advertisement
White Papers, Webcasts, and Resources
About Technology Industry

BNET Technology provides daily industry trends and news coverage with insights for managers and executives about all aspects of the high-tech industry. In addition to detailed tech company profiles, we bring you industry analysis on new mergers and acquisitions, tech products, investments, patents, and a host of other important technology related business issues.

Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

By Erik Sherman | Nov 10, 2009

We hear a lot about the iPhone and various handsets sporting Android 1.0 — make that 2.0 — duking it out, with the Palm Pre limping along somewhere behind. But that’s the market struggle on the surface, there’s another battle going on: whether mobile will be ruled by device or platform. And history suggests that the natural winner will be platform, much to the pleasure of Google and eventual dismay of Apple.

This isn’t a feature slug-out where only the well-positioned survives. The mobile space fight more resembles the personal computer space in the early years, where IBM established a category and both Microsoft and Digital Research wrestled to create the default operating system. At the same time, Apple had a closed system, hardware and software all under its thumb. I think we’re seeing a similar scenario play out today.

There are some significant differences. For example, Apple is out in the lead early in the race. But in the long run, that isn’t going to be enough. The issues are economics and scalability. There are too many people in the world who will want units without having to pay a premium price. That’s why the openly available platform is going to win. It’s too cheap and well-developed for the hardware manufacturers, who, as one expert in cost management for consumer electronics companies told me, work on shaving fractions of a cent off per-unit costs.

And how can a company like Google afford this economic advantage? Online ads. When I mentioned the other day about Eric Schmidt saying that the company wanted to avoid Microsoft’s mistakes, I failed to mention something else he said in the Fox Business interview: Google can give away Android because “we make money, and lots of it, it turns out, from advertising on mobile phones.” Not will make money, but do make money. Google can infinitely leverage its development over many handset manufacturers and carriers without worrying about maintaining margins or overexposing itself. The more places Android is, the more money Google will make.

I also realized that Google has a tremendous advantage in the way it reports revenue. Ad revenue is all in one bucket, with no differentiation among platforms. As its numbers have shown at least a little growth during tough economic times, many — myself included — have assumed that they were doing a bit better than keeping par on search ads. But what if they weren’t? What if that had gone down and the “lots” of mobile advertising dollars have more than backfilled the drop? You can tell what the iPhone means to Apple, but Android’s fiscal importance to Google is like the Purloined Letter: invisible and in plain sight, all at the same time.

More manufacturers will turn to Google — or maybe a competitor like Intel or Symbian, though they don’t seem to be keeping pace at the moment — and eventually it will win the handset wars because, as happened in the PC wars, Apple cannot and will not be everywhere.

Image via stock.xchng user rubenam, site standard license.

Erik Sherman is a freelance journalist whose work has appeared in Newsweek, the New York Times Magazine, Technology Review, the Financial Times, Chief Executive, and other publications. Follow him on Twitter.

BNET User Analysis

Web Buzz:
  • Google Phone tipped to be released on January 5, rebate for Google account holders

    SmartCompany - 56 days 8 hours 28 minutes ago

    The details come after a number of photos of the Google phone were released on Twitter by a marketing executive in the US, along with reports Google has given the handset to employees for testing purposes. As reported by Reuters, Google will release the phone, dubbed by tech analysts as the "Nexus One", in early January unlocked and with the...

  • Banker Seeks to Put a Price on Nature

    New York Times - 88 days 14 hours 26 minutes ago

    According to Pavan Sukhdev, a banker working with the United Nations Environment Program, putting a price on the world’s trees, water stores and other natural resources will be the most cost-effective way of tackling the challenges posed by climate change — at least until cleaner energy technologies become available. Treating nature and its...

  • Charm, History, Design and Nature for Carnival

    Hotel News Resource - 362 days 19 hours 32 minutes ago

    Charm, History, Design and Nature for Carnival Check the ARTEH(R) Website (www.arteh-hotels.comGo to the North of Portugal and discover Douro's surprises, cross Alentejo's plains until you arrive in Estremoz, venture through the Monchique Mountain Range or travel to the heat of Pipa and Búzios in Brazil.See the ARTEH(R) Hotels' Carnival...

