11–20 of 117 posts
>The striking thing is how the two companies peaked are almost precisely the same time and how that moment (end of 2010) was not related to the entry timing of their nominal disruptor[iPhone]. Could it be that it was Android that hurt Blackberry and Nokia more than the iPhone did? Low end Android phones definitely replaced a lot of Symbian phones in the marketplace. It would certainly explain the timing of the change…
Finally, someone else who agrees that the iPhone was a disruptive product. It had all of the hallmarks of a disruptive product except for the low price. It appealed to a different set of values (i.e. usability and interface), ignored features that were seen as critical in the existing market of smartphone users (No third-party apps at launch? No copy/paste? No editing of Word documents ?!), and it blindsided the incu…
You already needed to pay for a phone, so the real price compared to a portable was just how much more expensive the iPhone was compared to a standard mobile phone.
Due to the system with 2 year phone contracts in USA, that extra price was low.
Finally, someone else who agrees that the iPhone was a disruptive product. It had all of the hallmarks of a disruptive product except for the low price. It appealed to a different set of values (i.e. usability and interface), ignored features that were seen as critical in the existing market of smartphone users (No third-party apps at launch? No copy/paste? No editing of Word documents ?!), and it blindsided the incu…
Finally, someone else who agrees that the iPhone was a disruptive product. It had all of the hallmarks of a disruptive product except for the low price. It appealed to a different set of values (i.e. usability and interface), ignored features that were seen as critical in the existing market of smartphone users (No third-party apps at launch? No copy/paste? No editing of Word documents ?!), and it blindsided the incu…
[1]'cheap' initial payment with an expensive mobile contract.
Lazaridis saw the iPhone and the Engineer in him went - the battery won't last and it will bring down the AT&T network with its full fledged browser. Ballmer saw the iPhone and laughed at the $500 price. Both did not see the potential from a changing market's standpoint. Battery tech gets better, hardware, networks and OSes get better every year, and the prices can and do fall.
But some of it was inevitable for Blackberry. There really wasn't any differentiation potential left behind for them. iPhone got the smooth, attractive, computer replacement part. Android got the customizable, ubiquitous, many options, open and the "not iPhone" part. There just wasn't any way for BB to differentiate and win. They could've had a perfectly smooth touch optimized OS with great BB hardware, security suite and BBM etc. and even then their target market would still be limited.
The only way they could've saved themselves was if they had innovated ahead of time. After the iPhone and Android it was game over for them.
Finally, someone else who agrees that the iPhone was a disruptive product. It had all of the hallmarks of a disruptive product except for the low price. It appealed to a different set of values (i.e. usability and interface), ignored features that were seen as critical in the existing market of smartphone users (No third-party apps at launch? No copy/paste? No editing of Word documents ?!), and it blindsided the incu…
It HAD lower price: it disrupted the portable computers which were more expensive at that time. You already needed to pay for a phone, so the real price compared to a portable was just how much more expensive the iPhone was compared to a standard mobile phone. Due to the system with 2 year phone contracts in USA, that extra price was low.
The disruption in the iPhone was technical, social, political and economic.
[0] http://reviews.cnet.com/smartphones/at-t-8525/4505-6452_7-32...
Finally, someone else who agrees that the iPhone was a disruptive product. It had all of the hallmarks of a disruptive product except for the low price. It appealed to a different set of values (i.e. usability and interface), ignored features that were seen as critical in the existing market of smartphone users (No third-party apps at launch? No copy/paste? No editing of Word documents ?!), and it blindsided the incu…
I wonder what differentiates a disruptive product from a better product? It seems like the qualities you listed are hallmarks of all good products, right?
A disruptive product is one that the public cannot conceive of, such that its introduction alters the standards in an industry.
A better product is the HTC8525[0] over the HTC8500. A disruptive product is the HTC8525 versus the iPhone.
[0]http://reviews.cnet.com/smartphones/at-t-8525/4505-6452_7-32... - The leading WinMo smartphone in Q4 2006, pre-iPhone.
Finally, someone else who agrees that the iPhone was a disruptive product. It had all of the hallmarks of a disruptive product except for the low price. It appealed to a different set of values (i.e. usability and interface), ignored features that were seen as critical in the existing market of smartphone users (No third-party apps at launch? No copy/paste? No editing of Word documents ?!), and it blindsided the incu…
The iPhone (mandated) plan from AT&T was $20/mo for data, including 200 texts.
Even if I didn't prefer the iPhone, that cost differential was a no-brainer to me.
Ok, if we're using this framework, here are some interesting thought experiments: (1) What is Google Glass disrupting? What are the faulty assumptions about it? ("iPhone was a pocket Mac, not a better phone. Google Glasses is a ____, not a ?") (2) What are the AI / Machine Learning disrupting? (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, IBM, MS) ("AI is a ____, not a ?") (3) What are the Kiva Systems robots disrupting? ("Kiva…
2) Education and reference resources. I now longer have to spend hours and hours looking up information and synthesizing it myself, I can get an AI to do it for me. (crossing fingers that it synthesizes it like I want it to)
3) Thieving, lazy, sloppy warehouse workers (no offense). The amount of stuff that gets stolen and "missing" out of fulfillment centers is astronomical. Plus, it's basically a a task that doesn't require human level intelligence. What do I need to ship? Where is it? Is it in stock?
4) Service Bureaus and Machine Shops. Prototyping physical things is expensive and time consuming and requires lots of skill to do. When making any kind of physical thing, the equivalent of compiling and debugging, is to run off a prototype at a Bureau. It's so onerous a problem that very few organizations even bother to make more than half a dozen physical prototypes of an item before committing to production. In the end, it'll probably just mean more variety of cheap junk we can buy off of Amazon.
Blackberry's was the case of being too much in love with their own beliefs and processes. Also known as inability to adapt to changing circumstances. Microsoft also has those tendencies but they tend to get their act somewhat together even if that's too late. Lazaridis saw the iPhone and the Engineer in him went - the battery won't last and it will bring down the AT&T network with its full fledged browser. Ballmer sa…