The Five Problems Apple Faces

| Hidden Dimensions

At Macworld 2010, a well-known Apple writer presented a list of ten problems Apple faces. I didn’t agree with most of the issues cited in that list. Some seemed irrelevant, and some seemed padded, just to round out the list to a perfect 10.

I’ve spent the last month pondering, from my own experience at Apple, the real problems that Apple faces. These are the ones that percolate throughout the Apple culture and continue to crop up. If Apple deals with these problems, it’s just one less thing to get in the way of Apple’s completed transformation from a niche player to a major consumer electronics corporation.

1. Apple is Thin Skinned. Everyone knows that Apple’s relationship with competitors and allies alike is filtered through the psyche of one mister Steven Paul Jobs. Whether is a spat with Adobe over Flash, a skirmish with Intel over Apple’s bypassing the Atom CPU in favor of its own A4, or irritation with Google competing with the iPhone, corporate dealings always seem to take on the subtext of Mr. Jobs’s personality.

Case in point. It’s well known that Steve Jobs dislikes Ivan Seidenberg, the CEO of Verizon. Both men are strong willed, and both men have a vision cast in concrete. Neither is willing to put aside personalities in order for the common good of both companies. Namely, Apple and Verizon could both be making a lot more money if Apple and Verizon could work together. Instead, each is seeking the destruction of the other.

Apple’s prickliness deprives the company of untold business opportunities. I’m not saying Apple should go along to get along, but it does need to think about how and why its corporate thin skin has led to lost opportunities. And those lost opportunities, more often than not, back Apple into a corner, causing yet more problems.

2. Apple Product Documentation Sucks. How? We all know for a fact that Apple’s products are easier and more fun to use, more consistent, and better documented than most of the competition. Even so, the pervasive politic behind Apple’s documentation is that the simplicity of the documentation reflects the ease of use and simplicity of the product. By edict.

That conceit by Apple prevents the staff members who prepare Apple’s documentation from going the extra mile to make sure all topics are properly covered. Apple would rather leave out a difficult section of explanatory text if it makes it appear that the product is simple and a joy to use.

With modern, complex technology that’s seldom possible.

Let’s look at Apple’s support page, nicely laid out with an icon for manuals near the middle. Scan along the top section of images until you see Peripherals, click, and select Airport. Then select “Airport Extreme (Early 2009).” This manual makes it appear that Setting up an Airport Extreme is as as simple as baking muffins.

While the diagrams affirm that one has a choice between 2.4 and 5 GHz modes, when you actually get to the settings, and if you’re lucky enough to find out the “secret” of holding down the Option key on the popup, you’re faced with these options.

Airport Utility

AirPort Utility Settings

Nowhere in the manual does it explain why one would pick one of these settings, what the performance impact is, and so on. This lack of attention to detail drives IT managers crazy, and it’s one reason you won’t find Apple Wi-Fi base stations widely used in the enterprise — except for small business. The manual depicts the device, cool as it is, as being a toy, used by and documented for idiots.

Recently, I’ve documented other examples where additional documentation or some extra effort by Apple would have really paid off:

Unfortunately, because Apple is run as a very lean organization, when a new product phenomenon comes along, like the iPhone or iPad, resources are diverted away from attending to the nitty gritty details of previous technologies.

3. Enterprise Support Often Fails. There is an extensive body of thought on how Apple deals with the enterprise, so I won’t go into detail except to say that Apple marches to the tune of its own drummer, never condescending to the enterprise nor giving up its degrees of freedom by excessive catering to the enterprise.

And yet Apple does sell to all levels of governments all over the world as well as business. What drives those organizations crazy is that priorities within Apple will cause support for their own projects to periodically fail.

A good example is the on-again, off-again support for smart cards in Mac OS X. A few years ago, just when companies and government agencies thought Apple had nailed down the OS underpinnings, a new release of Mac OS X would break something, and it would be impossible to find out when a fix was forthcoming. The same thing has happened with the Common Criteria support in terms of the Basic Security Mode (BSM) auditing subsystem. It would periodically change, break, lose features and become under documented for as long as this author has been working with it. Also, NFS issues were troublesome and longstanding right after Mac OS X shipped.

