- Correctly explaining how large of an improvement the 5S is over the original iPhone is not a valid argument for why 2013 was a "pretty good year" for Apple. Mac Pro was the biggest move Apple made -- for better or for worse -- and I'm surprised to see its omission.
- If you’re not excited by the performance of the A7 SoC or, say, the quality of the iPhone 5S camera, why even bother writing about technology? This is ridiculous in a multitude of ways: the most glaring of which being that some of the best technology writers on the web today don't concern themselves with consumer technology.
- You can't look at raw price point as evidence for iPhone's ability to resist depreciation because their starting value is so much higher than other smartphones -- though I do think Apple hardware ages better than other hardware. To answer his question of What other companies make cell phones that retain any value at all after two years?: Samsung, Google/Motorola.
- The whole arguments of iOS 7 spurring planned obsolescence comes from the theory that the transitions, parallax, etc. etc. were done not only from a design standpoint but from an inferior-hardware-can't-replicate-this standpoint, which I believe Gruber propagated himself (though in reference to Android, rather than older iPhone models.)
- Everything besides the 'jetpacks' line in the final section was great. Technology is something that should be celebrated with wary eyes, rather than blindly castigated.
Ultimately, he seems to be dragging Mims' argument to a greater extreme than it is and attacking it on those grounds: I encourage readers to read the original article -- which, at the very least, is interesting and thought-provoking -- and draw their own conclusions.
I want to keep this short, so I'll only address your first point.
He used the 5s vs original iPhone comparison to make the point that improvement happens incrementally, not to make the point that 2013 was a great year.
The whole arguments of iOS 7 spurring planned obsolescence comes from the theory that the transitions, parallax, etc. etc. were done not only from a design standpoint but from an inferior-hardware-can't-replicate-this standpoint, which I believe Gruber propagated himself (though in reference to Android, rather than older iPhone models.)
I don't think anyone is arguing that Apple added those features solely because they perform poorly on inferior hardware. Perhaps that's a side effect, but Apple openly concedes that, as evidenced by graceful fallbacks included in the operating system which turn off features such as blurring and parallax on older devices, as well as manual options to disable various hardware-intensive aesthetic improvements.
No, I'm not going to read his article and drive his traffic up.
What stories did Gruber break this year? What exclusives? None! He has no special access at Apple, he has no insiders who give him the scoops, he's no different from any other armchair blogger.
In truth, John Gruber is an Apple PR stenographer. The sad thing is, he probably doesn't even know it, because he's so drunk on the kool-aid.
Is Gruber's goal to break sweet stories or deliver exclusives?
Two days after a story breaks no one cares anymore about the breaking of it. But a smart and thoughtful editorialist is likely writing pieces that hold value for years.
Certainly not everything Gruber writes is gold or even worth reading, but he is trusted for his opinions and insight, not for how early or accurately he gives you some "inside scoop" (even if he occasionally trumpets his playing of that game).
Okay yapcguy, I'm interested in who you think exceeds Gruber's quality, insight, and consistency in terms of watching Apple?
The list is pretty short - maybe Philip Elmer DeWitt, Benedict Evans, Ben Thompson and Horace Dediu - but none of them bring the deep and consistent product insight - they are more focussed on broader reporting, strategic assessments, or disruption/market theory.
Gruber, to the best of my knowledge, is the only writer that consistently tracks all the major apple developments with the quality of writing that he brings to the table.
Yes, he's a partisan, (Siracusa's term for him) - and writes for his audience, but his words are reasonably measured, and always have a reasonably rational basis.
I wouldn't continue following him if that weren't the case - I've dropped dozens of other Apple observers over the year, but Gruber is still on top of his game.
Perhaps not in the same area, but I would nominate Anand Shimpi from anandtech.com. He writes in depth review of Apple hardware (currently writing a Mac Pro review), and offers fairly deep insight into both the hardware and what the product offers as a whole.
Gruber might do it better; I admit that I don't read any of his posts, not being much of an Apple watcher. I have a slightly negative opinion of him based solely on comments, on HN and elsewhere, that appear on submissions of his articles. They seem to indicate that he has a pair of horse blinders on when it comes to Apple. For people who don't already think what they offer is the best, I can see why it is grating. I would have to read his articles for some time to form an actual opinion, but as it stands I'll stick with Anand, as he covers, in depth, other entrants as well as Apple.
- You can't look at raw price point as evidence for iPhone's ability to resist depreciation because their starting value is so much higher than other smartphones -- though I do think Apple hardware ages better than other hardware. To answer his question of What other companies make cell phones that retain any value at all after two years?: Samsung, Google/Motorola.
Baring some weirdly cheap outliers the S4 comes in at £500 payg in the uk but that is via the networks and I don't know if they'll bugger about with it before it gets to you. You save fifty quid versus he 5S but you lose out in performance and it's made of plastic.
Also, the combination of Apple's iOS 7 forced obsolescence and the relatively low depreciation rate of Apple hardware makes the Apple ecosystem is a really shitty experience at the low end of the market. The only iProduct priced competitively with low-end Android and Windows Phone is a second-hand 3GS, which is no longer supported and doesn't have access to most apps - in fact, at the rate we're going, it's not even going to have support for basic apps people expect from all platforms.
