The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple

http://hunterwalk.com/2013/10/04/the-time-i-interviewed-at-apple/

by nikunjk • 13 years ago

90 86 13 years ago

JonFish852• 13 years ago

And how they’ll need to change the questions they ask of potential senior execs in order to bring in some of the mentality required to iterate towards excellence in public as opposed to behind closed doors.

I feel like, with possibly the exception of the iPhone, Apple's magic sauce has been to let others launch first and learn from their mistakes, iterate in private until they have their product as close to perfection as they can, then release it.

They weren't the first computer. They weren't the first MP3 player. They weren't the first place to buy songs online. They weren't the first to make a smartphone. They weren't the first to make a tablet.

Granted these weren't software services for the most part, they were hardware. But in the same sense, Apple does a lot of development in the background almost by design, so they can storm the set and have a polished product ready to go (with some exceptions, notably Mobile Me).

This "iterating on the fly" web thing is a software mentality. I'd argue that Apple is first & foremost a hardware company. Once you release the hardware, you're stuck with it for better or worse. There's no such "ship it before it's ready and fix it later" mindset in hardware.

twrkit• 13 years ago

I'd argue that Apple is first & foremost a hardware company

I would argue that Apple is primarily a software company. Sure, they do offer nice, polished hardware touches like Retina display, TouchID, unibody aluminum enclosures, but the actual components are the same as commodity PC hardware. Further, companies like Samsung are making phone with bigger screens and (ostensibly) faster processors. What people are paying a premium for is the Experience (well, and the Brand) - in OS X, things "just work," and the OS is generally more stable and user friendly than Windows. Similarly with iOS, at least before iOS7, the design choices that were made by Ive and Co allowed the mass market to intuitively use a smartphone.

redthrowaway• 13 years ago

I really can't see Apple adopting a more iterative approach to product development. "Perfect the first time" is so deeply engrained in their corporate identity that the CEO feels the need to personally apologize when they don't achieve it (see: Apple Maps). Compare that to the new Google Maps, which was pretty shitty when it went to open beta but has been getting progressively less so.

Google's users cut Google the necessary slack to allow them to release imperfect products and improve on them. Apple's do not.

JonFish852• 13 years ago

Google's users cut Google the necessary slack to allow them to release imperfect products and improve on them. Apple's do not.

Also an excellent point. The reason people line up for many hours for the privilege of spending $500 is because they expect perfection. These are the consumers that Apple has courted, and so far they have reaped the rewards from it by earning the trust of their users. To change that would damage their brand in a huge way.

jaredsohn• 13 years ago

I think the Apple Maps situation is a little different since they actually took away the product people were previously using.

dragonwriter2• 13 years ago

"Perfect the first time" is so deeply engrained in their corporate identity that the CEO feels the need to personally apologize when they don't achieve it (see: Apple Maps).

Apple Maps wasn't a failure of "perfect the first time", it was a failure of iteration: it was an existing Apple app using Google data that, as part of an OS update, Apple "upgraded" with a new version using non-Google data that performed, in many users opinion, less well than the previous version.

Compare that to the new Google Maps, which was pretty shitty when it went to open beta but has been getting progressively less so.

When Google maps was released to "open beta", it wasn't a new version of base app delivered as part of the OS bundled into a premium-priced hardware device that was widely seen as a downgrade in functionality from the prior version. It was a free web application that added to, rather than replacing, the existing options in the space.

Google's users cut Google the necessary slack to allow them to release imperfect products and improve on them. Apple's do not.

Google's users get mad when they perceive Google to make products worse in subsequent versions just as much as Apple users do. Google tends not to put premium price tags on its first public release of products, while Apple does, and people paying premium prices for products are less inclined to grant the maker slack.

rmrfrmrf• 13 years ago

Apple does plenty of iteration, just in a different way. Think about copy and paste on iPhone, MMS messaging, multitasking, etc. They work depth-first rather than breadth, so instead of dozens of half-working features, you get one or two complete features. I think it opens Apple up to more criticism, especially combined with their secrecy, but the criticism and even trolls only help contribute to more buzz.

Patrick_Devine2• 13 years ago

I'm looking at the Dock at the bottom of my MacBook Pro and I can't help but think that most of the apps are half baked and most of them I don't even use.

I've replaced Safari with Firefox. I haven't fired up iChat in a while because I just use GMail chat instead. iTunes is really wonky when you want to play music off of an NFS server. I've never fired up FaceTime or PhotoBooth. The X11 app is so buggy it's ridiculous. I use Terminal all the time, but it's got some serious memory leaks. Time Machine breaks half the time in unexpected ways. Calculator works pretty well, although I find myself using the R console more and more instead.

