From: laird@think.com (Laird Popkin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: 21 Rules for Apple Consumer Electronics
Date: 15 Aug 1992 01:57:56 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: django.think.com

In article <1992Aug14.203635.12418@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> rittle@supra.comm.mot.com (Loren James Rittle) writes:
>[Thanks to Mike S. for getting me to post to this newsgroup again.  Mike
> enjoy, this post is for you... :-]
>
>In Dr. Dobb's Journal this month (8/92), Michael Swaine reproduces a
>list contained in a letter sent from Stan Cornyn, president of Warner
>New Media, to Apple.  Stan was quite excited that Apple was getting into
>the Consumer Electronics business and wanted to share some ideas with
>Apple that might help them avoid being Betamaxed (tm) out of the
>market.  Michael states that Stan allowed him to reproduce the list
>because, ``Cornyn doesn't mind the world seeing, in full.'' [this is my
>license to reproduce... :-]
>
>My comments are indented one tab after each entry.

And mine are flush left.  Ah, democracy...

>21 Rules for Apple Consumer Electronics [that C= should have applied to
>CDTV, but didn't]
>
>1. Once you make a box, don't change the way it works for at least ten
>years.
>
>	Good to base a `new' box on 7 year old hardware... real smart...

The two don't have much in common.  IMHO, either C= should have taken real
advantage of the connection between CDTV and the Amiga, by releasing a CDTV
(CD-ROM) add-on for the Amiga in order to jump-start the market by creating
a large number of Amiga/CDTV's, or they should have designed a truly
original platform specifically designed for CD-ROM-based interactive TV
applications.

Cleverly, Kaleida (the Apple/IBM partnership) has managed to do both, in
that they're making a new, "multimedia OS" that will run on top of current
machines, so they're breaking with the old OS's in order to do new things,
and at the same time allowing the huge number of PC and Mac owners to
cheaply run Kaleida and create a large market for Kaleida software.

>2. Start from the cheap boxes and progress to expensive ones, as the
>Japanese automoblie industry has done.
>
>	No upgrades or higher base systems released yet!  I
>	wouldn't call the first base box a good buy at its price
>	either.

That takes time.  I think that C='s emphasis on a single model makes sense,
given the small volumes that any new platform will sell at.  Later, once it
catches on, they can branch out.  Also, it's important to software
developers to keep things simple, to eliminate configuration headaches.

>3. Find an exposure method as powerful as top 40 radio and video
>arcades to show what your box can do.
>
>	C= do this?  You must be joking.  If what you have to sell
>	(CDTV) isn't all that great (see HW comment above), this sort
>	of thing doesn't buy you much.

All it takes is cash...

>4. Hire a vice-president of CD-ROM sales.  Fund the position.  Insist
>that the VP sell 500,000 CD-ROM drives in 1992, no matter what it takes.
>
>	If CDTV sells more than 1% of this figure this year, I'd
>	be *real* surprised.

That would take amazing marketing and the willingness to seed thousands of
machines to reviewers, developers, and so on.

>5. Lowering the price of your box is not enough.  You must also increase
>its value for all to see.
>
>	Where is the value enhancement?

CDTV needs to do something that you can't do on a computer.  It's not much
cheaper than a PC-clone with a CD-ROM drive, so it has to have something
else going for it...

>6. Once your CR-ROM drives have been sold, help publishers learn the
>addresses of buyers.  Otherwise publishers can't target their marketing
>efforts and will begin to sleep around.
>
>	CD-I around... :-)

Right now pretty much the same companies are doing the CD-I and CDTV
development, as far as I can see.  At first that was a win for CDTV, since
C= was out the door first and could take advantage of the material built
due to Phillips' 5+ year investment in CD-I material, but now CDTV needs to
be *better* than CD-I.

>7. Real consumers do not want tools.  They want the product of tools.
>
>	At least C= didn't get SAS to do a special version of
>	SAS/C (R) for CDTV... :-)
>
>8. Forego early profits for long-term market share, and don't bitch
>about it.
>
>	C= : ``what is long-term planning''? :-/
>
>9. Court mass publishers.  If they can sell a million copies, you have
>sold a million boxes.
>
>	C= didn't get this right with the Amiga, so CDTV - ha!
>	C= : ``what is courting''? :-/

Well, C= *did* get most of the CD-I developers to port to CDTV.  Now they
need to go beyond that...

