With the 5.0 iWork suite we revisit Apple’s propensity to make lofty claims that fall short of reality. The repetition of such easily avoidable mistakes is puzzling and leads us to question what causes Apple executives to squander the company’s well-deserved goodwill.
Once upon a time, our youngest child took it upon herself to sell our old Chevy Tahoe. She thought her father was a little too soft in his negotiations on the sales lot, too inclined to leave money on the table in his rush to end the suffering.
We arrive at the dealership. She hops out, introduces herself to the salesperson, and then this kid — not yet old enough to vote — begins her pitch. She starts out by making it clear that the car has its faults: a couple dents in the rear fender, a stubborn glove compartment door, a cup holder that’s missing a flange. Flaws disclosed, she then shows off the impeccable engine, the spotless interior, the good-as-new finish (in preparation, she’d had the truck detailed inside and out, including the engine compartment).
The dealer was charmed and genuinely complimentary. He says my daughter’s approach is the opposite of the usual posturing. The typical seller touts the car’s low mileage, the documented maintenance, the vows of unimpeachable driver manners. The seller tries to hide the tired tires and nicked rims, the white smoke that pours from the tail pipe, the “organic” aroma that emanates from the seat cushions — as if these flaws would go unnoticed by an experienced, skeptical professional.
‘Give the bad news first’ said the gent. ‘Don’t let the buyer discover them, it puts you on the defensive. Start the conversation at the bottom and end with a flourish.’ (Music to this old salesman’s ears. My first jobs were in sales after an “unanticipated family event” threw me onto the streets 50 years ago. I’m still fond of the trade, happiest when well executed, sad when not).
The fellow should have a word or two with Apple execs. They did it again, they bragged about their refurbished iWork suite only to let customers discover that the actual product fails to meet expectations.
We’ll get into details in a moment, but a look into past events will help establish the context for what I believe to be a pattern, a cultural problem that starts at the top (and all problems of culture within a company begin at the executive level).
Readers might recall the 2008 MobileMe announcement, incautiously pitched as Exchange For The Rest of Us. When MobileMe crashed, the product team was harshly criticized by the same salesman, Steve Jobs, who touted the product in the first place. We’ll sidestep questions of the efficacy of publicly shaming a product team, and head to more important matters: What were Jobs and the rest of Apple execs doing before announcing MobileMe? Did they try the product? Did they ask real friends — meaning non-sycophantic ones — how they used it, for what, and how they really felt?
Skipping some trivial examples, we land on the Maps embarrassment. To be sure, it was well handled… after the fact. Punishment was meted out and an honest, constructive apology made. The expression of regret was a welcome departure from Apple’s usual, pugnacious stance. But the same questions linger: What did Apple execs know and when did they know it? Who actually tried Apple Maps before the launch? Were the execs who touted the service ignorant and therefore incompetent, or were they dishonest, knowingly misrepresenting its capabilities? Which is worse?
This is a pattern.
Perhaps Apple could benefit from my daughter’s approach: Temper the pitch by confessing the faults…
“Dear customers, as you know, we’re playing the long game. This isn’t a finished product, it’s a work in progress, and we’ll put your critical feedback to good use.”
Bad News First, Calibrate Expectations. One would think that (finally!) the Maps snafu would have seared this simple logic into the minds of the Apple execs.
We now have the iWork missteps. Apple calls its new productivity suite “groundbreaking”. Eddy Cue, Apple’s head of Internet Software and Services, is ecstatic:
“This is the biggest day for apps in Apple’s history. These new versions deliver seamless experiences across devices that you can’t find anywhere else and are packed with great features…”
Ahem… Neither in the written announcement nor during the live presentation will one find a word of caution about iWork’s many unpleasant “features”.
The idea, as best we can discern through the PR fog, is to make iOS and OS X versions of Pages, Numbers, and Keynote “more compatible” with each other (after Apple has told us, for more than two years, how compatible they already are).
To achieve this legitimate, long game goal, the iWork apps weren’t just patched up, they were re-written.
