Google: Open versus1 Closed
A few days after he unveiled the iPad in January 2010, Jobs held a “town hall” meeting with employees at Apple’s campus. Instead of exulting2 about their transformative new product, however, he went into a rant3 against Google for producing the rival Android operating system. Jobs was furious that Google had decided4 to compete with Apple in the phone business. “We did not enter the search business,” he said. “They entered the phone business. Make no mistake. They want to kill the iPhone. We won’t let them.” A few minutes later, after the meeting moved on to another topic, Jobs returned to his tirade5 to attack Google’s famous values slogan. “I want to go back to that other question first and say one more thing. This ‘Don’t be evil’ mantra, it’s bullshit.”
Jobs felt personally betrayed. Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt had been on the Apple board during the development of the iPhone and iPad, and Google’s founders6, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, had treated him as a mentor8. He felt ripped off. Android’s touchscreen interface9 was adopting more and more of the features—multi-touch, swiping, a grid10 of app icons11—that Apple had created.
Jobs had tried to dissuade12 Google from developing Android. He had gone to Google’s headquarters near Palo Alto in 2008 and gotten into a shouting match with Page, Brin, and the head of the Android development team, Andy Rubin. (Because Schmidt was then on the Apple board, he recused himself from discussions involving the iPhone.) “I said we would, if we had good relations, guarantee Google access to the iPhone and guarantee it one or two icons on the home screen,” he recalled. But he also threatened that if Google continued to develop Android and used any iPhone features, such as multi-touch, he would sue. At first Google avoided copying certain features, but in January 2010 HTC introduced an Android phone that boasted multi-touch and many other aspects of the iPhone’s look and feel. That was the context for Jobs’s pronouncement that Google’s “Don’t be evil” slogan was “bullshit.”
So Apple filed suit against HTC (and, by extension, Android), alleging13 infringement14 of twenty of its patents. Among them were patents covering various multi-touch gestures, swipe to open, double-tap to zoom15, pinch and expand, and the sensors16 that determined17 how a device was being held. As he sat in his house in Palo Alto the week the lawsuit19 was filed, he became angrier than I had ever seen him:
Our lawsuit is saying, “Google, you fucking ripped off the iPhone, wholesale20 ripped us off.” Grand theft. I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go to thermonuclear war on this. They are scared to death, because they know they are guilty. Outside of Search, Google’s products—Android, Google Docs—are shit.
A few days after this rant, Jobs got a call from Schmidt, who had resigned from the Apple board the previous summer. He suggested they get together for coffee, and they met at a café in a Palo Alto shopping center. “We spent half the time talking about personal matters, then half the time on his perception that Google had stolen Apple’s user interface designs,” recalled Schmidt. When it came to the latter subject, Jobs did most of the talking. Google had ripped him off, he said in colorful language. “We’ve got you red-handed,” he told Schmidt. “I’m not interested in settling. I don’t want your money. If you offer me $5 billion, I won’t want it. I’ve got plenty of money. I want you to stop using our ideas in Android, that’s all I want.” They resolved nothing.
Underlying21 the dispute was an even more fundamental issue, one that had unnerving historical resonance22. Google presented Android as an “open” platform; its open-source code was freely available for multiple hardware makers23 to use on whatever phones or tablets they built. Jobs, of course, had a dogmatic belief that Apple should closely integrate its operating systems with its hardware. In the 1980s Apple had not licensed24 out its Macintosh operating system, and Microsoft eventually gained dominant26 market share by licensing27 its system to multiple hardware makers and, in Jobs’s mind, ripping off Apple’s interface.
The comparison between what Microsoft wrought28 in the 1980s and what Google was trying to do in 2010 was not exact, but it was close enough to be unsettling—and infuriating. It exemplified the great debate of the digital age: closed versus open, or as Jobs framed it, integrated versus fragmented. Was it better, as Apple believed and as Jobs’s own controlling perfectionism almost compelled, to tie the hardware and software and content handling into one tidy system that assured a simple user experience? Or was it better to give users and manufacturers more choice and free up avenues for more innovation, by creating software systems that could be modified and used on different devices? “Steve has a particular way that he wants to run Apple, and it’s the same as it was twenty years ago, which is that Apple is a brilliant innovator29 of closed systems,” Schmidt later told me. “They don’t want people to be on their platform without permission. The benefits of a closed platform is control. But Google has a specific belief that open is the better approach, because it leads to more options and competition and consumer choice.”
