Egg Freckles

A lot of people have been displeased by the skeuomorphic design elements appearing in Apple’s latest operating systems. Some attribute these design decisions to the tastes of Steve Jobs. I don’t think anyone could clearly define the tastes of Steve Jobs, not even himself. One minute he might be appreciating the craftsmanship of his Bsendorfer grand piano, the next he might be observing the minimalistic teachings of Zen sitting cross legged on the floor of his unfurnished home. If there is one thing that could be said for Steve Job’s taste it is that he only wanted the best. Apple’s history with skeuomorphism reflects the desire to present users with the best technology has to offer, even if that desire is misguided, and Steve is not around.

The Desktop Metaphor

Steve Jobs might not have started the desktop metaphor, but he did bring it the world’s eye with the introduction of the Macintosh. Before the Mac there was no skeuomorphism, because there was no graphical user interface. For almost thirty years the iconography of desktop objects have greeted users as they stare into their computer screens. The desktop metaphor has given new computer users a familiar foundation to ground their experiences upon, and expert users terminology such as “files” and “folders” we still use today.

The Classic Calculator

Steve Jobs was so concerned with the skeuomorphic design details of the Classic Mac OS Calculator that early Apple employee Chris Espinosa had to develop “the Steve Jobs Roll Your Own Calculator Construction Set” just so that he could get it right.

Every decision regarding graphical attributes of the calculator were parameterized by pull-down menus. You could select line thicknesses, button sizes, background patterns, etc.

Steve took a look at the new program, and immediately started fiddling with the parameters. After trying out alternatives for ten minutes or so, he settled on something that he liked.

The calculator Steve designed remained the standard calculator on the Macintosh for over sixteen years, all the way up through Mac OS 9.

Apple CD Audio Player

By the time System 7 shipped in 1991, Steve Jobs had long since left Apple, but his appreciation for the finer things in life was still ingrained in the minds of software engineers working on the Mac. One of their creations, the Apple CD Audio Player, brought an unconventional skeuomorphic design to the Mac that allowed users to adjust the color of the apps stereo receiver facade. This was a first for Mac software, and an unusual move for Apple who normally prohibited users from changing the appearance of the Mac OS. The trend of user customizable themes, and skeuomorphic app designs would continue with the release of Mac OS 8.

Mac OS 8

The introduction of Mac OS 8 on July 26, 1997, brought with it the Appearance Manager, and a new face to the Macintosh GUI called Platinum. The Appearance Manager was originally developed for Apple’s failed en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copland_(operating_system text: Copland) project. It introduced a layer of abstraction between the Control Manager and QuickDraw allowing users to theme the Mac OS. Platinum, the default theme, introduced 3D elements into the Mac OS GUI through the use of subtle shadows and simple gradients. Platinum wasn’t the only Apple-developed theme though.

Hi-Tech is based on a shades-of-black color scheme that made the interface look like a piece of stereo equipment. Gizmo is a “kids” interface, using lots of bright colors and “wiggly” interface elements. Both changed every single element of the overall GUI leaving no trace of Apple Platinum. A third theme was later introduced, Drawing Board, developed at Apple Japan. This theme uses elements that make the interface look like it has been drawn in pencil on a drafting-board, including small “pencil marks” around the windows, a barely visible grid on the desktop, and “squarish” elements with low contrast. Although none of these themes were included with a released version of Mac OS, the files can be copied from the pre-release versions that contained them and successfully used on retail versions.

The optional themes in Mac OS 8 might have been Apple’s greatest example of skeuomorphism to date, but it was Steve Jobs who decided to officially drop support for themes in order to preserve a consistent user interface. Themeing would live on in later versions of the Classic Mac OS and even into the early days of Mac OS X, but only as eggfreckles.net/(kaleidoscope.net/What_is_Kaleidoscope.html text: third-party extensions) and haxies.

QuickTime 4

Intended to showcase the technological improvements of the QuickTime 4.0 multimedia technology, the QuickTime 4.0 Player sported a completely re-imagined user interface designed to look like a “real-world” consumer electronics device. The QuickTime 4.0 interface represented an almost violent departure from the long established standards that had been the hallmark of Apple software by introducing skeuomorphic design elements such as drawers, brushed metal, dials, and borderless windows that would haunt the Macintosh GUI for years to come.