I feel like the Mac software side of things just doesn't get any love anymore. Apple is so focused on iPhone/iPad that the OSX applications are stretched completely thin and rarely get any love and attention. The machine has really just turned into a glorified terminal and browser where I run the occasional Linux virtual machine or the odd game in Steam. Any serious heavy lifting is left for Linux, and most applications have migrated to the web.

gdilla• 13 years ago

Definitely. And also, people have short term memories. No one will remember what didn't work after it eventually gets fixed. It becomes the new normal. One day, no one will care that Apple maps weren't great when they first debuted.

aestra• 13 years ago

copy and paste on iPhone, MMS messaging, multitasking

As I recall Apple tried to say things at the time that amounted to "you don't really need that." Every single iPhone user I knew at the time drank the Steve Jobs koolaid and talked about how yeah, they didn't need those features.

smsm42• 13 years ago

I'm not sure where this "perfect the first time" thing comes from, but so far every first version of the product I've seen from Apple was far from perfect. It is true that Apple spends a lot of time on visual design and polishing the limited set of scenarios to their complete satisfaction, but I don't think is can be called perfect.

For example, first version of iPhone OS did not have copy-paste functionality. On a device that has keyboard with keys sized 1/4 of my fingertip size. Now try getting a long URL or email from one app to another in this setup. Perfect? Yeah, right.

Another iOS thing - it gained multitasking (for apps other than select few) only in the 4th version. For years we've been told multitasking is evil - right up to the point when they got to make it usable and then it suddenly became newesest bestesest thing ever.

Now we can look at hardware. Macbooks are extremely popular, but I've personally seen a number of Macbooks dying at 2 years of age from exactly the same symptoms (failure of graphics subsystem). It's a reasonably nice piece of hardware, but perfect? No way. And it still doesn't have docking capability, after all these years.

And those are just random things, if I tried, I probably could list dozens of deficiencies in Apple products. Both first and current versions. It doesn't make them especially bad - all their competitors have their sets of faults - but let's not buy into the "perfect" hype too much.

So I can attribute this "perfect the first time" myth to a definite success of Apple marketing, but, unfortunately, there's little substance behind it.

calvin_c• 13 years ago

While the feature set may not have been perfectly filled, I think that you're highlighting areas where their 'perfect the first time' philosophy clashed with customer frustration. They hadn't figured out how to do copy/paste 'perfectly', so they didn't do it. Same with multitasking. While I agree, these things were not perfect even when they did launch, Apple has always preferred to leave out a feature than to push something out half baked. This is why they still haven't integrated NFC into the iPhone.

bpyne2• 13 years ago

I'm not sure you can work iteratively when your product is equally as much about the hardware as the software. Apple can't just iterate on a hinge issue because they pushed a MacBook line out quickly.

Software companies, especially ones that are service-based, have a distinct advantage in deployment.

Apple is fairly unique in that its product is both hardware and software.

auctiontheory• 13 years ago

While I have three Apple products within arm's reach of me, including the one I'm using to type this post, none of them is "perfect!"

replicatorblog3• 13 years ago

I wonder if this notion that Apple needs to "get" web services to survive will really matter in the long run? It's the conventional wisdom, just like that they "lost" the PC wars even though they've been the most profitable PC maker for a decade now. There haven't been many web services that have lasted for a decade or more in a dominant position.

Might Apple's best long term strategy to...

1. Support/innovate the heck out of browser/web connectivity software

2. Push the boundaries of input devices and make the best hardware

3. Secure content deals with popular artists

4. Continue to expand their retail/service footprint

5. Let the various waves of social networks rise and fall, but make money on every device sold?

Even the Android hegemon, which supposedly poses an existential threat, could easily fracture if Samsung decides to go their own way.

Apple's position would be better with a firm control of key web services, but I'm not sure it's a requirement.

dannyr6• 13 years ago

Look at people's IPhones. A lot of its users use apps not built by Apple.

Search, Mail, Social Network, Maps, Photo-sharing, etc.

Yeah, Apple will always make tons of money but IPhone/IPad will become just a device that hosts these apps. If most of the apps people need are available in another platform, the costs of switching is going to be low.

replicatorblog3• 13 years ago

For sure, but can't the same be said of their Mac lines? I'm sure iOS will always be a minority in terms of market share, but I wouldn't be surprised if they are the dominant player in the part of the market where people actually PAY for their product compared to free Android phones.