>10. Stop selling to school administrators.  Sell to students.
>
>	When did C= start selling to school administrators? :-(
>
>11. Make your box part of the home-information system.  Make portable
>boxes that can connect with telephones, stereos, and cable.
>
>	Where is the phone connection on CDTV?  Where is the cable
>	connection on CDTV?

Hopefully that's in the future.  (personal opinion) C= has always lacked a
vision of where it was going.  The Amiga was originally sold on specs (cool
graphics, cool sound, etc.) rather than a vision of what computing could
be.  The Mac has been the reverse, in that the specs aren't that great, but
the vision was clear.  That's why a little black and white 68000-based
machine (with DIG, real outline fonts, quality applications, etc.) can be
more productive to many people than an Amiga which would "win" on any
features comparison.  C= focuses on specs to sell boxes.  Apple focuses on
tools to help people get work done.

If C= had combined their cool hardware with a clear vision of how people
and computers work together, it would have been a killer combination.
Hopefully it's not too late.

>12. Present your CD-ROM players to the public as Ultra CD audio players
>that can do extra things.  That way people will catch on faster.
>
>	C= sorta got this right.

Yep.  If C= had capitolized on CD-I's weakness, a lack of consistency
between titles, then they could have had a leg up.  That is, all titles
should act the same way, providing a consistent user interface.  Instead,
both CDTV and CD-I have a mish-mash of buttons, sliders, objects to click
on, etc., so people need to re-learn how to use the machine for every title
they buy.  Using CDTV should be as natural and consistent as reading a
magazine.

>13.  Fifty titles is not enough.  Two thousand is more like it.  Devise
>a plan to obtain 2,000 titles fast.
>
>	C= seems to think that about 50-100 is enough.

Once MPEG chips arrive, I think that there could be a huge market for CD's
of movies.  CD-ROMs cost much less to produce than videotapes, are easier
to display and distribute, are "cooler", and could provide an easy, *huge*
library of material for CDTV (or CD-I, for that matter).  As an added
bonus, there could be Voyager-style additional information, such as
articles about the actors and director, subtitles, and so on, as well as
prividing frame-accurate control over playback.  I suspect that hour long
TV shows, TV-movies, etc., would sell well for $10-20, which is certainly
possible given the very low cost of producing CD-ROM's ($1 each in large quantities).

>14. Color pictures look better than black and white.
>
>15. Having better-looking pictures isn't enough.  Remember Betamax?
>More titles is the answer.
>
>	I guess C= could win over CD-I here.  CDTV doesn't have the better
>	picture, so maybe more titles can help it...

Yep.  Crank out those movies.

>16. Can you sell this box at Wal-Mart?  If not, rethink it.  Maybe paint
>it pink.
>
>	C= made it black.  Morbid.

Aside from the color, CDTV is still not compelling enough for Wal-Mart.
What will "middle america" do with one?  Sure, gadget freaks might be
attracted to it.  But would your mother buy one?

>17. Whoever makes a box that easily converts to digital video is the
>winner.  Whoever doesn't is planning obsolescence.
>
>	7 year old HW?

With MPEG hardware this could happen.

>18. CD systems using TV screens will always be cheaper.  Emphasize the
>advantage of monitor display.
>
>19. Don't call it a computer.  Call it, for instance, a Time Machine.
>Not P3-TV.  4D-TV is a better choice.
>
>	C= was right on here, and then a while ago they let up and
>	admitted that it was a computer! :-)

The name CDTV is cool, though the acronym is stupid.

>20. Start product development with a breakthrough marketing campaign.
>Force your engineers to catch up with you.
>
>	C=!?  It seems marketing/management is years behind engineering
>	at C=.
>
>21. Careful market research results in one sure thing: You will be late
>to market.
>
>	Good thing C= doesn't do market research... :-)
>
>Rumor is that Apple is so gun ho about this list that it can be seen
>posted through out Apple.   Maybe someone will get it right...
>Too bad it isn't C=/Amiga and the CDTV.

It's not impossible, though I agree that CDTV hasn't gotten everything
right yet.

>Best Regards,
>Loren J. Rittle
>rittle@comm.mot.com
-- 
- Laird Popkin, Thinking Machines

Connection Machine: Massively parallel supercomputer.  Also a cool black
cube with more blinking lights than you can shake a stick at.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy