Apple changes words in order to change the debate Oct 19 2010
58 comments Latest by David
Google likes to characterize Android as “open” and iOS/iPhone as “closed.” That puts Apple in a tough spot. Arguing for a closed system when the competition is offering an open one makes you seem like the bad guy.
But change the words being used and it becomes an entirely different debate. Closed vs. open is one thing, fragmented vs. integrated is something else. Look at how Steve Jobs reframes the issue during this conference call with analysts:
We think the open versus closed argument is just a smokescreen to try and hide the real issue, which is, “What’s best for the customer – fragmented versus integrated?” We think Android is very, very fragmented, and becoming more fragmented by the day. And as you know, Apple strives for the integrated model so that the user isn’t forced to be the systems integrator. We see tremendous value at having Apple, rather than our users, be the systems integrator. We think this a huge strength of our approach compared to Google’s: when selling the users who want their devices to just work, we believe that integrated will trump fragmented every time.
...So we are very committed to the integrated approach, no matter how many times Google tries to characterize it as “closed.” And we are confident that it will triumph over Google’s fragmented approach, no matter how many times Google tries to characterize it as “open.”
Reframing in politics
Reminds me of how politicians use words to reframe issues. Consultant Frank Luntz advises Republicans to use phrases like “death tax” instead of “estate tax.”
Look, for years, political people and lawyers — who, by the way, are the worst communicators — used the phrase “estate tax.” And for years they couldn’t eliminate it. The public wouldn’t support it because the word “estate” sounds wealthy. Someone like me comes around and realizes that it’s not an estate tax, it’s a death tax, because you’re taxed at death. And suddenly something that isn’t viable achieves the support of 75 percent of the American people. It’s the same tax, but nobody really knows what an estate is. But they certainly know what it means to be taxed when you die.
Meanwhile, George Lakoff, a Professor of Linguistics at UC Berkeley, pushes liberals to reclaim terms like life, patriot, and family values.
Consider progressives across the country consistently saying something like this: “I am for life. That’s why I support the right of all women to receive prenatal care and the right of all children to receive immunizations and to be treated when they are sick. That’s why I believe we must safeguard the planet that sustains all life.”
Or perhaps this: “I am a patriot. That’s why I am compelled to oppose the government’s spying on American citizens without court order and in defiance of Congress.”
Say it again
At least Luntz and Lakoff agree on one thing: It’s all about repetition. Lakoff writes, “Repetition of such articulations is the key to redefining these words and reclaiming them.” Luntz says, “There’s a simple rule: You say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and then again and again and again and again, and about the time that you’re absolutely sick of saying it is about the time that your target audience has heard it for the first time.”
So don’t be surprised if we hear more “fragmented vs. integrated” talk coming out of Cupertino.
Got a web design project in mind? Find a web designer on Sortfolio. Browse by visual style, portfolio, budget, and geographic location.
Over 1 million people use 37signals' simple web-based software to collaborate on projects, track contacts, and organize their business with an intranet.
58 comments so far
Pat 19 Oct 10
It’s interesting, because Google’s use of the words “open” and “closed” imply a value applied to each; open is “good” and closed is “bad/evil.”
The words Apple is choosing to use, “integrated” and “fragmented,” are simply facts. Even the most ardent Google users cannot argue that the Android universe, for better or worse, is highly fragmented. In the same vein, one cannot argue that Apple doesn’t put much emphasis on having a fully integrated system (whether we agree with their implementations or not. See: synching iWork iPad app documents).
Personally, I’m in favour of Apple’s approach primarily because I am paying them money for use of their product, rather than trading personal information for use of their product/services. That’s a personal preference, and everyone is entitled to their own.
Dan 19 Oct 10
Pat: The point is that ‘open vs. closed’ and ‘integrated vs. fragmented’ are two different discussions – Apple are attempting to subvert the open/closed debate (which they lose) to make people think it’s about integration vs. fragmentation, which they win.
