Why It Just Works

July 8th, 2009 30 Comments

So John suggested I delve into why “it just works“.

He suggests that Apple’s tight control of their products, from design to software and hardware development and third party components allows them to do what “open” systems cannot. I agree.

Beyond control, this approach both limits the possible combinations software needs to support and allows it to integrate tightly with the hardware.

Photo by Marcin Wichary from Flickr used under Creative Commons

Photo by Marcin Wichary from Flickr used under Creative Commons

From its beginnings, Microsoft’s O/S ran on multiple hardware configurations, PC-DOS on IBM PCs and MS-DOS on the IBM clones. I don’t agree entirely with John that the PC architecture was open; IBM didn’t open its architecture; it was legally reverse-engineered. Maybe it was accidentally open or improperly closed.

Anyway, by supporting multiple hardware configurations, Microsoft set its course. This path allowed it to dominate a market, which it continues to do today. Tough to argue with that business strategy. In so doing, Microsoft has to maintain millions of lines of code on hundreds of different hardware configurations.

Imagine how much code handles the hardware differences between Dell’s Inspiron and Latitude laptops. Even hardware from the same vendor is different, and even components from the same vendor behave differently in different hardware configurations, e.g. an Nvidia chip in a Dell Inspiron vs. the same chip in an Alienware XPS.There’s a lot involved there, whereas Apple standardizes configurations across its product lines.

By burning less development time and effort on various hardware configurations, Apple can spend more time designing and building products.

I don’t know anything about product design and development at Apple. Very few people do. They’re secretive that way. So, I won’t speculate about better or worse design and development practices. The problem of scale across hardware configurations is enough to illustrate one reason why Apple does a better job at just working.

This problem brings up an interesting point. Linux distros have done a great job blending “it just works” with scads of hardware configurations, although sometimes your configuration didn’t get enough development time.

In the end, it doesn’t really matter though because the future is good enough, whether or not “it just works”. As Chet has noted a few times, Windows is good enough for pretty much everyone, and they don’t care enough to make a switch and try something new. These are the people who feel that Windows 7 and Ubuntu are the same; these are people like my wife to whom the biggest difference between her iMac and her old PC is speed.

We live in a little corner. We fiddle with technology for fun and for work; we like shiny things and are confident in our abilities; we debate the virtues of software and hardware; we own several computers and tons of gadgets.

We fix those people’s computers.

Your thoughts + comments = win.


Possibly Related Posts

  • http://oraclenerd.com/ chet

    I just want to beat John to the punch this time…seeing as how he stole my thunder last post.

    I think you just did a great job of articulating the benefits of simplicity. It just works. Bravo. I think that's a great illustration of why their product is (arguably) better. I like them from afar…no real world experience yet.

    In software, simpler is usually better. If you are able to spend more time in the design phase, you will (hopefully) produce a better product. I've argued in the past, for 90% or more of the applications, Oracle and APEX will do just fine. You just brought this point home in regards to Apple. Thank you for that.

    (sorry to be all fanboi (my new word) on you…but I really feel like I Just pointed out something which should have been pretty clear)

  • Gary

    Why Windows doesn't work….
    It wasn't supporting the hardware, but the software
    Check out this article from 2004:
    http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html

    Developers cheat. The didn't stick to the 'official' APIs for the OS, but tried workarounds and sneaky stuff. And MS bent over backwards not to break the rubbish they wrote. And they still do because when something worked on XP but not in Vista, people blamed Microsoft, not the the app vendor.

  • http://oraclenerd.com/ chet

    BTW, by “I,” I meant “You”

    Gary,

    Thanks for sharing that article. Very interesting read.

  • http://friendfeed.com/empoprises John E. Bredehoft

    Bump 1 of 2, cross-referencing the AppsLab comment and the Inquisitr post.

    This comment was originally posted on FriendFeed

  • http://theappslab.com Jake

    Thanks, fanbois welcome.

    It will never happen, but it would be fascinating to see how much code goes into these major O/S (Win, Mac, Linux) and where the bulk of the code is. It can't only be design. Smart people are all over the place.

  • http://empoprise-bi.blogspot.com/ John E. Bredehoft (Empoprises)

    First person, second person…what's the difference between friends?

    Oh, and Jake, thanks for setting me straight on how the IBM PC architecture ended up on the computers of other companies. A subsequent Wikipedia read, coupled with an account from an old Compaq employee, explained exactly how the so-called “100% compatible” PCs were created.

  • http://empoprise-bi.blogspot.com/ John E. Bredehoft (Empoprises)

    Gary,

    Chet already stole my thunder on this, but thanks for sharing the Joel on Software post from 2004. A long, but worthwhile, read, and it's amusing to hear SimCity cited as an example of why Microsoft (well, some in Microsoft) do what they do.

    This 2004 description of the philosophies of two apparent camps within Microsoft helped to give me a fresh perspective on this 2009 Inquisitr post. In the July 6 post, Steven Hodson argues that Microsoft should stop trying to make Internet Explorer compatible with previous versions (i.e. a web-based version of the Raymond Chen camp?) and start afresh.

  • http://theappslab.com Jake

    Awesome post and very prescient considering the timing.

    This leads me to believe in the Good Enough theory even more.

  • http://theappslab.com Jake

    Sure, I enjoy the history of technology. It's always interesting to look back (not very far) and see how decisions and strategies affected the modern landscape.