The key issue here is that the enterprise always takes second place to the consumer side of Apple. That’s okay, but that doesn’t mean that Apple’s enterprise products should also be second class. The enterprise should expect nothing less than long term, consistent excellence. It’s that simple.

4. Failure to Attend Conferences. Apple’s reluctance to at least rub shoulders with others at various industry and technical conferences makes it appear that Apple is both snobbish and fearful that its employees will somehow spill important beans.

As Mr. Jobs has gotten older, I have noticed the recluse in him has extended to the culture of Apple. At one time, Apple attended Supercomputing, all the bioinformatics conferences, SIGGRAPH and two MacWorlds. No more. It takes some time and effort to reach out, and it seems to me that as Steve grows tired, so does the company, pulling within itself.

Apple would have us believe that its retail stores are the best and only ambassadors for its products, but industry and university people aren’t fooled. They see Apple’s unwillingness to show up, work with the rest of the industry, as elitist and contrarian. There are genuine issues to work out with the rest of the industry, but Apple is increasingly a lonely and thin skinned company. In the end, Apple will have no one to depend on but itself. I hope Mr. Jobs’ US$40B war chest helps him when the need arises because no one else will.

5. Tim Cook’s Future. There are several issues associated with Tim Cook. The first is training a successor. If Mr. Cook believes, when the day comes, that he can be both COO and the new CEO, he is mistaken. I hope Mr. Cook has a really great person lined up for the COO position because being CEO is all about more than what he’s doing now.

Secondly, Mr. Cook will have to look deep into his ego to decide if he’s going to be the visible Apple spokesperson. He really should avoid that role as CEO. He doesn’t have the temperament or voice quality to be the visible Apple spokesperson, and if he is wise, he’ll roll up his sleeves and work behind the scenes as a quiet but effective CEO. Meanwhile, he’ll need to let other Apple VPs take on the role of visible spokesperson(s). That’ll be a tough nut to swallow, and it will be threatening.

When the day comes that Tim Cook takes over as CEO, we’ll learn a lot more about his character, honor, humility and judgment. My hope is that he’ll realize that Phil Schiller, Scott Forstall (who’s getting there slowly) and others are much better equipped to speak for Apple, in general. That will be a challenge to Mr. Cook’s authority and self-image as CEO. But, if he doesn’t keep his cool in this regard, Apple is in for a lot of trouble after Mr. Jobs hands over the reigns.

There you have it. Not ten problems, but just five. The first four have been nagging Apple for awhile now, and they keep coming up in the press as candidate items to turn Apple into a whipping boy. The thing is, the problems are easy to solve. The act of solving them would not hinder Apple’s image or freedom to succeed, only enhance it.

Sign Up for the Newsletter

Join the TMO Express Daily Newsletter to get the latest Mac headlines in your e-mail every weekday.

19 Comments Leave Your Own

Gareth Harris

Well said, John. I would add that computing is entering another era of change - even bigger than the transition from mainframes to PCs - going from computing for geeks - to computing for everybody else via highly networked personal mobile devices.

Apple, as signified by its name change, is committed to explore this new territory. Opportunities like this promise large successes, but also invite large mistakes.

This is uncharted territory. Being the point man is dangerous. The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

Lee Dronick

The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

Love it! is that original? If so can add it to my repartee?

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Spot on John. I would have written #1 as Steve Jobs is a head case and nobody under him challenges him. But I’m just direct that way. You covered that point as well as anyone could be expected to in a respected journal dedicated to all things Apple.

Gareth Harris

Sir Harry Flashman said: is that original?

I wish it were. I believe it is an oldie that we are all free to use.

BTW, I probably should have said “us geeks” instead of just “geeks” above.

palenoue

garethharris@mac.com said:The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Love it! is that original? If so can add it to my repartee?

Terry Pratchett, I think, from “The Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents” if I remember correctly.

Lee Dronick

I wish it were. I believe it is an oldie that we are all free to use.

Terry Pratchett, I think, from ?The Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents? if I remember correctly.

An oldie? Here I am a greybeard, bordering on old fart and that is the first I heard the phrase. Never too late to learn.

Getting back on topic. Yes, I doubt that Steve Jobs would make a good politician, he doesn’t compromise much.

Nemo

While I think that Mr. Martellaro’s comments are on the whole well taken, I have a few comments and qualifications.

