TechCrunch: The Death Of The Spec

[HansTWN]

It makes sense for companies to de-emphasize specs. That way they can use cheaper components and make more money. And Apple, with such a strong hold over its users who tend to be not interested in technical details, was in a unique position to do so. Others have followed, all companies love an opportunity for extra profits, not just Apple!

What we are saying is that this is not in the interest of consumers, why should it be good for consumers to be kept in the dark, buying the cat in the bag? Sort of "hey, who cares about MPG on a car, look at the memory function on those seats!" Specs are indicators of performance.

It is true that specs cannot be used as the only means to compare different platforms -- but specs should be a very important part of upgrade decisions within the platform. As in "is it worth for me to get the iPad3 when I have the iPad2 already"? Another reason to keep quiet about specs, if consumers knew the truth they would be a lot less willing to upgrade every year. I personally will keep on using my phone (a Dell Streak) for the foreseeable future, since nothing has come up that is that much better to justify an upgrade.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by stonetools

What's dead is the techie idea that specs are ALL that matters, and that ease of use and ecosystem either doesn't matter , or is peripheral. That way of comparing devices is now deader than fried chicken, and good riddance. What matters is total user experience, which includes ease of use, ecosystem, and specs , which are weighted based on the user. For the techie user, specs reign supreme, whereas for the newbie, ease of use is primary.
Apple has led this way of thinking about device comparison, but all companies and most pundits have pretty much signed on to this way of thinking, because this is how most consumers think.
The tablet wars sealed the doom of the " specs only" approach. The Android and web OS tablets were superior even to the iPad2 in lots of ways specs wise, but were rejected by the consumers but were rejected by the consumers because in terms of total user experience, the iPad2 was so superior.

Your post is one of the few times I have ever heard that techies ever had such a notion.

A lifelong audiophile, I have fond memories of pouring over flyers with stereo specs in expensive audio listening salons...starting as a kid in the 1960s.

[JD Gumby]

Originally Posted by stonetools

The Android and web OS tablets were superior even to the iPad2 in lots of ways specs wise, but were rejected by the consumers but were rejected by the consumers because in terms of total user experience, the iPad2 was so superior.

Bullcrap. Android had 27% the shipped tablet market (iPad 67%) for the 3rd quarter '11, up from 2.3% in 3rd quarter '10. That is not consumer/distributor rejection. Quite the opposite, in fact. Might take a little while, but they'll get there. Now, individual brands are a different matter, but not that big a deal.

Originally Posted by Phogg

Your post is one of the few times I have ever heard that techies ever had such a notion.

A lifelong audiophile, I have fond memories of pouring over flyers with stereo specs in expensive audio listening salons...starting as a kid in the 1960s.

Enthusiasts who outright reject technical specifications are fanboys, not techies. Techies are people who want to know what goes into a device and how it works. A skilled techie will go further by using that information to modify the device to suit their needs.

I am not denying that user experience is an important part of the device. It's just that the specifications or benchmarking are the only objective ways to evaluate them. It lets you know the boundaries of the device's utility. The refresh rate of the screen tells you if it's good for video. The resolution of the screen tells you if it's good for text. CPU performance and RAM indicate the types of applications you can run. And so on. Anything less is arguing over personal preference. Yes, personal preference is okay. The problem is that varies from person to person, so there is really no way to figure out if a device will meet your needs unless you already know that the tastes of the review reflect your own.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by JD Gumby

Bullcrap. Android had 27% the shipped tablet market (iPad 67%) for the 3rd quarter '11, up from 2.3% in 3rd quarter '10. That is not consumer/distributor rejection. Quite the opposite, in fact. Might take a little while, but they'll get there. Now, individual brands are a different matter, but not that big a deal.

Right, and what is happening now that wasn't happening then?
A version of Android targeted at tablets rather than phones.
Companies releasing heavily wrapped versions of Android to streamline the user experience.
So as the user experience improves, sales improve. Which was the point the poster you quoted was making.

[Sil_liS]

I think that specs vs. user experience is essentially this:

To some people it doesn't matter if the specs say that A and B are exactly the same shade of gray if they appear to gave different shades, and to some people it does.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by Phogg

Your post is one of the few times I have ever heard that techies ever had such a notion.