So what did Bill Gates think as he watched Jobs, with his closed strategy, go into battle against Google, as he had done against Microsoft twenty-five years earlier? “There are some benefits to being more closed, in terms of how much you control the experience, and certainly at times he’s had the benefit of that,” Gates told me. But refusing to license25 the Apple iOS, he added, gave competitors like Android the chance to gain greater volume. In addition, he argued, competition among a variety of devices and manufacturers leads to greater consumer choice and more innovation. “These companies are not all building pyramids next to Central Park,” he said, poking30 fun at Apple’s Fifth Avenue store, “but they are coming up with innovations based on competing for consumers.” Most of the improvements in PCs, Gates pointed31 out, came because consumers had a lot of choices, and that would someday be the case in the world of mobile devices. “Eventually, I think, open will succeed, but that’s where I come from. In the long run, the coherence32 thing, you can’t stay with that.”
Jobs believed in “the coherence thing.” His faith in a controlled and closed environment remained unwavering, even as Android gained market share. “Google says we exert more control than they do, that we are closed and they are open,” he railed when I told him what Schmidt had said. “Well, look at the results—Android’s a mess. It has different screen sizes and versions, over a hundred permutations.” Even if Google’s approach might eventually win in the marketplace, Jobs found it repellent. “I like being responsible for the whole user experience. We do it not to make money. We do it because we want to make great products, not crap like Android.”
Flash, the App Store, and Control
Jobs’s insistence33 on end-to-end control was manifested in other battles as well. At the town hall meeting where he attacked Google, he also assailed34 Adobe35’s multimedia36 platform for websites, Flash, as a “buggy” battery hog37 made by “lazy” people. The iPod and iPhone, he said, would never run Flash. “Flash is a spaghetti-ball piece of technology that has lousy performance and really bad security problems,” he said to me later that week.
He even banned apps that made use of a compiler created by Adobe that translated Flash code so that it would be compatible with Apple’s iOS. Jobs disdained38 the use of compilers that allowed developers to write their products once and have them ported to multiple operating systems. “Allowing Flash to be ported across platforms means things get dumbed down to the lowest common denominator,” he said. “We spend lots of effort to make our platform better, and the developer doesn’t get any benefit if Adobe only works with functions that every platform has. So we said that we want developers to take advantage of our better features, so that their apps work better on our platform than they work on anybody else’s.” On that he was right. Losing the ability to differentiate39 Apple’s platforms—allowing them to become commoditized like HP and Dell machines—would have meant death for the company.
There was, in addition, a more personal reason. Apple had invested in Adobe in 1985, and together the two companies had launched the desktop40 publishing revolution. “I helped put Adobe on the map,” Jobs claimed. In 1999, after he returned to Apple, he had asked Adobe to start making its video editing software and other products for the iMac and its new operating system, but Adobe refused. It focused on making its products for Windows. Soon after, its founder7, John Warnock, retired41. “The soul of Adobe disappeared when Warnock left,” Jobs said. “He was the inventor, the person I related to. It’s been a bunch of suits since then, and the company has turned out crap.”
When Adobe evangelists and various Flash supporters in the blogosphere attacked Jobs for being too controlling, he decided to write and post an open letter. Bill Campbell, his friend and board member, came by his house to go over it. “Does it sound like I’m just trying to stick it to Adobe?” he asked Campbell. “No, it’s facts, just put it out there,” the coach said. Most of the letter focused on the technical drawbacks of Flash. But despite Campbell’s coaching, Jobs couldn’t resist venting42 at the end about the problematic history between the two companies. “Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully43 adopt Mac OS X,” he noted44.
Apple ended up lifting some of its restrictions46 on cross-platform compilers later in the year, and Adobe was able to come out with a Flash authoring tool that took advantage of the key features of Apple’s iOS. It was a bitter war, but one in which Jobs had the better argument. In the end it pushed Adobe and other developers of compilers to make better use of the iPhone and iPad interface and its special features.
