DJ Bitterbarn

I'll make this quick, because it's not about the OP's assertion and it's really going nowhere fast:
If Whirlpool had left Office, I think the article would have mentioned this. Plus if you're moving from Notes to Google it's a big savings but it's a big savings whether or not you move from Office. LotusNotes is not a de-facto standard, either, so you can leave it more easily. Also, given that the article did not mention leaving Office, I suspect that's what they're doing (unless, of course, the article just conveniently forgot to mention that, and if someone can provide a reference that says so, well then I'm wrong).

I'm not a fan of the "license by subscription program" but it does seem to be winning over corporations in the short term, such as JCI and other large companies who I won't mention here. How short is short term is another question, but I have a feeling we'll be seeing docx files as the majority for a long time.

I think this could go around until the argument is ancient history, but I don't agree, both on the percentages and the supporting of multiple architectures to do the job at the same time and then the hassle of dealing with conversion. Most likely you'll see someone finally try to make a serious effort at competition, but I could be wrong in different fields. In science/engineering, though, the functionality just isn't there (and I do use Google Apps and for the most part quite like them).

Anyway, the point isn't this I'm not going to get into a discussion about apple, so I'll leave it here on this thread.

skofarrell

This too: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD...apter?fnode=72

skofarrell

I know IT people at Whirlpool, that's why I had the article. They are leaving MS Office.


Fine.

Weez_1000

I agree with the lack of innovation but I think a lot of it has to do with the overwhelming success of the iPhone and iPad. When a company has something that ridiculously successful they have to keep refreshing/updating the individual items ie: iPhone and iPad and i think its hurts the innovation of other products. Im not saying its right but I do think has hurt development of new products.

pseudoswede

With over $140 billion in the bank, I think they could create a skunkworks-type division without hurting the bottom line. I'm sure they already have one.

deniah

yes, its absolutely true that the apple launch platforms are little more than sidenote today.

but what relevance does that really play? theyve never really been the first at anything. (and their stock price is still healthy.)

ive had multiple competing media players before the ipod. ipod was the best.
ive had multiple competing tablets before the ipad. ipad is now the best.
ive had multiple laptops, super portables, netbooks before the macbooks. mb pros and mb airs are the best.
ive had multiple set top boxes before the appletv. appletv is arguably the best (love boxee box but its discontinued, unsupported, and problematic)

ive also owned every generation of the google branded phones so far. depending on what happens this winter -- if i swing towards nexus 5 or iP5s -- im afraid it might follow the curve.

im early adopter to a lot of gizmos. first 7" tablets. first netbooks in 7, 9, and 10". first webos phone. no affiliation or allegiance to one brand over another. but damned if apple doesnt end up making the best product in each class. dont know what metric people are using to compare stuff -- megahertz per dollar? -- but for bottom-line-consumer-satisfaction they really hit it for me.

ScottC

Thing is, the overwhelming success is not where it was three or four years ago. Don't get me wrong, their devices still outsell any of the competition, but cracks are definitely appearing. Samsung is doing quite well against them. And for the first time in forever, tablet marketshare in Android is increasing a little.

If they get complacent, they run the risk of ending up where they were in the late 90's.

lensman

Of the original list, I would say the following:
iPod - revolutionary (as in done right)
iPod Shuffle - leverages iPod share, but a significant innovation
iPod Touch - iPhone without a phone
iPhone - revolutionary (smartphone done right)
iMac (newest flat panel generation) - possibly revolutionary, but not a significant market participant
Macbook Air - amazing, but how significant is it?
Move to all Intel - great architectural move, but not a product per-se
Mac Mini - nice, but not a significant market participant
Apple TV - nice, but not a significant market participant
XServe - nice, but a commercial failure
MacPro - nice, but a commercial failure
Time Capsule - nice idea, but I don't even know anyone who has one
MobileMe - failure
iPod Nano - I really loved it, but I'm not sure how it was usefully revolutionary
iWork - ?
iLife - ?
Final Cut - nice niche product, but I'm not sure what the last three software entrants are doing in this list.

