Faruk At.eş

iPhone 4: Your Technology in your pocket

¶

When the iPhone was not yet, but about to be announced in early 2007, a friend of mine and I theorized about the marketing angle Apple would use for it. The one we both settled on that we liked the best, but knowing nothing of the device beyond what (little) the rumors told us, was this:

"iPhone: Your Life in your pocket."

It was short, punchy, and made a fair bit of sense given the context of knowing nothing about the device or the software. A widescreen iPod with touch controls? No doubt. A revolutionary mobile phone? Kind of a given. An Internet Communicator? …we got nothing. What?

What made sense about it is that the technology industry at that time had hit a point where mobile computing was no longer constrained to lousy "smart" phones and bulky "ultra-portable" computers, but no company had done something remarkable, even noteworthy with it all. No company had given us a device and a usable software interface that took advantage of what was possible. No company had the ability to deliver the whole package… except, we knew, Apple.

So of course Apple would bring us this magical, revolutionary convergence device. We lined up the usual suspects and realized that this phone, this rumored cellphone, could well turn out to be your life's mechanical companion device. You'd have it with you at all times. You'd use it for myriad purposes. It would be the portable portal into your digital domain… Your life in your pocket.

Apple never used the phrase "Your life in your pocket" as far as I can recall, but what the iPhone ended up being could have been described as such nonetheless. And that was just the first generation phone, with no third-party apps, cut-copy-paste, 3G networking or video recording.

Three birthdays later we have iPhone 4. Little iPhone's all grown up.

I'm not going to discuss what's new about iPhone 4; for that you should read Joshua Topolsky's comprehensive iPhone 4 review instead. No, I'm here to talk about just one thing, and that's the technology angle surrounding iPhone 4.

Back in 2000 I got my first cellphone, having just left high school and at the cusp of starting a job, I figured a cellphone would be a responsible thing to have. It was the first real gadget I had with me all the time, a dumb Nokia phone with green LCD display capable of holding maybe 50 text messages, doing calls and that was about it.

In 2003 I, too, went to iPod band camp, enjoying my music on the go in much more efficient and usable ways than I had before with the pathetic 128MB Flash MP3 player I had, a device so far detached from real practicality that I only brought it with me for lack of an alternative.

In 2004 I got into photography after discovering how talented my mother was, and wanting to try my hand at it as well. I bought a small (for its time) point-and-shoot Sony Cybershot camera, with a stunning 3.2 megapixels. Oh, the joys I had taking photos, and the frustration I had trying to squeeze that point-and-shoot into my pocket all the time. It quickly forced me to carry a bag around if I wanted to take my camera with me, because cellphone, iPod and camera combined often left no space to spare for wallet or even keys. And the latter two have priority.

Then, in 2006 I upgraded myself from point-and-shoot to Digital SLR, and the doors to my photography world blew wide open. Of course, carrying a stunning 8 megapixel DSLR around pretty much guaranteed the need of a bag, and fortunately my cellphone had been replaced (several times, in fact) with newer, much smaller models. At this time, the Flip video camera was introduced as well but I never got one myself; wasn't I carrying enough devices already?! I did play with the Flips that some of my friends had over the years that came next, though.

Enter 2007 and the iPhone 2G. It could take photos, but so poorly that even my several-years-old mid-range point-and-shoot camera looked orders of magnitude better. It couldn't take video, but I wasn't into video much yet, at the time, so I didn't care about that. It was great at playing music, though. The best iPod Apple had ever made, and also the best phone they (or anyone else) had ever made, up to that point. So I happily got to ditch two devices, one I utterly loved (my iPod) and one I utterly despised (my cellphone).

In the years since, that situation didn't really change. I upgraded my DSLR along the way, bought some nicer lenses and eventually realized that, holy mother of Bokeh, I was carrying around 8 pounds worth of camera gear alone in my bag. More than four times the weight of my laptop! I started rethinking my strategy of bringing the DSLR with me at all times, even though my iPhone 3GS was only moderately acceptable at taking photos. Nothing remotely as exciting as my Nikon D300 shots, but at least something tolerable.

