Seeding the Apple Way

I've been wanting to say this for a longest time.

Of course, I hope that Apple is successful - that Steve Jobs created a viable business model that will follow in his footsteps.

But I also fervently hope that now that Apple is the biggest company in the world, that someone - anyone - will wake up and try to emulate the way Apple is thinking rather than merely copying what Apple is doing. In other words, I hope that business become more like Apple because I think it would make businesses better and would make the world a better place in which to live.

For Love or Money?

Steve Jobs did not do what he did because he loved money. He made money because he did what he loved. There's a difference.

Is Android Disrupting Apple?

As this point in time, has Android caused Apple to sell even one less phone or make one less dollar in profit? The only battle that Android is winning (not won) is market share in a market that is still growing by leaps and bounds. With the exception of the patent lawsuits, Android hasn't made Apple change its iPhone strategy one iota.

So has Android disrupted Apple? Not hardly.

Improving What Is v. Creating What Should Be

I would say that Steve Jobs didn't think about products. He thought about categories or industries. With the iPod, Apple didn't try to make a better MP3 device, they tried to make a better music industry. With the iPhone, Apple didn't try to make a better phone, they tried to create a pocket sized computer. With the iPad, Apple didn't try to make a better netbook, nor even a better tablet. Apple tried to create a category of portable computers.

The reason Apple reinvents every market it enters is because it doesn't try to improve on what exists. It tries to create what they think should exist.

The Definition of Innovation

Many people don't understand the definition of "innovation". Innovation is not measured by the "newness" of its parts, but by the newness of how those parts are used.

The person who figured out how to make fire by rubbing two sticks together did not discover sticks. He did not discover fire. He just took something old and used it in a new, in a different way. THAT is innovation. And what Steve Jobs did was innovation too.

Patent Purgatory

Here's what's happening in the patent wars.

Android Advocates hate Apple because Apple is being sued by so many others. This, they say, is proof that Apple is a thief and evil.

Android Advocates hate Apple because Apple is suing so many others. This, they say, is proof that Apple is anti-competitve and evil.

Android advocates don't give a damn about patent litigation and they don't give a damn about being fair mined. They just hate Apple. The end.

Android's Fall from Grace

Via Foss Patents:

The Federal Court of Australia ordered an interim injunction against Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 over strong suspicions of the infringement of two technical invention patents.

The patents at issue are not tablet-specific. They are very broad and can hardly be worked around, unlike various other intellectual property rights that Apple asserted and Samsung recently engineered around.

Not tablet specific. Can't be worked around. Sounds like real trouble for all tablet makers.

After today's decision, I believe no company in the industry be able to launch any new Android-based touchscreen product in Australia anytime soon without incurring a high risk of another interim injunction. The two patents on which today's ruling is based aren't Galaxy Tab 10.1-specific at all. They will affect all Android-based smartphones and tablet computers, across all vendors.

Google's cavalier attitude toward other companies' intellectual property is starting to backfire in seriously harmful ways. Samsung is only the first Android OEM to suffer serious economic damage by not being able to launch products in certain markets.

Off the top of my head, I can think of at least 5 reasons why Android might be nearing its end:

1.  It's a failed business model that doesn't make anyone any sustainable profits.
2. The purchase of Motorola by Google has ended Android's licensing model and initiated the integrated model. I think Google has even less chance of creating a successful integrated Android product than Microsoft had with the Zune. Furthermore, the purchase of Motorola has lit a fire under every other Android manufacturer as they desperately seek to separate themselves from Android before Google cuts them off in favor of Motorola.
3. License fees paid by Android manufacturers means that Android is no longer "free".
4. The Oracle suit. A potential nuclear bomb that may end Android altogether.
5. The various Apple injunctions which may make it impossible for various Android products to even reach the market.

Android is unraveling. It now appears that it's only a matter of how fast and how hard it falls.

