Cleverboy
Nov 3, 2008, 07:21 AM
DARE TO COMPARE
Okay, so... I've thought this for a while. Obama is like the iPhone. He's shiny, new, and a serious hype-magnet. People don't think he has enough "features" (read: experience), and there's a genuine argument to be made comparing marketing vs. milestones, rhetoric vs. results... and people tend to think both aren't good for business (whether this is true or not). He's co-sponsored what's often referred to as Google for government and has won the support of Google CEO Eric Schmidt (ties with Google) and he supports a equal access as a fundamental building-block of the Internet (much like Apple seeks another aspect of Internet ubiquity with its mobile Safari).
I've run into a number of articles to make the comparison is various ways, but following the Obama iPhone app, Google has suddenly become disenchanted with returning many of these results versus announcements regarding the new AppStore addition. :p
Here's at least one article though:
How Barack Obama is like the iPhone. - February 23, 2008
http://waxbanks.typepad.com/blog/2008/02/how-barack-obam.html
Some nice quotes:
Part of what appeals to me about Obama's candidacy is that beyond his status as Great Transformative Symbol and so forth, he's the right Democrat for right now. He's serious about his religion, and can speak to activist Christians without sloppily pandering; he's serious about his secular liberalism, and has credibility with more militant liberals and lefties [compared to his opponent, certainly]; and he's enough of a scholar to know that the two major parties can't stand forever in simpleminded opposition, nor are their politics immutable, nor are their constituencies fixed. His appeals to moderate Republicans don't seem cynical. Early in the campaign some critics on the left claimed he was 'running to the right' of Clinton on some issues. But I believe that's a simpleminded criticism, because I believe Obama's candidacy represents a good-faith attempt to conceive of political alignment differently.So here's what the iPhone is: an attempt to make mobile computing a part of the lives of millions of people who've never considered it. It makes the tent bigger. It's network-society technology, getting more things right than any predecessor because its makers know its potential importance (and because the folks at Apple tend to get those things right).
So... he "thinks different" in finding common ground, he believes in an "iPod government", is forward thinking on issues like net neutraility and technological convergence (wants the world more connected as sees appointing a CTO of America), and thinks that making the "tent bigger" with a smarter government is justified in the philosophy that the strength of a Democracy is measured in the amount of participation (back to his community organizing roots).
PROBLEMS AHEAD
Where is this thought going?
Well, I'm thinking about the NEXT level. What PROBLEMS will occur that are inherent in this comparison. The iPhone experienced a very interesting rash of criticism simply because it made the "tent bigger" for smart phones (things that phone makers and carriers had been doing forever). Suddenly Senate members were questioning why the phone industry had "early termination fees". Customers were wondering why the phone was locked to one carrier. People questioned why data fees were so high, and what the difference was between Text Messaging and Instant Messaging... and why one charged you much more than the cost to the carrier.
#1. EXPECTATIONS
What kind of problems do you run into when you make the "tent" of government accountability bigger? It sounds like the FIRST problem, is trying to deal with managing "expectations". If the hype is out of control, it will encounter a balloon-bursting brick-wall, when it encounters the realities of a tough economic situation. Nothing is going to happen overnight. People will STILL lose their houses. Jobs will still ship out overseas. Should he win, no "magic wand" will be waved in Obama's first 100 days. America won't be out of Iraq anytime soon, no matter who's in the White House. Iran, North Korea, and Russia will still be doing what they feel is in their interests.
Some people are still asking for MMS and Cut & Paste on the iPhone, and STUNNED they are still waiting for it, and don't consider the platform a success until they get it. What will be Obama's "hold out" issues. Unlike the iPhone, many of Obama's hold-out issues, will likely be a direct result of "promises" made during the campaign.
#2. COMMUNICATION
Apple SUCKS at communication. Apple's handling of expectations has been so poor, they've generated sights with names like Apple Insider, ThinkSecret, and... MacRumors. :) The idea of secrecy of pretty much antithetical to Obama's appeal. Transparency has been one of his halmarks, yet one of the reasons Apple is successful, is because it only makes announcements when things are READY to launch... leading to the immediate gratification of "On Sale Today", with a trade-off of often an "anti-climax" at the end of the latest keynote.
#3. ROLLOUTS
Apple faced one of the worst rollouts of its history with its MobileMe offering, that happened at the same time it launched its "iPhone 3G" device. Is a new type of government comparable and therefore subject to the hazards of such simultaneous technology rollouts? When an Obama administration works to mobilize U.S. citizens, and transitions from "Obama for America" to "The Office of the President", what sort of changes will be see? Can the White House afford to "nod" to organizations like MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, etc... without appearing to show favoritism? One of the biggest minefields Apple successfully crossed, was in making the iPhone easy to use and powerful, yet jumping through numerous hurdles that have dogged competitors who've long attempted to find a similar "sweet spot".
When Obama talks of a private-public partnership in the healthcare industry (and other areas), will that take on some of the same problematic stumbling blocks that Google encountered in breaking new ground (ie: being sued by trademark holders on advertising, book publishers on content search, newspapers for feed republishing, and content providers on YouTube)? Yet, in accomplishing real changes, the government will be cutting many existing organizations out of the picture, generating some measure of ill-will when the rubber meets the road. Apple list of patent suits from releasing the iPhone continues to grow like a doomsday ticker. When it comes to any innovation, it sounds like the best way to know you're not doing anything of importance, is that you're not being sued. Being a lawyer, no one should know that more than Obama... yet, if his administration is to be a success, he's got a very small window in which to accomplish it. --And being sued by squadrons of disenfranchised businesses (or powerful industries) will NOT be the way to accomplish it.
