I’m not sure what I think of this article by Jason Snell. On one hand, I think he makes relevant observations, for instance, his critique of Apple Intelligence and perhaps the Vision Pro. On the other hand, as others have noted, Apple has innovated with Apple silicon and has other products in the queue.
Is he overstating the situation, or is there truth in his observations?
All these articles (there have been many over the years) are based on some mythical period in which everything Apple did and very new product was great from day one. Apple’s had failures throughout its history, even under Steve Jobs who, supposedly, would never have done whatever it is that Apple’s doing (or would have done whatever they’re not doing). I expect a bit better of Jason Snell, especially since the “string of failures” consists of:
There’s a long (and dishonourable) history of pundits telling us (a) that Apple has to deliver product/feature X right now or it’s doomed and then (b), when Apple delivers X, the same pundits tell us that Apple’s X is uncompetitive and too late and a sure sign that the company’s lost its mojo.
I’m not suggesting that Apple’s recent record is perfect, or beyond criticism; but this, is just lazy writing with a clickbait headline.
Well, yes, but tech journalists need to get our attention or they become irrelevant. 
The iPod Hifi is still the best speaker that Apple ever made.
Apple is running into the same issues that all “appeal to everyone” companies face. The Apple we all wax nostalgic for had a much smaller user base then it does today. Let’s face it iOS is the new Windows. With that level of mainstream success comes mainstream problems.
I really really hate that Apple feels pressure to get on the AI bandwagon that they are stumbling. But over the long term I think they will be fine. I think the core of their issues comes with over reliance of the iPhone. It’s their cash cow like Search is for Google that they can flounder elsewhere. Androids failure to dominate the US market has made Apple Lazy on the iPhone.
If I had Tim Cook’s Ear my advice would be to make the “Ecosystem the product” but less reliance of the iPhones Central place in it.
I’ve not read the Article, but it’s worth noting that Jason Snell doesn’t pick the headline for any articles he writes on Macworld. He provides the Article and Macworld are responsible for the Headline and any copy for links.
This is my way of saying that the Headline may imply a stronger lede than the article actually provides.
I don’t think you’d find this Headline on Jason’s own website, Six Colours.
Exactly. The headline he has chosen:
He also talked about some of his thoughts, especially regarding Apple AI, in the recent episode of
While the Macworld headline for sure is … well …, I honestly have to say that I have to agree with the actual content. Something is out of whack right now. Apple mostly is delivering fantastic hardware these days (the iPhone, the iPads, recent Mac generations), but the software is lacking and their AI releases are not only lacking, but some of the stuff for sure should not be out there in the open at all, as far as I am concerned. I would even call it irresponsible. Which is sad.
When Apple made all those announcements back on WWDC 2024, I had this FOMO moments. As of today, I have to say, that I do not miss anything of this over here. I really am considering to turn it off, when it eventually shows up.
Absolutely, thanks for noting that - I realise that’s how it works. I separated the “lazy writing” from the “clickbait headline” to try and make that distinction.
It’s been a common comment for the 25-odd years I’ve been in the Apple ecosystem that Apple is a hardware company, and that ti doesn’t always get the software right. And I’ll stick with my point (as made in the Gruber item I linked) that Apple’s first generation software is often seriously lacking. I have no idea where they’ll go with AI, but I’m very sure they’ll iterate and make it better over time.
Apple is good at iteration. The Apple Lisa was expensive and a commercial failure but the gui and mouse was born. The lessons from the Vision Pro will filter down to another product. Siri was terrible, not it is a little better.The same will happen with Apple intelligence. It is disappointing that Apple Intelligence does not have a better user experience. Apple may have felt the need to rush the product, but it will improve.
I think it’s important to remember that Apple isn’t “one thing”. It’s a huge multinational corporation with plenty of competing interests and motivations. The chip designers have been immensely successful, bringing about the M-series chips and other components used in Apple products. The teams working on “Home” and “Siri” have clearly not succeeded - for many different reasons, I’m sure.
In this article, I am very much agreeing with Jason Snell that pushing Apple Intelligence to sell more iPhone 16 Pros - months before shipping a very early version of features that barely work. Again, for many reasons. LLMs and image generation models have their limitations and, tbh, are not intelligent in any sense of the word. Apple have had immense success in the AI space, back when they called it “machine learning”. Just look at the Photonic Engine and all the trickery included in the Camera.app. Often I’ve seen images posted online stating “straight out of my camera, no processing, Wow!”, which, on the face of it is correct. The user didn’t need to do any post processing because the algorithms in the camera did it for them already.
Things like Fall Detection in the Apple Watch and Crash Detection in our phones are other examples of “intelligent” technology that analyses sensor data to help users in need. Same with “adaptive noise cancelling” of AirPods, adapting to the situation.
Now, for the Vision Pro - is it a failure? Technologically, it seems like an impressive device, but marketing wise it wasn’t a great moment for Apple. Also, it is still a product in search of a use case. Probably never gonna be a mainstream product.
We all remember Minority Report, but do we really want to interact with our apps in that way?
I don’t consider the Vision Pro a failure. IMO, it was something that Apple had invested a lot of time and money in that wasn’t close to being a commercial product. But Apple decided to release it because they were considering putting it on the back burner, so they could respond to AI?
The iPhone is Apple’s lifeblood. It is directly responsible for half of Apple’s revenue, and according to some, may be responsible for as much as 89%. Apple’s standard tactic of watching the competition, judging the market, then coming out with a better product backfired when OpenAI surprised everyone with ChatGPT.
