Archive

Posts Tagged ‘HTC’

Apple – Not A Technology Company

February 17, 2011 Leave a comment

Each time a new highly promoted mobile phone is launched, the media adds the following by default: “potential iPhone killer”. It seems to be believed that almost any phone launched is made to compete directly with Apple. The same is now said of tablets, where everything launched since the iPad is an iPad competitor. The sense of these comparisons is questionable at best, since Samsung, Motorola, HTC and others are technology companies. Apple is a fashion company.

A company launches a revolutionary product that changes the way in which we consume media on the move. Sold at a premium, this device becomes the “must have” item of its generation and propells the company to worldwide success, as it becomes a household name. Anyone looking to purchase a device for personal media consuption immediately thinks of this product before all others, not because of a superior feature set but due to its status as THE device of this type. There were others on the market of matching and even superior quality, but with no premium brand recognition, consumers were always going to choose the safe, accepted option.

Competitors eventually realised that you can not beat someone at a game that they did not invent themselves. What they needed was a new, evolved game, one with rules that they could control and shape in their own favour. With a new game they could compete on price and functionality in a way that suits your needs and gives you access to the market you desire. Sony was too slow to react; the iPod destroyed the Walkman.

Apple achieved this victory over the previous champion of portable media consumption, and in recent years took control of the smartphone market (without actually producing smartphone initially) because they changed the game. A hard drive instead of a cassete tape or CD meant it couldn’t be directly compared to the Walkman, which used inferior technology, so they were able to price it as a premium item, immediately creating an “exclusive” label for something most never realised they wanted (unless you truly do need to take 1500 hours worth of music with you for your daily 90 minute round trip to the office). A mobile with a capacity touchscreen, perfect for finger based navigation could not be compared to resistive devices as they were meant to be used with a stylus. In both cases the products took years before they could be classed amongst the top tier on features, but in the eyes of the consumer they were the ones to own.

Ask the typical iOS user why the are not using another operating system. You will not be impressed with reasoned, informative views on the failings of competing products and why they can not match their needs. You will be informed that Apple is better because it has better applications. Push for examples of this and you will be lucky if even a single app name is provided as being better on iOS than other platforms. I can only assume that companies have so far failed to realise exactly what they are fighting because they refuse to look at the industry through a different window. This failure is ever more shocking when you consider how Apple propelled themselves into the position they hold today. 

If you were to look into the home of a typical Apple user today you would see their Macs and iOS devices take centre stage, placed and positioned so precisely they could be mistaken for ornaments. But ornaments they are, used to present their owners as “cool” and “up-to-date” with today’s technology. They are on show to highlight that their owners buy the best, regardless of cost. Apple products are fashion accessories to the general public, in the same way that Nokia devices with the changeable faces were a few years ago.

Buzz words like “eco-system” and “closed environment” are used in ways that imply this is a game never before seen. This game is just another evolution of the one always played, and the key remains the same – “cool” always wins. Not the most features, the most open source, the best applications or the best screen technology, just ask Apple of the 80s or every other mobile manufacturer when the iPhone first arrived that could not even send MMS and had no app store behind.

Attempting to best Apple by offering products with improved specifications but at a higher price will never work, nor will offering a device with matching specifications at a slightly lower price. You must offer something different, something unique that blurs the lines when comparisons are drawn.  You can not play Apple’s game and win; their game, their rules. Change the game.

Advertisements

Bloated Businesses

September 15, 2010 Leave a comment

One of the most frustrating lessons I have been taught over the years is that big does not mean better. It seems obvious now, but when this realisation first struck me it was met with great disappointment.

I started my career in the early days of the mobile industry, a time when every company tried to be as “flexible” as possible in order move products out the door. What this really meant was corners were cut in every area, processes and sound practices were ignored and bad habits formed within said companies, but we were convinced that this was the price we had to pay in order to get products out the door on limited budgets. Each business did however have its own lose 1-2 year strategy for improving processes, to be executed “once things settled down”. We all soon recognised of course that as businesses grow, they become more resistant to change. It seems to only take a matter of days before  new businesses have arranged their own “old boys club” and begin accepting new members, as everyone attempts to sit back and relax now that they have “made it”. The lesson here seems an obvious one, yet every day start-ups are begun with the same bad practices, largely due to the employees originating from the same bloated businesses with lofty ambitions to “do things a different way”, without seemingly ever having found what that right way could be.

The current boardroom turmoil at Nokia is a wonderful example of what can go wrong when established processes and good practices are ignored. This is a company where friendships were always more important than qualifications, as the “old boys club” thrived in every department. This was perfectly acceptable when the goal of the day involved releasing more of the same devices and copying the competition where needed with their multitude of patented products they had been “saving for a rainy day”. The success of the iPhone however brought with it an abrupt end to this easy life, as it became clear that for the first time, Nokia had nothing in the locker to immediately retaliate with. This was the beginning of the end for Nokia’s “old boys club”, as with each passing quarter it became more and more apparant that the company lacked qualified, experienced professionals in every area of the decision-making process.

We must give out Finnish friends some credit however, as they have recognised and are forcing through change while they are still the number one handset manufacturer in the world by some distance. Motorola allowed their “old boys” (with more than a helping hand from Finland) to drag the company right back to pre-RAZR days before they begun their own clear-out, and that hasn’t been particularly successful when you realise those who escaped the cull.

Samsung, HTC, Palm (poor Palm), Sony Ericsson, Panasonic, Apple, Siemens, every business has its own “old boys” club, some are simply better than others at hiding the deadwood amongst the pack, and not allowing it to drag down the entire company. All of these companies in some way of failed to move when the opportunity presented itself, failed to recognise a market opportunity that cost them millions etc. In the midst of all this, there is one benefit to such bloated, slow moving institutions: their inability to adapt quickly and move at market pace always leave the door open for someone new to innovate and take advantage. My bet goes on the company that recognises Archos are ripe for a take-over.