How to beat Apple (1 Viewer)

[Sam Posten]

It's not a product, it's something designed to be in the back room of the store thanking the employees. Having worked software retail decades ago I will say this is a MILLION times cooler than anything we ever got to put up.


Heartfelt and sincere. And rousing. Prideful yet measured. And optimistic.

Here's to the crazy ones.

 

[mattCR]

That wall-of-tiny-text poster looks more like something Microsoft would have made. Doesn't seem very Apple-like to me.

It's for employees. It's actually one of the better employee/HR things I've read; it reminds me a lot of the employee notice that went out to a completely different industry, that being Southwest Airlines employees about 8 years ago. Nothing wrong at all with encouraging your employees and making them feel like they are part of something special. Probably the best example of this of any business I have ever seen is Pixar, which has taken time to put on every DVD or BD release a small "coming to Pixar" which allows employees to tell cute stories, etc. Now, Pixar is much smaller then say, Apple with retail stores, but the idea and philosophy is the same: make everyone feel as though they are part of something special. It's good HR practices.

 

[Steve Tannehill]

I'm digging that poster, I read the entire transcript. Happy 10th anniversary Apple Stores!

 

[DaveF]

Oh. I thought it was new advertising.

 

[Sam Posten]

LOL you know who Pixar is right, or did you forget?

 

[mattCR]

Originally Posted by Sam Posten

LOL you know who Pixar is right, or did you forget?

Of course I didn't forget, but it's why I mentioned them You have to admit, can you think of any other HR program in the world like Pixars? Really?

I was talking about this in reference to this poster, and someone reminded me of the Southwest campaign, which outside of Pixar's is the only thing that springs to mind. I guess the next closest would all be things that happen in small companies. But as HR efforts, those really stood out. In comparison to say, a recent event for a large, nationwide company I attended (NOT in the computer field, healthcare) which would go down as one of the most painful and humiliating afternoons I've spent in years

 

[Steve_Tk]

Best way to beat them is stop copying them and create the next GREAT thing that makes apple copy you.

 

[Sam Posten]

Compete with long term vision like this?

http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/07/steve-jobs-cupertino/


I'd love to see the fire suppression plans for this bad boy. I wouldn't have put the parking garage under it if possible, i guess they had no choice.

 

[DaveF]

Long-term vision of building new office space?


A nice, medium-sized modern building, I'm sure. The grand, stylish, inefficient layout suggests the work of a cash-rich company. Very Silicon Valley: construct a mini-city to keep employees onsite 80 hrs a week.


I'm no office-space expert, of course. But compared to other industrial and office designs I've read of, this says nothing to me that Apple will or won't be successful a decade from now. (c.f. Dell, its reputation as the epitome of manufacturing efficiency, their plant designs, and their present performance).

 

[Sam Posten]

Fair point, here's why I say this is special:

-Ultra concerned with power requirements. Will run on its own power first, with the city grid second.

-Being a good neighbor. As someone who lives in the middle of a LOT of dumpy office spaces (AT&T being the worst offender) I'm all for companies pushing the envelope to make their campuses attractive

-Built to last. Built bigger than current needs are. Built to outlive Jobs. It took them 5 years to get the plan this far!

 

[RobertR]

I'm really not sure what this thread is trying to say. Apple is already being beaten in the mobile phone market (Android has a ten percent market share lead, and that should increase). It's always had a small percentage of the PC market. The only market it seems to really "lead" in is the Ipad, and there's no guarantee that will continue.

 

[mattCR]

Originally Posted by RobertR

I'm really not sure what this thread is trying to say. Apple is already being beaten in the mobile phone market (Android has a ten percent market share lead, and that should increase). It's always had a small percentage of the PC market. The only market it seems to really "lead" in is the Ipad, and there's no guarantee that will continue.

Profits. Apple leads the market in profitability for what they do.


That having been said, the more I thought about this I realized the way to beat Apple is already being done.. and it's by someone who is succeeding and growing at it.. Amazon. Everyone keeps worrying about Google and Microsoft etc. But Amazon's marketplace is a direct stab at iTunes. Songs are cheaper. Their cloud services have been around longer and are broader. They have multiple marketplaces that make Android seriously profitable for them.



Everyone is concerned about how Apple has a deal with the record labels to let you upload your stuff to their locker. But what Amazon/Google do is what most people will be after allow them to redownload the music you buy there, anytime.


Amazon's move into local markets, AmazonLocal, directly takes on a different competitor (GroupOn) but unlike GroupOn, it allows for a more seemless user experience and a lot less of a spam-oriented front.


People shouldn't really worry about "beating Apple" They should worry about how to be better tomorrow then they are today, and keep their user base and add more. Flat out, as far as growth, I think Apple grows in sales - which is good. But I think sales growth potential really lays with someone like Amazon. The more iPads, Android pads, whatever sells, the better position Amazon is to push out content.

