[Isu570-f08-rpf] The struggle to compete creating new designs - interesting article - Apple and "the others"

[Alex Simoes]

I think this is a very interesting article as I have always admired Apple
for their intuitive minimalist designs. This article is quick to point out
the success of the iPod in light of competitors (such as Microsoft's Zune)
coming to market and trying to compete directly with similar products, but
I'm not sure this author has investigated all the iPhone's competition.

It is not just Nokia that is coming out with competing touch screen phones,
there is also T-Mobile's G1 that will be running Google's new open OS -
Android. With Apple using a proprietary OS on their iPhone and restricting
many community developed apps, they seem to be shooting themselves in the
foot much the way they did when Windows first came out. Users like options
and with the iPhone, they just may not be getting them. But I guess we'll
see soon enough.

- alex simoes

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Bob Futrelle <bob.futrelle at gmail.com> wrote:

> From
>
> http://www.thomas-fitzgerald.net/2008/10/05/the-rush-to-add-touch-screens-to-cellphones-demonstrates-that-innovation-in-the-industry-is-further-than-ever-behind-apple/
>
> Oct 5, 2008
>
> The Rush to Add Touch Screens to Cellphones Demonstrates That
> Innovation in the Industry is Further Than Ever Behind Apple.
>
> When Apple launched the iPhone nearly two years ago at Macworld Expo
> in San Francisco, Industry insiders and competitors were quick to
> decry the signature feature of Apple's new phone, the use of a
> touchscreen. Until then most touch screen devices had been
> unresponsive and clumsy. With the iPhone Apple showed that this did
> not have to be the case. Fast forward to today, the iPhone has been a
> huge success and every major cellphone manufacturer is rushing to add
> touch screens to their cellphones. An element of fear has gripped the
> massive cellphone industry, that the company they had all ridiculed 18
> moths earlier was quickly becoming a behemoth, and they need to
> counter the Apple juggernaut by taking on the iPhone head on.
> Unfortunately the rushed responses show that the Industry clearly
> doesn't even understand why the iPhone has been such a success.
>
> Case in point, the new Nokia Touch Screen 5800 XpressMusic Phone. What
> Nokia have basically done is shoehorn a touchscreen onto their
> existing symbian mobile platform in the hopes of gaining some momentum
> against Apple. Clearly in Nokia's, as well as most other manufacturers
> eyes, what has made the iPhone successful is that it has a touch
> screen, so If they add a touch screen to their own phones and cram in
> a bunch of other features, then they'll be even more successful,
> right? But matching features hasn't exactly worked for all the iPod
> competitors out there, and now here's a whole new branch of the
> electronics industry lining up to make the same fundamental mistake.
> They are spending billions of dollars / euros / yen to make devices
> that may appear to compete very well with Apple on paper, but when it
> comes to the real world they fail miserably. What makes the iPhone so
> appealing to people is not it's feature list, or even it's design.
> It's the whole package, the synthesis of form and function and that's
> something that, in the twenty first century very few companies outside
> Apple seem to comprehend.
>
> I think for a large portion of the electronics industry, product
> development is broken into three areas. Hardware Design, Engineering
> and Software, and priority is usually in that order. For the vast
> majority of companies these are separate discreet disciplines. For
> most the term "Design" refers to the physical look of the device. For
> Apple, however, the term "Design" is all encompassing. It is, as Steve
> is fond of saying, in their DNA. It permeates all disciplines of
> bringing a product to market, from hardware design to the engineering
> of the electronics to the software that runs on it. For Apple Design
> is not just the look, but the feel, the emotion of a product, the way
> it works and its ease of use. Every aspect is carefully thought out,
> not just in isolation but how it will interact with other aspects of
> the product. The hardware design compliments the software and visa
> versa, and all are given equal priority. In the end it is (most of the
> time) the perfect blend of form and function (occasional bugs aside).
> And unfortunately (for the industry), no one else seems to get that
> concept.
>
> In fact most other companies deride Apple for focussing too much on
> the design of their products. They are stuck in the twentieth century
> view that products are sold based on their spec sheet. That's simply
> not the case any more. The success of the iPod has shown the world
> that an electronics device doesn't have to be a collection of
> disparate functions and features. I think many competitors fail to
> realize this because they think Apple's success is down to dumb luck,
> because Apple doesn't play by the accepted rules of the industry, and
> therefore couldn't possibly be successful.
>
> Out in the real world however, people now realize that form and
> function go hand in hand, that form can be function and function can
> be defined by form. For Apple this has led to unprecedented success
> that continues to confound experts and competitors alike. For everyone
> else it's become a constant struggle to stay relevant with their old
> world views of how the electronics industry should work.
>
> _______________________________________________
> isu570-f08-rpf mailing list
> isu570-f08-rpf at lists.ccs.neu.edu
> https://lists.ccs.neu.edu/bin/listinfo/isu570-f08-rpf
>
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed