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

181–190 of 190 posts

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#181

Post by echaozh »

echaozh wrote: post #180

There's a question under which people discuss what would happen if WeChat is blocked from AppStore on a Chinese quora like Q&A site Zhihu.[1] Tencent removed a tipping the author feature from WeChat because Apple wanted a share from the tips, which made the blocking worries more realistic than many people may think. The people on Zhihu, possibly the richer and more knowledgeable among the Chinese internet users, supp…

And in China, many iPhone buyers are among the students and blue collar workers who buy it because it's subtly expensive, coming from a foreign country (though assembled in China), and was used by richer people. They don't buy it because it's a good phone, but because it's a luxury.

This is beginning to change, as some Android phones are actually getting more expensive to appeal to their vanity (well, being more expensive is so much easier than the reverse), and they're working on a very appealing feature for the those who mainly use the phone to take selfies and photos of their food: automatically beautification.

Also, it boosts China's computer vision technology as a side effect, which is good for us as well.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#182

Post by tormeh »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #160
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 think you underestimate the degree of vendor lock in Apple has. If you are a heavy user of iMessage, and you are a participant in multiple iMessage group threads, and you switch to Android, you will never be able to participate in those threads again. There's no way to convert an existing iMessafe thread to a hybrid MMS one without getting every participant to delete the old thread and start a new one. Good luck co…

Where do people use iMessage? Do they refuse to be friends with Android users? The whole phenomenon sounds bizarre, like people who only communicate with people using the same carrier or something.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#183

Post by chmaynard »

In China, the most important layer of the mobile software stack is WeChat, not the operating system.

If true, then the next "killer app" is already here. Connie Chan's 2015 article lays out a very convincing case for this claim (http://a16z.com/2015/08/06/wechat-china-mobile-first/). WeChat, or something like it, will soon spread to other markets. Surely, Apple executives understand this and are busy working on an Apple equivalent.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#184

Post by valuearb »

kcorbitt wrote: post #138
valuearb wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 y…

If you think about it, it's not. Coke has a great brand because their products pleased consumer expectations, just like Apple. Cokes brand is so good people won't switch even if given a potentially better product, because Coke has always tasted good to them, Sams Cola might not.

There is a significant difference between Apple and Coke. You always buy Macs because they are better for your workflow and find the experience delightful. That makes you usually want to replace one with another. You then have a bad experience with a Mac purchase. You now are far less likely to trust Apple and the Mac when you make your next of purchase.

Coke doesn't suffer the same problem. The joy of its purchase is the consistency of the experience, it's always the same. You know it will never disappoint that taste desire. That's why Coke never ever allows its bottlers to vary the formula even minutely. That way They can never lose your trust. If you drink it from fountain dispensers, your experience is less consistent, making that a more challenging market fir them.

So yes Apple is helped by branding. But like all great brands, Apples brand was built from product excellence, not advertising. Advertising is just a reminder or purchase trigger for the good feelings you already have for the brand.

"Yea, those AirPods look cool, that reminds me I wanted a pair because I expect them to work really well. I should do that now"

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#185

Post by valuearb »

panzer_wyrm wrote: post #128
valuearb wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think status is why Apple succeeds, you don't really understand the PC or smartphone markets.

For apple to succeed they have to actually make good devices. There comes a breaking point at which platform is abandoned en masse. Lets call it the lotus excel inflection. Or myspace facebook. While apple had the best hardware untill 2014 I feel they are slipping behind. Two more generations and the iphone system dying overnight is not unthinkable if they dig deeper into mediocrity.

I agree with this. Their entire business model is built on providing a premium experience and value to customers who value that. If customers don't see premium value from their devices, the brand will be tarnished and customers will leave.

But so far I only see it happening in Macs.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#186

Post by valuearb »

bobsam wrote: post #135
valuearb wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

They haven't made a white MacBook in a very long time.

At the time I made my switch, a MacBook Pro lasted 7 hours, my Dell with very similar configuration lasted 4.5 hours. There were numerous technical discussions about how custom sealed batteries could provide more density in the same or smaller space. But their problem was they weren't usable because they typically lost capacity after a years worth of charge cycles, so no one could figure out why Apples didn't. Until they realized MacOS had special conditioning software in it.

And while today's laptops have roughly reached battery life parity, for years MacBooks were indisputably the best at it. Look it up, the facts are out there.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#187

Post by erikpukinskis »

tormeh wrote: post #182
erikpukinskis wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you underestimate the degree of vendor lock in Apple has. If you are a heavy user of iMessage, and you are a participant in multiple iMessage group threads, and you switch to Android, you will never be able to participate in those threads again. There's no way to convert an existing iMessafe thread to a hybrid MMS one without getting every participant to delete the old thread and start a new one. Good luck co…

Where do people use iMessage? Do they refuse to be friends with Android users? The whole phenomenon sounds bizarre, like people who only communicate with people using the same carrier or something.

It's random... if you have three friends who happen to all have iPhones, that thread will be iMessage only forever. If one of the participants has an Android, it will use MMS. I've been in friend circles where people were using mostly iPhones.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#188

Post by probe »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #187
tormeh wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do people use iMessage? Do they refuse to be friends with Android users? The whole phenomenon sounds bizarre, like people who only communicate with people using the same carrier or something.

It's random... if you have three friends who happen to all have iPhones, that thread will be iMessage only forever. If one of the participants has an Android, it will use MMS. I've been in friend circles where people were using mostly iPhones.

Same in my social circle - in fact if someone is on Android, we hate using text in general and go straight to FB messenger (or GroupMe depending on the size, but less so recently).

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#189

Post by probe »

valuearb wrote: post #184
kcorbitt wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 y…

If you think about it, it's not. Coke has a great brand because their products pleased consumer expectations, just like Apple. Cokes brand is so good people won't switch even if given a potentially better product, because Coke has always tasted good to them, Sams Cola might not. There is a significant difference between Apple and Coke. You always buy Macs because they are better for your workflow and find the experie…

I agree with your point, but would add the nuance of "how much do you actually care?". Humans use heuristics (aka rules of thumb) to answer questions that don't really matter as much, ex "what should I drink". Coke has become that rule of thumb, you don't want to spend extra bandwidth thinking of an inconsequential decision.

This is NOT true for questions where there is a bigger consequence. I feel one is much more rational in those decisions (you carefully consider multiple choices when purchasing a phone, car, etc.) This means there is a greater opportunity of disruption because your brand, while still very important, is not the main differentiation anymore and is not the "rule of thumb".

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#190

Post by thaumasiotes »

davidf18 wrote: post #68

In the US at least, most of the phone is paid for by monthly installments as part of the plan so a phone which might sell for nearly $1K elsewhere appears to cost only $200 here. That has helped Apple immensely. For my needs living in NYC with tall buildings, with need for good signal, voice quality, I use yearly iPhone upgrade on Verizon network. Verizon buys the $1K iPhone and I pay them back at less than $1.50 per…

> I use yearly iPhone upgrade on Verizon network. Verizon buys the $1K iPhone and I pay them back at less than $1.50 per day

The math here doesn't work. One year ("yearly upgrade") at $1.50 / day means you're paying Verizon back less than $600 for a $1000 phone. Assuming, of course, that a year is less than 400 days.

Post reply on HN