make any observations he likes, just like you are entitled to on these forums.

daddywags214
Oct 31, 2007, 10:29 AM
Oy. Woz is an intelligent man, who makes valid points. Points worth considering. Points that I'm sure HAVE been considered. The call for Jobs to step down and Woz to replace him is silly - it makes no sense businesswise. I'm sure Woz would have zero interest in that. From everything I've known of him, he wouldn't want to in the slightest. Jobs can be a control freak, so far as I know, but honestly, the man has turned the company around in a huge way.

Apple is running HIS way and THAT'S why it's so successful right now. That's why we even have an iPhone, let alone why we're trying to unlock it.

Woz is a good man to read and consider; his is an important point of view. But at this point (even though he's a low-paid employee), he represents a consumer's view; a small portion of the consumer's view. The portion whereby people on this forum get their hopes up because if Woz wants unlocking, that must mean it's for the best! Apple makes its decisions consciously, and whether they're for the best or not has yet to be decided; I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt because I'm not qualified to run a huge corporation.

sikkinixx
Oct 31, 2007, 10:30 AM
Arstechnica's review is nice, but unfortunately should have taken more than 2 days after Leopard's release to be thorough.

I'll stop.



You should. Because in the ARS review he clearly states several times that he has had many many different builds of it and since September they have been pretty damn stable. It's not like he just got in and reviewed it in two days. Maybe you should write a better review, oh...but wait... people can't have opinions without being narcissistic..darn.

Maybe you were being sarcastic, since the review is pretty damn thorough and lengthy..

jackc
Oct 31, 2007, 10:31 AM
I'm surprised Woz would choose to remain in the dark about Leopard just so he could have the surprise factor.

ChrisK018
Oct 31, 2007, 10:38 AM
To Woz's point, I never open the manual for Apples and I've had them back to the Apple II plus.

Unlocking the iPhone? Duh. Just about everybody wants that besides the provider that just bent over to accept Apples' terms. Needless to say, they passed those 'savings' onto the consumers. That's just the nature of the beast. I don't blame Apple or AT&T or their European counterparts, nor do I fault the all the people, myself included, that wish the dang thing was unlocked (and how about a 40gig model while we're at it?)

Rocksaurus
Oct 31, 2007, 10:47 AM
[Apple has] a right to lock [the iPhone]. But I am really for the unlockers, the rebels trying to make it free. I'd really like it to be open to new applications. I'd like to install some nice games. Why in the world can I not install a ringtone that I've made? How would that hurt AT&T's network? Here is Steve Jobs sending letters to the record companies saying [they] should provide music that's unprotected, but here he is taking the opposite approach with the iPhone. I don't know to what extent AT&T is involved in the thinking and direction.


Dear Woz,
It looks like Steve used to agree with you:

"Why join the navy if you can be a pirate?"


We wish he still did. :(

bdkennedy1
Oct 31, 2007, 10:48 AM
I totally agree with him. No one is really doing anything to make computers easier to use. There are so many features that many of them have to be hidden and the user has to search for them, if they even figure out that they're there.

rjwill246
Oct 31, 2007, 10:49 AM
Think you've got it backwards. Once you open up, you can't revert. I am in favor of Apple testing the waters and slowly allowing third party options.
The freeloaders who love everything for nothing complain about the 99c for ringtones (I agree that is unreasonable) but I also know it's not JUST Apple who is doing this. Presumably, these folks don't know about contracts.

Woz, is cute and usually totally off the mark as he was in this interview. Apple under his guidance would have long ceased to exist. He has no idea about protecting your IP and interests but has become the hippy happy freebee lover that has come to characterize much of the western world, where reward for risk and hard yakka is an unknown concept.

Woz, back to the cave to contemplate your navel-- way more useful to Apple that way!!

MikeTheC
Oct 31, 2007, 10:51 AM
Alright... *cracks knuckles*

Let's see if I can tackle this one.

I have all the respect in the world for Steve Wozniak. I honestly and sincerely believe that, without him, much of the espirit de corps in the kind of design ethic he espoused during his time with Apple would never have existed, and I believe the entire computer world would be greatly diminished (from what we have come to know) as a result. However...

Woz is simply wrong about some of what he's said here, and wrongly-focused on the rest of it.

There are certain basic areas of infrastructure that would suffer a greater detriment by "being open" than they have, are, and will continue to benefit from "being closed". Now, mind you, I accept that this is a minority case, since on the whole I think the whole "being open" thing is the preferred status. However, some things simply require "the extra mile" of defense.

The world-wide telecommunications infrastructure is a perfect, nearly text-book example of what I'm talking about. As it stands, that network is critical to the functioning of the citizens of each region of each country, and collectively to the functioning of all regions of our world, and should it ever get compromised by anyone, it would have a crippling effect. And so I'm all for us having a multitude of different broadcast frequencies, different broadcast technologies, different back-ends, and a lack of any real ability for "the general public" to mess with any of it.

Think of it like you do an ocean-going vessel. You DO NOT build a ship with completely open (on the inside) decks, from end to end. You build and partition off individual sections, and make each a water-tight compartment. That way, if any one section were to become compromised, the rest can be protected.

Now, that doesn't mean I don't think technology developers, such as phone companies and telephone manufacturers wouldn't benefit if they could have the quantity of coders out there which, say, the open-source movement has. However, I am not able to reconcile in this particular, limited-case instance, the benefit that would bring with the ability to compromise the network should full access to seemingly-trivial application installation functionality be given to phone end-users.

All the "bad guys" need is to get their foot in the door, and then tomorrow or next week or next year, we'd be fighting a battle that should never have had to be fought.

Now, moving on to Woz's relatively disparaging comments about Linux...

The man should know better. If I, as a "regular plain citizen" know about Linux's movement into imbedded devices, into third world countries, into mainstream manufacturers' PCs -- and the attendant benefits of such -- then how the hell can Woz not? Or does he think that to be insufficient to the task? What in God's name is his problem?!?

There's no question that, for the longest time, Linux was an OS "by geeks for geeks", but that hasn't been the case in ages. Eons, in fact, in Linux time. Heck, we all have UNIX and Linux developers to thank for MANY of the features, capabilities and improvements we've seen in Mac OS X. And yet he doesn't think it's capable of being grasped -- or desired to be used -- by average computer users at this point? I mean, I'll readily acknowledge there are an awful lot of stupid people out there -- I deal with them every day -- but there comes a point where you have to insist people have to be willing to put forth *some* degree of effort to make themselves knowledgeable or to otherwise better their minds.

ALL operating systems, no matter *how* brain-dead simple or candy-coated you make them have SOME degree of learning curve. Hell, simple driving has a learning curve, and yet if Woz's comments were to be applied more broadly you'd expect to see groups out there protesting how "hard" it is to learn to drive a car. But you don't. People learn to drive, and they do drive -- some better than others -- because they're willing to be at LEAST that mature enough.

I don't understand -- and I've never understood -- why anyone expects to get a pass on this sort of thing when it comes to computers, nor why there seem so many out there willing to go along with that mentality. THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT GAVE RISE TO THE "AOL USER" OR "WINDOWS USER" MENTALITY WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGHT!!!!!

If Woz thinks that Apple did the world a favor by helping to begin the process of mainstreaming computers for the masses (and clearly there's no argument this is the case), and if he's willing to go along with the notion that Microsoft -- love them or hate them -- picked up that torch and went pretty far with it (and it's quite ironic when you stop to consider the degree of complexity involved in many of the aspects of Windows -- can anyone say "Windows Registry"?) then he should also recognize Linux's broad-based adoption in everything from university tech lab back ends to Wall Street servers, to the common person in Uganda or Argentina who's very grateful -- and even quite pleased -- to have Linux in front of them.

Geez...

sushi
Oct 31, 2007, 10:54 AM
I don't know whom Apple is grooming to replace Jobs, but only a single person, Akiro Morita, co-founder of Sony, has to date exceeded Jobs leadership, and he passed on quite some time ago.
Akio (without the "r") Morita was a very interesting person and a leader. I was lucky enough to meet him many years ago and spend some time with him.

With his passing, Sony has gone down hill quickly. They are not highly regarded in Japan and generally make lackluster products compared to what they once were. Among my friends in the electronics arena, they joke that Sony products are design to last a year. And from what I've seen, unfortunately, it's pretty true. There quality pales in contrast to 20-30 years ago. Heck, my Sony TV made in 1984 is still working and it has travelled around the world with me.

This is what worries me about Apple. When Steve leaves, whomever fills in for him will have a huge pair of shoes to fill.

nxent
Oct 31, 2007, 10:56 AM
would be interesting to see where apple would be today if woz stayed around...

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 10:56 AM
The freeloaders who love everything for nothing complain about the 99c for ringtones (I agree that is unreasonable) but I also know it's not JUST Apple who is doing this. Presumably, these folks don't know about contracts.

LOL freeloaders.

Scenario:
Customer 'A' has an iPhone to replace their previous cell phone. Previous Cell phone had some ringtones that were purchased. 'A' now has to repurchase all those ring tones once again.

Instead, he hacks iPhone and uploads his legally purchased ringtones for free.

Question:
Why do you think this is freeloading?
Do you believe that customers should pay twice for products?
What other cell phone manufacturers force their customers to purchase ringtones, rather than freely uploading? Answer: None. The carrier may cripple phones, but its not the manufacturer.

Do you think DVD regioning is a good idea? If consumers moves from Europe to North America, do you think its good that consumers have to pay for all their DVDs again? ( Of course, you can easily get a DVD player that is changeable to region 0 ( i.e., region free ).

pooryou
Oct 31, 2007, 11:05 AM
The freeloaders who love everything for nothing complain about the 99c for ringtones

:rolleyes: Give us a break please.

TMay
Oct 31, 2007, 11:11 AM
[QUOTE=TMay;4422251]I don't know whom Apple is grooming to replace Jobs, but only a single person, Akiro Morita, co-founder of Sony, has to date exceeded Jobs leadership, and he passed on quite some time ago.{/QUOTE]
Akio (without the "r") Morita was a very interesting person and a leader. I was lucky enough to meet him many years ago and spend some time with him.

With his passing, Sony has gone down hill quickly. They are not highly regarded in Japan and generally make lackluster products compared to what they once were. Among my friends in the electronics arena, they joke that Sony products are design to last a year. And from what I've seen, unfortunately, it's pretty true. There quality pales in contrast to 20-30 years ago. Heck, my Sony TV made in 1984 is still working and it has travelled around the world with me.

This is what worries me about Apple. When Steve leaves, whomever fills in for him will have a huge pair of shoes to fill.

Thanks for the correction to the spelling of his name.

