Other than giving a bunch of Apple fans the initiative to call me nasty names (go here to understand why), the real question I’d like you to consider is, “Can anyone beat Apple?”
The answer is yes. No company is impossible to beat. Clearly, Apple has been pounded in the past, but with every cell phone and MP3 player company on the planet focused on kicking Apple’s hind end, why the heck hasn’t anyone been able to do it yet?
At the Intel Developer Forum, I saw two devices that show the potential, once they mature, to do Apple significant damage (Apple fans, note the words “once they mature” and “potential,” not making a prediction here, I’m asking a question). Aigo had a next-generation iPhone-like product with a keyboard, and Lenovo had done a vastly better job with the UI but lacked the critical keyboard. Both had chosen Linux, much like Apple initially chose UNIX, to flesh out their offerings. Of the two, the Lenovo product had the overall better fit and finish. Lenovo also has resources and capabilities in line with Apple. Aigo is much smaller and not as well known.
Can Apple Be Beat?
Whether we are talking about taking on HP, Microsoft, GE, or any company dominant in a market class, there is a formula. This formula has to do with understanding where the company is strongest and weakest and making sure you don’t focus all of your resources on the strengths. Apple doesn’t compete with Microsoft on OSs, infrastructure or productivity software as standalone products because it would lose and lose badly. What Apple does is compete against Microsoft on packaged solutions, which are much more similar to how Microsoft took on and beat Lotus than it is to how folks typically try to compete with Apple. Bundles are powerful and “embrace and extend” actually works.
The key to an Apple-beating solution is to provide something that does what Apple does well enough that Apple’s solution becomes redundant. The obvious attack vector earlier this decade was the cell phone which, when coupled with a good iTunes-like back end, could make the iPod redundant. Microsoft misfired with the Zune, which initially wasn’t competitive and then was a little better. But too few people missed having an FM radio or understood the advantages of subscription music well enough. I could also argue the device wasn’t attractive enough nor the marketing strong, but the result is a matter of history.
Apple, upon seeing the threat, brought out its phone first and effectively blocked this weakness. Yes, it effectively made the iPod redundant, but only to its own iPhone, and it held onto the revenue stream and customers brilliantly.
Where Apple Is Exposed
Where Apple remains exposed is on e-mail. RIM, the poster child for e-mail solutions, grew strongly last year, apparently helped more by the iPhone than hurt by it. RIM lacks the capability, apparently, to build a device that can match the iPhone with the consumer. so it didn’t take away from the iPhone either, but certainly showcased where the iPhone was exposed. I would argue that RIM is more exposed than Apple in a fight between the two, based on some head-to-head analysis.
Apple has several other exposures. It is connected to a single carrier, which isn’t exactly the most popular in the U.S.; its device isn’t well integrated with Windows, which remains the dominant desktop operating system; it lacks the battery life and screen size to be a truly great video player; and its device browser doesn’t support all Web standards (particularly flash). While it is supposedly working on the inability to provide a subscription-based service, it can’t yet provide it. These services remain for many the better value. Finally, interoperability isn’t one of its strengths, but this is substantially offset by the fact that Apple is dominant in this portable media player segment (so folks jump through hoops to interoperate with it).
Read »