Jobs had a tougher time navigating47 the controversies48 over Apple’s desire to keep tight control over which apps could be downloaded onto the iPhone and iPad. Guarding against apps that contained viruses or violated the user’s privacy made sense; preventing apps that took users to other websites to buy subscriptions49, rather than doing it through the iTunes Store, at least had a business rationale. But Jobs and his team went further: They decided to ban any app that defamed people, might be politically explosive, or was deemed by Apple’s censors51 to be pornographic.
The problem of playing nanny became apparent when Apple rejected an app featuring the animated52 political cartoons of Mark Fiore, on the rationale that his attacks on the Bush administration’s policy on torture violated the restriction45 against defamation53. Its decision became public, and was subjected to ridicule54, when Fiore won the 2010 Pulitzer Prize for editorial cartooning in April. Apple had to reverse itself, and Jobs made a public apology. “We’re guilty of making mistakes,” he said. “We’re doing the best we can, we’re learning as fast as we can—but we thought this rule made sense.”
It was more than a mistake. It raised the specter of Apple’s controlling what apps we got to see and read, at least if we wanted to use an iPad or iPhone. Jobs seemed in danger of becoming the Orwellian Big Brother he had gleefully destroyed in Apple’s “1984” Macintosh ad. He took the issue seriously. One day he called the New York Times columnist55 Tom Friedman to discuss how to draw lines without looking like a censor50. He asked Friedman to head an advisory56 group to help come up with guidelines, but the columnist’s publisher said it would be a conflict of interest, and no such committee was formed.
The pornography ban also caused problems. “We believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone,” Jobs declared in an email to a customer. “Folks who want porn can buy an Android.”
This prompted an email exchange with Ryan Tate, the editor of the tech gossip site Valleywag. Sipping57 a stinger cocktail58 one evening, Tate shot off an email to Jobs decrying59 Apple’s heavy-handed control over which apps passed muster60. “If Dylan was 20 today, how would he feel about your company?” Tate asked. “Would he think the iPad had the faintest thing to do with ‘revolution’? Revolutions are about freedom.”
To Tate’s surprise, Jobs responded a few hours later, after midnight. “Yep,” he said, “freedom from programs that steal your private data. Freedom from programs that trash your battery. Freedom from porn. Yep, freedom. The times they are a changin’, and some traditional PC folks feel like their world is slipping away. It is.”
In his reply, Tate offered some thoughts on Flash and other topics, then returned to the censorship issue. “And you know what? I don’t want ‘freedom from porn.’ Porn is just fine! And I think my wife would agree.”
“You might care more about porn when you have kids,” replied Jobs. “It’s not about freedom, it’s about Apple trying to do the right thing for its users.” At the end he added a zinger: “By the way, what have you done that’s so great? Do you create anything, or just criticize others’ work and belittle61 their motivations?”
Tate admitted to being impressed. “Rare is the CEO who will spar one-on-one with customers and bloggers like this,” he wrote. “Jobs deserves big credit for breaking the mold of the typical American executive, and not just because his company makes such hugely superior products: Jobs not only built and then rebuilt his company around some very strong opinions about digital life, but he’s willing to defend them in public. Vigorously. Bluntly. At two in the morning on a weekend.” Many in the blogosphere agreed, and they sent Jobs emails praising his feistiness. Jobs was proud as well; he forwarded his exchange with Tate and some of the kudos62 to me.
Still, there was something unnerving about Apple’s decreeing that those who bought their products shouldn’t look at controversial political cartoons or, for that matter, porn. The humor site eSarcasm.com launched a “Yes, Steve, I want porn” web campaign. “We are dirty, sex-obsessed miscreants63 who need access to smut 24 hours a day,” the site declared. “Either that, or we just enjoy the idea of an uncensored, open society where a techno-dictator doesn’t decide what we can and cannot see.”
At the time Jobs and Apple were engaged in a battle with Valleywag’s affiliated64 website, Gizmodo, which had gotten hold of a test version of the unreleased iPhone 4 that a hapless Apple engineer had left in a bar. When the police, responding to Apple’s complaint, raided the house of the reporter, it raised the question of whether control freakiness had combined with arrogance65.
Jon Stewart was a friend of Jobs and an Apple fan. Jobs had visited him privately66 in February when he took his trip to New York to meet with media executives. But that didn’t stop Stewart from going after him on The Daily Show. “It wasn’t supposed to be this way! Microsoft was supposed to be the evil one!” Stewart said, only half-jokingly. Behind him, the word “appholes” appeared on the screen. “You guys were the rebels, man, the underdogs. But now, are you becoming The Man? Remember back in 1984, you had those awesome67 ads about overthrowing69 Big Brother? Look in the mirror, man!”
