Pretty revealing that this does seem premature. This is named the developer conference. There ought to be plenty of topics to discuss for developers before hand. But really the compelling conversational piece is the specter of what they may release during it.
Well, if you're here to speculate, we already have the Xcode leak to talk about, as well as possible plans to move towards a new, more cross-platform UI framework. Also some subdued hardware rumors.
It’s highly frustrating. So many companies used to be able to make decent laptops. Now even Apple doesn’t seem capable of keeping a straight face with their releases (in the sense that they don’t seem to be targeting an end user that owns a Mac anymore)
Watching this, I can't help but feel that Apple has committed fully to a very specific target audience, and that audience is mostly the global affluent.
While this is not entirely surprising, it's still fascinating to see how much emphasis they put on things that I, a working-class-but-now-tech-middle-class, truly don't care about. Until a year or two ago I felt Apple still targeted at least my audience, but recent developments feel strangely alienating.
The alternative explanation is that Apple is spinning its wheels and just doesn't know what to do next, but what with the rise of global uber-affluent (Chinese and Russian elites, for once, see: gold themed products), this doesn't seem like a bad choice considering the competition. It just feels saddening somehow.
I'll admit it's more a feeling than something I'm convinced of, but I'll try.
The Airpods, Apple Watch, Apple TV and the HomePod are products that relatively few people around me bother with. It's mostly the few techies (that make well above median wage) and more well-off friends (couples or otherwise) that can afford these kinds of 'extravagances' or care enough to make the expense. But even those wouldn't bother with much of this because they lack the house/space or lifestyle for it. The slightly older iPads are sort of like this, but I know quite a few people who do have one of those lying around, I suppose because they're both cheap and useful enough.
The Apple Watch is perhaps the best example of how it feels Apple is shifting their focus. As far as I can remember, it's the first of their products that offered insanely expensive versions (and wristbands) that couldn't be justified as 'pro user stuff'. And even the cheapest version is one very few people I know would by unless they had plenty of disposable income (or bad with money / huge Apple fans). I mean, the thing is basically Apple's entry into the jewelry world.
There's a few other things that made me feel like they were changing direction, but they've slipped my mind. And again, it's more of a feeling than something I'm utterly convinced of. I do mean to investigate this properly sometime, because aside from a slight 'sadness' I also find it fascinating.
(let me add that perhaps it's more that, in a broader sense, the 'tech/gadget/digital lifestyle' world seems to be moving/aiming upwards in society somehow. I remember reading an interesting BBC article that argued the 'techies', who I suppose are both the creators and primary audience of a lot of this stuff, are becoming a class of their own, and one economically above what we would traditionally call the working class. maybe that has something to do with it.)
I'm not sure how large of a timeline you're looking at Apple with, but in my experience, they've always catered to the "wealthy", or those who didn't spend their money well.
They've always been a company that made beautiful hardware, the kind that serves an aesthetic purpose in addition to it's function. Far cheaper alternatives exist, but that's never been Apple's goal.
Yeah, that's a fair point, but my feeling is mostly that they've become more catering to wealthier over time. Could very well be I'm wrong.
I'd say for timeline the Apple Watch (so about three years ago?) is probably when I started feeling this way. This is also around the period they released their weirdly pretentious/impractical cylindrical Mac Pro, and moved to the new, generally-disliked-by-the-pro-audiences MacBook Pro's (to the point where I'm about to buy a 2015 model in the near future).
EDIT: actually, the new MacBooks are a great example of why I feel there's been a 'shift' of sorts. The whole things seems to mostly aimed at the affluent than the pro users: thinness at the expense of everything else, a touchbar that looks cool but is the last thing pro users want, and removal of ports which strikes me as exactly the kind of thing that wouldn't bother a fancy executive with a gold iWatch, but cause major trouble for most power users.
It's like they decided the original MacBook Air customer is now their primary one, or at least more important than before.
Ahh, I see your point. While they have generally been marketed as a "premium" product, it's really the rise of these "pretentious/impractical" products + features that indicates their catering to a wealthy / elite class.
Interesting. Could be as wealth has become more striated, they've decided to double down on the affluent.
Another less cynical reason why Apple might be 'changing' is that their usual approach to things just doesn't work as well as it used to.
The usual approach Apple takes, or so it seems to me, is to first release a 'luxury' iteration of a product and eventually make it accessible to a broader market. I remember the first iPhone felt like a bit of an excess, and few people around me bought it other than die-hard fans and people with more disposable income (often techies). But around the 3GS (I think?) this changed and it became a mass-market thing.
The same happened with iPods, and the MacBook Air is an even better example. The first iteration of the latter was clearly just for the fancy few, but eventually its innovations (unibody, thinness) became core to their more affordable range.