If I'm not mistaken, Steve stated in the 80's how much he admired Akio and Sony, and I wouldn't be too far off to state that Akio has been a major influence.

tom

Eraserhead
Oct 31, 2007, 11:24 AM
Think you've got it backwards. Once you open up, you can't revert. I am in favor of Apple testing the waters and slowly allowing third party options.

I definitely thing that making it totally open is a bad thing. Distribution through iTunes makes Spyware virtually impossible, it also makes sure security holes in applications can get fixed on the end-users machine by allowing auto-update of applications on connect. As a developer having people on the latest version is good.

Of course it depends how its done, whether anyone can submit a program, and it'll get added ala Apple Downloads, or if it'll only be allowed by specific developers which would be bad.

liberty4all
Oct 31, 2007, 11:28 AM
Ok, so why doesn't Apple rehire Wozniak?! Seems like it would make sense to me! I hope Jobs isn't the one holding back such a thing.

joseph2166
Oct 31, 2007, 11:31 AM
LOL freeloaders.
'A' now has to repurchase all those ring tones once again.


How many $1 ring tones do you actually need - you're gonna spend.. what at most $5?!!

Charging for ring tones is the best thing any mobile phone operator could do! - the fewer crappy sounding songs i hear coming out of phones every day the better - just have a 'RING RING' like any sane person!

CJD2112
Oct 31, 2007, 11:35 AM
If only Jobs and Woz would team up, Jobs being the marketer and Woz handling the creative direction. Sigh.

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 11:39 AM
How many $1 ring tones do you actually need - you're gonna spend.. what at most $5?!!

Charging for ring tones is the best thing any mobile phone operator could do! - the fewer crappy sounding songs i hear coming out of phones every day the better - just have a 'RING RING' like any sane person!

Personally, I have one ring tone. Its very different. I like it that way because I know its my phone rather than someone elses ( i.e., RING RING )

However, there are a great many people who like ring tones. It sucks for people like you who don't like varied ring tones, but you'll just have to live with it :-).

Apple's ring tone policy is anti-consumer ( having to pay multiple times for products you have *legally* purchased ).

Rodimus Prime
Oct 31, 2007, 11:45 AM
How many $1 ring tones do you actually need - you're gonna spend.. what at most $5?!!

Charging for ring tones is the best thing any mobile phone operator could do! - the fewer crappy sounding songs i hear coming out of phones every day the better - just have a 'RING RING' like any sane person!

The ring tones is completely apple being greedy. ATT clearly does not have an issue with it because all their phones allow it.

Also the ring tone only is allowed if you own the song that you bought from the iTMS. If you have not done that you have to buy the song and then pay another $1 to make it a ring tone ($2.00 total). On top of that it only works if apple allows that song to be made into a ring tone.

The rings tones I used my my cell phone you could not get from iTMS even if I wanted to because I made them out of a song that no where sells it. iTMS sure as hell does not have it. or I got it from sony for free and transfered it to my new phone.

People try to pin this on ATT but ATT is not going to get a penny of that ring tone money. Apple gets it.

MikeTheC
Oct 31, 2007, 11:46 AM
Speaking as a former employee of Sony, there's absolutely no question that's the case. Whatever innovation which Sony once stood for has been undercut and compromised by what they've become in the years since Morita-san's departure from that company.

They've ceased being a pioneer, a leader, an innovator or anything else positive and have, instead, turned into an all-consuming monster. And if you laugh at the visual image of some cheezy Japanese monster movie which that description brings, please know I'm not speaking figuratively, but rather in an unfortunately quite literal sense.

Sony has compensated for their lack of vision with a merciless power-grab. Look how much of the electronics industry they control. Look how much of the entertainment industry they control. The only thing keeping a company the size of Sony going so long and so well is the sheer amount of revenue they bring in through these other means. The Playstation group used to do this, but then Sony butchered that, too, and came out with the PS III, which to this day is eating away at Sony's bottom line, to say nothing of their pre-eminent status amongst console game platforms.

In short, to paraphrase Lt. Pete Mitchell (Maverick)'s CO from Top-Gun, Sony is writing checks it's body can't cash.

MacTheSpoon
Oct 31, 2007, 11:46 AM
As far as ringtones go - AT&T is not the only partner Apple has to deal with, there are also the record companies. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple is charging for ringtones and locking down the installation process because the record companies are applying a lot of pressure. Ringtones are a multi-billion dollar industry and I'll bet they are loathe to give up on that revenue source. Greedy bastards.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 11:53 AM
It's always nice to see a legend like Woz candidly speak about these issues. I mostly agree with him, especially on the iPhone. It's ridiculous that it is so locked down in almost every way. He is spot on that you should be able to install new programs and your own ringtones. It's also disgusting that Apple is charging an extra 99c just for using A SONG YOU ALREADY OWN to make a 30 sec ringtone. It's as if I purchase pepper from the store and I have to buy a separate one for every food. I have to buy one for soup, one for steak, etc. Apple shouldn't be allowed to do this; we shouldn't tolerate it.

I happen to disagree, but respect your point of view and the democratic process.

We as consumers need to:
1) Let apple know by writting to them
2) Vote with our wallet, by not purchasing software or hardware that does not meet our needs / expectations.
3) Understand that like it or not, the prime directive of a corporation it's is shareholders.
4) Understand that no matter how much of a fan we are, the product they are selling with the specific conditions is the way it is, and that we may not be the primary target/market. Apple is going to try to satisfy and provide the features for that particular product primary market.

Once again, vote with your wallet.
:cool:

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 11:57 AM
Its not that he has a lot of pull, so I imagine little or no influence. I think it isjust nice to hear from him being the creative mind that he is.

While he may not have a lot of pull inside of Apple, He has a lot of pull with the masses and can rally the troops.

Given that he should always be responsible with his comments as they can take life of their own.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 12:00 PM
Oh, if only Woz could replace Mr. Jobs. That would be the day.

He can't, Jobs is marketting and has always been, WOZ is creativity. I remember a company (DEC) that had a superior CPU, the company was full of creative types and went under because they could not market the chip.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 12:05 PM
Woz is the bomb! He's awesome! :D

Any one who says bad stuff about him, obviously doesn't know what they are taking about.

WOZ church is around the corner, don't drink the coolaid.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 12:10 PM
yeah I agree. I think it is getting time for Jobs to step down. While Jobs is a good CEO when the company was in trouble right now with the company doing great I think he is a poor CEO and likes to have to much control. I do agree apple is rather very hypercritical in how they act. I can not stand hypocrites and that is what apple has become. Jobs is leading them down that path and it is getting time for him to step down and let some else take control and lead the company. It needs fresh leadership and some one who is less of a control freak. Apple is a huge control freak of a company.

I felt inclined to put into writing what most people who know Apple already know.



WOZ is Apple.



"The real dreams of how it will work for someone who knows nothing about the computer have been lost and don't get addressed anymore." -WOZ



EXACTLY! Apple is the best we have today. BeOS and Haiku-OS have/are trying to carry on the tradition but in reality Apple is the closest thing we have to what WOZ was trying to say.



WOZ really needs to be a bit more public.





This is a good example of why when Woz talks, it may cause damage to Apple and why he needs to be very responsible and choose his words.

If Woz was in charge, the company would go under, he is not a Marketing guy.

Apple does well because they find ways for people to want their product even if the product does not fit a need or is perfect.

johnnybluejeans
Oct 31, 2007, 12:14 PM
Hah, I know Steve's game. "3rd party applications" are being held back because they'll be a major touted feature for the iPhone2, he will announce it at one of the special events and everyone will cheer and do a standing ovation - result: it looks like a major new feature :)


Uhm, he announced it via a press release like two weeks ago. Where were you?

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 12:21 PM
Personally, I have one ring tone. Its very different. I like it that way because I know its my phone rather than someone elses ( i.e., RING RING )

However, there are a great many people who like ring tones. It sucks for people like you who don't like varied ring tones, but you'll just have to live with it :-).

Apple's ring tone policy is anti-consumer ( having to pay multiple times for products you have *legally* purchased ).

I am looking for a digitized version of the ring tone for the old crank phones. Works for me.

rockosmodurnlif
Oct 31, 2007, 12:22 PM
"The real dreams of how it will work for someone who knows nothing about the computer have been lost and don't get addressed anymore." -WOZ


It wasn't until I read your post and saw that quote for the second time that I realized how absurd that quote is. Especially given the context of where I'm reading it and where it was originally given. But let's ignore that for the time being.

How it will work for someone who knows nothing about the computer? What is he talking about there? Is he refering to hardware or software? I thought the trend in computing lately was to make data more accessible no matter where it is in the machine. Isn't that what computers are for? To hold our information, our files, our data until we want to do something with it? The basics of computer operation are such that people can jump from Windows to Mac OS X to Linux and still have a basic idea of how to get around the system. Linux has to have a GUI installed and active but isn't that what we were moving towards anyway? Abstraction then interaction.

The quote sounds nice but it doesn't mean anything. What are the real dreams? And whose dreams are they? If they're not being implemented then why isn't something done about it? If they're so meaningful then they should sell shouldn't they?

I don't get it. Maybe I don't get Apple, Inc. All I know is I've got no problem with my MacBook Pro, on the whole, and I don't have an iPhone. Maybe I am ignorant to the promise of technology. Someone enlighten me.

johnnybluejeans
Oct 31, 2007, 12:23 PM
Why does everyone seem to think Woz is creative? Woz is a good engineer, a great engineer. But creative?.. No, not at all.

Steve Jobs was the visionary, always was and always will be. Without his vision of what the PC should be we never would have had the Mac. He was the driving force behind all of what makes Apple so great today- OS X, the iPod/iPhone family, the Mac. Not only did he have the vision, but the keen business sense to reinvigorate the Apple brand through marketing, opening retail stores, etc..

Woz could have NEVER done what Jobs has done with Apple in the last 10 years. This is why Jobs is at the helm of one of the fastest growing companies in tech, and Woz is playing with laser pointers and talking about the pranks he likes to pull.

killerrobot
Oct 31, 2007, 12:27 PM
Wow ... lots of opinions here...

I think Wozniak said some true things, and I think it has put Jobs in a delicate position that makes him like a little like a hypocrite.

As far as the AT&T ring tone thing, don't you have to buy those through iTunes? Therefore isn't Apple getting that money not AT&T? (Seriously, its a question, not being smug.)

All this being said, Apple has really turned things around over the last 5 or so years. Is Jobs the only person at Apple to give that credit to?. No. Jobs is not Apple. Can you say that Wozniak couldn't have done the same thing with Apple? No. Once again one person does not do all the designing, marketing, production, and creative thinking that runs the entire company.