1.  Apple’s prickliness arises from in part from it relentlessly pursuing a set of values and virtues in designing its products that other companies, including some its partners, only pay lip service to.  Apple’s relentless pursuit of, for example, the best possible graphics in its notebook computers has resulted in a conflict with Intel.  These kinds of conflicts are inevitable, as long as Apple sticks to its values, and are a good sign up to point.  Where, however, Apple’s pursuit of its values goes beyond making insanely great products and results a siege mentality and supercilious attitude, it is counterproductive, isolating, and leads to dangerous hubris.  It’s a thin line, Apple will have to stay on the right side of it.

We’d all love to see Messrs. Jobs and Seidenberg recognize that each has a valuable part of the wireless mobile equation, Seidenberg and Verizon the network and Jobs and Apple the devices, and then come to a fair deal that apportion each company its due share of the revenue.  While hope springs eternal, I doubt that it will happen, until something decisive happens on the field of battle in the marketplace or both sides recognizes that a knockout blow can be achieved.

2.  Mr. Martellaro’s second point is well taken.  While most ordinary users, like me, can have a great experience with the default settings, more sophisticated users need more.  And even I have occasionally have made a call to Apple Support that could have been avoided by more complete documentation.

However, I suppose that Apple’s view is that its approach works best for the vast majority of its customers, and for the rest or those occasions when the default setting won’t do, there are Apple’s support, consultants, and online updates.  I don’t know that sophisticated users and IT departments would agree.

3.  Apple is a company, unlike, for example, Microsoft and Dell, that relentlessly pursues excellence and innovation in search on that new product paradigm and the perfect user’s experience, racing into the future and usually getting it right.  Apple won’t, nor should it, halt or slow innovation to glacial speeds to accommodate enterprise IT’s desire for the cheap and reliable.  But to the extent that it can profitably accommodate the enterprise without compromising its pursuit of the ideal user’s experience in the ideal product, Apple should do so, and there is some sign that Apple is taking a renewed interest in the enterprise will make such accommodations in the pursuit of the profits that can be obtained.

Now, I don’t expect that the enterprise would rapidly abandoned Microsoft for Apple, but I think that by accommodating the enterprise where it can and should, the enterprise will reward Apple’s accommodations.  However, Apple must stay true to its values and carefully pick the spots where it has a real opportunity to profitably expand its presence in the enterprise.

4.  Some of the conferences that Apple avoids, it should avoid, because they are merely or principally opportunities for Apple’s competitors to market their products.  By attending such conference, Apple would only let competitors share the stage with its generally superior products and services and would force the timing of Apple’s marketing of its products to the schedule of these swap meets.  But other are conclaves, where Apple could benefit from participating.  This is another line that requires good judgment by senior executives.

5.  On the point that Mr. Cook considerable talents as a future leader of Apple don’t incline to being Apple’s spokesman, I am inclined to defer to his judgment.  However, I haven’t seen enough of Mr. Cook as Apple’s spokesman and marketer in chief to fully and finally assent to his view.  I suggest that, as the time approaches for a transfer of power, Mr. Cook, if he is to be the one to succeed Mr. Jobs and if he believes that he can and should be Apple’s spokesman, try the role to see whether it fits.  If it doesn’t fit, then he should, I think, follow Mr. Martellaro’s suggestion and give that role to other senior executives, who are better suited to it.

But on the whole, I find Mr. Martellaro’s comments, supra, are well taken.

John Martellaro

I didn’t have room to re-emphasize the points Nemo makes. They are valid.  I agree that Apple’s singular pursuit of excellence and innovation prohibits them from going along to get along.  But what I believe is that Apple can still fix the problems I’ve identified without compromising that value! If other companies can manage to do it, so can Apple.

UrbanBard

It seems to me that Apple is more intent on exploring new markets than competing for old ones. Some of this has to do with coming trends.

The hardware is increasingly being folded into a smaller process size thus prompting everything to be included onto a chip which will be very cheap. The fabricators will find it easier to design a chip for the widest possible use and disable functions for those unwilling to pay for more. Whether this is by software disablement or from a laser cutting out functions at the last manufacturing step is anyone guess.

The chips will get so cheap that this means that every devise or peripheral gets its own computer inside. The computer system which operates the most transparently and flawlessly wins. And that is likely to be Apple.

