Apple vs. Google - Basically The Best Topic Ever (if you pop in Microsoft along with the Google)

As I'm coming in a bit late with this blog - all the hype, I assumed would've died down but it looks like I'm not the only passionate lover of my chosen vessel for technology. There's some pretty dedicated Apple and PC/Google lovers out there voicing their opinions not just in our class but all over the web and in our lives.

I'll just put it out there - I do not like Apple products. I have never liked Apple products. I don't even like iPods. I have no reason not to like them. I just didn't like them because they are Apple. I'm also a Graphic Designer. So it is assumed that I will love Apple. But I don't - I just don't. I cop a bit of slack about that from other designers but I can't help how I feel. I think they look like fun, shiny, toys but I have always thought they were stupid in terms of functionality and actually getting stuff done.

Yet, people do get stuff done on them. I see them do it and it amazes me. I felt it must be me! I just can't function not having all my options laid out in front of me, with tool bars of settings of options under sub-headings with little plus tabs, and the ability to go into properties like Microsoft allows you. A Mac lets you to an extent - but it never seems to let me do what I want. I even bought myself a Macbook Pro to learn to be able to "do the stuff" on it and found it way too restricting... oh and I got a virus on it somehow straight away. Oh, and it wouldn't system upgrade at all. Oh it also liked to do this thing where the screen died:

And the service I got from Apple was crap as they permanently bent my laptop a little bit prying it open, and did not actually fix the problem because I STILL COULD NOT UPDATE! So all these people saying Apple products are SO FAST and SO EASY. It was not for me. I guess apparently I don't like change - having grown up with a PC loving father who owned an Asian computer store (you know, those really cheap ones?)  - I was taught in the ways of the PC.

Still, after a very insightful lecture on Apple vs Google by Ted last week (which I had been looking forward to for aaaages) - I now feel much more knowledgeable on both platforms. It's fascinating - the difference in ideologies and philosophies between Google and Apple.

Apple is all about being a "closed device" - a "walled garden." Why? - Firstly, A Better Experience - this is because they have completely designed your experience from start to finish making everything simple, to the point, swish and swanky. Secondly, Control - Apple acts at the gate-keeper, filtering out any malicious or 'crap" apps or anything they deem inappropriate and only allowing you things on their phone that they allow meaning a sterile, carefully policed device with less viruses. Morton Hjerde blogs about this and I particularly liked what he said here:

"The iPhone is currently a closed device with very basic functionality, but it has turned the "mobile phone world" on its head. Its a beautiful but expensive device. It does not do a lot, but what it does, it does better that anyone else. "

Google is all about being an OPEN SOURCE and FREE PLATFORM. An Open garden where they do not control the platform, content or the user. As such, there is no set standard of quality, no gatekeeper telling us what we can and can't have on our phones; Anyone can make Apps and upload it to the market (even malicious apps). The advantage? We are the ones in control, we have the choice to do what we want. We have the freedom and every opportunity is given to everyone to create more things for the platform and grow it. As Ted said, compared to Apple - which is just one company, albeit, a giant one - Android is now EVERY OTHER COMPANY working on improving the platform, apps and usability of the device.

Companies aside though, I really just love the idea that people are making and creating things for other people with the only benefit being to better the platform for themselves and others. I love the communal aspect of this - the human aspect of this - and despise the corporate philosophy of Apple which is against people working together for a common cause and better experience - instead - for dictating what users can and cannot have and for money.

I guess I am a bit of a hippy.

Financially, things get quite interesting too!  This article says that "there's money in closed systems". However, it seems that while they are indeed a very popular company making a stack of money, basically all the other phone companies are using Android as their platform (Samsung, Motorola, HTC, LG, Huawei etc) and thereby simultaneously work together to clock up a pretty hefty amount of sales themselves. Sure, the profit doesn't go to Google in the way Apple does but it comes in other ways. And believe it or not, it looks like Australia has FINALLY caught up with the rest of the world! Android is now beating Apple in Australia.

GO AUSTRALIA. I now have respect for you again :)

A 2 PART BLOG

WE ARE CONTENT PRODUCERS (LOSERS?)

Isn't the world of the internet a funny place? We are now all content producers but with one small difference - we don't reap the benefits (to a certain extent). Instead, the people who supply the platform to us do - e.g. facebook (we are the one's making the content which makes facebook interesting), blogger (we are the one's who write the blogs, the reasons why we like to go there), and even gaming - with the concept of Machinima (we create small films out of interactive games which end up promoting the games even further).

Now - I don't know if you noticed, but I said we don't reap the benefits to a certain extent. Let's have a look at this. The people who supply the platform, what benefits do they get from this new system of "prosumers"?

Without all that much personal effort from them, their platforms are generating content which draws more and more people to them. The more people, the better the value of the platform. And the more people, the more people are being drawn to it - making the platform even better. The platforms get success, financially, socially and culturally but what do we get?

Well, better platforms are a benefit for us for sure. I am not complaining and I'm certainly not going to stop people using a platform becuase the more people use it - the more advantages there are to using it. We benefit culturally and socially - because the content which is created by us, is content that we want to read. We add value to the things that we want. Yet, it still gives me a funny feeling when I realise I am putting so much time and effort into blogs, facebook posts etc in order to benefit these large corporations...

IS THIS THE DEATH OF MARKETING?