I agree completely with Wozniak when he said that computers have "lost their way" (my paraphrase). All OS' GUIs are so eye-candy covered that their main goal is to win over any user - and the development of programs, utilities etc., that do what the end user wants to do have been put on a hold for several years by the main OS developers. Hence, the dire need for 3rd party software.

That's just all my opinion - take it or leave it.

Lesser Evets
Oct 31, 2007, 12:34 PM
Woz should still be employed by Apple at certain levels of development. While his business views might be concurrent with a teenager, or his 1974 persona, his ideas of computers' functions are extremely valid. Most of the computer market is oriented to computers as a lifestyle instead of computers as a tool to accentuate non-technical people. Apple is going in that direction, but should make even greater strides and separate almost completely from the dopey nerd-pack.

Data
Oct 31, 2007, 12:48 PM
All i can see happening with apple ever since the above named 3 is Greedyness, 85% market share means power, and as always , absolute power corrupts absolutly , i thought steve and apple were above that but the proof that they aren't is there to be seen all over the place, just look at the prices in EUROS, it has been long proven that that is not only Taxes.
Ringtones, And locked phones, i'll stillbe bying all of it but i really dislike the greedyness of the Apple companie.

jt2ga65
Oct 31, 2007, 01:34 PM
I think it's amusing how you think that it is Apple that decided this. This is clearly an AT&T concession.

Don't forget that millions of people volutntarily pay for $2 and $3 ringtones every day even though they own the song. And they're not complaining about it either.

Gah! It's not about PAYING for a ringtone that's an issue, it's about not being able to use your OWN ringtone that is. I would gladly pay for software to put a ringtone of my own creation on my cell phone, and would even consider paying for the "service" to convert a audio file to a ringtone. The fact that you can only do this with a select number of songs (not even sounds) on iTunes does not satisfy my desire for a ringtone that is unlike everyone else's.

Is it right to charge $3/ringtone that I own the rights to, one of my own creation? That's a decision that the market will determine.

The quote sounds nice but it doesn't mean anything. What are the real dreams? And whose dreams are they? If they're not being implemented then why isn't something done about it? If they're so meaningful then they should sell shouldn't they?

I think that the quote means that Woz wanted the comupter to be an enabler to the dreams of the users, rather than force the users to become computer experts in order to realize their dreams. This is done by making them easier to use, but also has to be balanced by making sure that the features are rich enough to fully realize them. This is often down through third-party applications.

-jt2

gugy
Oct 31, 2007, 01:54 PM
Crazy talk in my opinion. You have folks look from the outside in, and say, "I know better, find someone better." Disagree or agree with Apple's decisions, but they clearly know what they're doing and 2007 (yes, this year!) has been the most fantastic year yet. Open? Not being a control freak? Remember when Apple "opened" to clones, and they found their main source of revenue (at the time) quickly deteriorating, even though they had a scheme to have cloners sell outside the U.S.? It was a mess. I still have my StarMax clone in the other room (it was very cool), and I remember the debates at the time... but Apple was going down hill as a company and had no breaks. They're shooting like a rocket to 64bit, and managed a truly impressive transition to a new chipset with a more robust future. Would that have even been possible in a clone world? I love my StarMax, but I want Apple to be around. If they needed 6 months from launch to complete mobile OSX's security and release an SDK, and felt they couldn't make that announcement until they were certain (first things first, get the phone launched)... then, fine with me. Apple listens to customers. They always have. These demands that Apple relinquish "control" and loosen up, seem very "I want to have my cake and eat it too".

Apple along with Google are launching a two pronged attack on the status quo in the mobile industry. Apple with OSX and Google with its gPhone OS. Most people can't seem to understand how Apple is clearly making each network it is on be valued for the strength of the network performance as a whole (coverage, call quality, drops), and NOT for uniqueness of its carrier specific features. This is a HUGE undertaking, especially doing so while trying to produce a revolutionary consumer friendly device.

People wildly slinging their "GOOD/BAD" stamp need to take a step back and look at the larger game being played. Jobs was criticised for Apple's use of DRM, yet they couldn't even play the game without it (and even tried waiting). Now, they're encouraging exactly what the studios never wanted to do, and the pressure is making these studios balk.

I find it personally insulting for someone to say, "when the company's doing poorly, he was a great CEO, but now that [he improved those conditions] he's a poor CEO". What the hell IS that really? Let him work wonders and then kick him out and turn the company into a consumer grab bag? How's that even supposed to make sense? Apple gives consumers what they want. Impatience due to Apple doing such a stellar job, shouldn't be misconstrued as Apple somehow NOT giving consumers what they want. It's just not FAST enough given the apetite they've created. This is nothing to fault Apple or Steve Jobs for.

~ CB

I am with you man. I can't believe people here are complaining about Jobs. Must be a bunch of teenagers that did not know about Gil Amelio and Apple's troubles prior to Jobs comeback. Apple is healthy and doing fantastic. I hope Jobs stay leading Apple for years to come.

Rodimus Prime
Oct 31, 2007, 02:17 PM
I am with you man. I can't believe people here are complaining about Jobs. Must be a bunch of teenagers that did not know about Gil Amelio and Apple's troubles prior to Jobs comeback. Apple is healthy and doing fantastic. I hope Jobs stay leading Apple for years to come.

but a lot of people forget about when Jobs was fired. Jobs needed to be fired from apple back then. He was going to kill the company if he was not removed. Even Steve Jobs agrees that when he was fired from apple it was the right thing to do.

To me Jobs seems good at getting a company off the ground and starting it up but when it become successful and larger he fails to have to adapt to the new rules of the game. The very strong interlinking between apple stuff start backfiring after a while and starts becoming the undoing. I think Jobs fails when it comes to that part.

This is why I think it time for Jobs to announce he is retiring/stepping down from CEO. If he does it right it not going to really phase the stock prices or the company much at all. Just announce when he plans on handing over the reins to some new like a year away. This gives remove the shock factor.

gmanrique
Oct 31, 2007, 02:32 PM
You said it right. Lets look at the quotes from the interview:

"The real dreams of how it will work for someone who knows nothing about the computer have been lost and don't get addressed anymore."

Well, why don't you address it then? Anybody could be saying that. It does not mean they are geniuses. Seriously, this guy was a great engineer, but not a visionary. And what has he done after the Apple I, II, and some limited influence on the Macintosh? I know what he does now, and it is great, but although it helps us all, as human beings, (his altruist job is remarkable), it has no impact in the computer industry, and it has been like that for a long time.

Just look at this other quote for the interview:

"Question: Beyond touch, how would you like to see user interfaces evolve?
SW Answer: I don't think anything revolutionary is close on the horizon, but I guess you never know. I didn't think the iPhone would be as pleasing. I was really surprised. Eventually, I would love a little computer with a camera that recognizes me, and I can throw a lot of little gestures at it, and it responds to what I say and do. It will be very hard to create a computer that can understand our voice and our rhythm."

Is that supposed to be a great visionary of the computer industry that will take Apple to the next level? that answer certainly cannot be one to tag as ingenious.

And about his rant on the iPhone being closed, etc., as I said before, Apple had things planned long ago. They are not talking about an SDK because of the pressure from the whiners, I mean hackers, etc. they just wanted to do it right, and that is what they said since day one.

As for ring-tones, it is not Apple's decision to charge for it. In this digital era of greedy labels trying to survive, it is in their legal definition of fair use that you cannot use your music for such thing. That is why they sell you the ring-tone capability as extra. In fact, that is something usually sold at a higher price by other cellular companies. Additionally, I read somewhere that the artists actually fought for this one with the record labels, since they wanted to control and sell the ring tones directly, but it was concluded that the labels had the rights on the music and its uses, or something to that effect. The one thing that Apple could have done, though, is to implement the ring tone builder to work on music that has no DRM protection. I guess the problem is that labels are already selling music without DRM and they still consider the ring-tone usage as something outside of their fair use agreement. Anyway, I think Apple could have done something else so you can create your own ring-tones using whatever you like, Garage Band, a microphone, etc.m but that is about it. And that whole ring-tone thing is more of a popular trend that will fade in a couple of years, or at least until those users grow up. (No offense to heavy ring-tone users)

Go smoke another bowl while you're at it. Steve Wozniak has never been successful in business. He stopped being an intricate part of Apple decades ago.

You want to put Wozniak at the head of the company? Grow up. He's not a visionary nor a business man.

He's a specific task problem solver. He doesn't see the problem and solves it. He is shown the problem and finds a solution.

To the point, he stopped being that "brilliant engineer" decades ago.

Now he's a piece of nostalgia that people keep alive by asking about his opinion on OS X.

Either he contributes to something that he blabs about or shuts the hell up on what it should do or not do and especially what he thinks Apple should or should not do.

The reason Apple works is that everyone knows their place.

Whine about hypocrisy on Apple and blame Steve Jobs. Don't forget you get the operating system you have because of these purported hypocrites of industry.

512ke
Oct 31, 2007, 02:53 PM
Cool comments. After Steve Jobs got kicked out of Apple, he started Next and Pixar.

Maybe Woz will start a company and back up his talk about what the iPhone should be with action.

I wish he would!

Maccus Aurelius
Oct 31, 2007, 03:03 PM
Apple should hand out free puppies with every Macbook sold in any retail location. Give me a promotion!

rjwill246
Oct 31, 2007, 03:34 PM
Cool comments. After Steve Jobs got kicked out of Apple, he started Next and Pixar.

Maybe Woz will start a company and back up his talk about what the iPhone should be with action.

I wish he would!

Will never happen- Woz, was-- he is a not now and never will be.
He is not a luminary, has little vision and could never make a product that would be useful. His utility left him many moons ago.
Put SJ and him side by side and you have NO comparison.

fastbite
Oct 31, 2007, 03:34 PM
If only Jobs and Woz would team up, Jobs being the marketer and Woz handling the creative direction. Sigh.
Are you serious! Steve Wozniak remains me of my mother -- lovely lady, but give me a brake.

Rantipole
Oct 31, 2007, 03:38 PM
Let’s get one thing straight. The limitations of the iPhone, some of which Woz alludes to, are ENTIRELY due to ATT and how the cellphone industry currently works in the US. Jobs has commented on this before (referring to mobile phone service providers as sphincters or something). Also, Walt Mossberg had an article on this subject recently in the Wall Street Journal. I’m sure the iPhone would be “more like a computer” and a lot “freer” if it weren’t for the paranoid business model of mobile phone companies.

exigentsky
Oct 31, 2007, 04:12 PM
Let’s get one thing straight. The limitations of the iPhone, some of which Woz alludes to, are ENTIRELY due to ATT and how the cellphone industry currently works in the US. Jobs has commented on this before (referring to mobile phone service providers as sphincters or something). Also, Walt Mossberg had an article on this subject recently in the Wall Street Journal. I’m sure the iPhone would be “more like a computer” and a lot “freer” if it weren’t for the paranoid business model of mobile phone companies.