  • How Nokia, Samsung and LG Could Gain from Slump

    BusinessWeek - 298 days 14 hours 22 minutes ago

    Register Sign In"gatewaySWF", "1", "1", "8"); so.addParam("allowScriptAccess", "always"); so.write("gatewaySWFWrapper"); window.gatewaySWF = document.getElementById("gatewaySWF"); // ]]> Posted by: Jack Ewing on April 17 Sony-Ericssonâ??s pre-tax loss of $469 million in the first quarter suggests that the global handset industry could look a...

  • Hearst rivals in no hurry to launch an e-reader

    Poynter Online - 341 days 14 hours 15 minutes ago

    New York Observer "There are a lot of people bringing these devices to market, so it's advantageous to see how the market develops before we do something like this," says Time Inc.'s Peter Meirs . Washington Post executive editor Marcus Brauchli adds: "The history of business innovation is littered with examples of companies that have...

 
Reply to Story

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    Jeffbrandt

    11/10/09 | Report as spam

    Why doctors should choose Google Android over the iPhone for medical apps

  •  
    2

    rvassar

    11/10/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    Stick with blogging. You are not going anywhere else. To
    compare the old 'PC DOS' market with the current Smartphone
    saga is simplistic and just wrong. Just look at Dell these days
    and compare with Apple. Look at the MP3 market. What
    happened with the cheap devices there competing against the
    'premium priced' iPod? What happens when (not if) the iPhone is
    put on Verizon's wonderful network (that doesn't allow
    simultaneous voice and data?) Chances are you'll be eating your
    words in 12-18 months.

  •  
    3

    AdanC

    11/10/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    The iPhone 3G is available at $99 and the 3GS is going for
    $199 and $299, at these prices they are not cheap then I
    don't know what is.

    The main determinants of the winner will be ease of use,
    functions and a great service support.

    Apple wouldn't be repeating their mistake of the 70's and I
    wonder why most Apple bashers, er, tech bloggers failed to
    see this.

  •  
    4

    ErikSherman

    11/10/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    rvassar, compare the Mac market to the Windows PC market. If you don't see that Windows ended up owning the market share, then I guess there's not much to talk about. The non-premium devices ultimately won. I know that Apple die-hards like to think that their preferences will eventually sway everyone, but I think that's pretty unrealistic.

    AdanC, Apple is already repeating its pattern of the 70s, 80s, and 90s. If ease of use were all, then the market would be completely different than it is - and to assume that Android-based devices won't get a whole lot better is pretty naive.

  •  
    5

    peter02l

    11/11/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    ErikSherman,

    Read rvassar's comment again. You cannot use that
    comparison. Anyone can go buy a motherboard, a box, a hard
    drive, and a couple of sticks of RAM and slap together a PC.
    You cannot do that with a smartphone. A phone also requires
    service from a carrier which by the way is the bulk of the cost
    for its use. A PC doesn't.

    Also why do you conveniently make no references to Microsoft
    in the smartphone business. You say "Apple is out in the lead
    early in the race". Do you forget that Microsoft had a 10 year
    lead on Apple with Windows Mobile and with the exact business
    plan that you are suggesting will will in the long run. Now all
    their hardware partners are abandoning them. This strategy
    also failed miserably in the mp3 player business.

    Your PC/Mac analogy is totally wrong. Your use of terms like
    "Apple die-hards" does nothing to further your argument. And I
    think you show your naivet? here by suggesting that only
    Android-based devices will get a whole lot better, and failing to
    point out that Apple will not be standing still.

    Apple's got this smartphone hardware business down to a
    science now. Using the experience they have gotten from the
    iPod, their manufacturing and parts procurement expertise
    allows then to make margins that competitors can't match. The
    way they buy memory, displays, and other key components,
    create shortages for other manufacturers, who have to pay
    higher prices. Check out the early sales estimates for the
    Driod. 100,000 in the first weekend. Today, Orange UK sold
    30,000 iphones in 8 hours (by 3 o'clock in the afternoon) and
    they were still expecting more sales in the evening. That is in
    one day! in UK!. Driod, on the other had has had the "iCan't"
    and "There is a map for that" ads running leading up to its
    release. It is being offered (and is backed by) the largest
    wireless provider in the U.S. and supposedly the best 3G
    phone service and coverage. I don't know how one-sided or
    biased you are, but there is nothing so far that suggests this is
    going to be anything like the Mac/PC scenario of the 80s and
    90s.