We find this trend toward “consumer” interfaces to be particularly disturbing. The design places a premium on aesthetics over usability. The emphasis is on creating a flashy product, and not on creating a useful and usable product. Rather than asking, “How can we make this look more like a real thing?”, the designers would do their users a far more important service by asking, “How can we make this operate better than the real thing”. To use the QuickTime 4.0 Player as an example, the designers spent far too much time making the software look like a hand-held player, and far too little time examining how they might add utility to such a player. A hand-held player is just that: a player. A software-based multimedia viewer can become an information device. It would appear that this latter approach was never considered in the design of QuickTime.

Apple DVD Player

The Apple DVD Player that shipped with Mac OS 9 went far beyond apps without windows. It shipped with a completely round user interface that more closely resembled the Puck Mouse from the first iMac than a traditional Mac OS application. It is hard to grasp the design decisions made around the Apple DVD Player, and even harder to grasp the app itself. Without a titlebar, or window border to speak of the Apple DVD Player was a skeuomorphic flop that kept users guessing how to drag it off screen long after the movie had started to play. In the age of the candy colored iMacs, and the dawn of brushed metal, Apple emphasized form over function to keep things cool and tide customers over until the arrival of Mac OS X.

iTunes

Another Skeuomorphic design that kept things cool before the arrival of Mac OS X’s Aqua interface was the deeply beveled, brushed metal interface of iTunes 1.0. Complete with jelly bean volume sliders, and Aqua blue accents, iTunes 1.0 looked like something straight out of the future, even running under Mac OS 9. The Faux LCD interface is still a part of iTunes today, but back in version 1.0 the screen was purposely left pixelated to preserve the look of a high-end stereo receiver. (Bitmapped greyscale displays were still a luxury feature on the stereos of 2001.) As an experiment the iTunes user interface was a complete success. Just the right mixture of skeuomorphic cool, combined with the usability of a conventional GUI. iTunes showed the world that skeuomorphic accents could work as long as user interface fundamentals were preserved.

Aqua

Aqua, the Mac OS X user interface, brought many of the accents that made Apple hardware cool and fun to use back to the Mac OS. There were jelly bean buttons, like the CD eject button on the very first iMac. There were translucent colors, like the blue apple on the Power Mac G3, G4, and G4 Cube, There were pinstripes, like those found on all of Apple’s Studio Displays and iMacs shipping at the time. For the first time in history, computer graphics were powerful enough to support photorealistic icons, smooth animations, high-definition textures, and deep drop shadows. Apple didn’t hesitate incorporating these features into Mac OS X, and in doing so changed what we thought of computer interfaces forever. Everything else looked dated in comparison.

As time progressed, the Aqua interface has evolved to reflect the changes in Apple hardware. Gone are the over the top transparencies, deep drop shadows, and distracting pinstripes. Subtle grays, mute reflections, and soft gradients now fill the retina displays of Apple’s latest portables. Some might say that Aqua is not a skeuomorphic interface because it does not resemble a specific real world object. To them I say Aqua is a mirror reflecting back the design decisions that have made Apple’s hardware so appealing over the last 10 years.

Brushed Metal

Despite the abundance of candy colored hues, silky blues, and soft gradients, Mac OS X imprisoned many of its apps in a colder metallic texture for several years. Born in the dark ages of QuickTime, Sherlock, and iTunes, Brushed Metal made its way into the world’s most advanced operating system as an optional interface theme. Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines state that the brushed metal interface should be used for programs that mimic the operation of, or interface with, common devices, but that didn’t stop Apple from bringing Brushed Metal to the Finder and Safari in Mac OS X 10.3 Panther. Out of all of Apple’s skeuomorphic faults, brushed metal might be the most loathed by long time Mac users. It was retired from Apple’s desktop operating system in October 2007 with the release of Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard.

iOS & Back to the Mac

The runaway success of the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch have introduced a whole new generation of users, both young and old, to modern computing. To help them find their way, Apple has littered their path with real-world objects such as torn paper, Corinthian leather, wooden bookshelves, green tabletop felt, stitched pages, dark linen, reel-to-reel tapedecks, and highway road signs. Apologists for skeuomorphic design maintain that users will more readily be able to transfer their knowledge of real-world objects to software using these helpful guides. Unfortunately, the apologists fail to recognize that there are two likely consequences of this approach:

1. The user is unable to transfer his or her existing knowledge of computer interaction.
2. The software becomes needlessly subject to the limitations of the physical device.

