4 ms·
"Apple will become the Apple of the phone market much as it was the Apple of personal computer market." No offense, but this is probably the most banal argumen
by mrobvious 16y ago
"Apple will become the Apple of the phone market much as it was the Apple of personal computer market."
No offense, but this is probably the most banal argument imaginable.
"There is a myth, more of a meme actually, about the 'inevitability' of commoditization. It is a view of the world that sees things linearly, in terms of singularities, and the so-called "one right path."
In this realm, where commoditization is God, horizontal orientation (versus vertical integration) rules the roost. How else to define consumers, not in flesh and blood terms, not as spirits that aspire to specific outcomes, but rather, as a composite set of loosely-coupled attributes.
This mindset is compelling because it is simple and familiar, but it also leads to blind obsequiousness.
Historical edifices are held as indelible fact. "It's Microsoft v. Apple all over again." "There has to be one absolute, dominant leader." "Open will always prevail -- and should prevail -- over proprietary systems." "Market share matters above all else. Even profits."
There is one small fly in the ointment to this ethos, however, and its name is Apple."
Later:
"The following inconvenient facts must be an affront to the horizontal, commoditized, open, market share zealots. Apple has launched three major new product lines since 2001: the iPod (October, 2001); the iPhone (July, 2007); and the iPad (April, 2010).
The company’s stock is up 3,000 percent since the launch of iPod, 125 percent since the launch of iPhone, and 20 percent since the launch of iPad.
In that same time period, the major devotees of the loosely coupled model — Microsoft, Google, Intel and Dell — have been, at best, outpaced by Apple 6X (in the case of Google dating back to the launch of iPod) and at worst, either been wiped out (in the case of Dell) or treaded water (in the cases of Microsoft and Intel) in every comparison period."
From: http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/09/apple-segmentation-strategy-an.html http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/09/apple-segmentation-strategy...
- siglesias 16y agoAgreed. Additionally, this takes on a second, perhaps more significant meaning: if the Apple of the smartphone market is the same Apple of the MP3 player market, then you're looking at a very different outcome. Think about this harder guys: is designing and building a phone closer to building an iPod or a desktop? The Mac vs. PC analogy is inadequately nuanced to be taken seriously. The mobile market doesn't resemble the PC market nearly as closely as people would like to think. I'd encourage people to think about it more deeply. The app lead and cost advantages enjoyed by clone makers does not exist in this market. Also this is a consumer driven market and not a business driven market, so factors like design and ease of use weigh in more heavily to buying decisions than they did in the PC market.
- buster 16y agoMP3 players will be replaced by mobile phones anyway ;) I think I'm the last person in my circle of friends that still owns one. And in a few months I'll just use my phone I guess.
- sudont 16y agoWell, there are situations in which a mp3 player is more appropriate. The gym, and anywhere that it could get damaged. As such, I use both my iPod nano and touch both on a daily basis. If the iPhone 4 was made of lab-grown diamond, sure, who'd care, then.
- siglesias 16y agoThat wasn't my point. My point was that folks are marking Apple's fate in mobile as their same fate in the PC market. I'm asking why nobody is referencing their success in the music player market, which they dominated with a similar approach to the one they are taking now with phones.