I’ve read the article now and I agree with the content.
I don’t think it’s a new thing though, Apple famously didn’t employ focus groups to create new products and while they have a great record of “skating to where the puck is” they’ve also made significant missteps in the past like the Puck Mouse, the original release of Final Cut X, Butterfly Keyboard, and the iPhone 5C (which was a great entry level iPhone but didn’t sell in the quantities Apple expected)
The Smartphone is a once in a lifetime product which Apple reinvented revolutionarily from the crappy Smartphones we had before (Sony Ericsson P800 anyone?) It’s no surprise Google quickly followed their lead. There was nothing like it before and it’s unlikely to be topped, but it dominates Apple as a company, the iPad, Macs, AirPods, Apple Watch are ubiquitous and hugely successful, with any other lense they’d be seen as massive successes but the iPhone overshadows them.
The iPhone is Apple’s lifeblood. It is directly responsible for half of Apple’s revenue, and according to some, may be responsible for as much as 89%. Apple’s standard tactic of watching the competition, judging the market, then coming out with a better product backfired when OpenAI surprised everyone with ChatGPT."
Oh it 1000% is but I would advise Tim Cook to start spreading the pot more into other hardware and software categories. It is never good to have all your eggs in one basket. For Example, I have long been a believer in making the Apple Watch integrate with other products like the iPad and the Mac so they can sell more Apple Watches to non-iPhone users. (or people like me who see its potential as a minimalist phone.) The iPhone will probably always be the life blood. But it wouldnt hurt to secure the companies future by building up other ecosystems aspects.
I’m not all that interested the “old playbook” narrative. I’m not saying he’s wrong, but I do agree wholeheartedly with his assessment of their AI rollout. They’ve over-promised and under-delivered in a move to catch themselves up at the expense of the user.
Not sure I have much to add except it seems a little rich to be calling one of the richest and most profitable companies in the world a failure on the basis of two launches into a very ill-defined “space” in very new market segments. I’d also say that building your own computer architecture and chips, from scratch, and delivering such fast and reliable machines is little less than miraculous.
Apple is incredibly successful at using “machine learning”: users don’t even realise what is recognising things in their photo library, producing very good dictation, recognising trends in their health data, checking their spelling and grammar and has been doing so for years. The new bits, obviously designed to be more like chat-GPT etc. draw attention to how new they are, but they are still officially in beta and will likely improve to the point where they “just work”.
I agree that Apple also has quite an impressive record of successes in recent years - as does Jason Snell.
He has not called Apple a failure. His headline is that Apple’s historical successes have bred its recent failures. He names them and he explains his thoughts.
(…) When you’re riding high—and have been riding high for a couple of decades—it’s very hard to notice the parts of your business that have begun to emit a bit of an odor.
To take another page from football, Apple has a winning playbook, and it keeps using it. But if you keep calling the same plays without adapting and reacting, a winning playbook can become something much worse. (…)
And after that he explains why the Vision Pro should not have been launched the way it has been launched. And he explains how Apple AI was used to sell an iPhone that launched without Apple Intelligence. He expresses his point of view where Apple AI is at (by the way: the thing is that AI notifications do not run as beta, they bother normal users on their non-beta OS devices, they would be perfectly fine if they ran in a real beta surrounding). He thinks about how Apple is reacting to regulation and that it behaves like the former “underdog that was fresh from a near-death experience and desperately had to scrape to survive. Today’s Apple is a titan, but it still behaves like it’s a put-upon underdog in danger of being taken advantage of by the cold, cruel world.” And his conclusion is that Apple has to show more adaptability, that it needs to adapt to its new position. Long story short: he does not call Apple a failure, he is pointing out recent releases and events and how they can be explained with Apple’s past and past successes and that Apple’s position in the industry has changed, which may be a reason to adapt.
I think this is a ridiculously overblown article which is completely disconnected from the normal user. It’s clear he has buyers remorse after spending a fortune on a device that wasn’t even designed for bloggers and journalists. It’s being used in science and industry a lot and is an amazing tool for doing medical training and other professional simulation scenarios. I don’t think it was ever designed for power users, it’s clearly aimed at industry with that price point (and a few rich users who have cash to burn, AKA “early adopters”).
Apple Intelligence is an inevitable reaction to the current industry hype - and it’s not that bad for most people (at least for me, I cancelled Grammarly as the built in corrections are good enough). I don’t think most users care as they don’t have any need for AI, and are more than happy with the standard built in text correction.
I only see success for Apple recently. The Mini has created a huge amount of hype as Apple is finally offering better value with higher specs, and the current Mac lineup is incredibly strong and innovative - no other manufacturer comes close in quality. The new iPads are the most exciting tablets ever and are absolute powerhouses. The new phones while not revolutionary, they are incredible devices. I’ve also never been happier on the desktop, the Studio is a remarkable piece of kit, especially paired with a Studio Display - nothing else on the market comes close for pro grade equipment.
Bloggers need to spend more time away from social media echo chambers and step into the real world occasionally!
Bloggers don’t get hits for nuanced opinions or repeating obvious truths, only for loud outrage.
Videos (apparently) don’t get viewed if they don’t have a gurning idiot pointing at a daygo headline.
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars
But in ourselves, who click on the bloody things…
Shakespeare, anticipating enshittification.
(This post has been brought to you by the words “grumpy” and “bah”. And yes, there are some exceptions…)