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by RobertR

I'm really not sure what this thread is trying to say. Apple is already being beaten in the mobile phone market (Android has a ten percent market share lead, and that should increase). It's always had a small percentage of the PC market. The only market it seems to really "lead" in is the Ipad, and there's no guarantee that will continue.

In past discussions, I was one of those arguing that smartphone OS share mattered, and not total-OS share (an iPod Touch was not as important as an iPhone). I've been convinced otherwise since then. And from that perspective, Apple has not been beaten where it matters:


Total OS marketshare, iOS beats Android (iPhone + iPod Touch + iPad -vs- Android phone + Android tablet) (*)

Profitability against any phone maker, Apple beats them all (e.g. Apple $ >> Motorola or HTC $).


So "to beat" Apple might mean to overtake total OS marketshare. Even then, there's the argument that the ultimate metric is profitability, so what do you do to reach parity, let alone , overtake Apple's profits of the "mobile" sector, or even the sub-slice of the phone market.


I think both are important. If Apple loses too much total marketshare, they'll eventually lose profitability. Likewise, if their margins were reduced, their ability to innovate would decline and likely lead to a loss of share. But right now they have a potent -- historic and unpredicted -- combination of both.



(*) Last I read, iOS was ahead of Android in the US. Maybe I'm out of date. And we can quibble over how the data is sliced.

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Sam Posten

Fair point, here's why I say this is special:

-Ultra concerned with power requirements. Will run on its own power first, with the city grid second.

-Being a good neighbor. As someone who lives in the middle of a LOT of dumpy office spaces (AT&T being the worst offender) I'm all for companies pushing the envelope to make their campuses attractive

-Built to last. Built bigger than current needs are. Built to outlive Jobs. It took them 5 years to get the plan this far!

No denying it's a marvelous, modern, cutting edge office design. Certainly I'd rather work there than my amenity-free office. But glamorous office space is a symptom of success; not a driver thereof. Apple's continued success will have little to do with this building, and more to do with the work accomplished by engineers in the interior, windowless offices working 80 hrs a week, who forget there's an on-site gym.

 

[RobertR]

Originally Posted by DaveF





In past discussions, I was one of those arguing that smartphone OS share mattered, and not total-OS share (an iPod Touch was not as important as an iPhone). I've been convinced otherwise since then. And from that perspective, Apple has not been beaten where it matters:


Total OS marketshare, iOS beats Android (iPhone + iPod Touch + iPad -vs- Android phone + Android tablet) (*)

Profitability against any phone maker, Apple beats them all (e.g. Apple $ >> Motorola or HTC $).


So "to beat" Apple might mean to overtake total OS marketshare. Even then, there's the argument that the ultimate metric is profitability, so what do you do to reach parity, let alone , overtake Apple's profits of the "mobile" sector, or even the sub-slice of the phone market.


I think both are important. If Apple loses too much total marketshare, they'll eventually lose profitability. Likewise, if their margins were reduced, their ability to innovate would decline and likely lead to a loss of share. But right now they have a potent -- historic and unpredicted -- combination of both.



(*) Last I read, iOS was ahead of Android in the US. Maybe I'm out of date. And we can quibble over how the data is sliced.

I would agree that market share doesn't mean much if you're not making money. But if you're making money and increasing your market share, you're in good shape. I don't know how profitable the big Android manufacturers are, but they seem to be doing quite well.


http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal-tech/smart-phones/229402844


This article:


http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20051610-17.html


Says Android will have nearly 50% of the market next year, with iOS down to about 19%. That seems like a reasonable prediction.

 

[mattCR]

 

No denying it's a marvelous, modern, cutting edge office design. Certainly I'd rather work there than my amenity-free office. But glamorous office space is a symptom of success; not a driver thereof. Apple's continued success will have little to do with this building, and more to do with the work accomplished by engineers in the interior, windowless offices working 80 hrs a week, who forget there's an on-site gym.

I'm reminded of the KC Star. One of the prettiest buildings in KC, it's entire see-through glass wall structure is fantstic to look at and it really catches the eye. Very impressive. But, they are still a sucky paper. Apple having a nice campus is great, but I can think of lots of businesses with a fantastic campus (I really do like Microsoft's campus; the walk over the bridge is awesome) and some that I think are truly fantastic that I've been to - if you've ever been in the national PGA offices, that's sensational. But I also think of offices that don't look like much but where greatness occurs. Years ago, a friend who worked for Google (damnit! I why didn't I take that gig!?!!) Sent me photos of their office space and it looked like the basement at my sister's house. Tons of bean bags, dark, monitors everywhere, open cans of pop scattered to the walls.. but they were jumping off the walls about something. Anyway, what it really showed me is that cool campus are great for PR, but the right people will work wherever. Otherwise, Apple would be begging FoxConn and ST to radically improve their design

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by mattCR


But I also think of offices that don't look like much but where greatness occurs. Years ago, a friend who worked for Google (damnit! I why didn't I take that gig!?!!) Sent me photos of their office space and it looked like the basement at my sister's house. Tons of bean bags, dark, monitors everywhere, open cans of pop scattered to the walls.

