While the article focuses, perhaps unsurprisingly, on his links to Britain — his design education, how London’s a vibrant city and so on — and runs over the now-familiar details of his career, there are a few choice quotes where he explains a few things about his sensibility.

In particular, he mentions how Apple tries hard to make its customers feel that the products and services have a built-in sense of care. By that he means trying to instill a carefulness and thoughtful philosophy right through the product — and avoid the worry that producing millions of devices would somehow introduce a “godless” quality to the things it makes.

“We try to develop products that seem somehow inevitable. That leave you with the sense that that’s the only possible solution that makes sense.”

“I think subconsciously people are remarkably discerning. I think that they can sense care. I think it’s a wonderful view that care was important – but I think you can make a one-off and not care and you can make a million of something and care. Whether you really care or not is not driven by how many of the products you’re going to make.”

“One of the concerns was that there would somehow be, inherent with mass production and industrialisation, a godlessness and a lack of care.

“We’re keenly aware that when we develop and make something and bring it to market that it really does speak to a set of values. And what preoccupies us is that sense of care, and what our products will not speak to is a schedule, what our products will not speak to is trying to respond to some corporate or competitive agenda. We’re very genuinely designing the best products that we can for people.”

The allusion to “godlessness” may seem odd, but I suspect that he hasn’t turned to religion — and is in fact referring to the soullessness of many designed-by-committee, manufactured-by-the-ton products.

Given how rarely Ive steps into the limelight (even now) (he also spoke to London’s Evening Standard a couple of months ago) it’s worth a read: the rest of the interview is here.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Forecast: Tablet App Sales To Hit $8B by 2015
• Controversy, courtrooms and the cloud in Q1
• Monetizing music in the post-scarcity age

I was especially interested to learn that though Wozniak had confidence in Apple’s ability to rise out of the depths in 1996 when Jobs returned to the company through the purchase of NeXT, he admitted that he was initially skeptical of how Jobs would accomplish that. He then goes on to state that Jobs’ success in doing so was due in large part to his ability “to keep secrets where you need to keep secrets” and “to make sure you’re not overbuilding a bunch of junk you can’t sell.”

It’s also interesting to see the role that Wayne played, which was explained by both in what are obviously fairly diplomatic terms. It was pretty harsh when Chang reminds Wayne that he’s “not a wealthy man” after selling his stake in Apple at a very early stage, which comes at around 6:50 mark in the interview. Take a look at the full interview below and let us know what you think.

Video courtesy of Boomberg Televison.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Flash analysis: Steve Jobs

Below are a series of comments and insights from several top developers in the Mac community: Rich Siegel, founder and CEO of Bare Bones Software (Yojimbo, Textwrangler, and BBEdit), Gedeon Maheux, principal at Iconfactory (Twitterrific, Frenzic, etc.), Alykhan “AJ” Jetha, CEO of Marketcircle (Billings, Daylite, etc.), David Frampton, founder of Majic Jungle (Chopper 2) and Ken Case, CEO of The Omni Group (OmniFocus, OmniGraffle, OmniPlan, etc.).

Surprisingly United

These developers represent a pretty broad cross-section of solutions including developer tools like BBEdit, utilities like Twitterrific, business software like Billings, games like Chopper 2, and serious productivity tools like OmniGraffle Pro. What’s perhaps most interesting is how each one sees enormous opportunity for both “mass market” and “niche” solutions on the Mac App Store.

Why release through the Mac App Store?

When asked about why they chose to release their products on the Mac App Store, a general theme emerged. Most everyone was excited about getting in front of customers on the 20 million Snow Leopard Macs out there with a low-friction sales channel.

Rich Siegel, Bare Bones: “Folks who learn about our products through the Mac App Store are a welcome addition to our existing audience, particularly if they wouldn’t have become aware of our work otherwise.”

Gedeon Maheux, Iconfactory: “The sheer number of people who will be able to find your creations is exciting.”

AJ Jetha, Marketcircle: “The Mac App Store removes two friction points: downloading/installing and purchasing. That’s HUGE!”

David Frampton, Majic Jungle: “I was always planning to do a Mac version of Chopper 2 anyway, but the Mac App Store came along at just the right time, and being part of the launch was too big an opportunity to miss.”

