It’s called Glue (http://gluenow.com – not to be confused with http://getglue.com), and it’s a new way of posting to many places like Twitter, Facebook and blogs at once. I’m particularly impressed that it also supports Tumblr and Posterous too. The iPhone app is nice and clean as is the website layout, and the developers seem to be pretty on the ball. It’s certainly one to watch out for…
2 weeks ago3 months agoDo you ever get tired of blogging the same old debunkment of every wildly unlikely, off-base, and misleading Apple rumor report every time a cheap rumor site writes about them to get a bunch of pageviews so they can earn 63 cents from AdSense?
Sometimes, I do.
There’s not much to say about the Apple tablet rumors except that there have always been Apple tablet rumors and nothing has ever come of them. Except that inexpensive portable touch-screen media computer with near-ubiquitous internet connectivity that we already have in our pockets because Apple released it two years ago and many of us are already on our second or third one. But nearly every rumor prior to its announcement was completely wrong. (Ask Kevin Rose for a summary if you’ve forgotten.)
I’m sure Apple is working on something really cool. Apple is always working on cool things. Most of them never get beyond prototypes. Some become real products — hopefully, only the best. The concept of a cheap tablet computer is so problematic, as we know it, that I can’t see Apple wanting to release one.
The biggest indicator that it’s not worth their trouble is to look around at who’s requesting it, anticipating it, and assuming it’s on the roadmap: Tech geeks and “analysts”. (Quick aside on analysts: It’s a hilariously corrupt business full of payola and bullshitters. But back to geeks.)
Tech geeks are terrible at knowing what they want from technology. (A faster horse.) It’s embarrassing, because we’re supposed to be the experts. But we suck at this. If you listen to geeks, you get products targeted at geeks, usually at the tremendous exclusion of design, usability, marketability, and usefulness to regular people.
Then, when someone shows us what we really want but were too narrow-minded to ask for, we ridicule it and say it’s too expensive or too small or too big or too limited or too closed or too underpowered or too light or too heavy or too ugly or too stylish. We trash it on our blogs and make fun of the people who wasted their money on it. Six months later, we want one.
Geeks are terrible customers, too. We’re whiny and demanding and entitled and self-important and high-needs, and we’re incredibly fickle. We switch products and services much more frequently, and for much more trivial reasons, than regular people. We have low tolerances, long memories, and little brand loyalty.
The products made by and for geeks can occasionally create profitable businesses, but aren’t likely to ever get mass-market appeal or noticeably change the marketplace, like Android phones or Ogg codecs or desktop Linux or social media cross-posting group dashboard follow feed management service frameworks.
In other words, targeting us is a terrible idea for a consumer products company. It has never been Apple’s business to target us. Therefore, whatever they have up their sleeve this time — if anything — is unlikely to resemble any of our predictions, assumptions, or expectations.
When they do announce their next product, we’re probably going to be disappointed by some seemingly significant aspect of it that turns out to be completely insignificant, and after six months of making fun of it and the people who buy it, we’ll all realize that it’s actually what we really wanted, fall in love with it, and buy one for ourselves.

http://twitter.com/RickWebb/status/32208

http://twitter.com/RickWebb/status/32209

http://twitter.com/RickWebb/status/32209

http://twitter.com/RickWebb/status/32209

http://twitter.com/RickWebb/status/32209

http://twitter.com/RickWebb/status/32209

http://twitter.com/RickWebb/status/32209

http://twitter.com/RickWebb/status/32209
msg:
I really enjoyed @rickwebb’s twitter rant last night in response to jason calacanis’ apple rant
Rick Webb is my new hero.
3 months agoThere are some valid points here — Apple hardware isn’t always exactly price-competitive, often because of little built-in RAM and low hard drive capacities. But it’s usually close.
The conclusion of this, though, is absurd, citing a $3367 premium for Apple over 5 years for a theoretical family. But they’re not making a fair comparison:
- $1451 of the difference is because they’re pitting a Mac Pro, with its Xeons and server-class motherboard, power supply, and ECC RAM, against an HP consumer desktop with Intel’s consumer CPU line. It would be more fair to pit the HP consumer desktop against Apple’s consumer desktop line, the iMac, which would gain more pricing ground with its integrated monitor and speakers (the report doesn’t specify whether the HP’s price includes these). If the Mac Pro is replaced by the $1199 iMac, this difference shrinks to about $150.
- $745 of the difference is a 5-year family subscription to MobileMe.
- $205 of the difference is assuming that the Mac owner would buy a standalone Sony Blu-Ray drive for $300, 4 years from now, for some reason.
- $30 of the difference is an Airport Extreme Base Station for the Mac table vs. a Linksys N router for the PC table. Obviously you could use either router with either setup.
- $99 of the Mac’s cost is for “One to One Care” (is this what Apple previously called ProCare?) in addition to AppleCare. The PC family just got Dell’s 3-year warranty, which I doubt includes whatever’s in One to One Care.
- $90 of the difference is assuming that both families will upgrade their video card to a high-end gaming card 3 years from now (and presumably the Mac version will cost $90 more based on today’s prices). How many average home users ever upgrade their video cards?
- $99 of the difference is an iLife upgrade 3 years from now. The PC side doesn’t include any software upgrades over the entire 5 years.
- The software logic is pretty shaky. The Mac side includes Microsoft Office ($150), Quicken ($70), and “other software” ($70). It doesn’t specify whether the PC side includes Office in the price, but what if the family chooses iWork ($70) instead of Office? What’s the “other software”? Why doesn’t the PC’s price include Quicken? For that matter, why doesn’t the PC’s price include any sort of antivirus software over 5 years? Isn’t that considered a standard requirement for PC owners?
By omitting the bullshit figures, his Mac premium shrinks from $3367 to $508. And if he’s making a supposedly comprehensive 5-year TCO report, I challenge him to include resale value at the end: What are two 5-year-old Macs worth? How about those PCs?
In addition to the heavily flawed figures, the writing is amateurish and inflammatory. Microsoft’s willingness to sponsor, publish, and promote this report speaks volumes about their integrity and dignity.
“Roger L. Kay is founder and president of Endpoint Technologies Associates.” This is a great advertisement for Roger’s services. (Check out that site.)