Speaking of "Impressive" - Apple Servers Down

[flyingcheesehead]

It appears you are correct, Ed.

Kevin,

There are stories from Apple employees where they're on the elevator. Steve gets on, and by the time the elevator reaches the ground floor, Steve is holding your badge and you're looking for a new job. This, as with products getting killed and suppliers getting axed, is also known as being "Steved."

 

[sba55]

If any of you are having any really difficult problems with Apple products - getting stuff fixed right, customer service is being really unhelpful, etc. - shoot me a PM. I'll get you in touch with a team that can most definitely help.

I had one issue with Apple a few years ago. One of my laptops had a screen problem, which would only show up intermittently. I sent it in 3 times, and they were not able to reproduce and fix it. Finally, I called up my other contact at Apple, and within a few days, I had a brand new upgraded laptop no questions asked

-Felix

 

[john smith]

Item: When the iPhone first shipped neither Apple nor AT&T made a huge profit on it. The cost per unit was pretty much the $499 they charged even when AT&T was subsidizing $200 a phone. They built a market, became the standard, and became #2 worldwide in year.

Broke even on the phone maybe, but they collected $16/month from each phone contract. Of course, something like 1/2 of all the G1 phones were hacked and never had a contract. Its still a significant amount of money from the contracts that did get signed. [24 x $16 = $376 times ~3 million(?)]

 

[Allen C]

Finally, I called up my other contact at Apple, and within a few days, I had a brand new upgraded laptop no questions asked
-Felix

And this pretty well sums up Apple. Call the Tech guys all day long, but if you really want something done, you need to know somebody. Sorry Steve, but that’s not customer service.

Not an Apple fan. That said, I own two iPods and an iTouch. Love the products; hate the company and their paranoid business practices. As soon as Microsoft or some other company comes out with an iStore that does not bog down my CPU I will switch.

For the past 15 years I have had a Palm PDA in my pocket. A friend bought one of the first abnoxiously overpriced iPhones and I was blown away by the GUI and accelerometer. I could not justify the price of the phone, nor the obligation to AT&T so I looked into the iTouch.

Well it did not take long to discover that the touch was useless unless you did a jailbreak. Before I unloaded it I waited for the release of 2.0 so I could try the infamous App Store. In the end it became invaluable, but not because of Apple, but because of third party apps.

This BS about requiring owns to buy the updates doesn’t hold water. If it was indeed accurate we would not be seeing it isolated to poor ole Steve’s company.

Apple has some SERIOUS management issues that they need to get resolved before knockoff products take away their market share. ****ing off their customers would not be my first step in my retention plan.

Before the iPod Apple had a relatively small cultish following. Now, when people think Apple they think iPod, not computers. Wonder if Steve thinks about why that is much.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

And this pretty well sums up Apple. Call the Tech guys all day long, but if you really want something done, you need to know somebody. Sorry Steve, but that’s not customer service.

Allen,

This seems odd. I've always gotten excellent service over the phone (and I'm glad that they're one of the very few companies that still has their customer support centers in the US and I don't have to talk to "Steve" or "Bob" from India). Support in the store is phenomenal - I just went the other day, and I was greeted at the entrance, helped one-on-one for as long as I wanted, and walked out with a brand-new power adapter for free.

What was your problem, and what happened?

 

[jmaynard]

Before the iPod Apple had a relatively small cultish following. Now, when people think Apple they think iPod, not computers. Wonder if Steve thinks about why that is much.

Actually, I think that's exactly what he wants. Apple doesn't want to be the world's leading computer company; they want to be the leading personal/home gadget company. They're succeeding at that quite well.

 

[Allen C]

Kent,

At the expense of sounding like a MS plant, I will say that I found Apple's approach to the online music sales revolutionary that broke the music industries strangle hold on price gouging for mediocre product. The introduction on iTunes rehabilitated many of us felonious Napster users at 99 cents a shot.

As the proverbial fine print often reads, "Individual results may vary."

 

[mikea]

I haven't paid for my upgrade from 1.x to 2.x or 3.x on my Zune - software on the PC or firmware on the device. They were definitely not a bug fix. Everything changed, I even got games with the latest firmware releases, so I'm not buying - so to speak - the SarbOx excuse crapple is spewing.