It’s a false dichotomy – openness and integration are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Pies 19 Oct 10
The opposite of fragmented isn’t integrated. It’s monolythic.
Adi 19 Oct 10
Steve Jobs failed to mention that the average person doesn’t use multiple phones. This means that it does not matter for the user if different android phones have different interfaces.
Both are right and wrong in different regards. It depends on what type of user they are advertising to.
Joe 19 Oct 10
The word choice also takes different points of view.
Open/closed is in the view of the developer. Its obvious a developer would want his or her project to be used by many. Integrated/fragmented is in the view of the (usually non-developer) user.
The average user is not a developer, so the integrated approach is wonderful for the majority. But they have to be careful as to not forget about the developers as well, since they are who provide a lot of value to the users.
Perhaps permitting 3rd-party apps from friends or friend markets to be installed somehow (instead of outright jailbreaking to accomplish this), while fully supporting the integrated market would be an acceptable compromise.
Hardy Leung 19 Oct 10
The emphasis of “integrated” vs “fragmented” was clearly shown when Steve Jobs’ rant was visualized as a word cloud:
http://blog.tagxedo.com/steve-jobs-google-rant
I thought Steve Jobs went overboard and forced the rant a bit too much, in both tone and content, making him sounded more fearful, angry, and desperate than his usual self.
Jamie 19 Oct 10
@Pat – integrated vs fragmented are another mans monotonous vs variety, dictatorship vs freedom, etc.
bostonOU 19 Oct 10
“Open” vs. “closed” isn’t really that different from “integrated” vs. “fragmented” when the argument is about the consumer. From a regular consumer’s view, “open” Andriod just means that carriers can take Android and make it their own, resulting in “fragmentation.” Apple being “closed” means, to the regular consumer, that Apple has all control and therefore can present a consistent user experience across multiple devices.
So really, Jobs didn’t change the discussion except to talk about the benefits/drawbacks of “open/closed” from the view of the consumer. That’s why Jobs can say things like “When you think of ‘open’ you think of Windows.” The tech crowd goes into fits but your average computer user agrees completely. They see Windows as “open” because you can use a Dell or Gateway or custom built, but Apple is “closed” because you have to use their hardware. Again, not exactly changing the discussion, just speaking from a specific point of view.
Nick Campbell 19 Oct 10
To me, a fragmented environment is one that I can integrate my way. I can’t do that in one that’s integrated for me, especially if I don’t like the way the integration is happening. Apple has some positives like design. Google has some positives like engineering. Between the two choices, I’m going engineering because I can make that look good.
TWAndrews 19 Oct 10
Whether an integrated system is better than a fragmented one depends on how well the integration is done.
Apple does at best an ok job of integration, and only as long as you’re using exclusively Apple products.
Jeppe 19 Oct 10
@Matt, excellent observation. I noticed that reframing is so much more convincing when you misdirect by accusing the other arguer of reframing, e.g. when Jobs say “We think the open versus closed argument is just a smokescreen to try and hide the real issue”. Not only did he reframe the argument, he also reframed both Google’s and his intentions. “They’re trying to fool you with words, while I’m giving you the full picture.”
Michael Long 19 Oct 10
Android and Linux developers constantly preach open source. Users don’t care either way, as long as it does what they need.
And as far as Android sales growth goes, let’s face it. If you’re a Verizon customer, a Sprint customer, or a T-Mobile customer, then your only real smart phone choice is… Android.
Windows 7 phones have still yet to ship. No one wants to be stuck with 6.5. Blackberry failed to up their game significantly, and it shows. Palm’s WebOS was a non-starter.
So what’s left on the shelf? Android.
The way I see it, the majority of the people who’re buying Android aren’t “choosing” Android.
Walk into a Verizon store, or Sprint store, or T-Mobile store, and the only viable options available are Android phones. Faced with no real choice, customers examine a couple of nearly identical plastic phones for a few minutes, find the same set of features on each… and then proceed to buy the cheapest one.
