Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

A History of Apple and Innovation: The Past, Present and the iPad.

Introduction; Aims and Objectives

Apple and the early years; the two Steve’s

―One fine day in 1976, 21 year old Steve Jobs quit his day job at Atari and convinced computer engineer Steve
"Woz" Wozniak to quit his job at Hewlett-Packard. Together, in the garage of Jobs’ Cupertino, CA home, they
founded a new company which they christened "Apple".‖ - (The New York Times, 2010)

This was the beginning of Apple Computer Inc, now known as Apple Inc. Apple has come a long way since
their humble beginnings assembling basic computers in the garage of Jobs. Today Apple is a fortune 500
company and is widely thought of as one of the most innovative organisations on earth. This essay seeks to
investigate this contention in some depth, but before one can further investigate the innovative qualities of
Apple, one must first define innovation. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines innovation as;

―The introduction of something new: a new idea, method, or device.‖ - (Merriam-Webster, 2010)

Using innovation as a central theme for the contextual analysis of Apple’s products, processes, marketing and
organisation, this essay hopes to investigate the following:

 Is Apple truly innovative or does consumer perception of the Apple brand and product range, re-
enforced by Apples corporate message, in fact contribute to an audience perception that is inaccurate or
favourable?

1
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

 How Apple have been able to construct a loyal market following and sub-culture of their own.

 The relationship between past, present and future Apple product offerings and how product innovation
has often been a lengthy process that consumers have neglected to acknowledge.

 To look into notable Apple product case studies; providing a contextualised analysis of their impact on
the consumer market and society.

 What does Apple’s approach to technology and innovation hold for the future of the company, and how
does the notable market competition found in Google and Microsoft serve to shape Apple’s evolution.

 How science fiction can contribute to the innovation of both ideas and products; and in this context
what broader reaching effects could new technological evolution mean for society.

As reflected by the removal of “Computers” from their name, Apple Inc has expanded over the years into
numerable other markets since 1976.

―Apple Inc. (Apple) designs, manufactures, and markets personal computers, mobile communication devices,
and portable digital music and video players, and sells a variety of related software, services, peripherals, and
networking solutions. The Company sells its products worldwide through its online stores, its retail stores, its
direct sales force, and third-party wholesalers, resellers, and value-added resellers.‖ - (Geeks, 2010)

Apple has lost out in terms of mass market dominance due to their historical rivals Microsoft. This can be
broadly attributed to the differing market tactics, ethos and the positioning of their products over the years. The
following quote from MGBs, Tanks and Batmobiles alludes appropriately to the differing organisational
attitudes of Microsoft and Apple and helps us to set the scene from in an historical context;

―Imagine a crossroads where four competing auto dealerships are situated. One of them (Microsoft) is much,
much bigger than the others. It started out years ago selling three-speed bicycles (MS-DOS); these were not
perfect, but they worked, and when they broke you could easily fix them. There was a competing bicycle
dealership next door (Apple) that one day began selling motorized vehicles--expensive but attractively styled
cars with their innards hermetically sealed, so that how they worked was something of a mystery.‖ - (MGBs,

Tanks and Batmobiles, 1998)

So how have Apple utilised innovation, in its various contexts, since the “early years.” How is the company
positioned now and what can we expect to see from Apple in the future?

2
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

Apple’s Marketing Processes and Customers

Mythology of the Apple Brand; Commodity Camaraderie

Design communities are awash with subcultures that are bound together by common production goals or the use
of similar production tools, many of which are built around computer driven media. Unlike historical cultures
where formation is often bound by the constraints of geography, time and space, technocultures are able to
bridge oceans and continents in seconds and have very little prohibiting their spread of common goals, ideals or
beliefs. Apple’s ability to construct a technocultures around its brand ethos and products has allowed them to
create a loyal customer following. Lunenfeld described this phenomenon as “commodity camaraderie”, and
notes that;

