Apple is not closed, just not stupid
Posted by Mauricio Longo in General on Apr 18th, 2010 | 1 comment
I just had the opportunity to read the open letter to Apple signd by John Battelle founder of Wired and Tim O’Reilly about Apple being too closed. In the letter, they argue the point that there was a time when Apple executives would appear on trade shows and industry events, that the company has changed and it is obviously implied that the change was not for the better.
This comes from the fact that Apple withdrew from Macworld, an event in which it played a central part every year and the fact that the company doesn’t talk about its future products except in well orchestrated media events it organizes. Over the past several years Apple has increasingly moved to a position where it doesn’t talk about any products until they are very close to being released and this seems to bother many people.
Perhaps we should consider Apple’s past and how another company who was well informed of Apple’s development plans took advantage of these plans in creating a similar competing product. Does any one think that Apple, and its CEO have forgotten that small detail from the past? Over the past decade, Apple has been busy innovating and revolutionizing technology and the way we use it. They did it with the iPod and iTunes, they did it by showing the industry that computers didn’t have to be beige boxes, did it with the iPhone, and again with the iPad. In all those situations, which are spread over more than a decade, no one knew beforehand what their new products would look like or even what they were going to be in some cases.
In every situation this gave Apple a market advantage. In some cases a small one in others a huge one as in the case of the iPhone. Why would they be willing to give up on the advantage of not telling people what they are working on, until they absolutely have too? What would Apple gain in return for talking about products which are not ready and providing invaluable information to its competitors?
Let’s take the case of the iPad as an example… Many companies, such as HP, have been going down the road of creating Windows 7 based tablet computers. That is a dead end path at this moment. The main reason people cite for using Windows is the ability to run existing software. Hey, anybody notice that existing software was not designed to be used with your fingers? That is one competitor that is wasting its time working on a product that even though it might sell a decent number of units when released, will not pose a competing threat to the iPad. If Apple had been babbling about the iPad for the past three years while they were working on perfecting the device and had engaged developers and community in the discussion of why a desktop operating system was a bad fit for tablets, would that have benefited HP? Possibly, or perhaps even probably. Would it have benefited Microsoft? Possibly, or again even probably. How would that have benefited Apple?
It seems obvious that Apple seems to be doing well with their current policy. Why should they change?
Apple has embraced a path of disruptive innovation for quite some time. Disruptive innovation creates opportunities for the early movers and by creating their innovations within the confines of their buildings and labs, they have ensured that they are early movers. They don’t have to resist external pressure to release new products which might not have reached the necessary quality standards. Does anyone think that Apple couldn’t have released a phone before the iPhone was released? Of course the could, but it wouldn’t be such a great experience for the users as the iPhone was. Would they have become the standard against which all other smartphones are compared or compare themselves to? Probably not.
Anyone that has seen an iPad and iPhone cannot imagine that Apple could not have released an iPad two years ago. But would it have a battery life that exceeds their claims? Would it have the beautiful software designed specifically for its larger screen or would it just be an iPhone with a big screen, as some people have called it? Apple keeps its cards close and makes the most of that in terms of technology and market advantages.
In the case of the iPad, the fact that Apple does not comment about its forth coming products again favored the company as the rumors about such a product that started circulating a couple of months prior to its announcement drew an unprecedented level of speculation and buzz around the company. So, if Apple’s current policy has been so positive for its market position so far, why should it change now?
Who would benefit from Apple being “more open”? Would Apple customers stand to gain something? I doubt it, as you can’t really buy a product earlier just because the company is talking about it. Microsoft talked about Windows Cairo for years and it never made it to the market. Windows vista was going to have some features which didn’t make it into the final version and some were disappointed in that. Would developers benefit from knowing that a knew SDK is going to be available when it still isn’t? Perhaps in doing some annual planning of staff allocation? Okay developers wouldn’t benefit either. Apple makes SDKs available a few months before the devices go on sale and the number of applications that were published when the iPad went on sale should be enough to prove that it was possible for developers to create them.
Would Apple’s content partners benefit if Apple discussed its products more openly? Perhaps, but how? Would they be in a better position to negotiate content deals with Apple? Perhaps, as they might have information on just what Apple is planning. Would that make any business sense? When you go out to buy a car, do you start out by telling the sales person how much your business will profit by buying that car? Do you start out by giving the sales person a figure you are prepared to spend on the car or do you just try to get the best deal you can for yourself, or your company?
So, who would benefit from Apple being more open? Or is the idea to just have an executive come to a trade show and demo an iPad, an iPhone and a MacBook and tell everyone, what great products they are?
Apple is not closed, it’s just not stupid enough to give up its current innovation advantage. Apple is just behaving as a regular company, instead of following in the practice established in the software industry of talking about products that don’t exist. Instead of telling people that it will be developing this fantastic new operating system for several years, Apple showed its operating system running on a totally new processor architecture in a computer which looked exactly like her other computers but had a totally new design inside. In the old days of the industry this was known as Vaporware and generally considered a bad practice. They let people know that they had worked on it for the past five years instead of telling that they would be working on it for the next several years.
So the question stands, who would really benefit from Apple talking more openly about its products and plans? Their competitors would benefit that much is certain.
Thank you!
Thank you!
Thank you!
Apple has walked through the valley of Death and survived. Very few companies get that chance(including their CEO)!
Apple has learned their lessons the hard way. And now they are applying them.
Good luck to the competition.
They’re going to need it!