苹果搜索身份

重点 (Top highlight)

大技术 (Big Technology)

Apple doesn’t typically bungle its marketing, yet its recent ad about working from home was uncharacteristically bad. The spot showed a team working furiously from their living rooms, communicating exclusively via Apple software. They used FaceTime for video conferencing, iMessages for chat, and Apple’s calendar app for scheduling. The production value was great, but the message somewhat delusional.

人们通常不会束缚其营销活动，但是最近关于在家工作的广告反常是不好的。 当场展示了一个团队，他们在客厅里疯狂地工作，专门通过Apple软件进行通信。 他们使用FaceTime进行视频会议，使用iMessages进行聊天，并使用Apple的日历应用程序进行计划。 生产价值巨大，但信息有些妄想。

Anyone who’s worked from home knows the world Apple imagined is a fantasy. We use Zoom and Hangouts for video, not FaceTime. We use Slack and Teams for chat, not iMessage. Using Apple’s communications software for work excludes people who don’t own Apple devices, so we stick to what functions on any platform. Apple knows this, yet it still ran an ad wishing it weren’t true.

任何在家工作的人都知道 [R 苹果公司想象的是一个幻想。 我们对视频使用缩放和环聊，而不是FaceTime。 我们使用Slack和Teams进行聊天，而不是iMessage。 使用Apple的通信软件将不拥有Apple设备的人排除在外，因此我们坚持在任何平台上使用什么功能。 苹果公司知道这一点，但它仍然刊登广告，希望它不是真的。

More than a bad marketing decision, the ad points to a greater identity crisis taking place within the company. Marketing inside Apple has always been about defining what it is at its core. “It’s a very noisy world, and we’re not going to get a chance to get people to remember much about us,” Steve Jobs said before releasing Apple’s Think Different campaign in 1997. “Our customers want to know who is Apple and what is it that we stand for.”

这则广告不仅仅是一个糟糕的营销决定，还指出了公司内部发生的更大的身份危机。 苹果公司内部的营销一直都在定义其核心。 史蒂夫·乔布斯(Steve Jobs)在1997年发布Apple的Think Different活动之前说： “这是一个非常嘈杂的世界，我们不会有机会让人们记住很多关于我们的事。我们的客户想知道谁是苹果公司以及什么？是我们所代表的。”

The answer to “Who is Apple” was simple back then — Apple built devices, and built them well — but today it’s in flux. Apple still builds devices, but it’s expanding aggressively into software and services, and doing so in order to keep growing. Apple’s software and services’ interests are often in natural conflict with its devices’ interests, yet instead of picking one path and betting on it, Apple is clumsily trying to make everything work. The ad reflects the awkwardness.

当时，“谁是苹果”的答案很简单-苹果制造了设备，并很好地制造了它们-但是今天它在不断变化。 苹果仍在制造设备，但它正在积极地扩展到软件和服务中，并且这样做是为了保持增长。 苹果的软件和服务的利益通常与设备的利益有天生的冲突，但是苹果没有选择一条道路并下注，而是笨拙地试图使一切正常。 广告反映出尴尬。

To realize the ad’s vision, Apple would have to let FaceTime and Messages work everywhere. But it’s keeping them exclusive in order to sell more devices, sacrificing long-term strategy for short-term gain. The lack of coherence doomed Apple’s marketing department on the “WFH” ad from the start.

为了实现广告的愿景，Apple必须让FaceTime和Messages在任何地方工作。 但是，为了让他们卖出更多的设备，它们一直保持排他性，从而牺牲了长期战略以谋取短期利益。 缺乏连贯性注定了苹果营销部门从一开始就在“ WFH”广告上注定要失败。

“All I see with this is Apple pointing out how poorly their apps integrate,” one tech CEO, who does not compete with Apple, told Big Technology. “Crazy to show iMessage and FaceTime as a way for companies to meet.”

一位不愿与苹果竞争的技术首席执行官告诉《 大科技 》：“我所看到的就是苹果指出了他们的应用程序集成得多么糟糕。” “疯狂地展示iMessage和FaceTime作为公司开会的一种方式。”

Apple has a decision to make. It can choose to milk its assets — the iPhone and Mac — and make as much money from them as possible, at the expense of its future. Or, it can build that future, free its software, and accept a possible short-term hit.