Ken Case, The Omni Group: “The Mac App Store is the most convenient way to buy our software. Period.”

What are the advantages of the Mac App Store?

There are a number of advantages that these developers saw in distributing software through the App Store, like simpler licensing, management of serial numbers, and the ability to trust Apple to notify users of updates. The advantages are probably a little bigger for a small shop like Majic Jungle that had been using the shareware distribution model prior to the App Store’s launch.

Frampton: “I think historically many users have been scared of shareware and unsure of where to find and download apps. These users will now have the trust of Apple’s approval process and the single location to find apps, and so more users will be downloading more apps. It’s a perfect fit for Majic Jungle Software, which mostly focuses on games and entertainment apps with a broad appeal.”

What’s most exciting about the store?

When I asked what was most exciting about the App Store, many of the developers were optimistic about the convenience for customers. Apple has already developed a lot of trust with customers in running a software marketplace, which will make it easier for customers to buy at the new store. Gedeon Maheux captured a lot of my feelings about the App Store as a user.

Maheux: “For myself, I think the most exciting thing is there is now a place I can go to search specifically for Mac-based software. Before you had to a Google search, sort through the results, ask on Twitter, etc. The whole one-stop-shop approach is very appealing.”

Is the App Store a revolution in software distribution?

As to whether or not the Mac App Store was truly “revolutionary,” reaction was mixed:

Frampton: “Absolutely. It introduces a previously unviable business model, that of distributing ‘snack’ cheap apps with very specific tasks.”

AJ: “The iOS App Store was a revolution. The Mac App Store is just following in its footsteps, but it will be disruptive.”

Siegel: “So, it’s hard to give it full-fledged “revolution” status, but pretty easy to give it solid “evolution” status.”

How does the App Store compare to your existing sales process?

Maheux: “We really tried to make our sales process frictionless, but compared to Apple, it might as well be sandpaper. There really is no equal among online shopping experiences except maybe Amazon’s One-click checkout. Even Android can’t compete in this way with the App Store. It can’t be overstated.”

Case: “I view the Mac App Store as a replacement for the retail sales channel: It’s a place for consumers to go when they want to buy software.  And there couldn’t be less friction in their one-click purchasing process. Our own online store has a lot of flexibility the Mac App Store doesn’t offer, such as upgrade pricing and discounts for volume, bundle, and educational purchases.  But those options do lead to some extra complexity and friction.”

Siegel: “Products purchased using the Mac App Store interface are instantly downloaded, installed, and kept up to date for you. It’s hard to be lower friction than that.”

Will you market your products any differently to generate demand and push people towards the App Store?

Frampton: “I’ll be taking the same approach as I do on iOS. It basically comes down to managing your prices, updates and portfolio of apps, and taking any opportunities to cross-promote with other developers or announce new features to the press. It is a very different approach, but one that I am familiar with, and prefer.”

AJ: “We will still have to do marketing to drive awareness (especially after the buzz wears off), so this portion of the equation stays the same.”

Gedeon: “We won’t shy away from the fact that it’s also available on the App Store, but neither will we shift our entire focus there.”

Are you worried about a race to $0.99 with Mac App Store pricing?

Frampton: “The increase in customer numbers will make up for the lower price point in lower price games and apps with broad appeal. But on the flip side, niche apps with a focused markets can still price high or continue to distribute outside of the store.”

AJ: “People will eventually learn that you get what you pay for, but in the meantime …”

Maheux: “Naturally we are, but the iPad has demonstrated the ability to hold off price points above $0.99 so we’re encouraged that the Mac may be able to do this as well.”

Case: “I wouldn’t be surprised if there were another race to $0.99 — in fact, I fully expect one since some vendors clearly want the visibility that comes with being on their top 10 lists. But our iOS apps have done well without changing any prices, and I’m confident that our Mac apps will also”

Siegel: “Further erosion of pricing, we think, would be unsustainable for quality software. Quality erosion would be a very, very sad thing for the Mac eco-system generally. So, we hope companies are smart enough to charge a fair price, not exorbitant, but fair.”

Is the App Store only for impulse shopping?