A second point from me about these large corporations.... is about the rise of the long tail and about how physical shops are being forced into bankruptcy by the online, cheap, alternatives where they don't have to spend money on the shop front and merely have a big warehouse capable of holding more stuff. On one hand, I think - great! I love cheap stuff!!!! On the other hand - being a student of marketing, it really struck me as a little ridiculous. In the past, so much effort went into marketing and creating brand identity. Creating a shiny brand was the main goal and then you could jack up the prices as you want. Creating shops with attractive displays, spending money on the interior design, creating a enjoyable shopping experience. The products in the shop had an "aura" about them - a sort of presence, and when we bought it - we felt like we were buying into this amazing experience.

As Kelly says: "when copies are free, you need to sell things which can not be copied" as they become scarce and valuable.

Well - amazingly, it's now the companies who don't bother with marketing and designing the amazing product experience for the user who are winning. Or so it seems.... I guess you could think of it as a different KIND of marketing? It's definitely a different way of thinking. But as a graphic designer, and one who loves the auratic feeling of owning something tactile, with a presence.... and enjoy going into a store and appreciating the effort gone into its presentation - I don't think I will ever stop wanting to go to shops to buy things.

That doesn't mean I won't occasionally buy things online if they are cheaper though!

All Work and No Play makes workers...something something

As we continue on through the fast-paced course that is DIGC202 - I realise that essentially, we are being shown a small piece of the puzzle each week about the new media industry that is THE INTERNET and Global Networks. Each week, we discuss the benefits this medium has given us, as well as debate the ethical issues which arise which contradict our society and cultural conventions as we know it.

This week, we looked at the idea of how being constantly connected can have quite the impact on our work lives. M Gregg writes a really comprehensive and thought provoking article about this very topic - using the term "function creep" - where the workplace is now flexible, thanks to the internet, so we find ourselves sometimes called to work outside of work hours, away from the workplace. It's a great article and I definitely recommend you give it a peruse. Essentially - it looks like the boundaries that existed in the past in regards to work and leisure have become blurred. Work being something you do, rather than a place that you go - and with our handy little smartphones in our pockets, we can take our workplace with us wherever we go! Bradwell puts it simply: Time outside of work has become a precious commodity. Elise and Matt both shed some great ideas about this work/leisure clash and the effects if you wanted to read further into the topic.

It's becoming obvious to me that we are indeed living what Deuze calls a "liquid life" - “a precarious life, lived under conditions of constant uncertainty.” New information, products, and ideas are being produced every second of every day which can be sent to us at anytime on our phones, emails and laptops without our control. Honestly, sometimes it can be hard to keep up. Technology has allowed us to live our lives at such a fast pace compared to the past (where instantaneous communication was not possible) that it seems to make sense to me that the things we do in life such as work and leisure will become, consequently, fast-paced too.

So it seems that the great convenience of instantaneous communication and networked societies has a price. As Deuze quotes: "each year we have to work harder in our free time to consume all those things that we have been working harder to produce in our work time". We are addicted. We WANT to be connected. As much as we say we don't want a world where work can reach us in the privacy of our homes - if we know there is a message about work ready and waiting on our phones - let's face it, we will want to know what it says. If you really don't want to have your privacy and leisure time interrupted, then it's your choice to turn off communication and switch off - most will choose not to though.

Bradwell estimates that people spend an average of twelve hours a day using media. "Media has become such an integrated part of our lives that most of the time we are not even aware we are using media." It's just a part of life - and it is a picture of the fast-paced life that we now lead. There's no turning back and we will evolve to be able to handle it. I think most of us are handling it OK......

I feel pre-tty bad for work-a-holics though...

A Brave New World

The idea that struck a chord with me during the lecture this week was the notion that with the advent of the internet, we are able to live a whole portion of our lives separate from our bodies. What I mean is, that we are able to separate the "information" (our mind) from its "physical carrier" (our body) and travel virtually anywhere we want, do, learn and see things whilst keeping out butts planted firmly in our chair.

That is nothing new to anyone, it's pretty obvious I know. The reason I mention it is because so many of us in the world are spending a lot of our time with our minds online; in a sort of alternate world - "Cyberspace" I guess you would call it - interacting with each other virtually but not physically, living our lives virtually, but not physically.

Kevin Kelly calls it "the new economy." John Barlow calls it "the new home of the Mind."With this new world, comes new rules, a new language, a new culture and a whole new way of thinking in terms of politics.

And what an amazing world it is! Judging from the idealist world described in the Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, there is complete equality (as all nodes in the network are equal, regardless of race and gender), true freedom of speech, ("anyone, anywhere may express his or her beliefs, without fear of being coerced into silence or conformity"), and autonomy ("we declare our virtual selves immune to your [Governments of the Industrial World] sovereignty even as we continue to consent to your rule over our bodies").

This world is instead built off the logic of networks. Kelly explains that we "clothe the globe with a network society," connecting everything to everything - making a world that Barlow believes to be "more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before."

So wow - a world completely free from any authority and control? My first thought is - wouldn't that cause complete havoc and chaos? Well, I guess so in a way and in a way not. We see cases of internet bullying, cyberstalking, unethical behaviour (see: gate-crashing of virtual funerals on WOW for example) and networking to cause crazy riots. But on the other side: we see unified communities with free open source software, forums with people helping others, people tagging each other in facebook photos to relive memories and overall sharing of information for education and entertainment.

Just like our real physical world, the virtual world can be a world of good and bad - and to an extent, it is a world that the user them self can influence to be what they want. Hopefully, we will continue to build towards the utopian vision of this "new world" of ideas, information and relationships.