[REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment][02.04]

都说了不是又八UID: 2728357

关于REBORN FROM THE ASHES组COMMENTS活动的说明&汇总
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1042733-1-2.html




Can Apple Out-Innovate Microsoft and Google?

Back to the Future

Apple is innovating like its old self once again. But can the company avoid repeating the mistakes that forced it to play catch-up in the '90s?



One of the great things about covering technology is that if you hang around long enough, you get to write the same stories all over again. In 1987, when I first started on the tech beat, desktop PCs were a big deal. Today the excitement has moved to mobile devices, also known as smartphones. Watching this new market unfold is a bit like seeing one of those movies where they've taken an old classic and remade it with new stars but the same script. (Click here to follow Dan Lyons).


Now, as then, a smaller device is displacing a bigger one. Now, as then, the platform remains somewhat primitive but is evolving rapidly. Hardware makers are trying to figure out which user interface works best. Software makers are dreaming up new ways to use machines that even their creators could not have imagined. Now, as then, a new ecosystem is arising, with disruptive technology creating new powerhouses and threatening the survival of market leaders.


The most striking Groundhog Day moment for me involves Apple. Back in 1984, Apple leapt way ahead in the PC market when it released the original Macintosh, the first popular computer to employ a graphical user interface. It took Microsoft six years to come up with something that could compare to the Mac, in the form of Windows 3.0. Six years! For all that time, Apple had the market to itself. Nevertheless, Windows took over the world and now holds more than 90 percent market share, while Apple squeaks by with less than 5 percent worldwide.


Cut to the mobile phone market, today. In June 2007, Apple introduced the iPhone, a device that was so far beyond everything else in the market that even now, two and a half years later, nothing can beat it. To be sure, Nokia and Research in Motion still hold a greater share of the smartphone market than Apple does, but their aging software platforms look obsolete next to Apple's.


The question is, will Apple do with the iPhone what it did with the Mac? Will it leap out to a technological lead and then find a way to clutch defeat from the jaws of victory? Or has Apple learned from its previous experience and figured out a way to turn its superior design and wonderful technology into market domination?
Probably Apple's biggest blunder with the Mac was refusing to let other companies license its software. (There was a time when Apple did license its software, but by then it had already lost out to Microsoft.) The thing is, Apple CEO Steve Jobs is a control freak who believes in keeping the software tightly coupled to the hardware. In his mind, this is the only way to guarantee that you'll give customers a terrific experience.


Microsoft took the opposite approach, letting any PC maker license the Windows operating system. There's a tradeoff here. Microsoft couldn't control the user's experience. But its decision led to greater diversity of machines, and lower prices. For most of the world, cheap machines that were "good enough" trumped Apple's pricier, perfectionist, control-freak approach.


Microsoft also encouraged developers of software applications to create programs for Windows, and gave them a huge audience they could sell to. The more apps the software guys created, the more appealing Windows became, so it was a self-reinforcing phenomenon, a virtuous circle.


With Apple and the iPhone, in some ways it's 1984 all over again. Just as with the Mac, Apple keeps the iPhone's hardware and software tightly coupled. Meanwhile, other companies are taking the old Microsoft approach, most notably Google, which has developed a smartphone operating system called Android that any phonemaker can use at no cost and customize any way they like. Android can do things that the iPhone can't, like run multiple applications at the same time.


Again, as with Windows PCs, with Android we're going to see a tradeoff: more diversity, lower prices (eventually), but perhaps a less predictable experience. No two Android–based devices will be completely alike. Also, it's still in the early days for Android, so your experience might be rockier than on the iPhone. One new device that has lots of technogeeks buzzing is the Droid, from Motorola, which just started shipping this month. The Droid has a touchscreen, like the iPhone, but it also has a real keyboard. And the Droid runs on the Verizon network, while the iPhone runs on the AT&T network, which isn't as good. And the Droid costs the same as the iPhone.


But here's where Apple has learned something from Microsoft, namely the power of having a huge ecosystem of software developers making programs for your platform. Apple has wisely encouraged people to create applications, or "apps," for the iPhone. There are now 100,000 apps available for the iPhone, 10 times more than for Android. So even if you think that the Droid is better than the iPhone, if you go for the Droid, you're giving up that wonderful ecosystem of iPhone apps.