With the release of Mountain Lion, Apple is bringing even more “helpful guides” back to the Mac, and needlessly limiting the capabilities of software. With the dawn of the Retina display, and more pixels to fill, I don’t think the trend of skeuomorphic design is going to stop anytime soon, even after the passing of Steve Jobs.

For those of us already running Mac OS X Lion, Mountain Lion will be a minor update. Continuing the iOSfication of Mac OS X, Mountain Lion brings even more apps and features back to Mac from our iPhones, iPads, and iPod Touches. Unfortunately not everyone will be able to take advantage of the polish Apple’s latest cat provides. Mountain Lion, like its predecessors will be leaving some Macs, and some Mac OS X features behind. The list might not be as long as last year’s, but any feature worth using is a hard feature to lose.

Hardware

At first glance Mountain Lion’s system requirements look pretty straight forward, Mac OS X v10.6.8 or later installed, 2GBs of memory or greater, and at least 8GBs of available hard disk space. It is not until you get to the list of supported models that you realize something is up, and not all of the Macs that can run Mac OS X 10.7 will be able to make the move to Mountain Lion.

• White plastic iMacs with Model Identifiers iMac5,1, iMac5,2, and iMac6,1 will not make the cut due to outdated graphics chipsets.
• All plastic MacBooks that pre-date the aluminum unibody redesign with Model Identifiers MacBook2,1, MacBook3,1, and MacBook4,1 will not make the cut due to outdated integrated Intel graphics chipsets.
• MacBook Pros released prior to June 2007 with Model Identifiers MacBookPro2,1, and MacBookPro2,2 will not make the cut due to outdated graphics chipsets.
• The original MacBook Air with Model Identifier MacBookAir1,1 will not make the cut due to outdated integrated Intel graphics chipsets.
• The Mid-2007 Mac mini with Model Identifier Macmini2,1 will not make the cut due to outdated integrated Intel graphics chipsets.
• The original Mac Pro and its 8-core 2007 refresh with Model Identifiers MacPro1,1, and MacPro2,1 will not make the cut due to a 32-bit boot EFI, although there is a work around.
• The Late 2006 and Early 2008 Xserves with Model Identifiers Xserve1,1, and Xserve2,1 will not make the cut due to a 32-bit boot EFI, although the same work around may apply.

The official Mountain Lion release date is just around the corner, and as it approaches I am sure we will learn more about which models are supported, and what workarounds can be taken to update an aging Mac one last time.

RSS

RSS has been part of Mac OS X since the release of Safari 2 and Mac OS X 10.4 on April 29th, 2005. One of Mac OS X Tiger’s 150+ new features, RSS in Safari allows users to read news feeds from within the browser and stay up-to-date with new content as it is published. Safari’s RSS capabilities were never a threat to dedicated readers, but provided a quick way to peruse a publications feed, distraction free, prior to subscribing.

Starting the release of Mac OS X Leopard on October 26th, 2007, Apple took a second shot at publicizing the potential of RSS by including it in Mail 3. RSS in Mail gives users the ability to subscribe to feeds and read articles alongside the email in their inbox. Mail proved to be a better RSS reader than Safari, but neither method provided much in the way of sharing articles, or syncing feeds between devices. In Mountain Lion both RSS in Safari and Mail are gone, replaced with Reading List in the browser and the chance at using a dedicated client instead of a half-hearted attempt in Mail.

X11

XQuartz (commonly referred to as X11.app) is Apple’s version of the X server, a component of the X Window System, for Mac OS X. The current version of XQuartz implements support for hardware-accelerated 2D graphics (in versions prior to 2.1), hardware OpenGL acceleration and integration with Aqua, the Mac OS X graphical user interface. X11 was initially available as a downloadable public beta for Mac OS X v10.2 and later included as a standard package for Mac OS X v10.3, which can be downloaded from Apple’s website. In Mac OS X v10.4, X11 was an optional install included on the install DVD. Since Mac OS X v10.5, X11 is installed by default. As of OS X Mountain Lion, Apple has dropped dedicated support for X11.app; users are directed to the open source XQuartz project instead.

Because The X Windowing System and X11.app were written with the MIT open source license these technologies will continue to be available for Mac OS X even if Apple does not want to support them. I suspect X11’s lack of Retina display support, and Apple’s move away from freely distributed applications might have something to do with X11.app’s abandonment.

