Editorial

Ross's Rant: So a guy walks into a bar and loses his iPhone

Nothing exciting about that I hear you cry, but not when its an iPhone 5 prototype.

In a story that bears a striking resemblance to an incident that occurred just over a year ago, it would seem that an Apple employee got a bit too tipsy and left his phone as well as his sobriety in a San Francisco bar and restaurant. It just goes to show that tequila, hot-wings and smart phones do not make a good combination. To make matters worse someone allegedly found the phone and sold it for $200 on craigslist. Which is cheap seeing as it cost Gizmodo 5 grand last time. But maybe they just marketed it wrong or no one really wants an iPhone 5, but I doubt that and being charitable as we are here at Neowin, we would have just given it to this guy and save him the trouble of sleeping rough on Apple's doorstep for fruit labeled electronics.

There is little to argue with the fact that Apple is an iconic brand, and has been responsible for the deprecation of the PC and laptop to just another web connected form factor amongst many other devices. Such is the power of this brand, the passion behind it has created a cult of almost hysterical proportions. People camping out, lines queued round the block, investors questioning its future on the basis of one man. Now we have headlines news about a lost iPhone.

What makes Apple as a brand so powerful however? The root lies in that they have created an emotional connection with people. This is one of the worst kept secrets in marketing. One which precipitates many a debate on online forums among "fanboys" people so passionate that they are willing to go toe to toe with their fellow internet users who prefer competing products. In a similar way to soccer teams create a connection to their following Apple is a master of creating "buzz" and "excitement" around their fans, tapping into the fundamental human psychology of de-individuation. "He has one, so I want one too".

The fashion element cant be underestimated particularly when it comes to appealing to women. When I look at something I'm more focused on 1. What does it do for me? and 2. How much does it cost? Without seeming to be sexist here, if I ask my wife the same question she would say 1. What does it do for me? 2. Does it look nice/fit well/match/colour coordinate? 3. How much does it cost?

This is where Apple has really nailed it in the past 10 years. Iconic designer Jonathan Ive, managed to create a perfect fusion of form and function with Apple products that have simply left others in the industry scratching their heads. Creating truly beautiful products that are easy to use that just work. This has opened up a range of mobile devices to a whole different section of the population who purchase for a whole different reason from us "Geeks".  Fashion however is a fickle mistress. Lets hope that she is kind and that Apple doesn't repeat the mistakes of the past, and that Tim Cook et al can take the company forward.

So lets hope that we have many other phones/tablets/[insert future Apple product here] to be talking about in the future as we bid farewell to one of the true enigmatic icons of our industry.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

HTC Radar hands-on and first impressions

Next Story

Not guilty pleas given in iPhone 4 prototype case

26 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Poorly hidden usual anti-Apple Neowin BS. Not all Apple users are ignorant fanboys who do not use or get exposure to any other system and blind to their abilities.

Septimus said,
Poorly hidden usual anti-Apple Neowin BS. Not all Apple users are ignorant fanboys who do not use or get exposure to any other system and blind to their abilities.

anti-apple neowin bs? serisouly have you been on this site for the past couple years? it's been more pro apple lately then ever

For someone who writes articles and editorials, I would have expected to at least use a spellchecker before submitting an article with so many mistakes

Apple could and should have done better with the annual "I lost my new unannounced new gen iphone" PR fairy tale.For example it could have been stolen form a developer's house. This years story is so lame. As Jobs and Cook said, nothing will change.

I seem to have been born without the Apple gene (iGene?). I'm totally immune to the perceived charm of Apple products.

Shiranui said,
I seem to have been born without the Apple gene (iGene?). I'm totally immune to the perceived charm of Apple products.

I seem to lack the iGene too

Shiranui said,
I seem to have been born without the Apple gene (iGene?). I'm totally immune to the perceived charm of Apple products.

Very naive to think that people only buy the product for the Apple logo.

This crap of focusing on obvious marketing ploys of Apple is why its products do so well. Its all people know these days. You know i saw an digital music player prototype in a Sony Style store back in the late 90s and didnt have a clue how it worked and now you never hear of anything about digital music players except for iPods. Stop focussing all attention on Apple. Neowin you are perpetuating this crap. Please just STOP!!! Imagine if everyone spoke about Samsung all the time, that would be all the consumers knew so they would only buy Samsung products. Apple has somehow figured out a way of getting free marketing out of all the tech websites.

I love how Apple employees keep "accidentally" losing iPhones. It's not done on purpose for publicity at all, no sir. You'd think they'd be a little more creative than to do it in a bar again.

TRC said,
I love how Apple employees keep "accidentally" losing iPhones. It's not done on purpose for publicity at all, no sir. You'd think they'd be a little more creative than to do it in a bar again.

yeah, maybe next time they can do it in park or in an airport

bruNo_ said,

yeah, maybe next time they can do it in park or in an airport

What would be more creative is just mailing a prototype but it "mistakenly" went to the wrong address, and landed at a tech news site's doorstep. Lol.