It's now 2010. If you're taking a guess at the conclusion of this little story, you're almost certainly guessing right: the iPhone 4 has now taken over all the technology in my life that I bring with me. For my current trip to San Francisco, knowing a bit more about iPhone 4 than we were all supposed to know, I decided to leave my DSLR at home. In The Netherlands.

iPhone 4 has become my technology in my pocket. It's not just my phone, music player and general-purpose Internet device, it's now my go-to still and video camera as well. In fact, its photo and video quality is so great, I'll be leaving my DSLR at home for anything that isn't an obvious photo-op, shoot or dedicated travel destination.

It may still not be the marketing tagline that Apple's interested in using, but with iPhone 4 they've truly and effectively put my digital life in my pocket. Wrapped in a beautiful encasing, driven by fantastic software: iPhone 4 is unequivocally another magical device.

On Brand Loyalty

¶

Earlier today I looked into booking a hotel for next year's SXSW Interactive (Tip: don't bother, they're not offering the reduced rates yet), during which process I noticed that my preferred hotel offered its own Rewards program. This reminded me of a somewhat recent disaster of an online booking experience with airlines, which at the time made me realize just how frustrating it really is having to deal with airmiles and all these airlines teaming up and still having six or seven different rewards programs. Then there's examples involving Starbucks, Shell and several other companies with whom I've had mostly-frustrating experiences trying to actually benefit from being a regular customer. This all prompted me to tweet a startup idea:

Startup idea: centralized rewards service that allows you to earn _and spend_ airmiles, rewards etc. from many companies, all in one place.

In hindsight this was too idealistic and naïve, as Peter Bierman pointed out to me in a reply on Twitter that businesses offer these rewards programs to build brand loyalty, and would thus be very unlikely to participate in a centralized program where their rewards points become commoditized.

Which brings up the question: what is brand loyalty, anyway?

There is a marked difference between what is typically perceived as brand loyalty, and what real brand loyalty actually is. The latter, by the way, is most often typecast as "fanboyism"—especially in the case of Apple, but more on that below.

As Peter pointed out, many companies both large and small offer certain benefits or awards to regular customers as a way to reward their "brand loyalty", which effectively reduces brand loyalty to the equivalent of "repeat buyer." The fundamental flaw in this system is that repeat buyer doesn't always mean "loyal customer," in fact, I would be surprised if it's the case even half of the time.

For instance, airlines offer airmiles and frequent flyer benefits to people who 1) sign up for their program and 2) fly on their flights, or nowadays, on any of their or their alliance's flights. The thing is, there are only three airlines I actively choose to fly with: Jetblue, Virgin (America and Atlantic), and KLM. And they don't cover anywhere near all the destinations I go to, or sometimes when they do they're too expensive or inconvenient to make them a viable choice for me, meaning I end up flying quite a bit on airlines I'm indifferent towards. But, since I signed up for their frequent flyers programs at some point, I still get to earn some miles here and there.

For example, I once signed up with United because they were Apple's go-to airline for its employees' business trips, and I was allowed to gain airmiles personally while on those business trips. I have zero allegiance to United nowadays, because I've since had more unpleasant flight experiences with them than pleasant ones. However, if they look at the airmiles on my account with them, they might well consider me a "brand loyal" customer.

Small companies offer rewards just as often as major corporations do. My favorite place in San Francisco, Thorough Bread & Pastry, has a Frequent Buyers rewards card which gives you up to $10 off of your next purchase when it's full. It costs at least $120 to fill up a card, but given enough time it's entirely likely that you'll hit that mark. Their food is incredibly good, affordable, and the overall feel of the place is great. They're a one-shop artisan bakery, and their brand loyalty program is virtually the same as that of the biggest airline in the world. But neither program, I argue, is actually relevant to brand loyalty at all.