By late spring the issue was being discussed among board members. “There is an arrogance,” Art Levinson told me over lunch just after he had raised it at a meeting. “It ties into Steve’s personality. He can react viscerally and lay out his convictions in a forceful manner.” Such arrogance was fine when Apple was the feisty underdog. But now Apple was dominant in the mobile market. “We need to make the transition to being a big company and dealing70 with the hubris71 issue,” said Levinson. Al Gore72 also talked about the problem at board meetings. “The context for Apple is changing dramatically,” he recounted. “It’s not hammer-thrower against Big Brother. Now Apple’s big, and people see it as arrogant73.” Jobs became defensive74 when the topic was raised. “He’s still adjusting to it,” said Gore. “He’s better at being the underdog than being a humble75 giant.”
Jobs had little patience for such talk. The reason Apple was being criticized, he told me then, was that “companies like Google and Adobe are lying about us and trying to tear us down.” What did he think of the suggestion that Apple sometimes acted arrogantly76? “I’m not worried about that,” he said, “because we’re not arrogant.”
Antennagate: Design versus Engineering
In many consumer product companies, there’s tension between the designers, who want to make a product look beautiful, and the engineers, who need to make sure it fulfills78 its functional79 requirements. At Apple, where Jobs pushed both design and engineering to the edge, that tension was even greater.
When he and design director Jony Ive became creative coconspirators back in 1997, they tended to view the qualms80 expressed by engineers as evidence of a can’t-do attitude that needed to be overcome. Their faith that awesome design could force superhuman feats81 of engineering was reinforced by the success of the iMac and iPod. When engineers said something couldn’t be done, Ive and Jobs pushed them to try, and usually they succeeded. There were occasional small problems. The iPod Nano, for example, was prone82 to getting scratched because Ive believed that a clear coating would lessen83 the purity of his design. But that was not a crisis.
When it came to designing the iPhone, Ive’s design desires bumped into a fundamental law of physics that could not be changed even by a reality distortion field. Metal is not a great material to put near an antenna77. As Michael Faraday showed, electromagnetic waves flow around the surface of metal, not through it. So a metal enclosure around a phone can create what is known as a Faraday cage, diminishing the signals that get in or out. The original iPhone started with a plastic band at the bottom, but Ive thought that would wreck84 the design integrity and asked that there be an aluminum85 rim86 all around. After that ended up working out, Ive designed the iPhone 4 with a steel rim. The steel would be the structural87 support, look really sleek88, and serve as part of the phone’s antenna.
There were significant challenges. In order to serve as an antenna, the steel rim had to have a tiny gap. But if a person covered that gap with a finger or sweaty palm, there could be some signal loss. The engineers suggested a clear coating over the metal to help prevent this, but again Ive felt that this would detract from the brushed-metal look. The issue was presented to Jobs at various meetings, but he thought the engineers were crying wolf. You can make this work, he said. And so they did.
And it worked, almost perfectly89. But not totally perfectly. When the iPhone 4 was released in June 2010, it looked awesome, but a problem soon became evident: If you held the phone a certain way, especially using your left hand so your palm covered the tiny gap, you could lose your connection. It occurred with perhaps one in a hundred calls. Because Jobs insisted on keeping his unreleased products secret (even the phone that Gizmodo scored in a bar had a fake case around it), the iPhone 4 did not go through the live testing that most electronic devices get. So the flaw was not caught before the massive rush to buy it began. “The question is whether the twin policies of putting design in front of engineering and having a policy of supersecrecy surrounding unreleased products helped Apple,” Tony Fadell said later. “On the whole, yes, but unchecked power is a bad thing, and that’s what happened.”
Had it not been the Apple iPhone 4, a product that had everyone transfixed, the issue of a few extra dropped calls would not have made news. But it became known as “Antennagate,” and it boiled to a head in early July, when Consumer Reports did some rigorous tests and said that it could not recommend the iPhone 4 because of the antenna problem.
Jobs was in Kona Village, Hawaii, with his family when the issue arose. At first he was defensive. Art Levinson was in constant contact by phone, and Jobs insisted that the problem stemmed from Google and Motorola making mischief90. “They want to shoot Apple down,” he said.