It's easy to excuse Apple, but maybe you're forgetting that even if it is due to AT&T, they agreed to these terms. I'm sure they could have negotiated something better for consumers, but I guess the shareholders weren't too thrilled about it. I can see it now: "What? We can't charge the consumer twice for what they already own!?! Blasphemy!" Apple is as guilty as AT&T regardless of whether or not they favored such terms.

lazyrighteye
Oct 31, 2007, 04:28 PM
It's always nice to see a legend like Woz candidly speak about these issues. I mostly agree with him, especially on the iPhone. It's ridiculous that it is so locked down in almost every way. He is spot on that you should be able to install new programs and your own ringtones. It's also disgusting that Apple is charging an extra 99c just for using A SONG YOU ALREADY OWN to make a 30 sec ringtone. It's as if I purchase pepper from the store and I have to buy a separate one for every food. I have to buy one for soup, one for steak, etc. Apple shouldn't be allowed to do this; we shouldn't tolerate it.

this may have been addressed one time or another but, re: iPhone, apple is partnering with att. don't you think it is att's idea of locking the phone? don't you think it is the riaa's idea of selling the songs again to create ringtones? maybe apple signed an nda to not discuss this. not defending apple, but this is one possibility.

First, I heart Woz.
He's the only person I'd rather head Apple than Jobs.

Second, redapple is most definitely right with regards to ringtones: has everything to do with the labels, the RIAA and greed.

Third, what exigentsky touches on is a prefect example of the short-sightedness that is killing the industry (be it music or film).
If I ran a recording label - we would be offering free ringtones as fast as possible. Every track of our entire catalog. No strings attached. Free. Go get em. Use them. Share them. Spread the word.
Why?
Exposure.
Saturation.
It's not rocket science. It's no different than the free samples at the grocery store. The odds dramatically increase that I'll buy some new cracker if I get a free sample. Otherwise, like most people, I'll stick with what I know. Same goes for music. If I can freely acquire, use and share ringtones, the odds of me and my friends actually purchasing the single (or album or concert ticket) increases, big time.
The alternative is what we have today: people, like me, that like the concept of ringtones but are not willing (or able) to purchase the track and then repurchase the ringtone. Thus, less exposure, decreases the odds of their product being purchased and so on...

It's this moronic, short-sighted greed that is completely missing the point and actually, in the end, costing those same greedy f*cks even more revenue.

It really can be both this simple and extremely profitable. Just look at Phish's open taping policy.
http://www.phish.com/guidelines/index.php?category=6
This allowed fans to freely enjoy and share the band's music which led to their massive following and constant sold out tours. They got right what the labels have gotten so incredibly wrong.

I'm just saying...

HLdan
Oct 31, 2007, 04:30 PM
yeah I agree. I think it is getting time for Jobs to step down. While Jobs is a good CEO when the company was in trouble right now with the company doing great I think he is a poor CEO and likes to have to much control. I do agree apple is rather very hypercritical in how they act. I can not stand hypocrites and that is what apple has become. Jobs is leading them down that path and it is getting time for him to step down and let some else take control and lead the company. It needs fresh leadership and some one who is less of a control freak. Apple is a huge control freak of a company.

You totally contradict yourself when you say that. First you say that Jobs was good when the company was in trouble and now that he has brought it up to a profitable company he should take a hike? The company is where it is today because of his being a good CEO. What do mean by control freak? How has SJ being a control freak affected your daily computing?
You can't just make anyone who seems like a nice guy and has a passion for the company a CEO.
Apple's products are top notch and their OS is better than ever and Apple has become the king of multimedia and now you think the CEO needs to step down? When the company starts going down is when the CEO needs to leave which is why SJ was fired in the beginning.
The company is big today because of him and you have to admit he makes the Macworld shows exciting, WWDC is exciting, his idea to keep quiet on new products before they are unveiled has made it fun.
Not even Bill Gates makes computing fun.

vga4life
Oct 31, 2007, 04:39 PM
Woz is not the right person to be CEO of Apple (not now, not yesterday, not tomorrow) but Apple only exists because Woz was in the right place at the right time to design the Apple I and II (dram architecture, 1200 bps tape interface, IWM floppy controller, hand-coding integer basic in machine language, etc.)

I will eat a shoe if there's a single Woz hater here with a tenth Woz's engineering chops. Y'all snot-nosed hater punks need to grow up.

Mike Teezie
Oct 31, 2007, 04:43 PM
First, I heart Woz.
He's the only person I'd rather head Apple than Jobs.

Second, redapple is most definitely right with regards to ringtones: has everything to do with the labels, the RIAA and greed.

Third, what exigentsky touches on is a prefect example of the short-sightedness that is killing the industry (be it music or film).

If I ran a recording label - we would be offering free ringtones as fast as possible. Every track of our entire catalog. No strings attached. Free. Go get em. Use them. Share them. Spread the word.
Why?
Exposure.
Saturation.
It's not rocket science. It's no different than the free samples at the grocery store. The odds dramatically increase that I'll buy some new cracker if I get a free sample. Otherwise, like most people, I'll stick with what I know. Same goes for music. If I'm can freely acquire, use and share ringtones, the odds of me and my friends actually purchasing the single (or album or concert ticket) increases, big time.
The alternative is what we have today: people, like me, that like the concept of ringtones but are not willing (or able) to purchase the track and then repurchase the ringtone. Thus, less exposure, decreases the odds of their product being purchased and so on...

It's this moronic, short-sighted greed that is completely missing the point and actually, in the end, costing those same greedy f*cks even more revenue.

It really can be both this simple and extremely profitable. Just look at Phish's open taping policy.
http://www.phish.com/guidelines/index.php?category=6
This allowed fans to freely enjoy and share the band's music which led to their massive following and constant sold out tours. They got right what the labels have gotten so incredibly wrong.

I'm just saying...



And if I were a shareholder with the company that you ran, I'd be calling for your head. Do you really believe that giving away ringtones would push regular music sales so high that they would throw away a 500 million dollar industry?

I guess I'm the minority. I'm only 25, but I know enough to know that music has never been free. It's a product, and there are companies that own that product. You have to pay to use the product.

Say Apple let's you use any mp3/aac as your ringtone. They piss off the owners of all that precious material at the iTunes store, who don't see any reason to piss 500 million down the drain. I don't think Apple can afford to do that, and lose all those precious iPod sales.

I've bought exactly one ring tone, and I don't use it. Apple's system is amazing. It was worth $2. That's certainly cheaper than the systems in place now, and the implementation is obviously far, far superior. Definitely worth it.

Cleverboy
Oct 31, 2007, 04:49 PM
Somebody already said this but I agree in that Woz is ONLY saying this because he doesn't have to deal with ANYTHING that he says.

He can make himself out to be such a good guy, and a hero to the people... but it's because he doesn't have to back anything up.

Hey everyone... I think war is stupid and if I had the power... everyone would live in peace and be rich and live forever!!!! Who likes what I said? Anyone? Must mean I'd make a great world leader.Yup. That's exactly it. I'm all for popular ideals, but I'm for practical ideas more. When push comes to shove, where do you stand on the hard decisions where there is no "right" answer... and when the smoke clears, how will history regard your choices you made? Legacy is painful when the buck stops at your desk.

~ CB

the vj
Oct 31, 2007, 05:12 PM
"Why in the world can I not install a ringtone that I've made? How would that hurt AT&T's network? Here is Steve Jobs sending letters to the record companies saying [they] should provide music that's unprotected"

Ouch... I feel hurted and it wasn't with me. :confused:

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 05:13 PM
Why does everyone seem to think Woz is creative? Woz is a good engineer, a great engineer. But creative?.. No, not at all.

Steve Jobs was the visionary, always was and always will be. Without his vision of what the PC should be we never would have had the Mac. He was the driving force behind all of what makes Apple so great today- OS X, the iPod/iPhone family, the Mac. Not only did he have the vision, but the keen business sense to reinvigorate the Apple brand through marketing, opening retail stores, etc..

Woz could have NEVER done what Jobs has done with Apple in the last 10 years. This is why Jobs is at the helm of one of the fastest growing companies in tech, and Woz is playing with laser pointers and talking about the pranks he likes to pull.

LOL, I was trying to be nice by calling him creative.

Nicky G
Oct 31, 2007, 05:16 PM
As an AAPL shareholder, I am glad teenagers like some of the folks on this forum are not running multi-billion-dollar companies I own a stake of.

First, people have no idea what Woz even contributed to the original Apple. Hint -- almost nothing you now think of as a "Mac" was created by Woz. Woz, way back in the day, was good at designing elegant hardware circuit-boards and the like. Now, Apple has Intel to do that stuff. Woz I believe still technically is an Apple employee, although I guess it's probably in name only, because any responsible employee wouldn't spout so much crap abut their employer. Woz WAS involved in a cellphone/communicator startup, it was called Danger, and if you think he would be involved with a better phone than Steve Jobs go pick up a Sidekick and shut up, because that was Woz's cellphone.

10.5 kicks butt, I don't care about some of it's rough point-oh edges. It's freaking awesome, it dramatically improved the performance of my dual 2GHz MacBook Pro and gave me a ton of new features AND stability to boot. Apple has an awesome hardware lineup now, although servers/RAIDs could seriously stand updates. But desktops, laptops, and software-wise, they are doing awesome. Not to mention iPhone, iPod, etc. Why does anyone feel Apple is floundering now? They are a stronger company now than they have EVER been. They are innovating, making tons of money, expanding their business -- anyone who wants Jobs to step down needs to stay as far away from the world of business as possible, because you have no idea what you're talking about, at all.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 05:17 PM
Woz should still be employed by Apple at certain levels of development. While his business views might be concurrent with a teenager, or his 1974 persona, his ideas of computers' functions are extremely valid. Most of the computer market is oriented to computers as a lifestyle instead of computers as a tool to accentuate non-technical people. Apple is going in that direction, but should make even greater strides and separate almost completely from the dopey nerd-pack.

Think about it .... Why is Woz not working for Apple?
You are wishing for what it could be without knowing the reasons for the way they are.

Answer: The two of them are not as close as some would think.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 05:22 PM
Gah! It's not about PAYING for a ringtone that's an issue, it's about not being able to use your OWN ringtone that is. I would gladly pay for software to put a ringtone of my own creation on my cell phone, and would even consider paying for the "service" to convert a audio file to a ringtone. The fact that you can only do this with a select number of songs (not even sounds) on iTunes does not satisfy my desire for a ringtone that is unlike everyone else's.