 

 

 

Tipping Point

From  Philip Elmer-DeWit of Apple 2.0:

Gartner: Mac grew 20 times faster than the PC market in Q3. IDC gives Apple an even bigger edge, with Mac's U.S. shipments outpacing PCs 80 to 1.

Malcolm Gladwell defined a tipping point as "the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point." Of course, we normally don't recognize the tipping point until after it has long since passed. Have we reached a "tipping point" with the Mac? I would contend that we passed the tipping point long ago.

I've often wondered what it would take to return the Mac to the mainstream. Twenty years ago, the Mac entered a vicious cycle - a death spiral - that few products ever recover from. The Mac was viewed as a toy, and then a niche product and then, worst of all, as a product that was doomed - destined to disappear forever. In the world of platforms, where software is crucial and developers only develop software if they think there will be sufficient customers to pay them for their products, loss of confidence in the sustainability of the platform is a death sentence. But Apple's fanatical following kept the platform alive - against all odds, against all common wisdom, against all common sense. Slowly, painfully, inch-by-inch, step-by-step,  Steve Jobs halted  and then reversed this patten. The Mac moved from a death spiral to a virtuous cycle. And then, the Mac's integrated business model leveraged its modest market share into massive profit share. If this wasn't a miracle, it's about as close to one as it gets.

Now the Mac's profit share is not only growing, it is growing by leaps and bounds, a sure sign that sales have passed the "tipping point" and propelled the Mac into the mainstream. So what does this mean? It means that you ain't seen nothing yet. The Mac isn't just outgrowing the PC hardware market, its growth is accelerating. The stigma that Macs were doomed has long since passed. And the stigma that Macs were niche products has passed too, allowing consumers and even businesses to buy Macs without hesitation, without feeling that they have to somehow justify their purchases either to their bosses or to their spouse or tot themselves. And the stigma that Macs are just toys? Well, if by "toy" people mean that their Macs are fun to use, then perhaps the Mac will never outgrow - will never want to outgrow - that "stigma".

Something's broken alright

More Thurrott via Daring Fireball:

I have one prediction of my own. And that is that Apple will completely revamp the very much broken external antenna design that it saddled iPhone 4 users with.

You mean the "broken" external antenna that allowed Apple to sell 20.3 million iPhone 4's last quarter alone, up from the 8.4 million on the iPhone 3GS that had a "working" antenna? THAT broken antenna?

Funny thing about that "broken" antenna. I never heard any of Apple's customer's complaining about it. Just Pundits and self-proclaimed experts.

Too easy

Wendy Li via Daring Fireball

However, when iPhone 4S was launched, Apple fans were disappointed somehow, for they were expecting the redesigned iPhone 5 as rumors suggested. Naturally, many analysts had predicted a subdued response to iPhone 4S. 

But no one foresaw that the tech genius Jobs would suddenly pass away, only one day after iPhone 4S was released. Jobs’ demise stirred sadness and grief around the world and it’s believed that Jobs’ untimely death has rocketed demand for iPhone 4S from consumers.

Paul Thurrott via Daring Fireball

Apple’s lackluster iPhone 4S garnered more than 1 million preorders in its first 24 hours of availability, though much of that is likely tied to the delayed launch. 

Pundits say the iPhone 4S is lackluster so sales will be lackluster. Sales are spectacular. Do Pundits admit they were wrong? Of course not. They look for a way to explain why their reasoning was correct but their conclusions were wrong. "The lackluster phone sold well? Must have been Steve Jobs' death. Must have been the delayed launch."

How about iPhone 4S sales were great because Apple's customers think that it would be great to own the iPhone 4S?

Nah, too easy.

Believing in what Apple already knows

We use the phrase "they don't get it" far too often, but I have to admit that when I see the way investors, analysts, and pundits view Apple, I honestly do believe that they truly don't understand Apple at all.

This is not new. People didn't understand Apple back in the 80's either. The difference then was that Apple fell from grace and the critics were quick to say "I told you so". Apple doesn't conform to the norms? Well, Apple failed, proof positive that the old guard was right and the radical teachings of Steve Jobs was merely a passing fad.