The tablet market is a good example of this, aside from Kindle's no Android tablet has really taken off and I think it's because of some of those points I enumerated above.

martin_bech• 13 years ago

Many of these apps, have no equal on other platforms.

bpyne2• 13 years ago

The assumption is that the integration of those apps into use-patterns closely enough resembles what they do on the iPhone/Pad. The reality is that it's mostly people who have a predilection towards experimenting with technology who will switch. I doubt that user group makes up more than a few percent of the consumer market.

Apple, I'm sure, studies price patterns and knows well how far up they can push a price without losing the core of their market.

deepinsand• 13 years ago

Isn't the prevailing argument in the industry that vertical integration is necessary for great customer experience?

On Android, I sign in ONCE with my @gmail address and everything is instantly configured.

Another great example is Google Now. That feature is very deeply tied into the Android UI and possible because Google owns the services.

I'm not saying you can't get "good enough" without owning the services, but I think you can provide greater value if you do.

dannyr6• 13 years ago

"Even the Android hegemon, which supposedly poses an existential threat, could easily fracture if Samsung decides to go their own way."

I highly doubt Android would fracture if Samsung goes its own way. A number of manufacturers (Motorola, ZTE, even Xiaomi) would fill the void if Samsung leaves Android.

I highly doubt Samsung would do it. Samsung doesn't know platform. Microsoft does but it still struggles to convince developers to build on top of Windows Phone.

If Samsung leaves, it loses all the Google apps and services. I highly doubt that Samsung could build a decent Map, Mail and other essential apps.

replicatorblog3• 13 years ago

Maybe, but I'd be surprised if Google didn't port their apps over to this imaginary platform. My larger point is that now that a rich UI is becoming a commodity, non-software/platform factors will become increasingly important e.g. manufacturing, distribution, etc.

diydsp• 13 years ago

Apple is in the position Sun Microsystems was 20 years ago. They supplied finished, working solutions, which were really "just" high-quality versions of what the other guys did. Eventually, services got so widespread (Lintel) that customers got less picky and Sun's peculiar quality didn't matter anymore.

However, that won't be how Apple will die out (if they do...), because there is already a huge market of people with lesser quality standards than Apple (Android). Instead, Apple's threat is another company who takes the time to give extraordinary quality for novice users. This isn't happening right now, b/c everyone is fighting for the disruptive (low) end of the market.

So, Sun could have extended their business by diversifying to serve specific high-volume customer markets. Java was an epic half-step. They gave away their ability to add value to customers for nearly free, while focusing ever harder on custom unix hardware and software (UltraSPARC!).

If Apple wants to avoid a Sun-like fate, they'll need to properly diversify beyond custom hw and sw and extend into the spaces of large customers where they can add value. You see _some_ of this in their supporting multimedia Bitflingers, but they'll need to incur much deeper and much more specifically into the multimedia and small office spaces.

Perhaps the Cyanogen corporation could morph into a "luxury" distro?

toadi2• 13 years ago

Difference between apple and sun is that apple is a consumer product. Companies make cost effective decisions. Consumers emotional factors.

CamperBob22• 13 years ago

I was skeptical ... Namely, I was used to web speed: iterative, launch before perfection, leverage your community.

If that's not a one-sentence summary of the iPhone's release history, I don't know what is.

lazerwalker• 13 years ago

It's a subtle difference. Web startups tend to release individual features before they're polished. Apple releases products that have fewer features than one would expect ("launch before perfection"), but the few features they do have tend to be polished.

untog• 13 years ago

I certainly don't think something that changes once a year is 'iterative' in the way he was referring to.

CamperBob22• 13 years ago

The original iPhone got better at a very rapid pace, through iOS updates.

throwaway1979• 13 years ago

Best post I've read on HN in a while!

I think there is a fundamental difference between building hardware+system software vs. building web services and apps. In the former case, you have to get it right and then release. In the latter case, you can afford to iterate for a while as you keep getting better.

Some of the hardware I've bought from Google has made me feel like I'm beta testing it. I don't get that feeling when I buy Apple hardware.

This makes me wonder if other players in the Android space are following Apple's playback. The specific player I am thinking about is Samsung. Why are they doing so well where other Android manufacturers are doing just okay?

hunterwalk2• 13 years ago

yup - the Apple way works well on hardware and even on operating systems. My post is more about my own experiences on how they'll either embrace different styles (or not) for software application development.