    You should also read about the sentiments of Android
    developers before passing judgement:
    http://androidandme.com/2009/10/news/google-fails-to-
    address-app-storage-issue-with-droid-and-android-2-0/

  •  
    6

    ErikSherman

    11/11/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    peter02l, this has nothing to do with buildling your own machines. It has everythign to do with broad-scale economics. The vast majority of people do not own iPhones and they won't in the future because Apple's business model does not lend itself to that approach. I made no references to Microsoft because a) I have before, and b) I'm using the Apple/Google comparison as a form of synecdoche, where the part stands for the whole. It's not Droid versus iPhone so much as mass market platform versus controlled device/software combination. When you take handsets altogether, platform definitely wins over specific device. Features will get pushed down and that disparity will continue. Maybe it will be Android. Or maybe it will be some other platform. But unless Apple gets beyond owning all aspects, it's not going to be the iPhone OS. Because it's also not about features so much as features introduced widely enough to enough people at a price low enough that most will buy. I'm also not saying that Apple disappears by any means.

  •  
    7

    Justa Notherguy

    11/24/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    @Peter021:

    > Do you forget that Microsoft had a 10 year lead
    > on Apple with Windows Mobile

    Uh, do you recall when Apple had a 10-year lead on _everybody_ _else_, in both home and school computers?

    Yet, they managed to squander all of that advantage via much the same kind of behavior they have exhibited, recently. Will they once again relegate themselves to niche status, eventually leading to big drops in revenue? Hard to say. But one thing is certain: if Android brings smart phone prices down to $50 and under, Apple's 'premium' margins are toast.

    > You should also read about the sentiments of
    > Android developers before passing judgement:

    The thread shown in your link is not even a developer-centric discussion, much less developer-only...nor is the website, itself. In fact, a few minutes of reading shows that most of the correspondents don't seem to be all that familiar with the basic issues. And those who are (in my opinion, anyway) the best-informed reveal little concern over the alleged problem.

    Fact is, Android devs are free to install apps - in whole or in part - on the handset's microSD card. That's fast, cheap, and portable storage...arguably superior to the same amount of on-board RAM. Assuming similar features, would most users prefer a pricey 32Gb phone or a cheap/free phone plus cheap, optional, unlimited storage? Interesting question. happy

  •  
    8

    Justa Notherguy

    11/24/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    @rvassar:

    > To compare the old 'PC DOS' market with the
    > current Smartphone saga is simplistic [...]
    > Look at the MP3 market. What happened with
    > the cheap devices there competing against the
    > 'premium priced' iPod?

    They failed. But not for the reason(s) you are suggesting.

    Sure, most of those competing efforts suffered from mediocre - in some cases, horrible - design. But much of the problems can be traced to vertical manufacturing ...single companies who design everything, in-house, from hardware to user-interface. That's a low-percentage play, in today's competitive tech markets, even if you aren't fighting Apple.

    That's where Android comes in. For manufacturers, it saves time and money - no development cost, no licensing fees, less testing - while also improving product quality. Plus, if you install a standard ('vanilla') Android ROM, you instantly gain a certain level of consumer comfort...and, perhaps, their confidence. In some ways, Android O/S is _better_ than free.

    Imagine if Dell, Sony, etc. found a free, solid, customizable UI for their PMPs. And several white-label Chinese factories have a knack for turning out ever-better hardware at rock-bottom prices...tainted by so-so software and lousy interfaces. How many opportunities are opened by the appearance of a reliable, 3rd-party O/S? Well, we're going to find out, soon.

    > What happens when (not if) the iPhone is put on
    > Verizon's wonderful network (that doesn't allow
    > simultaneous voice and data?)

    Be careful making that claim, without specifically mentioning '3G', because that's the only case where it is true. But Verizon Wireless users can get simultaneous voice-data transmission if there's open WIFI, nearby. By the way, same goes for the iPhone. If, as it so often does, AT&T's system routes you over to 2G then you can forget about simultaneous voice & data.

