[pffft8888]

It’s not being an Open Startup that kills your chances. If you have an insurrmountable business advantage (it’s who you know, not what you know) and you keep the how-to details of your solution hidden behind a generic description where the solution is really hard to pull off well, being open only helps you. Firstly, by using idiots who would steal your idea to create buzz in the market for you as they pitch their silly me-too, and secondly by inspiring confidence and showing lack of insecurity, with clarity and transparency. I mean you can’t rely on NDAs anyway. Why act in fear unless what you’re doing is just run of the mill and you have no particular advantage.

I also argue that there is no net advantage to Apple's secrecy. If they had openly talked about the M1 (Apple Silicon) when they were working on it they would have just had more mindshare and the whole Apple ecosystem could have been preparing for it. By staying silent until they released it, it bought them nothing other than the element of surprise, which is like when little children don't want you to see what they're working on, in case you would take over their creative process, and instead want to surprise you with their brilliance.

I very much doubt that secrecy in the absence of insecurity has any value.

[widdershins]

I personally find the lack of vaporware from Apple refreshing. With Apple, when you hear about the thing you can go out and buy the thing. From too many companies you hear about cool tech, only to find it disappointing or hobbled a year later when they actually get to release.

[pffft8888]

There is a difference between promising and not delivering, and firing employees for leaking a photo of an upcoming product. I think Apple is on the narcissistic spectrum of wanting to induldge in the moment and show off their brilliance. It's good to have a policy of not promising specific products or features if they're not sure. But their secrecy policy goes far beyond that, and includes silencing employees for workplace abuses. Apple is not a good company in the moral sense. They are good at building stuff. That's all the credit they deserve.

[serf]

>I personally find the lack of vaporware from Apple refreshing.

They recently nixed their AR products that had been hinted at for forever, and the 'Apple Car' was 'right around the corner' sitting as a boogey-man juxtaposed to Tesla's efforts for years before being cancelled.

They're more reliable than most groups, but post-Jobs Apple loves to mention fantasy stuff that consumers will never see, it's part of their hype cycle.

[piperswe]

I think there's important distinction here in that neither of those projects have ever been officially mentioned by Apple PR.

[scarface74]

Apple at no point ever “announced” a car or any AR products.

[askafriend]

> but post-Jobs Apple loves to mention fantasy stuff

Apple never does this. They've never mentioned AR hardware, they've never mentioned Apple Car or anything else to that effect.

You're talking about the media at large which does this for the purpose of speculation.

[filoleg]

Yeah, fully agreed. I think it helps that Apple fairly recently reinforced their belief in that approach with their AirPower charger fiasco[0] as well. Everyone was excited for it, and then it got quietly canceled, with people still bringing it up occasionally. Announcing ahead of time ended up blowing up in their face, lesson learned.

0. https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/5/22611234/apple-airpower-wi...

[tomcam]

I can’t cite examples, but in my long experience, ever since the Osborne computer was released, it was understood that if you talked about a future product, people would simply stop buying the current product because they were waiting for the replacement.

[scarface74]

That was a myth

http://www.thesoftwareunderground.com/2005/06/osborne-effect...

[tomcam]

I’ll be damned, thanks. Cringely is a far better source than I.

[bordercases]

It in the absence of insecurity, it preserves security.