Is it right to charge $3/ringtone that I own the rights to, one of my own creation? That's a decision that the market will determine.



I think that the quote means that Woz wanted the comupter to be an enabler to the dreams of the users, rather than force the users to become computer experts in order to realize their dreams. This is done by making them easier to use, but also has to be balanced by making sure that the features are rich enough to fully realize them. This is often down through third-party applications.

-jt2

If you are not happy return the fricking phone or sell it in eBay. Why you buy a closed device and then sit here and complain?

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 05:26 PM
but a lot of people forget about when Jobs was fired. Jobs needed to be fired from apple back then. He was going to kill the company if he was not removed. Even Steve Jobs agrees that when he was fired from apple it was the right thing to do.

To me Jobs seems good at getting a company off the ground and starting it up but when it become successful and larger he fails to have to adapt to the new rules of the game. The very strong interlinking between apple stuff start backfiring after a while and starts becoming the undoing. I think Jobs fails when it comes to that part.

This is why I think it time for Jobs to announce he is retiring/stepping down from CEO. If he does it right it not going to really phase the stock prices or the company much at all. Just announce when he plans on handing over the reins to some new like a year away. This gives remove the shock factor.

I think you should attend the next shareholder meeting and raise those issues and ask for a vote to remove Steve.

If you are not a shareholder then buy the stock and do the above.

If not willing to buy and participate in governing the company, why you posting?

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 05:26 PM
If you are not happy return the fricking phone or sell it in eBay. Why you buy a closed device and then sit here and complain?

It was only quite recently that we learnt Apple only allow ringtones uploads that are bought from iTunes. Before that, it was a guessing game to whether apple would allow freely uploadable ring tones.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 05:28 PM
You said it right. Lets look at the quotes from the interview:

"The real dreams of how it will work for someone who knows nothing about the computer have been lost and don't get addressed anymore."

Well, why don't you address it then? Anybody could be saying that. It does not mean they are geniuses. Seriously, this guy was a great engineer, but not a visionary. And what has he done after the Apple I, II, and some limited influence on the Macintosh? I know what he does now, and it is great, but although it helps us all, as human beings, (his altruist job is remarkable), it has no impact in the computer industry, and it has been like that for a long time.

Just look at this other quote for the interview:

"Question: Beyond touch, how would you like to see user interfaces evolve?
SW Answer: I don't think anything revolutionary is close on the horizon, but I guess you never know. I didn't think the iPhone would be as pleasing. I was really surprised. Eventually, I would love a little computer with a camera that recognizes me, and I can throw a lot of little gestures at it, and it responds to what I say and do. It will be very hard to create a computer that can understand our voice and our rhythm."

Is that supposed to be a great visionary of the computer industry that will take Apple to the next level? that answer certainly cannot be one to tag as ingenious.

And about his rant on the iPhone being closed, etc., as I said before, Apple had things planned long ago. They are not talking about an SDK because of the pressure from the whiners, I mean hackers, etc. they just wanted to do it right, and that is what they said since day one.

As for ring-tones, it is not Apple's decision to charge for it. In this digital era of greedy labels trying to survive, it is in their legal definition of fair use that you cannot use your music for such thing. That is why they sell you the ring-tone capability as extra. In fact, that is something usually sold at a higher price by other cellular companies. Additionally, I read somewhere that the artists actually fought for this one with the record labels, since they wanted to control and sell the ring tones directly, but it was concluded that the labels had the rights on the music and its uses, or something to that effect. The one thing that Apple could have done, though, is to implement the ring tone builder to work on music that has no DRM protection. I guess the problem is that labels are already selling music without DRM and they still consider the ring-tone usage as something outside of their fair use agreement. Anyway, I think Apple could have done something else so you can create your own ring-tones using whatever you like, Garage Band, a microphone, etc.m but that is about it. And that whole ring-tone thing is more of a popular trend that will fade in a couple of years, or at least until those users grow up. (No offense to heavy ring-tone users)

His ego is bigger than his gird.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 05:31 PM
Cool comments. After Steve Jobs got kicked out of Apple, he started Next and Pixar.

Maybe Woz will start a company and back up his talk about what the iPhone should be with action.

I wish he would!

Yes he should stop complaining and instead do something positive, it is not like he is poor, and abously he has an opinion that is different from the direction Apple is taking.

It is easy to do the talk, it is much harder to do the walk and that goes also for all those that think they can do better than Steve and the Board of directors.

Stop the bull and do the action.

La Porta
Oct 31, 2007, 05:34 PM
News Flash: Woz LEFT Apple...over 2 decades ago. If he wanted to go back, he would. He doesn't. He works the education sector now. He wasn't fired or booted or anything like that.

Second: If Jobs left Apple now, we would return to the Apple that existed from the Mac II to the 20th Anniversary Mac. OS X would undergo slight improvements over the next 20 years, getting to version 10.7.45 Rev. B Update 2.0, with System Enabler 1.3 (or some insane garbage, old time System 7 users can feel me). Macs development would become stagnant. iPods would increase in capacity...but no new interface would come out.

A lot of people don't realize that Steve Job's cracking the whip, beating people into the shape that his ideas take, constantly demanding more and more is what makes Apple what it IS. Without his insanity, no one would push the envelope quite as hard. I, for one, dread the day when he does get to be too old to be CEO. Then what will we do? (hopefully we gain ~50% market share by then!).

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 05:34 PM
Are you serious! Steve Wozniak remains me of my mother -- lovely lady, but give me a brake.

She is fat, rich and has a beard?

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 05:47 PM
"Why in the world can I not install a ringtone that I've made? How would that hurt AT&T's network? Here is Steve Jobs sending letters to the record companies saying [they] should provide music that's unprotected"

Ouch... I feel hurted and it wasn't with me. :confused:

You can, just need a different phone. This one is closed and has always been, and it was known from the start.

Why is it that everyone wants the iPhone to be something it is not?

There are other phones out there that may meet your needs better.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 05:54 PM
It was only quite recently that we learnt Apple only allow ringtones uploads that are bought from iTunes. Before that, it was a guessing game to whether apple would allow freely uploadable ring tones.

Before that it was not a choice that Apple provided. It is a closed phone, it has the features they decide to implement and they are implemented in the way they decide.

How come nobody complains this bitterly about the capabilites of other phones?

Lets be fair folks, we all knew what we were getting into, deal with it. If you don't like it return it or sell it or write to Apple and complain.

What exactly are people getting accomplish by moaming and telling everyone how much better they and Woz would run the company?

Take action, vote your shares, vote with your wallet or quit bitching.

This is not constructive and it hurts the company you seem to love.

Do you kick your mom when she does not let you see a ceirtain TV show?

Why you kicking Apple?

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 06:09 PM
Because other phones ( bought out of contract ):
- don't lock the consumer into a carrier
- freely allow 3rd party apps to be installed
- not locked down to high heaven
- allow ringtones to be uploaded freely ( clearly: an Apple decision to make the consumer buy from iTunes )
- more importantly: have capabilities far beyond what the iPhone offers ( except UI )


How come nobody complains this bitterly about the capabilites of other phones?

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 06:09 PM
All i can see happening with apple ever since the above named 3 is Greedyness, 85% market share means power, and as always , absolute power corrupts absolutly , i thought steve and apple were above that but the proof that they aren't is there to be seen all over the place, just look at the prices in EUROS, it has been long proven that that is not only Taxes.
Ringtones, And locked phones, i'll stillbe bying all of it but i really dislike the greedyness of the Apple companie.

Buy a Dell and run Vista or Linux.

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 06:13 PM
Because other phones ( bought out of contract ):
- don't lock the consumer into a carrier
- freely allow 3rd party apps to be installed
- not locked down to high heaven
- allow ringtones to be uploaded freely
- more importantly: have capabilities far beyond what the iPhone offers ( except UI )

So why you want an inferior product like the iPhone when you have so many other reasonable and fair choices?

Again, the iPhone is what it is, take it or leave it. Buy it when it meets your needs, until then buy something that is appropriate to your opinion and life style.

kresh
Oct 31, 2007, 06:18 PM
Because other phones ( bought out of contract ):
- don't lock the consumer into a carrier
- freely allow 3rd party apps to be installed
- not locked down to high heaven
- allow ringtones to be uploaded freely ( clearly: an Apple decision to make the consumer buy from iTunes )
- more importantly: have capabilities far beyond what the iPhone offers ( except UI )

Not trying to be a smart-alek, this is a serious question, why don't you just buy one of those?

Seriously, if one has such problems with the iPhone then don't buy it.

HLdan
Oct 31, 2007, 06:25 PM
Because other phones ( bought out of contract ):
- don't lock the consumer into a carrier
- freely allow 3rd party apps to be installed
- not locked down to high heaven
- allow ringtones to be uploaded freely ( clearly: an Apple decision to make the consumer buy from iTunes )
- more importantly: have capabilities far beyond what the iPhone offers ( except UI )

It's amazing how you conveniently forgot about the main feature that other cell phone companies block the customer's freedom of use. Shall we say, Bluetooth? Almost every cell phone company disables the majority of the Bluetooth features accept for the ability to use it for the Bluetooth headset. T-Mobile is the only company I was able to buy a Razr phone from that had all the Bluetooth functionality open.
It pisses me off that these companies block the Bluetooth because many of them won't allow me to even sync my phonebook on the computer. So since I want that feature what did I do? Bought a phone from T-Mobile that allowed me to use Bluetooth the way I want.

Stop complaining about what Apple blocks from the customer, they are not the only ones. Get what works the way you want our don't buy anything.

isoMorpheus
Oct 31, 2007, 06:29 PM
Why did Woz leave Apple?

EagerDragon
Oct 31, 2007, 06:30 PM
I just get bend over all the complaining and the lack of action.

Every system, game console, computer and phone was designed with a set of principles that we may or may not agree with.

But they are what they are, and there is little we can do other than write to the company and not purchase the product in its current form.

Sooner or later they will get the message or flat out ignore us until enough of us stop buying.

ACTION is the thing to do.

I am not necessarily against some of the opinions expressed here, as a matter of fact I agree with most of you to some degree or another.

What I do not agree with is all the bellyaching about a cat not being checkered when big G did not decide to have that version of the cat. If you absolutely need to have a checkered cat, don't buy the current model and then complain it is not checkered.

If the show does not look good or provide you the right support, don't buy it.

If you do not think Apple is being run properly, don't buy their product, buy a competitor product that fits you better.

Send the message home where it counts, I do not think this forum is the right place. Try the Apple feedback site instead.