―Digital artists find themselves stripped of the ethos around which most previous artistic communities were
founded. Beyond neophilia and millennarianissium, around what centralizing concept can these artists build
community? I would propose that the cohesive force binding them together is less a shared sense of destiny than
the common use of similar tools-what I refer to as ―commodity camaraderie.‖ - Lunenfeld (2000, p.4)

Apple’s relationships with universities and other creative institutions is often used to reinforce the construction
of technocultures formed around Apple’s products and further contributes to commodity camaraderie in this
context. By reinforcing students’ perception of themselves and the products and tools they use as been
“creative” or “innovative” in a broader sense, Apple reinforce the notion of a self perceived design elite. Apple
has succeeded in creating cohesion between its company ethos and that of the personalities found within design
cultures. Web designers, graphic designers, video editors and other such digital artists have always sought to
reinforce their own perception of themselves as being creative; Apple only helps to further reassure these
creative’s that this is in fact the case.

―Commodity camaraderie, generated by this contact, creates a sense of neo-community that is palpable at a
massive trade show like Macworld. This show, which concentrates on products and services for the users of
machines manufactured by Apple Computer, Inc, was famously successful in creating a conspiratorial
cohesiveness among its participants. The official corporate pronouncements of Apple, the editorial content of
magazines like the now-defunct MacUser, and the buzz on the trade-show floor all combined to reassure Apple
Customers that they were creative, rebellious, and right on the edge.‖ - Lunenfeld (2000, p.7)

Supporting Education; iTunes U

As well as reinforcing the construction of Apple centric technocultures by positioning their products within
educational institutions, Apple has intuitively created iTunes U, to facilitate the spread of educational media
(podcasts, videos etc) within a closed environment that makes up part of the Apple iTunes product
infrastructure. By doing so Apple further constructs a link between the institutions that produce and educate the
next generation of Apple users, while facilitating the spread of useful and informative content that serves to
attract new audiences into its closed structure. Apple describes iTunes U as follows;

3
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

―iTunes U — a powerful distribution system for everything from lectures to language lessons, films to labs,
audiobooks to tours — is an innovative way to get educational content into the hands of students.‖ (Apple, 2010)

Apple’s intuitive use of Advertising

Apple cleverly use advertising to further contribute to the cohesion of personality, machine and products. Take
for example the famous series of Apple adverts “I’m a Mac, I’m a PC” which served to personify the Apple
Computer and its market competition “PC”. The series of adverts attempted to construct, what is in the eyes of
the audience, was a simple choice; to be a trendy, young or forward thinking person, epitomised by the Apple
product range, or instead choose the path of a clunky, nerdy and somewhat bemused individual, epitomised by
the “PC” product range.

The series of adverts (2006-2009) were also famed for their visual consistency and presentation; they were shot
on a white background and featured the same two men, John Hodgman as “PC” and Justin Long as “Mac”. This
visual consistency allowed people not only to quickly recognise the adverts and relate to their associated
connotations, but allowed the audience to build a rapport with, or warm to the characters over time. The series
of adverts were so successful that AdWeek named the series “campaign of the decade” in its best of the 2000s
roundup. Here’s what they had to say;

―Apple always diverged from the "speeds and feeds" ads associated with the computer category, but the brand
really defined itself with the 2006 launch of TBWA\Media Arts Lab's "Get a Mac" campaign. That series of 60-
plus ads brought some humanity into the equation by turning the machines into live-action cartoons. In so
doing, the comic spots offer transparent understanding of the aspirations of its audience and how people
identify—and connect emotionally—with technology. The genius is in the casting. The Mac guy, Justin Long, is
a younger version of Steve Jobs who is casual and comfortable in his skin. PC, personified by John Hodgman,
as a rounder, paler Bill Gates, is a well-meaning geek with all kinds of operating problems. For Apple, the
campaign managed the neat trick of making the brand look laid back and cool while it mercilessly skewered its
rival.‖ - (Best of the 2000’s, 2010)

The viral nature of the adverts and their positioning within new media channels such as YouTube, also meant
that they spread rapidly and meant by the time the competition could respond, the damage had been done. While
the adverts themselves were undoubtedly very intuitive and creative, they also further served to reinforce a
wider audience perception of Apple as market leaders and innovators.

―In the past few years, clever commercials have become content in and of themselves, thanks in no small part to
the rise of YouTube and embeddable multimedia.‖ - (Mashable, 2010)

In summary the “Get a Mac” campaign, of which the adverts were a central component, were a typically
intuitive marketing move by Apple, since the centrality of their brand and their somewhat “closed” product
range allows them to carefully consider, orchestrate and present their brand values to their potential audience
with precision. The adverts depict “PC” as being the competition, existing within a comparable closed
infrastructure, when in fact a “PC” is nothing more than a combination of various differing components, both

4
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

hardware and software, sourced from an often innumerable set of suppliers; the most notable of which include
Microsoft that Apple’s advertising often seeks to belittle. This move by Apple left “PC”, as the audience now
thought of it, in a very exposed position. The lack of centrality associated with the production of personal
computers and associated software, left companies likes Microsoft with the need to either establish an
equivalent corporate infrastructure, or to take the lead and defend both themselves and the newly Apple
constructed notion of “PC” that would be difficult to reverse.

While Apple has achieved considerable success, they have never really succeeded in conquering the market.
They have captured and retained a small market that is in part preserved by a closed universe of compatibility
and above all by the user friendly presentation of technical devices; permitting the technically illiterate to enjoy
the prestige and convenience of being in the "fore front of technology." This of course may be a conscious
decision based on the premise that positioned as perceived market leader, Apple have less competition than
exists in the “PC” market.

Are Apple True Innovators?

The evolution of the “Tablet” – From Star Trek’s PADD to Apple’s iPad

The science fiction genre has long been a source of inspiration for technological creativity and product
innovation. Should it be those that produce tangible, technologically realisable products that should be
considered innovators? Or is it those who construct the credible ideas and concepts, that serve to inspire product
design and creativity in the first instance, that deserve such credit? To further expand this subject I shall attempt
to tentatively demonstrate the product evolution of the Apple iPad and iTouch devices we use today to reveal
some of Apple’s key historical influences.

Existing concepts; Star Trek-nology

Science fiction has long been the testing ground of technological concepts; it provides an area for society to
express its wants, perceived needs and consider the new possibilities of technology in general. It is no surprise
then to find many examples of technology in the science fiction setting that strike an uncanny resemblance to
the technologies we use today. The following quote demonstrates the link between the iconic Star Trek series
and that of Apple’s gradual evolution of touch screen devices.

―Not long after their debut in TNG, PADDs became a real-life technology with the introduction of the Apple
Newton; Palm Pilots being a similar device common in the world of the present. Recently, devices with touch-
sensitive displays and user input systems which reconfigure themselves depending on the task at hand, such as
the iPod Touch, iPhone, and most recently, the iPad have been developed which bear an even stronger
resemblance to PADDs and the LCARS system.‖ - (Memory Alpha, 2010)

5
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

We have already demonstrated how Apple are extremely intuitive in the marketing of their products, well they
didn’t miss the trick with the iPad either. The iPad advertising campaign featured many examples of the iPad
displaying Star Trek related imagery and content, couple this together with the striking resemblance in name and
visual form and one can confidently assume there is a little more than co-incidence involved.