It's reported that the Android team works in an overcrowded, uninspired side building, run like struggling startup.

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by RobertR




I would agree that market share doesn't mean much if you're not making money. But if you're making money and increasing your market share, you're in good shape. I don't know how profitable the big Android manufacturers are, but they seem to be doing quite well.


http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal-tech/smart-phones/229402844


This article:


http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20051610-17.html


Says Android will have nearly 50% of the market next year, with iOS down to about 19%. That seems like a reasonable prediction.

I think it's fair to say that people should simply ignore any market predictions from Gartner. Did you notice that they also predicted Windows Phone 7 will take second spot in 2015? One meta-analysis reported that Gartner simply took Nokia's recent marketshare and gave it to Microsoft as an "analysis".

Gartner offered up another surprise in its forecasts: in 2015, Microsoft's Windows Phone platform will secure the second spot in the smartphone space with 19.5 percent market share. It will follow Android's 48.8 percent market ownership.

According to Asymco, it's not as simple as "Android phone makers are growing." It's disruptive. Nokia is dying. Motorola is losing market share. RIM is making good money, but may have Osbourne'd themselves. But HTC is moving from an unknown OEM to name brand, cannibalizing Moto and others. And Samsung seems to be doing well.


But Apple is growing. Making money hand over fist. Marketshare is holding, perhaps growing (depending on how you slice it).


What confuses the lay audience (myself included) is the conflation of "Android", the OS from Google, and the manufacturers who actually sell phones based on the OS; and also that Apple's iOS runs on two platforms besides cellphones.



http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/26/a-new-mobile-phone-market-index/

http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/18/the-rawr-chart/

http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/25/a-disruption-is-not-sufficiently-described-by-the-success-of-some-others-must-fail/

http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/24/why-the-phone-market-is-resilient-to-low-end-disruption/

 

[RobertR]

Originally Posted by DaveF





I think it's fair to say that people should simply ignore any market predictions from Gartner. Did you notice that they also predicted Windows Phone 7 will take second spot in 2015? One meta-analysis reported that Gartner simply took Nokia's recent marketshare and gave it to Microsoft as an "analysis".





According to Asymco, it's not as simple as "Android phone makers are growing." It's disruptive. Nokia is dying. Motorola is losing market share. RIM is making good money, but may have Osbourne'd themselves. But HTC is moving from an unknown OEM to name brand, cannibalizing Moto and others. And Samsung seems to be doing well.


But Apple is growing. Making money hand over fist. Marketshare is holding, perhaps growing (depending on how you slice it).


What confuses the lay audience (myself included) is the conflation of "Android", the OS from Google, and the manufacturers who actually sell phones based on the OS; and also that Apple's iOS runs on two platforms besides cellphones.



http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/26/a-new-mobile-phone-market-index/

http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/18/the-rawr-chart/

http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/25/a-disruption-is-not-sufficiently-described-by-the-success-of-some-others-must-fail/

http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/24/why-the-phone-market-is-resilient-to-low-end-disruption/

I don't think the Gartner prediction about Windows Phone has any bearing on the Android prediction. The recent trend in favor of Android is undeniable. Apple used to lead the market, and now it doesn't, and there's no sign that Android market share won't continue to increase. If more and more people choose an Android phone (regardless of who makes it) instead of an iPhone, that can't be good for Apple no matter how you look at it.

 

[mattCR]

I don't think the Gartner prediction about Windows Phone has any bearing on the Android prediction.  The recent trend in favor of Android is undeniable.  Apple used to lead the market, and now it doesn't, and there's no sign that Android market share won't continue to increase.  If more and more people choose an Android phone (regardless of who makes it) instead of an iPhone, that can't be good for Apple no matter how you look at it.

 

It's the "good enough" issue. Fact is, Android exists on every single platform. Sprint. Tmobile. Verizon. ATT. Global partners. With multiple shipping partners. Tons of phones. iPhone is two platforms, ATT and now Verizon. It's still being outsold on Verizon by Android, in part because Verizon really committed to building up the Android. Android falls into the category of "good enough" Lots of things I don't like about it, but it is everywhere with tons of vendors and it seems to offer tons of different formats to fill almost all areas of the marketplace. Profitability, though, is Apple's bag.