    It's also nutty how recently these things happened.

  • Gary

    “These apps all use Javascript heavily, making the speed and experience highly dependent on the browser’s ability to render JS”
    Not just Javascript, but the ‘Asynchronous’ magic of Ajax. The irony is that this, the XMLHttpRequest, was invented by Microsoft to give an edge to its own browser Outlook client.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://theappslab.com/ Jake

    Sure, they’re very AJAX-heavy. Didn’t think I needed to clarify that Did not know that bit about MSFT, though. Interesting tidbit, especially considering how differently IE flavors handle AJAX.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://twitter.com/bex Brian Huff

    why buy a netbook when you can get an iPod Touch, or an iPhone?

    Its not like netbooks are all that useful… they’re like a dust buster: too small for big jobs, too big for small jobs. They’ll sell, but like all fads, they will crash and burn…

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://theappslab.com/ Jake

    Agreed, I don’t see a lot of value in netbooks for me for that very reason, in fact, I mentioned that when the iPhone came out:

    http://theappslab.com/2007/07/05/did-you-buy-an…

    The price points are pretty similar, and even the argument of a long term contract with a cell carrier is a bit off, considering you have to get the netbook, you know, on the net and everything.

    Dunno about crashing and burning, but I think the lack of a good network bundle hurts them.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://oraclenerd.com/ chet

    I hate inertia.

    I spent my whole life adapting to change…it’s the world we live in now. While I will usually accede to the demands, it won’t be without some coaxing to try something different. But…I have not done it on your scale either. Makes sense (in that regard)…I think.

    One story I like to tell are about my cousins who all live in Indiana…they all expect(ed) to go to work for Delco (a GM parts supplier) to make ridiculous sums of money for hardly any work (unions, but that’s another rant). Seriously, they would, out of high school, make $30 an hour. WTF? I’ve busted my ass trying to keep up with the latest and greatest (and complicated) technology and I’ve only just reached that point.

    You should expect change. Chaos is your friend. Change is the new…what’s a good word?…not change? nah. You know what I mean.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://theappslab.com/ Jake

    Sure. I’m with you re. change generally.

    I tend to err on the user’s side when it comes to work, as long as I can get a real use case, e.g. I won’t put chat into every web app I build, but I’ll consider bacn emails, assuming time/resource constraints allow.

    Change a big problem for innovative stuff though b/c people want work to go smoothly. After all, doing the job outranks how to do it. It’s a major balancing act.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://oraclenerd.com/ chet

    That’s why you are where you are. You’ve learned to cave…I mean balance.

    I get it though. Curious as to how you balance the innovative (Google Wave?) with traditional? That’s a sea-change from what I can tell. I guess that’s not going on people’s desktops (yet)…i.e. they’re not forced to use it.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://theappslab.com/ Jake

    Wave seems to be accommodating to the old ways, via robots. Tough to tell for sure.

    I should have mentioned this in the post. Edge-in apps (social stuff, e.g.) helps b/c people recognize what you’re trying to do and feel more at home with it, but even so, they want training, etc.

    It’s not easy by any means.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • runescapepowerleveling

    Stakers were the ones who put the greatest demand on rares. The average player would take months to actually make the same money as a staker could in a day.

    Many stakers hoarded rares, but with this new update, they can no longer afford to buy more rares so the demand has pretty much disappeared. It’s a shame, since my purple went up like 40M since September

    You apparently haven’t been paying attention, because I have been complaining all day about the 3k limit, *even though* it doesn’t affect me at all personally.

    But the prices of rares going down doesn’t “disturb” anyone’s gameplay. I think it’s a good thing when ridiculous situations are corrected, and the prices of rares definitely qualifies.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • runescapepowerleveling

    It was New Year’s Night. runescape items An aged man was standing at a window. runescape moneyHe raised his mournful eyes towards the deep blue sky, where the stars were floating like runescape accounts white lilies on the surface of a clear calm lake runescape gold.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://twitter.com/kottarainen Joonas Linkola

    Then again, there are large corporations (do I need to name names?) that will make policy / technology decisions and just force them through. People are expected to adapt to changes in the workplace, technical or otherwise. The temporary loss in efficiency while people pick up the new ways is just a drop in the ocean in many cases, especially if the change can otherwise streamline processes or workflows. (Your mileage may vary.)

    But I hear what you mean. While I was working in internal I.T. and we were doing the rollout of Office 2003 (from Office 2k), I couldn’t wait to get it over and done with as O2k3 was such a better product from I.T.’s point of view. Still, most of the support cases from users were asking to configure things “back to the way they were”.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://theappslab.com/ Jake

    Sure, top-down IT is pretty standard, and it generally makes sense. The problem is with user unrest, which contributes to “workarounds” and unnecessary customizations.

    It’s just disappointing that IT’s point of view and the user’s point of view don’t seem to overlap in enough cases.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • megbear

    I have to agree — software is hard.

    -Meg

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • http://theappslab.com/ Jake

    I know, right? I think people would be surprised at how much really goes into even the simplest of software.

    This comment was originally posted on http://theappslab.com/)”>Oracle AppsLab

  • Pingback: Inertia and Separation Anxiety Drive Design | Oracle

  • Pingback: BYOD Is Absolutely Top-Down « oracle fusion identity