Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Video Apple Has a Lot In Common With The Rolling Stones (Video) 147

Tech journalist Ron Miller (not a relative) wrote a piece titled Apple has a lot in common with The Rolling Stones, based on the song It's Only Rock 'N' Roll (But I Like It). In the article, Ron writes: "Much like the Rolling Stones, Apple has to get up on stage again and again and figure out a way to blow the audience away – and it’s not always easy." In fact, Apple's latest iPhone announcement seems to have been greeted with a massive "ho hum" instead of the frenzied interest some of their earlier product announcements have created. In today's video, Ron tells us why he thinks this is, and ruminates briefly about the future of Apple and what kinds of products might help people get excited about Apple again.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Has a Lot In Common With The Rolling Stones (Video)

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Yup (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Em Adespoton ( 792954 ) <> on Thursday September 12, 2013 @02:24PM (#44832805) Homepage Journal

    Old, played out, desperate to remain relevant.

    ...and yet any new repackaging of their material is met with instant sellouts.

  • Re:Yup (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Thursday September 12, 2013 @02:55PM (#44833153) Homepage Journal

    Must... resists ... making... dried... up... corpse... joke...

    In some ways true...but I think there's other reasons the Stones (no, not talking Fred and Wilma here) have been around so long.

    In their heyday...they WERE just about the most important musicians in the world, they got world wide attention just for picking their nose, and they were one hell of a rock band. Look back at films like "Ladies and Gentlemen", and watch concerts from back in the '69-'74 era.

    While they did try to start putting on stage shows that rivaled anything of their day, often they were simple lights, maybe a slightly whacky stage....but the draw was the performance. The Stones were a FUN band to listen and watch.When I see these old shows and then think about acts today that are lip sync'ing, using auto tune, and have no concept of improvising on stage, I literally cringe.

    The Stones were sloppy often....hell, much of the time they didn't start or stop a song all together, but somehow they have a sort of magic that made the event something to see and hear. Where is that in bands over the past couple of decades? I just don't see it....

    We've not seen much like that in a band with few exceptions...many of those exceptions being other bands in their day (Zeppelin, Floyd, etc).

    The Stones, in addition to being one of the largest money making and popular touring bands ever....produced a legacy of music that is still strangely popular today. Why haven't we seen a large number of bands in the past 20-30 years that have done the same? What happened to music? Where are the songs from the 80's and 90's and 00's that will be the classic rock that will have the longevity the Stones' songs have had and somehow still do? I see young kids today wearing tshirts with the Stones tongue on them or AC/DC shirts, and surprisingly they KNOW the songs from these groups of *my* youth....

    I'm saying and asking much of this, to just say that we've not really had bands that came along to supercede them and replace them, and hence their long professional lifetime.

    I still get a rush when driving down the road, and something like the Stones' song "Gimme Shelter" comes on. I get shivers down my spine when I hear that chick Merry Clayton [] singing with them hit the last note so hard that her voice breaks.

    I miss songs that you can 'feel' the soul coming through the speakers.

  • by sandbagger ( 654585 ) on Thursday September 12, 2013 @03:03PM (#44833223)

    This is blog-itis. No, really. The phones these days are so bloody wonderful that apart from adding a Fleshlight and 3D holograms, what the heck else do you want. This is a 64-bit hand-held device with an amazing display and good battery life that reads porn to you. People "complaining" about the top end phones are manufacturing criticisms about minor issues of the mountain-from-a-molehill variety.

    Tell me what specifically this (or any other phone of its calibre) is missing that is so wrong? The columnist is saying he's not jazzed by the recent unveiling. So what? Does he mean like most product announcements like cars, televisions and airplanes? How is this Apple's/Google's fault? These are now mature products that, like cars, will differ in the fenders but not in the operation.

    I guess he had space to fill.

  • Re:My Thoughts (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Thursday September 12, 2013 @03:53PM (#44833749) Journal

    You don't understand the use of 64-bit processing if you only think it is about memory limitations.

  • by Quila ( 201335 ) on Thursday September 12, 2013 @04:04PM (#44833893)

    One time market leader in smartphones?
    On a volume basis, now #2 worldwide, and that's against much cheaper (and even free) phones sold. On a profit basis, by far #1.

    Main product has been eclipsed by more nimble competitors?
    Apple releases once per year. Given the fast pace of phone technology, in that time it is likely one of their many competitors will release something better in various ways. Apple just release again, eclipsing them. The leapfrog game will continue.

    Has a large cash hoard but nothing to invest in?
    Apple has been buying a lot of companies in order to bolster its chip design, mapping, search, voice control and other products and technologies. The fingerprint reader on the iPhone 5S comes from the $356,000,000 buy of AuthenTec last year. This doesn't count the billions invested in manufacturing. Apple just keeps making money faster than they can spend it.