NDizzle• 13 years ago

Only meeting with 2 people and only spending an hour on site. This is probably the best interview process I'll read about in the next few weeks on HN.

mikestew• 13 years ago

Don't get your hopes up. The rest of us grunts still get to spend an entire day in front of a whiteboard at Apple, at least as of about a year ago.

hunterwalk2• 13 years ago

ha! well, it was only an hour w two people for both sides to mutually figure out I wasn't a good fit. Probably would have taken longer if it went forward :-)

001sky• 13 years ago

I walked them through my opinion of how technology was changing media and creating open, global platforms.

danso• 13 years ago

Despite knowing going in that this wasn’t likely going to lead to anything, I’m still glad I took the time – you learn a lot by observing how companies hire. Driving away from their HQ I left thinking how difficult consumer services were going to continue to be for them if they insisted on perfection before release. I still think of this every time I use Dropbox instead of iCloud, Sunrise instead of Calendar, Mailbox instead of Mail and so on. Even when I look at iMessage and wonder why the fastest growing apps are chat-related (don’t tell me it’s just cross platform, I think Apple could have been way more aggressive with evolving and opening iMessage up).

Hmmm...when I use the aforementioned services, I have the opposite assumption...that Apple is not at all insisting on perfection before release...and is sometimes OK with substandard releases. It's the promotion of these services as being perfect that Apple seems to be better at...or at least readying these services so that in many/most use cases, they seem perfect to the casual end user.

But I think developers who have worked with iCloud, for instance, would argue strenuously that iCloud was not released in a robust state.

As another anecdotal point...buying an iPod 5 made me realize how perfection is not necessarily Apple's goal, even in hardware. The previous iPod touch, and the iPhones, all had ambient light sensors...this was dropped in iPod 5...this seems like a minor feature but only if you don't go in and out of buildings during the day. Unless I remember to jack up the brightness on my iPod before going out during the day, I literally will not be able to see anything on the iPod screen, unless I go back inside or the day gets darker. Moreover, switching the brightness has been moved out of the quick-nav and buried in Settings.

This is such a massive inconvenience that I can't help but think that Apple was on deadline and for some reason, couldn't fit in the ambient light sensor, and then said, "fuck it, just ship it"

crazygringo• 13 years ago

...how difficult consumer services were going to continue to be for them if they insisted on perfection before release. I still think of this every time I use Dropbox instead of iCloud...

There's a big difference between startups iterating, and giants like Apple. I think we all remember how they were excoriated on the Maps release, which certainly wasn't perfect. Because of their scale, Apple doesn't have the kind of flexibility that unknown startups do -- not just because of their scale, but also because most of their software isn't solely web-based, but is tied into software that is sold with hardware which is released yearly.

I agree that they have a difficult time with a lot of consumer services. But I don't think it's nearly as simple as the author suggests.

badman_ting• 13 years ago

Good point, and Maps is a good example. Apple's whole image is around "it just works", so things are expected to just work. "If you're not embarrassed by it, you waited too long to release it" doesn't really work in Apple's case.

rohansingh• 13 years ago

I actually don't think Maps is a good example. I'd argue that Apple wouldn't have taken such heat and criticism if they'd launch Maps as an independent app, worked to iterate and improve it, and then baked it into iOS as a Google Maps replacement when it was good and ready.

toadi2• 13 years ago

Actually the premium prices paid for apple products makes me expect it's perfect. I'm nog going to pay for a beta product that improves at those prices!

the_bear• 13 years ago

Isn't the author comparing Google's approach to Apple's? Google has more market share than Apple in just about every software category, so if Google can iterate, than why can't Apple?

I think it has more to do with Apple's marketing. Every time they release even the most trivial improvement they tout it as being amazingly innovative. They also charge premium prices. This creates an expectation with their users that everything will be perfect from the beginning.

atlanticus• 13 years ago

so if Google can iterate, than why can't Apple?

Google is known for no customer service because you are the product, Apple while not being perfect, it is clear that their users take precedent over advertisers and even developers.

MikeCapone3• 13 years ago

People pay for Apple products, so they expect something that works well and looks good.

The switching costs are also much higher with hardware than software. You don't want to pay for a phone and find out it's half-baked, while if a 'free' web service doesn't work, it's easy to switch.

It's also about branding and culture, people expect different things from each company. That has pros and cons.

Steko6• 13 years ago

"Google has more market share than Apple in just about every software category, so if Google can iterate, than why can't Apple?"

This seems like the wrong way to understand each companies motivations. Google got into the maps market because Google's ambition is to be the worldwide leader in (among other things) mapping software. Apple got into maps because Google maps product for iOS was shitty and that was being held against the iPhone.

Apple doesn't want to be in every software category, much less be the leader. Google does.

drzaiusapelord• 13 years ago

Maps might not be a great example. Apple was clearly banking on crowdsourcing to help with its inaccurate maps. They could have just released it as an optional app and fixed it over time, until it became mature and then replaced google maps with it. But it looks like they were caught with their pants down as the google maps contract renewel deadline was looming and they said "fuck it, launch with it, and we'll handle the PR of it sucking."

Steko6• 13 years ago

Maps is a great example of the difference because, wait for it, Apple never wanted to be in the mapping business. People are comparing Apple and Google and forgetting that the two companies ambitions are completely different.

Google wants the full vampire squid platter. It wants to be your phone OS, your browser, your desktop OS, your search company, your video site, your social network, your office software solution, your maps solution, your knowledge resource, your ISP, etc.

Apple never wanted to make a browser. Apple had to make a browser because the vampire squid company that led the market in browsers gave them a shitty one and used it to malign one of Apple's biggest products.

Similarly, Apple never even wanted to be in the Maps business. Apple had to get in the maps business on relatively short notice because the vampire squid company that led the maps market gave them a shitty one and used it to malign one of Apple's biggest products.

protomyth• 13 years ago

Apple has a history of only getting one chance. The Newton at the end was great. Maps could turn into the best mapping system ever and it won't matter. As for Microsoft, Bing could start giving the best results and it won't matter. You have to be in shouting distance of perfect in the consumer market.

For a media version take SNL's clumsy portrayal of Pres. Ford after his incident and the reality of his athleticism[1].

Ask Blackberry about how their release with flaws worked.

1) he played linebacker and was actually pretty athletic and not clumsy. Chose your shoes wisely.

xvolter• 13 years ago

I believe Apple fanboys are those who always have the latest Apple products, as hunterwalk describes he has. Seems to me he is just a closet fanboy. Apparently he doesn't actually care if Apple opens up at all, he'll stick with them and support them regardless.

Create• 13 years ago

Hunter Walk 99% Humble, 1% Brag

The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple Posted on October 4, 2013 by hunterwalk

I’m writing this from my latest gen macbook air. And I have a 5S coming (goldie baby).

-- No BS like HBS

nfoz• 13 years ago

God I hope Apple doesn't start releasing shoddy beta-quality software like we've all been forced to expect from the web.

lostlogin• 13 years ago

Someone is proud of the YouTube UI? I avoid it if I can. There is the intro advert I can't skip for 10 seconds, the banner, the ones down the side. How could anyone claim users drove that development?

codelust• 13 years ago

Going through the comments (and most of the HN comments on platforms that tend to divide people), I still find it deeply distressing that even geeks/nerds chase hard after the one-true-way approach. You don't see one true type of bread, you don't see one true type of car, you don't see one true type of anything. Yet, when it comes to things like mobile phones and platforms, we behave like absolute twerps.

People have different circumstances, levels of understanding and fifty to the power of three other factors that determine their choices in life. We want to ignore all of that and dismiss every person who does not see the same merits that we do. And that is sad beyond what can be expressed in words.

Can you imagine in a world in which it makes sense to have both the Apple and Google approach? If you cannot, you should step out and see a lot more of the real world. Choices, no matter how disagreeable or flawed, are welcome in a more open world. I hope we will all, eventually, understand that, even if we don't like what that understanding allows for.

YeeHaw• 13 years ago

I'm happy that at least one company tries to get it right BEFORE unleashing its products on the public. From my experience, the iterative approach often means that a bunch of casual users are given as much input into a design as the designer who devotes months or even years to trying to solve a problem holistically. Iterative design usually means Frankenstein design, that is, a product with way too many unnecessary features, a lack of cohesion and just plain ugliness. The iPhone could not have been created iteratively, and even if it had been, it certainly wouldn't have had the design impact it did. I don't think Google is even on the same planet as Apple, design-wise.

vitd• 13 years ago

Reading this leaves me feeling like the author has some enormous cognitive dissonance going on:

"And finally I defended some of YouTube’s UX elements by demonstrating how it needed to feel like the community’s fingerprints were on the site, not just some experience they lean back and watch but don’t touch."

Every Google service is an experience where Google just leans back and watches but doesn't touch. They have no tech support, not even an email to write to in most cases. What a baffling statement to make.

The Time I “Interviewed” At Apple

Related Stories