Levinson urged a little humility91. “Let’s try to figure out if there’s something wrong,” he said. When he again mentioned the perception that Apple was arrogant, Jobs didn’t like it. It went against his black-white, right-wrong way of viewing the world. Apple was a company of principle, he felt. If others failed to see that, it was their fault, not a reason for Apple to play humble.
Jobs’s second reaction was to be hurt. He took the criticism personally and became emotionally anguished92. “At his core, he doesn’t do things that he thinks are blatantly93 wrong, like some pure pragmatists in our business,” Levinson said. “So if he feels he’s right, he will just charge ahead rather than question himself.” Levinson urged him not to get depressed94. But Jobs did. “Fuck this, it’s not worth it,” he told Levinson. Finally Tim Cook was able to shake him out of his lethargy. He quoted someone as saying that Apple was becoming the new Microsoft, complacent95 and arrogant. The next day Jobs changed his attitude. “Let’s get to the bottom of this,” he said.
When the data about dropped calls were assembled from AT&T, Jobs realized there was a problem, even if it was more minor96 than people were making it seem. So he flew back from Hawaii. But before he left, he made some phone calls. It was time to gather a couple of trusted old hands, wise men who had been with him during the original Macintosh days thirty years earlier.
His first call was to Regis McKenna, the public relations guru. “I’m coming back from Hawaii to deal with this antenna thing, and I need to bounce some stuff off of you,” Jobs told him. They agreed to meet at the Cupertino boardroom at 1:30 the next afternoon. The second call was to the adman Lee Clow. He had tried to retire from the Apple account, but Jobs liked having him around. His colleague James Vincent was summoned as well.
Jobs also decided to bring his son Reed, then a high school senior, back with him from Hawaii. “I’m going to be in meetings 24/7 for probably two days and I want you to be in every single one because you’ll learn more in those two days than you would in two years at business school,” he told him. “You’re going to be in the room with the best people in the world making really tough decisions and get to see how the sausage is made.” Jobs got a little misty-eyed when he recalled the experience. “I would go through that all again just for that opportunity to have him see me at work,” he said. “He got to see what his dad does.”
They were joined by Katie Cotton, the steady public relations chief at Apple, and seven other top executives. The meeting lasted all afternoon. “It was one of the greatest meetings of my life,” Jobs later said. He began by laying out all the data they had gathered. “Here are the facts. So what should we do about it?”
McKenna was the most calm and straightforward97. “Just lay out the truth, the data,” he said. “Don’t appear arrogant, but appear firm and confident.” Others, including Vincent, pushed Jobs to be more apologetic, but McKenna said no. “Don’t go into the press conference with your tail between your legs,” he advised. “You should just say: ‘Phones aren’t perfect, and we’re not perfect. We’re human and doing the best we can, and here’s the data.’” That became the strategy. When the topic turned to the perception of arrogance, McKenna urged him not to worry too much. “I don’t think it would work to try to make Steve look humble,” McKenna explained later. “As Steve says about himself, ‘What you see is what you get.’”
At the press event that Friday, held in Apple’s auditorium98, Jobs followed McKenna’s advice. He did not grovel99 or apologize, yet he was able to defuse the problem by showing that Apple understood it and would try to make it right. Then he changed the framework of the discussion, saying that all cell phones had some problems. Later he told me that he had sounded a bit “too annoyed” at the event, but in fact he was able to strike a tone that was unemotional and straightforward. He captured it in four short, declarative sentences: “We’re not perfect. Phones are not perfect. We all know that. But we want to make our users happy.”
If anyone was unhappy, he said, they could return the phone (the return rate turned out to be 1.7%, less than a third of the return rate for the iPhone 3GS or most other phones) or get a free bumper100 case from Apple. He went on to report data showing that other mobile phones had similar problems. That was not totally true. Apple’s antenna design made it slightly worse than most other phones, including earlier versions of the iPhone. But it was true that the media frenzy101 over the iPhone 4’s dropped calls was overblown. “This is blown so out of proportion that it’s incredible,” he said. Instead of being appalled102 that he didn’t grovel or order a recall, most customers realized that he was right.