Frampton: “Chopper 2 is very definitely targeted at the browsers, and Fluid Noise Generator is targeted at the hunters, and they are priced and marketed accordingly. I think there will be plenty of room for everyone to get along!”

AJ: “Our products are not for the impulse purchaser — we cater to people who want to build a successful business — so this type of thinking has not really entered our thought process.”

Maheux: “No, not really. All of our apps fill specific needs, mainly because we created them for us to fill our own needs as users.”

Siegel: “[Our customers] are more likely to do their homework before purchasing, and so we expect them to seek out curated reviews from journalists and domain experts, as well as anecdotes from multiple sources before buying.”

Bottom Line

While the Mac App Store represents a large shift in the landscape for Mac developers, the general consensus is that this is a good thing for everyone. It will be very interesting to see how developers choose to manage their products and promote themselves both within, and outside of,  the App Store itself.

Related content from GigaOM Pro (sub. req.):

• How to Ride the Freemium App Wave to Success
• Will Killer Apps Affect Which Handsets Consumers Buy?
• How Carriers Can Crack the App Discoverability Nut

In what BusinessWeek is describing as “his first extensive interview on the subject,” Phil Schiller, everyone’s favorite Senior Vice President of Worldwide Product Marketing for Apple, has defended Apple’s application approval process.

I’ve read through it a few times, and I’d hardly call it “extensive.” I think it’s more accurately described as “PR spin” more than anything else. Schiller’s opening salvo is actually an advertisement.

We’ve built a store for the most part that people can trust. You and your family and friends can download applications from the store, and for the most part they do what you’d expect, and they get onto your phone, and you get billed appropriately, and it all just works.

It’s obviously going to transmit good vibes to the majority of BusinessWeek readers (who likely weren’t even aware of an application approval process in the first place, never mind a problem with it) but it’s unlikely to smooth the feathers of frustrated, angry developers. See, Mr. Schiller not only defended the approval process, but said that developers actually like it.

Most [apps] are approved and some are sent back to the developer. In about 90% of those cases, Apple requests technical fixes—usually for bugs in the software or because something doesn’t work as expected. Developers are generally glad to have this safety net because usually Apple’s review process finds problems they actually want to fix.

Here’s what TechCrunch’s Jason Kincaid had to say about that:

This is a laughable statement. Developers may like the concept of having an external QA safety net that helps catch bugs, but not one that’s incredibly inconsistent and penalizes them with extended delays and notoriously bad communication.

Schiller does manage to admit that Apple has made mistakes. Sadly, he doesn’t say it loudly enough. In a Social Networking era when transparency is not only beneficial to a company but almost essential to maintaining a happy customer base, Apple still can’t manage genuine “openness” where it most counts. I’m sure Misters Jobs and Schiller grudgingly decided this interview was a necessary (if bitter-tasting) step in damage-control. But it’s dripping with convoluted and downright unfriendly corporate-speak.

Here are Schiller’s comments on the matter of Apple’s recent inconsistent approach to trademark protection (brief recap; Rogue Amoeba’s Airfoil Speakers app displayed a tiny icon of the remote computer to which the app was connected — Apple initially approved the app, and it proved very successful. Then someone noticed the icons were of Macs, and Apple pulled it for trademark violation).

[Schiller] says Apple is trying to make trademark guidelines more sophisticated. “We need to delineate something that might confuse the customer and be an inappropriate use of a trademark from something that’s just referring to a product for the sake of compatibility,” he says. “We’re trying to learn and expand the rules to make it fair for everyone.”

In a twist I didn’t see coming, BusinessWeek’s Arik Hesseldahl adds that Rogue Amoeba “…will soon submit a version of the app with the Apple images intact.” That’s good to know, since it was almost universally agreed (except perhaps by the most fundamental fanbois) that Apple’s actions were not only inconsistent and hypocritical — they were just plain stupid.

Kincaid summarises:

Schiller’s interview highlights how badly Apple is underestimating the negative impact the App Store is having on its reputation in the developer community… Apple may not care about losing a handful of developers to Android, but their shortsighted strategy of answering developer complaints with PR spin rather than transparency and action may hurt them in the long run.

