Skip to main content

Bashing the iPad - but will you purchase?

The question is not will the iPad do everything you or I wish it to, clearly Apple did not intend it to be the One Device to Rule Them All.  Apple's intent has been clear for several years.  Jobs stated the intent in a speech 9 years ago: The digital hub strategy.

"The Mac," Jobs said, "can become the 'digital hub' of our emerging digital lifestyle, adding tremendous value to our other digital devices."

"Jobs laid out a path of PC evolution that defined the early 80s as an initial 'golden age' of computing based on productivity software, which began to wane in the early 90s.  A 'second golden age' began in the mid-1990s with the rise of Internet; but it too began to lose its momentum by 2000.  Jobs said he believed a third age would focus on a digital lifestyle, driven by an 'explosion of digital devices.'"
-- by Phil Simon The Age of the Platform

Steve Jobs introduces the "Digital Hub... by HiltonRobb

Simon writes "Apple forced this third golden age by developing its platform -- and making it so compelling to use."

To see the ecosystem of the computer as a hub of your digital life.  They have executed on that vision with the iPod, then the iTunes store, the iPhone and the App store, now the iPad and the iBookStore.  Are we following a pattern, is there a cookbook?  The leader has a vision, shares the vision with the followers, the followers buy into the vision and together make it a reality.  

The new product adoptions phases are progressing quite nicely.  Apple is a master at this process, described by David Pogue in:
Wildly Successful New Product Launch Phases
Phase 1 feverish speculation and hype (preannouncment)
Phase 2 disappointment and bashing (prerelease)
Phase 3 attainment anticipation and adoration (post release)

So we are clearly in Phase 2 (bashing).  With rational reasons, but when Phase 3 (attainment) arrives - will you rationalize these arguments and purchase an iPad? I've got $5 on Yes, you buy.  Actually a bit more than $5 as I purchased Apple shares just under $200 after the bounce and drop on the iPad news.

My reasons for the confidence in Apple:  They have executed on Jobs vision, they are in iteration 3 of new products that connect to the computer hub.  I have Pogue's model of phases of product adoption for an explanation of the media. I refer you to the long list of "desired" feature missing in the iPhone, and the large number of iPhone sells.

Apple has the magic balancing act of the perfect engineer - they are at the top of the game in the compromise to optimize simplicity thereby maximizing enjoyment of the product.  They are not as concerned about shareholder value as they are customer satisfaction.  They have a very good measure of customer satisfaction.  I think they are getting the customer satisfaction equation optimized.

See comments section for continuing updates to this story line.

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

Elements of an Effective Scrum Task Board

What are the individual elements that make a Scrum task board effective for the team and the leadership of the team?  There are a few basic elements that are quite obvious when you have seen a few good Scrum boards... but there are some other elements that appear to elude even the most servant of leaders of Scrum teams.

In general I'm referring to a physical Scrum board.  Although software applications will replicated may of the elements of a good Scrum board there will be affordances that are not easily replicated.  And software applications offer features not easily implemented in the physical domain also.

Scrum Info Radiator Checklist (PDF) Basic Elements
Board Framework - columns and rows laid out in bold colors (blue tape works well)
Attributes:  space for the total number of stickies that will need to belong in each cell of the matrix;  lines that are not easy eroded, but are also easy to replace;  see Orientation.

Columns (or Rows) - labeled
    To Do
    Work In P…

Exercise:: Definition of Ready & Done

Assuming you are on a Scrum/Agile software development team, then one of the first 'working agreements' you have created with your team is a 'Definition of Done' - right?

Oh - you don't have a definition of what aspects a user story that is done will exhibit. Well then, you need to create a list of attributes of a done story. One way to do this would be to Google 'definition of done' ... here let me do that for you: Then you could just use someone else's definition - there DONE!

But that would be cheating -- right? It is not the artifact - the list of done criteria, that is important for your team - it is the act of doing it for themselves, it is that shared understanding of having a debate over some of the gray areas that create a true working agreement. If some of the team believes that a story being done means that there can be no bugs found in the code - but some believe that there can be some minor issues - well, …

What belongs on the Task Board?

I wonder about these questions a lot - what types of task belong on the task board?  Does every task have to belong to a Story?  Are some tasks just too small?  Are some tasks too obvious?  Obviously some task are too larger, but when should it be decomposed?  How will we know a task is too large?

I answer these questions with a question.  What about a task board motivates us to get work done?  The answer is: T.A.S.K.S. to DONE!

Inherent in the acronym TASKS is the point of all tasks, to get to done.  That is the measure of if the task is the right size.  Does it motivate us to get the work done?  (see notes on Dan Pink's book: Drive - The surprising Truth about what motivates us) If we are forgetting to do some class of task then putting it on the board will help us remember.  If we think some small task is being done by someone else, then putting it on the board will validate that someone else is actually doing it.  If a task is obvious, then putting it on the board will take vi…

A T-Shaped 21st Century Knowledge Worker

Knowledge workers in the 21st Century must have many areas of deep knowledge, while also be capable of collaboration across multiple other domains with dissimilar T-shaped individuals.  This description of a person is a metaphor.  Compare it to the shape of the "I" in the classic saying there is no "I" in Team.

I first read about Scott Ambler's term "Generalizing Specialist" - but it's so hard to remember the proper order of the words... get it backwards and it has an inverted meaning... T-Shaped is easier to remember. 
A generalizing specialist is someone who:
Has one or more technical specialties (e.g. Java programming, Project Management, Database Administration, ...). Has at least a general knowledge of software development. Has at least a general knowledge of the business domain in which they work. Actively seeks to gain new skills in both their existing specialties as well as in other areas, including both technical and domain areas.  General…

David's notes on "Drive"

- "The Surprising Truth about what Motivates Us" by Dan Pink.

Amazon book order
What I notice first and really like is the subtle implication in the shadow of the "i" in Drive is a person taking one step in a running motion.  This brings to mind the old saying - "there is no I in TEAM".  There is however a ME in TEAM, and there is an I in DRIVE.  And when one talks about motivating a team or an individual - it all starts with - what's in it for me.


Pink starts with an early experiment with monkeys on problem solving.  Seems the monkeys were much better problem solver's than the scientist thought they should be.  This 1949 experiment is explained as the early understanding of motivation.  At the time there were two main drivers of motivation:  biological & external influences.  Harry F. Harlow defines the third drive in a novel theory:  "The performance of the task provided intrinsic reward" (p 3).  This is Dan Pink's M…