What you're talking about is shifting paradigms. And in a world with
Microsoft in it, a business model based on paradigm-shifting is a
sure-fire way to go bankrupt. Let me explain my somewhat cynical view:
1) Company (possibly Apple but more likely some two-guys-in-a-garage
company) develops a new product which changes the way people think
of... um... let's say toasters. But they're the first ones to do it, so
they run into several problems:
2) The public doesn't understand it, so they get loaded with false
expectations, be them too high or too low. Maybe they think it only
toasts bagels. Or maybe they think it can fix them a three-course meal.
That's because many people simply skim product descriptions and
reviews, and fill in the blanks themselves.
3) Those early adopters who purchase the toaster or get a free copy for
review in ToastWorld run into a barrage or problems. Since this was
probably an ultra-secret project, user testing was probably kept to a
strict minimum. And the engineers had no examples to learn from. They
have to make the mistakes themselves. The first version of anything
truly new usually doesn't work well. (There are some notable exceptions
here, the iPod being the first that comes to mind... but then again it
wasn't the first portable MP3 player either.) Anyway, ToastWorld tries
it out and uses the wrong settings, turning the toast into a llama.
Many users in the field run across the llama problem as well, and
pretty soon popular media is picking up the llama problem and making
humorous parodies and cartoons mocking the product.
4) While the original developers who put the effort and development
into creating a completely new product, and the marketing dollars to
get people to understand it, a third party (usually Microsoft) has been
working on copying it. And guess what? It's much easier to look at
someone else's product, see what they've done better, and fix it. Or,
in Microsoft's case, they may just copy the idea with little regard to
improving it. When it's shipped with the well-known brand name, they
can put the saved R&D dollars into their marketing budget or, better
yet, into reduced margins, making their product cheaper. And because
it's marketed under a different brand name, it doesn't have the stigma
attached to the original product.
And therein lies the problem. It's incredibly risky and difficult, even
for a company like Apple, to create something completely new and
different. And with Apple, whenever they create something new that
isn't a complete success (look at the Cube), the press has a field day
with it and the sales of all of their products, and the price of their
stock, fall from the sky. People understand and soak up small changes
(mostly cosmetic ones) much easier than big ones. Making the new 1GHz
Superdrive-equipped PowerBook will impress media-geeks, but I guarantee
that if they came out with a color they'd sell more of them than this
technologically-challenging feat.
But there's no good solution to this, other than to limit the power of
companies like Microsoft to force their knockoffs on hardware
manufacturers that don't want them. Amazon's solution isn't bad
(patenting some of their concepts) but they've taken it way too far.
(one-click shopping? why not patent the hyperlink too?)
I'm not saying any of this to support Steve Jobs, and it has nothing to
do with me working for Apple. It has no basis on insider information
(come on, I work for the server group, they don't tell me anything).
I'm just expressing disgust with the state of technology
Hmmm... I've been thinking of starting a weblog... perhaps I should do
so with this long-winded rant :-)
John Anderson
everchanging
On Saturday, November 9, 2002, at 08:17 AM, Joel M. Sciamma wrote:
> When Jobs returned, Apple became a marketing led instead of an
> engineering
> led company and little good can come of it.
>
> We needed a company like Apple to push things forward for the benefit
> of
> users and the industry but they're blowing it.
-- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries List FAQ/Etiquette/Terms: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Dec 02 2002 - 22:02:20 EST