I’ll give Apple this; it’s learning. Slowly, painfully slowly, continental-drift-slowly, but remember that the iPhone is not yet three years old, the application store even younger. In a sense, Apple is making this up as it goes, and it’s bound to take some wrong turns along the winding path toward approval process nirvana. Developers don’t expect Apple to be perfect; they will tolerate and forgive occasional missteps, but only if the channel of discourse between them significantly improves beyond where it stands today; which, so far as I can see, is a slightly updated status page on the Apple Dev Center website and, when developers get rowdy enough, the occasional intervention by Phil Schiller.

Do we need Apple to act, as Joe Hewitt put it, as Gatekeepers? Apple doesn’t vet the quality and functionality of applications built for the Macintosh; though, I wonder — were the Mac to be invented today, would Apple insist on an Application Store for the desktop Mac OS X? If so, would it offer the same reasoning for its draconian regulation of its software ecosystem?

Everyone has an opinion on how best to solve the problem; I suspect it’s all about balance. An approval process is fine so long as Apple’s rules are fair, practical and consistently applied across all apps, all the time. And if or when it screws up, Apple should admit it instantly and correct its error. So, riddle me this… if it’s so easy for the community to offer reasonable solutions, why is it proving so hard for Apple?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A 2011 NewNet Forecast
• How to Market Your iPhone App: A Developer’s Guide

Questioned on Apple’s success in Europe during the recession, Cagni responded that the Mac is “typically above 20-25 [percent] market share in each of the countries.” That’s about twice the market share in the U.S., and you have to wonder how the numbers add up to worldwide figures that put the Mac under 5 percent. Still, at Monday’s conference call, it was noted that Mac growth was around 40 percent in Spain, Germany and France, so the Mac is doing very well indeed in Europe. Less so, the iPod.

On declining sales, Cagni stated that Apple needs “to carry the message out there much better” regarding the new iPod nano, and that the decline has not yet hit Europe. Again, this is in keeping with comments from the conference call, in which it was stated that the iPod is gaining market share year over year in nearly every country tracked. While Apple does not break out iPod sales by geographic region, 40 percent of all revenue comes from North America, so it would seem then that the decline is largely in the U.S. It’s possible the iPod has hit a saturation point, though another possibility would be cannibalization of iPod sales by the iPhone.

As for the iPhone, the question was whether multiple carriers in the UK will affect pricing in the future. Again, the response lined up with the conference call. Apple does not “dictate” price. Personally, I wonder if AT&T feels that way.

Besides a non-response to the Beatles for Christmas at the iTunes Store — “nothing to announce” — the most interesting comment was another oblique reference to new products in 2010. While Apple executives routinely talk about the great and mysterious “product pipeline,” chief Steve Jobs elevated that hype in Apple’s press release for the fourth fiscal quarter. Cagni echoed that in the interview:

And guess what, as Steve stated, we are going to continue to surprise you in the year to come.

It doesn’t take 20 questions to get to the tablet, the only question now is when?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Mobile Q4: All Eyes Were on Android, 4G and the Rising Tablet Tide
• Report: A Mobile Video Market Overview
• In Q3, the Tablet and 4G Were the Big Stories

No, I’m not kidding. This actually happened. I had a 30-second “interview” with Jonathan Ive.

On the way out of the Moscone Center this morning, as streams of people are leaving to get some fresh air and digest all of the announcements from the WWDC 2009 keynote address, I see a familiar face walking towards me. It’s Jonathan Ive. I can’t believe it. This guy is design royalty.

But I’m from Los Angeles: We’re not afraid to approach the rich and famous in my city. Heck, I produce theater with lots of famous actors and comedians, so I often have to work with known personalities. This was a rare opportunity and certainly not a time for sudden shyness, so I approached the master designer and introduced myself.

The following is an exact transcript of what transpired.

Me: Jonathan…?
Jonathan: [Turns, sees I'm no one he knows] Yes…?
Me: David Koff. Nice to meet you.
Jonathan: Thank you.
Me: May I snap a photo with you?

[Beat. He pauses, looks around, unsure of what to say, clearly uncomfortable.]