    Meanwhile, two pieces of interesting info.: (1) AT&T's 3G system is a bit like cable broadband. As the volume of usage goes up, speed & reliability drop off. Not so, on Verizon's network. (2) There is some evidence that iPhone's network problems indicate a design flaw - not AT&T's fault. Apple hoped they'd fixed that, in the 2nd-gen phones.

  •  
    9

    ErikSherman

    11/24/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    @Justa Notherguy

    >> But one thing is certain: if Android brings smart phone prices down to $50 and under, Apple's 'premium' margins are toast. <<

    To be fair, the savings from Android isn't the main driver. However, given the dynamics of electronics prices, given another few years, smartphone costs will be down in that range, at which point they become true giveaways.

  •  
    10

    Justa Notherguy

    11/25/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    @ErikSherman

    > To be fair, the savings from Android isn't the main driver.

    I think I understand your point, but would argue otherwise.

    Meanwhile, its an open question whether Apple can maintain their enviable margins - through upcoming rounds of price cuts, in both rates & hardware, plus rapid improvements in other platforms & handsets - into the future you posit. Not to discount Mr. Schiller's confidence, but his company must compete into buyers' perceptions, like anyone else. And that means selling the Apple/AT&T combo against Verizon's (now) ~$120 Motorola Droid and $30 HTC Droid Eris, among others.

    The next few weeks should prove interesting, especially in terms of advertising. happy

    http://tinyurl.com/yh3r83y

  •  
    11

    ruffinius@...

    11/29/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    Finally some vision and someone who has not forgotten the past. I
    bought a PSP 3000 a couple of months back as an entertainment
    device for my 3 year old while traveling. After setting it up and
    fiddling awhile I thought it was pretty cool. This IPhone/Droid war
    was raging at work. I pulled out the PSP which I now use as a
    study tool because I am not a gamer and it was more recognized
    by women than men, anyway the iPhone user compared screens
    and began to attack the fact that it uses removable disc. The
    iPhone ego is some how bruised by this most recent android.

  •  
    12

    edcoughlin

    11/30/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    The mistake here is that you are forgetting the reason Apple
    lost the second generation of computers (the Apple II to mac
    switchover). They just charged too much money. If they had
    put the mac out for the same cost as an inferior windows (or
    more likely DOS) machine they would have won the hearts and
    minds. They loved high margins though, didn't want to get
    down in the trenches, and saw their market share erode
    despite the superior product.

    They have changed this with the iphone. Now not only do
    they have the best product (ala the early mac) but they also
    are extremely price competitive. Why pay 200 dollars for a
    Windows phone that barely works when an iphone is only 100
    bucks? This is helped by the iphone being so in demand Apple
    can get extra large concessions from carriers which breeds
    even lower iphone prices.

    Without the price component the only thing really holding
    Apple back is ATT exclusivity. Look at France, as soon as the
    exclusivity dropped the iphone gained almost 50% market
    share. I bet it would be at least that in the states from a
    Verizon addition alone.

  •  
    13

    abugida

    11/30/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    You very correctly pointed out that IBM established the PC standard back in the
    80s. What are you suggesting Apple should have done then? License their OS to
    IBM? And who is the IBM of today? There's no such company, and there will
    never be enough traction behind Android.

    Right now, Apple is reaping enormous margins from the iPhone (which is $499
    to $699 in real prices, by the way). Clearly, they already have the economies
    of scale you claim will make the difference--unlike the Android camp. Should
    Android emerge as a more serious competitor in the market place next year,
    Apple could swiftly drop prices by $100 or more. This would burn many
    companies relying on immediate profits and leave only the most desperate of
    the old guard standing, notably Motorola, which has nothing left to lose right
    now.

    And Apple already have entered the mass market, with 20 % or 30 % of all
    new contracts/contract renewals on AT&T going with the iPhone each quarter.
    Their US market share is edging on 10 % this year, and once the iPhone comes
    to Verizon, it will be even higher. The Mac never was that strong that early in
    the race.

    I'd argue that right now the one thing holding back Apple from lowering prices
    and selling more iPhones are not lack of demand or economies of scale, but
    the networks. AT&T is aching, as has widely been published, but we have seen
    slowdowns in Europe and Australia as well, and if Apple sold any more iPhones
    it would result in a consumer backlash, heard not just in the Valley and the
    blogosphere.

