3 ms·

Are people surprised by the idea that a company might make design decisions based on their entire product catalog and long-term marketing strategies? In my min

Are people surprised by the idea that a company might make design decisions based on their entire product catalog and long-term marketing strategies? In my mind this isn't even a conspiracy theory, it's just what you'd expect from a competent company. If nobody in the decision-making process to remove the headphone jack asked how it would affect long-term AirPod sales, then that just seems like a pretty big oversight on their part, doesn't it? Spotify bought podcasts so it tie them to a DRM-encumbered platform with ads, Facebook bought Oculus so it could monetize the data, consoles remove disk drives in part to drive digital purchases and cut down on game reselling, iMessage is iPhone exclusive because it makes it harder to switch to Android, and Apple cares about influencing long-term consumer trends in the headphone market. I don't necessarily agree that acknowledging this stuff counts as being cynical.

chrisseaton 5y ago
How does this tally with the fact that they sell a cheap adapter, and also included one in the box for the first phone without a jack?
- danShumway 5y ago
  I'm not sure what you mean, that doesn't seem like a contradiction to me. Apple sells an adapter that needs to be separately purchased (which is inconvenient), they no longer provide that adapter for new phones. They provided it initially because the market demanded a stopgap solution. Once the market stopped demanding that solution, Apple stopped providing it. This is how basically every business works. Facebook didn't merge Occulus accounts with Facebook accounts the same year that they bought the company. Epic has been outright giving away games to chip at Steam's market share, but they're not planning to do that indefinitely. They have plans about what they want the PC market to look like in the future. Companies are capable of thinking long-term. Apple is definitely capable of thinking long-term, it's a business run by very smart people. Do you believe that the iPhone has not driven Bluetooth adoption at all? I think that would be a pretty bold claim to make. Apple has positioned the lack of a headphone jack as a signature mark of a premium phone. Other phone manufacturers have jumped on board with that consumer perception, which has driven investment into making more Bluetooth compatible devices, which in turn makes AirPods more convenient and easier to use with a wider variety of devices. Because wireless audio technology is still evolving (unlike static wired standards), Apple now has an opportunity to make a set of devices that work best with their own products, encouraging more consumer lock-in to the Apple ecosystem. This also positions Apple to differentiate their headphones from competitors in ways that would be difficult to do with an analog connection (offering seamless paring, higher bitrates, etc...). It's not like Apple doesn't have a history with this, they have openly (proudly) removed features in order to push industries in preferred directions. See CDs over floppies, USB/Thunderbolt over CDs, HTML5 over Flash, etc... That's not a conspiracy, that's literally Apple's stated reason for those changes. And of course Apple thinks about how changes in those industries and markets will affect the products they sell. They'd be foolish not to. What is it that makes you think that wireless headphones are different then the last 3 or 4 times that Apple has done this? This just seems like very obvious business practice to me, almost every company tries to manipulate markets and demand to some degree.

chrisseaton 5y ago

How does this tally with the fact that they sell a cheap adapter, and also included one in the box for the first phone without a jack?

danShumway 5y ago
I'm not sure what you mean, that doesn't seem like a contradiction to me. Apple sells an adapter that needs to be separately purchased (which is inconvenient), they no longer provide that adapter for new phones. They provided it initially because the market demanded a stopgap solution. Once the market stopped demanding that solution, Apple stopped providing it. This is how basically every business works. Facebook didn't merge Occulus accounts with Facebook accounts the same year that they bought the company. Epic has been outright giving away games to chip at Steam's market share, but they're not planning to do that indefinitely. They have plans about what they want the PC market to look like in the future. Companies are capable of thinking long-term. Apple is definitely capable of thinking long-term, it's a business run by very smart people. Do you believe that the iPhone has not driven Bluetooth adoption at all? I think that would be a pretty bold claim to make. Apple has positioned the lack of a headphone jack as a signature mark of a premium phone. Other phone manufacturers have jumped on board with that consumer perception, which has driven investment into making more Bluetooth compatible devices, which in turn makes AirPods more convenient and easier to use with a wider variety of devices. Because wireless audio technology is still evolving (unlike static wired standards), Apple now has an opportunity to make a set of devices that work best with their own products, encouraging more consumer lock-in to the Apple ecosystem. This also positions Apple to differentiate their headphones from competitors in ways that would be difficult to do with an analog connection (offering seamless paring, higher bitrates, etc...). It's not like Apple doesn't have a history with this, they have openly (proudly) removed features in order to push industries in preferred directions. See CDs over floppies, USB/Thunderbolt over CDs, HTML5 over Flash, etc... That's not a conspiracy, that's literally Apple's stated reason for those changes. And of course Apple thinks about how changes in those industries and markets will affect the products they sell. They'd be foolish not to. What is it that makes you think that wireless headphones are different then the last 3 or 4 times that Apple has done this? This just seems like very obvious business practice to me, almost every company tries to manipulate markets and demand to some degree.