We are likely to have dozens of computers in our home or office doing specialized tasks. We may have several monitors in every room depending on their use. We will have personal servers in fixed locations and devises like the iPad which will go with us everywhere. We will have both cloud and local applications depending on which serves us best.

Apple needs to work on some of the items which the author names, but some of that applies to markets which Apple chooses not to serve.

As I see it, Apple has it’s traditional niches in graphics, design and education, plus the upper end of the consumer market. Apple shows interest in the Small to Medium sized Businesses while the iPod Touch, the iPhone & the iPad appeal to people who need very light computing or internet services, but dislike computers and are fearful of the complexity of NetBooks.

Government and Big Business sales are not Apple’s niche; partly, that is because each would make demands of Apple which it chooses not to deliver. Delivering them would screw up Apple’s consumer marketing strategy. Also, Enterprise is Microsoft’s market niche; it has created game plans, perceptions, services and sales organizations which would make it difficult for Apple to compete head on in Enterprise.

Apple’s COO, Tim Cook, recently remarked that government and big business sales comprises only 10% of the computer market, while consumers are at 50%. The consumers are much easier to please than the Enterprise Market is. Apple makes far more money from its consumers.

The Windows market is huge but stagnant. Sixty percent of the computers in existence are using Windows XP on older hardware. As much as two thirds of these computers are doing light or occasional work in businesses using old software. There is little reason for these computers to be upgraded for years and it would, probably, require the purchase of new hardware.

The computers which were sold with Vista on them comprise 18% of the world’s computers. About half of those were downgraded to Windows XP. Every Vista computer has the hardware capable of running Windows Seven well, but their upgrade has been disappointing. Windows Seven had an upgrade of only 9% after four months when 2% were running the Windows Seven Release Candidate. This means that PC’s are being upgraded to Windows Seven at about 2% a month. This is at half the rate of Mac’s which are being upgraded to Snow Leopard.

Apple is positioning itself for where the market will be in two to three years. Many hardware changes are imminent. There is great uncertainty of how this will play out. Microsoft and the Wintel manufacturers will be savaged by coming events. Apple may be surprised, too, but it is nimble enough to respond.

Neil Anderson

“In the end, Apple will have no one to depend on but itself.”

And that’s the way it should be.

Nemo

Bosco, you’ve really gone around the bend.  There is nothing in Mr. Martellaro’s comments, supra, that say or could even reasonably be construed to intimate that Steve Jobs is a head case.  And your comment, supra, stating that Mr. Martellaro said or even suggested that Steve Jobs is a head case only calls into question your judgment and confirms your rabid anti-Apple and anti-Jobs bias.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Nemo, it doesn’t take a 490 on the LSAT to see that I offered an alternative _explanation_ for the same phenomenon that John observed. Two things that are indisputable. (1) Nothing significant or newsworthy happens at that company without Steve Jobs explicit approval (and likely him at least thinking it was his idea). (2) The dude is a nutcase on lots of everyday life issues. Did you ever hear about the WWDC Steve-note he gave on his return (just before he toppled Amelio) where some staffer had purchased the wrong brand of bottled water and he threw a giant tantrum backstage? His method of patent posturing with Jonathan Schwartz is just a scaled up version of the same crap. And so is his Nazi App Store. And so is his undying loyalty to AT&T as a partner. And so is his brain-dead crusade against Flash while his current flagship mobile device doesn’t even handle HTML5’s <audio> tag. And so was the ridiculous Kabuki Theatre to disguise the seriousness of his health a year ago.

Nemo, one thing you can look at with your lawyer glasses on, is Apple’s patent applications. Do you seriously think that when Steve Jobs’ name appears on pretty much all their important patents that he is intimately involved in the process that leads to the claimed invention? Really involved enough to have his name on there, while still having time to prepare Steve-notes, get fresh livers, and call up other CEOs to practice his shakedown routine? It’s so opposite of how patents work at “old-school” innovation companies like IBM, GE, the old AT&T (Bell Labs, Lucent). It’s beyond belief.