Mac OS X

The biggest feature missing from Mountain Lion might be the Mac in its name. Starting with the release of 10.8 the name of Apple’s Macintosh desktop operating system will be OS X. The “Mac” has been removed from the name.

The first version of Mac OS was 7.6 released in January of 1997. Prior to that the Macintosh operating system was referred to as “System Software” and could be acquired for the price of floppies from many Apple resellers, and user groups. When Steve Jobs returned to the company he founded in 1996, the Macintosh operating system was officially rebranded as “Mac OS”, and Apple began charging for new releases.

“Mac” is a powerful brand name among computer enthusiasts, but “Apple” is recognizable by almost everyone. The removal of Mac from OS X might signal a future where the lines between OS X and iOS begin to blur, and we are all buying Apple’s instead of Macs. Whatever the course, I’m hoping that during the continued iOSfication of OS X we don’t forget all of the good things the Mac has given us over the years.

I missed out on the original release of Pretty Hate Machine in October of 1989. I was only six years old. Since then Nine Inch Nails has become my favorite band, Pretty Hate Machine my favorite album, and Trent Reznor my favorite artist. It is hard to sum up why I like Nine Inch Nails so much. As with most memorable human experiences it comes down to connections. I first discovered Nine Inch Nails during a difficult period in my life when I felt trapped. Pretty Hate Machine, and Nine Inch Nails taught me I am never imprisoned as long as I have the power to express myself. Trent Reznor, the frontman of Nine Inch Nails, has a unique talent for turning everyday noise into emotionally charged experiences. Mechanical rhythms, high voltage instrumentals, and passion fired vocals are the recipe for Nine Inch Nails’ greatest hits. Every time I listen to Pretty Hate Machine, I not only feel the power of his performance, but remember a time when I discovered I was no longer powerless to express myself. I missed out on the Kickstarter project for Pretty Eight Machine, but thanks to Inverse Phase’s hard work I can still benefit from it today. Pretty Eight Machine is a Chiptune parody/tribute/ of Nine Inch Nails’ Pretty Hate Machine. A Chiptune is a piece of music composed in the 8-bit Nintendo/Atari style. Think the theme songs of Mario, Mega Man, and The Legend of Zelda. Pretty Eight Machine is a parody/tribute because is stays true to the source material (tribute), while containing the whimsical feel of a 1980’s era video game (parody).

I think Pretty Hate Machine already sounds a bit gamey and that makes it perfect for my project. That’s also what gave me the inspiration to Chiptune some of it in the first place. Though some of this is for the challenge, I do want to end up with something that resembles the original music; I don’t want to destroy it.

Pretty Eight Machine is more than a just down sampled version of my favorite album. It has been meticulously crafted to invoke an emotional response for the music I love, played in a way that still sounds familiar. Think of Pretty Eight Machine as a cover of Nine Inch Nails’ greatest album recorded on piano, saxophone, or acoustic guitar. The music sounds similar, but is expressed in a whole new medium. > The plan is to approach each song and find one sound chip that works particularly well with it, and then just go to town, following the appropriate limitations. Since this is a parody, my tradition is to also make a nerdy, possibly corny pun of each track title.

Despite being a fan of video games all of my life I am new to Chiptunes. I never spent much time listening to the music from my favorite video games, because I always thought they were just part of the game. Pretty Eight Machine has opened my eyes to this new genre of music. I now think of Chiptunes as not just video game music, but a form of musical expression with the same validity as Jazz, Country, or Rock & Roll. > I’m a big NIN fan. I want to share the impact it’s had on me with the rest of the world. I want to introduce Chiptune fans to NIN and I want to introduce NIN fans to Chiptunes. And if they’re already a fan of both, I want to give them a funny feeling in their pants or at least put a smile on their face.

If you are a fan of Chiptunes or Nine Inch Nails I strongly suggest you check out this album. Inverse Phase has given me a new way to listen to my favorite music, which without lyrics is perfectly suited for listening while writing or performing other concentration intensive tasks. Starting at $6.50 it is hard to go wrong supporting an album that will bring you back to the video games of your childhood, and remind you of the power of personal expression.