But over time, a lot of iPhone apps will become available on Android, too. So Apple's advantage will diminish. Market research company Gartner predicts that by 2012, Android will have slightly more market share than the iPhone, thanks to a tidal wave of Android-based devices that are expected to flood the market over the next few years. Rumor has it that Apple will expand its presence in the mobile-device market by introducing a tablet computer next year. But by going it alone, Apple will never keep up with the Android army. In smartphones, as in personal computers, Apple may ultimately become a niche player once again, content to do a great job for a smaller audience. In tech, as in baseball, it's déjà vu all over again.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/222141?from=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+newsweek%2Fcolumnists%2FStevenLevy+%28UPDATED+-+Columnists+-+Daniel+Lyons%29

fancywwUID: 2583671

niche player：a company holding a specialized and profitable part of a commercial market
Groundhog Day:土拨鼠日。比喻：指糟糕的事情循环发生的情况。


My comment:
I'd rather regard Steven Jobs as an admirable perfectionist than a control-freak. His creativeness and pursuit of perfection is always an inspiring story. After leaving Apple, Jobs tried his hand in the movie industry. He produced Toy Story, wildly successful movie and the world's first computer-animated film. After returning to Apple, he designed and marketed wildly successful products, for example, i-mac, i-pod, and i-phone, which saved the Apple from bankruptcy.

Now, as then, Apple has never been a dominant play in the personal computer and mobile phone industry. The article says that "Apple may ultimately become a niche player once again", however, I agree that Apple has always been a niche player. It's their concept or ideology to run the company, which makes Apple refuse to let other companies license its software. And it is the terrific experience of the hardware combined with the software that make Apple and its products such a special position in customers minds.

prettywraithUID: 197049

Comments (2010-02-04):
In this passage, one famous business case has been introduced. For Apple, it is indeed an old classic, whether the star is Mac or iPhone. Though I do not have an opportunity to buy one iPhone, I am always interested in Apple's products. Their fashionable outlook and terrific customers' experience attracts me so much. But, Apple possesses little market, though owes creative products. I am curious why Apple does not success in business as in techonolgy. This passage shows me some reasons, though it may too concise to illustrate more details about Apple's strategies. Certainly, Apple has begun to realize its problem for competing with other powerful competitors. Hope Apple to do another good job not only leads the high technology but also holds more market share.

Wrong Spelling：
technology  techonolgy

海王泪UID: 2673613

Unfamiliar Words
hang around, blunder

Useful Expressions
Apple leapt way ahead in the PC market when it released the original Macintosh, the first popular computer to employ a graphical user interface.
Leap way ahead=be much more advance in=be so far beyond
Nokia still hold a greater share of the smartphone market than Apple does, but their aging software platforms look obsolete next to Apple's.
A look obsolete next to B=A drops behind B
In his mind, this is the only way to guarantee that you'll give customers a terrific experience.
Terrific=stunning
For most of the world, cheap machines that were "good enough" trumped Apple's pricier, perfectionist, control-freak approach.
Trump=defeat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Materials(Ideas/Examples/ Technique)

1.【Ideas- History develops with different characters in the same way】
One of the great things about covering technology is that if you hang around long enough, you get to write the same stories all over again. In 1987, when I first started on the tech beat, desktop PCs were a big deal. Today the excitement has moved to mobile devices, also known as smartphones. Watching this new market unfold is a bit like seeing one of those movies where they've taken an old classic and remade it with new stars but the same script.
（观察这个新兴市场有点像是在观看那么一类电影，这类电影被人们当做经典并启用新的明星来翻拍制作，不过仍然沿用同样的剧本。）
Now, as then, a smaller device is displacing a bigger one. Now, as then, the platform remains somewhat primitive but is evolving rapidly. Hardware makers are trying to figure out which user interface works best. Software makers are dreaming up new ways to use machines that even their creators could not have imagined. Now, as then, a new ecosystem is arising, with disruptive technology creating new powerhouses and threatening the survival of market leaders.
{{Structure}}
(1)【TS】 One of the great things about (new characters) is that if you hang around long enough, you get to write (the same stories) all over again.
(2)【E.G.-New Characters】The same excitement from PCs to smartphones.
(3)【Analogy-History develops with Different Characters in the same way】
Watching (a phenomenon) is a bit like seeing one of those movies where they’ve taken an old classic and remade it with new stars but the same script.
(New stars=new technology, new ruler, new conference)
(Same script=The same way of development)
(1)【E.G.-The Same Way】Now, as then, (a new egl) is displacing (an old eg). Now, as then, (a trend) is evolving rapidly. （2）【Details-Players】From Hardware makers to software makers.（3）【Conclusion-System】History develops with different characters in the same way. It is an ecosystem where new characters are displacing new ones.