    Once the networks can keep up (and more networks, like Verizon for one,
    share the weight), Apple has plenty of room for price wars (also keep in mind
    their $30 billion warchest). A look at the iPod might help to assess Apple's will
    to compete on price, as the iPod has seen dramatic price drops between 2003
    and 2006, when competition was most aggressive, from $299 to $149 (less if
    you include the shuffle) or $50 each year. Apple won this competition and
    they're still market leader today and profitable.

    And we haven't talked about RIM at all, which is even more proprietary and
    even stronger than Apple, at least in the US. This whole notion of the PC
    market as a universal pattern for all kinds of IT markets has never made any
    sense and it's even less convincing now that the innovation and demand is
    happening in the consumer space, not corporate IT.

  •  
    14

    ErikSherman

    11/30/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    >> They just charged too much money. If they had
    put the mac out for the same cost as an inferior windows (or more likely DOS) machine they would have won the hearts and minds. <<

    It wasn't just charging too much. It was trying to control everything. That makes the company a bottleneck, which isn't something that necessarily scales well when you have many vendors who can all use Android and innovate on multiple paths simultaneously.

    >> What are you suggesting Apple should have done then? License their OS to IBM? And who is the IBM of today? There's no such company, and there will
    never be enough traction behind Android. <<

    No. Apple could have considered licensing the operating system and design to multiple vendors. To claim that there will never be enough traction behind Android is foolish. There are some sizeable companies in the handset space, selling a much bigger volume than Apple. If they use Android and can come up with something that has market appeal (Droid is showing that as possible), then they could cause real trouble, and these companies all are important vendors to the carriers, whcih is critical to success.

  •  
    15

    abugida

    11/30/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    >> No. Apple could have considered licensing the operating system and design to multiple
    vendors. <<

    The Apple II, maybe. The MacIntosh was based on more advanced hardware compared to the
    IBM PC. Even Mac clones would not have been able to compete on price. More importantly,
    corporations bought the IBM PC because they wanted IBM, the near-monopoly in IT for 2 or 3
    decades. What could Apple have done against that? With more innovation and more
    aggressive pricing Apple might have been able to reach twice the market share it actually
    had. But the decisions that created the PC monopoly were made by IBM and Microsoft.

    And again, those were corporate purchasers (in the 80s). It's one thing to tell your office
    clerks that this cheap PC is good enough to get the job done. It's a different thing when you
    buy a phone for yourself today and really see no reason why not to buy the better designed
    Apple product if it's just $50 or $100 more (if that).

    >> To claim that there will never be enough traction behind Android is foolish. There are
    some sizeable companies in the handset space, <<

    There are indeed big players in the handset space, but the best ones are rolling their own OS.
    The #1 Nokia has Symbian and Maemo, the #2 Samsung has just announced Bada. Nokia and
    Samsung alone hold 60 % of the market and they're not going to push Android.

    That leaves LG, which has a reputation of a follower, not a leader, as well as two deeply
    troubled companies who have lost market share and bled red ink for several quarters,
    SonyEricsson and Motorola. Motorola (besides HTC) is the only notable company that has fully
    embraced Android, while the others are hedging their bets. It's really just Motorola and HTC.
    Will that be enough to build critical mass for Android?

    The whole problem for Android is about economies of scale. Apple has them, Android doesn't.
    Apple is more innovative, Apple has the mindshare and the market share. There is just no
    leverage for Android to beat Apple.

    >> selling a much bigger volume than Apple. <<

    If by volume you refer to units, yes. If you refer to revenue, not so much. RIM and Apple now
    have mobile phone revenue that equals that of Motorola or SonyEricsson.

    >> If they use Android and can come up with something that has market appeal (Droid is
    showing that as possible), then they could cause real trouble, and these companies all are
    important vendors to the carriers, whcih is critical to success. <<

    I'd love to see shipment figures for the Droid before we judge it. While it is a solidly
    engineered device, its size alone might relegate to a niche. It certainly does not have RAZR
    potential.

  •  
    16

    ErikSherman

    12/01/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    Mac clones *did* compete on price during the brief period in which Apple allowed them. Certainly the IBM name was a huge advantage.