And Spike...how dare you ever question Apple, EVER!!

How well's that Zune working today?

http://gizmodo.com/5121311/30gb-zunes-failing-everywhere-all-at-once?skyline=true&s=x

You know. No problem with Microsoft having to know and OK the thing working or anything.

 

[SCCutler]

Tommy's back.

Apple's servers still won't play. I guess the "up to a week" threat was no joke.

 

[EdFred]

How well's that Zune working today?

http://gizmodo.com/5121311/30gb-zunes-failing-everywhere-all-at-once?skyline=true&s=x

You know. No problem with Microsoft having to know and OK the thing working or anything.

I'm disappointed. It took you and Kent over 18 hours to get on this. I probably wouldn't have even noticed it wasn't working since it was a 1/2 day at work, and someone said they were having isues. So I turned mine on. Had it not been on at all today I would have never had the issue. Turns out that it was a glitch having to do with leap year and this being the 366th day of the year and the firmware not able to resolve that 1/1/08 +365 = 1/1/09 = 12/31/08. Supposed to magically start working at 00:01 this evening.

 

[jesse]

If I were in charge of designing the infrastructure for the uploads, I definitely wouldn't want to be the one that tries to push the idea of buying capacity for the day after Christmas. Sure the servers are overloaded today, but the load will decrease exponentially within the next several hours. And they aren't going to lose (much) business due to the loss of connectivity for a few hours.

This is what cloud computing is all about. The trick is figuring out if, in the long run, you actually save money on the cloud. Personally--I think their best use is for short-term high CPU jobs *or* short-term use to address unpredicted load.

Basically--these companies have many thousands of servers. You can bring up your software on one of their servers nearly instantaneously. You generally pay by the hour. You can use as many as you want or as little as you want--start and stop them as needed.

http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/

Problem is once you start running them 24x7x365 the costs add up higher than the traditional methods we're all used to.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I'm disappointed. It took you and Kent over 18 hours to get on this.

Didn't even show up on my radar.

Besides, who'd have thought that BOTH Zunes would crap out on the same day?

 

[mikea]

Tommy's back.

Apple's servers still won't play. I guess the "up to a week" threat was no joke.

Everybody will be back at work (theoretically) on Monday. They should have the brain reloaded enough to remember how to do their jobs by Wednesday.

 

[mantakos]

Apple's servers still won't play. I guess the "up to a week" threat was no joke.

I upgraded my ipod touch to 2.2 on Monday, no problemo.

I was running 2.1 before. At first, itunes kept trying to make me pay for the upgrade, but then I realized I was trying to download it via an itunes install on a computer different from the one I usually use with that ipod. Once I moved back to the itunes install on the right computer, the one my ipod usually synced with, with the ipod docked, it knew that I was already running 2.1, and thus could download the 2.2 software for free.
-harry

 

[astanley]

I'm a CPA, but a tax guy, not an audit guy, but I think Apple is full of feces, and is using this as a lame excuse to charge. I haven't researched Apple's claim, but these are my thoughts.

First, Sarbox generally has to do with internal controls, and does not promulgate generally accepted accounting methods. Second, revenue recognition cannot possibly compel a company to charge something that they otherwise wouldn't charge. Revenue recognition simply defines when the revenue is recognized. When you sell a product, you either recognize the income when the product is sold, or in some circumstances the revenue recognition is deferred, as when you sell an extended warranty or a subscription, for example.

Sarbanes Oxley is a CF, but it by no means requires companies to charge customers more than they otherwise would have.

I have spent the past little while trying to make sense of this, and no where in my brain (as a finance wonk) can I figure out how in the hell SOX would "force" you to do this; moreover, I'm more inclined to think that someone is trying to make SOX work for them...

I can think of a situation where they have some sort of whacked out depreciation structure on the features, essentially holding a portion of those features on the balance sheet until an upgrade is released (since they are already constructed but not "delivered" or "productionalized", and thereby "requiring" a pick up of revenue to offset the depreciation jump.

But even then, that makes so little sense to me that the part of my brain that conjured it up has been sacked.