Anyone else see any parallels, or is the entire concept useless and off-base?
~ CB
Okay, so... I've thought this for a while. Obama is like the iPhone. He's shiny, new, and a serious hype-magnet. People don't think he has enough "features" (read: experience), and there's a genuine argument to be made comparing marketing vs. milestones, rhetoric vs. results... and people tend to think both aren't good for business (whether this is true or not). He's co-sponsored what's often referred to as Google for government and has won the support of Google CEO Eric Schmidt (ties with Google) and he supports a equal access as a fundamental building-block of the Internet (much like Apple seeks another aspect of Internet ubiquity with its mobile Safari).
I've run into a number of articles to make the comparison is various ways, but following the Obama iPhone app, Google has suddenly become disenchanted with returning many of these results versus announcements regarding the new AppStore addition. :p
Here's at least one article though:
How Barack Obama is like the iPhone. - February 23, 2008
http://waxbanks.typepad.com/blog/2008/02/how-barack-obam.html
Some nice quotes:
Part of what appeals to me about Obama's candidacy is that beyond his status as Great Transformative Symbol and so forth, he's the right Democrat for right now. He's serious about his religion, and can speak to activist Christians without sloppily pandering; he's serious about his secular liberalism, and has credibility with more militant liberals and lefties [compared to his opponent, certainly]; and he's enough of a scholar to know that the two major parties can't stand forever in simpleminded opposition, nor are their politics immutable, nor are their constituencies fixed. His appeals to moderate Republicans don't seem cynical. Early in the campaign some critics on the left claimed he was 'running to the right' of Clinton on some issues. But I believe that's a simpleminded criticism, because I believe Obama's candidacy represents a good-faith attempt to conceive of political alignment differently.So here's what the iPhone is: an attempt to make mobile computing a part of the lives of millions of people who've never considered it. It makes the tent bigger. It's network-society technology, getting more things right than any predecessor because its makers know its potential importance (and because the folks at Apple tend to get those things right).
So... he "thinks different" in finding common ground, he believes in an "iPod government", is forward thinking on issues like net neutraility and technological convergence (wants the world more connected as sees appointing a CTO of America), and thinks that making the "tent bigger" with a smarter government is justified in the philosophy that the strength of a Democracy is measured in the amount of participation (back to his community organizing roots).
PROBLEMS AHEAD
Where is this thought going?
Well, I'm thinking about the NEXT level. What PROBLEMS will occur that are inherent in this comparison. The iPhone experienced a very interesting rash of criticism simply because it made the "tent bigger" for smart phones (things that phone makers and carriers had been doing forever). Suddenly Senate members were questioning why the phone industry had "early termination fees". Customers were wondering why the phone was locked to one carrier. People questioned why data fees were so high, and what the difference was between Text Messaging and Instant Messaging... and why one charged you much more than the cost to the carrier.
#1. EXPECTATIONS
What kind of problems do you run into when you make the "tent" of government accountability bigger? It sounds like the FIRST problem, is trying to deal with managing "expectations". If the hype is out of control, it will encounter a balloon-bursting brick-wall, when it encounters the realities of a tough economic situation. Nothing is going to happen overnight. People will STILL lose their houses. Jobs will still ship out overseas. Should he win, no "magic wand" will be waved in Obama's first 100 days. America won't be out of Iraq anytime soon, no matter who's in the White House. Iran, North Korea, and Russia will still be doing what they feel is in their interests.
Some people are still asking for MMS and Cut & Paste on the iPhone, and STUNNED they are still waiting for it, and don't consider the platform a success until they get it. What will be Obama's "hold out" issues. Unlike the iPhone, many of Obama's hold-out issues, will likely be a direct result of "promises" made during the campaign.
#2. COMMUNICATION
Apple SUCKS at communication. Apple's handling of expectations has been so poor, they've generated sights with names like Apple Insider, ThinkSecret, and... MacRumors. :) The idea of secrecy of pretty much antithetical to Obama's appeal. Transparency has been one of his halmarks, yet one of the reasons Apple is successful, is because it only makes announcements when things are READY to launch... leading to the immediate gratification of "On Sale Today", with a trade-off of often an "anti-climax" at the end of the latest keynote.
#3. ROLLOUTS
Apple faced one of the worst rollouts of its history with its MobileMe offering, that happened at the same time it launched its "iPhone 3G" device. Is a new type of government comparable and therefore subject to the hazards of such simultaneous technology rollouts? When an Obama administration works to mobilize U.S. citizens, and transitions from "Obama for America" to "The Office of the President", what sort of changes will be see? Can the White House afford to "nod" to organizations like MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, etc... without appearing to show favoritism? One of the biggest minefields Apple successfully crossed, was in making the iPhone easy to use and powerful, yet jumping through numerous hurdles that have dogged competitors who've long attempted to find a similar "sweet spot".
When Obama talks of a private-public partnership in the healthcare industry (and other areas), will that take on some of the same problematic stumbling blocks that Google encountered in breaking new ground (ie: being sued by trademark holders on advertising, book publishers on content search, newspapers for feed republishing, and content providers on YouTube)? Yet, in accomplishing real changes, the government will be cutting many existing organizations out of the picture, generating some measure of ill-will when the rubber meets the road. Apple list of patent suits from releasing the iPhone continues to grow like a doomsday ticker. When it comes to any innovation, it sounds like the best way to know you're not doing anything of importance, is that you're not being sued. Being a lawyer, no one should know that more than Obama... yet, if his administration is to be a success, he's got a very small window in which to accomplish it. --And being sued by squadrons of disenfranchised businesses (or powerful industries) will NOT be the way to accomplish it.
Anyone else see any parallels, or is the entire concept useless and off-base?
~ CB