With Steve Jobs, if you can’t see who is being screwed, you simply need to turn around. He has never been a good guy. With Apple… I have hope that when they get rid of this jerk, they might figure out that no one person has all the answers. See John’s point #5. I’m just a little bit ahead of the curve on seeing Jobs for what he’s always been and knowing that empowered by a sky-high stock price, he will reveal his true colors for all to see.

iJack

Every week or so for the past couple of years, I read or hear something that makes me wonder about my beloved Apple, and like Steve Jobs less, and less.  Trouble is, is there anybody, anybody else out there that has the same vision?  Or is it simply time to put down a mad scientist, and let Apple slide back to good-but-not-great?

M.

As to Verizon, the situation has been made abundantly clear: It’s not cost effective or smart to provide a CDMA. Between Verizon’s switch from CDMA soon and the ATT contract, the time hole is too small to justify financially or for pissing off ATT.

UrbanBard

Bosco, Apple is confounding the conventional wisdom. Naturally, this provokes controversy. Apple is secretive, so it doesn’t tell anyone what markets it expects its products to serve.

Despite Apple’s detractors, we are not seeing where Apple is being hurt by its practices. Apple has been making record profits in a down economy from charting its own course. Perhaps, Apple’s management knows its business better than the pundits do.

Let’s take up Mr Martellaro’s complaints.

1. Apple is contrary. It makes bets on technology, with or against some companies, and has the gall to win. The Floppy Disk is history, so too, will be Flash. The odium which Apple gains from this is the price of being an innovator.

2. Apple is not as bureaucratic as some people wish; it doesn’t document its features well. This is true, but is one of the prices of change.

Snow Leopard was a major revamping under the hood; many features are still in a process of growth. Some features will not be important, or well documented,  until Apple moves to the 64 bit kernel by default, so expect more complaints about this.

3. Apple is not an Enterprise company, although it will sell to businesses on its own terms.

The Enterprise market demands actions which Apple believes will disturb its consumer marketing plans. Since the bulk of Apple’s prospective sales are to consumers, I do not expect this pattern to change. This is especially so, when the world market in computers is depressed.

Moreover, coming technical changes will sideline many f Enterprise practices.

The main thing which keeps Apple out of Enterprise is not hardware; it is the intrenched software which businesses use. Much of that intrenched software is sheltered from Microsoft too, because it is old software run occasionally on XP computers. Companies running those machines would not benefit from an upgrade to Windows Seven and they are likely to avoid the expense of purchasing a new computer.

I expect Google’s Chrome OS, not Mac OSX, to gain market share among Enterprise’s XP users which are 60% of the computers in existence. WINE on Chrome OS will run those old programs at no additional cost.

4. Apple is focused like a laser on new markets, not existing ones. The existing computer market is stagnant world wide; barriers to entry have been erected by defensive companies as they fight over scraps. This means that attending trade fairs would futile. It would soften Apple’s intensity.

The bulk of the iPhone sales were not from existing Smart Phone users. Apple grew the market by converting feature phone users. The IPhone and its competitors grew what was a stagnant market.

I expect the same thing to happen with the iPad. Most of its buyers will have never had a computer before. There will be a “halo effect” for the iPad too. Once people have purchased an iPad, it makes it likely for them to buy Apple if their computing needs increase.

5. Apple is not making a big deal about Steve Jobs successor. Apple’s consumers are unconcerned about that, too. We have no idea how much control Steve Jobs has on Apple’s current plans.

Steve has put together a superb management team; he is not as important to Apple as he was in 1997. It is likely that Apple will continue to have success after Steve is retired. But, Apple’s board of director have decided not to rock the boat. This may be unwise, but it is their call.

WetcoastBob

John says:  “As Mr. Jobs has gotten older, I have noticed the recluse in him has extended to the culture of Apple. At one time, Apple attended Supercomputing, all the bioinformatics conferences, SIGGRAPH and two MacWorlds. No more. It takes some time and effort to reach out, and it seems to me that as Steve grows tired, so does the company, pulling within itself.”

I noticed at the last keynote that Steve does not have the bounce and energy of previous keynotes.

A leader can only be leader so long and they outlive their effectiveness.  Promising employees will become disillusioned and leave the company.

The greatest failing of leaders is to not groom a successor.  If there is no one in your organization which shares your visions and values you are less likely to retire and let the next generation continue.  This can put you well past your best before date.