Cheers,

-Andrew

 

[LearDriver]

I have been a Apple user now for about the past 6 years. I have owned 5 computers, at least 10 ipods, and 2 iphones. This is the first time that I have ever had to pay for an update. I am not sure why they felt that they needed to charge for this. I don't mind paying for a one time thing due to the quality of the product. However, I really hope that this is not what is going to be happening in the future.

 

[SCCutler]

Tommy's update finally loaded Friday evening.

 

[Kelvin]

I have been a Apple user now for about the past 6 years. I have owned 5 computers, at least 10 ipods, and 2 iphones. This is the first time that I have ever had to pay for an update. I am not sure why they felt that they needed to charge for this. I don't mind paying for a one time thing due to the quality of the product. However, I really hope that this is not what is going to be happening in the future.

Not trying to be nosy or a smart a** but 10 ipods?!? Are you losing them, breaking them, giving them away or buying another one everytime a new flavor comes out? Inquiring minds want to know...

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Tommy's update finally loaded Friday evening.

Spike, I'm tellin' ya - Apple owes ya 10 bucks. Call them or tell them next time you're by the store.

Glad the update finally made it, at least.

 

[ReverendSlappy]

Not trying to be nosy or a smart a** but 10 ipods?!? Are you losing them, breaking them, giving them away or buying another one everytime a new flavor comes out? Inquiring minds want to know...

(Em. added)

The above is probably the main reason why AAPL is in such good shape: They know they can release a "new" version of any of the iPods and there are several million people out there who will camp overnight and wait in line to buy it, no questions asked -- and no matter whether or not there's anything significant or better about it whatsoever.

 

[EdFred]

(Em. added)

The above is probably the main reason why AAPL is in such good shape: They know they can release a "new" version of any of the iPods and there are several million people out there who will camp overnight and wait in line to buy it, no questions asked -- and no matter whether or not there's anything significant or better about it whatsoever.

Which is also why Apple claims 70% of the MP3 player market. Well, when I only buy 1 non Apple, product, and someone else buys 10 of an apple product, it's not that hard to claim market share.

 

[ReverendSlappy]

Which is also why Apple claims 70% of the MP3 player market. Well, when I only buy 1 non Apple, product, and someone else buys 10 of an apple product, it's not that hard to claim market share.

Very true.

And I'm not saying there's anything "wrong" with that, necessarily... Just that there are quite a few people who'd buy just about anything with an Apple logo on it, whether they need/actually want/know why they want it or not.

 

[mikea]

(Em. added)

The above is probably the main reason why AAPL is in such good shape: They know they can release a "new" version of any of the iPods and there are several million people out there who will camp overnight and wait in line to buy it, no questions asked -- and no matter whether or not there's anything significant or better about it whatsoever.

You didn't mention the remaining steps: 2-3 year old used Apple gear sells for 80% of original retail on eBay, while Apple itself sells fully tested refurbed gear at a 10-15% discount.

 

[ReverendSlappy]

You didn't mention the remaining steps: 2-3 year old used Apple gear sells for 80% of original retail on eBay, while Apple itself sells fully tested refurbed gear at a 10-15% discount.

There's that too. But most of the Apple fanatics I know don't even bother with that... They just accumulate iPod after iPod, and they happily admit that their main motivation is just to be among the first to have the latest and greatest.

Again, I'm not saying there's anything "wrong" with that.

 

[LearDriver]

Not trying to be nosy or a smart a** but 10 ipods?!? Are you losing them, breaking them, giving them away or buying another one everytime a new flavor comes out? Inquiring minds want to know...

I have 3 kids and a wife. one of the kids is a little hard on the equipment. He's pretty ok so we are going to keep him. We need to keep replacing his toys a little more often than with the other ones.

Besides the fact that apple tends to update (improve) their product line up quite often.

 

[mantakos]

...there are several million people out there who will camp overnight and wait in line to buy it, no questions asked ...

In my experience, I've found Apple zealots to be extremely well-informed on the specs of each device.

