Comments on: Blind mavericks; Why Apple will be the next Sony

By: Ton Bil

Ton Bil — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:24:16 +0000

This reminds me of Guy Kawasaki’s famous remarks on meaningful company missions: (1) increase quality of life (2) right a wrong or (3) prevent the end of something good. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQs6IpJQWXc]

Joop’s true and interesting post here makes me conclude that there’s no number 4 mission: (4) perfectionize ordinary life.

If a company has increased quality of life – like Apple has done more than once -, that new quality becomes ordinary, in a way. Pursuing on a certain “product line” or belief in it’s infinite powers, leads them to (4), which is off the road, as Joop clearly demonstrates.

By: http://www.irdomain.com

http://www.irdomain.com — Sun, 31 May 2009 20:06:15 +0000

HI looks very interesting! bookmarked your blog. john brightman

By: admin

admin — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 03:22:34 +0000

[... que miran mi pc como una commodity..por eso me parece interesante esta sesuda entrada de Joop Dorresteijn - a quien sigo por sus comentarios del mercado coreano. Para Joop, Apple va ...] Marketing & IT

By: http://iturjc.blogspot.com

http://iturjc.blogspot.com — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 14:06:15 +0000

I do agree with U!..I think Apple is loosing important markets like netbooks…and Apple is becoming the next Microsoft in the software market…

By: http://www.hauntingofcambria.com

http://www.hauntingofcambria.com — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:47:47 +0000

I used to buy Sony products because they were the best designed and constructed. Then they were merely the best designed. Then they were merely Sony. Then I started buying Panasonic. Then I started shopping for everything.

I buy Apple products because they are the best designed and constructed. Even when that wasn’t so, brand inertia kept me in the fold long enough for Steve Jobs to return and reinvigorate the company. As long as Steve Jobs (or someone like him) runs Apple, it won’t become Sony.

Really, it’s about the product and its quality. The rest is BS.

By: http://theaffiliatedesk.com

http://theaffiliatedesk.com — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:31:52 +0000

Agreed. Innovation is a matter of the implemetation of strategy and invention. But it is always “sidelined” by the conventions of market sensibilities, ie: stockholder considerations and the product’s “S Curve”. I mean, whoever thought that we’d be using electric toothbrushes! So, if it fits the “It will make your life better… Make your life easier and Sexier” model, a product stands a chance; otherwise it needs to fit into the straight out “Vanity” model, well before a product reaches the shelves. (The real art is in selling us something we don’t really need). Yep, I still fall for that one! Alas… I digress. Many a statistician has spend countless hours of “profiling” intended demographic, targeted markets and liasing with marketing, product development and sundry infrastructure teams to “proof” the snapshot in darkroom before a product goes out to “internal coorperate tender”. In other words… Who wants to take it on?

Enjoy!

By: admin

admin — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:09:21 +0000

I work for an emerging company attempting to bring a disruptive technology to market. The reason we have an opportunity is because the existing technologies are attempting to “sustain” their advantage — ie, “give me something that is 10% [faster, smaller, better, etc.].” This makes it difficult for the current leaders to truly innovate to the next level because it is not what their customers are asking for and it is quite expensive to put the resources on the “next generation” problem with no real revenue expected for years.

There’s a great book on this (probably many) called “The Innovator’s Dilemma” (Clayton M Christensen). It’s a very good read if you are interested in these types of things.

The author gives many examples of the (then) current day leaders either completely failing or not leading in the next round (anyone remember Wang, DEC, the steam shovel, etc.?)

One potential point — Apple has always seemed to buck this trend and I tend to believe they will do it again. Sometimes it is best to “not listen” to your customers.

In any case – this discussion has been useful for me because it is giving me a bit more confidence that, for my use model, this box might fit the bill. Come on MBA UPDATE — the waiting game continues.

By: http://theaffiliatedesk.com

http://theaffiliatedesk.com — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 15:28:49 +0000

Joop, I agree with many of your points stated in your post. Well done and highly observant. Product creation must always fit within the specific model of it’s creators, in other words, there must be a demand for said product by virtue of the vision and research of the market leaders that cause them to believe a product is viable. In the case of pushing “design parameters” is concerned, Apple, and in particular, Steve Jobs; is not only a visionary, but a major protagonist. Steve Jobs was insightful enough to own the proprietary rights to the NExt OS. Be rest assured that he will not let the team down when he retires.

Regards

Lawrence