TRC said,
I love how Apple employees keep "accidentally" losing iPhones. It's not done on purpose for publicity at all, no sir. You'd think they'd be a little more creative than to do it in a bar again.

They can't even innovate how they lose a phone. Just like they show no innovation in their devices either. Its like a single model car with different trim levels.

"What makes Apple as a brand so powerful however? "

Step 1: Choose a technology
Step 2: Take advantage of the general persons stupidity/ignorance

stunts said,
"What makes Apple as a brand so powerful however? "

Step 1: Choose a technology
Step 2: Take advantage of the general persons stupidity/ignorance

oh I see anyone with intelligence doesn't buy Apple, they buy say Android, yep its stupid to be buy a fully developed OS with the bugs worked out and a massive eco system compared to a Beta OS with limited ecosystem for pretty much the same price.........

evo_spook said,

oh I see anyone with intelligence doesn't buy Apple, they buy say Android, yep its stupid to be buy a fully developed OS with the bugs worked out and a massive eco system compared to a Beta OS with limited ecosystem for pretty much the same price.........

Or they buy WP7, that doesn't crash like Android or iOS...

People never buy based on actual technology and the few that do think they are buying based on some sense of self intelligence and ability to discern the best often fall into traditional traps, no matter how intelligent they/we actually are.

If it was about intelligence, people wouldn't even buy a device because it was 'easy' to use, as they would truly not need it to be easy. Which also works in reverse, as people will buy Android because it makes them appear to be more intelligent because they by proxy have the 'intelligence' to operate a complex device.

Which sadly conflates complex with technical advancement.


If it was about buying the most 'advanced' or 'capable' technology, the majority of companies that are successful would be relegated to blips in history.

As for phones, what do you consider to be an 'intelligent' purchase? What works the bet for you? It is based on what you do with it, or what you want to do with it, or the actual advanced technology in the phone, and brilliance in its core operations that are hidden?

We all have our preferences that are vastly different, so it all becomes less of an ego related argument of intelligence, and more of a simple concept that our realities and necessities are different; all being equal.

I do not like when people are 'suckered' into a way of thinking, or tricked into creating a 'faith' about a product, when it doesn't fit their needs. This has been my biggest angst with Apple over the past 20 years, are the periods where they do 'deceive' people and create a false perspective of what is to gain market share and profit.

There are key facts about technology that a large portion of the Apple consumer base would fail to answer correctly. This is dangerous when it is just willful ignorance of consumer, but extremely dangerous when these concepts are whispered and even directly marketed by a company that is an authority on technology. (Apple's work in the 70s and early 80s give them this credibility, even if they don't uphold in the future.)

Here are some basic questions the average consumer and even technically minded person would not be able to answer correctly if they only referred to Apple and Apple fans for technology information:

1) Who made the first touch screen cell phone?
2) Who made the first multi-touch interface?
3) Who made the first portable music player?
4) Who made the first 64bit desktop computer?
5) Who made the first GUI?
6) Does the BSD kernel interface in OS X make it more secure than other OSes?
7) Who made the first 'successful' tablet computer?
... etcetera...

Apple also uses this disruption of facts to make themselves and their products appear better.

Again you could submit a set of questions, that even Apple themselves contradicted as technology demonstrated Apple was not being truthful.

1) Is 64bit computing faster, even if it isn't using the larger RAM address space?
2) Which display technology is better, grayscale or color?
3) What offers more functionality, a single button mouse or a multi-button mouse?
4) What CPU technology is better, CISC or RISC?
5) Is voice dialing important on a Cell Phone?
6) Is wireless headset support (bluetooth) important for a cellphone?
7) Is a 64bit kernel and OS necessary to get the benefits of 64bit computing?

These are all things Apple has argued, and then finally conceded they were not being honest. (The grayscale vs color in the late 80s was when I first noticed how insane the arguments were.)

So, if Apple has admitted they mislead their own fans and customers, and done it repeatedly, what are they telling people now that is not true and they themselves will eventually admit when they change to the 'better' technologies?


Back to phones and intelligence. If you were going to rip apart the kernels and the OS layers, here is how they come out with regard to being advanced, defined as having the most capabilities, using the latest technology concepts.

1) WP7
2) iOS
3) Android

As I mentioned above, people see the 'complexity' of Android as being more advanced, and this simply is not true. It is more the effect of a poor OS model on top of a rather average kernel model that was dated when it was designed in the early 90s.

iOS and WP7 being easier to use have nothing to do with the level of technology that actually makes the devices work.

evo_spook said,

oh I see anyone with intelligence doesn't buy Apple, they buy say Android, yep its stupid to be buy a fully developed OS with the bugs worked out and a massive eco system compared to a Beta OS with limited ecosystem for pretty much the same price.........