Flame away.

irun5k
Oct 31, 2007, 06:40 PM
Some are saying that AT&T is the reason why the iPhone is the way it is. For example, locked down, no iChat, etc. I'm not sure this is entirely true but it may have something to do with it.

That begs a question about the iPod touch. This device is handicapped by Apple so it won't cannibalize iPhone sales. And the iPhone may be hadicapped by AT&T? it is no wonder the iPod touch is so limited.

So the question is, wouldn't Apple have been better off to NEVER have released a phone? If there was no iPhone, they'd be free to remove every single artificial limitation on the iPod Touch's feature set, and develop even more new features. One micro example: The iPod touch could have iChat AV assuming they decided to include a camera. As it stands, the iPod touch may never get any iChat simply because the iPhone won't ever get iChat, presumably because AT&T doesn't want it because it will compete with SMS.

If there was no iPhone, the iPod Touch might have been one of the most killer handheld products ever created. But as it stands, the iPhone and indirectly, AT&T, are severely handicapping it.

mfethers
Oct 31, 2007, 06:48 PM
I still am a little confused as to why I should be listening to Woz anymore. What's the last significant contribution he's made to technology since leaving Apple. Seriously, it seems like all he does is sit around and pretend to know what companies should do. What would have happened to Apple if he stayed on?

His comments about usability are ridiculous. Computers are complex because we keep heaping on expectations. Just come to this forum and listen to all the complaining about what our computers won't do. And of all the companies, Apple has made unbelievably complicated issues simple. Rendevous, spotlight, even burning a CD in iTunes, all made amazingly simple because of the innovation. Imagine how many frickin' icons you'd have to have in order to "simplify" anything, short of the Star Trek face recognition he talked about.

I just keep listening to this guy, thinking about how much he sounds like my dad ranting about politics - and not in a good way...

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 07:06 PM
So why you want an inferior product like the iPhone when you have so many other reasonable and fair choices?

Again, the iPhone is what it is, take it or leave it. Buy it when it meets your needs, until then buy something that is appropriate to your opinion and life style.


Not trying to be a smart-alek, this is a serious question, why don't you just buy one of those?

Seriously, if one has such problems with the iPhone then don't buy it.

Obviously, I haven't bought one - nor will I - not until Apple open it up, including the carrier. I can still comment on the iPhone. The iPhone has a great UI, but very little else, as it stands at this moment in time.


Apple manufactured the iPhone and *they* crippled BT functionality. Thats the difference. Apple are not the carrier, AT&T have not crippled the BT functionality ( and they carry phones that DO have BT enabled phones ).


It's amazing how you conveniently forgot about the main feature that other cell phone companies block the customer's freedom of use. Shall we say, Bluetooth? Almost every cell phone company disables the majority of the Bluetooth features accept for the ability to use it for the Bluetooth headset. T-Mobile is the only company I was able to buy a Razr phone from that had all the Bluetooth functionality open.
It pisses me off that these companies block the Bluetooth because many of them won't allow me to even sync my phonebook on the computer. So since I want that feature what did I do? Bought a phone from T-Mobile that allowed me to use Bluetooth the way I want.

Stop complaining about what Apple blocks from the customer, they are not the only ones. Get what works the way you want our don't buy anything.

HLdan
Oct 31, 2007, 07:22 PM
Apple manufactured the iPhone and *they* crippled BT functionality. Thats the difference. Apple are not the carrier, AT&T have not crippled the BT functionality ( and they carry phones that DO have BT enabled phones ).

Okay so think about it, would Apple sell a bunch of ringtones if they left the Bluetooth opened up? I have never bought a single ringtone on my Bluetooth Razr. Why? because I have full access to Bluetooth ringtones to my phone. I worked for Sprint for 7 years and I can tell you that cell phones are ALL sold below cost and although Apple makes the iPhone they have only sold over 1 million of them. Most likely they have not made even a fraction of their money back spent on R&D.
Companies have to cell extra web features on the phones to make any profit.

It's obvious you don't want Apple to make a profit on the iPhone, you just want them to make you happy as a customer and that's just not realistic for it to be all about the customer's happiness.

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 07:52 PM
Thats your experience, but you shouldn't make yourself a benchmark for the population ( but I doubt you'd do that:) ). The fact is the ringtone market is huge despite people being able to upload ringtones to their ( non iPhone ) phones without restriction.

I don't care if Apple sells ring tones, but what I do object to is making people pay for ringtones twice for the tones they may already ( legally ) have.

Apple will still sell ringtones if iPhone had no restriction - the size of the ringtone market tells you that. Additionally Apple make it quite easily for the customer to choose the section of the song they want as a tone - which is great. I think your underestimating ring tones on iTunes.

From your argument, you think that Apple should force people to buy any music they put on their iPod - since the iTunes purchases music per iPod customer is low? That should crank up the ratio more ( and kill off the iPod!!!)



Okay so think about it, would Apple sell a bunch of ringtones if they left the Bluetooth opened up? I have never bought a single ringtone on my Bluetooth Razr. Why? because I have full access to Bluetooth ringtones to my phone. I worked for Sprint for 7 years and I can tell you that cell phones are ALL sold below cost and although Apple makes the iPhone they have only sold over 1 million of them. Most likely they have not made even a fraction of their money back spent on R&D.
Companies have to cell extra web features on the phones to make any profit.

It's obvious you don't want Apple to make a profit on the iPhone, you just want them to make you happy as a customer and that's just not realistic for it to be all about the customer's happiness.

rjwill246
Oct 31, 2007, 08:06 PM
It's amazing how you conveniently forgot about the main feature that other cell phone companies block the customer's freedom of use. Shall we say, Bluetooth?
Stella, has never been on track, so no worries. He is a pot stirrer with little appreciation of the business world and like the person who said "oh please" when I mentioned freeloaders, cannot fathom out why Apple/ATT have done what they did.

I would expect no less and they could expect no more...

Stella
Oct 31, 2007, 08:21 PM
Stella, has never been on track, so no worries. He is a pot stirrer with little appreciation of the business world and like the person who said "oh please" when I mentioned freeloaders, cannot fathom out why Apple/ATT have done what they did.

I would expect no less and they could expect no more...

Oh, your the one who likes to ( but fails to ) troll me and flame bait...

mihiruthere93
Oct 31, 2007, 09:14 PM
finally, someone understand's our pleas

gmanrique
Oct 31, 2007, 09:18 PM
Apple employes in Europe are paid in Euros, not in US$ nor according to US salaries. And so is the rest of the business. Each country has its own economy and companies work/deal around it. Do you complain to a home builder who is selling houses at a higher price (same model) in San Jose California, than in springfield? No.

All i can see happening with apple ever since the above named 3 is Greedyness, 85% market share means power, and as always , absolute power corrupts absolutly , i thought steve and apple were above that but the proof that they aren't is there to be seen all over the place, just look at the prices in EUROS, it has been long proven that that is not only Taxes.
Ringtones, And locked phones, i'll stillbe bying all of it but i really dislike the greedyness of the Apple companie.

megfilmworks
Oct 31, 2007, 09:33 PM
yeah I agree. I think it is getting time for Jobs to step down. I do agree apple is rather very hypercritical in how they act. I can not stand hypocrites .
The day Steve Jobs steps down is the day Apple stock nose dives.
By the way, which is it; "hypercritical" or "hypocritical"?

gmanrique
Oct 31, 2007, 09:43 PM
On a more serious note, keep in mind that his engineer skills are not being argued, even if it was a long time ago since he did something worth it, from a pure engineering point of view. But the vision we are talking about here is not Woz. Steve Jobs was the visionary, simple as that. He used the UI from Xerox, and the engineering skills from Woz. That is how it all happened.


Woz is not the right person to be CEO of Apple (not now, not yesterday, not tomorrow) but Apple only exists because Woz was in the right place at the right time to design the Apple I and II (dram architecture, 1200 bps tape interface, IWM floppy controller, hand-coding integer basic in machine language, etc.)

I will eat a shoe if there's a single Woz hater here with a tenth Woz's engineering chops. Y'all snot-nosed hater punks need to grow up.

gmanrique
Oct 31, 2007, 09:54 PM
Seriously, you said it: "more importantly: have capabilities far beyond what the iPhone offers". So if it is that important, it would be sort of idiotic to buy a product that does not let me do what I want and then complain about it.

Edit: Oops. Others already pointed this out. And I saw your response already.

Because other phones ( bought out of contract ):
- don't lock the consumer into a carrier
- freely allow 3rd party apps to be installed
- not locked down to high heaven
- allow ringtones to be uploaded freely ( clearly: an Apple decision to make the consumer buy from iTunes )
- more importantly: have capabilities far beyond what the iPhone offers ( except UI )

CJD2112
Oct 31, 2007, 11:42 PM
She is fat, rich and has a beard?

ROFL pwned

CJD2112
Oct 31, 2007, 11:46 PM
It's amazing how you conveniently forgot about the main feature that other cell phone companies block the customer's freedom of use. Shall we say, Bluetooth? Almost every cell phone company disables the majority of the Bluetooth features accept for the ability to use it for the Bluetooth headset. T-Mobile is the only company I was able to buy a Razr phone from that had all the Bluetooth functionality open.

Wrong. Cingular doesn't (or didn't). I was a Verizon customer for years until the crippled the bluetooth on the v710 and RAZR (they lost in California suits in 2005 regarding crippling the ObEx in the Motorola v710 in order to charge customers for their "Get it Now" ringtones and pictures file exchange service). I switched to Cingular and had two RAZR's, neither were crippled. Now that ATT acquired Cingular, I am not certain if they changed bluetooth on their phones as I have the iPhone currently, but my RAZR still have full Bluetooth capabilities with my Mac (and all I would need to do is drop in my SIM card to use it again).

CJD2112
Oct 31, 2007, 11:47 PM
ACTION is the thing to do.

I couldn't agree more. Action is the best solution in any situation; in commerce, politics, etc. Consumer dollars speak volumes, and the less people buy the more companies will listen.

rjwill246
Nov 1, 2007, 12:12 AM
Oh, your the one who likes to ( but fails to ) troll me and flame bait...
You are joking-- that would be a waste of time! I do like to deal with real issues and people with the capacity to interact in an intelligent way-- so no, that would not apply to you. There is hope, as it springs eternal-- yeah, right!

Galaxius
Nov 1, 2007, 12:12 AM
I read Wozniak's autobiography and he still is with Apple but doesn't really "work". He gets paid the lowest salary an engineer makes. Without him the computer wouldn't be around so he is a great visionary, but in terms of business, he said himself in his book he never would want to be a manager type.