The iPod and iPhone and MacBook are the kinds of products everyone needs, wants, and is willing to pay a decent chunk of money for. But already with the iPad and Apple TV that seems more difficult. And the latest iPhones also seem to suffer from a lack of proper innovation that has mass-market appeal. A watch or, say, a car strike me as even more difficult to turn into a smash hit. Same goes for smart home stuff.
So perhaps it's not so much that Apple is intentionally targeting the affluent, but rather that their later products are stuck in a kind of first-iteration-for-the-fancy-people limbo.
I don't know whether this is lack of creativity on their part, or an actual issue. Probably a bit of both, but I have to admit that I also find it difficult to come up with an iPhone style innovation or new product that wouldn't suffer from this problem. I suppose something AR glasses could be a thing someday: start with luxury versions, Apple Watch style, that end up having mass-market appeal in a way the Watch clearly doesn't.
WWDC's website feels so bland compared to the Google I/O website. Monotone design, awkward text positioning.. there's just no excitement. Ditto for recent Apple keynotes.
There isn't anything new anymore. This isn't the Apple we knew a decade-or-so ago. It feels like Apple peaked around then, sad! They just don't try anymore.
I for one, really want to see Apple do something creative (but before they do anything new, PLEASE FIX IOS NOTIFICATIONS.. THEY'RE A JOKE COMPARED TO ANDROID)!
I understand your sentiment but I switched from iOS to Android 2 years ago and the first thing I noticed was how powerful Android's notifications were. I still own an iPhone which I primarily use for testing web apps etc. and I keep notifications off on that device purely because I hate how it works on iOS. Once you get used to the Android way, you start to realize everything you're missing on iOS.
Here are a few things I like about Android notifications:
- Grouped notifications and notification channels make swiping away unnecessary alerts a breeze
- One tap to clear all notifications
- Reply to text messages through the notification
- Ability to take action on a notification without additional swipes (for example, you can "Archive' an email from Gmail's notification without having to swipe left like in iOS - this small UX improvement makes a huge difference if you get a barrage of notifications)
- Notification priority - system notifications like alarms etc. are smaller indicating that it isn't as important. You can always expand if you need to.
- When you play a song on a music app, the notification changes color to match the most prominent color in the album's artwork. Little fun stuff like this adds some character.
- Swipe to mute notifications from an app for a few minutes, an hour etc. without having to poke around settings.
I am sure I am missing a few points but in general, the UX is just a LOT better than iOS's one-style-fits-all design. I know this is a matter of personal preference and that there are surely iOS users who prefer a simple notification list. Worst case, it'd be nice if iOS had the option to toggle between simple listed notifications and a more advanced version that works like Android.
I switched from android to iOS about 2 years ago as well, and I see my spouse use android all the time. All those flows you speak highly of look like bloat and a barrage of buttons to me. There are notifications you can’t dismiss, and the notification styles themselves almost always clash with the theme unless they come from google-developed apps. I like the clean look. You also describe a lot of features that are exactly or nearly identical on iOS (like responding to a message in the notification).
On iOS, clearing all of today's notifications from the notifications list is either one tap (on the iPhone) or a force-touch and a tap (on Apple Watch).
(to be fair, I believe those are both pretty recent features)
edit: clearly some people share your sentiment, but whilst introduction of iOS notifications were a relief, I can't understand why anyone would think they are better than Android.
It's a commonly shared sentiment at least that Android notifications are leagues ahead of iOS.
My biggest gripe is the lack of grouping, and I do miss the fact Android used to give me 'active' notifications such as a progress bar on the download of a Spotify album, for example.
Aside from grouping, iOS notifications are better for me.
It feels like you control the messages you get, how they're positioned, what priority they get etc; much more on iOS. I'm sure this is actually release dependent, I can only speak from the old CM and modern Samsung ROMs.. but iOS generally >feels< a lot nicer, like I'm in control; non-removal notifications, general frequency and lack of notification location control contribute to this.
Newer Android version do bring a lot of control, you can disallow applications to send specific types of notifications and set up how the notification will be made notifiable; vibration, tone, none at all, blink LED, etc.
My take is simple: if you need grouping that means you are getting way too many notifications. I leave only the most essential on (like the very important, or very rare).
No the world will not fall apart if you are not notified about something the second it happens.
>I can't understand why anyone would think they are better than Android.
I have used Android exclusively since some early Sony-Ericsson phones, and moved to iPhone just recently. I cannot put my finger exactly on why I prefer these notifications, but I think it has something to do with how easy it is to ignore them on iOS.
On Android, they're constantly on my face until I manually go through them. On iOS, they pop by once and exactly once and if I ignore them, they kinda vanish to the background immediately.