    Apple doesn't have nearly the potential for unit scale that you have when you pull together Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, LG, et. al. Not even close. The unit scale will drive down price while still delivering what most people want. Apple will again be a niche manufacturer - which is fine. There's nothing wrong with it. But the market is a lot bigger.

    The analyst estimates I've been seening for Droid suggest upwards of 10 million units next year. That's a whole lot of phones. But, again, we'll see.

  •  
    17

    Jeffbrandt

    12/01/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    The religion of Apple... FYI, I am typing on a Macbook pro. I select the best tool for the job.

    I agree that Apple has the coolest devices but their OS of the iPhone is inferior to Android and Blackberry, Symbian... It is still a great phone. Apple draconian review process is so poor that they do not even know what is going on. We have a medical app that has been in review for over 2 months and no one at Apple can tell us why. The review dept cannot talk to the connect dept. It was just an update to a previously review product.

    Apple will be fine, As an entertainment device it is great. A developer can put out a short shelf life product and make good money if they have their marketing down. But, for companies like ours that are building long term mission critical products for health care the platform just doesn't work. Companies cannot invest thousands of dollars in development and have Apple kill your business at their whim.

    Sorry, I am trying to educate not insult.

    Jeff Brandt
    www.comsi.com

  •  
    18

    ErikSherman

    12/01/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    Jeffbrandt, yes, the business and marketing issues for developers are big, though there are already enough signed on to keep Apple going. However, there will be plenty of third party interest in the other platforms, especially if companies think they can control their own marketing more than is possible with the iPhone.

  •  
    19

    TJC007

    12/02/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    Ohh the joys of Apple vs IBM battle in the 80s. Users can be just too defensive sometimes.

    Everything I've read on ErikSherman's posts are correct when comparing IBM and Apple. Apple's demise in the PC market can be traced to their closed system approach. The same approach they have adopted over and over again. IBM's compatibility and alliance with Intel and Microsoft launched it to the forefront.

    So is this a bad approach by Apple? Apple has been very innovative with their products over the last decade. I see Apple as an interface company by the way... not an OS company. Having a closed system incurs a higher cost but also slows competition if the product is very innovative. The goal here would be to charge a premium price to regain your investment in R&D and turn profits before the competition can catch up; lowering barriers as competition enters but retaining the premium price point. As a side effect you can expect product life cycles to be shorter requiring more innovation to keep it fresh (ipod, ipod nano, ipod shuffle, ipod touch, iphone 3g, iphone 3gs)

    As long as the innovation that allows introduction of new products before the competition has a chance to erode significant market share remains the focus of the company strategy, Apple is achieving the goals it sets. Apple has proven they can make the closed system work and this system I believe drives the creative edge synonymous with Apple's image and required to keep Apple a competitor. Apple's goal is not volume.. it's premium price points for perceived premium products.

    BTW: The Apple vs IBM case study is a great business/marketing learning tool! Especially for those that think Apple should learn from "past mistakes"

  •  
    20

    TJC007

    12/02/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    I should have tied this in with the article... I apologize..

    The link I see here is that I don't believe Apple is looking to be a long term competitor in the handset market/platform. I believe they know they have a limited lifespan and their closed system will have a slowing affect on their adoption. They will retain their loyal supporters while others shift... but if the past is to be any indicator Apple will be here 10yrs later with the same system and a new product.

  •  
    21

    ErikSherman

    12/02/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    TJC007, an interesting idea - Apple gets into a market only to expect to withdraw, presumably when the money no longer pans out. Only sometimes a given niche, like the Mac, can last a long time. Perhaps longer than they expected. Certainly closed, when applied to a limited market segment, works for them.

  •  
    22

    TJC007

    12/03/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    ErikSherman, Every company needs a "staple" brand and Mac is definitely theirs. I doubt that little gem would go out silently. But I don't see them pursuing a withdraw strategy, but instead their goal is not to be in every home and every pocket of the world. As you said "when applied to a limited market segment, [it] works for them."

  •  
    23

    abugida

    12/03/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    Alright, a lot of interesting ideas why Apple will never be dominant in
    the mobile phone markt (which at least I never claimed), but where's
    the proof that Android can do it? I've mentioned RIM several times
    (whose product offering is very complementary to Apple's), there's
    Symbian (which will see UI revamp next year, as has just been
    announced), and there is still a Microsoft willing to poor billions into the
    mobile space. What is the unique advantage that Android has against
    these offerings? Merely being an open platform is not enough. There are
    thousands of open platforms out there, waiting for somebody's attention.