What makes me return to Thorough Bread & Pastry is the excellence of the food, the atmosphere, and the prices. What makes me care about them, on the other hand, has more to do with their dedication and passion for their craft, food and for small, artisan businesses, than their actual products. I love the place because their interior decorating is beautiful, cozy and warm. The people who work there are always friendly, always helpful, and you get to see them make everything as the kitchen is right there in the middle of the shop. Want to know how they make that grilled chicken sandwich you ordered? Just watch them. Want to learn more about how they make their bread? Just ask them! It doesn't really get better than that.

Similarly, the things that make me care about Jetblue, Virgin, and KLM is not that they fly me from A to B when I pay them to, but their concerns about impacting the environment. All three airlines upgrade their planes as often as possible to benefit from the better fuel efficiency of newer aircrafts. It's also their quality of service; Jetblue and Virgin with their superior legroom, KLM with its food, et cetera. I really couldn't care less about their frequent flyer programs; I'm only signed up for them in case it'll save me money some day. My brand loyalty to them is based on what they do, how they do it and how they consider me as a customer. Not as another one out of many millions they serve each day, but as someone they are providing a service to, and they better do it damn well. That's their perspective, mind you, not some sense of entitlement I exhibit.

Which brings me to my finest example: Apple. My brand loyalty to Apple is far greater than to any other company in the world. This started before I was bestowed the honor of working for them; back then, I liked them because they made products that showed they actually cared about their customers. Not about just selling something to you, but about selling you something you really enjoy using. Then, in 2006, I started working for them and I learned a great deal more about them. Now, no longer employed by them, I still consider them the most admirable company on the planet, but it may surprise you to learn why. It's not because I think their sense of design is absolutely superior (but I do), or because so many of their products have put smiles on my face as I used them and discovered that things just worked exactly as I had expected them to work. Neither is it that their products are so lusted-after in the world that I feel "cool" or "hip" for having them.

It's things like their Supplier Responsibility program. Their Environmental Responsibility. Or one-offs like Steve Jobs personally decrying Digital Rights Management.

Apple's competitors stumble over one another to copy Apple's products, but where are any of these competitors in copying their moral and ethical lead in the industry? Where's Google's Supplier Responsibility page? I'm sure they try to be responsible with such matters, but I'll be damned if I can find out anything about their efforts in that area. Same for so many of companies in the hardware or mobile devices business.

And what about the environmental responsibility? Some have a corporate page about the environment—most of them have a department dedicated to this, it should be noted, if often living under the radar—but not a single one goes as in-depth into the company's environmental impact or footprint as Apple's does. Nor do any of them mention that the company takes into consideration (and calculates) the environmental impact of their products when used by customers, rather than just the manufacturing and distribution impact. Contrast this to Apple's new Mac Mini page, which title reads "The most affordable, energy-efficient Mac." Better still, one of its four feature pages is dedicated entirely to the environment.

There are also many examples of Apple staff meetings, which I can't divulge any details about due to non-disclosure agreements, wherein I got to see Steve's real position on things; no media present and (at the time) a belief that no employees would share details or transcripts with the press. Suffice it to say, those too have left me deeply impressed and inspired. I often think back to those moments and the real things that drive Steve & Co. to run the company the way they do, especially when debating Apple with people who base their opinions only on what they know of Apple from the outside (and, usually, partially from someone else who is more enraged with Apple than they themselves are). I often think, "oh, if only you actually knew what the reality of the situation is," and sadly remind myself that I can't tell them these things. And then, of course, I get accused of being a fanboy, for liking Apple despite their opinions of the company.

Of course, it is a company's actions that ultimately matter most, and it's undeniable that Apple has upset people from time to time. They've dropped the ball plenty, alienating customers and sometimes even downright upsetting long-time loyal fans and developers. But when it comes to the bigger picture, not only does Apple still make the best products in their respective categories, but they also continue to be a more honest and trustworthy company to take cues from. Sure, Steve has lied or twisted the truth from time to time in interviews or even keynotes, but those cases are typically marketing spin, meant to protect the existence of products (or plans) yet to be announced. On the things that really matter, though, the things that I would sum up as corporate ethics, you'll rarely find a more straightforward, honest CEO. The recent D8 interview and WWDC keynote both had plenty of examples of that, too.

