• Steve Jobs faked full signal strength and swapped devices during the first iPhone demo due to fragile prototypes and bug-riddled software.

• Engineers got drunk during the presentation to calm their nerves.

• Despite the challenges, Jobs successfully completed the 90-minute demonstration without any noticeable issues.

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      123
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I know it’s already normalized, but…

      Maybe it’s just me, but maybe we shouldn’t be normalizing outright deceiving people when you’re selling a product.

      How is that not false advertising? Why should companies be allowed to magic up a fake example of their product actually working, and sell that to customers, when the real product doesn’t actually work yet?

      Just because it’s “perfectly normal” doesn’t make it okay to peddle propaganda and lie to people for profit.

      It’s like the Tesla “robot” that was clearly a person in a weird suit. Why are they allowed to advertise things that functionally don’t exist? Why are they allowed to sell unfinished products with promise they may one day be finished (cough full self driving cough)?

      I mean holy fuck it’s like Beeper offering paid access to a service that allows Android and PC users to use iMessage, but Apple keeps breaking each new iteration every few days… Like there was no long-term plan to make sure that the service would work long-term before asking people to pay for it.

      It’s all fucking bonkers, man. We’ve just allowed snake-oil salesmen to rule the roost. The bigger the lie, the bigger the profit.

      • PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Oh, I agree with you! And I’m sure we can have this discussion about almost any current product launch, too.

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          How is that not false advertising? Why should companies be allowed to magic up a fake example of their product actually working, and sell that to customers, when the real product doesn’t actually work yet?

          If when they ship the actual thing to the customer it’s not like they claimed then it’s fraud (or “false advertising” which is the lenient version).

          Strictly for presentation ahead of time I think it’s borderline. Negative hype can kill a product that could have been good. Sure, complete honesty would be ideal, but if you say “well it sucks right now but we promise it will be ok when you buy it”, not many people would rush to order one. Many good products never made it to market because of insufficiently good perception. On the flip side, creating positive hype out of smoke and mirrors can be used to kill a competitor’s product for no good reason, so it’s not quite ok either.

          • 1847953620@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Negative hype can kill a product that could have been good.

            Positive false hype can deceive people into wasting money.

            Sure, complete honesty would be ideal, but if you say “well it sucks right now but we promise it will be ok when you buy it”, not many people would rush to order one.

            And they shouldn’t. It’s just another way of saying “people acting rationally based on truthful information”

            Many good products never made it to market because of insufficiently good perception.

            That should be a separate issue. It’s not the only available path, just one often taken because it’s the most forgiving of shoddy business practices, doesn’t justify its existence, either.

            On the flip side, creating positive hype out of smoke and mirrors can be used to kill a competitor’s product for no good reason, so it’s not quite ok either.

            I think people are starting to realize the depth of corporate deception and bad-faith practices and how that affects everyone at large, and so they’re rightly tired of them and trying to reset it all back to simple, effective, and fair ethical standards.

      • gradyp@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I agree, but what’s more, I am not trying to defend the behavior of Jobs here. But…to me anyway there is a material difference between say this, where the product did live up to the demo ultimately. In this case the demo was done on pre-release versions and so problems were expected and planned for.

        Contrast this with say the cyber truck launch. Similar situation but 1. they failed to properly anticipate and plan for failure (broken window?) and 2. they made promises about wishes and desires, because the delivered product thus far does not live up to the promises.

        The whole behavior is shitty to be sure, but I’d be ok going back to demos about planned yet achievable and deliverable features.

          • dave881@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            I think that’s kind of rhe point of these sorts to demos to begin with.

            The company says we’re developing a product that, we are not ready to ship today, but will be this awesome. Give us some money and you can see how awesome it will be.

            I generally assume that anything a company says about a product/service that is not shipping today is the best possible spin on the best version of what they’d like to sell. What you buy probably won’t be what is shown as an early demo

            • 1847953620@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Just because you’ve adapted to the lies doesn’t make them ok, nor the best version of what is possible

      • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Eh I think it’s fine because they weren’t selling the public engineering samples, they were selling finished devices. As long as the product they sold worked as shown on stage, that’s fine.

      • Alex@feddit.ro
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Beeper stopped charging customers for the time Apple broke their app.

        • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          So each time Apple breaks it, they have to stop charging customers? Sounds like a real winning business plan to lose money each time you need to code up a new solution to the original problem. /s

          • Alex@feddit.ro
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            10 months ago

            That shows they actually care about billing their users fairly. They lost some money but gained some trust, just like how Apple would’ve lost some money if they didn’t fake their demo

      • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Why should companies be allowed to magic up a fake example of their product actually working, and sell that to customers, when the real product doesn’t actually work yet?

        The way Apple does things is insane, but they weren’t selling iPhones yet.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Who’s normalizing it?

        I have exactly zero control over what these people do. They’re gonna do what they’re gonna do, and I have fuck all to do with it.

        And don’t tell me we have influence en masse. If that were true, then this stuff wouldn’t be happening. Quite the opposite, clearly most people don’t want to look past the smoke and mirrors for the stuff they’re hyped about. (We’re all susceptible to this kind of thing).

        A quote from 230+ years ago kind of sums it up nicely:

        Happy will it be if our [decisions] should be directed by a judicious estimate of our true interests, unperplexed and unbiased by considerations not connected with the public good. But this is a thing more ardently to be wished than seriously to be expected.

        He’s talking about public good, but you could insert any subject, eg. Perspective on a sales presentation (all of them are lies, to greater and lesser degrees).

        I’m sure I could find similar quotes from the Stoics (~1000 years ago), Sun Tzu (~1900 years ago) or even Hammurabi (~3800 years ago), showing this ain’t new. It’s part of human nature.

        Liars gonna lie, telling myself I can change that is just delusion, which gets me nowhere.

      • whofearsthenight@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        How is that not false advertising? Why should companies be allowed to magic up a fake example of their product actually working, and sell that to customers, when the real product doesn’t actually work yet?

        For Apple, we can stop right here, the product worked as described. Apple did the demo, and then released the things they said they would in the time they said they would.

        It’s like the Tesla “robot” that was clearly a person in a weird suit. Why are they allowed to advertise things that functionally don’t exist? Why are they allowed to sell unfinished products with promise they may one day be finished (cough full self driving cough)?

        Snake oil salesman in the dictionary should just be updated to a picture of Elon Musk. Elon has a long track record of saying shit and not doing it, whether that’s full self driving, cybertruck (well, that finally came out), solving world hunger, etc.

        I mean holy fuck it’s like Beeper offering paid access to a service that allows Android and PC users to use iMessage, but Apple keeps breaking each new iteration every few days… Like there was no long-term plan to make sure that the service would work long-term before asking people to pay for it.

        Yeah, I totally agree.

    • distantsounds@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Maybe a demo should be just that; not a magic show. Normalizing deception for profit doesn’t seem like a healthy thing for anyone, but that’s only because I** didn’t own any stock in apple back then. Edit: Yes, I am still salty about the purchasing Starfield also

      • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Eh I think it’s fine because they weren’t selling the public engineering samples, they were selling finished devices. As long as the product they sold worked as shown on stage, that’s fine.

    • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Yeah I think the industry learned from Bill Gates’ flub when demoing Win98.

      For those too young, it bluescreened and crashed on a giant projector screen in front of thousands of people when they plugged in a scanner to demonstrate “plug and play”.

      • gullible@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Even more worth a laugh is the Surface presentation where both the presentation model and the backup froze within a minute of each other.

      • PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        That was an early beta of Win95, very iconic. He famously closed the laptop, smiled, and said “I guess that’s why we’re not shipping yet.”

        And yes, that’s exactly the kind of situation you want to avoid on stage.

  • aeronmelon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Calling the stage units prototypes is being nice. The reality was that at that point the iPhone had barely gotten to a proof of concept stage. Months before this event, the developers were still using a giant desktop tower to simulate the phone’s hardware.

    That the photos of the phone were real and not concept art, that the stage units weren’t just unusable rubber dummies was a magic trick itself.

    When the developers revealed years later that the iPhone presentation (just the presentation, not even the actual launch) was a make or break moment for the company, they absolutely were not kidding.

    And then they went from “should not even be working” test units to fully functional production units in six months!

    Whatever your opinion of Jobs or Apple, credit where credit is due.

    • Mereo@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      This is marketing. Showing the phone as a working product ready to be shipped is a tactic to scare off the competition, demonstrate that you have the upper hand, and entice customers to buy it.

      That is marketing in our capitalist system. I’m not saying it’s right, just that it’s a fact.

        • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Android, Windows Phone (the “metro” rewrite from scratch - not the WinCE one), Palm WebOS, etc were all well and truly in development and close to launch and most of them were being developed in the open. Apple who was cutting corners everywhere to leapfrog those products. It took Apple just four years to go from initial planning to a shipping product.

          Symbian was starting to look pretty good too — my last “feature” phone ran Symbian, and it was better than an iPhone in a lot of ways. For example it had an “app store” well before Apple did.

          It was the ARM CPU that kicked it off. At the time even a shitty slow Intel CPU only got a third of a day battery life with a 100Wh battery. ARM had just worked out how to design a processor that could last all day on a 10Wh battery and with decent performance.

          Apple was a founding partner of ARM - decades before iPhone, so they knew it was coming and what was on the roadmap. They also likely knew other phone companies were ramping up production taking advantage of the new generation of processors.

          • Mbourgon everywhere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            10 months ago

            Android was still a year+ out at that time (first beta came out in Nov 2007, though). Thanks, I did forget Symbian. Thanks for the opportunity to dig through the rest, though.

  • Nacktmull@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Not saying all these necessarily apply to Steve jobs but I really hate how capitalism gratifies liars, fakers, cheaters, egomaniacs, narcissists, psychopaths and selfish exploiters in general.

    • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      You say that like there’s a single system in the history of the world which doesn’t. Capitalism isn’t novel with regard to humans taking advantage of one another.

      • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        The difference is that in other systems, when people behave like that, it’s then gaming the system. Capitalism is the only system that incentivizes it in rewards it directly, As a matter of principle.

        • galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          It doesn’t reward it anymore than even local government control over resources. You act like nobody has ever tried to get out of a speeding ticket or fake their way to impress their lead.

  • Veedem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    This article is terribly written and seems to repeat itself a bit. Almost seems like it was written by a GPT system.

  • serial_crusher@lemmy.basedcount.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    10 months ago

    Every tech demo ever is fake, with the possible exception of the original Cybertruck demo, but I suspect even that one just wasn’t faked very well.

  • Dra@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    This is how all demos used to be. If the author/publisher of the ai prompt wasnt born less than 20 years ago they would know this

    • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      Used to be?

      Even as early as a few years ago, game demos at E3 were extremely controlled environments to avoid the journalist player crashing the game.

    • whofearsthenight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I have a hard time even figuring out what the issue here is? it’d be one thing if the first iPhone shipped and was riddled with bugs and promised/demoed features weren’t there, but that wasn’t the case. Launched more or less rock solid, and iPhoneOS 1.0 (as it was called then) was far from the buggiest wide release.

  • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Why is this published now as news when every one of these anecdotes was published over a decade ago? This story leaves out all the better juicy details.

    • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      In my career, I’ve learnt the hard way that every crowning achievement starts with a bullshitter being cursed by a bunch of engineers - the very same engineers who years later laud the bullshitter as the person with the tenacity to drive them to achieve greatness.

  • LainOfTheWired@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    They didn’t fake full signal strength they had AT&T( I think) bring in a full blown portable GSM transmitter

  • doublejay1999@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Well that’s where I’ve been going wrong in my career. I have worked for 2 startup companies, who faked product demos, in software.

    I’d come from corporate background, where it was all fairly standard off the shelf software we sold and implemented. Not above the odd white lie, but the products could do what they claimed.

    In the startups, the first occasion I did a presentation on a laptop. I was new to the company, had a couple of days training. The demo went great, the client loved it. Since I would also be managing the systems integration, I asked the devs how exactly x talked to y - and they said it didn’t yet, I’d just shown a simulation. Looking back I was naive, but I quit at the end of the week . I had no idea it was not uncommon.

    I think people outside tech have no idea how common place this is.

  • binboupan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    I think it is normal since the software wasnt ready for production yet; at work we also have forks and forks of forks just to demo new features for people. At the end he did deliver a working product unlike many game devs these days.

    • M137@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Agreed that it’s pretty cool. The vast majority of on-stage demos like this are faked, but it’s not usually because they aren’t long enough into development that they just can’t do it any other way. And as long as what they show is what you get, which is the case here, I think it’s fine.

  • AnActOfCreation@programming.devOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    The headline is pretty negative but the actual article is a pretty insightful look at the behind-the-scenes of the demo and how they made it work.