This started as a simple answer to the remark by Charlotte, but it expanded
into some observations about Apple, someof which I just learned yesterday.
So, read on.


On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Charlotte Magnusson <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

One problem at least scientifically is that failures are so damned hard to
publish. When will we see a failures track on any important conference:-)?
/Charlotte

 --------------------------------------------------------

Although it is a well-known problem that failed experiments are difficult
to get published (a problem I and other journal editors have devoted
considerable time to), in the case of publicly announced products that
fail, a good investigator, perhaps from a business or design school, can
interview the people involved, especially if they have left the company, to
try to determine the story (or is it, *a* story).



Another problem with the story of failures is that people don't want to
talk about them. So in science, even if an editor is willing to publish
reports of failed experiments, few scientists want to admit their failures
publicly.  Same with business or perhaps any endeavor.


When I was at Apple, we had a number of failed projects where I thought
that the ideas were excellent but that there were simply some problems with
the execution.  Please redo it, I pleaded, but the culture was such that
people would slink away: nobody wanted to go near a failure. So many good
ideas died for this reason. Microsoft’s culture was just the opposite: if a
product failed, they redid it. As a well-known joke put it, they never got
things right until try three.



Note that in the period I am talking about, Apple was languishing and dying
whereas Microsoft was booming.



--------------------------------

Yesterday, I went to a talk at IDEO about Apple. The event was to announce
a new book about Apple and its culture:



Adam Lashinsky, "Inside Apple: How America's Most Admired -- and secretive
-- Company Really Works. New York: Business Plus. 2012.


There were lots of people from Fortune magazine there because the book came
from an article in that magazine.



Adam got no cooperation from Apple in writing the book. He had to rely upon
people who had left.  This book is complimentary to the Steve Jobs
biography in that it tells the story from the lower ranks and also
emphasizes the product process.


speaking of failures, David Kelley (founder of IFEO) gave a little talk
about his relationship with IDEO. His company (David Kelley Design until it
merged with the company run by Mike Nuttall and the one run by Bill
Moggridge to became IDEO) had a long involvement with Apple. David proudly
showed us the early prototypes for the first Apple mouse, the Apple III and
the Lisa. Speaking of failures, David pointed out that perhaps IDEO should
not be so proud of the Apple III and Lisa because they were both failures
in the marketplace.  (But in my opinion they were failures because the
Apple III software and features were badly thought through and the Lisa was
too expensive, too weak, and too soon to market.)


A number of IDEO folks talked about their relationship with Apple as a
designer's delight. Apple pushed them harder than any client, but also
supported them better than any client -- ever. Kelley spoke of getting a
phone call at 3 AM from Steve Jobs who complained that the screws on the
inside of the Macintosh were were bronze, not whatever material Steve gad
requested.   "Don't you have anything more important to do at 3 AM?" Kelley
asked. "This is important, damn it," said Jobs.  IDEO emphasized that other
companies talk design, but in the end draw back because "too expensive" or
"customers said ... " or ...   Apple never drew back. Too expensive? So
what -- Charge more.


Don