That's not to say that all other companies are doing poorly in these regards, but based on my experiences with them they don't quite match Apple's lead or innovation. Sometimes they come close—Google, for instance, is really great about the environment as well—but I can't think of a single example where any of them do things better than Apple. And that's why, of all the brands I am loyal to, I am loyal to Apple's the most.

Now obviously, no company is flawless, but for me Apple has come remarkably close given the large number of products they make (and that I've bought from them), their huge scale of operations and the responsible lead they exhibit while doing all that. And if their continued profits, popularity and customer satisfaction ratings are any indication at all, my personal case is equally applicable to a large majority of Apple's other customers. That's something very few companies get to say, and so very few companies will see me or others come to their defense so rigorously when being criticized indiscriminately.

That's brand loyalty.

UPDATE: Several people have pointed me to the British site Nectar, which is effectively doing what I suggested. They're already covering over 400 retailers, the only difference is that you have to shop through Nectar's site, which isn't what I suggested. Still, it's good to see there's something like this going on.

Stop Hacking Safari Reader

¶

With the launch of Safari 5 has come a new feature, Safari Reader, which takes a webpage and isolates its main body of text, strips out everything else and presents the text in a large, isolated pane with beautiful type. It makes for a nice, clutter-free reading experience, except for its justified text which is cause for a fair bit of grief among designers and type lovers.

To that end, people have become "inventive" and decided to explore the Safari.app bundle on the Mac OS X file system, dug around until they found the file called Reader.html and started playing with its innards to their heart's content. So far no harm.

But then they started sharing their efforts in easy-peasy tutorial format, encouraging people who may not know any better to hack their own Safari bundle as well. Whether it's just to fix the justified text, add a dark/night reading mode, or do a whole bunch of stuff, this is a highly discouraged practice—and I really hope people stop doing this.

Why is this a Bad Thing™? Why am I so concerned by and opposed to people hacking their Safari bundle just to change the Reader? Three reasons:

1. Telling Apple that the Reader needs some customizability is a good thing to do; backhandedly telling them so by leveraging users' willingness to hack their own Safari bundle is not.
2. If Mac OS X were to, at any point, verify the application signature, Safari won't launch for people who hacked their Bundle. The iOS platform already does this, it would be unwise to assume that Mac OS X will never do this.
3. In quietly encouraging this practice, you're creating a bigger and bigger potential security breach in Safari itself. What if a user changes their Reader.html file in the bundle with a file provided (or modified) by an ill-meaning hacker? The security concerns here are numerous.

"But I would never add malicious code in there!" you might say. Perhaps, but if this practice becomes commonplace, someone with malicious intent will try it.

"But only advanced users are capable of following my instructions!" your other argument might be. Except that any average user is capable of reading and following your well-written step-by-step instructions that tell them precisely what to do and where to find the files.

"But, but, but…" No. Stop it. Don't go down this road.

I'm right there with you in that the Reader needs better typography, more controls over the look and feel, and that Apple needs to make this available sooner rather than later. But this ill-conceived practice is not the way to make that happen. Instead, do the following:

1. Point your browser at bugreport.apple.com and log in with your Apple ID.
2. Open a New Problem and write an Enhancement Request, specifying exactly what you think is wrong with the Reader as-is and what features you'd like to see added to it.
3. Reference or cite Problem ID: 8092718 in your description to point the fine folks at Apple at the bug report I filed for this exact issue. The more bugs (or Enhancement Requests) are reported to Apple pointing to that same Problem ID, the faster this will bubble up to the top of their priority list.

Don't risk unwitting users' safety or their user experience with your hacking suggestions. File the bug reports to Apple, suggest ways to improve the Reader, and exert a bit of patience. It's the best way to get this new Safari 5 feature improved so that we can all enjoy it—safely and happily so.