We don't. We think it matters more than someone else's user experience, because specs are objective and don't change when the user does, but everything? Nah. Don't be silly. Specs are just the starting point.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by JD Gumby

Bullcrap. Android had 27% the shipped tablet market (iPad 67%) for the 3rd quarter '11, up from 2.3% in 3rd quarter '10. That is not consumer/distributor rejection. Quite the opposite, in fact. Might take a little while, but they'll get there. Now, individual brands are a different matter, but not that big a deal.

Interesting stats. According to NPD, 1.2 million non-Apple tablets were sold in the first 10 months of 2011 (Jan-Oct), of which 17% were WebOS, and at least a few were QNX.
Apple sold 25 million iPads in in thefirst 9 months of 2011.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by kjk

Interesting stats. According to NPD, 1.2 million non-Apple tablets were sold in the first 10 months of 2011 (Jan-Oct), of which 17% were WebOS, and at least a few were QNX.

And that number was heavily inflated by the fire sale a while back.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

It makes sense for companies to de-emphasize specs. That way they can use cheaper components and make more money. And Apple, with such a strong hold over its users who tend to be not interested in technical details, was in a unique position to do so. Others have followed, all companies love an opportunity for extra profits, not just Apple!

What we are saying is that this is not in the interest of consumers, why should it be good for consumers to be kept in the dark, buying the cat in the bag? Sort of "hey, who cares about MPG on a car, look at the memory function on those seats!" Specs are indicators of performance.

It is true that specs cannot be used as the only means to compare different platforms -- but specs should be a very important part of upgrade decisions within the platform. As in "is it worth for me to get the iPad3 when I have the iPad2 already"? Another reason to keep quiet about specs, if consumers knew the truth they would be a lot less willing to upgrade every year. I personally will keep on using my phone (a Dell Streak) for the foreseeable future, since nothing has come up that is that much better to justify an upgrade.

You are making a fundamental error in your analysis by assuming that Apple's deemphasis of specs means that their specs are worse. Or that the motive for deemphasizing specs is because they are worse.

Neither of these are true, but this is hard for people who don't pay attention to get their head around. By most measures, Apple has *better* specs than competing devices - better screens, better battery life, better chips - in particular, much better GPUs. Apple deemphasizes specs because they tend to believe - and correctly, I think - that consumers *don't care.* Again, Apple believes that it is more effective to show people what they can do with their products...how they can fit them into their lives...than to get involved in a religious argument about whether 512MB of dual channel memory @ 1066 is better than 1GB of single channel memory @667.

Most consumers just don't care about that. And more and more companies are catching on (it has, I think, been true for a while, although Apple was probably the first major tech company to make this point explicitly).

But if you *are* one of the people who are interested in specs, they are available. Go to Anandtech and read spec-laden reviews of the 4S crushing the competition, if that's important to you. (I always read his reviews). But you would need to go elsewhere *anyway*, since whatever specs even the tech-heaviest device manufacturer put out in its advertising material are going to be cherry picked and not useful without a more thorough breakdown anyway.

Originally Posted by JD Gumby

Bullcrap. Android had 27% the shipped tablet market (iPad 67%) for the 3rd quarter '11, up from 2.3% in 3rd quarter '10. That is not consumer/distributor rejection. Quite the opposite, in fact. Might take a little while, but they'll get there. Now, individual brands are a different matter, but not that big a deal.

As has been well documented, the "shipped" number for Android tablets includes a huge number of tablets that did not sell. I.e., Samsung shipped 1 million Galaxy Tabs in 2010, but apparently only sold 20,000. Here's a link, but there's a lot more like this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...ung-galaxy-tab

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Enthusiasts who outright reject technical specifications are fanboys, not techies. Techies are people who want to know what goes into a device and how it works. A skilled techie will go further by using that information to modify the device to suit their needs.

