New horizons Apple: why it’s not so prosto review
What not to say “Apple” the Corporation world public opinion. Sometimes bold assumptions to reach the point of absurdity, attributing to magicians from Apple something
absolutely fantastic, and when expectations are not met, enthusiasts Express their “Fe” on countless forums. However, few people think which causes the range of products the company doesn’t expand at a rate matching its current scale. Why Apple is in no hurry to enter new markets?
Mythical category of products from Apple has already become an “urban legend” of our time. By and large in this scenario is not surprising — scandals like the transition in Cupertino key persons not connected with the sphere of activity of the Corporation enterprises are able to sow doubt even among inveterate skeptics. Something similar happened with the notorious TV, which Apple was allegedly going to enter this market that was quick to refute in the press, referring to some internal sources. Actually, despite all the leaks from supposedly involved in the development of staff to declare absolute closure of the project would be somewhat bold, even for such publications as The Wall Street Journal. In the end, for the sake of preserving the veil of secrecy over such an ambitious plan, the company could resort to the classics, namely the artificial dispelling myths about its activities. However, the question, as always, is the advisability of release of any product to which a spoiled audience because the specifics of Apple will definitely set very high standards. What does this mean?
Not so long ago cupertinos giant, which in those days such was not already released under its own brand peripheral or even not directly related to computing devices. For example, in the nineties of the last century, the company tried its hand at manufacturing PCs (by the way, a certain contribution was made: the Quicktake camera was one of the first consumer digital cameras).
But what fate befell the result of these initiatives? All projects were somehow collapsed, and the completed “cleaning series” returning to Apple at the end of the decade, jobs which quickly thrown overboard a sinking ship, all unnecessary, in his opinion, the ballast. Steve recalled one of those caught under the hot hand products, the legendary Newton PDA:
Maybe I’d give him a chance, if the then state of the Apple would not have been so severe.
Note: at the time of the founder did not bother amount of resources invested in a development unusual for a company gadgets. Such measures may seem unduly harsh, since their production required not only cash, but also the work of many tens or hundreds of people, but you can blame is that illiterate management who almost turned Apple into bankruptcy. What is this? On own TV, and the probability of the fact of development is very high, obviously it would be spent not less effort than the previous entertaining stuff. If true and information on the termination of work, in Cupertino has somehow given up on trying to justify expensive R&D process prior to the final phase. Here is manifested the skill of Tim cook as a leader, instead of any cost to try to recoup the project, the CEO reflected on the company’s reputation as a major player in the electronics market, and it does not mean failure. The same jobs said about the Apple rolled initiatives:
I’m proud of closed projects just as successful. Being a innovator means to answer “no” to thousands of offers.
The key concept here is innovation. You can argue with that, but any product released by Apple, completed in an excellent manner from competitors, even if the use of a technology is not here in the literal sense first. The measure and extent of this difference can vary from gadget to gadget, but absolutely unknown to your living arena’s objective was hardly to become another name on the stand with the TV. Instead of seeking to expand its presence on all possible markets, in Cupertino prefer to introduce a new product when his vast influence on the industry there is a certain amount of confidence.
To understand why this strategy, which at first sight restricts the freedom of action of manufacturer, it is enough to perform a simple thought experiment. Let’s imagine that Apple has included in the ‘ TV ‘ race. And with it — and in a dozen obscure of events, among which, say, the production of toasters and fridges and bikes and even table lamps. Yes here the ill luck — all this diversity is not much stands out from competitors and is not connected in a holistic ecosystem. Is there enough Finance in the richest Corporation in the world, to design and produce such devices? Of course. But will this be enough to get you at least one such product, not to mention regular updating? Now think of how it will affect the overall image of the company. What is the release of the grey, monotonous products, unable to stand apart in a crowded market, as a manufacturer with an established reputation of a revolutionary industry? Deprived of the “highlights”, the very “magic”, released only in order to cover more industries, gadgets quickly become familiar to consumers and, as a consequence, it will become uninteresting. And along with them a negative reputation can purchase and the other offspring of the company, because human psychology is a thing sometimes unpredictable.
In addition, TVs devices are even more inert than, for example, tablets. The iPad example shows that long cycle life is not the best way affects the statistics, and the income of the manufacturer. At least in the short term. If we are talking about something brand new for the latter, to sell a certain number of units is not enough, instead you need to call the consumer with admiration, and so he gladly bought new models. But how to do it, if most users updates its TV not even once in three years, while Apple used to roll out new items each season?
Considering all the above it can be assumed that the development of TV and if stopped, it is at the stage where the resource costs become too high relative to expected results. Yeah, maybe Apple could even release on the basis of these developments is the finished product, but failing to make it a real “bomb” for the Foundation of today’s industry or integrate it as an integral component in their ecosystem, the company has postponed the idea until better times. That is what was meant above when it was suggested that the project may not be closed completely. Budgets for research only grow — this is evidenced by both numbers and new patents to the Corporation, and the time when a sample of the TV on the table jony Ive will sootvetstvovat the requirements of perfectionists may be at hand already. Over the past fifteen years the company has established itself as a player, able to fire in the most unexpected areas, for example in the same segment of players or smartphones, and almost from scratch. The iPhone, of course, was preceded by a bad experience in cooperation with Motorola (ROKR E1), but this did not prevent Apple to turn upside down the entire mobile phone market. I think the main question that will determine the future development of the company, would not be whether Apple to develop and bring to market a product, and in the ability of engineers, programmers and marketers to work together to make it special. However, the ability to dumbfound the audience, the guys from Cupertino are unlikely to take.