I don’t think the Cult of Jobs has long-term sustainability without its Glorious Leader. Sure, they’ll last for a long time but once Jobs is gone there will be a considerable dropoff in Apple’s “innovativeness”.
You’re assuming that Apple’s greatness is a large percentage made up of Steve Jobs. I disagree. He’s just the outspoken figurehead. Besides, if they drop off in innovativeness (which was NOT held up when Steve was out on a leave of absence…remember, there was no hint he would return) then hey, they had one amazingly awesome run at it.
But they get away with stuff just exactly BECAUSE they’re apple. Example: Their current laptop exterior has not changed in 3 years…the PREVIOUS laptop exterior didn’t change for 6 odd years. NOBODY does that. Year after year all the other big players continually redesign their enclosures. Why do you suppose that is?
So what if they haven’t changed the laptop enclosures? It’s black plastic, it’s white plastic, it’s aluminum. What’s to change? On the other hand, in the past few years, they’ve introduced the MacBook Air, the iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad, etc. And they’ve sold millions of songs, movies, TV shows and applications through the iTunes store. Lots of innovation, but none in a mature market like “laptop enclosures.”
The point is (and I’m not sure we’re really debating opposite sides of this topic):
They make their bread and butter on minimalism. Nobody else does that as well as they do. It means their devices don’t appear as dated as quickly. The perception is that the computers are a better value, even if they’re a little more expensive on the uptake. They’re made out of materials that wear better, last longer, and avoid looking dated.
Apple is more than Jobs, and they’ve hit more home runs, more consistently, than anybody else. I suspect that’s NOT a fluke, and will continue to happen with Steve becomes an ex-parrot.
Apple won’t die as long as there are people willing to sacrifice function for form. Or at least until some other company gets how to make a more usable experience.
While I agree wholehearted with BigT (when Apple has to choose between being useful and looking cool, they choose looking cool every single time. That’s why Apple computers are so slow to operate – though I suppose it gives you more time to admire their coolness), Apple is unlikely to die even when Steve Jobs does.
It’s not the cult, but the company right now is too big and with too many income streams (like the iPhone and itunes) that it’s here to stay. In addition, Apple works to maximize its profits by doing things like limiting what other companies can do on their platform. (Has no one ever noticed the inherent contradiction in what Apple says? “Our operating system is the safest and most reliable.” “We can’t allow your app because it might break our operating system.” If the OS is so reliable, why is it so easily broken?).
Apple also overcharges for its product. This makes sense economically, since it lets them make more money per item sold. If you want an Apple, you can’t shop around for a better deal, and the amount of freeware available is pathetic – but you can buy more software to do what you want (and Apple gets its cut).
What do you mean by saying Macs are slow to operate?
There’s no inherent contradiction in having a secure operating system and forbidding third party apps that would compromise that security.
–Insecure OS w/ insecure apps = Worst
–Less insecure OS without insecure apps = Best
–Less insecure OS w/ with insecure apps = Less than Best, Better than Worst.
You can’t rightfully say Apple overcharges for their products. You can say they have a higher profit margin than other major personal computer companies. Consumer Reports routinely judges their notebooks as the best – having a unique blend of low weight, long battery life, superior sound, excellent screen, excellent speed and unrivaled customer service.
Since it’s a unique product you can’t legitimately say they are over-priced… unless people stop buying them because of the price.
The amount of Mac freeware isn’t pathetic. It’s damn amazing for a company with their market share. Personally I’ve found the Sigma chess program to be the better than anything free for Windows. Recently I went looking for freeware 3-D design/rendering software and had no trouble finding several good programs.
There will be more niche programs for Windows, but in the major categories the difference is minor.
While I agree that Macs aren’t slow, I disagree with the idea that they are actually offering anything significantly different. A Mac is just a PC with different operating system. And if you can get that same PC with Windows for cheaper, then you can say it’s overpriced.
Yes, Mac freeware is okay. Plus, with a little bit of work, you can run almost all Windows freeware on a Mac, too, just like you can in Linux. I’d still like more selection in the native apps, however.
Finally, my point of form over function was mostly me bashing their portable gadgets: iPod, iPhone, and iPad. The Mac itself isn’t that bad. It could use some better settings tweaking tools, but I’ve never really felt closed off on one. (Though, admittedly, I haven’t used one since the G4, and only used that at school.)
But I’m very glad I didn’t go with a Mac when I got my current computer. Even though my PC was worse than the Macs offered at that time, both are quite out of date by now. One I’m out a few hundred dollars, the other a little over a thousand. In other words, my cheaper parts are justified because I’m going to have to replace them before they go out anyways.
Well, eight years later, Apple continues to do OK. Someone should write a book about this company, or something. 
It seems funny now that those goofy looking iMacs were the first step in Apple’s salvation, some three years before the iPod.
I’m staying with my parents this week, and they have CNBC on almost constantly. The other day, as they were talking about Apple and other tech stocks (Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, Alphabet/Google, collectively called the FANG stocks) they said that among those stocks Apple was undervalued. That’s when it was very close to its trillion-dollar valuation. And it looks like the P/E ratio of Apple is less than the S&P 500 or the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
Warren Buffett has said that he shies away from investing in technology companies because he doesn’t understand it, but even he bought Apple stock within the past year or two. (I think it was about $17 billion worth.)
But still, it seems to me that Apple hasn’t had any really new product in a while. Perhaps not since Steve Jobs passed away. The Apple TV is only a so-so product compared to something like a Roku and they have nothing really to compete with the Amazon Echo or the Google Home products.