But what about now? Apple has the largest market cap in the free world. In fact, their market cap exceeds their nearest competitor by hundreds of billions of dollars. Their brand is revered, their products are ubiquitous and their profits are outrageous. By any measure, Apple is not only a success, but they are the epitome of success.

Yet, just as in the 80's, Apple generates nothing but doubt from outside observers. They still think that Apple is "doing it wrong". "Yeah, sure," they say, "Apple may be on top today, but their business model is fatally flawed and Apple is doomed to fail."

One doesn't trust what one doesn't understand. One doesn't understand unless one seeks knowledge. One doesn't seek knowledge when one believes that all the answers are known and that they know all the answers.

Why don't the pundits believe in Apple? Because what Apple is doing is unbelievable. Literally. The pundits are not going to start to understand Apple, to trust Apple, to believe in Apple, until they stop knowing what they already believe and start believing in what Apple already knows.

We were promised jetpacks

From Mark Gongloff:

Apple shares have climbed back to $400, up nearly 3% today, as analysts cheer word that people are actually interested in buying the iPhone 4S.

Apple shares have rallied hard in recent days, which some called a tribute to the late Steve Jobs, but also driven by word that there might be more demand for the iPhone 4S than the “we were promised jetpacks” crowd realized. 

There's a certain class of people who insist that Apple is failing because they never live up to their unfair and unrealistic expectations. The label "'We were promised jetpacks' crowd" cleverly and succinctly sums up their nature.

Once you go Apple, you never go back

From Tony Bradly at PC World

Last week was a huge week for Apple. First the iPhone 4S was unveiled and met with criticism that it wasn't an iPhone 5. Then Steve Jobs passed away. Then Apple and its wireless providers shattered previous records by pre-selling a million of the "disappointing" iPhone 4Ss on Friday. One thing that didn't seem to get the attention it deserves is the iPhone 3GS.  

But, the big news is that people can get an iOS smartphone for free with a two-year contract with the iPhone 3GS.

Not sure I would say that a free 3GS was THE big news, but it was very big news indeed. At $49 dollars, the 27 month old iPhone 3GS was the second best selling smart phone in the world. Now its free. Expect the 3GS to continue to be popular.

That's all well and good. But the big news is that with Apples high satisfaction numbers, with Apple's high retention ratings, those who buy an Apple product - any Apple product - may never want to buy anything else ever again.

Disappoints Who?

From Nick Mokey , June 8, 2009, via John Gruber at Daring Fireball:

Apple iPhone 3GS Disappoints at 2009 WWDC. A better camera, overpriced memory upgrade and a compass aren't really cutting it for us.

Hmm. Sounds mighty familiar.

• Apple disappoints fans with modest iPhone 4 update
• Apple disappoints faithful followers with iPhone 4S
• APPLE’S IPHONE 4S DISAPPOINTS

Apple products always seem to disappoint but Apple products always seem to sell well. Isn't that a paradox? Perhaps the better way to put it would be to say that Apple products always seem to disappoint the pundits, but always to more than satisfy Apple's intended customers.

Picture Perfect

Peter Sichel of Sustainable Software:

Apple didn't design the hardware to match some feature checklist, they designed it to make their software amaze and delight customers, to create an emotional connection that effects peoples lives. To compare the iPhone or iPad to other products primarily on their hardware specifications is not representative of the quality of experience users are likely to have with the product.

iOS 5 comes out tomorrow. Across the blogasphere, the Anything But Apple crowd shouts loud and clear that iOS 5 simply copies features that their phones already have. But is that really the case?

Android creates a collage, Apple paints a picture. The Android approach is to pile feature upon feature upon feature, one atop another. The advantage of this approach is that, well, you get lots and lots of features. For many, this is exactly what is wanted.

Apple does things differently. They see features as merely pieces to a giant, constantly expanding puzzle. Rather than looking at what their devices do and adding from there, they look at what their devices can do for their customers and work their way backwards. Features are not added to enhance their products, features are added to enhance their customers.