    Someone up there stated that IBM intended their PC platform to be open
    from the start which is of course flat-out ridiculous! It was IBM's laxness
    and disregard for the little PC compared to their mighty mainframes that
    allowed Microsoft to pull the rug out under them and license the OS to
    other companies against IBM's interests, which led to IBM losing billions
    of $ by 1990, shedding half its workforce by 1992, completely losing
    power over the PC market in the 90s, and eventually selling off the
    whole business to Lenovo. IBM never intended any of this.

  •  
    24

    ErikSherman

    12/03/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    >> Every company needs a "staple" brand and Mac is definitely theirs. I doubt that little gem would go out silently.<<

    I think there's a possibilty that the staple brand could become the iPhone, which would allow Apple to phase out the Mac over time. (Or maybe they can sell the line to Psystar. Sorry, bad joke.)

    >> What is the unique advantage that Android has against these offerings? <<

    As I mentioned in another comment, I'm not saying that it necessarily does. What I am saying is that ultimately the platform trumps the specific set of machines. If a good number of vendors end up building compelling offerings based on one OS, that could end up winning the major share of smartphone sales. I used Android as an example, not as a definitive prediction.

  •  
    25

    comp_indiana

    12/14/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    >It wasn't just charging too much. It was trying to control
    >everything. That makes the company a bottleneck, which
    isn't >something that necessarily scales well when you have
    many >vendors who can all use Android and innovate on
    multiple paths >simultaneously.

    Just because Apple chose to sell the Mac and not license it to
    all takers doesn't mean they controlled everything. Nothing
    stopped anyone from developing for the Mac, either hardware
    add ons or software applications. Apple has a lot more control
    over the iPhone, but then look at the total mess that results
    from no control at all (Windows PC market).

    But even the iPhone, with all of Apple's control over it (which I
    think is a GOOD idea, btw, and is reassuring to users to know
    that at least someone other than the seller has examined the
    software (to at least check what sort of data it is snooping,
    etc...) even the iPhone is a platform, not merely a device.
    There are FAR more accessories, and a much larger market for
    add ons than for the very fractured Android market. Maybe
    this will change, (I don't pretend to know eveything the way
    you do, Erik) but only time will tell (we know you are just
    blowing smoke.)

    Multiple paths of innovation? From the generic hardware
    companies that don't do software? Riiiiight. Name one
    single innovation from any of the following. Dell, HP, Lenovo,
    Acer, etc... ad infinitum. The truth is, Microsoft PREVENTS
    them from doing anything innovative or even rational, such as
    updating the BIOS.

    Erik, you are so enamored by the Microsoft model that you
    can't see the forest for the trees.

  •  
    26

    AdanC

    12/21/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    @ErikSherman

    Sorry to tell you that the development of the iPhone will not stand
    still but moving further up the scale of improvement and the next
    iteration of the android will just be a copy of the iPhone, don't
    believe? watch this space.

  •  
    27

    ErikSherman

    12/21/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    AdanC - if you think that the rest of the world will hold still so the iPhone can move ahead, particularly when you're talking about some large companies with lots of creativity, technical chops, and money, then I'd say you're living in Apple Fanboy Dreamland.

  •  
    28

    Jeffbrandt

    12/21/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    In a few years we will wonder why we took the time for this discussion. The market will push innovation. There will be VM on all the phones and the WebApp will become more of a driving force as bandwidth grows. The current system of any company controlling the developers customer is ridiculous and will need to change before the so call "smartphone" can be anything other than a "iFart" entertainment box.

    I have been in the cell phone development sense the early ninety and this is going to be an exciting time for all of us.

    Happy Holidays,

    Jeff Brandt
    www.comsi.com

  •  
    29

    ErikSherman

    12/21/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Apple iPhone vs. Google Android: Machine vs. Platform

    Jeffbrandt, I suspect you are right, but then hindsight always makes the earlier questions moot. At the moment, though, decisions still have a future impact, and companies are juggling to find the advantage.

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement
advertisement