If you bought each time Apple made "significant" changes, and you've been around since the beginning, you'd have reason to buy at least 7 of them, just on the merits of improved capability. In the early days, you were going from "inadequate storage capacity" towards "adequate", then you got color screens and video, then you got tiny flash-based devices ('mini' and 'shuffle'), then you got "iphone 2g", then "iphone 3g", and at some point we'll get "iphone 3g, adequate storage", and hopefully "iphone 3g with slide-out keyboard".

It's sort of like the early days of digital cameras, where the product was marching towards "adequately mature", so buying something new every year seemed nearly "mandatory".
-harry

 

[mikea]

In my experience, I've found Apple zealots to be extremely well-informed on the specs of each device.

If you bought each time Apple made "significant" changes, and you've been around since the beginning, you'd have reason to buy at least 7 of them, just on the merits of improved capability. In the early days, you were going from "inadequate storage capacity" towards "adequate", then you got color screens and video, then you got tiny flash-based devices ('mini' and 'shuffle'), then you got "iphone 2g", then "iphone 3g", and at some point we'll get "iphone 3g, adequate storage", and hopefully "iphone 3g with slide-out keyboard".
-harry

4G within 2-3 years. I'm thinking I'll even skip the next release unless 2G stops working.

Screen resolution will ever improve.

Software updates will add such as copy-paste(!!!!), voice dialing, and real IM.

AND A TOUCH SCREEN MACBOOK.

 

[ReverendSlappy]

In my experience, I've found Apple zealots to be extremely well-informed on the specs of each device.

If you bought each time Apple made "significant" changes, and you've been around since the beginning, you'd have reason to buy at least 7 of them, just on the merits of improved capability. In the early days, you were going from "inadequate storage capacity" towards "adequate", then you got color screens and video, then you got tiny flash-based devices ('mini' and 'shuffle'), then you got "iphone 2g", then "iphone 3g", and at some point we'll get "iphone 3g, adequate storage", and hopefully "iphone 3g with slide-out keyboard".

"iPhone 3g with slide-out keyboard" is something I'd consider waiting in line for (and maybe even shelling out the outrageous sum of money that the current iPhone costs.) Anyway...

It's sort of like the early days of digital cameras, where the product was marching towards "adequately mature", so buying something new every year seemed nearly "mandatory".
-harry

I get what you're saying, but it really does seem to me that a lot of folks out there feel that the biggest reason to buy the latest iteration is because... it's the latest iteration. I mean I can't wrap my head around the idea that somebody really, honestly wants a Nano, a Classic, and a Touch -- let alone the newest Nano, the newest Classic, and the newest Touch in addition to prior versions. I know several people who do and I can't come up with any other reason why anybody would. I mean what are they doing, starting a museum or something? I just don't get it.

 

[mantakos]

...I mean I can't wrap my head around the idea that somebody really, honestly wants a Nano, a Classic, and a Touch ...

You end up with multiple ipods because each has significant strengths and weaknesses.

I have an ipod touch and a "classic". The ipod touch has software capabilities the classic doesn't have, but the ipod touch has a small flash-based storage capacity, and the classic has a hard drive big enough to carry my entire MP3 collection. I can't drop one without losing something significant.

I don't like listening to music during "active pursuits", e.g. running, biking, whatever, but the 'nano' and 'shuffle' are tiny, light weight, and have flash-based storage that seems more appropriate for "bouncing around". So it wouldn't be too hard to rationalize adding the third one.
-harry

 

[mikea]

You end up with multiple ipods because each has significant strengths and weaknesses.

I have an ipod touch and a "classic". The ipod touch has software capabilities the classic doesn't have, but the ipod touch has a small flash-based storage capacity, and the classic has a hard drive big enough to carry my entire MP3 collection. I can't drop one without losing something significant.

I don't like listening to music during "active pursuits", e.g. running, biking, whatever, but the 'mini' and 'shuffle' are tiny, light weight, and have flash-based storage that seems more appropriate for "bouncing around". So it wouldn't be too hard to rationalize adding the third one.
-harry

I currently have a 16GB iPhone and a 30GB iPod Classic. I'll keep both.