Hence Android’s sales growth.
What will tell the tail is the day AT&T loses its exclusivity agreement, and the iPhone hits Verizon…
Dan Lewis 19 Oct 10
Why not use the real words: unmanaged vs. managed apps. If you trust Apple as the curator of your phone and have no interest in anything outside the four corners of their experience, then you’re good. On the other hand, Android won’t help you manage your app experience. You have the power to manage your phone, with the possibility to manage your phone unwisely.
The reason we’re using the word open is in the sense of glasnost, openness, or thermodynamics, open system. You can interact and exchange with the system from outside the system. This is the real lie behind Apple’s “integrated” talk. It is integrated, it just isn’t integrated with you. And there are endless analogies in tech, like Internet vs. America On Line.
The Apple App Store is the AOL of Apps.
Alex Bowles 19 Oct 10
@Adi – Users are only half the equation, and their experience is a direct function of what happens on the developer side of the equation.
Developing for the App Store means developing for THE App Store, which is tied to a platform that pushes out updates synchronously and universally. Developing for Android means (a) developing for every single version of Android (1.6 – 2.x), and (b) doing so knowing that carriers may NEVER allow a phone’s owner to update their OS – let alone provide that update in a (relatively) orderly fashion.
People angryblog about a few over-hyped examples of AppStore randomness, then go onto suggest that Apple is the NKVD reincarnate. Aside from being totally overblown, it’s hard to argue these problems are remotely commensurate with a carrier who bans an entire OS upgrade, forcing you to buy a new phone (and another two-year contract) for what should be a routine, OTA measure designed to keep the entire ecosystem healthy.
If Google were a little less open with regard to carrier crippling, they may find that the platform – as a whole – lived up to their rhetoric. In the meantime, the ‘fragmented’ characterization actually does resonate as something undesirable.
dagwud 19 Oct 10
Actually, Android isn’t truly “unmanaged” either. There are Apps that don’t show up for my Android phone on AT&T, even though I know they exist. And AT&T has disabled unknown sources for installation.
While that’s more “management by AT&T” than by Google, Google’s still managing my apps.
Annoyingly, HTC released an update for my Aria, and afterward there were programs that didn’t show up in the marketplace because Google had yet to validate and accept the new ROM . Google actively (or passively) restricts my app experience.
Matt Oakes 19 Oct 10
@Michael Long In the UK O2 has lost there exclusivity on the iPhone a long time ago and ever major and most minor companies sell the iPhone both on contract and pay as you go. I see lots of people with iPhone but just as many with android phones in some form or another.
Lots of people have the HTC Desire (including me), a friend ordered the HTC Desire HD, loads have the Sony Ericsson Experia X10 and a few seems to have the Samsung Galaxy S. My mum also has the HTC Desire and my brother is moving off the iPhone and onto some sort of android phone.
To be honest I have no idea which sells the most, but being on every carrier doesn’t make much difference really. It’s all pretty even still.
WindPower 19 Oct 10
Jobs said something similar in a keynote, calling Android “An uncontrolled environment” and the iPhone “A curated environment”.
Rudy 19 Oct 10
Apple used similar techniques to reframe the debate around Flash. An argument against Flash was that it was closed, yet closed when it suits Apple is okay. They’ve now created a fragmented web with content being authored for multiple targets, and content owners facing more work when developing for these multiple targets. “What’s best for the customer – fragmented versus integrated?” Hmmm. I just wish Apple would be honest instead of acting like politicians.
Adi 19 Oct 10
He changed the meaning behind the words. This is what made the difference.
Henrique 19 Oct 10
@Adi ” Steve Jobs failed to mention that the average person doesn’t use multiple phones. This means that it does not matter for the user if different android phones have different interfaces.
Both are right and wrong in different regards. It depends on what type of user they are advertising to. “
It’s not a problem to the average user, but to the developer that targets that platform. And without people producing good content to your platform and pushing you to drive it forward, your platform will suck.