    Develops overly conservative derivative products to protect its existing business and margins?
    You say protect, I say leverage. It all works together very well in the ecosystem. Remember though that Apple is known to take a hit on margins just to make a better product.

    Was once seen as hip and cool but now ridiculed as "my father's" device?
    Yeah, right.

  • by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Thursday September 12, 2013 @04:18PM (#44834075) Journal

    How about they try to revolutionise their neglected computing line?

    This event was about phones. They wanted media focus on phones. Other product announcements will be made at other events about those product lines. How do you get the media to write less about your phone? You give them other things to fill column inches with.

    How about they sell their OS, looking why iWork failed before?

    They did licensing to clone makers before, and it practically killed the company because none of the clone makers had the R&D costs that Apple did in order to make the OS and hardware to begin with. It works for Google because Google cares about ad impressions, and not hardware sales.

    How about they buy Dell; Nintendo; Nokia; Netflix?

    Dell (the company) is already being bought by Dell (the guy). Besides, what value would purchasing Dell add?
    Apple is already beating Nintendo by accident. What value would purchasing Nintendo add?
    Nokia is already being bought by Microsoft; and Microsoft isn't even getting the patent portfolio which is one of the reasons to buy Nokia.
    Netflix is an interesting proposition, but they also aren't for sale.

    How about competing with Office instead of limiting it to their products?

    Apple has long had a strategy of not making products that already have useful versions available, where they have nothing to add. This is why they never attempted to go after Exchange. Going after Microsoft Office is the same - there's nothing to add in a compelling or novel way, and it's the biggest uphill battle in the world because of the entrenched nature of Microsoft Office.

    They never went after Adobe Creative Suite either because it's a fully functional suite of tools for doing print layout and photograph editing. However, After Effects was a piece of shit (back in the day) so Final Cut Pro was born, along with Motion, DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack Pro, LiveType, and Compressor.

    How about they compete against Amazon; Facebook; Google search and advertising?

    They compete against Amazon where it makes sense - music, Apple merchandise, books, video.
    There is no reason to compete against Facebook - it's far easier to just work with them; and you can ask Google how that social media competition is working out for them.
    They do compete against Google in mobile advertising. It's called iAd.

    How about they they do a Netbook or a Console; Car Radio?

    Netbooks are traditionally underperforming stale technology at razor thin margins which would erode Apple's most valuable asset - their brand. Besides, Apple does compete with Netbooks - it's called the iPad. iPad launched, Netbook market evaporated overnight.
    Apple's full living room strategy is yet to be realized - the Apple TV is a self-proclaimed "hobby" which clearly shows promise for much more, if they decide to do it.
    iOS in the Car was announced at WWDC in June, and has a list of manufacturers on board to ship in 2014.

    How about they buy or build a University or Manufacturing facilities?

    They used to do their own manufacturing way back when, and it's much more convenient and scalable to pay people that have core competencies in manufacturing to do the manufacturing. That's why everyone does it that way, not just Apple.

  • by mveloso ( 325617 ) on Thursday September 12, 2013 @04:41PM (#44834359)

    Yeah, I mean, give Apple a break. They only did, uh:

    * the first mass-market personal computer (Apple ][)
    * the first mass-market GUI (Mac)
    * the dominant music player (iPod)
    * the dominant online music store (iTunes)
    * the dominant laptop mouse input device (trackpad)
    * the dominant laptop form factor (Powerbook)
    * the dominant laptop form factor (Macbook Pro)
    * the dominant small laptop form factor (Macbook Air)
    * the dominant smartphone phone (iPhone)

    I mean geez, what a bunch of fuckups. It's not like they're doing anything special. I mean, just look at Tandy, Atari, Creative, Gateway, Leading Edge, Compaq, Tandem, Sandisk, Microsoft, Nokia, Motorola, Sony, Panasonic, Commodore, Tower Records, and the rest of the industries in those spaces. It's not like they've been standing still doing nothing - oh wait.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12, 2013 @05:01PM (#44834569)

    Every announcement since the iPhone 4 has come out hohum. People complain that there's not enough innovation, not the right name, too small, too big, no Adobe Flash, no removable storage, blah blah blah. Every release has been followed with a stock dive. And every release ended up being a major success in sales. So next year when all these analysts are reviewing, they don't mention all the negative crap they wrote, they just talk about how excited the sales were.

    This phone brings a lot. 64 bit proc, motion co processor, hashed fingerprint identification, revolutionary camera flash(if it works as good as they say). But all we hear about is not enough innovation. LIke a bigger screen would be innovative. Please.

    I can understand people not liking the style of the phone, I can understand people not liking the OS, form factor, or people just don't like apple. But you can't say they're not making great products.

"What the scientists have in their briefcases is terrifying." -- Nikita Khrushchev