Year: 2012

The Tick-Tock of Apple

⌘ Permalink

The term “tick-tock model” was made famous (at least to nerds) first by Intel:

With a “tick” cycle every couple of years, look for Intel to advance manufacturing process technology and continue to deliver the expected benefits of Moore’s Law to users. The typical increase in transistor density enables new capabilities, higher performance levels, and greater energy efficiency—all within a smaller, more capable version of the previous “tock” microarchitecture.

[…]

In alternating “tock” cycles, expect Intel to use the previous “tick” cycle’s manufacturing process technologies to introduce the next big innovation in processor microarchitecture. Intel microarchitecture advancements seek to improve energy efficiency and performance, as well as functionality and density of features, such as hardware-supported video transcoding, encryption/decryption, and other integrated capabilities.

In short, revolution, then evolution.

Of course, this is how Apple works, too.[1] The company introduces something new, then iterates on it for several years. After a few rounds of upgrades, it jumps forward in a big way.

This strategy gives companies like Intel and Apple time to both refine existing ideas and to come up with new ones.

A lot of companies — namely Apple — also uses this philosophy across its product line. It focuses on one product, leaving the others ones hanging for a time, then coming back around to them.

Sometimes, this leads to issues.

In April 2007 — two months before the original iPhone shipped — Apple announced that Mac OS X Leopard would be delayed. Here’s David Chartier, writing for TUAW:

Apple has just issued a press release statement announcing that Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard has been delayed until October. The reason? iPhone: “we had to borrow some key software engineering and QA resources from our Mac OS X team, and as a result we will not be able to release Leopard at our Worldwide Developers Conference in early June as planned.” However, Apple will still be displaying a “feature complete” version of Leopard at June’s WWDC event, and will be giving beta versions for developers to take home and help put the finishing touches on.

In late 2010, the company held an event named “Back to the Mac,” in which Steve Jobs and company showed off OS X Lion and the then-new MacBook Airs.

While Apple explained the event’s name as the company “bringing back” iOS features to the Mac, I think that most Apple-watchers knew what was really going on: that the company’s focus has been on iOS most of the year (with the iPad being released that spring), and that things were cycling back to the Mac.

With Apple’s hardware releases basically on a fixed schedule for several years now, the easiest place to see this is with Apple’s software.

Just look at the relationship between Mac OS X and iOS to see this. On a slower release cycle, OS X often plays second fiddle to its mobile cousin. iCloud is much more integrated in to iOS at this point, with Lion only enjoying a few more features than Snow Leopard and MobileMe customers did. If the iPad 3 is really getting ready to be announced (alongside with iOS 5.1, I’d be willing to bet), I think we’re in for some Lion/iCloud improvements sooner rather than later.

I think a lot of people look at this and think:

Apple has more money than just about any other entity on the planet. Why not just hire some more engineers?

As Merlin, Dan and Marco discussed late last week, more people isn’t always the solution. Hell, sometimes, more people isn’t even a good solution.

Apple obviously knows this. Even though it is a huge company, it acts like a small one. Everything goes through a very small number of people at the very top. It’s a bottleneck, but it’s a bottleneck by design. Apple keeps a firm hand on the throttle, and would rather move too slowly, or in just a singular direction, than too quickly. While it can be frustrating as a customer, it’s what keeps Apple products great.

Apple’s focus is limited, but intense.

  1. I wrote about this at length back in 2010.  ↩

Writing About Apple

⌘ Permalink

Chris Rawson at TUAW:

But first you have to decide what kind of Apple writer you’ll be. Will you be the kind of writer who takes a step back from the linkbaiting Controversy of the Week, calmly and logically analyzes the situation, and then writes objectively about it? Will you keep your BS detector active and not believe every single rumor that blooms on your RSS feed? Will you have the patience and foresight to analyze past trends before predicting future performance, even if it means dragging yourself across a desert of spreadsheets and financial statements?

If you’re saying to yourself, “Nah, that all sounds like work,” and you’re not worried about sounding dumb when you write about Apple, then by all means, write whatever comes into your head without putting it through a logic filter first. You’ll have absolutely zero credibility among anyone who doesn’t actively loathe Apple, but at least your page views will be through the roof.

Version 1.3

⌘ Permalink

New as of tonight:

  • Switched to ragged-right alignment in the sidebar.
  • CSS for links and kerning on various bits of text is better.
  • Sidebar and body containers are narrower for easier reading.
  • The site is semi-responsive now.
  • The site logo and Read & Trust logo in the footer are now Retina-ready. On an iPhone 4 zoomed in, they should look as sharp as the text does.

I owe PJ the naming rights to our third child.

Review: The Motorola DPC

⌘ Permalink

I’ve had bad luck trying to get review units of phones. The one place that has let me have a phone is my mother-in-law’s attic, so I present to you the Motorola Digital Personal Communicator for the BellSouth Mobility Network.

History

The DPC was introduced in 1989 as a lower-cost option for those not wanting to drop the change required for the 9800X.

Hardware

The DPC features a orange 7-character segment LED display, set in gray plastic above a back-on-white keypad. Beneath the standard layout, are the following feature keys:

  • RCL
  • PWR
  • STO
  • VOL
  • CLR
  • FCN
  • SND
  • END

Button presses are firm and solid, but not so hard that bruising will occur.

The battery pack is pretty large. With it attached, the phone is difficult to pocket. Without it, it doesn’t work. The battery is nearly the size of the iPhone.

The antenna pulls out of the top of the phone to extend for better reception. This action is smooth, and feels good, unlike the hinge for the speaker. It doesn’t flip open smoothly at all — it feels quite cheap.

The lines formed in the side of the case make it easy to hold on to the phone, despite the phone’s weight. It is nowhere as slippery as the iPhone.

Software

This review unit does not power on, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the software is rather simple for a day in age where iOS and Android rule the roost.