Roderick Usher
Nov 1, 2007, 02:02 AM
There are a few books that anyone who purports to know about Apple's history should read. They don't give you the simplistic and sanitized version of history that's propagated as gospel through various forums - they give you everything, dirty laundry and all. Why read it? Any real fans of Apple owe it to themselves to acquire a complete and honest picture of a company that has clearly meant a lot to them on a personal level. And, more to the subject at hand, this picture is essential to understanding Steve Wozniak and where he comes from. The books are:

West of Eden - Frank Rose
Accidental Millionaire - Lee Butcher
The Little Kingdom: The Private Story of Apple Computer - Michael Moritz

Steve Wozniak earns his right to be heard by being one of the main reasons that this forum even exists for you to post in. The reason his work with the Apple I and II receives such enduring acclaim, acclaim that can seem obnoxious to a younger generation (as evidenced by some of the posts in this thread), is that it stands in its own league as an engineering achievement. Consider the meaning of that idiom: in its own league. It's not enough to know that he "designed the innards of the Apple II," because that doesn't provide the proper context to what he did. The other two computers of the famous 1977 trio, the Commodore PET and the Radio Shack TRS-80, were designed and produced by established companies. The Apple II's motherboard, its architecture, its resident programming language, its expansion slots and amazingly efficient disk controller that, more than any other components, were responsible for the machine's (and thus Apple's) success - all of this was engineered by one man. There was absolutely no precedent in the computer industry for anything like it; old-timers and knowledgeable geeks recognize the true magnitude of Wozniak's contribution, even after younger folk and the popular media have sloughed it off and now mindlessly perpetuate a legend that they themselves do not understand. I find it hilarious that people are actually debating the appropriateness of him offering public opinions on the company - he's vetted. He's got his cred. Without the Apple II, there would have been no Mac, and that alone qualifies him to offer up his opinions at any time. What he's done since the Apple II, or whether he has an active role in Apple or even the computer industry in general, is irrelevant. It's disappointing that he hasn't continued to fully apply his engineering genius in greener pastures, but that in no way lessens his authority to speak.

Mr.Texor
Nov 1, 2007, 02:05 AM
As far as ringtones go - AT&T is not the only partner Apple has to deal with, there are also the record companies. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple is charging for ringtones and locking down the installation process because the record companies are applying a lot of pressure. Ringtones are a multi-billion dollar industry and I'll bet they are loathe to give up on that revenue source. Greedy bastards.

I'm pretty sure that the record companies are the ones that should be blamed for the ringtones price. Reason to believe this? Not all songs can be made into ringtones.. Unlike other cell phone makes, apple has to deal with record companies because of itunes.. I bet the RIAA told them they wanted a share of the ringtones or they would pull out of itunes.. or something similar...

winterspan
Nov 1, 2007, 02:26 AM
The 60's/70's are over, hippy. Reality is that computerized devices are tools to perform specific tasks in lieu of doing things manually (and hopefully the computer is better/smarter at it).

If Woz was so concerned he would have not given up designing computer systems to indoctrinating young heads full of mush into the State School system in the People's Republic of California.

He basically sounds like a jilted ex-lover of Steve Jobs, bitter with betrayal all those years ago when Jobs dared to try make profit (and thus make a living, and provide a living to millions of people in the information age) off of some Utopian pie-in-the-sky idea of a computer thought up by Woz.

Go back to dating that moronic convergence of a red-head Woz, the world has moved on - so should you.

Could you leave politics out of it please? No one wants to hear your conservative (i.e. ignorant, obtuse, orthodox, self-serving, zealot) *************
Besides, don't you have a "homosexual agenda" to be fighting?

mdriftmeyer
Nov 1, 2007, 05:24 AM
I read Wozniak's autobiography and he still is with Apple but doesn't really "work". He gets paid the lowest salary an engineer makes. Without him the computer wouldn't be around so he is a great visionary, but in terms of business, he said himself in his book he never would want to be a manager type.

Without him, the computer that he envisioned would have been credited to someone else who would come along not too long after him.

winterspan
Nov 1, 2007, 06:31 AM
The 60's/70's are over, hippy. Reality is that computerized devices are tools to perform specific tasks in lieu of doing things manually (and hopefully the computer is better/smarter at it).

If Woz was so concerned he would have not given up designing computer systems to indoctrinating young heads full of mush into the State School system in the People's Republic of California.

He basically sounds like a jilted ex-lover of Steve Jobs, bitter with betrayal all those years ago when Jobs dared to try make profit (and thus make a living, and provide a living to millions of people in the information age) off of some Utopian pie-in-the-sky idea of a computer thought up by Woz.

Go back to dating that moronic convergence of a red-head Woz, the world has moved on - so should you.

Could you leave politics out of it please? No one wants to hear your conservative (i.e. ignorant, obtuse, orthodox, self-serving) crap. Besides, don't you have a "homosexual agenda" or "war on christmas" to be fighting? :eek:

Stella
Nov 1, 2007, 06:33 AM
You are joking-- that would be a waste of time! I do like to deal with real issues and people with the capacity to interact in an intelligent way-- so no, that would not apply to you. There is hope, as it springs eternal-- yeah, right!

This debate was enjoyable, but then its ruined by people ( like you ) deliberately posting for flame baits and needless trolling, especially when you have nothing to add or back up your arguments ( which you have none ).

gmanrique
Nov 1, 2007, 06:42 AM
He did not create the concept of the PC, neither the UI that Macs have since inception. He designed what he was, mostly, told.

I read Wozniak's autobiography and he still is with Apple but doesn't really "work". He gets paid the lowest salary an engineer makes. Without him the computer wouldn't be around so he is a great visionary, but in terms of business, he said himself in his book he never would want to be a manager type.

gmanrique
Nov 1, 2007, 06:51 AM
Nobody is arguing his engineering achivements from 30 years ago. (Yes, I said engineering, and not visionary. His vision at the time was not the PC until a couple of people talk to him and convinced him to do something like that).

What we, or at least me, argue with this, oh so glorified interview, is the idiotic comments that now seem to be taken as the gospel when in fact make no sense. Such jewels like:

"The real dreams of how it will work for someone who knows nothing about the computer have been lost and don't get addressed anymore." (Him included in those not 'addressing' this issue)

"I don't think anything revolutionary is close on the horizon, but I guess you never know."

"Eventually, I would love a little computer with a camera that recognizes me, and I can throw a lot of little gestures at it, and it responds to what I say and do. It will be very hard to create a computer that can understand our voice and our rhythm."

I feel so enlightened with his quotes. :rolleyes:

BTW, his authority to speak is lessen by his comments, not by this forum comments.

There are a few books that anyone who purports to know about Apple's history should read. They don't give you the simplistic and sanitized version of history that's propagated as gospel through various forums - they give you everything, dirty laundry and all. Why read it? Any real fans of Apple owe it to themselves to acquire a complete and honest picture of a company that has clearly meant a lot to them on a personal level. And, more to the subject at hand, this picture is essential to understanding Steve Wozniak and where he comes from. The books are:

West of Eden - Frank Rose
Accidental Millionaire - Lee Butcher
The Little Kingdom: The Private Story of Apple Computer - Michael Moritz

Steve Wozniak earns his right to be heard by being one of the main reasons that this forum even exists for you to post in. The reason his work with the Apple I and II receives such enduring acclaim, acclaim that can seem obnoxious to a younger generation (as evidenced by some of the posts in this thread), is that it stands in its own league as an engineering achievement. Consider the meaning of that idiom: in its own league. It's not enough to know that he "designed the innards of the Apple II," because that doesn't provide the proper context to what he did. The other two computers of the famous 1977 trio, the Commodore PET and the Radio Shack TRS-80, were designed and produced by established companies. The Apple II's motherboard, its architecture, its resident programming language, its expansion slots and amazingly efficient disk controller that, more than any other components, were responsible for the machine's (and thus Apple's) success - all of this was engineered by one man. There was absolutely no precedent in the computer industry for anything like it; old-timers and knowledgeable geeks recognize the true magnitude of Wozniak's contribution, even after younger folk and the popular media have sloughed it off and now mindlessly perpetuate a legend that they themselves do not understand. I find it hilarious that people are actually debating the appropriateness of him offering public opinions on the company - he's vetted. He's got his cred. Without the Apple II, there would have been no Mac, and that alone qualifies him to offer up his opinions at any time. What he's done since the Apple II, or whether he has an active role in Apple or even the computer industry in general, is irrelevant. It's disappointing that he hasn't continued to fully apply his engineering genius in greener pastures, but that in no way lessens his authority to speak.

Roderick Usher
Nov 1, 2007, 10:09 AM
What we, or at least me, argue with this, oh so glorified interview, is the idiotic comments that now seem to be taken as the gospel when in fact make no sense. Such jewels like:

"The real dreams of how it will work for someone who knows nothing about the computer have been lost and don't get addressed anymore." (Him included in those not 'addressing' this issue)Exposing functionality is a continuing challenge for any operating system, be it OS X, Windows, Linux, or anything else. For people that know nothing about computers - and there will continue to be a lot of them for many years to come - there's still considerable room for improvement. This goal may have come to him late, after it first became clear that personal computers were truly mass-market, but that doesn't invalidate him espousing it. I don't see what's worth ridicule here.

"I don't think anything revolutionary is close on the horizon, but I guess you never know."

"Eventually, I would love a little computer with a camera that recognizes me, and I can throw a lot of little gestures at it, and it responds to what I say and do. It will be very hard to create a computer that can understand our voice and our rhythm."
The question was big-picture: "Beyond touch, how would you like to see user interfaces evolve?" There are only so many ways to go once you're talking about that large of a scale. Aside from telepathy, gestures and speech would be the most effortless way to interact with a computer. If you want a better answer, ask a better question, for example, what remains to be done within the scope of 2D interfaces? He actually alludes to specifics in an earlier question about the "intuitiveness" of Apple-written applications - if I'd been the interviewer, I would have pursued that line of inquiry, digging out details: okay, Woz, regarding the incomprehensible icons and hidden functionality, exactly how would you rectify that?

One of the problems I have with Woz interviews is that he's asked the same general questions over and over again. Some interviewees are better than others at taking a subpar question and running with it to a more interesting place, and for the sake of readers, a good interviewer needs to be aware of that and adapt to flush out better answers (though ideally the questions would be better to begin with). Take his commentary on the iPhone. Naturally, his response reflects his longstanding love of Apple II-style open platforms, which history has shown the public has a voracious appetite for (Apple II, PC compatibles, third-party apps on other cell phones). Why not have him expound on that? What's the true role and relevance of an open platform, and how can it be generalized to other devices? How does this square with meeting the cutoff between design elegance and overly-restrictive functionality, and what is Apple's record in that regard? There's meat to be mined from his brain, if only there were a real effort to do so.