苹果有决定权。 它可以选择挤占iPhone和Mac的资产，并从中赚取尽可能多的钱，而以牺牲未来为代价。 或者，它可以建立未来，释放其软件，并接受可能的短期打击。

“They need to make their software work seamlessly, like it does on their hardware, on someone else’s hardware,” Tom Forte, a research analyst at D.A. Davidson, told Big Technology, using CarPlay as an example. “Otherwise they can be disintermediated.”

DA Davidson的研究分析师Tom Forte以CarPlay为例，告诉Big Technology： “他们需要使他们的软件无缝运行，就像在硬件上一样，在其他人的硬件上一样。” “否则，它们可以被解散。”

Microsoft faced a similar choice in its Steve Ballmer years. It had to decide whether to milk its core asset, Windows, or focus on building its future. To get to that future, it would have to make Office available everywhere and support cloud computing, both of which threatened its operating system business. (I cover this in depth in Always Day One.) Microsoft stuck with the asset-milking under Ballmer. But when Satya Nadella took over, it went cloud-first and cross-platform, and quickly revitalized its business.

微软在史蒂夫·鲍尔默(Steve Ballmer)时代面临着类似的选择。 它必须决定是挤占其核心资产Windows还是着眼于建立其未来。 为了实现这个未来，它必须使Office随处可见并支持云计算，这两者都威胁到其操作系统业务。 (我将在“ 总是第一天”中对此进行深入介绍。 ) 微软坚持在鲍尔默的领导下进行资产挤兑。 但是，当萨蒂亚·纳德拉(Satya Nadella)接手时，它率先采用云技术和跨平台，并Swift恢复了业务活力。

Apple, like Microsoft, must figure out its philosophy. As long as it stays in asset-milking mode, it’s going to endure more strife. Just look at what happened with Hey, an email service that fought Apple’s attempt to take 30% of its $99 annual fee through iOS. Apple eventually capitulated, and left the incident looking greedy and even a bit lost. It didn’t exhibit the behavior people expect from a $1.6 trillion company confident about its future.

苹果公司像微软一样，必须弄清它的理念。 只要它处于资产挤兑模式，它就会遭受更多的冲突。 只需看看Hey发生了什么，这是一项电子邮件服务，它与Apple试图通过iOS收取其99美元的年费的30％进行了斗争。 苹果最终屈服了，使事件显得贪婪，甚至有些失落。 它没有表现出人们对一家对自己的未来充满信心的1.6万亿美元公司所期望的行为。

Apple could build more assets, and it certainly has the capacity. But Hey co-creator David Heinemeier Hansson didn’t seem too optimistic about the prospect. “It’s a lot easier to build a tollbooth than it is to build a compelling merry-go-round,” he told Big Technology. “Cheaper in maintenance too.”

苹果可以建立更多资产，而且它肯定有能力。 但是Hey的共同创作者David Heinemeier Hansson对此前景似乎并不乐观。 他告诉Big Technology： “建立收费站比建立引人注目的旋转木马要容易得多。” “维护也更便宜。”

助长危险 (Proctoring peril)

Earlier this month, approximately 1,400 surgery residents prepared to take their written board exams. Traditionally, they’d take the exams in person. But with Covid-19 afoot, the American Board of Surgery, which administers the test, decided to hold it online. Now, many of the residents are wondering whether their personal data has been compromised.

本月初，约有1400名外科手术居民准备参加书面董事会考试。 传统上，他们会亲自参加考试。 但是，随着Covid-19的到来，负责测试的美国外科委员会决定将其在线保存。 现在，许多居民想知道他们的个人数据是否已被泄露。

The episode began when the board hired a subcontracted vendor to serve as a proctor. To monitor the students, the proctoring company had them install software it could use to watch their screens. And after installing the software, the residents started reporting suspicious activity.

该情节始于董事会聘用分包商作为监理人的时候。 为了监视学生，监理公司让他们安装了可以用来观看屏幕的软件。 安装软件后，居民开始报告可疑活动。

Some residents told the board they were added on Facebook by proctors, others reported strange credit card charges, and more still saw strange login activity on their Google and Netflix accounts. On test day, the exam itself failed. The software broke down, and the board ended up canceling the second day of the test. It’s unclear what happens from here.

