[hutzlibu]

Ok, in the context of that time, that apples devices had the best hardware (and optimized drivers) - then yes, it makes some sense, that apple would have the best mobile apps, so win in that regard.

But since he clearly stated the goal as apple should have the best apps, I am not convinced, that he would have continued to push for a open technology, that would run well on any good hardware, whether apple or not.

And in 2010 the competing smartphones were already not that far behind.

[scyzoryk_xyz]

I really don’t know how to count “best” either in hardware or software. Very difficult to define something like that. The promise of Apple apps early on was that they conformed to a particular UX style which definitely gave the user a feeling of safety.

The way I see it - his strategic decisions were based on all of the decades of experiences in the computer industry. The goal was to build a closed platform and to guard it by emphasizing quality as an ideal. And then to incentivize eager developers small and large to come to it and become dependent on it. I don’t think he would have pushed for “open technology” or running that software on anything but apple. It was the hallmark of his whole thing.

But he could have run and defended the whole thing in a completely different way. And this is why it would have been very interesting to see the guy live. Would he have enforced on all those quality related shortcomings that Apple stands accused for today? Would he have argued vehemently in their defense or would he respond differently? Or maybe perhaps he would have moved on to another “big thing” product-wise by now?