2.【Examples-Creator v.s Imitator, Original v.s Recent】
Apple vs. Microsoft
Apple leapt way ahead in the PC market when it released the original Macintosh, the first popular computer to employ a graphical user interface. It took Microsoft six years to come up with something that could compare to the Mac. Nevertheless, Windows took over the world and now holds more than 90 percent market share, while Apple squeaks by with less than 5 percent worldwide. Probably Apple's biggest blunder with the Mac was refusing to let other companies license its software (so that the software tightly coupled to the hardware seems to give customers a terrific experience.) Microsoft took the opposite approach, letting any PC maker license the Windows operating system. There's a tradeoff here. Microsoft couldn't control the user's experience. But its decision led to greater diversity of machines, and lower prices. For most of the world, cheap machines that were "good enough" trumped Apple's pricier, perfectionist, control-freak approach.

3.【Examples-Self-reinforcing Phenomenon】
The more apps the software guys created, the more appealing Windows became, so it was a self-reinforcing phenomenon, a virtuous circle.(良性循环、自我增值系统)
The more users the website owns, the more accurate and more information Wikipedia hold. So it was as a self-reinforcing phenomenon, a virtuous circle.
The more users the communication tool attracts, the more convenient and broader the QQ became, so it was a self-reinforcing phenomenon, a virtuous circle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Comment
Apple is famous for its creativity. From Macintosh to iMac, from iPod to iPhone, Apple shows us power and passion when it brings us innovative and stunning things. Recently iPad, an integration of computer and hand device, also captures out attention. But, this article, from Newsweek though published before the iPad, critically asked a question:” Can the company avoid repeating the mistakes that forced it to play catch-up in the '90s?”

As far as I am concerned, the company did make mistakes in the ‘90s but different from what the author said. Why Apple lost was for the shortage of continual innovation instead of maintenance of locking system. In fact, applying despotic system can bring a company much bigger success in a short time but it needs further and sustained innovation to keep its fable again and again, while adopting an opening system enjoy long-term interests but it needs ample resources and healthy self-reinforce method to overcome a hardship during the early days. Both control-freak or philanthropism could succeed in their own virtuous circle but break if there is a glitch on “continual innovation” or “self-reinforce”. Therefore, the author falsely treats the despotic approach, which indeed brings specific advantage, as the cause of what Apple cry for.

I really appreciate Steve Jobs when he has long adopted the dangerous model of operating products. It risks a lot but urges great inspiration. Jobs’ policy in blocking other companies’ access to Apple’s cutting-edge would make software tightly coupled to special hardware and thus keep customers a terrific experience. Therefore Apples’ leading position in the market is prolonged until the technology being widely studied, copied and sold. During its monopolization, with high price only affordable by a small group of consumers, Apple succeeds in grasping great profit ignoring the market share. And bundles of money rushing to Apple in a short time make available a new bleeding-edge technology.
Then, new stars would be lionized and the same script would be played again.

It is not too bad for Apple to become a niche player once again when it again and again create stunning fable.

123runfordreamUID: 2697608

One of the great things about covering technology is that if you hang around long enough, you get to write the same stories all over again. In 1987, when I first started on the tech beat, desktop PCs were a big deal. Today the excitement has moved to mobile devices, also known as smartphones. Watching this new market unfold is a bit like seeing one of those movies where they've taken an old classic and remade it with new stars but the same script. (Click here to follow Dan Lyons).

Groundhog Day (February 2 observed traditionally as a day that indicates six more weeks of winter if sunny or an early spring if cloudy)


Comment:
To some extent, technology is a short-life business, which the IT area provides classic example that standing for fast developing. However, when the level comes to a mature stage respectively, it becomes not easy to create rather first-margin stuff, sometimes, recreating from old, existed technique is a resolution for safe, especially for the significant companies. But that’s not the way can solve all the problems at once. To live much longer means to innovate more.
Therefore, surviving in such a competitive world, it is like fighting against a beast in Colosseum. For Apple, people appreciate its perfect experience, which is prompted strongly by Steve Jobs, the CEO of Apple. With my little knowledge about these sub rules among the competition, I have to say, Apple would like to pursue perfect in every possible aspects, from software to hardware, but it cost money, for the creators and buyers. Since the lion’s share of market is ordinary people, Apple could not take the leadership all the time, which the reason is, as my saying, that companies like Microsoft open the doors for commons. The ordinaries would like to choose a relative cheaper but same functional with some tiny defect, not so perfect but is good enough.
But as personal feeling about this game, I’d like Apple choosing to keep the pursuit of perfectionism though I am not a regular user of Apple. Same as the direction of Google, I refer it keep its faith by retreating for China’s market.