Between the introduction of the iPod in 2001 and 2006, the story of Apple is the story of the iPod - growing from zero to close to $10bn a year in revenue. From 2007 even through today, the story of Apple is the story of the iPhone - growing from zero to close to $90bn a year in revenue. The iPad is no slouch, growing from zero in 2010 to over $20bn a year in revenue. But in each case, though the initial product had revolutionary aspects, I would say it was the incremental improvement of the product that led to its success. The MacBook is in there somewhere, but it's hard to talk about MacBook innovation because it's more *all* "incremental innovation" in pursuit of a set of key value vs being a groundbreaking product unlike any other we've seen.

Anyway, I would assert that the incremental innovation is still there, but it remains to be seen whether Apple will be the source of another disruptive product innovation. I'll give them another 5 years to change the world again before I call their story over.

My question is: if not them, then who? I haven't seen anyone else changing the world since 2010. Have you?

corporate666

When you think about it, the successes of Apple over the last few years are really about one single product.

A small handheld lightweight (in terms of functionality) computing device.

The iPod Touch is the basic device.

The iPhone is the same as the iPod Touch but with a phone chip.

The iPad is the same as an iPod Touch but in a larger form factor.

The iPad Mini is the same as the iPod Touch but in a medium size form factor.


A lot of folks talk about Apple's string of home runs... I wonder if it was really a string of home runs as much as it was just exploiting a single product to maximum effect. Sort of like Microsoft with Windows, Office, and Server products. It was somewhat just logical extensions of the same basic thing.

And I think that is why Apple is in trouble. They are losing a lot of market share in all of their key markets, and I don't see that trend changing anytime soon. Apple is late to the party with a low priced phone, and I don't think the new low cost iPhones will be able to compete with the low priced offerings running Android or Windows.

I think a lot of people hyped up Apple into a visionary company that was better than anyone else at making the best products in the world. I think the reality was that they hit a home run with the small portable high quality computing device and exploited it to the max.

It's similar to what Microsoft did with Windows. It's not that Microsoft understood computing better than anyone, it's that they hit a home run with Windows (95 especially) and exploited that to it's fullest. Then they spent years languishing with seemingly no direction.

As for tech leaders, I actually think Google is the one to watch out for. They are doing things the right way - putting tons of irons in the fire and seeing which ones pan out and which don't. Apple seems hesitant to try new new things for fear of diluting their brand. I think that will be their undoing over the next 10 years. Watch and see.

Need

Well, the iPhone outsold Galaxy S4 34 millions to 16 millions in the 4th quarter, but in the same quarter, Samsung actually sold 86 millions smartphones. Apple maybe winning who got the best sold smartphone game, but Samsung is winning the we sold the most number of smartphones contest.

wco81

There aren't too many multibillion dollar market opportunities like iPhone and iPad.

TV is a declining market. Panasonic is getting out of plasma production and the remaining companies don't have big margins to brag about, if they're even making profits.

pseudoswede

TV isn't a declining marketing--but you're right about profit margins. People still want large TVs for watching sporting events and movie nights on the sofa.

Integrating TV with online (and smartphone/tablet/computer) content is the logical next step for TV manufacturers as consumers try to cut the cord with cable/satellite providers.

ScottC

But how often do people buy a new TV, and with so many people who already have a nice 60" LCD, would a lot of them take it off the wall and buy a new Apple TV?

skofarrell

The same people that buy a new iPhone every year.

skofarrell

What, exactly is Samsung "winning?" The war? Is there a war? A game? Are we in the 4th quarter or about to head to extra time?

Apple is making money hand over fist. That's what they care about. Samsung has always been a mass market, throw as many devices at the wall and and what sticks kind of company (have you ever noticed how many SKUs there are for appliances?). In the end both companies are profitable.

Why is is so difficult for people to understand that Apple as a company has never been focused on mass marketshare? Their roots have always been in the premium priced market. Look at the Mac: never competed on price, always at a hefty premium over the PC. The first iPhone was $500 for cryin out loud! Apple cares about as much about capturing marketshare as Mercedes does...

In the end, competition is a great thing. Who wants a monopoly? Does anyone remember how much Windows started sucking when OS/2 died? I'm cheering for Windows Phone 8! For iOS! for Android!