I am not denying that user experience is an important part of the device. It's just that the specifications or benchmarking are the only objective ways to evaluate them. It lets you know the boundaries of the device's utility. The refresh rate of the screen tells you if it's good for video. The resolution of the screen tells you if it's good for text. CPU performance and RAM indicate the types of applications you can run. And so on. Anything less is arguing over personal preference. Yes, personal preference is okay. The problem is that varies from person to person, so there is really no way to figure out if a device will meet your needs unless you already know that the tastes of the review reflect your own.

Go back and read the what post you were actually says.
My point is that Techies generally demand subjective testing because companies can lie on specs and because even a once reliable company can suddenly grow spotty quality control after a corporate sale or merger.

Techies have never had any overarching tendancy to rely on specs alone. If they had, Stereo shopps would have only spec sheets, not spec sheets and listening rooms.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

You are making a fundamental error in your analysis by assuming that Apple's deemphasis of specs means that their specs are worse. Or that the motive for deemphasizing specs is because they are worse.

Neither of these are true, but this is hard for people who don't pay attention to get their head around. By most measures, Apple has *better* specs than competing devices - better screens, better battery life, better chips - in particular, much better GPUs. Apple deemphasizes specs because they tend to believe - and correctly, I think - that consumers *don't care.* Again, Apple believes that it is more effective to show people what they can do with their products...how they can fit them into their lives...than to get involved in a religious argument about whether 512MB of dual channel memory @ 1066 is better than 1GB of single channel memory @667.

Most consumers just don't care about that. And more and more companies are catching on (it has, I think, been true for a while, although Apple was probably the first major tech company to make this point explicitly).

But if you *are* one of the people who are interested in specs, they are available. Go to Anandtech and read spec-laden reviews of the 4S crushing the competition, if that's important to you. (I always read his reviews). But you would need to go elsewhere *anyway*, since whatever specs even the tech-heaviest device manufacturer put out in its advertising material are going to be cherry picked and not useful without a more thorough breakdown anyway.

Why are you ignoring what has been said? We are not talking Apple vs Android specs we are talking iPhone 4S vs iPhone 4. Exactly the same device, except for the specs. (and yes, you can have Siri on the 4, even though Apple doesn't want you to). Yet people upgraded in record numbers --- are you calling all of them mindless sheep taken in by marketing hype? De-emphasizing specs means that you think buyers are fools who can't be allowed to make their decisions based on objective data. Or that you want to hide something.

Apple does talk about specs, retina screen is a good example. After the initial introduction their marketing never mentioned the actual resolution again. And long after others have higher resolution screens they can still say "they don't have retina screens!". It is part of their marketing genius.

And as you are insisting on talking cross platform specs, the 4S has just been blown away by the Galaxy Nexus for everything except GPU. The retina screen (a nice step forward last year, no doubt) has been surpassed. And any phone out there with exchangeable batteries outlasts the iphone many times over. Not that Apple will want to stress battery life given the current iOS 5 battery problems!

[HappyMartin]

As the technonolgy matures so specs become less important. It happens in lots of industries. After awhile we expect it all to just work. No big deal.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by Phogg

Your post is one of the few times I have ever heard that techies ever had such a notion.

A lifelong audiophile, I have fond memories of pouring over flyers with stereo specs in expensive audio listening salons...starting as a kid in the 1960s.

Back then getting a THD under 1% was considered awesome . Today the cheap stuff has THD under .01%.
Smooth (and flat) Response curve was something to kill for. Now days, if there isn't +20db Bass boost

[kjk]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Why are you ignoring what has been said? We are not talking Apple vs Android specs we are talking iPhone 4S vs iPhone 4.

The article wasn't just about Apple. You seem to be the one intent on talking about Apple.

Originally Posted by HansTWN

And as you are insisting on talking cross platform specs, the 4S has just been blown away by the Galaxy Nexus for everything except GPU.

Well, since you just accused AndrewH of "ignoring", I should mention you ignored the rear camera. And Bluetooth 4.0. And the storage options (16/32/64), to name a few features besides "everything except GPU".

And price, apparently (which was again part of the original article, for those not ignoring that) :

Right on the cover of this December catalogue for Best Buy is an ad for the Samsung Nexus Prime for Verizon (above), and if you flip a few pages you’ll see a second ad with a price tag of $299.99 on-contract.