4 ms·

>>the ipad's secret was not innovation but polish [which is no more innovative than selling products cheap to earn money on content, Amazon Kindle style] Uhm,

by berntb 14y ago

>>the ipad's secret was not innovation but polish [which is no more innovative than selling products cheap to earn money on content, Amazon Kindle style] Uhm, no one on the planet knew how to build an affordable pad that would be interesting outside niches. Microsoft tried for a long time, too. Then comes the iPhone/iPad. The market, the world, is different. I do smell a bit of spin in what you wrote... :-)

lmm 14y ago
If you're talking about changing individual people's lives, I'd be willing to bet that the amazon effort will eventually reach more people than apple did, simply because the market at $299 is a lot bigger than that at $499. If you're talking about showing the world what's possible, those of us who had tablets years before the ipad could see that. The software was clunky, but if you were willing to spend time learning and work with it (which, yes, is a niche market) you could do everything you can today. What apple did was undeniably a huge step forward. But I don't think it was qualitatively different from those who came before or after, and I think chalking up their success to "innovation" is missing the point.
- seanmcdirmid 14y ago
  Innovate on the experience, not just the features dammit! I'm really tired of hearing this refrain that Apple is not innovative because all they do is take existing features and put them into....a package that people can actually use!? But then "isn't that the easy, uncreative, uninnovative part?" Yes, building usable experience is innovation, and yes its very important.
  - lmm 14y ago
    >"isn't that the easy, uncreative, uninnovative part?" Yes, building usable experience is innovation, and yes its very important. If you consider that to be innovation, surely offering an equivalent product at a substantially lower price (as amazon is doing) involves just as much innovation.
    - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
      Apple innovates on the experience, but they've also refined their supply chain (actually, Cook's main contribution). That is more good engineering than innovation (we can even argue if good engineering is innovation in itself, but its kind of pointless). Amazon has come up with an interesting business model by focusing more on content sales to offset low hardware prices, whereas Apple's thinking is quite the other way (content supports hardware sales, not the other way around!). If you want to call that "innovating on business model", I won't argue with you, but now the term is so diluted that its not very meaningful. My original point was that Apple did a lot of work to bring products to market that were usable and didn't suck, and that is really the innovation that most people acknowledge and notice. "just as much innovation" is such a weird term, how do you actually measure innovation? At least this isn't another "Apple is successful b/c of their marketing" argument, which is bogus since their marketing budget was (until recently) absurdly low compared to other companies in the same industry.
      - a45l98 14y ago
        "their marketing budget is extremely low compared to others in the same industry" Any pointers to the figures? Apple's marketing seems unlike any other hardware manufacturer I can think of. But maybe that's just my perception. When you're watching a film and the camera makes a special pan around a laptop to show the Apple logo, it's hard not to think "This hardware company really puts a lot of effort into marketing. This is not your ordinary hardware company." I have seen Dell do this sort of product placement on occasion, but nobody seems to do it to the extent Apple does. That's just the tip of the iceberg. To discount the amount of Apple marketing and its effects as "standard for the industry" or even below standard seems a little like willful blindness.
        seanmcdirmid 14y ago
        http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/27/apple-ad-spending/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/27/apple-ad-spending/ quote "And while $691 million may seem like a massive amount of money, it’s still less than half of what Microsoft spent on advertising last year. And it’s less than what Dell spent last year." I'm not sure what the case is like today, I'm sure its gone up a bit but would be surprised if they surpass Microsoft yet. Apple doesn't pay for product placements; see http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-10/apple-the-other-cult-in-hollywood http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-10/apple-the-ot... quote "The cast’s (Gossip Girl's) sudden conversion cost the Cupertino (Calif.)-based iPhone maker nothing. Apple has spent decades strengthening its subtle but powerful grip over Hollywood, and unlike many companies, says it never pays for its products to appear on television or in movies." Apple doesn't SPEND much on marketing, but the marketing done is incredibly effective. Turns out, just having the best product makes the job much easier.
- berntb 14y ago
  >>I think chalking up [Apple's] success to "innovation" is missing the point I didn't chalk anything up to anything. I noted that you were smoking something strange -- probably found at a marketing department -- when you wrote that the iPhone/iPad was as innovative as the Amazon "sell the razor cheap, earn money on the blades" strategy... Just because lots of people had been trying to create pads, but failed. (Because they were innovative?:-) ) You didn't touch that simple point.

