Forget Microsoft — they might have liked to play by Edisonian rules in the computer market, but for truly scary “evil empire”-style practices, one has to give it to Apple. The Boys from Cupertino have a penchant for control-freak attitudes, something that shouldn’t be entirely surprising to those who know the engineering mindset.
It’s a mindset that was absorbed into a lot of early Progressive thought — Taylorism, Fordism, scientific management… At heart, Apple wants to put out a product that is better than the rest, and to do that, they have to control the use of the devices. Like all adherents of scientific management, planning has to come at the expense of freedom; you can’t solve complex problems by democratic means — few individuals will agree on how to solve a problem — it has to be done by fiat. For efficiency’s sake.
Hence their 1980s annoying system of requiring their computers to be serviced only by Apple authorized dealers, and their reluctance, until they were practically irrelevant outside of the smug, elitist “I’ve got a Mac!” crowd, to move toward a more open architecture that could be modified by the user, and to allow for competing software platforms like Office to compete with their Mac-based word processor/database/presentation/spreadsheet suite (which, while quite good, is pretty much useless if you’re not talking to Mac-only users…otherwise, you export the vile as a .pdf or .doc file. This is the definition of “lose” in the software market.)
With their adoption of PC-style interchangeability, the ability to use Windows programs, Apple managed to keep themselves from disappearing, but it was the success of their hardware — and ultimately, Apple has always been about pushing hardware; their commitment to software is dodgy, at best — Apple has returned to form.
The success of the iPod brought with it their obsessive need to control access to material to put on the wee devices. For several years, if you didn’t go through iTunes (a format that doesn’t play well with other MP3 players), you were hosed as a iPod user. It was only when the MP3 player market caught up that iPods started allowing the use of formats outside of iTunes.
The iPhone and iPad brought Apple into the forefront of the smartphone market and boosted them from elitist underdog to smug frontman. The iPhone is a wonderous invention — it really is — but Apple’s continued refusal to entertain opening hte device to other service networks seriously hampers the users. PArtly this is due to development agreements with AT&T over the microSIM card tehcnology, partly, it’s Apple being Apple. They trapped their customers into a deal with AT&T with the iPad, as well, but it’s not about choice.
When you buy Apple, you buy into the Apple corporate philosophy. Much like the Progressivism that coopted Taylorist thoughts for its own use, you don’t get to pick and choose which elements of Progressivism (or Applism) you want — it’s all or nothing.
Network issues aside, the Apple App Store is another example of the Apple need to control content, not just use of their products; it’s already established that programs that have a political bent unappreciated by Cupertino have a habit of getting deleted — like the iSlam app which was pulled, while Christian-slamming software remains there for download. (This is one of the reasons for linking Applism to Progressivism…) The iBooks app will read .pdfs not, sure…but you can’t simply download them to read on your iPhone or iPad. You can’t look at Flash animation on the iPhone or iPad because Apple doesn’t trust their functionality; it’s not up to you, should you want to view the myriad sites using Flash…you will view only HTML5 sites. And you will like it. (Now don’t get me wrong, Shockwave is a disaster, as far as I’m concerned — it crashes Chrome and Firefox with alarming regularity, and often requires a restart of the computer if you want to, say, listen to music, as it hijacks your Windows media players. But I want the option to go to those sites.)
Apple mirrors Progressivism in that it coopts the terms of the argument from its opponents. Progressivism uses freedom and choice a lot, but that’s incompatible with planning; Apple uses functionality (Bestest electronic devices evah!), user options (thousands of apps at the App Store!), and support…but these are ephemeral. While Microsoft and PC manufacturers are not enthusiastic about Open Source — the realm of the true computer geek, where Linux rules the roost and thousands of programs are manipulated by their users for the benefit of others — their equipment and software are often compatible with these iAnarchists.
As with Progressivism, Apple brooks no apostasy. Recent concerns about the functionality of the iPhone4 have been met with hostility and derision from the Boys of Cupertino (“You’re holding the phone wrong!”) Discussions of the problem amongst Apple junkies is not tolerated, nor are these issues directly addressed by the company (it’s the user…it’s the program for the signal strength…it’s not us!) Instead of talking to their customers, and trying to find some kind of solution (like, say, Windows eventually did with Windows 7 after they realized that Vista was a big turd in the operating system punchbowl), Apple excises threads on the subject from their support website.
This is, in short, no way to run a business. There is a happy medium. Apple could openly and honestly address problems, but that would relinquish a certain amount of control of the situation to their customer base, and would make them look less competent than the image they have through total control of content, delivery, and use.
Make no mistake: I love my iPad. Enough I even looked at the MacBook for about 2 minutes — then realize I could get more performance from a PC for half the price. And it would require me to get cozier with the Apple corporate philosophy, and I just can’t do that.
Eventually, the rest of the market will catch up to the iPad. It’s already happening with the Android phones — Google, while it has a lot of shady practices, as well, is more firmly on the side of the Open Source types (electronic libertarians, if you will.) Once there is choice in the tablet/slate/ whateverthehellwe’recallingthem market, Apple will see a serious chunk of their market share erode.
Why..? ’cause we already bought the damned thing; we’d like to be able to use our device as we see fit.
UPDATE: Cult of Mac is reporting that public relations experts are convinced that Apple will have to bite the pomme-flavored bullet and recall the iPhone 4.
The Black Campbell 