I think Apple has a smart team of executives who would have thought over the historical past and the opportunities in the future, as well as the risks of opening its platform to every smartphone manufacturer. I seem to agree with their closing the platform and maintining the quality of their products to the level it has always performed.
Apple is probably making up for the posibility of repeating the past by buying its suppliers/competititors and re-structuring these new acqusitions to Apple's standards. The Apple quality that has its base and new comers drawn to it is what Apple is protecting and it is important they protect this asset since innovation is Apple's main area of expertise.
Trailblazing comes with small market shares so that the company has more time devoted to R&D of new technologies and products.
@Parser, i agree that Apple is completly different from others and what they do is a standard in itself. This is the company which has a solid fan base and no matter what they will try to keep that base. But this is the right time for Apple to do something different as history does not repeat itself. Apple should try to embrace other companies and make partnership, make their products more affordable and reasonably priced by sharing the burden of innovation.
They are not a jellybean company to compete with everyone. They are the leaders. And as we know leaders fall, but it is the higher cause they are fighting for. It is like being a USA citizen and die for homeland. They will go out of business rather than engage in peer to peer competition leaving the leadership to others.
I was a fan of Apple when they were going out business a few decades ago. Their design was superior and no-one recognized it (not on profitable scale). Now they combined leadership with profit.
Well Apple definitely likes monopoly but then they are giving what user wants. And with the way people are using Apple products it looks like that they love using it.
There is a huge difference on the source of income. While IBM made architecture and software an open platform and that platform is sold everywhere it is not and has not been a sole income for IBM.
Apple tried to allow others to manufacture Mac computers in 1990. The effect was cutting its own profits, because this all what Apple does. No other income.
Apple is unable to make their products as an open architecture. Their market is too narrow for them to risk competition.
Google is offering Android as a complete OS and it is not an open architecture. However now Android is being expended to control home appliances using cheap specially designed low-cost wireless network.
The two companies are quite different in business strategy and source of income. It is not a monopoly by choice. Apple may have to stay innovative to survive.
Morry, I have sensed the same feelings for quite some time about history repeating itself for Apple.So far Apple is still the setting the standard, but others are playing catch up and fast.At this point, I see no indication of Apple becoming more open.
Android devices will sure outgrow Apple devices. The reason is it is cheaper and good enough to use. Apple fans still love their products of course. Nevetheless, i am interested to see what will happen in 2 years time.
I agree, TaimoorZ. Apple has their own unique image, which many companies have tried to copy at times. Experience with using Apple products is different than other manufacturers. I think Apple needs to keep this trend to stay successful going forward.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
