2 ms·

I don't want to defend Intel, but Apple's own announced hope at the time of the iphone introduction was to "eventually reach 1% of the phone market".

• Nevermark 4y ago
  Apple was just reassuring customers and the market, by telling them that their tiny size and newbie market status was an advantage, not a disadvantage. But they clearly had high ambitions for their new revolutionary ergonomic mobile "phone" + "music player" + "internet". They wanted to define a new indispensable market and they wanted to own it. They already had a multi-year product path and design pipeline for regular major upgrades in place. The iPhone was intended to be a "next big thing" from the start. And it seems unlikely Steve was selling Intel on doing a new chip for 1% of the phone market. He was telling Intel this was the future, in some form. Apple was an objective market demonstration, with no ambiguity, that there was now a need for low-power first (as apposed to speed first) that would got to other suppliers if Intel didn't move. This was a leadership failure at Intel. They happen.
  • hollerith 4y ago
    I always thought it was a response to other cell-phone makers integrating music-player functionality into their cell phones, threatening Apple's music-player revenue stream.
    • gumby 4y ago
      Me too. Ballmer's reaction to the iphone was not obviously stupid at the time, especially given Microsft's business model of direct enterprise sales.