Regarding “The Apple phone flop”
You can read Michael Kanello’s full Cnet article here: http://news.com.com/2010-1041_3-6141607.html?part=rss&tag=2547-1_3-0-5&subj=news
Apple is slated to come out with a new phone. Reports say that it will have a slide-out keyboard, 4GB or 8GB of storage, and work on CDMA or GSM cellular networks. It will start at $249 before subscription rebates.
And it will largely fail.
I think it’s funny that he uses the term “slated” as opposed to “rumored.” …there is a very big difference there. paraphrasing John Gruber of daringfireball.net, predicting a flop for a product that hasn’t even been announced yet may be the first sign that Kanello is a jackass.
i initially planned on writing a response to every stupid comment he made, but the Macalope has already done a pretty good job. Instead, i only want to counter a few of his ridiculous ideas:
Why won’t the Apple phone succeed? […] The entire strategy, however, is based on what I call “iPod magic.” Apple succeeded with the iPod, the theory goes. Therefore, they can break into other categories and turn them upside down. […] But the iPod looks like it may turn out to be a non-repeatable experience. Look at the historical record. When the iPod emerged in late 2001, it solved some major problems with MP3 players. At the time, such music devices came either equipped with a nominal amount of flash memory–like 64MB or 128MB–or a large 2.5-inch hard drive. […] Apple opted to adopt the 1.8-inch hard drive, a piece of hardware spurned by other manufacturers. That was the world’s mistake. The 1.8-inch drive let Apple put a huge amount of storage–the real problem with MP3 players–into a small form factor. The first iPod sported 5GB of storage, or nearly 40 times as much as the upper crust of flash players. The company even locked up supply of 1.8-inch drives for a while, so no one could copy it.
So essentially the only reason for Apple’s success with the iPod is because of 1.8″ hard drives? That’s it, huh? the wildly speculated iPhone rumor will fail because it doesn’t have a shunned technology to bolster? That’s your “historical record”?
The iPod also conquered the problem of small screens and cheesy navigation. […] Unfortunately for Apple, problems like that don’t exist in the handset business. Cell phones aren’t clunky, inadequate devices. Instead, they are pretty good. Really good.
What planet does this guy live on? The current state of the handset industry is exactly that: clunky inadequate devices. Sure the RAZR is slim, but it’s a piece of junk, and i’ve yet to meet a single person who owns a RAZR that hasn’t told me “i’ll never own another motorola phone in my life.” …and this is no exaggeration.
Even my Samsung a900, which is considered to be a pretty slick phone, or the Blackberry Pearl my friend uses (that i got some face-time with) …these devices are praised as being good phones, but that’s only a relative assertion. The best phones on the market right now are only good when comparing to what else is on the market, most of which is total garbage. Every interface i’ve ever used on a cell phone (and i’ve used a fair share) has been clunky and inept. The closest thing to an intuitive interface was with my old Kyocera (at that time, Qualcomm) and even that had small but obvious ridiculous problems. Granted, exterior design has gotten better, but adding animated gifs to the interface hasn’t solved any of the basic usability issues plaguing the handset market.
Samsung has scoured the world’s design schools and hired artists on three continents to keep its phones looking good. Motorola has revived its fortunes with design. […] Apple, in other words, won’t be competing against rather doltish, unstylish companies like the old Compaq. The handset companies move pretty quick and put out new models every few weeks.
Samsung, for all their ingenuity and “fresh designers”, still has a lackluster interface, mediocre “me too” designs (in the US) and cant even manage to include industry-standard SyncML to let users synch contacts back and forth between their handset and computer automatically. (Something even Sony’s been doing for years.) Moto may be doing decent, but their customer satisfaction is in the shitter, as decent industrial design may sell phones, but frustrating interfaces (and poor build quality) loose customers.
I’m not really sure where Kanello is trying to go with this thought. That only the outside appearance counts? Not a moment’s consideration of interface? I dont think anyone is arguing that a rumored apple phone would win the market over based on looks. (though it would obviously be a part of the equation, many other more important aspects like a uniformly superb user experience end up playing a much larger role.)
Other companies that “put out new models every few weeks” doesn’t seem like a negative for Apple, at this point, appears to be the only company that understands that a simple and straight-forward product line sells better than elaborate crowded product lines that are forced to compete with themselves.
Second, Apple has to face the issue of trust. Music players are fairly easy. Songs come out of memory and must be amplified. With cell phones, consumers care mostly about quality of service. Who, really, doesn’t expect a new company to conquer all the static and connection issues with their phones? Granted, Apple will use contract manufacturers to assemble their phones, but designing these phones takes experience and talent. And the cell carriers are far deeper into it here.
This argument lacks any resemblance of sense. “Apple has to face the issue of trust”? people won’t trust an apple product? “Who, really, doesn’t expect a new company to conquer all the static and connection issues with their phones?” Me, and every other logical thinker on the planet. I’m not even really sure what he’s trying to say there, but i know i disagree… And i dont really have connection or “static” problems, except when i’m outside of a service area, which i can’t hardly blame on Samsung; it’s obviously a carrier issue.
His final “designing these phones takes experience and talent. And the cell carriers are far deeper into it here.” statement makes far too little sense to even try to dissect.
So when consumers get to that counter at CompUSA, they will debate buying the Apple phone, and even hold it up for a look. But when they whip out the credit card, they’ll probably opt for a Motorola.
Nice conclusion there jackass. Lovely way to write a trolling opinion piece with absolutely no evidence to support your backwards theory, in a lame attempt to drive traffic to yet another useless anti-apple article, completely based on a rumored device that hasn’t even been announced.
As frustrated as i am with all the available cellphones, and as much as i believe that IF Apple were to enter the market, they might buck the trend and make something Worth-a-Shit™ and as much as i would LOVE to throw my $400 piece of crap in the toilet and buy Apple’s iPhone, i would MUCH rather it turn out that Apple has no plans to release anything like an iPhone just so Kanello and the rest of the “analysts” will look like the idiots that they are, writing articles about imaginary products.