豆腐店的86UID: 2512956

COMMENTS
The Apple Inc. never fail to fascinate customers by its cutting-edged innovations, it, however, still in the danger of losing its market share, considering the history of being squashed by Windows decades ago. The article is worried about the future of iPhone, while I am pretty sure that Steve Jobs have learnt the lesson and ready for challenges. What is misleading in the passage is that the writer improperly combines Apple with Windows, because Apple who produces hardware coupled with software is quite different from Windows whose production merely focuses on software. It was IBM who equipped with Windows that took I MAC down 20 years ago, because I mac is not suitable for any other kind of operation system. Contrarily, nowadays Apple PCs are able to install both mac os and windows which help Apple take back its market share recently. Apparently, Jobs and his team have found a way to compete with their opponents, as the saying “a pain in pit, a gain in wit”, so, personally, I don’t think iPhone would take the same disastrous road.

plukaUID: 2721764

NOTE
Now, as then, a smaller device is displacing a bigger one. Now, as then, the platform remains somewhat primitive but is evolving rapidly.
For all that time, Apple had the market to itself.
Or has Apple learned from its previous experience and figured out a way to turn its superior design and wonderful technology into market domination?
Probably Apple's biggest blunder with the Mac was refusing to let other companies license its software.

COMMENT
two points interested me. First one is that Windows won trememdous success and subsequent profits by literally dispensing the software for free.Another one is the "ecosystem" for the development of a product. As for the ecosystem, I'm reminded of google and nokia, who are actually having their gadgets and little innovative ideas done by other smaller companies around the world. Those small companies, be it of electronic, computer or other appliances, serve for the magnate and furnish them with convenient products. Perhaps that's kinda ecosystem.
well, I'm kinda in a hurry those days……so have to cut the length of the comment~

dingyi0311UID: 2627919

My comment
This article warn the Apple that what happened on Macintosh may happen on iPone again. the failure of the Macintosh is that steven jobs would not to let other company license their product, partly may because the company strict to the creed that the software need to tightly couple to the hardware, partly may because Apple want to monopoly the market and maxim their profit. As the Chinese saying goes:”No one can maintain personal integrity during chaotic times.” It is a wisdom to share the interest with others, through it will give up some profit to others, yet when a larger share of the market was occupied the gross profit will increase and competitor will be eliminated.

zhengchangdianUID: 2563082

Comment：

It is well established that software system has been a special commodity ever since human beings began to exchange cargoes in the ancient times. To some extent, it violates the famous universal law of supply and demand. As known to all, the lesser merchandises exist in the market, the higher the price of them could surge up, especially when there is no like product. And history has witnessed this discipline coming to be truth. Unfortunately, the seemed omnipotent rule cannot serve to explain the perverse phenomenon of software market. It is a kind of goods that will prevail only when its users cover almost every corner of the world. The convenience it brings to mankind in communication may provide a reasonable answer to this queer circumstance. Suppose one applies a software system that no one else use or each individual applies significant different software systems, then we can conclude the trouble he would meet in his process of exchanging documents between interpersonal computers. In fact, it is a bit like that there is only one telephone in the world.

tequilawineUID: 2702008

1 Watching this new market unfold is a bitlike seeing one of those movies where they've taken anold classic and remade it with new stars but thesame script.
2 Now, as then,a new ecosystem is arising, with disruptive technologycreating new powerhouses and threatening the survival of market leaders.
3 Cut to themobile phone market, today.退一步说
4 The question is, will Apple do with theiPhone what it did with the Mac? Will it leapout to a technological lead and then find a way to clutch defeat from the jaws of victory? Or has Apple learned from its previous experience and figured out away to turn its superior design and wonderful technology into marketdomination?
5 The more apps the software guys created,the more appealing Windows became, so it was aself-reinforcing phenomenon, a virtuous circle.
6 niche player：a company holding aspecialized and profitable part of a commercial market
Groundhog Day:土拨鼠日。比喻：指糟糕的事情循环发生的情况。
comment:
Indeed，I dare notsay to totally agree with author’s attitude, assaulting CEO Steven personalability on ground that his has some kind of freak controlling ambition. The companyhas its own concept of operation, which does not mutate by individuals, as weknow, we only can understand that the mainstream of customers the company aimsat are not most of people, that means, they don’t care so much about thepercent of market share, on the contrast, most company muscle in on this.

There are also some other alternative options thatare reasonable. Maybe at first, they just want to monopoly this technologywithout considering the real circumstance at that era, when all the world arecrazy about computerization, and to set back this irresistible trend just bymere one power seems a little bit presumptuous. The other one relies on that theyare perfectionists, chasing for the flawless one, but they just forget,business is just business, not research, you can not strict yourself and makethe world wait for you.