Linked by Yoni on Fri 18th Jan 2013 21:56 UTC
Apple "Never mind the fact that the iPod turned the entire music industry on its head. Never mind the fact that most successful notebooks today resemble designs first popularized by Apple. Never mind the fact that the blueprint of the modern day smartphone remains the original iPhone. Never mind the fact that competitors are scrambling wildly to copy the success and design of the iPad. Forget all of these things, because when it comes to Apple, the 'what have you done for me lately?' mentality reigns supreme."
Thread beginning with comment 549400
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Reponse
by bassbeast on Sat 19th Jan 2013 06:19 UTC in reply to "Reponse"
bassbeast
Member since:
2007-11-11

Even that though ignores what we are seeing in the mobile market which is an exact (on fast forward) repeat of what we saw in X86.

You have the chip used in all these systems (ARM) hitting a thermal wall and going from MHz wars to core wars, with Nvidia up to 5 and Samsung up to 6, and just like with X86 we are seeing that when they can no longer compete on speed (because the average user won't "feel" the difference between a dual and a quad because writing programs that scale with cores is VERY difficult) so they are competing the only way they can...on price.

This severely hurts Apple as while there will always be Apple fans that will pay any cost for the Apple logo most folks? Just want a device that works. Apple has already basically admitted this by keeping their older models being built as well as introducing the iPad Mini but even that isn't gonna help when you have offerings like Kindle Fire for $200 and from the looks of it we'll have dual core tablets running the latest Android for $100 or less by this summer.

The reason Apple HAS to have "the next big thing" is that is how Jobs kept the Apple premium so high, they were the first in the market and were cutting edge. The longer they are in a market the more the market will sour for them as they are no longer unique and therefor can't command the premium prices anymore. Just look at how few X86 laptops they sell compared to the larger market, how Android smartphones are exploding thanks to having price points for everybody (they even have a $75 USD Android 4 phone at Walmart on their pre-paid and it actually works quite nicely) and now in tablets we are seeing more and more units with nicer hardware at lower prices, because they don't have to please Wall Street with higher profit margins.

So its not so much "what have you done for me lately?" its instead "If we don't have a new market we are gonna end up in commodity land" because as any retailer will tell you "good enough" with cheap prices will always end up winning in the end. Apple will always have a niche but without new markets it will continually become a smaller niche until it becomes a repeat of X86.

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[2]: Reponse
by Soulbender on Sat 19th Jan 2013 06:51 in reply to "RE: Reponse"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

+1 insightful

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Reponse
by Tony Swash on Sun 20th Jan 2013 13:24 in reply to "RE: Reponse"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Even that though ignores what we are seeing in the mobile market which is an exact (on fast forward) repeat of what we saw in X86


I think that is a common but completely wrong interpretation of what is happening in the mobile device markets. What is interesting is how different the mobile device markets are and how differently the dynamics of platform performance in the mobile device markets are compared to the PC markets.

In the PC era a Mac was pretty much an equivalent of a Wintel PC when it came to platform utilisation. On both Macs and Wintel PCs people did pretty much the same things, they all ran programs to do similar things and with similar patterns of usage. It was probably true that there was a slightly higher amount of graphic design being done on Macs compared to Wintel PCs but that difference wasn't hugely significant and the difference faded over time. People generally used their Macs as much as people used their Wintel PCs and people generally pretty much did the same sort of stuff on both platforms.

This was very important.

Because is meant that one Mac and one Wintel PC had an equivalent impact and value when it came to platform utilisation. Broadly speaking if twice as many Wintel PCs were sold as Macs then there would be twice as many people buying Wintel PC software, twice as many Wintel PC compatible documents would be produced, twice as many web pages would be surfed using Wintel PC browsers, etc etc. Broadly a Mac was only as valuable as a Wintel PC in the larger PC ecosystem and value chain.

And this this meant that if the ratio of Wintel PCs sold to Macs was ten to one then Wintel PCs would utterly dominate the PC ecosystem and value chain. Macs were marginalised because the money followed the consumers and the Mac ecosystem became less attractive and this in turn drove even more marginalistion.

This is what people think is happening with iOS versus Android. But it isn't.

Mobile device platform utilisation can be measured by these sort of common sense metrics (I have probably missed some)

Web browsing
Web commerce
Developer revenues
Peripheral makers revenues
Hardware makers profits
Advertising income and spend
Availability of digital content

The most striking thing when one looks at the statistics for these sorts of platform utilisation metrics is how consistently they show iOS significantly out performing Android. It seems that in terms of platform utilisation, and therefore in terms of added value in the ecosystem, one average iOS user is worth several times one average Android user.

This is has very big implications. It means that in order for the Android ecosystem to just reach parity with the iOS ecosystem there needs to be something between four and ten times as many Android devices as iOS devices in the installed base. In order for Android to have a richer and healthier ecosystem than iOS might require Android to achieve an installed base twenty or more times that of iOS.

The mobile device market is not the PC market. The dynamic is completely different and trying to analyse it using concepts and patterns from the PC era will lead to a misunderstanding of what is happening.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Reponse
by WereCatf on Sun 20th Jan 2013 13:40 in reply to "RE[2]: Reponse"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Mobile device platform utilisation can be measured by these sort of common sense metrics (I have probably missed some)

Web browsing
Web commerce
Developer revenues
Peripheral makers revenues
Hardware makers profits
Advertising income and spend
Availability of digital content

The most striking thing when one looks at the statistics for these sorts of platform utilisation metrics is how consistently they show iOS significantly out performing Android. It seems that in terms of platform utilisation, and therefore in terms of added value in the ecosystem, one average iOS user is worth several times one average Android user.


Too simplistic. Such a comparison completely ignores facts like e.g. there are no sub-$100 iPhones -- poor people generally buy cheaper phones and end up spending less money on all sorts of extras, so that immediately drags the average down.

If you wanted a more honest comparison you'd have to compare phone models of similar price and then see how the numbers add up. Then again, this is such an obvious thing that I have a strong feeling of bias on your part.

Reply Parent Score: 3