Posts Tagged ‘Steve Jobs’
Hoje, 26 de maio de 2010 a Apple Inc. ultrapassou em valor de mercado, pela primeira vez na história, a Microsoft Corporation e assumiu o posto de maior empresa de tecnologia do mundo, segundo informações da agência Reuters e da consultoria Capital IQ.
A Apple com US$ 227,1 bilhões é a segunda maior companhia que integra o índice S&P 500. O primeiro lugar é do grupo de energia Exxon Mobil com US$ 282 bilhões.
O sucesso da companhia comandada por Steve Jobs, que esteve prestes a fechar as portas na década de 1990, deve-se essencialmente a uma boa gestão e a liderança visionária do seu CEO.
“É a virada mais importante que eu já vi no Vale do Silício” — Jim Breyer, capitalista de risco
Steve percebeu com pelo menos uma década de antecipação que as pessoas logo estariam consumindo bens digitais, se comunicando e se relacionando através de diversos dispositivos para além dos PCs convencionais. Com essa visão ele construiu o que pode ser chamado de ‘estratégia do hub digital’.
Inovações e lançamentos de produtos como iPods, passando pelas Apple Stores, o iPhone e mais recentemente o iPad, além é claro de Macs, MacBooks e do Mac OS X, fazem parte de um ecossistema de produtos e serviços inter-relacionados e com uma interface com o usuário extremamente bem cuidada para pontencializar ao máximo a experiência e a satisfação de uso.
É uma estratégia coerente e até certo ponto simples. Mas não se engane, trata-se de algo dificílimo de implementar. Em resumo, a Apple obteve sucesso onde todas as outras falharam e continuam falhando.
Vejamos o caso da Microsoft que segundo algumas estimativas possui uma base instalada de 90% dos sistemas operacionais de desktop no mundo. Hoje a gigante do software enfrenta a queda no valor de suas ações e passa por uma profunda reorganização interna em busca de voltar a ser competitiva.
Em carta aberta publicada no Apple.com, Steve Jobs em pessoa, justifica os motivos pelos quais a Apple decidiu não oferecer suporte ao Flash em suas plataformas móveis (iPod, iPhone e iPad).
Thoughts on Flash
Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobe’s founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work together to serve their joint creative customers – Mac users buy around half of Adobe’s Creative Suite products – but beyond that there are few joint interests.
I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.
First, there’s “Open”.
Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.
Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.
Second, there’s the “full web”.
Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users aren’t missing much video.
Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.
Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.
Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We don’t want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads by adding Flash.
In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?
Fourth, there’s battery life.
To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.
Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.
When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
Fifth, there’s Touch.
Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.
Sixth, the most important reason.
Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.
We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.
This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms.
Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobe’s goal to help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X.
Our motivation is simple – we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful applications. Everyone wins – we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.
Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short.
The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on Apple’s App Store proves that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.
New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.
O que mais eu posso dizer? Só que Steve é o cara!
O blog Royal Pigdom reuniu em ordem cronológica um conjunto de citações (em inglês) de três das mentes mais influentes da indústria de TI mundial em todos os tempos, Steve Jobs (Apple), Bill Gates (Microsoft) e Linus Torvalds (Linux).
É curioso notar nas palavras de cada um traços marcantes de suas personalidades. As palavras de Jobs transbordam determinação e raciocínio apurado. Gates sempre contraditório deixa a impressão de que não fala o que realmente pensa. Já Linus é pura objetividade e bom humor.
What a computer is to me is the most remarkable tool that we have ever come up with. It’s the equivalent of a bicycle for our minds.
1994, while he was obviously not working at Apple:
If I were running Apple, I would milk the Macintosh for all it’s worth — and get busy on the next great thing. The PC wars are over. Done. Microsoft won a long time ago
1996, on Bill Gates:
I wish him the best, I really do. I just think he and Microsoft are a bit narrow. He’d be a broader guy if he had dropped acid once or gone off to an ashram when he was younger. 1997, on Apple products: The products suck! There’s no sex in them anymore!
2003, a modest comment on the iPod and iTunes:
It will go down in history as a turning point for the music industry. This is landmark stuff. I can’t overestimate it!
2006, on Microsoft:
Our friends up north spend over five billion dollars on research and development and all they seem to do is copy Google and Apple.
2007, on his $1 annual salary:
I make fifty cents for showing up … and the other 50 cents is based on my performance.
There’s nobody getting rich writing software that I know of.
We will never make a 32-bit operating system.
The next generation of interesting software will be done on the Macintosh, not the IBM PC.
I believe OS/2 is destined to be the most important operating system, and possibly program, of all time.
If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today.
The Internet? We are not interested in it.
There are no significant bugs in our released software that any significant number of users want fixed.
1996, on the oft-quoted “640K ought to be enough for anybody.”:
I’ve said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time… I keep bumping into that silly quotation attributed to me that says 640K of memory is enough.
Microsoft looks at new ideas, they don’t evaluate whether the idea will move the industry forward, they ask, ‘how will it help us sell more copies of Windows?’
1998, memo to the Office product group:
One thing we have got to change in our strategy – allowing Office documents to be rendered very well by other people’s browsers is one of the most destructive things we could do to the company. We have to stop putting any effort into this and make sure that Office documents very well depends on PROPRIETARY IE capabilities.
Microsoft has had clear competitors in the past. It’s a good thing we have museums to document that.
Spam will be a thing of the past in two years’ time.
I’m doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won’t be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones.
Some people have told me they don’t think a fat penguin really embodies the grace of Linux, which just tells me they have never seen an angry penguin charging at them in excess of 100mph. They’d be a lot more careful about what they say if they had.
My name is Linus Torvalds and I am your god.
Do you pine for the days when men were men and wrote their own device drivers?
Really, I’m not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect.
Talk is cheap. Show me the code.
Which mindset is right? Mine, of course. People who disagree with me are by definition crazy. (Until I change my mind, when they can suddenly become upstanding citizens. I’m flexible, and not black-and-white.)
I have an ego the size of a small planet.
Security people are often the black-and-white kind of people that I can’t stand. I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in that they make such a big deal about concentrating on security to the point where they pretty much admit that nothing else matters to them.
As 10 melhores citações de Steve Jobs, Blog.MacMagzine
Steve Jobs rompe oficialmente o silêncio sobre seu problema de saúde com objetivo de tranquilizar o mercado e possivelmente evitar que a última participação da Apple na Macworld se transforme em fiasco.
Leia mais sobre isso em: Steve Jobs explica sua ausência na Macworld Expo – Blog.MacMagazine
Jobs conversou com Nocera ao telefone e, ao que tudo indica, confirmou que se submeteu a uma cirurgia no início deste ano (como já havia informado o também jornalista do NYT, John Markoff) para correção de problemas relacionados a dificuldades digestivas e que durante a WWDC estaria sofrendo com uma infecção (possivelmente relacionada ao prodecimento cirúrgico).
A boa notícia é que, segundo Nocera, Steve Jobs não está sendo acometido novamente pelo câncer de pâncreas.
A matéria pode ser lida na íntegra em Apple’s Culture of Secrecy (Talking Business, NYT).