The wait list for the phone, which was already sold out, went from two weeks to three. It remained the company’s fastest-selling product ever. The media debate shifted to the issue of whether Jobs was right to assert that other smartphones had the same antenna problems. Even if the answer was no, that was a better story to face than one about whether the iPhone 4 was a defective103 dud.
Some media observers were incredulous. “In a bravura104 demonstration105 of stonewalling, righteousness, and hurt sincerity106, Steve Jobs successfully took to the stage the other day to deny the problem, dismiss the criticism, and spread the blame among other smartphone makers,” Michael Wolff of newser.com wrote. “This is a level of modern marketing107, corporate108 spin, and crisis management about which you can only ask with stupefied incredulity and awe68: How do they get away with it? Or, more accurately109, how does he get away with it?” Wolff attributed it to Jobs’s mesmerizing110 effect as “the last charismatic individual.” Other CEOs would be offering abject111 apologies and swallowing massive recalls, but Jobs didn’t have to. “The grim, skeletal appearance, the absolutism, the ecclesiastical bearing, the sense of his relationship with the sacred, really works, and, in this instance, allows him the privilege of magisterially112 deciding what is meaningful and what is trivial.”
Scott Adams, the creator of the cartoon strip Dilbert, was also incredulous, but far more admiring. He wrote a blog entry a few days later (which Jobs proudly emailed around) that marveled at how Jobs’s “high ground maneuver” was destined113 to be studied as a new public relations standard. “Apple’s response to the iPhone 4 problem didn’t follow the public relations playbook, because Jobs decided to rewrite the playbook,” Adams wrote. “If you want to know what genius looks like, study Jobs’ words.” By proclaiming up front that phones are not perfect, Jobs changed the context of the argument with an indisputable assertion. “If Jobs had not changed the context from the iPhone 4 to all smartphones in general, I could make you a hilarious114 comic strip about a product so poorly made that it won’t work if it comes in contact with a human hand. But as soon as the context is changed to ‘all smartphones have problems,’ the humor opportunity is gone. Nothing kills humor like a general and boring truth.”
Here Comes the Sun
There were a few things that needed to be resolved for the career of Steve Jobs to be complete. Among them was an end to the Thirty Years’ War with the band he loved, the Beatles. In 2007 Apple had settled its trademark115 battle with Apple Corps116, the holding company of the Beatles, which had first sued the fledgling computer company over use of the name in 1978. But that still did not get the Beatles into the iTunes Store. The band was the last major holdout, primarily because it had not resolved with EMI music, which owned most of its songs, how to handle the digital rights.
By the summer of 2010 the Beatles and EMI had sorted things out, and a four-person summit was held in the boardroom in Cupertino. Jobs and his vice18 president for the iTunes Store, Eddy117 Cue, played host to Jeff Jones, who managed the Beatles’ interests, and Roger Faxon, the chief of EMI music. Now that the Beatles were ready to go digital, what could Apple offer to make that milestone118 special? Jobs had been anticipating this day for a long time. In fact he and his advertising119 team, Lee Clow and James Vincent, had mocked up some ads and commercials three years earlier when strategizing on how to lure120 the Beatles on board.
“Steve and I thought about all the things that we could possibly do,” Cue recalled. That included taking over the front page of the iTunes Store, buying billboards121 featuring the best photographs of the band, and running a series of television ads in classic Apple style. The topper was offering a $149 box set that included all thirteen Beatles studio albums, the two-volume “Past Masters” collection, and a nostalgia-inducing video of the 1964 Washington Coliseum concert.