The name ―iPad‖ itself evokes the PADD (Personal Access Display Device) which is the term used for the
gadget that was first introduced in the original series in 1966 and was coined in 1987 on Star Trek: The Next
Generation, the show’s first TV revival...At the end of the day, and even after all of Apple’s hard work, we have
Gene Roddenberry and his visionary designers from Star Trek to thank for the inspiration for this technological
marvel — the PADD. - (ZDNet, 2010)

Apple draws upon existing technologies

Both the concepts of touch screen user interaction and tablet based computing have existed for decades, but as
well as the concepts, the technology to facilitate the ideations have also existed for nearly as long. Hewlett
Packard developed a PC with touch screen commands in the 1983;

―HP allows users to activate features on their PCs simply by touching the screen when it introduces its first
touchscreen personal computer, the HP-150.‖ - (HP, 2010)

Apple’s original PDA or tablet like device was the Apple MessagePad, more commonly known as the Newton.
The Newton was released 10 years after Hewlett Packard developed the HP 150 touch screen computer.

―Released much ahead of its time in 1993, the Newton (official name was MessagePad) was touted as the future
of computing. It would be the first in a new line of Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs). The MessagePad was the
first pen based system running on the Newton Intelligence OS. It was powered by a ARM 610 processor at 20
MHz and 640k RAM / 4 MB ROM. It sported a reflective black and white touchscreen with a resolution of 336 x
240, PCMCIA card slot for expansion and Infrared port for communication between MP's.‖ - (Newlaunches, 2010)

Despite generally been considered as a “flop”, the Apple Newton was in fact produced for six years. Perhaps its
eventual failure can be attributed less to the strength of its concept and more to the market readiness and
available technology of the time. At the time of the Newton Apple were an extremely “closed” company, in that
they were wary of the open source development of applications that could have provided rich functionality for
the Newton.

―The Newton was developed and released during the time in which Steve Jobs was ―exiled‖ from the company
and was deemed to be a huge commercial failure, due to its high cost and difficult and highly proprietary
development platform which hampered the amount of 3rd-party applications which were created for the
device.‖ - (ZDNet, 2010)

The concept of the tablet computer has truly moved on from devices such as the Newton and so too have the
attitudes of Apple. Society looks to mobile computing today as much as a facet of life and entertainment as a

6
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

mode of computing as it was thought of at the time of the Newton. If we consider the relative success of the
Newton’s modern equivalent, the Apple iTouch, it must be noted that while it offers immense computing power
and convenience in comparison with the Newton, that the progression in product range leading to its
introduction stems from that of the iPod, a device which is centrally marketed as a form of personal
entertainment rather than computing. Thus it would seem evident that audience perception, product marketing
and positioning are as important to a product’s success or failure as the capabilities of the device in question. It
must also be noted, that in stark contrast to the time of the Newton, that Apple now allows third party
developers to produce applications for its mobile devices, this is a move that will likely see the use of these
devices multiply with some speed, since they essentially facilitate an open market of sorts.

Apple’s Product Design Influences

A great deal of Apple's contribution to the market place involves the precise aesthetic presentation of their
products, ensuring they develop products with appealing physical qualities that even technophobes can admire
and appreciate on a purely emotional level; this cannot be defined as innovation in a strict sense, however
Apple’s success in the areas of product design and creativity are often misinterpreted as innovation by their
audiences. So are we to believe that Apple should be accredited with all of the design concepts and product
design principles exemplified by their products? Or like many forms of creativity within the design industries,
did Apple have any key influences? The following contrasts some of Apple’s product designs by Jonathan Ive
and the 1960’s modernist product designs of Dieter Ram for Braun.

―When you look at the Braun products by Dieter Ram—many of them at New York's MoMA—and compare them
to Ive's work at Apple, you can clearly see the similarities in their philosophies way beyond the sparse use of
colour, the selection of materials and how the products are shaped around the function with no artificial design,
keeping the design "honest."‖ - (Gizmodo, 2010)

As well as Apple’s ability to draw upon product design influences ahead of their time, Apple is also successful
in providing a range of products that possess consistency. The visual continuity across their product range
provides consumers with a feeling of reassurance and trust in the evolution of the Apple’s product design
principles. As people become familiar and reassured by their Apple purchases, they experience little inhibition
when buying additional products. Apple’s tight control over their brand and associated product ranges allows
them to harness consistency as a selling point far more than the competing notion of “PC”.

