Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s China Problem

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 190 posts

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#131

Post by valuearb »

bobsam wrote: post #114
valuearb wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't say that MSFT and Samsung weren't competitors of Apple. He said MacOS and iOS are monopolies. Those are two different things. You can switch from a monopoly over a specific service/product to a similar but not identical one. MacOS has applications and features that Windows doesn't. It historically enabled features (sealed batteries) that Windows didn't, that provided better performance. And MacOS can run li…

> It historically enabled features (sealed batteries) that Windows didn't, that provided better performance. You are saying this as it was an undisputed fact. Which is the exact issue OP pointed at.

Sealed batteries are the reason I switched to Mac laptops. I used to carry an extra battery with my top of line dell laptop to make it through a flight. Then i read about the amazing battery life MacBooks were offering and switched and was able to make it through a single flight without every charging a backup battery again.

It wasn't just sealed batteries, but they offer better performance because they can better customized to fit available space in the laptop. To do that the OS has to have special drivers that condition the battery, or your battery will age rapidly and need replacement in a year or so. Apple put that into MacOS, which was a huge benefit in itself.

Sealed batteries also make devices lighter and sturdier. Fewer openings, more rigid enclosures.

These all seem like minor advantages, but they specifically led to me and others to became a Mac user.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#132

Post by ryanmarsh »

mikhailt wrote: post #49

This seems to confuse some people, the author is not saying Apple have a monopoly on smartphones. What the author is talking about is the locked-in ecosystem that Apple owns, iOS and macOS (watchOS/tvOS). > Moreover, the advantages go beyond margins: the best way to understand both Apple’s profits and many of its choices is to understand that the company has a monopoly on not just MacOS but even more importantly iOS.…

How wild is it that it took less than 10 years for a platform spanning killer-app to emerge in the largest smartphone market in the world?

To put it in perspective, this is like what the web did to Windows circa '99 - '05. Lesser examples might be spreadsheets or Adobe Photoshop.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#133

Post by eridius »

shmerl wrote: post #130
mikhailt wrote: post #49

This seems to confuse some people, the author is not saying Apple have a monopoly on smartphones. What the author is talking about is the locked-in ecosystem that Apple owns, iOS and macOS (watchOS/tvOS). > Moreover, the advantages go beyond margins: the best way to understand both Apple’s profits and many of its choices is to understand that the company has a monopoly on not just MacOS but even more importantly iOS.…

Why is normal competition considered not sustainable, and lock-in is viewed as a norm? Lock-in should never be a norm. Apple and MS are just too used to be monopolists and can't stand fair competition.

Lock-in is a natural consequence of having a platform. It's perfectly normal and happens without even making any explicit attempt at having lock-in. Any time you provide a platform and people build on top of it, you have automatic lock-in. This has nothing to do with "fair competition".

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#134

Post by dmix »

skdotdan wrote: post #53

The problem with many tech analysts is that they are Apple fanboys without even knowing that they are. Stating that Microsoft Surface and Samsung S8 are not competitors of Apple just because their products don't run Mac OS/iOS is pure fanaticism at the very least. Nevertheless, I find that the main point of the article is right. But Apple's China problem is also a very important problem for Google (actually, it's wor…

The fanboyism is strong on this one.

> iPhone users very rarely switch to Android, while a fair number of Android users switch to iPhone

> this is the point that was forgotten the last time Samsung was held up as an iPhone threat — a Samsung smartphone does not run iOS. That has always been Apple’s trump card

Considering this is a stats blog these bold claims are both made without any proof. And Android being a far cry from iOS is an antiquated position to take in 2017. They caught up quite some time ago.

The core difference is usually lock-in from using the Apple eco-system. But on a UX/hardware value level Apple doesn't have a significant advantage over companies like Samsung anymore.

But agreed re: the china problem, I wish he focused more on that over making sweeping statements about Apple's (imaginary) unmatched competitive advantage.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#135

Post by bobsam »

valuearb wrote: post #131
bobsam wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It historically enabled features (sealed batteries) that Windows didn't, that provided better performance. You are saying this as it was an undisputed fact. Which is the exact issue OP pointed at.

