What can we say about Apple? They recently changed their name from Apple Computers, Inc. to just Apple, Inc., even though they've had some trouble in the past from Apple Records, the Beatles label, for trademark problems. However, they arguably make the most stylish, streamlined set of new media technological products of any company in the world.

Their current head guy is Steve Jobs, though he left briefly several (CHECK) ago and only recently returned.

One problem for many "end-users" of Apple products has always been the cost, often times leading to a somewhat unsettling class division, in which middle-class kids make their parents buy them a Mac laptop and iPod, and the working class stiffs they go to school with gaze on longingly at the minimalist, pretty little piece of tech in their neighbors backpack, knowing they can never afford one. Apple sort-of addressed this problem recently with its creation of the Mac Mini line of desktop computers (which started at $499 fully configured less the monitor), but the minimum price on those has gone up to $599, slowly pushing out of mass-purchase range (if it was ever in it).

Over the last several years, in Apple's defense,the company has realized that in order to be competitive in the personal computing market (which might not necessarily be one of their priorities), it is in there best interest to ensure compatability with at least the widely used software of the computing word (hence the emergence of Microsoft Office for macs).

Apple computers, whether deserving or not, have been generally accepted as the ideal machine for creating and editing multimedia. The set of software that comes standard with an Apple purchase includes programs like GarageBand, iMovie, iPhoto, etc. These applications are all relatively to learn/master compared to their counterparts designed for other operating systems. However this should not necessarily be interpreted that these programs are better (is anyone familiar with other media editing software, b/c if one does have experience, they are much more qualified to talk about this than I am).

For as long as I can remember, Apple has (in their marketing/advertising) exploited the fact they are very user-friendly and have little programs.
[from my personal experience, owning an aging PC as well as a relatively new apple, the apple certainly has had far fewer problems, and when an issue of compatibility arises, instructions often arise on the screen telling the user exactly what codecs to download in order to resolve the issue).

But back to the exclusivity of Apple merchandise, which I feel is an extremely interesting aspect, I think it's important to look at this through a sociological or anthropological culture lens. A very 'extravagant' example that will hopefully illustrate this point goes like this. The wealthy can afford the newest most up to date products (not only Apple computers, but fully loaded Lexus's and Mercedes etc.). Interestingly, it's usually not the wealthy that are going to take the time to sit down and learn everything there is to about their new computer...chances are they could probably have spent 1/3 as much and accomplish the tasks of web-browsing and e-mailing with the same efficiency. But Apples look better! And they have glamorous stores, that make them look even better! What I find most interesting is though those (especially teenagers) who don't have everything handed to them on a silver platter, are the one's with the cheaper computers, but they know far more about the workings of them. So, as a social commentary, there appears to be two different types of pride. The first one (and arguably the less authentic) focuses on social status. The second is a kind pride that can (and hopefully will) develop from an individual's spirit that is not willing to be broken by something like bank accounts. It is this second type of pride that seems like it should prevail, as these hardened individuals realize that they can create, share, contribute, and distribute their material at a volume the social elites will never be able to match.

One last thing before I'll cease my ramblings I'll conclude this little contribution with a quote from the reading "Renaissance Now! Media Ecology and the New Global Narrative" by Douglass Rushkoff (one of the readings we read for class)

"...the Apple-was conceived by Steve Jobs on the bongwaer-stained capets of a Reed College dorm room. And Jobs, a Buddhist at the time, didn't call it an Apple for nothing. The personal computer was the forbidden fruit-a way of access to the Tree of Knowledge, and an affront to those who would sequester any information from the formerly little people. The meek would indeed inherit the earth" (Rushkoff, 24)

If the personal computer does indeed provide "access to the Tree of Knowledge"
and the assertion that "The meek would indeed inherit the earth", then I can only see two divergent paths when it comes to Steve Jobs and his apparent early ideology.

Path one- Jobs could still be an idealist and hasn't truly sold out on his initial beliefs. To really justify this though, the public would have to see him in a much more philanthrologic role, ensuring access to this incredible and enlightening collective of knowledge. To do this, Jobs would have to take the focus off his own company and willingly and generously work to spread personal computing and internet access to the fringes of society (a strategy his stock-holders would likely oppose)

Path two- Jobs could actively lead a campaign changing apple from a company for profit, to a company for knowledge. The affordibility of Apples would be key to this strategy, as they are generally accepted as easy to use and reliable- ideal for rural areas or inner-city areas were tech support/repair service is less than adequate. Apple would sacrifice the exclusive status that it currently holds.

Unfortunately neither of these are likely to occur by the hands of Steve Jobs, but we are entering a new age in which the typical teenager trying to stay afloat in the 'teenage wasteland' needs hope that the world can be a more equitable place. Therefore, the future of history is being shaped in this moment, and if new media, especially the internet can be molded into a networked community of those who share general principles, perhaps the coming future won't be so focused upon social status and wealth, but rather the creativity and compassion of the human race.

Is "access to the tree of knowledge" what we should be focusing on right now?
Are there more pertinent issues begging our attention? Or can "access to the tree of knowledge" present us with the tools and information to try to begin to understand our world and place within it.

Apple Inc. has surely created its niche, and it's not necessarily a bad thing (as I'm typing on one).

More that should be added to this article, as the information I've posted is a slightly more abstract (and maybe doesn't belong in this thread)
some ideas that I didn't get around to if anyone wants to tackle them:
-Apple's marketing strategy (simplicity: the box commercials)
-What Steve Jobs is up to these days
-Who really controls the decisions that are made? does Jobs own 51% of the company?
-the emergence of the glamorous apple stores
-the success and failure of various products
-Apples in the classroom
-the ease of creating media.