counternotions.com — Technology giants like Microsoft and Nokia have also had a penchant for concocting concept products that never see the light of day in the market. Why hasn?t Apple, the most innovative and visionary company in computing, produced a single concept product or vision in over a decade? Because, to paraphrase Jobs, 'real artists ship'.
Aug 12, 2008 View in Crawl 4
iie_wakarimasenAug 13, 2008
we're buying their concept products, and the second generation is when they got the product down for sure.
lmn8rAug 14, 2008
Sorry:October 27th, 2007: Microsoft posts quarterly profit of $4.29 billion<a class="user" href="http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/124437.asp">http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archi ...</a>September 29th, 2007: Apple posts quarterly profit of $542 million<a class="user" href="http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/10/22/apple_earns_904_million_on_sales_of_6_22_billion.html">http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/10/22/appl ...</a>So I guess that "fat sweaty imbecile" runs a company that makes Apple's yearly profits every 1-2 months. Sorry that my obvious hyperbole was lost on you!
squidwalkAug 14, 2008
I don't really understand how you can call me a fanatic because I see Microsoft Surface being used. Once it has a couple high-profile customers and units are being distributed, it's moved out of concept and is into sales. It's not a product that's supposed to be consumer-grade, or even available in every Motel 6. The property count of Starwood is irrelevant. The point this blog was makings is that concept products are a bad thing because they don't sell, and hence are a waste of money.As for demand, I work in the museum sciences field, and I've seen devices similar (but more poorly constructed) being independently developed in a half-dozen locations for much more than the twelve grand price tag of the the Microsoft table. NASA has a touring trailer that uses a multi-touch table as well. There are a few easily defined markets for this as a realistic product.So what part of my previous statement imply I'm a fanatic? I just thought it was weak that Surface was being needlessly misrepresented, seemingly for the singular purpose of Apple fanboy-ism. I'll admit to have anti-Apple views, but this is because I'm not in a high enough tax bracket to afford their products.Lastly, yes Smoozle, I did imply the "rather" in my last comment. I was not grammatically incorrect, and I think everyone reading it understood me fine. I have enough real typos in my entries, no need to point out ones I didn't make. Correcting grammar in an occasion where the poster has not been blatantly misusing it is a non-sequitur.
recidivusAug 14, 2008
Without digging too far, Neonode has been selling them for a while. 2005 I think.
anixmanderAug 15, 2008
As I understood it, Gates was part of the team that built the original Apple OS. I see that my information is apparently incorrect.Someone else writing that he did makes me an idiot?Are you always that big of an assh**e to people who have been given wrong information? Might want to change your name to mrDickless there.
kindwarriorAug 15, 2008
I think you may have missed the point. Apple takes the creative process seriously and values ideas. When you throw a "concept" out to the public to show how creative you can be you're just blowing smoke: You don't really take seriously the design or the ideas behind them (otherwise you'd breast them, patent them and leverage them for profit). What a "concept" really is then, is an attempt to sell you on an "illusion" of innovation without having to deliver on the innovation -- it's cowardly and dishonest.It's interesting to note that the only concept product produced by Apple was during John Skully's tenure; In many ways it was nothing more than a way to wrap John Skully's head and ego around the concepts Apple was already, internally, quietly, and seriously pursing so he could say, "See, I'm president of this really creative company that can come up with really cool things". Steve accomplishes the same by delivering on ideas. @Elranzer:If you're going to knock Apple's bad bets (and there are a bunch) top of the list has to be the PowerCD, the Quicktake and Apple Interactive TV. The PowerCD and the QuickTake were not bad products but Apple's move into the consumer electronic space was miss timed (they did not have the financial resources to establish a presence in the markets and reduce production costs) and they did not have distribution channels available (this last was largely due to Microsoft leaning on major distribution houses like Ingram Micro-d). Apple Interactive TV Bandai Pippin was perhaps Apple's first real lesson in trying to penetrate a market with already entrenched players (the lack of access to game developers killed the Pippin). It could be argued that all of these products were ill advised but only hind site can be so perceptive. The Newton on the other hand was an amazing product that, if Apple failed in any way with it, Apple should have promoted more vigorously. Technologies have changed to the point that it is difficult to make a fair comparison but I'd rather have an up-to-date Newton than an iPhone hands down. I don't think anyone associated with then Newton, the developers or those of us lucky enough to be users, saw anything "conceptual" or "half-baked" in the Newton: Outstanding handwriting recognition, remarkably intuitive interface, responsive, and stable with well thought out useful applications and features -- and the thing could go a week on a charge (on NiMH batteries). The failing of the Newton had nothing to do with the product (except that it scared the hell out of Microsoft), it was a victim of Apple's financial vulnerability in the mid-1990s which ultimately forced Apple to sacrifice the product to survive (There's much to be said about how this evolved too -- it's a lesson on how much anti-trust behavior Microsoft engaged in in the 1990s). Even the bad bets were never "concept" marketing they were genuine attempts to advance Apple into markets which failed. If you look closely at these products you should get a sense of just how long Apple has had a consistent vision of what it does and what products it should produce.