Me: It’s not a big deal. If you’d rather not, it’s quite OK.
Jonathan: Well, there are others here who are also deserving of a photo but I can’t accommodate them as well, so…how about we just shake hands?
Me: That would be lovely. I’m a great fan of your work.
Jonathan: Thank you, that’s very kind.
Me: You’re welcome. Keep up the good work.
Jonathan: [Looking at me like I'm insane] I’ll do that. Thank you.

[He walks off. I wait a moment. I follow, calling after him, running and waving my arms wildly as if in a Seth Rogan romantic comedy...]

Me: Godspeed, Jonathan! I love you! Have my babies…!

OK, well maybe that’s not how I ended the conversation, but everything before that was accurate. Ive is a notoriously private and quiet individual, which is why I was surprised to even see him out and about with the crowd — and which is why I was surprised he even stopped to turn and speak with me.

But that’s your dutiful David Koff, folks. Always willing to find the hard-to-get interviews…even when the interviewee doesn’t know he was scheduled to meet me in the first place.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

Admittedly, not everyone needs a Mac-based application to manage pictures taken by a microscope. If you’re a scientist, though, you probably won’t find an app that’s as useful and well-designed as Macnification. More than just an image organizer, this app lets users edit and analyze pictures from digital microscopes, attach important metadata , and even create time-lapse movies.

Apple must also think Macnification a pretty nifty app since it presented its developers Peter Schols and Dennis Lorson with a design award at Apple’s Worldwide Developer’s Conference this summer for Best Mac OS X Leopard User Experience.

As part of a series of posts that take a look at this year’s WWDC winners, I caught up with Schols to find out how to design a good user experience, and what it takes to be a good Mac citizen. Here’s what he had to say.

TAB: What gave you the idea to create Macnification? How long was the development process?

PS: My background is in biology and bioinformatics. While working in the lab to obtain my PhD, I made intensive use of electron microscopy. However, once the images were acquired from the electron microscope, I had to rely on a plethora of applications to manage them. I organized images in the Finder or in iPhoto, adjusted them with Photoshop, analyzed them with ImageJ and added scale bars with yet another application. Having to use half a dozen applications makes things very complex and error prone. In addition, most of these applications are designed for general purpose imaging: most of them are not able to deal with microscope metadata, for example. Therefore, I always dreamed of having one, easy-to-use application for this entire workflow. That’s how Macnification was born.

Development started in November 2006. Due to many new technologies in 10.5 that could benefit an image management application, we immediately opted to make Macnification Leopard-only. However, Leopard was still very much under development in the fall of 2006, so the initial development did not progress as well as we would have expected. It was only after we received the Leopard developer preview at WWDC 2007 that we could progress faster. We finally released Macnification 1.0 on May 6 2008, after 18 months of development.

TAB: How did winning the Best User Experience award benefit the Macnification project?

PS: The impact of an Apple Design Award cannot be overestimated. Needless to say, it has a positive impact on sales, which nearly doubled after the ADA announcement. Furthermore, it really makes the product stand out, especially in a niche that is not really known for excellent UI design. Most importantly though, it was a major recognition for Dennis and myself after 18 months of hard work.

TAB: Tell me a little about what goes into designing a good user experience when developing an app.

PS: We have put a lot of effort into planning this application: the first months of development were spent almost exclusively on planning the application’s mission statement, the main workflow and the application’s key features. Especially for a project this size, it’s really important to know exactly what you are going to develop, who you are going to develop for, how it will be used and what your users need.

Crafting a mission statement for the app, as John Geleynse emphasizes in his WWDC user experience presentations, is one of the best ways to make sure you do not overload the application with useless features or features that are not focused on the task at hand. Of course we had an advantage there: due to my experience with electron microscopy, it was much easier to know what users really need.

Once the mission statement has been established, we start thinking about the core user experience. What are the metaphors the user is familiar with when trying to accomplish tasks? How can we use the metaphors in the interface to make the application as easy-to-use as possible? Once the core UI is done, we start adding relevant but secondary features and we try to give them a place in the core UI in a way that makes them seem like natural extensions of the core UI.

Needless to say, this is an iterative process: sometimes you find that it’s very hard to add additional features without making the UI too bloated. That’s probably because the core UI is not well designed or because the metaphors being used are not in sync with the user’s mental model.