The fragmentation and lack of integration of the platform is what killed Linux-based systems on the desktop, and the same is happening to Android. Some months from now, you’ll end with a “Motorola Android”, a “Sony Ericsson Android” and a “Samsung Android”, and they will all suck in different aspects. Not mention that you won’t be able to ship a working product to all 3 simultaneously anymore, despite all being based in the same platform, because of spurious bugs and discrepancies that each vendor doesn’t fix.
Google engineers have their heads too much up in geekland, so they believe the open-source shotgun approach creates products. It doesn’t.
Having a good product is closer to craftsmanship than natural evolution.
Edward J. Stembler 19 Oct 10
The only two terms I care about are “Apple” and “Not Apple”. As in: Android is not Apple, therefore I’m not interested in it.
Jason 19 Oct 10
Why are Android fanboys getting sulky over this?
Why wouldn’t Apple reply back with its own perspective?
Google isn’t a saint. It want’s to own your data and serve ads based on your personal information.
While apple wants to provide a polished user experience.
You have a choice.
Juliana 19 Oct 10
Apple changes the WORLD in order to change debates?)
Anon 19 Oct 10
Here’s all I’m interested in: Does it have crapware that I can’t uninstall? So far, that’s the biggest downfall of the Android fragmentation.
etd 19 Oct 10
This reframing discussion reminded my of the “Thank you for smoking” movie 7.8/10 on IMDB http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0427944/ with Nick, the Big Tobacco’s chief spokesman
GL 20 Oct 10
@Jason Yes, at the end of the day, Google wants to push more ads to us that we are more likely to click. But do you think Apple really wants to provide a polished user experience? What they really want is to sell more of their products in their walled garden. We can only develop for their AppStore using XCode on a Mac, and to test it we have to own at least an iPod Touch.
Geoff 20 Oct 10
Reminds me of one of George W. Bush’s great quotes:
“See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.”
Henrique 20 Oct 10
@GL ” We can only develop for their AppStore using XCode on a Mac, and to test it we have to own at least an iPod Touch. “
To develop for Windows you need Visual Studio running on a Windows PC. What is your point supposed to be, anyway?
And while you can test your app on the iPhone emulator, I wouldn’t trust someone that develops for hardware he doesn’t have access anyway.
Your logic is flawed.
Edwin 20 Oct 10
Apple would have been better off with “we’re great, they’re crappy”.
closedFist 20 Oct 10
it’s semantics – it doesn’t matter what SJ says, the numbers don’t lie. Android is smoking Apple in several key areas. You can’t hide the fact Android sales numbers are going up, Apple’s are flat lining.
Artsrc 20 Oct 10
@Henrique
You certainly don’t need a particular brand of workstation hardware to develop for Android. I agree you should get an Android device.
Even to develop for Windows you can get pretty far with Python and Qt on Ubuntu.
Requiring a Mac Workstation for iPhone development is an artifact of Apple have a particular set of values.
McG 20 Oct 10
We can only develop for their AppStore using XCode on a Mac
McG 20 Oct 10
Oh damn, it came out wrong…
@GL + @Henrique said—‘We can only develop for their AppStore using XCode on a Mac’
Actually, you can just use a random text editor and compile with GCC on the command line on a Mac. Xcode just makes things easier.
A similar system would be the Microsoft XBox. You can either code everything on Visual Studio or use a random text editor and compile with the command line SDK compiler on Windows.
chrisBZ 20 Oct 10
@closedFist
Once the iPhone is available on Verizon, we will see who gets ‘smoked’.
In Europe, where both platforms are available on multiple carriers, Android’s marketshare is tiny.
King 20 Oct 10
Agreed that this is a debate between Google and Apple, but the reason why all the Apple and Android users are flaming each other is for a much more selfish and self centred reason:
In the same manner that a beggar sees his tin roof hut as a palace, no Apple or Android user wants to be told that their investment is a bad investment and thus under the sky that is wrought with the big guns: the phone manufacturing companies, on the ground their users are duking it out unnecessarily.