Sealed batteries are the reason I switched to Mac laptops. I used to carry an extra battery with my top of line dell laptop to make it through a flight. Then i read about the amazing battery life MacBooks were offering and switched and was able to make it through a single flight without every charging a backup battery again. It wasn't just sealed batteries, but they offer better performance because they can better cu…

I am sorry, you are missing the point. Your anecdata doesn't make a fact, neither does your perception. This is what OP was trying to get across.

I switched from a white MacBook to black Asus many years ago. The former lasted 6 hours while the replacable battery of the Asus lasted 9-11 hours.

Now I don't go around claiming Asus is better than apple, replacable is better than sealed or that black is better than white as it was a universal fact.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#136

Post by dragonwriter »

johncolanduoni wrote: post #26
Devid2014 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Apple may be a de facto monopolist for most of the world" May this is how some peoples from USA see Apple ? But here in EU Apple is just another smartphone vendor and most peoples are using Android.

AFAICT they're not a monopoly here either; most of the numbers I see are in the neighborhood of 40%.

Monopoly isn't defined by marketshare in some descriptive category, it's defined by market (pricing) power. If you have that's you have a monopoly (which makes sense, because that means that even if there are participants in the same descriptive category, you empirically are not competing with them for sales.)

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#138

Post by kcorbitt »

valuearb wrote: post #125
petra wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Branding isn't the sole reason for Apple's success. But it is probably an important one. As for the general power of branding: many commodity like products make lots of money through branding, be in the fields of luxury or fashion.

Yea, I don't think you understand branding. Branding is the power a product gets from fulfilling it's promise to consumers. Example: Coca-Cola. People don't buy Coke because advertising tells them to, people buy Coke because advertising reminds them to. Coke has a strong brand because Coke consumers prefer it's taste. Numerous taste tests have shown this. Sam Walton spent millions on a better tasting drink than Coke,…

> Numerous taste tests have shown this. Sam Walton spent millions on a better tasting drink than Coke, proved it was better in every taste test, and Walmart's coke bombed when it was released despite a heavy marketing push and excellent product placement. It bombed because despite the results of taste-tests, customers had developed an affinity for Coca-Cola.

Wait... this seems like evidence for the exact inverse of your thesis. If a better-tasting product comes on the market, for cheaper, with reasonable marketing, and still bombs, it sure seems like the value of the brand has become disconnected from the innate quality of the product.

Obviously, branding alone won't sustain a terrible product. But no one here was arguing that.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#139

Post by shmerl »

eridius wrote: post #133
shmerl wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is normal competition considered not sustainable, and lock-in is viewed as a norm? Lock-in should never be a norm. Apple and MS are just too used to be monopolists and can't stand fair competition.

Lock-in is a natural consequence of having a platform. It's perfectly normal and happens without even making any explicit attempt at having lock-in. Any time you provide a platform and people build on top of it, you have automatic lock-in. This has nothing to do with "fair competition".

Lock-in can be avoided, if platform is designed to be open. It's only "natural" when non portable or non standard things are used. Problem with Apple and MS is that they use the later on purpose.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#140

Post by bonzini »

tuna-piano wrote: post #57
skdotdan wrote: post #53

The problem with many tech analysts is that they are Apple fanboys without even knowing that they are. Stating that Microsoft Surface and Samsung S8 are not competitors of Apple just because their products don't run Mac OS/iOS is pure fanaticism at the very least. Nevertheless, I find that the main point of the article is right. But Apple's China problem is also a very important problem for Google (actually, it's wor…

I actually think the author has a good point. When the owner of an iPhone wants a new phone, they overwhelmingly buy an iPhone. The author makes the point, and I agree, that it is because of the iOS software and not the iPhone hardware. iOS users already have made investments in iOS apps, talk to their friends using iMessage, and are used to the look and feel of the OS. If these users could buy a Samsung phone with i…

It is neither because of the software not because of the hardware; it's because of the brand recognition, which is obviously higher for Apple than for Samsung or Nexus.

It's the same for cars; I wouldn't be surprised if VW or Mercedes or even Toyota are able to keep more customers than Renault or Fiat, just because the "faithful Mercedes customer" is a thing that people talk about and the "faithful Renault customer" is not.

Post reply on HN