It seems to me that the optimal life of a CEO is ten years.  This is evident in politics where around this time the leader’s henchmen gang up on the leader and he goes down in flames.  Or they hold on to power with a reign of terror. (Zimbabwe and Mugabe)

In Canada our prime ministers seem to be upended at the 10 year mark either by internal party dissent or by the voting public who, “throw the bums out”.  In the USA there is a two term limit which limits the reign to eight years.  Look at the before and after pictures of your past presidents to see the toll this leadership takes.

I feel that it is time for Steve Jobs to become the elder statesman of Apple Inc. and allow new blood to take the helm.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Bosco, Apple is confounding the conventional wisdom. Naturally, this provokes controversy. Apple is secretive, so it doesn?t tell anyone what markets it expects its products to serve.

That’s kinda like the Charles Manson defense. Just confounding the conventional wisdom and creating a little controversy. It’s so funny to read you write that, because for a decade from 1987-1997 and then another decade from about 2000-2009, I actually believed that about Apple. But I think with all of us, the BS detector eventually takes over. I am finding right now, that with Apple having totally pegged my BS detector and basically being suspect with everything they do, I’m never shocked or surprised. Just expect the worst imaginable behavior from them and they’ll do just about that. And I’m saving a crapload of cash and getting some nifty gadgets I hadn’t availed myself to previously. The time is right. Windows 7 actually has a level of polish that doesn’t make me miss my Mac as I use it.

As for your contention that the management team is excellent and functions without much direction from Jobs… Phil Schiller ought to be embarrassed for his explanation of the App Store skin purge that kept SI Swimsuit and Playboy in the App Store. Yeah, I could handle that kind of embarrassment if Phil’s paycheck comes with it, but still, you know he could feel the tickle of Steve’s fingers in his throat. (That was a puppet crack if you missed it.)

Chandra Coomar

@Che Bosco
Pause a moment and take a look in the mirror. Do it mid-rant.
You really must stay on your meds, my lad. Listen to your doctor. You can trust him.
Then you’ll be a happy boy again. The sun will shine on you. You won’t feel like crying in your milk any more. Everything will be so ....... nice in your life.
In time, you too will see the light, drink the KA and eat of the AAPL from the tree of temptation. You know you want to. Hey! It’s OK to do that.
I mean 10+% in 10 days. Whaddyawant? More? More?
Nothing ultra-profitable is permitted at Apple without Jobs’ approval in triplicate and certified by a Notary Public. Hmmm. Seems he’s been approving a lotta stuff since 1997. I know that pisses you off, but what’s a doofus dimwit to do? He should be more human like Mr. Dell dontchathink? Make a serious blunder, or seven.
And Michael Dell wants you as a replacement for himself, as you seem to have all the answers. Don’t you Sonny?
Gee. What it is to be clever. I’m almost jealous. But wait!
Err, Che Wizz, whose fingers are those right there tickling YOUR tonsils? Hmmm?

Eugene

“1) Nothing significant or newsworthy happens at that company without Steve Jobs explicit approval (and likely him at least thinking it was his idea). (2) The dude is a nutcase on lots of everyday life issues. Did you ever hear about the WWDC Steve-note he gave on his return (just before he toppled Amelio) where some staffer had purchased the wrong brand of bottled water and he threw a giant tantrum backstage? His method of patent posturing with Jonathan Schwartz is just a scaled up version of the same crap. And so is his Nazi App Store. And so is his undying loyalty to AT&T as a partner. And so is his brain-dead crusade against Flash while his current flagship mobile device doesn?t even handle HTML5?s <audio> tag. And so was the ridiculous Kabuki Theatre to disguise the seriousness of his health a year ago.”

Not true. Plenty happens in Apple without Steve’s approval and his mind can be changed, although best to approach that on a good day. Jobs is more involved in Apple than he was in Pixar, but the rest of the team: Serlet and Forstall in particular make a lot of the day to day decisions on what, and how things get implemented. The only difference with other companies is Jobs’ attention to detail on what UI gets shown to the user. About kernal tasks, he cares less. I doubt if the iPhone was his idea, it was probably Scott Forstall;s idea. Or Avie Tevanian.

The patent thing is weird alright.

As for the prima-doma antics back stage - probably related to pre-show nerves. He may not seem to have them, but most people do.

Log-in to comment