Once they reached an agreement in principle, Jobs personally helped choose the photographs for the ads. Each commercial ended with a still black-and-white shot of Paul McCartney and John Lennon, young and smiling, in a recording122 studio looking down at a piece of music. It evoked123 the old photographs of Jobs and Wozniak looking at an Apple circuit board. “Getting the Beatles on iTunes was the culmination124 of why we got into the music business,” said Cue.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
versus
|
|
| prep.以…为对手，对；与…相比之下 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
exulting
|
|
| vi. 欢欣鼓舞，狂喜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
rant
|
|
| v.咆哮；怒吼；n.大话；粗野的话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
tirade
|
|
| n.冗长的攻击性演说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
founders
|
|
| n.创始人( founder的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
Founder
|
|
| n.创始者，缔造者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
mentor
|
|
| n.指导者，良师益友；v.指导 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
interface
|
|
| n.接合部位，分界面；v.(使)互相联系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
grid
|
|
| n.高压输电线路网；地图坐标方格；格栅 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
icons
|
|
| n.偶像( icon的名词复数 )；（计算机屏幕上表示命令、程序的）符号，图像 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
dissuade
|
|
| v.劝阻，阻止 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
alleging
|
|
| 断言，宣称，辩解( allege的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
infringement
|
|
| n.违反；侵权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
zoom
|
|
| n.急速上升；v.突然扩大，急速上升 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
sensors
|
|
| n.传感器，灵敏元件( sensor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
vice
|
|
| n.坏事；恶习；[pl.]台钳，老虎钳；adj.副的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
lawsuit
|
|
| n.诉讼，控诉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
wholesale
|
|
| n.批发；adv.以批发方式；vt.批发，成批出售 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
underlying
|
|
| adj.在下面的，含蓄的，潜在的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
resonance
|
|
| n.洪亮；共鸣；共振 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
makers
|
|
| n.制造者，制造商（maker的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
licensed
|
|
| adj.得到许可的v.许可，颁发执照(license的过去式和过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
license
|
|
| n.执照，许可证，特许；v.许可，特许 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
dominant
|
|
| adj.支配的，统治的；占优势的；显性的；n.主因，要素，主要的人(或物)；显性基因 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
licensing
|
|
| v.批准，许可，颁发执照( license的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
wrought
|
|
| v.引起；以…原料制作；运转；adj.制造的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
innovator
|
|
| n.改革者；创新者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
poking
|
|
| n. 刺，戳，袋 vt. 拨开，刺，戳 vi. 戳，刺，捅，搜索，伸出，行动散慢 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
coherence
|
|
| n.紧凑；连贯；一致性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
insistence
|
|
| n.坚持；强调；坚决主张 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
assailed
|
|
| v.攻击( assail的过去式和过去分词 )；困扰；质问；毅然应对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
adobe
|
|
| n.泥砖，土坯，美国Adobe公司 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
multimedia
|
|
| adj.多种手段的，多媒体的；n.多媒体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
hog
|
|
| n.猪；馋嘴贪吃的人；vt.把…占为己有，独占 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
disdained
|
|
| 鄙视( disdain的过去式和过去分词 )； 不屑于做，不愿意做 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
differentiate
|
|
| vi.(between)区分；vt.区别；使不同 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
desktop
|
|
| n.桌面管理系统程序；台式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
retired
|
|
| adj.隐退的，退休的，退役的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
venting
|
|
| 消除； 泄去； 排去； 通风 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
restriction
|
|
| n.限制，约束 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
restrictions
|
|
| 约束( restriction的名词复数 )； 管制； 制约因素； 带限制性的条件（或规则） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
navigating
|
|
| v.给（船舶、飞机等）引航，导航( navigate的现在分词 )；（从海上、空中等）横越；横渡；飞跃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
controversies
|
|
| 争论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
subscriptions
|
|
| n.（报刊等的）订阅费( subscription的名词复数 )；捐款；（俱乐部的）会员费；捐助 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
censor
|
|
| n./vt.审查，审查员；删改 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
censors
|
|
| 删剪（书籍、电影等中被认为犯忌、违反道德或政治上危险的内容）( censor的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
animated
|
|
| adj.生气勃勃的，活跃的，愉快的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
defamation
|
|
| n.诽谤；中伤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
ridicule
|
|
| v.讥讽，挖苦；n.嘲弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
columnist
|
|
| n.专栏作家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
advisory
|
|
| adj.劝告的，忠告的，顾问的，提供咨询 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
sipping
|
|
| v.小口喝，呷，抿( sip的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
cocktail
|
|
| n.鸡尾酒；餐前开胃小吃；混合物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
decrying
|
|
| v.公开反对，谴责( decry的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
muster
|
|
| v.集合，收集，鼓起，激起；n.集合，检阅，集合人员，点名册 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
belittle
|
|