In the end no matter which team you support, each team is only after 2 things: 1. Your money right now 2. Your support now and incidentally your money in the future
Neither Apple and nor Google are doing anything like giving you a great product and all that bollock, for the consumer’s benefit, they just want your money, ironically they have to make something worth buying before you buy it!
Sachin 20 Oct 10
I am with Steve on this and like the integrated approach…..
RF 20 Oct 10
Sticking to their party line can do them in, too, if they refuse to adapt where it’s clearly wrong.
If you can only get a large screen or a keyboard by going to Android and enough people care, Apple might have to “fragment” their product line. If Android competition keeps up, Apple might have to give up on their promise never to make cheaper phones (even if “making cheaper phones” just means cutting into their margins).
Anyway, something to think about. Effective PR and effective reasoning are two different things.
Arthur Klepchukov 20 Oct 10
George Lakoff’s class, “The Mind, Language, and Politics” (Cognitive Science C104 ) was my absolute favorite class at UC Berkeley. We read plenty of his work and Frank Luntz. I’m glad to see these ideas again!
malclocke 20 Oct 10
I think Apple may have already got the message about repetition.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx7v815bYUw
Rimantas 20 Oct 10
Company sold 14.1 million iPhones in the quarter, representing 91 percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter.
Romain 20 Oct 10
I think that phone manufacturers somehow shot themselves in the foot by all adopting Android. Doing so they’ve lost a key differentiator. Or even they lost THE key differentiator as hardware is now mostly similar on all smartphone. What’s left to them is to compete on price (not such a good idea), come up with fancy package designs (this seems to mean copying the iPhone at the moment…) or add a customisation layer on top of Android (which means big headache for apps developer and indeed a fragmented market).
So we have now a blob of generic but fragmented smartphones versus fully differentiated iPhones… Notice that no-one is talking about Samsung, Nokia, et al. anymore but just iPhone vs. Android?
The only benefit I could see for users is prices being pushed downward within the Android blob…
So even if the scale ends up tipping towards Android by total market share (which is irrelevant) I think that the bulk of the profits will stay with Apple. Apple is the only relevant smart phone manufacturer.
Fernando Correia 20 Oct 10
As in the case of the death grip, this is another interesting analysys on how successful Jobs is at shifting the subject of discussion.
Nathan 20 Oct 10
@RF
As I understand it, they never promised to never make cheap phones, Jobs just promised to let everyone know when Apple figured out how to make a great $50 smart phone.Jason Clark 20 Oct 10
Too many syllables Steve. “Open/Closed” have three. “Fragmented/Integrated” have seven. That linguistic change doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell. :P
Dan 20 Oct 10
If you don’t like what is being said, then change the conversation. – Don Draper
Perhaps another term for “closed” or “integrated” is “curated”.
Dan 20 Oct 10
@Romain: You should have started with your last sentence, all your argument follows from that.
Are you suggesting that each manufacturer having their separate OS would be easier for the developers than dealing with the different UI customizations?
BTW , Nokia didn’t switch to Android, but that didn’t stop them from losing market share at all. Samsung have their own OS too, how much have you heard about that?
Romain 20 Oct 10
@Dan:
I’m not saying that each manufacturer should have their own OS per se, I’m saying that from the end user’s perspective if they all do have the same OS they just become interchangeable HW suppliers (ala PC market).
And at the same time the fact that they each customize Android cancels part of the advantage that a common OS should bring to developers: the part that is needed to reach Apple-like polish in the apps’ UI.
John 20 Oct 10
Maybe Steve used those words because if he argued for a closed platform, Adobe could scream HYPOCRITE .
Marcy Swenson 21 Oct 10
There is a super fascinating SALT talk sponsored by the Long Now in SF about How Language Changes Thought at the Cowell Theater on Oct 26th. If this post interests you, might make sense to check it out: http://longnow.org/seminars/02010/oct/26/how-language-shapes-thought/
I’m going!