―Take a look at the back of the iPhone. It’s silver on top, black on the bottom. Then take a look at the new iMac.
It’s is black on top, silver on the bottom. The top of the iMac looks like an iPhone rotated to horizontal
orientation.‖ - (37 Signals, 2007)

Market Acceptance and Readiness; is it the timing that counts?

It is interesting to me that most of these technological “flops”, as one might consider them, appear to be ideas
ahead of their time and often fail purely because the available technology of the era could not satisfy in totality
the potential of the ideas and concepts. Consider however what these “failings” as some see them have initiated.

7
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

Innovation doesn't always necessarily result in the successful realisation of financial profits. Perhaps while
many of these examples were not commercially successful, they could be considered as indispensible steps in
the evolution and testing of products and their market place. A certain number of unsuccessful products are
often an indication of life and virility in an otherwise stagnant company. It cannot be reasonably expected that
every new innovation or product will succeed in the market place, if that were the case it would be easy to
choose and market successful products. It would seem that while it might appear that Apple are extremely
precise in the deployment of their products at present, that much of their success is owed to the plight of
previous products they have learnt from along the way. Audiences look to Apple for “innovation” in whatever
form it may take; perhaps this is why Apple may succeed in an area of computing that has historically caused
failure for both themselves and their competitors.

The difficulty defining innovation; is it a matter of perspective?

The fore mentioned have demonstrated that many of Apple’s “innovations”, namely the iPad and Apple’s other
touch screen devices, have successfully integrated within the consumer market after having gone through a
lengthy product evolution that draws influences from science fiction, previous products and existing
technologies. So are Apple’s latest generation of touch screen devices truly innovative or are they a timely and
intuitive combination of existing ideas, concepts and technology? Should something only be considered an
innovation once it can be formalised with a patent or become available to a mass audience? Or had the true
innovation of Apple’s mobile touch screen devices occurred some years ago?

To draw an analogy, consider the clay tablets used by Babylonian scribes to transit information across time and
distance. Essentially the underlying motivations involved in writing, sending and storing the Babylonian clay
tablets, are the same as many of the functions iPad claims to have introduced. Innovation as a concept depends
very much on the perspective adopted by the observer in this context historical. The innovation of the idea or the
proposed use of a tablet device for storage of data occurred centuries ago; however the tangible product
innovation we see today in the form of the iPad or equivalent devices can be seen as a step forward or an
innovation of a pre-existing concept or product, however basic its predecessors in form.

Once again, consider innovation from a science fiction perspective; one could contest that famed social theorist
and science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke could be considered to have originated the idea of satellite
broadcasting from stationary orbit, but he didn’t introduce the physical innovation, only theorised over the
concept. Science fiction is in a sense a reification of the impact of evolving technologies and their actual and
possible impact on cultural expression. Innovation often requires concrete realisation to be considered credible
by society. From a legal perspective this often requires being the first to publish and/or patent an idea or
product. In Clarke’s final hours he was interviewed and questioned on the subject of geostationary satellites and
commented that;

―I'm often asked why I didn't try to patent the idea of communications satellites. My answer is always, ―A patent
is really a license to be sued.‖ Clarke couldn't pinpoint the exact reference that got him thinking about
geostationary satellites. ―One of the moons of Mars, Phobos, is always in a stationary orbit,‖ he mused. ―That

8
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

probably got me thinking.‖ He had discussed his ideas with his friends in the nascent British Interplanetary
Society but didn't get many comments, he reminisced. ―I never received any additional input, so it was all my
own work in the end.‖ - (Spectrum: Inside technology, 2008)

These comments from Clarke make apparent the link between science fiction, ideation, innovation and the
legality of the patent system. In this context Apple are famed for their tactical and efficient use of the patent
system. The following provides compelling arguments that support both the notion that Apple are indeed at very
least product innovators and highlights how the legal relationship between innovation and the patent system can
in fact serve to further drive future innovation rather than causing it to stagnate;

