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

31–40 of 190 posts

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#31

Post by archvile »

Devid2014 wrote: post #10
staticelf wrote: post #2

> None of that lock-in exists in China: Apple may be a de facto monopolist for most of the world, but in China the company is simply another smartphone vendor, and being simply another smartphone vendor is a hazardous place to be. Don't get that part. I live in Europe and sure a lot of people has an iPhone but I believe strongly that more people have an Android. Doesn't Android have like 80% or more of the world mark…

"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.

Even in the US they are less than 50% smartphone marketshare, and about 10% desktop/laptop marketshare - hardly a monopoly. They just have huge profit margins which explains their buckets of cash.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#32

Post by anjc »

> hardware differentiated by software such that said hardware can be sold with a margin much greater than nominal competitors running a commodity operating system.

Apple's hardware is not differentiated by software. Their creaking software is an ancillary requirement to use their excellent hardware. If their software was their differentiator then Hackintosh's would be more widely used. Secondly, OSX is a commodity operating system. Non-commodity operating systems would be things like VOS.

> The functionality is mostly the same, and if users value a sustainable advantage in the user experience Apple deserves the profits — and power — that follow.

Sorry to be a dickhead but you shouldn't throw terms like "sustainable advantage" around like they're literal terms, when they have a very precise meaning in literature and research going back nearly half a century. Sustained Advantage specifically relates to Corporate Strategy and industry competition and is completely unrelated to user experience and whether or not a company "deserves" profits; advantage in an industry implies value accrual regardless of whether it's deserved or not. Nice UX might arise from functional level strategies, which arise from business level strategies, but otherwise they're unrelated concepts and it's not something the user should be aware of.

Misuse of terms leads to them being confusing and meaningless (e.g. Disruption).

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#33

Post by naskwo »

imron wrote: post #30
staticelf wrote: post #2

> None of that lock-in exists in China: Apple may be a de facto monopolist for most of the world, but in China the company is simply another smartphone vendor, and being simply another smartphone vendor is a hazardous place to be. Don't get that part. I live in Europe and sure a lot of people has an iPhone but I believe strongly that more people have an Android. Doesn't Android have like 80% or more of the world mark…

> but I believe strongly that more people have an Android. If you go by people, Android has more market share. If you go by profit, iOS has more market share. https://www.macrumors.com/2017/03/07/apple-global-smartphone... > None of that lock-in exists in China This is true. If all your friends and family use iMessage and PhotoStream, then once you start using that too it creates lock-in specifically tied to software…

Try www.famipix.com - we'll be launching a React Native app (iOS & Android) soon, for platform-independent, no BS photo sharing.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#34

Post by Boothroid »

iplaw wrote: post #17
ganfortran wrote: post #3

Don't forget that China has biggest and most competitive smartphone market in the world, both in specs and price. iPhone is kinda underwhelming in the past year.

Too bad the phones from ZTE, Huawei, OnePlus, Xiaomi, etc generally suffer from horrendous build quality. From my experience, even their flagship devices feel more like a toy and less like an actual phone. The iPhone and Galaxy, and perhaps a few one offs from other companies, set build quality and craft benchmarks.

I have a ZTE and whilst it doesn't have the build quality of the more expensive brands, I would in no way describe it as horrendous. It functions amazingly well for a phone costing £90, and at that price if it goes pop I don't really care.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#35

Post by ForrestN »

anjc wrote: post #32

> hardware differentiated by software such that said hardware can be sold with a margin much greater than nominal competitors running a commodity operating system. Apple's hardware is not differentiated by software. Their creaking software is an ancillary requirement to use their excellent hardware. If their software was their differentiator then Hackintosh's would be more widely used. Secondly, OSX is a commodity op…

While you may find it creaking, myself and many other people find the experience of using Apple software far better than any competing systems. I wouldn't work somewhere that asked me to use Windows. For me, and maybe I'm overly aesthetically sensitive, it would make my day to day life much worse. This is just to say that the authority with which you dismiss Apple's software as a point of differentiation is probably misplaced.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#36

Post by thogenhaven »

marktangotango wrote: post #9
staticelf wrote: post #2

> None of that lock-in exists in China: Apple may be a de facto monopolist for most of the world, but in China the company is simply another smartphone vendor, and being simply another smartphone vendor is a hazardous place to be. Don't get that part. I live in Europe and sure a lot of people has an iPhone but I believe strongly that more people have an Android. Doesn't Android have like 80% or more of the world mark…

The article contradicts itself; it says there's a problem, but in the long term, that iphone being 'status conferring' will ultimately prevail, meaning nullify the "problem", not become dominant necessarily: > iPhone users very rarely switch to Android, while a fair number of Android users switch to iPhone, which means that even in a saturated market Apple’s share should grow over time. > And to be sure, an iPhone is…

Isnt the first point about Apple's global marketshare, and the second about China in particular?

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#37

Post by dilemma »

xiaq wrote: post #18
dilemma wrote: post #6

The real problem for Apple in China is that their brand simply isn't as strong as it is in the US. It has nothing to do with WeChat.

I agree with the first part, but the article has a point on WeChat. It is a very good example of how app vendors have stronger brands while smartphones are seen as commodities in China.

No, the article contradicts itself and makes an incorrect claim. First, it says that iPhones are bought as statement pieces, ie their hardware. Then, it says iPhones aren't as popular in China because Androids can use WeChat too. These are incompatible claims.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#38

Post by thogenhaven »

ganfortran wrote: post #3

Don't forget that China has biggest and most competitive smartphone market in the world, both in specs and price. iPhone is kinda underwhelming in the past year.

Thats Ben Thompsons point, right? That being underwhelming on features doesnt matter in any country but China, because Apple has a moat there: iOS. But iOS doesnt matter in China because there is another OS on top of it: WeChat.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#39

Post by tormeh »

So WeChat did what Java couldn't do: Build an abstraction that made OS irrelevant client side. I guess you could say that the browser has done this too, but not fully, I guess.

Re: Apple’s China Problem

#40

Post by thogenhaven »

dilemma wrote: post #37
xiaq wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the first part, but the article has a point on WeChat. It is a very good example of how app vendors have stronger brands while smartphones are seen as commodities in China.

No, the article contradicts itself and makes an incorrect claim. First, it says that iPhones are bought as statement pieces, ie their hardware. Then, it says iPhones aren't as popular in China because Androids can use WeChat too. These are incompatible claims.

Being a statement piece does not necessarily have anything to do with hardware. It's much more about branding.
Post reply on HN