3 ms·

>Can you imagine anything more ridiculous than a bunch of CEOs of Verizon, and Google, and Sony Ericsson, and Nokia, sitting around the table, and going "How ar

>Can you imagine anything more ridiculous than a bunch of CEOs of Verizon, and Google, and Sony Ericsson, and Nokia, sitting around the table, and going "How are we going to answer the iPhone ?" Unfortunately, you will rot and die a sad and painful death if you don't do precisely that. As a company, you always have to respond to your competitors. Whether you choose to do that by trying to catch up to your competitors or blow the competition away is what matters.

junklight 17y ago
Sadly the answer to "how are we going to answer the iphone" is not anything surprising or interesting - the answer is usually - "lets make our own iphone a-like and customers will buy it because they don't want to buy Apple or because they are tied to a different network" and I think that is what the article is getting at. if the answer was: "ok people like small gadgets that are connected (for example iphones and netbooks). Let us see what we can come up with" - then perhaps we would see something better.
- bitwize 17y ago
  Like it or not, Steve Jobs is a trendsetter for the electronics industry, and the strategy of aping his successes generally tends to work out well for other players. For example, if it weren't for large, established companies knocking off whatever Apple is doing, Windows wouldn't exist.
  - junklight 17y ago
    so yes I understand that. I also understand that Hollywood finds it safer to remake (and make sequels to) old successes than to innovate As an end user I wish it wasn't like that. I can live with Hollywood because it is possible to make low budget movies and people do - there is a thriving independent film industry. Likewise for software its affordable to start up on your own and innovate. Hardware is a whole other kettle of fish though - to afford to work with and on the miniaturisation needed for these kind of devices - its still beyond most small enterprises. Which is where innovation typically resides. Yes of course its safer for these people to spend their money following the leaders - just that it would be nice if there where a few more leaders (and I speak as someone who has many mac computers)

junklight 17y ago

Sadly the answer to "how are we going to answer the iphone" is not anything surprising or interesting - the answer is usually - "lets make our own iphone a-like and customers will buy it because they don't want to buy Apple or because they are tied to a different network" and I think that is what the article is getting at. if the answer was: "ok people like small gadgets that are connected (for example iphones and netbooks). Let us see what we can come up with" - then perhaps we would see something better.

bitwize 17y ago
Like it or not, Steve Jobs is a trendsetter for the electronics industry, and the strategy of aping his successes generally tends to work out well for other players. For example, if it weren't for large, established companies knocking off whatever Apple is doing, Windows wouldn't exist.
- junklight 17y ago
  so yes I understand that. I also understand that Hollywood finds it safer to remake (and make sequels to) old successes than to innovate As an end user I wish it wasn't like that. I can live with Hollywood because it is possible to make low budget movies and people do - there is a thriving independent film industry. Likewise for software its affordable to start up on your own and innovate. Hardware is a whole other kettle of fish though - to afford to work with and on the miniaturisation needed for these kind of devices - its still beyond most small enterprises. Which is where innovation typically resides. Yes of course its safer for these people to spend their money following the leaders - just that it would be nice if there where a few more leaders (and I speak as someone who has many mac computers)