As a long time Mac user I was born into the desktop metaphor of files, folders, drag, and drop. It is hard to imagine using my computer in any other way. iOS opened my eyes to how functional a simplified mobile operating system can be, and why ditching the filesystem might not be a bad thing for most users. But what about the Power Users amongst us? If iOS is a simplified computing platform, and the Mac is the "computer for the rest of us," then what are die hard file system addicts like myself supposed to be using? Some would say the command line, but I don't think the answer is that simple. A modern computing experience needs to be more than a powerful shell. Pictures, webpages, sounds, and multimedia are too much of what we use our computers for these days. A truly forward looking file system manager needs to accept these considerations while offering users powerful tools in a package that does not feel foreign to the way files are managed today.

Path Finder by CocoaTech is a file manager that promises more ways to access your data, using fewer applications in less time. It approaches the file system problem in the same way as the traditional Macintosh Finder. You won't find realistic 3D environments, multi-colored blocks, or exploding sunbursts while using Path Finder. Just the same icon, list, and column views that have been part of Mac OS X since the Public Beta. Path Finder doesn't depart from the Macintosh experience of overlapping windows, files, folders, drag, and drop. PathFinder feels at home on my Macintosh desktop just like any application developed by Apple. The difference is Path Finder was designed with Power Users in mind.

The similarities between the Finder and Path Finder end as soon as the preferences come out. As a power user's Finder replacement, Path Finder gives you a choice over almost everything with lots of exciting panes, drawers, toolbars, contextual menus, and keyboard shortcuts to customize. For starters Path Finder gives your more font, color, style, spacing, and sorting options for data than the Finder. You can have directory listings appear in bold, invisible items appear in grey, and the sort order vary by name, extension, or kind. I appreciate the freedom Path Finder gives me to see my data in my own way even if the combination of a brush script font with a deep drop shadow would cause Steve Jobs to roll over in his grave.

One of Path Finder's strengths over the Finder is the ability to view two different sections of the file system in a dual-pane view. This feature is especially helpful when transferring data within the local file system or across network volumes. You can use one pane to view the local filesystem while the other pane is monitoring a remote filesystem mounted over AFP, FTP, NFS, or SMB. You might be familiar with this functionality if you have used a popular file transfer utility like Transmit. Path Finder does one better than most FTP clients by allowing both panes to view remote volumes while supporting the direct transfer of files between panes without manually downloading files first. Path Finder makes right on Mac OS X's promise of being a good network citizen without needing additional file transfer utilities to live up to its word. It even gives you the option of withholding the Macintosh specific .DS_Store files that infest so many foreign network drives and drive System Admins crazy.

Just like your browser, Path Finder supports tabs. Within a single window you can collect multiple views of local or remote filesystems in one window, bookmarking your favorite destinations so you can come back to them later.

The built-in Drop Stack is a Path Finder first that makes copying files between two locations easier. Path Finder was the first application to offer this novel resting place to put your files during the middle of a complex drag and drop operation. Path Finder 6's Drop Stack allows you to collect multiple files on a single stack. When you are ready you can copy or move all of the files in a single step. The Drop Stack is especially handy when moving a collection of files between Path Finder tabs, or buried application windows.

Path Finder's most powerful features come in the form of customizable drawers that can be bolted onto any Path Finder window to display a variety of information. Possibilities include showing a selection's attributes, info, permissions, preview, path, size, tags, or rating. Each drawer can show two views of additional information. Drawers can be accessed from the left, right, and bottom of each Path Finder window. The option of a third pane on the bottom and the ability to make any view a floating pallet means no filesystem attribute is ever far out of reach. In addition to data attributes, drawers can also be used to show powerful developer tools like a terminal window, hex editor, and run common Git and Subversion commands without the command line. One of my favorite views is the built-in iTunes Browser for surfing my music without opening iTunes, but there is also a Cover View option for browsing files by icon preview. As a well crafted Mac app Path Finder supports Quick Look.

In addition to containing a hex editor, terminal emulator, file transfer utility, and source control app, Path Finder 6 is also a batch file editor, text editor, simple image editor, and built-in data compressor. Using Path Finder's file management tools users can apply filename changes to a group of files simultaneously. Prior to using Path Finder I had to perform similar operations using Mac OS X's Automator, or a third-party application. The built-in text editor gives you most of the features of TextEdit without leaving your Path Finder. Perfect for creating small text files in the filesystem without launching an additional application. Lion's Preview application has gained a reputation for saving unwanted modifications, and crashing unexpectedly. Prior to trying Path Finder 6 I would resort to using a powerful image editor to perform basic crops, scales, and rotations on my images. With Path Finder's built-in image editor I no longer have to start up an additional application even if I am working on a file saved on a remote server. The built-in data compressor works with a wide variety of archive types including zip, gzip, dmg, sit, and more without the need of a third-party compression application like StuffIt. Path Finder 6 keeps the tools I use most at my fingertips without reaching down to the Dock.

The customization possibilities in Path Finder 6 never seem to end. With the ability to define criteria based file selection, adjustable toolbars, customizable keyboard shortcuts, and the option to create your own contextual menu commands it is hard going back to the Finder. File tagging, and the access control list editor means it has never been easier to keep track of the your files, and keep them safe from prying eyes. By looking at Path Finder 6's feature list it is easy to see there is very little this Finder alternative can't do, but can it replace the Finder?

No, Path Finder is not able to completely replace the Finder. Path Finder is unable to duplicate some system functionality that is embedded in the Finder, and removing or disabling the Finder will break these functions. Also, a few applications are hard-wired directly to the Finder and are unable to communicate with any other file browser. These applications can launch Finder if it's not running.

The most troubling part of adopting Path Finder as your daily file management application is that it can't replace the Finder for everything. Clicking on the Trash in the Dock, or performing a Spotlight search will relaunch the Finder even if it is not running. The task of juggling two file managers breaks some of the enchantment Path Finder brings to file management, but CocoaTech have provides some powerful preferences to keep the Finder out of your way as much as possible.

• Set Path Finder as the default file viewer - If this option is enabled in Path Finder's Reveal preferences, applications that include a “Reveal in Finder” function will use Path Finder instead. This option adds a special key to every application's preferences file requesting that the application recognize Path Finder as its file browser. While this should work in most cases, it is unfortunately only a suggestion and some applications may ignore it.
• Launch Path Finder automatically after login - If set in Path Finder's General preferences, this will start both Path Finder and the Finder upon user login.
• Enable Finder's 'Remove from Dock' - Choose this menu item from Path Finder > Finder to allow the Finder icon to be removed from the dock. Once enabled, right-click or control-click on the Finder icon in the Dock and choose “Remove from Dock.” This will allow the Finder to run silently in the background. The Finder will necessarily reappear in the dock every time you restart your computer.

For the past 30 days I have tried to use Path Finder 6 as much as possible and have enjoyed the additional options and powerful customizations it provides. Path Finder 6 is more than a file browser though, it is an ultra wide Swiss Army knife chock of multi prong tools waiting to get work done. I would recommend Path Finder to anyone who is discontent with the options of the Finder, or works with multiple remote servers on a regular basis. The dual pane view and tabbed browsing make juggling multiple Finder windows unnecessary, and the popup File Transfer queue keeps all of the activity in one place. It is true that some of Path Finder's functionality like batch file editing and showing invisible files can be replicated in the Finder using various add-ons, but you will never find such a wide assortment of file management tools designed so perfectly for the Mac all in one place.

Steve Jobs didn’t come back to Apple to kill the Newton; he came back save the company. The Newton was sacrificed to keep Apple alive, and it is pointless to think if things had been different — if the Newton had been saved. If the Newton had been saved we would not have the Apple we have today. I am glad Steve Jobs made the choice to kill the Newton if it meant saving the company I love.

Input

I think that, to me, what I want is this little thing that I carry around with me that’s got a keyboard on it, because to do email, you need a keyboard. Until you perfect speech recognition, you need a keyboard. You don’t sit there and write stuff, you need a keyboard. And you need to be connected to the net. So if somebody would just make a little thing where you’re connected to the net at all times, and you’ve got a little keyboard, like an eMate with a modem in it. God, I’d love to buy one. But I don’t see one of those out there. And I don’t care what OS it has in it. So, you know, I don’t want a little scribble thing. But that’s just me.

It sounds like Steve was talking about a BlackBerry. He wasn’t the only one that poked fun at the Newton’s poor handwriting recognition. Deciphering people’s handwriting is hard. It is much easier to get the human mind to adapt to the restraints of a device, than it is to get a 20 MHz ARM processor to adapt to the infinite varieties of human handwriting. Graffiti on the Palm Pilot proved that people could be taught to write in a restrictive way a PDA can understand, but for a device to be accessible to the general public the learning curve had to be lowered. People are attracted to the familiar. Keyboards are familiar to anyone who has ever used a computer. If the technology for transparent handwriting recognition isn’t available why make people suffer through a half-baked experience, especially if the alternative, a keyboard, is readily available and the faster way to go? It is hard to support a product that was developed before its time when superior alternatives are available today.

