The Cult of Cool

The Cult of Cool

The Macbook Air is an absolutely fascinating case study, and I think, a metaphor for everything that people see negatively in Apple. But even moreso, I believe the Windows Guy/ Apple Guy ad exemplify this point better.

Apple is a dick.

People find the commercials funny, and sales numbers show that the stability of the OS, the admittedly pristine design choices, and the unprecedented marketshare of the iPod has paid off. Apple’s stock grows, and I hum along.

Apple existence in the public eye is of 3 things.

The sexy computers

1. The iPod
2. The computer “that guy” from work uses.
3. The love of journalists everywhere. It’s not so much that we use Macs, it’s just that, while Macs control a greater share of the market, it is disproportionate to the amount that is written about them.

And that last problem, I think, produces two problems. In smaller communities, Apple is “the big city thing”. The Apple stores are hundreds of miles away. The local stores don’t carry them. And the local paper has Walter Mossberg’s weekly tech column, provided to the local paper by the Associated Press. For the uninitiated, he is a Washington-based tech columnist, and every one of two articles he writes is about… you guessed it, Apple Computers.

All of this amounts to a great lack of show but plenty of tell when it comes to the big A. I would further contend that the journalists are doing Apple plenty of fiscal favors, but to the detriment of real journalism. The Apple fawning is becoming free advertising to a company that rather enjoys it but… well, it gets funny.

And not in the “ha ha” way. Journalists have made their position quite clear that they want the world to be running on Mac OSX. Some do want Ubuntu or another Linux variant, but they are the Sonic Burger to Apple’s Subway (and no one wants to admit they eat at McDonald’s).

But the dreams of journalists and Mac enthusiasts should be tempered with a simple fact.

Apple has a business strategy that makes Microsoft look like a soft kitten.

That’s not calling Microsoft gentle. That would be false, contrary to years of buy-outs, antitrust suits, and other bits of badness. Oh yea, the blue screen of death. We can never forget you.

But Apple can never, EVER, be as big as Microsoft. They can never, ever win. If they won, computing would suck ass. Apple as it exists now has the philosophy of the fascist, not of the greater good. The everyman image in jeans and grinning at the nerd is a lie.

First of all, they build their own hardware. While Microsoft was guilty of bundling software and choking competition, for the market to be OSX dominated would result in lawsuits contending that other companies would be forced out of the market. And it’s a valid point. The Fortune 500 companies like HP, Dell, Acer, and Lenovo would be left out in the cold? That won’t result in lawsuits. Nope, not at all.

And software bundling? Apple never got the memo that nations look very poorly on that. All the neat functionality and tools of Mac would have to be stripped in a Apple world, or face the hate of the European Union.

Apple’s business philosophy can never be more than the feisty, if arrogant and charming, underdog. They can never mount a serious challenge unless they abandon their cache. And they know this, and they exploit this.

Back to the new Air laptop, it is a system of intense simplicity. So much so, that things people generally like (optical drives, firewire, more than one USB) are left out in the cold. But it’s thin, and that is also in. It carries a great deal of appeal, and will sell like mad.

Ultimately, Apple can never win. They strive for better, but they need the big gorilla to make themselves look good. Without it, it would be discovered that they are no alpha male. They are a smartass, who may have some good ideas but trades business acumen and practices for smarmy marketing and products that a great deal cannot afford. Cheap laptops are a coveted benchmark for much of the world. As naïve as a Windows-based effort would be, it would be impossible to fathom OSX in such a way. It can’t. Even taking out the efforts of Bill and Melinda, Apple can never get their hands dirty with the poor the way MS does, the way Linux does. That wouldn’t be cool. They would have to deal with cheaper manufacturing. As for the semi-poor to the thrifty, Apple can’t go there either. Even the Mini mac cannot compare to what one gets with an E-Machine or a Dell. They are ultimately in a hard position.

So when Mac has a commercial showing how cool they are, I cringe. They may be cool, they may get many things right, but they can never dominate. No matter what the journalists say. Their marketshare and stock has a ceiling, and if they ever hit that ceiling, the company will be forced to change what people love about them, or it will stagnate due to a lack of growth.

In the 1980’s, Apple computers was lauded for the commercial that alluded to big brother with giant screens, and a defiant woman throwing some heavy rebellion at it, shattering the illusions. But Mac would be the worst big company, as their decaying relationships with music groups shows. They control the pricing, and they have demands of their user base with their price point (no screen on an iPod for the budget crowd, for example). Cool has become their control. And is cool more important than computing?

Ultimately, never. And the effectiveness of cheap computers, of a diverse marketshare, of philanthropy, workhorse models, can save lives, build economies, create jobs, and actually encourage competition. When I see Steve Jobs giving a presentation, the giant monitors behind him, the journalists drooling and dripping at his every “one more thing”… I’m reminded of an old 1980’s Apple commercial. And I despair, for there’s no woman in a speed suit. Just idiots drooling and falling over themselves obeying. Ironic? Sad. Bad business.

Maybe I’m missing the point about Apple. Maybe the point is never to usurp Microsoft. Maybe the point is just to be cool. But I can’t justify the consistent selling of cool computing to be the subject of journalism en masse. And if that is indeed the bias, we are not discussing business, we are not even discussing technology. They are accidental marketing, and the world can’t be let in on the joke. They are “better” without actually being better, and that unfortunate head is slowly beginning to show. If a stock does indeed have a ceiling, it is ultimately a bad move for investors, and for consumers. And I believe that it is coming.