Apple does not add a feature until it both fits and adds to the overall picture. This can lead to tremendous user frustration. Apple's features often come out late or, sometimes, not at all. But, as the Apple advocates like to point out, "It just works". What they mean by this is that the features in an Apple device are (mostly) part of a seamless whole, not just dots that the users have to connect themselves.

So, back to the original question: "Is iOS 5 merely copying features that already exist elsewhere?" Not hardly. Apple doesn't build superior features. Apple builds superior phones. Not only will each of the features of iOS 5 work and work well, but they'll all work together.

Apple doesn't always do things right away but they have a habit of doing things the right way. And for many - even for most - that's more than good enough. And really, who wants to settle for good enough?

Android strives to build the biggest collage.  Apple strives to be picture perfect.

All I want for Christmas is smarter analysis

From John Dvorak:

Data indicates that early Christmas shoppers are preordering the Amazon's new Kindle Fire tablet faster than you can say “Tickle Me Elmo.” Various tablet computers will top nearly every Christmas wish list. Therefore, it is very likely that Apple will roll out the iPad 3 by the holiday.

No it's not. The iPhone was on an annual cycle until that cycle was extended this past year. The iPad too is on an annual cycle. Apple is not putting out a new iPad only six months after their latest model.

The iPad and Kindle Fire are not the only hot tickets, either. HP seems to have “found” more of its tablets, which it will continue to sell for $99.  

You're kidding, right? The HP tablet has been discontinued and is being sold off to deplete inventory. That's what you call a "hot ticket"?

A lot of people thought the pad would be all they would need, but finally bought a new laptop computer as a more sensible traveling computer. 

I'm sure some people have done that, but a "lot of people"? Proof? Source?

The Apple mavens demonstrate this the best as they often own each and every Apple product—a phenomenon that tends to skew numbers and foil market research. They have every iPad, every iPhone, and at least two Macintosh computers. 

For God's sake, John, just retire already. Not only are you embarrassing yourself, but we're all embarrassed for you.

Choosing choices

Speaking with The Seattle Times yesterday, Lees, president of Microsoft's Windows Phone division, said he believes Apple missed an opportunity with the iPhone 4S. Comparing the new iPhone with Mango-enabled Windows Phone devices, Lees expressed surprise that Apple didn't give consumers more choice in terms of the hardware. 

Those consumers apparently don't see eye-to-eye with Lees. This morning, Apple announced that it logged 1 million preorders for the iPhone 4S in the first 24 hours it was on sale.

It's dogma on the web that "more choice is always better." Maybe in government. But not in marketing.

(In the Paradox of Choice) Barry Schwartz aptly demonstrates that having too many things to choose from often leads to the consumer feeling bewildered when facing the choice, and less satisfied even after taking a decision. He cites studies that indicate people are less likely to buy a product when faced with too many choices. 

One of the more important examples cited is that of 401k plans. The more fund choices offered by employers offering matching 401k plans, the fewer people actually selected any fund at all, even though that meant foregoing ‘free’ money.

In sales, choice is a strategy, not a moral imperative.

Bigger is not necessarily better

From Sebastiaan de With

Android phone manufacturers need to stop treating screen size as if it was penis size.

The importance of screen size is subjective. It's a preference. Tens of million of iPhone owners have voted with their dollars and have elected the 3.5 inch screen. Where do people get off saying that "bigger is better" when so very many people feel otherwise?

Your opinion is not a fact, its just an opinion and your preferences are not necessarily my preferences.

Putrid Pundits

The pundits just don't get it. They criticized the iPod, the iPhone, the iPhone 3G, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 4, the iPhone 4S, the iPad and the iPad 2. Then they're stunned when they get it wrong. Since they don't understand Apple they think that Apple cannot be understood. Rather than concede that they were wrong, they blame consumers for being stupid. I know who the stupid one's are. And it's not the consumers.

Analyze this

Apple PR:

Apple® today announced pre-orders of its iPhone® 4S have topped one million in a single day, surpassing the previous single day pre-order record of 600,000 held by iPhone 4.

Wise words from SplatF's Dan Frommer:

...remember this for the future, technology “experts” and skeptics: Normal people don’t really care about model numbers or cosmetic changes! Or they wouldn’t be ordering iPhones in record numbers.

Be in-"considerate"

Netflix is “still considering” game rentals, a rep says by email.

Never tell anyone that you're "considering" something. Either do it or don't talk about it.

Microsoft Lowers Flags to Half-Staff in Tribute to Steve Jobs

Classy. Very classy.

Steve Jobs was not a dictator, you're just being a dick...tator.

You think Jobs exercised censorship and authoritarianism? You think Jobs was a dictator? Apparently, you don't understand that words have meanings.

Dictator: a ruler with total power over a country, typically one who has obtained power by force.

Has Jobs obtained power over you by force? No he has not. Has Jobs obtained power over his customers by force? No he has not. Can you choose whether or not you use Apple's products? Yes, you can.

Jobs controlled Apple with an iron fist. But you don't have to - never had to - deal with Apple. You have freedom of choice. And tens of millions of people freely choose to buy Apple's products. That's hardly the mark of a dictator or a dictatorship. That's the mark of a successful business.

It's the interface, stupid

Steve Jobs is rightfully credited with many insights and many advances in technology. But here's a different way of looking at Jobs' contributions to computing.

Mouse.

Touch.

Voice.

Before Jobs, everyone interfaced with their computer by using their keyboards. The Mac popularized the mouse driven interface. The iPad popularized the touch driven interface. Now the iPhone 4S is on the verge of popularizing the voice driven interface.

Jobs didn't revolutionize the computer - he revolutionized how we INTERACTED with the computer. And each advance made the interaction between man and computer less computer like and more liked by humans.

Customer's disappointed with iPhone 4S? Not so much.

Apple's iPhone 4S breaks early order record; Mon Oct 10, 2011

More than a million people placed early orders on Friday for Apple Inc's latest iPhone, the last product the company debuted before the death of its co-founder Steve Jobs. 

Orders for the iPhone 4S, which will appear on store shelves this Friday, surpassed Apple's previous one-day record of 600,000 sales for the iPhone 4, pushing the company's shares up 5 percent to close at $388.81 on the Nasdaq stock market. 

The new phone disappointed some fans,,,

Apparently, it didn't disappoint very many customers.

...when Apple introduced it last week, but it is proving to be a bigger draw because more telephone companies are carrying it and it will appear in more countries, analysts said.

Or, it would have still sold 1 million units even if it had only been sold in the U.S.

Another big factor may be Jobs. Massive outpourings of grief and sympathy over his death last Wednesday at the age of 56, along with testaments to his genius and status as a visionary business leader in the media and by Apple products users online may have spurred sales.

Or, it would have sold 1 million units anyway.

"Many potential Apple customers, who have been on the fences before, will probably now want to (buy) it," said Steven Osinski, marketing professor at San Diego State University. 

Or. there weren't as many customers on the fence as you thought.

"It's no different than when John Lennon was assassinated, sales of Beatles records shot up for a little while."

Actually, it's very different. The Beatles hadn't put out an album in over a decade before John Lennon's death. Apple announced the iPhone 4S on the Tuesday before Jobs' death. People aren't buying the iPhone 4 because Jobs died. They are buying it because they want to own the iPhone 4S.

The initial skepticism from fans on the iPhone 4S was overridden by their desire to honor Jobs, said Barbara Sullivan, Managing Partner of Sullivan, a branding and marketing agency.

Who was initially skeptical again? The customers who bought 1 million pre-order units or just the pundits?

"It had everything people wanted. The market was disappointed, but the customers looked past the headline to see the content of the device itself," said Hudson Square analyst Daniel Ernst.

Spot on. There's a disconnect between what the people want and what the market thinks the people want.