TAB: What was the biggest thing you learned by attending WWDC?

PS: I have been attending for the past 7 years and Dennis has attended for the past 2 years. The presentations are very interesting, not only for the technical details but also because they paint a much clearer picture of where Apple is heading than you would get from visiting apple.com or reading Mac news sites. If there is one thing you should know as a Mac developer, it’s probably where Apple is going. For example, by attending WWDC, we knew that Leopard would have extensive support for image handling through ImageKit. Being able to use this new technology long before it is being shipped in the final OS is a major advantage.

The possibility to interact with Apple engineers and user experience specialists is probably the most important reason to attend WWDC. In 2007, we had a UI-review of Macnification at WWDC. This review helped us tremendously in making some final UI decisions and in solving a couple of UI problems we kept thinking about. In addition, it’s a great way to check whether you are still on the right track UI wise.

In terms of code, we had similar experiences. We worked very closely with the ImageKit team to make the best use of this technology. It was a mutual process: the ImageKit team was glad to see their framework being used in a scientific project and by using ImageKit we could help it improve while receiving some extra tips and tricks to improve Macnification itself.

TAB: What would you tell someone who hopes to one day win a design award at WWDC?

PS: I already mentioned some key points, like the importance of crafting a mission statement, talking to users and trying to find out what they need, trying to follow their mental model and creating a simple core UI. All this is very important, but at the same time your application won’t win a design award if it’s not a good Mac OS X citizen. Your application must feel right at home on Mac OS X in terms of visual appearance, interaction and technology integration. It’s important to integrate with other applications and with the OS. For example, Macnification uses Core Animation, ImageKit, PDFKit, Quick Look, Objective-C 2.0, Time Machine, QTKit, Core Data, Spotlight and Core Image. It works well with Numbers and Mail and it has support for multiple processor cores.

Your application should do things that are new to the platform or that really help to push the envelope. With Macnification, for example, we are releasing the first scientific imaging application to offer non-destructive image editing, taking advantage of Core Image. We even use Core Image to provide scientists with the fastest EFI implementation on any platform. Additionally, we use Core Animation, not just to show some nifty animation effects, but also to make navigating huge image stacks much more intuitive. The take-away point here is that you should not just integrate technologies for the sake of integration, but make sure they offer a real advantage for your users.

Finally, you should get in touch with WWDR at Apple for a user interface review. It can massively improve your application.

TAB: Obviously Manification is tied to microscopic not camera images, but do you plan to release an iPhone App at any point that would allow users to access some of the functionality of the main app?

PS: It’s something we think about. This currently isn’t a high priority for our users, but it’s definitely something we keep in mind going forward.

TAB: Is there anything else you’d like to add?

PS: Most Mac news sites only publish a list of Apple Design Award winners. As there is so much more to winning an ADA, it has been great to be able to share our experience! We would like to thank the Apple Blog for giving us that opportunity!

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

I recently had the pleasure of interviewing Richard Haddock, President of the Haddock Corporation, an Apple reseller that has been in the Mac business seriously since there have been Macs.

I first found Haddock a couple of years ago when, in a panic over accidentally wiping out my hard drive in some kind of strange Linux experiment, I needed OS X installed and couldn’t find my install disks. Not only that, but loading Linux had rewritten the boot record of the disk and wiped out how the Mac looked at it, resetting it from GUID, which the Mac installer requires, to MBR. 

Long story short, I couldn’t load OS X back on my MacBook. So, I called around town and was pointed at Haddock. I dropped by and explained my problem, and the staff booted my MacBook into target disk mode and mounted it on another Mac, and then fixed the disk with Disk Utility. I was very, very grateful for their help, I almost thought I had ruined my Mac! Haddock earned a customer that day with their honest help and technical expertise.

TAB: The Haddock Corporation has a long history with Apple. Can you tell me a little about what impressed you the most about your first Macintosh?

