Skip to main content

The New Toyota, Part 2

After last week's entry, I received a fair amount of flack from readers complaining that I was anti-Apple and that the company's products really don't deserve the constant tongue lashing that the haters keep delivering. I can relate to their viewpoint: nearly 20 years ago I was berating the Windows lovers for hating OS/2, which was obviously a better operating system. It was frustrating because I was right on the technical points but I missed the bigger picture, which is that a company has an obligation to its user community to do the right thing. (IBM let the OS/2 user base down considerably back then, but that's a story for another day.)

I'm not going to rehash last week's story, but I find it ironic that accusations have been leveled again against Apple after it appears that several iTunes accounts have been hacked. The Infoworld article describes how several hundred accounts have had unauthorized purchases made on behalf of the account owners, sometimes vaulting the purchased applications into Apple's Top Picks section of the App Store (according to something I read elsewhere regarding this).

Is Apple responding to the problem? Yes they are, but they are doing it Ostrich-style: they are putting their head in the sand and pretending that the problem doesn't exist. Or at least that's what they are publicly telling the world. "iTunes is an impenetrable application store architecture!" is the feeling I'm getting from Cupertino.

Am I being too hard on Apple? You tell me.

At least Apple - with regards to the iTunes situation - is reacting to a situation they did not initiate. Dell apparently initiated the situation and pretended that they did not know about it. From 2003 to 2005 they intentionally sold computers with faulty parts to resellers and customers alike. Ironically, the law firm defending the company from the ensuing lawsuit owned 1,000 of these computers, which Dell refused to fix after they stopped working.

What is wrong with these companies? I'm at a loss to explain it. Am I suggesting that all companies should be altruistic or at least have good intentions behind everything they do? I'm not naive - I know that'll never happen - but there are certain companies that represent more than just capitalism, e.g. Apple with its never ending pursuit of elegant and sleek design; and Dell with its exceedingly high standard of product quality and customer service.

Are these companies now relegated to the stable of companies that have made headlines for the wrong reasons such as Enron? Certainly not. But one can't help but feel a tad disappointed at the way companies that used to be untouchable (at least in my eyes) have fallen from grace just a little bit when it was quite preventable.

Popular posts from this blog

It's Easier to Fail at DevOps than it is to Succeed

Slippery when wet Since the term DevOps was coined in Belgium back in 2009, it is impossible to avoid the term whether in discussions with colleagues or in professional trade magazines.  And during the years while this movement has gained momentum, many things have been written to describe what elements of a DevOps strategy are required for it to be successful. Yet in spite of this, there is an interesting data point worth noting: not many organizations feel there is a need for DevOps.  In a Gartner report entitled DevOps Adoption Survey Results (published in September 2015),  40%  of respondents said they had no plans to implement DevOps and 31% of respondents said they hadn't implemented it but planned to start in the 12 months after the survey was conducted. That left only 29% who had implemented DevOps in a pilot project or in production systems, which isn't a lot. "Maybe it's because there truly isn't a need for DevOps," you say.  While t...

So What is this IPaaS Stuff, Anyway?

 In my last post , I discussed how no-code/low-code platforms fulfill rapid development of business applications - addressing the needs of the Citizen Developer (a Gartner term  first used around 2009).  I also commented on how this specific objective limits their ability to provide true integration capabilities, which require the flexibility to adapt to the myriad variations of infrastructure.  This is a concern because companies often have acquired legacy systems via M&A activity while simultaneously investing in new technology solutions, resulting in a mishmash of systems with multiple ways of accessing them. In this post, I'd like to examine how the needs of the latter group are met by describing some key capabilities that are "must-haves" for any company looking to execute on a digital transformation strategy.  In order to do this, let's define who the target user base is for such a technology platform. Disclaimer:   I work for MuleSoft (a division...

Application Development Done Right

In a previous article, entitled DevOps as the Ultimate Panacea? , I described how developing code without thinking about the current needs of the end user as well as the future needs once they've become accustomed to using your application ends up not only frustrating them but also can result in customer churn and ultimately lower revenues.  In this article, I'd like to describe something simple that I came across today that shows a definite degree of effort to do quite the opposite. Recently, we had a severe snowstorm, one with blizzard-like conditions, which is unheard of in central New Jersey.  Being responsible adults, my wife and I went to the grocery store to stock up on essentials (read:  chips, chocolate, etc.) in case we get stuck at home. As we were ringing up our order, the cashier mentioned to us that the store has a mobile application.  Since both of us are in technology oriented professions, we were skeptical about the need for a grocery store mob...