―Apple is also a perfect example of how the patent system is intended to work. Patents are strong, but waste
over time because technology grows stagnant. To continue to reap the benefits of a patent portfolio you must
continue to innovate and continue to protect that innovation. Patent are fragile because if you obtain a patent I
could obtain a patent on an improvement, thereby blocking you, the original patent owner, from making, using
and selling the improved version of your own invention. For that reason, when you get a patent on a valuable
product you must immediately start to innovate again, improve, push the envelope and obtain additional patent
protection so as to prevent competitors from blocking you.‖ - (IPWatchdog, 2010)

Apple’s Intuitive GUI and their unexpected benefits

Central to the public debate surrounding the “worth” of Apple’s new mobile devices is its relative cost
compared to that of notebook computers. Whether or not the iPad will succeed in challenging the notebook
market on a mass scale remains to be seen, perhaps Apple’s deployment of the product and its route to market
will prove a determining factor, just as much as any need or want for the product on the consumer’s behalf. This
aside however, it must be noted that the product innovation associated with Apple’s touch screen mobile devices
may provide some additional benefits for various user groups that were perhaps not originally considered.

What interests me is that the iPad does one thing particularly well; it succeeds in developing accessibility and
usability beyond that of many other such devices we’ve seen. As observed by many parents, the fact that a child
can pick up the iPad or similar touch screen devices and interact with the graphical user interface instinctively or
based on intuition is a very valuable asset, this should be central to the debate surrounding the worth of the iPad
to the consumer market.

The beauty of touch screen devices is that they rely on and promote our most basic human instincts. Take
children as an example, as they develop they rely on the tangible and on experimentation with objects to
determine what they are and how they can be used, if at all. Consider disabled users also, the ability to simply
lightly touch the screen to interact with the device, as opposed to requiring the dextrous use of the mouse or
keyboard could revolutionise the ability of some user groups to access information, products or services online.
After all, many would argue that access to the internet and information on a broader scale should be considered
a basic human right.

9
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

―The iPad is bigger. I know this is obvious, but the implications are that people with motor control problems
such as cerebral palsy may be able to use this device more easily than the smaller ones, as less very fine motor
control is needed for many tasks.‖ - (ATMac, 2010)

The whole online accessibility and usability debate often centralises on the W3C’s accessibility and usability
guidelines. These guidelines are intended to aid both web designers and web developers in deploying and
developing websites that allow easy use for all users, not just the disabled. Perhaps we are overlooking the
worth of developing more accessible devices for interacting with the web such as the iPad. This oversight is
probably in part due to the fact that the accessibility debate develops and exists predominately online and is
centralised around website design, when in fact the devices we use to access data may herald as many
innovations or benefits for certain user groups. With many new laws and guidelines been introduced to promote
accessibility of both online media and physical products themselves, accessibility could be set to become a far
more determinate factor in both product development and online media. Hopefully this debate will be one that
previously neglected user groups will ultimately benefit from.

The death of the manual; true accessibility and usability

What interests me is that society’s methods of communication seem to have gone full circle. Since the
iconographic principles of the Babylonian tablet, societies have developed complex languages and other forms
of communication. Yet in today’s application driven environments, where speed and efficiency are key and
physical screen space is at a premium, we have resorted once again to the use of iconography to convey clear
messages and instructions. It is perhaps the simplicity and clarity of this method of communication that makes it
so elegant.

―For many of us, modern intuitive devices make the manual superfluous, but Cameron offers hope for her
industry – and disenfranchised technophobes everywhere.‖Too many product designers are still distant from
users," she says. "Their products lack the accessibility and usability that would allow the people to behave
instinctively without a manual. But there are still a lot of people who refer to a booklet before they use a new
product. The manual has changed, but it's not dead." - (The Independent, 2010)

The App, the iPad and the Future

Apple still “closed” for business?