Richard Haddock: When I was shown the first Macintosh 128k, I was programming on an IBM 5110, which used BASIC, and I had to constantly work on the screen layout for my programs. When I saw it I knew that this new graphical interface was the future of computing, so I immediately signed up to be an Apple Reseller. We’ve been an Apple Reseller since 1984. During the time that Dr. Amelio was the CEO I became friends with him and asked him to set up the Apple Specialist program, which would reward and help dealers who mostly sold Apple products. He asked me to help him design this program with the help of Paddy Wong and a few others. I think it’s one of the longest running dealer programs at Apple. I’m very proud of that.

TAB: Apple went through some tough times in the 90′s, did Haddock also hit some rough spots with them?

Haddock: Fortunately we were able to hang on while Apple got things going again. It was a slow-down, but we were able to make it through.

TAB: What can you tell me about your involvement with the education market?

Haddock: We’ve been involved in the education market for nearly 30 years, selling into 11 states. In the past we sold Apple products to these schools, but Apple has since taken those education sales inhouse. We currently sell the Promethean interactive whiteboard to schools in 8 states in the midwest.

TAB: How has the opening of Apple’s chain of retail stores affected Haddock?

Haddock: I think that overall Apple stores have helped the Macintosh business. It has taken some business from us, but overall our Apple sales are up every year.

TAB: How do you use a Mac to run your business?

Haddock: We use Macintosh exclusively in our business, from ordering to research to our accounting.

TAB: Are there any “Must Have” applications that you use on a daily basis?

Haddock: Right now I have the following applications open, which is fairly normal for me:

Mail, iCal, Address Book, Safari, iTunes, Preview, Firefox, Calculator, Filemaker, Excel, OmniFocus and Google Earth. OmniFocus is an excellent program which I use constantly and actually syncs my to do list with my iPhone.

TAB: Haddock started out as Wichita Software, are you still involved in software development?

Haddock: We do some in-house software development on Filemaker, but no longer develop software for others. We sold off our Petroleum Accountant program to a company in New Zealand who still supports it.

TAB: What do you think about Apple’s focus on consumer technology with the iPod, iPhone, and Apple TV?

Haddock: Apple is playing to their strengths and making great consumer products. Everyone who I know owns any of these products really likes them and uses them daily. I know these products will only continue to only get better and lead the market in innovation. I think we’ll see many more breakthrough consumer products.

TAB: What do you see as the future of Apple, and Haddock Corporation’s relationship with Apple?

Haddock: We’ve had an excellent relationship with Apple over the years. In fact, I served on Apple’s Reseller Advisory Board for 10 years. They have an excellent strategy, and a great management team. I know that we’ll continue to do business with them for years and years. We continue to look for ways to expand and support Apple products for our customers.

I also was able to get some insight into the retail and repair side of the Mac market. Speaking with the technicians at the store, the topic naturally went to the new MacBooks. It seems that they are not nearly as excited about them as the average consumer is; they expect them to be much more difficult to service.

My many thanks to Richard for taking the time to answer my questions. Here, in Des Moines, we are a long ways away from Cupertino, but you never know when you might have a little piece of Apple history right in your backyard.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce

I think that if Bloomberg is right, it would be a really great thing for customers.

Signing a contract with a wireless carrier today is a complete mess for the customer. There are way to many plans to choose from, and each one is ridiculously complicated. On top of that, a plan that is advertised at $40/month really turns out to cost around $70/month, due to taxes and fees that are all hidden in the fine print when you sign a contract.

If Apple was the carrier for the iPhone, I’m sure they would make the whole process a delightful experience for the customer, and be very up-front about any hidden fees, as they are with everything.

However, I must say that I find it very unlikely that Apple would make this move. It would be a ton of extra work for Apple.

Bloomberg says that Apple would be a “mobile virtual network operator,” or MVNO, which means that it would use network infrastructure (cell towers, wiring, etc.) that is owned and operated by another company (Bloomberg suggests Cingular). This would save Apple the trouble of having to build towers, which, of course, would be an insane undertaking that I don’t think anyone thinks Apple would do. But even if Apple would be an MVNO, it would still have to operate the dealings with end-users, such as managing plans and contracts. This could become a huge headache for Apple, and it just doesn’t seem like the kind of thing Apple is interested in.

Apple becoming a wireless carrier seems just as awesome, but just as unlikely, as Apple becoming its own record label.

What do you think? Would Apple being the carrier make you more likely to purchase an iPhone?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks