Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ernie.berkeley.edu!mazlack
From: mazlack@ernie.berkeley.edu (Lawrence J. Mazlack)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
Message-ID: <13260@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Fri, 18-Apr-86 21:17:48 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.13260
Posted: Fri Apr 18 21:17:48 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 20-Apr-86 04:47:48 EST
References: <3525@sun.uucp>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: mazlack@ernie.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Lawrence J. Mazlack)
Distribution: net
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 63

>
>The Forbes 500 is out for the year, and reading through it last night a
>few ideas came home to roost.  The most important is the realization (one
>that I think most people who have dealt with Apple over the years) that 
>APPLE IS NOT A STARTUP ANYMORE.  
>
>According to Forbes, Apple is the 392nd largest company in america, with $1.7
>BILLION in sales. 
>
>
>So far, so good. But take a look at the list of companies that Apple is 
>BIGGER than (not all of these are hi-tech, but they are well known examples
>of Big Companies): Black and Decker; Subaru of America; Zenith Electronics;
>National Semiconductor; McGraw Hill; Gould; Tektronix; New York Times;
>Intel; Perkin-Elmer; Polaroid; Adolph Coors; AMD; ADP; Capital Cities/ABC;
>Clorox; Comdisco; Cray Research; Data General; Harris Corp; Intergraph;
>Prime Computer and Tandem Computers.
>
>
>When I look at it in terms of how Apple is (as opposed to how I perceived
>them to be) I don't think they're doing a bad job. If you've got a bitch
>against Apple, ask yourself if you'd exepect the same out of Dec or IBM.
>If not, then don't expect it ourt of Apple either -- it isn't a startup
>anymore.
>

I can't agree more with the statistics.  Just the conclusions.

If you recall, this discussion got started as to WHY APPLE WAS LOOSING THE
BUSINESS MARKET TO IBM.  

In my mind, one of the reasons is exactly what you say, they are not a start
up and do not do very well providing baseline service. The kind of service
that IBM DOES PROVIDE. Busineses expect service.  If they don't get it,
they won't deal with you.  IBM's three principles are:
  (1) Provide the best customer service,
  (2) Have good equipment,
  (3) Respect the individual.
From all that I hear, Apple does treat their people well - certainly they
have very talented individuals.  Apple does have good equipment.  But,
the quality of their service is suspect.

You are right, service should not be on the basis of friendships or people
being nice, it should be institutionalized.  If it isn't there, for all
customers, the business market place will eventually not use the product
as it will not be cost effective to do so.

It is really too bad.  Apple has a product with a feature that is really 
useful in the business environment: user friendliness for the casual
user.

One last comment.  A lot of the general, posted comments on this question
have come from people with minimal business environment experience. I have
got a lot of private mail from people like myself who have been selling
into that environment.  There is a real difference in perspective.

Larry Mazlack
  UUCP		{tektronix,dual,sun,ihnp4,decvax}!ucbvax!ucbernie!mazlack
  New style	mazlack@ernie.berkeley.edu	
  ARPA | CSNET	mazlack%ernie@berkeley.ARPA
  BITNET   	mazlack@ucbernie.BITNET
  telephone     (415) 528-0496
  snail         CS Dept, 571 Evans, U. California, Berkeley, CA 94720