Is Apple being true to its brand? Stefan Engeseth seems to think it’s a case of the Emperor’s New Clothes.
   It’s a daring position to take, but he has a point. When we were younger, Apple made moves that were pioneering. It made us think we were hurtling toward the 2000 predicted in science fiction. The Apple II and the Macintosh could only have come from a bunch of folks in Cupertino who flew a pirate flag outside their block.
   Now, there’s the iPod or, if you hate intercapitalized words, the Ipod. Which is one of the products of 2005 and, possibly, of 2006.
   I can’t see the point. In fact, I can’t see the point of any gadget which does not serve me and insists I change my life to suit it. The cellphone is one, though admittedly I am in a minority. But the Ipod is another.
   The ’Pod offers music on the go. Well, I already have music on my car stereo. If I am walking about, I can appreciate the scenery or indulge in silence, or if I want music, I’ll hum a tune. I like being creative. And it won’t take sitting on my hind end in my office downloading stuff.
   Stefan says that Apple doesn’t reach for the future here. He might be right. There’s not much futuristic about Desperate Housewives being downloaded on to your ’Pod. It’s rear-view, mass-market pandering here, and not the balls that gave us the Mac.
   Without those balls, the west can watch Red China and India beat the crap out of the rest of us with low-cost versions of the same gadgets. posted by Jack Yan, 5:38 AM  permalink