| v.轻视，小看，贬低 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
kudos
|
|
| n.荣誉，名声 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
miscreants
|
|
| n.恶棍，歹徒( miscreant的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
affiliated
|
|
| adj. 附属的, 有关连的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
arrogance
|
|
| n.傲慢，自大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
privately
|
|
| adv.以私人的身份，悄悄地，私下地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
awesome
|
|
| adj.令人惊叹的，难得吓人的，很好的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
awe
|
|
| n.敬畏，惊惧；vt.使敬畏，使惊惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
overthrowing
|
|
| v.打倒，推翻( overthrow的现在分词 )；使终止 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
dealing
|
|
| n.经商方法，待人态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
hubris
|
|
| n.傲慢，骄傲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
gore
|
|
| n.凝血，血污；v.（动物）用角撞伤，用牙刺破；缝以补裆；顶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
arrogant
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，自大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
defensive
|
|
| adj.防御的；防卫的；防守的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
humble
|
|
| adj.谦卑的，恭顺的；地位低下的；v.降低，贬低 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
arrogantly
|
|
| adv.傲慢地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
antenna
|
|
| n.触角，触须；天线 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
fulfills
|
|
| v.履行（诺言等）( fulfill的第三人称单数 )；执行（命令等）；达到（目的）；使结束 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
functional
|
|
| adj.为实用而设计的，具备功能的，起作用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
qualms
|
|
| n.不安；内疚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
feats
|
|
| 功绩，伟业，技艺( feat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
prone
|
|
| adj.(to)易于…的，很可能…的；俯卧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
lessen
|
|
| vt.减少，减轻；缩小 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
wreck
|
|
| n.失事，遇难；沉船；vt.(船等)失事，遇难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
aluminum
|
|
| n.(aluminium)铝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
rim
|
|
| n.(圆物的)边，轮缘；边界 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
structural
|
|
| adj.构造的，组织的，建筑（用）的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
sleek
|
|
| adj.光滑的，井然有序的；v.使光滑，梳拢 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
mischief
|
|
| n.损害，伤害，危害；恶作剧，捣蛋，胡闹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
humility
|
|
| n.谦逊，谦恭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
anguished
|
|
| adj.极其痛苦的v.使极度痛苦(anguish的过去式) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
blatantly
|
|
| ad.公开地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
depressed
|
|
| adj.沮丧的，抑郁的，不景气的，萧条的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
complacent
|
|
| adj.自满的；自鸣得意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
minor
|
|
| adj.较小(少)的，较次要的；n.辅修学科；vi.辅修 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
straightforward
|
|
| adj.正直的，坦率的；易懂的，简单的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
auditorium
|
|
| n.观众席，听众席；会堂，礼堂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
grovel
|
|
| vi.卑躬屈膝，奴颜婢膝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
bumper
|
|
| n.(汽车上的)保险杠；adj.特大的，丰盛的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
frenzy
|
|
| n.疯狂，狂热，极度的激动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
appalled
|
|
| v.使惊骇，使充满恐惧( appall的过去式和过去分词)adj.惊骇的；丧胆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
defective
|
|
| adj.有毛病的，有问题的，有瑕疵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
bravura
|
|
| n.华美的乐曲；勇敢大胆的表现；adj.壮勇华丽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
demonstration
|
|
| n.表明，示范，论证，示威 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
sincerity
|
|
| n.真诚，诚意；真实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
marketing
|
|
| n.行销，在市场的买卖，买东西 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
corporate
|
|
| adj.共同的，全体的；公司的，企业的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
accurately
|
|
| adv.准确地，精确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
mesmerizing
|
|
| adj.有吸引力的，有魅力的v.使入迷( mesmerize的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
abject
|
|
| adj.极可怜的，卑屈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
magisterially
|
|
| adv.威严地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
destined
|
|
| adj.命中注定的；(for)以…为目的地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
hilarious
|
|
| adj.充满笑声的，欢闹的；[反]depressed | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
trademark
|
|
| n.商标；特征；vt.注册的…商标 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
corps
|
|
| n.(通信等兵种的)部队；(同类作的)一组 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
eddy
|
|
| n.漩涡，涡流 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
milestone
|
|
| n.里程碑；划时代的事件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
advertising
|
|
| n.广告业；广告活动 a.广告的；广告业务的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
lure
|
|
| n.吸引人的东西，诱惑物；vt.引诱，吸引 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
billboards
|
|
| n.广告牌( billboard的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
recording
|
|
| n.录音，记录 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
evoked
|
|
| [医]诱发的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
culmination
|
|
| n.顶点；最高潮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |