>Imagine a world without Apple computers pushing the envelope. We'd still be using wired mice and ugly black boxes.

Wow talk about drinking the kool aid. Apple did not invent the wireless mouse, that honor belongs to Logitech[1].

[1]:http://www.macworld.com/article/1137400/input-devices/mouse4...

Invent != popularize.

I still see far more wireless Logitech mice than Apple mice, so I wouldn't give them credit for popularizing it either.

Once every few months you'll run into someone who uses a Magic Mouse, but it's practically a novelty item.

most common != popularize

Which wireless Apple mouse are you supposing inspired everyone jump on the wireless mouse train? The 1-button version that cost $100? Or the followup Mighty Mouse with its weird omnidirectional scrolling dust trap that nobody liked?

As far as I remember, every Mac user outside of schools was already on the Logitech mouse train back then, thanks to Apple's stubborn insistence that 1-button was the platonic ideal of computer input devices.

Personally, I had the Logitech S530 Cordless Desktop for Mac, which was a keyboard/mouse set that came out around the same time as the wireless Mighty Mouse did. The 8 buttons were great for Exposé shortcuts.

> Imagine a world without Apple computers pushing the envelope. We'd still be using wired mice and ugly black boxes.

I strongly disagree with these classes of statements. Would we not have calculus without Newton? Great ideas tend to often happen simultaneously for a reason.

Building of more complex abstractions (metaphors in the context of language) allows us collectively to consider ideas that previously we could have never considered (i.e. it increases our perception). Julian Jaynes on the power of metaphor for unlocking new ideas:

> All of these concrete metaphors increase enormously our powers of perception of the world about us and our understanding of it, and literally create new objects. Indeed, language is an organ of perception, not simply a means of communication.

If Jobs and crew hadn't done what they did, someone else would have. The timeline may not have been the same, but even 'geniuses' must exist within the context of their society and world.

Can you think of anyone else dedicated to making computer technology beautiful and easy to use?

I can't. I'm not usually a fan of the Great Man theory of history, but I literally cannot think of any individual working in electronics/computing/software with a similar set of abilities and drives.

By default, computer systems tend to be ugly and hard to use. It took someone who wasn't primarily a developer or engineer to push the field in a different direction.

There really aren't many people with entrepreneurial skills and aesthetic sense who can manage engineers in anything like the same way.

Sorry no, some people are truly exceptional and have a vision that only they can execute.

As much as Steve gets credit, the real credit goes to the thousands of engineers that were the ones who created the envelope of which to push, and then kept pushing that one as well. Its never one man.

Its unfortunate he chose to not use proven medicine as a treatment, though.

Why not quote Steve Jobs? He said it much better.

"Great things in business are never done by one person. They're done by a team of people." Steve Jobs

No, the real credit really does go to the guy with a unique vision of how computers should relate to humans.

To be fair though, without Steve, the engineers would have never thought of creating Apple and a business. It is a team effort, but let's not undermine the importance of a great leader.

There is nothing beautiful or inspiring about a suburban office complex in the middle of nowhere. To the contrary, the Apple office park epitomizes many of the things wrong with America: turning the workplace into an island unto itself, and turning land that could be used for nature into a useless manicured lawn.

It would have been far more efficient to build the thing as a few 12-14 story buildings in the nearest city.

Equivalent 12-14 story buildings are not pleasant to work in; in particular there is far less natural light, so only the privileged managers get window light.

[edit] Plus: "It is also the site of the world’s largest naturally ventilated building, projected to require no heating or air conditioning for nine months of the year." That's probably tough to do with a box in the city.

That's nice, but it also does encircle an enormous amount of usable land in an extremely high-demand real estate market and turn it into a private park accessible only to employees of the company.

The land in question used to be anonymous office buildings owned by...HP or someone like that, if I remember.

Apple has taken away precisely what from the public by replacing it with this?

The opportunity to use that land for anything better than a private park for Apple employees.

I don't think anyone here is saying this is awful. It's just not necessarily praiseworthy.

Does the Apple building have more light than skyscrappers with mostly glass walls?

The standard 12 story mid-rise buildings in DC are built with glass walls so that light doesn't get caught in outer offices.

The last few buildings I worked in had all the director-level offices in the center (glassed in), with the employee area taking up the ring around that. Plenty of daylight for everyone.

Cupertino is not "the middle of nowhere." And 12 story buildings are a terrible idea in an earthquake zone with soft ground.

The amount of space we use for office parks is tiny in comparison with the amount of space we use for agriculture. Only 3% of the land used in the US is urban sprawl-- less than the total acreage of a single crop, alfalfa hay. https://www.westernwatersheds.org/watmess/watmess_2002/2002h...

Of course, Cupertino's public transportation sucks. But so does San Francisco's, even though it's tiny. Maybe stop bragging about where you live, and find something else to be a snob about.

I'll add, Cupertino appears not to allow buildings taller than 4 storeys as well. The skyscraper idea is a non-starter unless Apple relocated to downtown San Jose.

Then Apple people would talk to non-Apple people. That's not allowed.

> We'd still be using wired mice and ugly black boxes.

im pretty sure a lot of people use wired mice and have black boxes as their desktop computer case.

... and are perfectly happy doing it. Heck, I even use an "ugly black box" as my laptop (an older Lenovo thinkpad) :)

There is nothing ugly about a thinkpad!

I'd like nothing more than a wired Magic Trackpad. Batteries suck.

Or maybe one that reports the current battery level correctly. Neither my Apple wireless keyboard or trackpad seem able to properly pass that info along to the OS.

Well, the new one they released almost a year ago is perfect for you then

> We'd still be using wired mice

I very much enjoy the worry-free experience with zero environmental impact and maintenance cost of wired compared to wireless mice and keyboards. You can pry them from my cold, dead hands.

> We'd still be using wired mice and ugly black boxes.

I still use a wired mouse, because it's superior to a wireless mouse.

My laptop happens to be black and happens to not be particularly attractive, but it's superior to an Apple laptop.

don't know if you are serious or joking.

Yeah.. i'm imagining it: its exactly the same. I am -currently- using a wired mouse attached to a black box. Any you know what? It works pretty damn good.

And then everyone took the bait.

Someone else would have filled whatever void you believe would be there.

I still use a wired trackball!

And we'd have a retina Macbook Air...

We do: https://www.apple.com/macbook/

The MBA is the perfect laptop for most people, except that the screen sucks. This made sense in 2011 - at that time good retina displays and good-enough low-powered GPUs (e.g. Intel integrated stuff) that could power them were expensive. Today they are not. Today Apple could launch a retina Macbook Air with the form factor and battery life that people love... with a great retina screen, for the same price, if they'd be happy with the profit margin the were happy with when Jobs ran the company.

The Macbook 12" is an underpowered Fiscer-Price-like toy with a crappy keyboard and one (ONE!) USB-C port and nothing else... well, except a good screen.

The current MBA is a text-book example of an intentionally under-specified product designed not to undercut the more expensive offering. If they put a good screen into the MBA form-factor a lot less people would buy the MBP. People who can't innovate their way out of a paper bag are terribly afraid of cannibalization of existing product lines. Jobs wasn't.

One of the great things I think he did was to introduce the MBA and to drive down its price point so that lots of people could and did buy it. For all of his faults, I think he did have a democratic kind of vision that great computers should not be reserved for the rich.

Instead of continuing Jobs's actions, Tim Cook has somehow decided that the best course of action for Apple is to transform into a luxuary brand, like LVMH (Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton).

>If only Steve Jobs had taken the traditional medicine route he would have been with us for another 50 years.

That's a mighty fine assumption you are making there. Please share with me how you know this? Are you a future seeing oncologist that can see how his body would have reacted to specific treatments, or maybe you know more details than the rest of us about the exact mutation?

Just an educated guess. He drank berries and got massages to cure his cancer.

His chances would have dramatically increase had he used traditional medicine.

Doctors who had first-hand knowledge of Jobs’ case suggest it was quite likely already too late:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/health/hindsight-is-kind-t...