Analyst Colin Gillis said Apple still has a long way to go to meet Wall Street's sales expectations.

"It's not the first million. We know there's a large loyal base of users."

Lord, I'm so sick of this argument. Apple's only sells well because it has a large loyal base of users? But last quarter, the then 12 month old iPhone 4 went from 8.4 million units in the previous June quarter to 20.3 million units - a year-over-year growth of 142%. You can't get 142% growth from Apple's "large loyal base of users". Growth like that comes from people who have never previously purchased an iPhone - and possibly have never previously purchased an Apple product - before.

They need to sell more than 20 million of these in this quarter to hit estimates," said Gillis. "Apple needs to break records to hit expectations."

So let's get this straight. The iPhone 4S "underwhelms" but it must break records to meet expectations? I'd say that those are some pretty unrealistic expectations...except for the fact that Apple is going to, once again, smash them.

Long term thinking...not

Netflix aborts Qwikster

...which they just announced. Way to think things through.

 

One can compete and still be classy

Samsung Delays Nexus Prime Launch After Jobs' Death

This move might have been done in order to avoid the unseemly spectacle of celebrating a new, competing product on the heels of Steve Jobs' death...

...but in my book, it was a class act.

Job's Death Increases Stupidity among know-nothing analysts

At a meeting with Apple Inc. finance chief Peter Oppenheimer this year, investor Kishore Rao asked the company to tap its billions in cash to pay a dividend. 

Oppenheimer had heard the request before and explained that Apple is keeping its powder dry for "strategic opportunities," without elaborating on what those could be, Rao said. The stock had almost doubled in the year before that meeting, and Oppenheimer argued Apple has been a good steward of its cash and investments, currently worth $76.2 billion. 

The drumbeat to open that treasure chest may now grow louder following the Oct. 5 death of Steve Jobs, Apple's former chief executive officer. 

"They don't need all that cash," said Keith Goddard, CEO of Tulsa, Oklahoma-based Capital Advisors Inc., whose largest holding is Apple. "It won't change their growth rate to pay a dividend."

Question: Who is in a better position to decide how to spend that $76.2 billion in cash: the company that earned it or the analyst who has done nothing but whine about it?

I'm sure that if Apple had listened to Keith Goddard's advice over the past five years, there would be no argument as to how best to distribute Apple's 76.2 billion in cash reserves because there would BE no 76.2 billion in cash reserves.

Man bites Mac

Mac OS X Lion drove me to Windows 7 - Joe Wilcox

Question: What do the following three things have in common:

-Man bites dog.
-Mac owner moves to Windows PC.
-Joe Willcox makes sense.

Answer: Three things that almost never happen.

Apple Shock

Apple's impact, which Joanne Chien, senior analyst at Digitimes Research named as "Apple Shock", has expand along with the global economic downturn, sending waves across the PC industry causing a reconstruction in all areas from market scale, brand operation and supply chain structure.

So apparently, this is what losing the PC wars feels like.

Distorting the reality field

Some things are subjective, some things are objective. One of the great shortcomings of mankind is that we often think that the subjective is the objective; that our opinions are facts; that what is good for me is necessarily good for thee. Just as egregious is our tendency to think that facts are merely a matter of opinion, a simple preference. You have facts that contradict mine? Well, they don't count because you're a fanboy or you're biased or you're paid to say that. Of course, none of those ad hominem attacks change the profound truth that facts are still facts no matter who says them or why they say them.

I'm glad there are choices. This is the true "open" a word that so many people abuse. An "open" government means that we get to choose who governs us. An "open" economic system means that we get to choose what we sell and what we buy. But an "open" company is neither of those things. It's merely a licensing model, a strategy, neither good nor evil, neither right nor wrong.

Do you like Windows Phone 7? Good for you. Do you like Android phones? Good for you. Do you like Apple branded phones? Good for you. The beauty of an "open" economic system is that you get to pick and choose your favorite product rather than being told which one you have to buy and use.