Connectivity

I tried a Newton, I bought one of the early ones, I thought it was a piece of junk, I threw it away. I bought one of the Motorola envoys, I thought it was a piece of junk after three months and threw it away. I hear the new ones are a lot better. I haven’t tried one… here’s my problem: My problem is, to me, the high order bit is connectivity. The high order bit is being in touch, connected to a network. That’s why I bought the Envoy: it had a cellular modem in it. And I don’t think the world’s about keeping my life on this little thing and IR-ing it into my computer when I get back to my base station.

The Internet is a big part of the iPhone’s success. One third of the iPhone introduction keynote was for a breakthrough internet communications device. Many of the App Store’s most popular applications leverage the Internet for real-time communications and services. Most desktop computers at the time of the Newton’s release didn’t have an always on Internet connection, and most mobile devices could not connect to the internet short of being tethered to a desktop computer. The Newton’s audible faxing capabilities and optional dial-up modem were a step in the right direction, but the technology for always on wireless internet connectivity just didn’t exist when the Newton was being developed. It would have been a financial mistake for Apple to wait another ten years for the Newton to fulfill its promise of being a great communications device. Putting the company further behind when it needed to focus on its strengths.

Focus

Apple suffered for several years from lousy engineering management. There were people that were going off in 18 different directions… What happened was that you looked at the farm that’s been created with all these different animals going in all different directions, and it doesn’t add up – the total is less than the sum of the parts. We had to decide: What are the fundamental directions we are going in? What makes sense and what doesn’t? And there were a bunch of things that didn’t.

Focusing is saying yes, right? No. Focusing is about saying no. You’ve got to say, no, no, no. The result of that focus is going to be some really great products where the total is much greater than the sum of the parts.

I think that most companies can’t be successful with one stack of system software. Rarely can they manage two, and we I believe are going to succeed at managing two in the next several years, with Mac OS and Rhapsody, which is a superset of that. I cannot imagine being successful trying to manage three. So I have sort of a law of physics disconnect with trying to do that, I just don’t see how it can be done. And I don’t think that has anything to do with how good or bad Newton is, or whether we should be making $800 products, or $500 products, which I think we should. It has to do with, I don’t see how you manage three software stacks.

Have you ever tried to buy a computer off of Dell, HP, or Sony’s website? So many options with obscure product numbers, unordered pricing, and customizations listed in a language only an engineer could understand. Excessive choice makes the shopping process more stressful than it needs to be. Customers begin to second guess themselves, and all of the acronyms lead towards too much confusion. It is fruitless to concentrate on making more, when the quantity you have is uninviting, and the effort you put towards maintaining that quantity is diluting your bottom line.

Steve Jobs understood this. He understood how expensive maintaining multiple software stacks can be, let alone the printers, cameras, and desktop accessories Apple was peddling at the time. For Apple to be great — no for Apple to survive — it had to concentrate on the Macintosh, the one thing it did best, while saying no to everything else. That included the Newton, the printers, the cameras, servers, desktop accessories, and middle management that were getting in the way of making the Macintosh great again.

Sculley

Oh, it was very painful. I’m not sure I even want to talk about it. (pause) What can I say? I hired the wrong guy. And he [John Sculley] destroyed everything I’d spent 10 years working for. Starting with me, but that wasn’t the saddest part. I’d have gladly left Apple if it had turned out like I wanted it to.

I don’t know if Steve jobs was a vengeful man, but people say since John Sculley created the Newton, and John Sculley threw Steve Jobs out of Apple, that upon Steve Jobs return the Newton had to go. I don’t know if that is true. It is hard to love your enemies child, but if John Sculley’s child had been a success would Steve have kept it around? Would Steve Jobs have returned to Apple in in 1997?

It is pointless to engage in these kind of “what-if” scenarios. If the Newton had been successful and transformed Apple into a thriving consumer electronics company Steve Jobs would have never come back to Apple in the first place. Steve Jobs didn’t kill the Newton because John Sculley was its father, Steve Jobs killed the Newton because it was already dead.