Andy Ihnatko's revised book tells you how to manage keeping multiple iPods topped off and current with smart lists. (Although I've spotted at least 4 minor errors in it so far. )

 

[flyingcheesehead]

(Em. added)

The above is probably the main reason why AAPL is in such good shape: They know they can release a "new" version of any of the iPods and there are several million people out there who will camp overnight and wait in line to buy it, no questions asked -- and no matter whether or not there's anything significant or better about it whatsoever.

Usually there *is* something significantly better. For example, on the latest rev, the iPod Nano gained the ability to do video.

I've had only two iPods and the iPhone. My latest iPod (several years old now, the 60G iPod "photo" version) crapped out a while back and since I hadn't been using it since I got the iPhone, I didn't bother doing anything with it. I really do wish that my iPhone had enough storage to hold my entire music library (25.2GB), all my videos (about 8GB and climbing rapidly), and all the apps I want (a relatively tiny 0.1GB) so it would do everything I want without needing another gadget.

Unfortunately, I think the 64GB iPhone is probably still a year or two out.

Which is also why Apple claims 70% of the MP3 player market. Well, when I only buy 1 non Apple, product, and someone else buys 10 of an apple product, it's not that hard to claim market share.

Well, it works for the wintel crowd.

 

[ReverendSlappy]

I currently have a 16GB iPhone and a 30GB iPod Classic. I'll keep both.

Andy Ihnatko's revised book tells you how to manage keeping multiple iPods topped off and current with smart lists. (Although I've spotted at least 4 minor errors in it so far. )

You end up with multiple ipods because each has significant strengths and weaknesses.

I have an ipod touch and a "classic". The ipod touch has software capabilities the classic doesn't have, but the ipod touch has a small flash-based storage capacity, and the classic has a hard drive big enough to carry my entire MP3 collection. I can't drop one without losing something significant.

I don't like listening to music during "active pursuits", e.g. running, biking, whatever, but the 'nano' and 'shuffle' are tiny, light weight, and have flash-based storage that seems more appropriate for "bouncing around". So it wouldn't be too hard to rationalize adding the third one.
-harry

Usually there *is* something significantly better. For example, on the latest rev, the iPod Nano gained the ability to do video.

I've had only two iPods and the iPhone. My latest iPod (several years old now, the 60G iPod "photo" version) crapped out a while back and since I hadn't been using it since I got the iPhone, I didn't bother doing anything with it. I really do wish that my iPhone had enough storage to hold my entire music library (25.2GB), all my videos (about 8GB and climbing rapidly), and all the apps I want (a relatively tiny 0.1GB) so it would do everything I want without needing another gadget.

Unfortunately, I think the 64GB iPhone is probably still a year or two out.

And I get all that in theory. But I'm sorry, having more than 2 is very, very difficult to honestly justify IMO.

And it still doesn't make sense to have, taking a co-worker as an example, a 16GB Nano, a 120GB Classic or whatever, and a 32GB brand-new Touch all in addition to God knows how many older versions and *still* be ready to jump in line to buy whatever next iteration there is. I mean you're talking, what, $850 in the last year alone? I mean come on. That's just the result of looking for ways to spend money.

Edit: And lemme be clear, here... Spending exorbitant amounts of money on things that can't really be justified most certainly isn't something I'm innocent of myself. But let's be honest about it, y'know? I just grabbed the co-worker's Touch I'm using as an example above (and I had it wrong... it's a 16GB ): 1578 songs, 0 videos, 0 photos, 14.6GB capacity, 7.7GB available (that's his whole collection). I mean... Come on, right?

Edit #2: I had dinner/drinks with another Apple fanatic tonight who's guilty of the same as above. I asked him what the deal was and he said, "Why would you want anything other than the newest version?" Again, I've got no problem with that. My issue is all the "Bu-bu-bu-bu-but no, like, uh, really... I can, uh, realistically justify spending that much because... uh... It... uh... Does video (which I'll probably never use.)" Know what I mean? I mean I'm not saying I've never gotten creative into talking myself into buying stuff, but I'd have a lot less problem with it if people would just come right out and say, "Hell yeah, man! I just want the new stuff because it's new!" and skip the disingenuous hemming and hawing over what amounts to an insignificant array of "new features."