by berntb 14y ago

lmm 14y ago

If you're talking about changing individual people's lives, I'd be willing to bet that the amazon effort will eventually reach more people than apple did, simply because the market at $299 is a lot bigger than that at $499. If you're talking about showing the world what's possible, those of us who had tablets years before the ipad could see that. The software was clunky, but if you were willing to spend time learning and work with it (which, yes, is a niche market) you could do everything you can today. What apple did was undeniably a huge step forward. But I don't think it was qualitatively different from those who came before or after, and I think chalking up their success to "innovation" is missing the point.

seanmcdirmid 14y ago
Innovate on the experience, not just the features dammit! I'm really tired of hearing this refrain that Apple is not innovative because all they do is take existing features and put them into....a package that people can actually use!? But then "isn't that the easy, uncreative, uninnovative part?" Yes, building usable experience is innovation, and yes its very important.
- lmm 14y ago
  >"isn't that the easy, uncreative, uninnovative part?" Yes, building usable experience is innovation, and yes its very important. If you consider that to be innovation, surely offering an equivalent product at a substantially lower price (as amazon is doing) involves just as much innovation.
  - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
    Apple innovates on the experience, but they've also refined their supply chain (actually, Cook's main contribution). That is more good engineering than innovation (we can even argue if good engineering is innovation in itself, but its kind of pointless). Amazon has come up with an interesting business model by focusing more on content sales to offset low hardware prices, whereas Apple's thinking is quite the other way (content supports hardware sales, not the other way around!). If you want to call that "innovating on business model", I won't argue with you, but now the term is so diluted that its not very meaningful. My original point was that Apple did a lot of work to bring products to market that were usable and didn't suck, and that is really the innovation that most people acknowledge and notice. "just as much innovation" is such a weird term, how do you actually measure innovation? At least this isn't another "Apple is successful b/c of their marketing" argument, which is bogus since their marketing budget was (until recently) absurdly low compared to other companies in the same industry.
    - a45l98 14y ago
      "their marketing budget is extremely low compared to others in the same industry" Any pointers to the figures? Apple's marketing seems unlike any other hardware manufacturer I can think of. But maybe that's just my perception. When you're watching a film and the camera makes a special pan around a laptop to show the Apple logo, it's hard not to think "This hardware company really puts a lot of effort into marketing. This is not your ordinary hardware company." I have seen Dell do this sort of product placement on occasion, but nobody seems to do it to the extent Apple does. That's just the tip of the iceberg. To discount the amount of Apple marketing and its effects as "standard for the industry" or even below standard seems a little like willful blindness.
      - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
        http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/27/apple-ad-spending/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/27/apple-ad-spending/ quote "And while $691 million may seem like a massive amount of money, it’s still less than half of what Microsoft spent on advertising last year. And it’s less than what Dell spent last year." I'm not sure what the case is like today, I'm sure its gone up a bit but would be surprised if they surpass Microsoft yet. Apple doesn't pay for product placements; see http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-10/apple-the-other-cult-in-hollywood http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-10/apple-the-ot... quote "The cast’s (Gossip Girl's) sudden conversion cost the Cupertino (Calif.)-based iPhone maker nothing. Apple has spent decades strengthening its subtle but powerful grip over Hollywood, and unlike many companies, says it never pays for its products to appear on television or in movies." Apple doesn't SPEND much on marketing, but the marketing done is incredibly effective. Turns out, just having the best product makes the job much easier.
berntb 14y ago
>>I think chalking up [Apple's] success to "innovation" is missing the point I didn't chalk anything up to anything. I noted that you were smoking something strange -- probably found at a marketing department -- when you wrote that the iPhone/iPad was as innovative as the Amazon "sell the razor cheap, earn money on the blades" strategy... Just because lots of people had been trying to create pads, but failed. (Because they were innovative?:-) ) You didn't touch that simple point.