Comments
Some random (counter and otherwise) points:
- Correctly explaining how large of an improvement the 5S is over the original iPhone is not a valid argument for why 2013 was a "pretty good year" for Apple. Mac Pro was the biggest move Apple made -- for better or for worse -- and I'm surprised to see its omission.
- If you’re not excited by the performance of the A7 SoC or, say, the quality of the iPhone 5S camera, why even bother writing about technology? This is ridiculous in a multitude of ways: the most glaring of which being that some of the best technology writers on the web today don't concern themselves with consumer technology.
- You can't look at raw price point as evidence for iPhone's ability to resist depreciation because their starting value is so much higher than other smartphones -- though I do think Apple hardware ages better than other hardware. To answer his question of What other companies make cell phones that retain any value at all after two years?: Samsung, Google/Motorola.
- The whole arguments of iOS 7 spurring planned obsolescence comes from the theory that the transitions, parallax, etc. etc. were done not only from a design standpoint but from an inferior-hardware-can't-replicate-this standpoint, which I believe Gruber propagated himself (though in reference to Android, rather than older iPhone models.)
- Everything besides the 'jetpacks' line in the final section was great. Technology is something that should be celebrated with wary eyes, rather than blindly castigated.
Ultimately, he seems to be dragging Mims' argument to a greater extreme than it is and attacking it on those grounds: I encourage readers to read the original article -- which, at the very least, is interesting and thought-provoking -- and draw their own conclusions.
I want to keep this short, so I'll only address your first point.
He used the 5s vs original iPhone comparison to make the point that improvement happens incrementally, not to make the point that 2013 was a great year.
I don't think anyone is arguing that Apple added those features solely because they perform poorly on inferior hardware. Perhaps that's a side effect, but Apple openly concedes that, as evidenced by graceful fallbacks included in the operating system which turn off features such as blurring and parallax on older devices, as well as manual options to disable various hardware-intensive aesthetic improvements.
No, I'm not going to read his article and drive his traffic up.
What stories did Gruber break this year? What exclusives? None! He has no special access at Apple, he has no insiders who give him the scoops, he's no different from any other armchair blogger.
In truth, John Gruber is an Apple PR stenographer. The sad thing is, he probably doesn't even know it, because he's so drunk on the kool-aid.
Is Gruber's goal to break sweet stories or deliver exclusives?
Two days after a story breaks no one cares anymore about the breaking of it. But a smart and thoughtful editorialist is likely writing pieces that hold value for years.
Certainly not everything Gruber writes is gold or even worth reading, but he is trusted for his opinions and insight, not for how early or accurately he gives you some "inside scoop" (even if he occasionally trumpets his playing of that game).
Okay yapcguy, I'm interested in who you think exceeds Gruber's quality, insight, and consistency in terms of watching Apple?
The list is pretty short - maybe Philip Elmer DeWitt, Benedict Evans, Ben Thompson and Horace Dediu - but none of them bring the deep and consistent product insight - they are more focussed on broader reporting, strategic assessments, or disruption/market theory.
Gruber, to the best of my knowledge, is the only writer that consistently tracks all the major apple developments with the quality of writing that he brings to the table.
Yes, he's a partisan, (Siracusa's term for him) - and writes for his audience, but his words are reasonably measured, and always have a reasonably rational basis.
I wouldn't continue following him if that weren't the case - I've dropped dozens of other Apple observers over the year, but Gruber is still on top of his game.
Perhaps not in the same area, but I would nominate Anand Shimpi from anandtech.com. He writes in depth review of Apple hardware (currently writing a Mac Pro review), and offers fairly deep insight into both the hardware and what the product offers as a whole.
Gruber might do it better; I admit that I don't read any of his posts, not being much of an Apple watcher. I have a slightly negative opinion of him based solely on comments, on HN and elsewhere, that appear on submissions of his articles. They seem to indicate that he has a pair of horse blinders on when it comes to Apple. For people who don't already think what they offer is the best, I can see why it is grating. I would have to read his articles for some time to form an actual opinion, but as it stands I'll stick with Anand, as he covers, in depth, other entrants as well as Apple.
Anand is excellent, but he looks at things and writes from a completely different perspective. They are not comparable in my opinion.
Save your rage. The parent was referring to the article Gruber is critiquing, not Gruber's article.
Baring some weirdly cheap outliers the S4 comes in at £500 payg in the uk but that is via the networks and I don't know if they'll bugger about with it before it gets to you. You save fifty quid versus he 5S but you lose out in performance and it's made of plastic.
Also, the combination of Apple's iOS 7 forced obsolescence and the relatively low depreciation rate of Apple hardware makes the Apple ecosystem is a really shitty experience at the low end of the market. The only iProduct priced competitively with low-end Android and Windows Phone is a second-hand 3GS, which is no longer supported and doesn't have access to most apps - in fact, at the rate we're going, it's not even going to have support for basic apps people expect from all platforms.