41–50 of 117 posts
The interesting thing about this is that the original iPhone was barely something that could be called a success. It sold 6.1 Million phones over 5 quarters. The recent launch was 9 Million in 3 days. They sold 50% more phones in a weekend than they did in 450 days. Reports of Apple's death are exaggerated I think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 better product is one the public can imagine. 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.
Apple was always biding their time, waiting for the right moment for a giant leap forward in consumer satisfaction to become possible; it's the opposite of the incrementalism of the usual disruptive product.
Few companies would consider such an approach because it seems to be a much, much bigger risk, leaping so far forward in consumer satisfaction that you are practically creating a new market.
But there is an enormous leverage opportunity created when you take this approach:
A visionary new product can generate a lot of marketing leverage from a strong sales pitch. It really is better. Using a strong sales pitch for an established "me too" product doesn't generate a lot of marketing leverage. And Apple had the head visionary as head salesperson.
The flip side of the potential sales pitch leverage is that the product can likely only be sold via strong sales pitch. It's too new.
So the best positioned company to take advantage of the strong selling opportunities of the Apple approach is one with a strong brand as an innovator. Upstarts or stodgy old companies won't know how to really pitch the product compellingly, or will be at too large a disadvantage from their non-existent/badly matched brand.
I worry that Apple with Jobs gone will forget to sell their next big innovation strongly enough, and will just rely on their existing customer base and strong brand. It will probably only work well the first time (existing huge base/incredible brand).
I say "I worry" because I want Apple to continue creating products that are great leaps forward, and I don't think they can do so perpetually without acknowledging the huge role that a really strong sales pitch plays in the success of such products.
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 unlimited (even tho 2G) data plan was price-disruptive. Verizon wanted to charge me $45/mo for data for my Treo (again 2G/1xRTT). 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.
>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…
I spend time in both countries you mention and couple more in Asia. Local OEMs are calling the shots because market as a whole is growing. But, the smarter OEMs realize that they have to make phones that are less shoddy. That is why you see brands like Oppo. What I have seen in the last couple of years is that as people get busier, they don't have time or patience to handle rubbish phones. They will not mind spending more money to get an iPhone or a Mac. Many analysts in the west try to say something like we Asians buy these gadgets as a status symbol. It might be true to a certain extent, but more people are getting them these because they are tired of cheap and crappy devices.
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…
Google Glass is, ideally, the new smartphone. In the sense that it could change how people interact with the world in much the same way that smartphones did, but at the next level. A more personal, immediate level. It's not just a smartphone stuck on your face. It's your constant link to all the information you need.
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…
What is Google Glass disrupting? Everything. There's never been a portable computing platform as aggressive in integrating with the physical (albeit visual) environment before. It will make what mobile disruption did to desktop computing look like what electronic typewriters did to their mechanical predecessors. Anything that people currently use their eyes for can and probably will be disrupted. Shopping : price com…
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…
1) I'm not smart enough to guess on that one. 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 astronomic…
(4) will happen, but I think the scope is far too small; again it also has the blinders that does not take advantage of the key insight from the article. With 3D printers, you wouldn't buy products off of Amazon so much as buy licenses to fabrication blueprints to print out a product in your garage, similar to the way you can now buy ebooks, digital music, and digital movies from Amazon without the physical product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A better product is one the public can imagine. 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.
This does not seem in line with the understanding of the word used in The Innovator's Dilemma , the book that popularized the word in a business sense. Guyzero's response above matches much more closely to it.
I can go into detail, but the standard ideas for Disruption tend to be technical in nature whereas the iPhone was a profound multi-faceted assault on the world. There are so many elements of this attack, it's hard to know where to begin, but it was certainly more than just a newfound set of components (a lot of the iPhones physical technology was not new).
But, I hear and agree with your point. Guyzero makes a great post above and it's certainly worth reading :).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A better product is one the public can imagine. 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.
This does not seem in line with the understanding of the word used in The Innovator's Dilemma , the book that popularized the word in a business sense. Guyzero's response above matches much more closely to it.