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.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Steve Wozniak on Apple, Leopard and Jailbreaking the iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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.
reference please?
I saw the same interview and I don't remember him saying this or anything like it.
Exactly....
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 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...
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.
...
"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.
"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.
No, its probably an Apple decision to make more money from iTunes.
AT&T allow other phones to freely upload ring tones.
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 youll learn a lesson or two, and not just rely on your infinite wisdom..
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.
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.
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.
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..
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?)
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?)
Woz said:
Dear Woz,
It looks like Steve used to agree with you:
Steve Jobs said:
We wish he still did.
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.
Totally agree
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!!
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!!
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...
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...
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.
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 ).
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.
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.
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!