So many of the remarks in this thread are assertions about Wozniak himself rather than actual analysis of his answers. They're like a muted version of FOX Newsian attacks on the character of someone that disagrees with that network's views. If you disagree, then disassemble the substance of the message, not the man. Although the interviewers' questions are weak, there are some responses in there that deserve dissection in a real debate of ideas. Anything else is crap.

MikeTheC
Nov 1, 2007, 12:00 PM
I'm getting really tired of the misplacement of discussion topics on this board.

This thread is a perfect example of a topic of discussion which is polarizing, and is simply degenerating into a huge flaming rant.

Immediately after posting this reply, I'm going to recommend to the admins this thread be locked, and that future such threads, however tempting not be allowed to be made Page 1 threads.

You folks really need to grow up and get a life. And maybe, just maybe, at least some of you would benefit from doing some basic Research 101 before opening your ignorant pie holes.

:mad:

EagerDragon
Nov 1, 2007, 12:05 PM
There are a few books that anyone who purports to know about Apple's history should read. They don't give you the simplistic and sanitized version of history that's propagated as gospel through various forums - they give you everything, dirty laundry and all. Why read it? Any real fans of Apple owe it to themselves to acquire a complete and honest picture of a company that has clearly meant a lot to them on a personal level. And, more to the subject at hand, this picture is essential to understanding Steve Wozniak and where he comes from. The books are:

West of Eden - Frank Rose
Accidental Millionaire - Lee Butcher
The Little Kingdom: The Private Story of Apple Computer - Michael Moritz

Steve Wozniak earns his right to be heard by being one of the main reasons that this forum even exists for you to post in. The reason his work with the Apple I and II receives such enduring acclaim, acclaim that can seem obnoxious to a younger generation (as evidenced by some of the posts in this thread), is that it stands in its own league as an engineering achievement. Consider the meaning of that idiom: in its own league. It's not enough to know that he "designed the innards of the Apple II," because that doesn't provide the proper context to what he did. The other two computers of the famous 1977 trio, the Commodore PET and the Radio Shack TRS-80, were designed and produced by established companies. The Apple II's motherboard, its architecture, its resident programming language, its expansion slots and amazingly efficient disk controller that, more than any other components, were responsible for the machine's (and thus Apple's) success - all of this was engineered by one man. There was absolutely no precedent in the computer industry for anything like it; old-timers and knowledgeable geeks recognize the true magnitude of Wozniak's contribution, even after younger folk and the popular media have sloughed it off and now mindlessly perpetuate a legend that they themselves do not understand. I find it hilarious that people are actually debating the appropriateness of him offering public opinions on the company - he's vetted. He's got his cred. Without the Apple II, there would have been no Mac, and that alone qualifies him to offer up his opinions at any time. What he's done since the Apple II, or whether he has an active role in Apple or even the computer industry in general, is irrelevant. It's disappointing that he hasn't continued to fully apply his engineering genius in greener pastures, but that in no way lessens his authority to speak.

I see you been using time machine.

I agree the man did something useful WAY-BACK-IN-TIME (30+ years ago) and was one of the founders.

Yet that does not mean that he is still competent enough to do the same type of miracle today, given all the new technology.

Also being a GREAT (if you can call him that) eng, doe not mean that he can sell gloves to a man with no hands like Steve can.

It also does not mean that he has the vision to take a company like Apple to the next level.

He did good and deserves our respect, but that does not mean that what he has to say today is good for Apple and it does not mean that it is well informed either.

If you all want to treat it like a God, please built him a cult church and don't drink the coolaid.

Roderick Usher
Nov 1, 2007, 12:08 PM
This thread is a perfect example of a topic of discussion which is polarizing, and is simply degenerating into a huge flaming rant.
My last two posts, especially the second, were partly intended to salvage this thread and spark some substantial discussion - they're neither degenerate nor flaming.

You folks really need to grow up and get a life. And maybe, just maybe, at least some of you would benefit from doing some basic Research 101 before opening your ignorant pie holes.
That, on the other hand...

EagerDragon
Nov 1, 2007, 12:12 PM
I'm getting really tired of the misplacement of discussion topics on this board.

This thread is a perfect example of a topic of discussion which is polarizing, and is simply degenerating into a huge flaming rant.

Immediately after posting this reply, I'm going to recommend to the admins this thread be locked, and that future such threads, however tempting not be allowed to be made Page 1 threads.

You folks really need to grow up and get a life. And maybe, just maybe, at least some of you would benefit from doing some basic Research 101 before opening your ignorant pie holes.

:mad:

Sounds like you just stepped down to the same level, relax.

HamishInsanish
Nov 1, 2007, 12:21 PM
We don't have a whole lot of right to critique what Woz has to say – regardless of the fact that in his absence someone else would have inevitably accomplished what he did, he was the one building the the first Apple as Steve was already trying to sell it. First, he's not an enemy of Apple, so he's not trying to attack the company. He may be criticizing where Apple (and the PC industry) is headed, but if you interpret it more macroscopically it's constructive criticism; this guy never fell into feud with technology.

Lets lend him some credit for maintaining his the originality of Apple ideas, and for continuing to personify (with Job's help) the authenticity of Apple's revolutionary mandate that began over of 30 yrs ago now. Leave the guy alone, respect him for what he stands for, and just aspire @ best to achieve even a fraction of what he helped set in motion.

gmanrique
Nov 1, 2007, 12:22 PM
At least we are trying to determine what was so great on that interview to make it a Fist Page News.

I'm getting really tired of the misplacement of discussion topics on this board.

This thread is a perfect example of a topic of discussion which is polarizing, and is simply degenerating into a huge flaming rant.

Immediately after posting this reply, I'm going to recommend to the admins this thread be locked, and that future such threads, however tempting not be allowed to be made Page 1 threads.

You folks really need to grow up and get a life. And maybe, just maybe, at least some of you would benefit from doing some basic Research 101 before opening your ignorant pie holes.

:mad:

HamishInsanish
Nov 1, 2007, 12:27 PM
Hey you know what, lol.. I didn't even think of that. I guess it's more of a "Ok Steve, you're a cool and respectable guy, but take it easy man" sort of issue. Odd case of Apple-bashing that should only be raising eyebrows @ best.

I just read some pretty nasty responses in here to begin with that I wouldn't particularly agree with.


At least we are trying to determine what was so great on that interview to make it a Fist Page News.

Roderick Usher
Nov 1, 2007, 12:32 PM
IYet that does not mean that he is still competent enough to do the same type of miracle today, given all the new technology.
Why does it matter whether he's pulling off Apple II-level feats today?

Also being a GREAT (if you can call him that) eng, doe not mean that he can sell gloves to a man with no hands like Steve can.

It also does not mean that he has the vision to take a company like Apple to the next level.
Is this related to the ludicrous side topic of making him CEO? Heh, I wasn't even thinking about that - the idea is so absurd it's not even worth discussion. Besides, his fitness for a senior management position has absolutely no bearing on the merits of the ideas he talks about in the interview.

He did good and deserves our respect, but that does not mean that what he has to say today is good for Apple and it does not mean that it is well informed either.
So let's take it apart. As I said in my second post above, there's been precious little talk about what he actually said in the interview, mostly because it's way easier to criticize or dismiss the man himself, in the troll-style you see on talking-head TV shows. The only reason I outlined his historical impact on Apple was to establish the basis of his credibility; however, even if one doesn't accept that, it's a far more constructive, interesting, and intelligent discussion to look at the substance of his interview responses.

HamishInsanish
Nov 1, 2007, 12:34 PM
BTW, That was my first post on the site, bud. Nevermind Woz: Next time you have something to say, remind me to call into question the validity of your freedom of speech. It was probably put on the front page as a matter of simple interest, not because it was crying out for debate. Have a great day.


At least we are trying to determine what was so great on that interview to make it a Fist Page News.

Roderick Usher
Nov 1, 2007, 12:46 PM
BTW, That was my first post on the site, bud.
Whoa, I just went back and read it:

regardless of the fact that in his absence someone else would have inevitably accomplished what he did,
In all seriousness, I ask: what is the basis for this statement? If one looks, I mean really looks, at the level of his accomplishment (see my first post above), this contention looks very, very unlikely, to put it mildly. One must remember the context of late '70s technology, and the type of engineering that was taking place at the time in both personal and corporate environments, to understand the improbability and significance of what he did. Plus, "inevitably" implies a gradual process, and speed was everything in those days of the fledgling market.

HamishInsanish
Nov 1, 2007, 12:47 PM
Eghad!! So sorry, gmanrique – didn't even see who you were quoting! Yeah, You've got to grow up yourself, MikeTheC. I hope the only thing that gets polarized is you from this site, because as I said before we all have a right to our opinions and the information age is moving so quickly it's full of interpretation.

BTW, Go Woz ;) *pushes up cieling, stirs vat*


At least we are trying to determine what was so great on that interview to make it a Fist Page News.

HamishInsanish
Nov 1, 2007, 12:54 PM
You got me there :) Though I just wanted to express the remote possibility of it happening, though another compelling question sort of venturing off this thread is how might the computer industry have developed (surely it must have any way in some form or another, though not nearly as good) if Woz had been in a car accident or something when he was ten years old? Just food for thought... though I'll stop there so to not deflect the topic nemore! :p

-Hamish

Whoa, I just went back and read it:


In all seriousness, I ask: what is the basis for this statement? If one looks, I mean really looks, at the level of his accomplishment (see my first post above), this contention looks very, very unlikely, to put it mildly. One must remember the context of late '70s technology, and the type of engineering that was taking place at the time in both personal and corporate environments, to understand the improbability and significance of what he did. Plus, "inevitably" implies a gradual process, and speed was everything in those days of the fledgling market.

mdriftmeyer
Nov 2, 2007, 01:35 AM
You got me there :) Though I just wanted to express the remote possibility of it happening, though another compelling question sort of venturing off this thread is how might the computer industry have developed (surely it must have any way in some form or another, though not nearly as good) if Woz had been in a car accident or something when he was ten years old? Just food for thought... though I'll stop there so to not deflect the topic nemore! :p

-Hamish

Your question would never be hypothesized as the world would have no history of him being in the Computing Industry.

coffey7
Nov 3, 2007, 08:45 PM
Without Woz would Apple even be around today?
Why does Steve Jobs have 6 Billion and Woz only 45 million?
All the microsoft guys all have Billions. Gates didn't screw over his sidekicks.

XENOR
Nov 7, 2007, 04:17 PM
Woz very cool:apple:
leopard uncool:mad:
Tiger and Ubuntu 7.10 only used in my world!:D-Xe.