Analysts Secretly Want to Run Apple

February 23rd, 2012

There’s an immense amount of freedom sitting in front of a computer and putting words on the screen. You can say almost anything you want (but watch the hate speech!), and probably find someone out there who would be willing to read what you say. And maybe agree with you. But that doesn’t necessarily mean you have the power to influence anyone, particularly a multinational corporation.

Now if you’re in a position where others are influenced by your words, you may begin to develop a feeling of power. You tell your audience what to do, and perhaps they’ll listen.

Of course, we all know that Apple Inc. got where they are marching to a different beat. Despite being told that releasing a digital music player in 2001 was a foolish idea, the iPod ended up becoming hugely successful. Despite falling sales (unless you count the iPhone and iPad as iPods of course), the iPad dominates the market by a huge margin.

Certainly the naysayers, which included no less than Steve Ballmer of Microsoft, said that the iPhone was a downright foolish idea. The market was already served well by others, so where did Apple have the temerity to think they could make a dent? But I don’t think those who criticized Apple so much are crying uncle. Instead, they’ve hunkered down, suggesting that Apple’s immense iPhone sales and profits are temporary. The market will right itself soon. Windows Phone will be second behind Android in just a couple of years, even though few care about Microsoft’s mobile platform, except for the companies who are building Windows Phone handsets, and Microsoft of course.

We can’t forget the iPad, the “oversized iPod touch” that many analysts suggested simply couldn’t succeed. Even when iPad sales soared, we were told that the latest tablet from RIM, make that Samsung, make that HP, would succeed. Well, Amazon did do pretty well with the Kindle Fire, but it’s not clear if any of those sales were at the expense of the iPad. It appears they just expanded the market, and, with middling ratings from customers, it’s not at all certain whether the Fire can expand beyond those who just want something — anything — on the cheap. But cheap isn’t so good if the user experience is no better than mediocre.

Just this week, I read reports that some analysts are again suggesting Apple is going to release a 7-inch iPad real soon now. Well maybe in the fall. But maybe it’ll be an 8-inch version instead, the better to expand Apple’s reach in the tablet market. The theory has it that the iPad, though cheaper than many expected before its arrival, is still too expensive for many customers. It’s also a wee bit too large and heavy for single-handed use. That may account for some of the popularity of an Amazon Kindle, but let’s not forget that Apple isn’t into producing loads of models for every perceived market segment. They’ve told us that, their actions agree, so why assume things are going to suddenly change?

Let us not forget that Steve Jobs made a big deal over his expressed belief that a 7-inch tablet was just too small. Better sandpaper your fingers so they’ll be small enough to navigate one of those things.

So far, there’s no indication that, aside from a few organizational and marketing adjustments, that Apple’s core product philosophy is undergoing any substantial change under the leadership of Tim Cook. Indeed, Cook has said that he won’t dismantle the product and marketing strategies put in place by Jobs, and there’s no reason not to take him at his word.

But that doesn’t mean Apple isn’t going to have an iPad mini, though it may not be quite as small as some suggest. If such a gadget does see the light of day, it won’t be because some analyst suggested that Apple needs to build one because they say so.

Sure, if sales of the iPad flagged, I suppose Apple would reconsider their strategy, and perhaps consider lower-cost and/or smaller versions. It’s still quite possible that the current iPad 2 will remain on sale after its successor appears, at a lower price. This will help grab customers who might have considered a Kindle Fire or another lower cost option. Even an 8-inch model would only be a modest concession, although some analysts would pronounce such a product as a vindication of their unproven theories. Maybe Steve Jobs even green-lit one before he passed on.

However, if those analysts are so good at what they do, why are they just talking out of their hats and not running their own multinational corporations to demonstrate that their marketing theories can actually work? Would any company even hire them, or is it far easier to just sit back with coffee in hand and shoot from the hip?

Here at The Night Owl, I’ll tell you what I think, what I’d like to see happen, and even express my concerns from time to time, but I would never presume to suggest I know better than Apple about anything. Microsoft? Well, that’s another story.

| Print This Article Print This Article

5 Responses to “Analysts Secretly Want to Run Apple”

  1. Neil Anderson says:

    Most analysts shoot from the lip.

  2. immovableobject says:

    Steve Jobs whole “you’d have to sandpaper your fingers” argument is predicated on attempting to run standard iPad apps on a 7″ screen. This would indeed be awkward. But clearly, there would be no problem running scaled up iPod Touch apps. As such, it would still be useful as an eBook reader, movie viewer, game device, and appeal to people with larger hands and poor eyesight that find the iPod Touch too small.

    The first question is would such a device (unable to run iPad apps) have sufficient demand to warrant its production.

    The second question is whether Apple would choose to incorporate a unique screen raster that would fragment the iOS line by enabling developers to create a third family of apps specifically optimized for that intermediate form factor.

  3. Kaleberg says:

    Another thing to consider is falling prices. Right now, it might not make sense for Apple to sell a 7″ iPad. It would cost way too much for the value perceived, since most people would find it too big and clunky to be a good iPhone and too small to be a good iPad. If the price were to go to $200 or $300, Apple might just decide to make one.

  4. Brionne says:

    . I have never had it crash, though I have had to back ymeslf out of apps that seemed to have no logical next step. This was the result either of my ignorance or the fact that there is less of a standard user interface from app to app than there is in classical GUIs such as OS X and Windows.For the laptop lugging road-warrior, it should be noted, this is not going to be a full replacement. I now take my laptop and my iPad when I go into the college. But much of the time there, I use my iPad because it is so light, convenient and useable. I use it to teach my classes and often reference traditional texts from the iPad instead of lugging them along to class. I develop my own web pages on my 27 desktop which is the right environment for such development; I wouldn’t expect to do that on an iPad. In education (and evidently in medicine), it is proving to be a real boon. The enterprise situations where portable information access and transmission are critical will find this a compelling solution. The heavy Photoshop user or music track editor will still need a conventional computer, either laptop or desktop.I purchased the 64GB version, which may be more storage than I need. But since it will drive my 50 screen downstairs I figured I would begin to load lots of pictures and favored music, so it may prove a wise choice in the long run. It can swallow up entire evenings with the music-augmented slide shows it can do. In fact, you may begin to wonder if you need cable TV. Conventional content providers should be worried about the iPad since it provides yet another way for the user to determine viewing experience. But if you are still drawn to cable, it makes a fine remote control.Before people evaluate

Leave Your Comment