One of Apple's historical problems in obtaining market dominance was that they essentially closed themselves
off from the contribution that other companies could make to the software and application driven environments
they developed. They in effect enabled DOS and Microsoft to always have available a wider selection of
competing programs, all of which made DOS much more interesting to work with, despite incompatibilities and
perhaps an inferior user interface.

10
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

It would appear that to some degree Apple have learnt from their mistakes in opening up their application
development framework to third party developers; however they still heavily moderate the approval of
applications for use within their application environments. It seems to me Apple are in a sticky situation, to open
themselves up completely means sacrificing the close control they have over their brand and associated
products; and in some sense it is this control that allows them to craft such appealing products and targeted
marketing campaigns. However to continue along their current path could see them lose out to Google the same
way they lost out to Microsoft decades ago.

Google’s democratic values and often community driven development of open source products allows their
brand to spread to mass audiences far faster than that of Apple. It is this very route to market that defines
Apple’s biggest challenge to date. Consider Google’s competing mobile operating system Android. It is based
on Linux, another open source product, and operates an open source license allowing various mobile hardware
companies to utilise the product. Android’s flexibility and open approach in comparison to that of Apple’s
mobile operating system could see it quickly spread to larger markets than that of Apple. Apple’s closed
approach has meant that they must not only produce mobile operating systems, but the mobile hardware in the
form of devices such as the iPhone also to go with it. One could argue that while they set very high standards in
both areas; that attempting to develop into both the software and hardware mobile market could leave them
exposed to strong alliances such as that of hardware producer HTC and mobile OS developers Google.
Considering Apple’s predicament, it is perhaps no surprise then to find Apple leveraging the patent system once
again;

―We were wondering when Google would have something to say about Apple's patent lawsuit against HTC,
since the majority of the claims appear to implicate Android itself, and while the knives aren't out yet, we just
got a short-but-sweet statement from a spokesperson:

"We are not a party to this lawsuit. However, we stand behind our Android operating system and the partners
who have helped us to develop it."‖ - (Engadget, 2010)

It is not clear what the future holds for Apple with respect to the mobile market, but what is clear is that they
have a big challenge ahead of them. Perhaps they could learn from the past and their historic battles with
Microsoft. After all, their products have benefited from steady “innovation” over time, so perhaps it is time that
Apple’s market positioning followed suit.

11
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

Conclusion

The social price of technological innovation; what would Orwell think?

Sci-fi can often provide a very good illustration of how philosophical, ethical, and even religious ideas evolve
under the influence of new technological opportunities and their impact of the structures of society, the effects
of their possible longevity, and the nature of human reaction and satisfaction.

When looking to the future it is often wise to consider society’s past concerns to provide a framework for
contextual analysis. Considering tablet style computing in general conjures up thoughts of George Orwell’s
dystopian science fiction masterpiece, 1984. In the novel Orwell depicts the struggle of society as it finds itself
in a state of increasing social and economic cohesion with that of machines.

Of particular relevance and interest to me is the way in which Orwell’s work provides a social analysis of
surveillance culture. It depicts the use of networked “telescreens” which one could compare to modern
computing and the internet. These “telescreens” served as a way for the fictional state, to observe and control
opinion through the transmission of fear.

―The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a
very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which
the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing
whether you were being watched at any given moment.‖ - (The Complete Works of George Orwell, 2003)

However the “telescreen” as Orwell thought of it could be avoided or escaped by Winston, he could move to
new areas of the room to avoid its glare, much like that of the desktop computer or television. Consider what
Orwell would have written regarding the “innovation” of Apple’s mobile computing devices? No longer can
one be removed from the on looking eye of the screen, society finds itself increasingly reliant on machines as
we take them everywhere with oneself to remain plugged in to our evolving human consciousness.