The logic of a fresh, clean start sounds compelling, but history isn’t always on the side of rewriting-from-scratch angels. A well-known, unfortunate example is what happened when Lotus tried a cross-platform rewrite of its historic Lotus 1-2-3 productivity suite. Quoting from a Wikipedia article:
“Lotus suffered technical setbacks in this period. Version 3 of Lotus 1-2-3, fully rewritten from its original macro assembler into the more portable C language, was delayed by more than a year as the totally new 1-2-3 had to be made portable across platforms and fully compatible with existing macro sets and file formats.”
The iWorks rewrite fares no better. The result is a messy pile of missing features and outright bugs that educed many irate comments, such as these observations by Lawrence Lessig, a prominent activist, Harvard Law professor, and angry Apple customer [emphasis and edits mine]:
“So this has been a week from Apple hell. Apple did a major upgrade of its suite of software — from the operating system through applications. Stupidly (really, inexcusably stupid), I upgraded immediately. Every Apple-related product I use has been crippled in important ways.“
“… in the ‘hybrid economy’ that the Internet is, there is an ethical obligation to treat users decently. ‘Decency’ of course is complex, and multi-faceted. But the single dimension I want to talk about here is this: They must learn to talk to us. In the face of the slew of either bugs or ‘features’ (because as you’ll see, it’s unclear in some cases whether Apple considers the change a problem at all), a decent company would at least acknowledge to the public the problems it identifies as problems, and indicate that they are working to fix it.”
Lessig’s articulate blog post, On the pathological way Apple deals with its customers (well worth your time), enumerates the long litany of iWork offenses.
Shortly thereafter, Apple issued a support document restating the reasons for the changes:
“…applications were rewritten from the ground up to be fully 64-bit and to support a unified file format between OS X and iOS 7 versions”
and promising fixes and further improvements:
“We plan to reintroduce some of these features in the next few releases and will continue to add brand new features on an ongoing basis.”
Which led our Law Professor, who had complained about the “pathologically constipated way in which Apple communicates with its customers”, to write another (shorter) post and thank the company for having at last “found its voice”…
Unfortunately, Lessig’s list of bugs is woefully short of the sum of iWork’s offenses. For example, in the old Pages 4.0 days, when I click on a link I’m transported to the intended destination. In Pages 5.0, instead of the expected jump, I get this…[See above.]
Well, I tried…CMD-CTRL-Shift-4, frame the shot, place the cursor, CMD-V… Pages 5.0 insists on pasting it smack in the middle of a previous paragraph [again, see above].
Pages has changed it’s click-on-a-link behavior; I can get used to that, but…it won’t let me paste at the cursor? That’s pretty bad. Could there be more?
There’s more. I save my work, restart the machine, and the Save function in Pages 5.0 acts up:
What app has changed my file? Another enigma. I’m not sharing with anyone, just saving my work in my Dropbox, something that has never caused trouble before.
Another unacceptable surprise: Try sending a Pages 5.0 file to a Gmail account. I just checked, it still doesn’t work. Why wasn’t this wasn’t known in advance – and not fixed by now?
I have to stop. I’ll leave comparing the even more crippled iCloud version of iWork to the genuinely functional Web version of Office 365 for another day and conclude.
First. Who knew and should have known about iWork’s bugs and undocumented idiosyncrasies? (I’ll add another: Beware the new autocorrect)
Second. Why brag instead of calmly making a case for the long game and telling loyal customers about the dents they will inevitably discover?
Last and most important, what does this new fiasco say about the Apple’s management culture? The new iPhones, iPad and iOS 7 speak well of the company’s justly acclaimed attention to both strategy and implementation. Perhaps there were no cycles, no neurons, no love left for iWork. Perhaps a wise general puts the best troops on the most important battles. Then, why not regroup, wait six months and come up with an April 2014 announcement worthy of Apple’s best work?
This hasn’t been a good week using Apple products and services. I’ve had trouble loading my iTunes Music library on an iPad, with Mail and other Mavericks glitches, moving data and apps from one computer to another, a phantom Genius Bar appointment in another city and a stubborn refusal to change my Apple ID. At every turn, Apple support people, in person, on the phone or email, were unfailingly courteous and helpful. I refrained from mentioning iWork to these nice people.