Not sure at your location. "pretty much the same price" does not fit in my country.

stunts said,
"What makes Apple as a brand so powerful however? "

Step 1: Choose a technology
Step 2: Take advantage of the general persons stupidity/ignorance


So let's assume what you say has a grain of truth in it. Why can't their competitors do the same?

stunts said,
"What makes Apple as a brand so powerful however? "

Step 1: Choose a technology
Step 2: Take advantage of the general persons stupidity/ignorance


Step 3: Profit!

evo_spook said,

oh I see anyone with intelligence doesn't buy Apple, they buy say Android, yep its stupid to be buy a fully developed OS with the bugs worked out and a massive eco system compared to a Beta OS with limited ecosystem for pretty much the same price.........

Apple products are bought by people who are smart buyers, and they are bought by fanatics. Then there who have noidea why they buy it other than it popular to do do. Android buyers buy because they are smart. Not because of any popularity as most Android devices never get advertised at all and they require a bit of tech savvyoness that Apple fanatics lack.

thenetavenger said,

Or they buy WP7, that doesn't crash like Android or iOS...

People never buy based on actual technology and the few that do think they are buying based on some sense of self intelligence and ability to discern the best often fall into traditional traps, no matter how intelligent they/we actually are.

If it was about intelligence, people wouldn't even buy a device because it was 'easy' to use, as they would truly not need it to be easy. Which also works in reverse, as people will buy Android because it makes them appear to be more intelligent because they by proxy have the 'intelligence' to operate a complex device.

Which sadly conflates complex with technical advancement.


If it was about buying the most 'advanced' or 'capable' technology, the majority of companies that are successful would be relegated to blips in history.

As for phones, what do you consider to be an 'intelligent' purchase? What works the bet for you? It is based on what you do with it, or what you want to do with it, or the actual advanced technology in the phone, and brilliance in its core operations that are hidden?

We all have our preferences that are vastly different, so it all becomes less of an ego related argument of intelligence, and more of a simple concept that our realities and necessities are different; all being equal.

I do not like when people are 'suckered' into a way of thinking, or tricked into creating a 'faith' about a product, when it doesn't fit their needs. This has been my biggest angst with Apple over the past 20 years, are the periods where they do 'deceive' people and create a false perspective of what is to gain market share and profit.

There are key facts about technology that a large portion of the Apple consumer base would fail to answer correctly. This is dangerous when it is just willful ignorance of consumer, but extremely dangerous when these concepts are whispered and even directly marketed by a company that is an authority on technology. (Apple's work in the 70s and early 80s give them this credibility, even if they don't uphold in the future.)

Here are some basic questions the average consumer and even technically minded person would not be able to answer correctly if they only referred to Apple and Apple fans for technology information:

1) Who made the first touch screen cell phone?
2) Who made the first multi-touch interface?
3) Who made the first portable music player?
4) Who made the first 64bit desktop computer?
5) Who made the first GUI?
6) Does the BSD kernel interface in OS X make it more secure than other OSes?
7) Who made the first 'successful' tablet computer?
... etcetera...

Apple also uses this disruption of facts to make themselves and their products appear better.

Again you could submit a set of questions, that even Apple themselves contradicted as technology demonstrated Apple was not being truthful.

1) Is 64bit computing faster, even if it isn't using the larger RAM address space?
2) Which display technology is better, grayscale or color?
3) What offers more functionality, a single button mouse or a multi-button mouse?
4) What CPU technology is better, CISC or RISC?
5) Is voice dialing important on a Cell Phone?
6) Is wireless headset support (bluetooth) important for a cellphone?
7) Is a 64bit kernel and OS necessary to get the benefits of 64bit computing?

These are all things Apple has argued, and then finally conceded they were not being honest. (The grayscale vs color in the late 80s was when I first noticed how insane the arguments were.)

So, if Apple has admitted they mislead their own fans and customers, and done it repeatedly, what are they telling people now that is not true and they themselves will eventually admit when they change to the 'better' technologies?


Back to phones and intelligence. If you were going to rip apart the kernels and the OS layers, here is how they come out with regard to being advanced, defined as having the most capabilities, using the latest technology concepts.

1) WP7
2) iOS
3) Android

As I mentioned above, people see the 'complexity' of Android as being more advanced, and this simply is not true. It is more the effect of a poor OS model on top of a rather average kernel model that was dated when it was designed in the early 90s.

iOS and WP7 being easier to use have nothing to do with the level of technology that actually makes the devices work.

Very awesome comment dude!!!! +100000

thenetavenger said,

...

You have got to be one of the most intelligent commenters on Neowin. A very large +1 to you. Those are some damn good questions, by the way.