It's a foregone conclusion that Apple Computer, otherwise known nowadays as just "Apple," has lead the way in technology product releases. Every year, technology buffs and newbies alike clamor to websites, blogs and electronics stores to find out what is "next and hot" in the Apple product line. But at this year's World Wide Developers Conference, something was missing besides Steve himself; a new Apple product.
Now, personally, I am an admitted "non-Apple follower", but that doesn't mean that I don't admire Apple's expertise in product design and implementation. And so I was left wondering, along with many others in the tech field, why we didn't witness the typical Apple product launch that we've come to expect year after year. With Steve Jobs' passing, are we left with the possibility that the annual Apple product launch cycle has also passed?
It seems safe to assume that with the change in leadership to Tim Cook, who was a previously former senior VP at the company, that Apple's entire product strategy has also changed flavor. Gone are the days of Steve and his "spicy, snappy" way of doing business. In its place, Cook seems to bring a "milder, gentler" approach to the company. Some might argue that the milder way of doing business is too much like the competition, if you could call the world of consumer electronics "mild."
But looking forward I would think that in today's economy, "mild" could be viewed as the new "wild," purely based on the amount of time, effort, and money it takes to be bullish in the technology market. When we look at examples like Hewlett Packard's Palm PRE smartphone, or the current Nokia line of Windows-based smartphones, we see examples of tepid offerings that leave little taste in consumers mouths.
Apple just may be heading towards the same path taken by its competitors, if it's not careful. Apple has always dominated its rivals through continuous product development and offerings. Now is not the time to ease back on the technology throttle, if the company intends to stay on top.
Apple usually tries to couple major new entertainment products with expansion of content available to be purchased through iTunes. Music with the iPod, TV shows with the iPod with video, Books and Periodicals with the iPad.
With most of these Steve could push the industry into doing it because of his status with the Disney conglomerate.
The natural thing with the the Apple Television would be to have cable networks available a-la-carte through iTunes. But the big cable networks are very leery of unbundling, mush as the music industry was uncertain about legal online sales until Steve pulled them in. As Disney's largest shareholder he could pretty much just order Disney to unbundle their cable channels and make them available on iTunes (including the ABC family of channels and the ESPN family of channels). And once Disney was on board with an a-la-carte cable world the rest of the industry would reluctantly follow.
But now that Disney's largest shareholder isn't Steve Jobs but The Estate of the Late Steve Jobs nobody is ordering anybody around and we see the rumored Apple Television get pushed back and back.
The first is that the company can't seem to come up with a product name any more. First it was the New iPad. Not only is it completely lame but completely short sighted. What are we supposed to do in a year? Talk about the Old New iPad and the New New iPad? And then a year after that? It was like
'What do we call it?'
'Steve always just asked how the new iPad was coming along'.
'Well I guess he wanted us to call it the New iPad!'
I felt that it couldn't possibly be that bad until we got The MacBook Pro With Retina Display as an official product name!
"What do we call it"
"Steve just said that the next thing we needed to do was a Macbook Pro with Retina Display"
"Well that's the name Steve Wanted."
Maybe Next year Apple will announce their new product called "An Apple TV That is as Good As The Competition".
The first roadblock was that TSMC and GlobalFoundries both had difficulties transitioning from the 40nm process node to the 28nm node, delaying critical parts such as a much more energy-efficient LTE baseband chip from Qualcomm by about 12 months.
Apple wanted to contract its 28nm semiconductor manufacturing to TSMC rather than to their handset rival Samsung, but Samsung got the first production silicon off the TSMC 28nm fabs by arranging to buy the Qualcomm Snapdragon S4.
TSMC figured that given their problems ramping up yields at 28nm, it would be smarter to produce a single chip design for two high-end Android phones from two different handset vendors (Samsung Galaxy S3 and HTC One X) than to deal with Apple's supply chain.
The second was that Apple pitched a bold design for the iPhone 5 which eliminated the SIM card by storing network access credentials on built-in flash memory. The U.S. cellular network operators banded together to veto the handset at the 11th hour.
Apple is racing against the clock to get a completely-redesigned iPhone 5 ready to launch in time for Christmas. They've compromised with the cell carriers by proposing a smaller micro-SIM card form factor. They also bit off about as much as they could possibly chew with their new support for editing documents on iCloud.
RIM is in a tailspin, and if Apple doesn't develop iCloud into a compelling business collaboration platform, then Microsoft could swoop in and reverse everything that Apple has fought hard to gain over the past decade.
Of course, it's easier to forget the technical environment or even the competitive landscape while focusing on the identity politics of Jobs vs. Cook. But even then, don't believe that Jobs rescued Apple from the doldrums of the late 1990s by bringing in Jonathon Ives and producing all-in-one computers like colorful gum drops.
Apple is what it is today because Jobs brought in Tim Cook, who proceeded to completely reinvent the consumer electronics supply chain in China. The modular plug-and-play form factors were out. Highly-integrated unibody appliances were in. It was as much about streamlining their supply chain as streamlining their industrial design.
Steve Jobs was the man. The man behind the man was Tim Cook. This is the Apple that Tim Cook built. If it were up to Steve Jobs, there would be no apps and no App Store!
The iPod is dead, the iPad 3 both lacks features of its competitors and is overpriced, and the cellphone companies are getting REALLY tired of subsidizing Apple's archaic battery hogging 3G phones (including the 4 and 4S),
And for all the Apple faithful out there, the Nokia Windows phones are superior in many aspects, including battery life, screen size, and connectivity speed. They may be late to the party, but why not try one before slagging it?
And after all the hootin' and hollerin' is done, Apple's desktops are overpriced Intel boxes, nicely packaged with someone else's screen.
What's left? Overpriced and unserviceable high end laptops (that sleek design comes at cost).
Oh, and a great deal of cash in the Apple coffers that has not been reinvested in their products nor given back as dividends to their stockholders.
Even if Apple comes out with a magical computer TV hybrid they will have to compete with Samsung and LG, so there won't be a couple of grand of margin money in the product that Apple's used to- and their competitors most definitely aren't sleeping.
One thing we know for sure. Hollywood is not stupid, and they won't make the same mistake in giving away video content like as did for audio.
Will Apple's be back at 20 or still hover at 600 three years from now? With a bean counter in charge, the future looks gloomy.