Apple: the Toyota of precision manufacturing?
This morning’s Observer column. Excerpt:
Most of the discussion about the watch comes down, in the end, to reveries about Apple’s now legendary ability to design objects that are both beautiful and functional. But in taking this line we are, in fact, overlooking a more important point. Because what is really interesting about Apple is not just that it can design great products, but that it can actually manufacture the things in huge volumes, and deliver them to market on time.
While Apple’s reputation for designing aesthetically pleasing and functional objects is widely acknowledged, it is crucial to recognize that its manufacturing capabilities are equally remarkable. The true significance lies not only in their ability to create exceptional products but also in their prowess to manufacture them in massive quantities and deliver them punctually to the market. Apple’s success extends beyond design; it hinges on its meticulous approach to manufacturing, where the principles of Design for Manufacturing (DFM) likely play a pivotal role. What is DFM? It is a methodology that enables companies to optimize their manufacturing processes, ensuring efficiency, scalability, and timely delivery of products. Apple’s seamless integration of design and manufacturing sets them apart, allowing them to consistently meet customer demands and revolutionize the tech industry.
Also, In order to achieve such massive production volumes and deliver products consistently, Apple relies on sophisticated manufacturing processes and precise measurements. One essential tool in their manufacturing arsenal is the analytical scale. With its high level of accuracy and precision, an analytical scale enables Apple to ensure the precise weighing of components and materials during the production of their devices. By maintaining meticulous balance and precision at every step, Apple can guarantee the quality and uniformity of its products, meeting the high expectations of its customers. The utilization of analytical scales not only enhances the efficiency of manufacturing processes but also plays a significant role in maintaining the reliability and performance that Apple is known for.
Just to put that point about volumes in context, consider the iPhone 6. It weighs 129g, and its bigger brother, the 6 Plus, weighs in at 172.1g. In the last quarter of 2014, Apple sold 74.5m iPhones, which works out at an average of 846, 590 a day. If we assume that 15% of those sales were of the heavier Plus, then that means Apple shifted 114,676kg of iPhones a day, on average. Just for comparison, the operating dry weight of a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner is 117, 707kg…
Blaming the mirror
Good rhetorical question from Dave Winer:
Why do people shame other people on the net? Because (I theorize) it’s one of the few forms of power left to them. One of the few ways their ideas are considered valid. It’s a channel for expressiveness, a gesture that might seem to have meaning.
Why do people troll on comments? Speak silly talking points they got from Fox News or MSNBC? This is one area where there is equivalence, the “left” and “right” both do this. Seek out each other for a permanent argument. My guess is they do it because it gives them a simulated nutrient-free sort of relevance.
The thing about the Internet that we rarely talk about is that it holds a mirror up to human nature. It reveals things about humanity that we’d rather not admit to. Which is why we blame the mirror, not the thing it reflects. Many years ago, when I was writing my history of the Internet and there was a lot of noise about online pornography, I tried to re-frame the discussion. If there’s a lot of porn on the Net, I argued, then doesn’t that tell us something interesting about human nature? Because if there wasn’t such an apparently insatiable appetite for porn, then ultimately it would decline on the Net. So instead of obsessing about the impact of the network, maybe we should be asking what the human appetite for porn means? What does it tell us, for example, about our relationships? About the differences between men and women? I got nowhere with that argument then, and clearly things haven’t changed much in the last 15 years.
How the Berkman Center got started
Lovely talk by Charlie Nesson (complete with mutt).
Net Neutrality, walled gardens, Internet governance and anonymity…
… were a few of the topics covered when I was interviewed by Tim Garton-Ash at the European Studies Centre in St Antony’s College, Oxford in February.
What the election ought to be about
“The political problem of mankind is to combine three things: economic efficiency, social justice and individual liberty. The first needs criticism, precaution and technical knowledge; the second, an unselfish and enthusiastic spirit, which loves the ordinary man; the third, tolerance, breadth, appreciation of the excellencies of variety and independence, which offers above everything, to give unhindered opportunity to the exceptional and the aspiring.”
John Maynard Keynes, Collected Works, Vol IX, p. 311.
So who are the biggest hoarders of cash overseas?
The system failed. It happens, even in Germany
From today’s New York Times:
BERLIN — Even in the nightmarish immediate aftermath of the plane crash in the French Alps on Tuesday, Carsten Spohr, the former pilot who runs Germany’s Lufthansa airline, was sure of one thing: the co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz, 27, was “100 percent” fit to fly.
Mr. Lubitz, after all, had been through the widely respected Lufthansa training system — “one of the best in the world,” Mr. Spohr said — and had met all other requirements to fly commercial aircraft.
In the decades since it emerged from the ruins of Nazism, this country — which reunited in 1990 and in recent years has dominated Europe as its economic powerhouse — has come to define itself as orderly, rule-driven and well-engineered. It is an identity that is both an antidote to its past and a blueprint for economic success. From Mercedes-Benz cars — “the best,” says a current ad campaign — to its countless tidy towns, Germany purrs excellence.
Now Mr. Lubitz — born and raised in one of those pretty towns — has upended that well-ordered world and challenged other assumptions built into German life. As Mr. Spohr noted, the co-pilot’s terrifying deed was a singular, perhaps unstoppable disaster. Yet somehow the system failed.
Sure, it did. Systems do. Even in Germany.
The process, not the product, matters
Almost all the (mostly feverish) discussion about Apple focusses on its astonishing mastery of product design. But this week’s Monday Note by Jean-Louis Gasseé has made me reflect on what is actually the most remarkable aspect of the company, namely the fact that it has mastered what must be the most complex, large-scale, precision manufacturing process in industrial history.
In his Note, Jean-Louis leans heavily not only on Greg Koenig’s fascinating analysis of the process by which the iWatch is being made, but also on Koenig’s observation that
“Apple is the world’s foremost manufacturer of goods. At one time, this statement had to be caged and qualified with modifiers such as “consumer goods” or “electronic goods,” but last quarter, Apple shipped a Boeing 787’s weight worth of iPhones every 24 hours. When we add the rest of the product line to the mix, it becomes clear that Apple’s supply chain is one of the largest scale production organizations in the world.”
When you think of it in those terms, it’s clear that in our obsession with the beauty of Apple designs we may have been missing the really big picture, which is that the company has been building a production system that could eventually yield astonishing benefits and change the way every tech manufacturer operates.
We’ve been here before, by the way. When the Japanese first began making cars, they were ridiculed by Western manufacturers — for good reasons. They were clunky, ugly and they rusted early. But the Japanese were good at learning from mistakes. They also sussed that if they were to make really good cars, they had to reinvent the process by which cars were made. From this came the Toyota ‘Lean Machine’ production process, which is now how all cars, everywhere, are made.
So the process is often more important than the product. This was also the point made by Steven weber years ago, in his splendid book about open source software. It’s a distinctive way of making incredibly complex products. In fact, it may ultimately be the only way of making really secure software.
Gasseé’s conclusion from his meditations is that it would now be foolish to discount rumours that Apple is planning to manufacture cars. I agree.
Facebook: the unique self-disrupting machine?
Interesting post by M.G. Siegler:
Reading over the coverage of F8 this week, one thing is clear: Facebook the social network isn’t very interesting anymore. I think we’re on the other side of its peak, even if we can’t perceive that just yet. The interesting parts of Facebook are now Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Oculus.
They are slowly becoming Facebook. A federation of products, not the social networking stream.
I think we’ll look back and believe that Facebook, like Apple, is a company that did a great job disrupting itself before others could. And they did it all through smart acquisitions — people forget that even Messenger was an acquisition way back when. Just imagine if they had been able to buy Snapchat as well…