Honestly, if it wasn't for my fear of the dangers that a formal, sanctioned, and public truth struggle could cause humanity, I would vote for a truth struggle to monitor, review and score website articles.
Here's the last. "IPhones goes the way for Selectric." Garbage. Adam Minter thinks it will happen, and he writes for Bloomberg, the Atlantic, and other publications about just about anything happening in Asia, so the connection must be that iPhones are made in Asia, and he once saw an IBM Selectric typewriter in a museum, so iPhones will be in a museum one day.
Maybe Minter is old enough to have used an IBM Selectric. I am. It was my first typewriter. It was the only school in a spacious manual typewriter and some old-fashioned electric. Needless to say, moving from the almost automatic touch typewriter to a manual was a rude awakening.
The only similarity to an IBM Selectric and an iPhone is that one day both should be in a museum.
Minters argument is one we've heard over and over again. Apple is doomed. iPhone is doomed. Smartphones are commodities and low cost will win because everyone wants the least expensive product available, and it's not an iPhone, and it wasn't the IBM Selectric typewriter.
In Kenya, users provide social media as the main reason for upgrading from a feature phone, and used smartphones ̵1; which go for as little as $ 40 – work fine to access Facebook. True the cheaper phones do not look so good. But they do everything that late smartphone adopters want, and that's good enough.
That says something, but not enough. & Nbsp; Good enough & # 39; is not good enough for everyone, everywhere. It's just not. There are many ambitious brands in technology, home appliances and all over the world. The products are not all goods.
"Good enough" doesn't sound good to Apple and other phone manufacturers who thrive on the relentless upgrade. But many well-known products have followed the same path, from groundbreaking innovation to reliable and profitable "good enough" staples. The KitchenAid Model K mixer revolutionized American cuisine when it was introduced in 1937, but has since changed only incrementally as it became a juggernaut wedding register. Maytag washing machines, windmill wind turbines, Ford Model T and Browning M1911 gun have been much the same.
Guess what? You can still buy a KitchenAid device, a Maytag and a Ford. Why? Because these manufacturers have brands and brands are differentiation in goods.
How does it compare something to an iPhone?
When IBM introduced the device in 1961, electric typewriters had already been around for decades. However, Selectric maintains its business by enabling faster writing and changing of fonts, thus increasing productivity worldwide. The technology was also packed in an elegant, minimalist case, quickly recognized as a landmark in industrial design.
In this regard, and it's limited, the iPhone is the Selectric by revolutionizing the electric typewriter market. iPhone made it to smartphones. But Apple's iconic iPhone did not dominate the way IBM's selectric did. iPhone has well less than 20 percent of the market.
In principle, the iPhone becomes something similar: a tried and true model that only fits the customer's needs. In Malaysia, where I live, an authorized reseller markets iPhone 6 with a big red sign that promises "Amazing Phone, Amazing Price", without reference to model name or vintage.
The smartphone, perhaps, but the iPhone is a brand of smartphone, and therefore easily differentiated from competitors in many aspects.
Look around. How many different brands of toasters or microwaves can you find? How many different washer and dryer models are there? How Many Different Cars? Everyone is a commodity, and they do much the same, but they are different; by price, style, design, features and much more. You see no one complaining that toasters need to expand the line because a toaster is nothing more than hot, and we've had it for thousands of years.
If Apple wants to maintain its reputation as an innovator, it should recognize the iPhone as the mature product it has become, and redirect its vaunted creative energy to something new.
Talking like a real armchair quarterback, but a far removed from how businesses and brands actually work in the world.
Apple not only makes a smartphone . It does the iPhone. Back in the day, IBM made selective and business fell in love with it. In the mid-1980s, IBM saw the future as personal computers and rejected Lexmark's electric typewriter. Over ten years ago, IBM sold its struggling PC business to Lenovo. Was it IBM's selectric for Apple's iPhone?
No. It is a false equivalence. IBM left the PC business because " good enough " that Minter describes was good enough for customers who wouldn't pay for IBM's higher prices, but that's not the same. IBM failed to distinguish and separate the venerable PC from cheaper competitors. It's a problem Samsung has; not Apple. Apple's products are easy to distinguish and differentiate thanks to macOS, iOS, the ecosystem, applications, service and support, and all the additions the company builds into the product. That's what users buy.
An IBM Selectric was the last representative of the old type technology and is not an equivalent comparison to the iPhone other than a day, both of which will be in a museum.