But please stop telling me that your phone is better than mine unless you have some objective criteria to back that up. I like chocolate, you like vanilla. Is vanilla better than chocolate? Better for you perhaps. Vanilla sells much better than chocolate. Does that mean that vanillas is better? More popular, yes. That's a fact. Better for me, no. That's a preference.

Does it come as a surprise to us that Android phones are favored by those that like to tinker with their phones? It shouldn't. Does it come as a surprise to us that Apple phones are favored by people who don't want to tinker with their phone; by those who value their time more than their money; by those who just want a phone that will to do its job so that they can get on with the job of living their lives? It shouldn't.

My only objection to Android Advocates is their suggestion that "open" is somehow morally superior; that "open" will inevitably defeat closed; that everyone who doesn't choose what they choose is necessarily wrong or stupid or both.

Oh, and one more thing I hate about the Anything But Apple crowd. Whenever they're proven wrong; whenever the facts are against them; whenever Apple is successful despite that ardent protests that Apple isn't successful or CAN NOT be successful; rather than revising their opinions to conform with reality, they revise reality to conform with their opinions.

-"There's a special class of people that will buy Apple products no matter what." Really? Where did this "special class of people" come from. Why does it exist? Why doesn't any other comapny have this mythical mystical fan base?

-"People who buy Apple products are stupid." Really? Because they like something that you don't like? Because their numbers grow every day? Because, overall, they're more satisfied with their purchase than other phone owners are satisfied with theirs? Doesn't sound to me like Apple owners are very stupid.

-"It's all clever marketing." Really? Why can't the company you favor get better marketing? What magical power does Apple have that they are the only ones who have this superior marketing of which you speak? If Apple's marketing is so magical and infallible, why does Apple have failures as well as successes? And why hasn't Apple's marketing overwhelmed you if its so irresistible?

-"Apple's customers are controlled by a reality distortion field." Really? A mythical, magical, hypnotic power exudes from Apple and only Apple? A power akin to witchcraft, a power founded on superstition and ignorance? That power?

You like your product and I'll like mine. But stop telling me what's best for me. And stop telling me that no one is buying Apple products or that Apple is failing or is inevitably doomed. All the facts, all the evidence contradicts that opinion. When Apple succeeds despite your fervent protestations, despite your ardent wishes that it not be so, stop telling me that it cannot be and start asking yourself, "What does Apple know that I don't?"

Apple was Steve Jobs' greatest creation

Did you notice that the presenters did no tribute to Steve? No homage. They scrupulously avoided mentioning him. Or even referencing him by imitating his presentation style or delivery. There was one moment, near the end, when they introduced Siri, their crowning achievement. It was then that they could have - almost felt like they should have - employed the "one more thing" mantra that Steve Jobs had made so famous. But they didn't copy him. They didn't emulate him. No pale imitation of the phrase that Steve Jobs had redefined, just as he had redefined so many things in his life. The presentation carried on without out him. Without referencing him. Because that is what Jobs would have wanted.

Steve Jobs was a showman. He was a private man. He was incredibly arrogant. He was incredibly humble. He was an egotist. Yet he put the needs of his company ahead of his ego. Perhaps it was because he was prouder of his company than he was even of himself. When it came time for Apple to present the future or to honor the man who had created that future, Apple choose the former. Because that is what Jobs would have wanted.

The tribute that all those who participated in the event paid to Steve Jobs - the last event to occur in his lifetime - was to carry on. To focus on Apple and not on the man who had single handedly raised Apple from the dead. To focus on the result of their efforts and not on the efforts themselves.To focus on the future and not the past. To focus on what would be and not on what would soon be no more.

Of all the things that Steve Jobs created, Apple may be his most important creation of all. Steve Jobs was leaving Apple forever, but he wanted Apple to carry on when he was gone. Steve didn't want Apple to end even though he was so near his end. If he had built Apple right, then Apple would continue without him. So that's what the presenters did. They continued without out him. Because that is what Jobs would have wanted.

RIP Steve Jobs

He made my life better. What greater compliment can I pay the man?