―And that is the second difference between this window and the past devices: the tablet window goes two ways.
You watch; it watches you. Its eye can remain on all the time, watching you as much as you like‖
- (Kelly, 2010, p. 123)

How ironic is it then to find that the commercial used to introduce the original Apple Macintosh computer
depicted a young woman, who can be likened to Orwell’s character Winston, in a cinematic depiction of
Orwell’s 1984. The female character, symbolising Apple, is shown hurling a metal hammer through a large
“telescreen” in an attempt to remove the presence of the on-looking overseer and herald a new epoch of
technology. The advert concludes with a message;

―On January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you’ll see why 1984 won’t be like ―1984.‖‖ -
(The Guardian, 2009)

12
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

Considering the intended symbolism of the advert some decades on, one could summarise that as successfully
as Apple has been able to define its values to its audience over time, that in retrospect Apple are quickly
deviating from their own historical moral message and ethical stance as demonstrated so aptly by the advert.
One would boldly conclude that despite Apple’s arguable ability to innovate, in many contexts of the word, that
were Orwell alive today, he may be heeding new warnings as a result of such innovations.

13
Simon English – EMIM10 Creativity and Innovation, Staffordshire University, May 2010.

Bibliography (Harvard APA):

1960’s Braun Products Hold the Secrets to Apple’s Future. (2010). Retrieved April 26, 2010, from Gizmodo website: http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-
products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future

Accessibility and the iPad: First Impressions. (2010). Retrieved April 28, 2010, from ATMac website:
http://atmac.org/accessibility-and-the-ipad-first-impressions/

Apple Inc. (2010). Retrieved April 26, 2010, from The New York Times website:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/apple_computer_inc/index.html

Apple iPad: We’ve reached Star Trek-nology. (2010). Retrieved April 26, 2010, from ZDNet website:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/apple-ipad-weve-reached-star-trek-nology/12305

Apple’s Macintosh, 25 years on. (2009). Retrieved April 26, 2010, from Guardian website:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/jan/23/apple-macintosh-25

Campaign of the Decade: Apple, ―Get a Mac‖. (2010). Retrieved April 26, 2010, from Best of the 2000’s website: http://www.bestofthe2000s.com/campaign-
of-the-decade.html

Final Thoughts from Sir Arthur C. Clarke (1917 – 2008). (2008). Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Spectrum website: http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/space-
flight/final-thoughts-from-sir-arthur-c-clarke-19172008/3

Get a Mac Named Ad Campaign of the Decade. (2010). Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Mashable website:
http://mashable.com/2009/12/14/get-a-mac-ad-campaign/

HP Timeline – 1980s. (2010). Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Hewlett Packard website:
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/histnfacts/timeline/hist_80s.html

Innovation. (2010). Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Merriam-Webster website:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/innovation

iPad: Manual not included. (2010). Retrieved April 28, 2010, from The Independent website:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/features/ipad-manual-not-included-1956027.html

iTunes U: Learn anything, anytime, anywhere. (2010). Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Apple website:
http://www.apple.com/education/itunes-u/

Kelly, K. (2010, May). Window on the World. Wired 05.10.

Lunenfeld, P. (2002). Snap To Grid. Cambridge: MIT Press.

MGBs, Tanks and Batmobiles. (1998). Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Adam Shand website:
http://adam.shand.net/iki/library/in_the_beginning_was_the_command_line/#index1h2

Tech Tip 90 - An Insanely Great Thirty Years of Innovation: A Brief History of Apple Computers. (2010). Retrieved April 24, 2010, from Geeks website:
http://www.geeks.com/techtips/2006/techtips-10aug06.htm

The Apple Way: Repeated Innovation + Patent = Domination. (2010). Retrieved April 24, 2010, from IPWatchdog website:
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/01/24/the-apple-way-repeated-innovation-patent-domination-2/id=8589/

The Complete Works or Orwell. (2003). Retrieved April 21, 2010, from George Orwell website: http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/0.html

Top 10 Apple products which flopped. (2007). Retrieved April 21, 2010, from Newlaunches website:
http://www.newlaunches.com/archives/top_10_apple_products_which_flopped.php

14