NR 21 Oct 10
Leaving aside Apple vs. Android, “closed” vs. “open”, “integrated” vs. “fragmented” and looking for one moment at language…”death tax” is a great example of how brilliant communication can actually be highly deceptive.
The sleight-of-hand there is breathtaking, really: dead people cannot pay taxes, because they’re dead. The tax falls on the living heirs. “Death tax” makes it sound like the taxman is there at your side with the grim reaper.
But repeat it enough and it doesn’t matter.
Which is maybe why Apple is actually losing this debate, all the while shipping products that kick the living shit out of the Android platform. The advocates of “open” got in early and have hammered the point.
Great post!
Hugene 21 Oct 10
Seeing these guys (Eric and Steve) talk about the other’s products and strategies has become a complete farce. Instead of concentrating on the other, and analyzing them, they should concentrate on themselves and see how to improve their offerings. And it’s become such a war of PR, and especially Apple is deploying so much smokescreening that it’s not even funny anymore.
It’s like two large peacocks, that have forgotten their flock, are taking every other animal around them for idiots, and are puffing up their feathers and fighting.
But I agree, changing words does end-up changing the topic: that’s the smokescreen.
Jeppe 21 Oct 10
People seem to forget that a linguistic frame (as a product) is emphasise. Neither is or should be the full picture.
@John, that’s a very interesting observation. Didn’t catch that.
foljs 22 Oct 10
Yes, they are not “necessarily mutually exclusive” it only has been so in the entire history of computing.
No, monolithic (see what I did here?), is the opposite of “modular”.
The average person changes phones every year or so—so he would like some interface consistency, thank you very much. Also “fragmented”
And let’s not forget: consistent vs hodgepodge, gracious vs messy, useful vs FAIL , usable vs PITA , Mac vs Windows, zsh vs sh, Python vs Perl etc…
An OK job? Yes, that must be the reason they always top the user satisfaction lists (except if they put something in the water, maybe kool aid).
But, if Apple is doing OK, I’m extremely interest in who does the better job. In fact, I will immediately auction all my Apple devices when you disclose this information.
Yes, because otherwise cross-compiling is HUGE in every other platform, and a sure-fire way to get a quality product…
Yes, “far” as in “far away from QA and commercial success”.
How about: shit vs hit?
Yes, because the notions of making a product to sell and CARING about the quality of that product are mutually exclusive.
(And you write that comment in the 37 Signals blog… Oh, the irony).
Yes, flatlining in the usual sense of huge year-over-year increase.
Not that market share means anything: more people use crappy Windows (even Vista) instead of anything else.
foljs 22 Oct 10
The average person changes phones every year or so—so he would like some interface consistency, thank you very much. Also “fragmented” translate to other bad things too, like: less developers, less interesting apps, least-common-denominator programming and design, etc etc…
mr fuckwit 24 Oct 10
politics of bollocks. Its not open source, it doesnt even work with flash. That aspect of Apple sucks a lot of arse. Especially the flash thing when they lie about why they dont want it. We know why, because it would lose you money. So just admit it you CUNTS .
Truth and politics dont mix, apple going down that path.
also 24 Oct 10
ps The opposite of fragmented is “Im trying to make a name for myself at apply by making bullshit arguments getting away from the fact we make a lot of restrictive stuff”.
tttttttttt 24 Oct 10
at APPLE . fuck.
Who cares anyway? Rant and rave, the facts are there. Come on apple get flash working and stop being such a bunch of tits.
Thanks
David 26 Oct 10
I remember that Steve talked about how many different versions that Android had and it was the same number that Tweetdeck released in their study of how many devices it had been installed on, but they were bragging that it worked on all devices. Knowing Google, I think they will figure a solution to the fragmentation issue. I am still divided which OS I will go to after my old WinMo phone, but I fragmentation compatibility seems like an issue they can solve.
Comments are closed