一些居民告诉董事会，监理人员在Facebook上添加了他们，其他居民则报告了信用卡收费异常，还有更多居民在其Google和Netflix帐户上看到了奇怪的登录活动。 在考试当天，考试本身未通过。 软件出现故障，评估板最终取消了测试的第二天。 目前尚不清楚从这里发生什么。

“Their sense of security in the world is shot, which is a horrible price to pay,” board president and CEO Dr. Jo Buyske told Big Technology. “It certainly has harmed our relationship with them; they’re holding us responsible, understandably so.”

董事会主席兼首席执行官Jo Buyske博士对Big Technology表示： “他们在世界范围内的安全意识已被击中，这是一个可怕的代价。” “这肯定损害了我们与他们之间的关系； 他们让我们负责，这是可以理解的。”

When we started moving much of our physical lives online, there were always lingering security concerns. Now we’re starting to see those concerns weren’t unfounded. Last week, Twitter experienced the most embarrassing hack in its history, an inside job facilitated by an employee working remote. This week, the American Board of Surgery provides another cautionary tale. We’re moving remote out of necessity. But we’re also seeing what happens when “digital transformations” meant to take years go forward in a span of months or weeks.

当我们开始将大部分身体生活在线上上网时，始终存在挥之不去的安全问题。 现在，我们开始看到这些担忧并非没有根据。 上周，Twitter经历了有史以来最尴尬的黑客事件，这是一名远程工作的员工提供的一项内部工作。 本周，美国外科委员会提供了另一个警示故事。 我们正在出于必要而远离远程。 但是，我们也看到，当“数字化转型”需要数月或数周的时间才能进行数年时，会发生什么。

反托拉斯期望 (Antitrust expectations)

Next week, the main characters in this newsletter — Mark Zuckerberg, Tim Cook, Sundar Pichai, and Jeff Bezos — will testify virtually before the House Judiciary Committee as part of its antitrust inquiry into their market power. Congressional hearings aren’t built for meaningful discussion. And with four CEOs on the call, it will be a circus.

下周，本新闻通讯的主要人物马克·扎克伯格，蒂姆·库克，桑达尔·皮查伊和杰夫·贝佐斯将在众议院司法委员会作证，这是对其市场势力进行反托拉斯调查的一部分。 国会听证会不是为了进行有意义的讨论而建立的。 有了四位首席执行官，这将是一场马戏团。

For the tech giants, the timing couldn’t be better. The country is focused on Covid-19, an economic crisis, and the election. Major antitrust action against these massive companies, always unlikely, is now even less plausible. This week, Big Technology emailed about a dozen representatives on the antitrust subcommittee, asking whether the hearing was a priority for their offices. None returned anything on record.

对于科技巨头来说，时机再好不过了。 该国专注于Covid-19，经济危机和选举。 如今，针对这些大型公司采取的重大反托拉斯行动一向不太可能，而现在似乎不太可能了。 本周， Big Technology向反托拉斯小组委员会的十几位代表发送了电子邮件，询问听证会是否是其办公室的优先事项。 没有人记录任何东西。

So expect next week’s hearings to be a pillow fight: Members of Congress will aim for YouTube moments. The tech giant CEOs will come in prepared and avoid getting pinned down. China will come up a lot. (Okay, that could be interesting.) The media will write roundups of the CEOs’ video call backgrounds. And the serious discussion this country needs about the tech giants’ power will wait for another day.

因此，希望下周的听证会像一场枕头大战：国会议员将瞄准YouTube时刻。 科技巨头的首席执行官将做好准备，并避免受到束缚。 中国将会崛起很多。 (好吧，这可能很有趣。)媒体将对CEO的视频通话背景进行综述。 这个国家需要就科技巨头的实力进行认真的讨论将等待另一天。

See you next Thursday.

下周四见。

OneZero is publishing this story in an exclusive syndication partnership with Big Technology, a newsletter by Alex Kantrowitz.

OneZero 与 大技术公司 (Alex Kantrowitz的时事通讯)通过 独家联合发布该故事 。

翻译自: https://onezero.medium.com/apple-searches-for-an-identity-52a668f5ae78