@Charles: Yes surprise indeed but I feel the movie cannot depict a character of an exact person since movies are being created based on a particular script. So they have to adjust it accordingly to match the script and that will change the things. We have to remember that movies are being done for commercial purposes.
I'm not surprised at all. Apple needs to survive and thrive without Jobs. It would be beneficial if people believe that his part was smaller than it may have been.
From an outsider's perspective, when I invested in Apple (1999 or '98, pre ipod), Jobs was the heart of the company. It wasn't clear the he was the brains. It was clear that Apple attracted an amazing group that really believed in something new.
I don't doubt that we'll see an evolution of innovation from Apple in the future. The expectation that it should be the same level and spectacle that we saw before is unrealistic and unfair to the next generation of designers and leaders.
I believe in the end that the "open" systems will overtake both Apple and Microsoft in many market segments. I don't think that either will be going away soon, but they will be challenged by open source stuff.
I have been watching with interest since my son recently switched from an Apple phone to an Android. The first couple of days were good, but on the third day I thought he was going to crack and go back to the Apple. He stuck it out, and somewhere before the 15 day "trial" period, he decided to stick with the Android based phone. I am monitoring the situation to get some objective feedback on the actual differences between the Apple and Android phones. His experience interests me, because he doesn't really have an axe to grind one way or the other. He is just a user that is looking for a product to meet his needs, and he happened to use Apple first, and now is trying Android.
Rich, Jobs was an interesting character. On the other hand, there is one thing that has not changed at Apple. They create closed systems that never take all the market. I can think of one exception, the iPOD, but this device has been basically superseded. The iPhone share does very well, but its share is shrinking. Their Macs started to get some traction, but now have fallen back to about 5% of the market. They did very well by selling premium gear, and then by innovating with the store idea. That is the real innovation, not the devices.
I am interested in this becuase of Microsoft's situation. I also was at IBM after they had started to recover from a near death experience. Both of those companies are having problems with perception of their future prospects, but both remain very profitable (and currently have similar market caps). Apple went through a couple of near death experiences. Jobs experience is an interesting tale for corporate America.
What should be the perception of a product’s real-world performance with regard to the published spec sheet? While it is easy to assume that the product will operate according to spec, what variables should be considered, and is that a designer obligation or a customer responsibility? Or both?
Biomimicry has already found its way into the development of robots and new materials, with researchers studying animals and nature to come up with new innovations. Now thanks to researchers in Boston, biomimicry could even inform the future of electrical networks for next-generation displays.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.