Journal: Apple TV Will Be Apple's Downfall Company 'Preoccupied With Strategy,' Not Products Predicting Apple's downfall certainly isn't new, and more than a few people have been proven wrong by the company's repeated, stellar successes. But with Steve Jobs gone, the iPhone 5 seen as a timid step by many, the recent iOS 6 maps fiasco, and the company embroiled in patent assaults across the globe -- predictions of Apple's slide have obviously now reached a fevered pitch. The Wall Street Journals's Holman Jenkins is the latest, arguing in a sometimes-coherent screed that Apple's shift from designing great products -- to strategy assaults that leave the company swimming upstream -- are the first chink in the company's armor: For entirely different reasons, though, the map mess demonstrates why circumstances are turning against Apple's current business model. Simply, content is king again. However much it might benefit Apple's business model to force users to patronize its own maps app, the company won't get far in trying to deny them Google's far superior app. Apple for a while managed to tame the power of content and make it subservient, but that day is coming to an end. Jenkins goes on to point out how Apple has run into a brick wall when it comes to attempts to revolutionize a legacy TV sector -- their biggest potential growth market. That's not uncommon since everybody else has too -- cable TV fights tooth and nail against outside innovation using everything from licensing and bandwidth caps to paywalls. People have repeatedly insisted that Apple will somehow be the one to finally force television's evolution, but even the Cupertino wunderkind hasn't been able to crack that nut. Jenkins argues that Apple is going to "fail to make the turn" needed to ever make it happen, and that's going to mean a slide into the toilet. Or something: Apple will have to change too. To maintain its position, the company will have to focus more on giving its devices superb access to content it doesn't control and hasn't approved. Can Apple CEO Tim Cook and company make the turn? Two years ago, in a column on the Microsofting of Apple, we noted that a company preoccupied with products was in danger of becoming a company preoccupied with "strategy"—which we defined as zero-sum maneuvering versus hated rivals. All great innovators ultimately become monsters focused more on anti-competitive turf protection than innovation, and to predict this really is no great accomplishment. It will happen (already is happening) to Google and Apple just as it did to Microsoft and countless others before them, and it's not really a question of if as it is a matter of when. Of course Jenkins also predicted Apple's demise two years ago and the company has continued to thrive. Apple has a pesky habit of being adaptable and surprising despite the occasional bone-headed blunder. Does it matter if television is too high of a hurdle?
|
 Anzio
join:2008-11-22
Canada
3 edits | "Oh no, Apple is dying" Really? :| | |
|  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: "Oh no, Apple is dying" Netcraft confirms it! | |
| | Reviews:
 ·Time Warner Cable
 ·Verizon FiOS
 ·voip.ms
| ATV is locked down to the hilt. If they opened it up to stream non Apple content (like local DLNA), it would be a winner because you could always buy fresh content from itunes.
With these new "sticks" they can plug ATV into a USB stick and voila, you get the apple experience on a Samsung TV-- I s**t you not.
Now Verizon, ATT, Comcast, etc per se doesn't like that because they are a commodity they just erect walls to make it difficult but in the end do their moderately integrated DVR and boxes really make them special, no. Sure I hear they are redboxing it, but boring. The rest goes for the telco's.
Tivo out of all of the companies is the biggest failure. They had a decade head start and to this day they have no concept of a master/slave relationship. Instead they sit back and roll in patent funds and wallow around. One of the biggest tech flame outs in history. Apple on the other hand, mints cash...bigtime.
The only industry innovation in the last 30 years is skipping commercials and that gets stomped on all the time. If you look at a DVR, all it really is, is a VCR on a hard drive. I could turn off my VCR though, and save the wattage... Now one can say we went from dialup to broadband, but I will say that when they aren't charging AOL-like extortion prices for something that costs pennies to deliver.
Apple and Google will eventually filter onto your TV--and maybe MSFT. I'm waiting for my xbox to do something magical here. The TV makers have shown zero real interest in integrating content on the TV, so let them make their 12% and move on. | |
| | |  LightSPremium
join:2005-12-17
Greenville, TX | Re: "Oh no, Apple is dying" This... is one of the best thing I've read in a long time. Well said, sir. | |
|
|  r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
 ·row44
·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| I dont think this is true.
Unless majority of consumers get technologically smart apple will always exist. Apple is the old persons smart phone.
The Iphone/Ipad is a niche market of lacking features smart people use, but technologicaly dumb cannot understand.
These features are USB file transfer, directory structure file management, command line, proper web browser, support for flash, drag and drop files, connecting to usb devices like cameras, have mutliple applications on the screen, drag and drop between applications, built in memory slot, possible ethernet adaptor, etc.
The lack of utility is designed to be as simple as possible for computer illiterate people. As long as the computer illiterate group has money apple will always exist.
Apple could easily adapt by giving iphone and Ipad users the option to load a touch screen optimized osx that can run all osx programs on it.
If apple made a few hardware changes like sd card slot and haveing some kind of usb port adaptor with allowing installation of osx the Ipad could actually be worth $500+ dollars and become the best tablet out there.
It would also be nice if they did wireless charging like with the HP touchpad.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr. | |
| | |  GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:20 | Re: "Oh no, Apple is dying" Errm, niche market? They've sold almost 400 million iOS devices. How many hundreds of millions of them do they have to sell before it's not a niche market? Some quarters, the iPad outsells all computers sold by any one PC company like Dell or HP...
When you sell that sort of volume at prices similar to the competion, and you've still got two thirds market share, there's a strong argument that you already have the best tablet out there, as far as the market is concerned.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org | |
| | | Reviews:
·Charter
| You are so right. $675B Market Cap. Apple definitely got there by only having computer illiterate people buy their products.
Flash on mobile devices and the HP Touchpad both did so well. And you're right about the world moving away from wireless and back to ethernet too. Lastly your point on having the command line on a 4" device really hit the nail on the head. Bravo sir, you certainly have your finger on the pulse of technology.
I'm sorry - the above is meant to be sarcastic. 2010 called and it would like your post back, please. | |
| | | | |
| | Trying to understand the point of the article. What's the point of the article?
I don't like Apple that much really and I agree that they're mis stepping with the maps and patent nonsense, but I doubt they're sliding quite yet. | |
| |  Woody79_00I run Linux am I still a PC?Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state | Re: Trying to understand the point of the article. Apple is sliding, but not for the reasons mentioned in this article.
They won't lose market share overnight mind you, but i do think Windows Phone 8 will be a worthy competitor, not to mean RIM is getting ready to launch new Blackberry that are Android compatible and can run Android Apps....this will make them a real competitor in the market.
in 3 years Apple won't be the top in the smartphone field anymore...they will still be a major player, they just won't be at the top of the stack. | |
| | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Trying to understand the point of the article. They aren't at the top now. Just like in the MAC days, Android is their Windows. Windows won and now Android won.
Sure, people think Apple is better and maybe it is but so was BetaMax and VHS won because it was good enough and cheaper. It was cheaper because JVC licensed it to multiple manufacturers, just like Android and Windows can be experienced on devices from a variety of manufacturers. Betamax was only Sony and Apple is only Apple.
Sony learned from this mistake and BluRay won because they licensed it at a fair price to multiple manufacturers and lobbied movie studios to support it. Was it the best -- doesn't matter because it won. History is written by those who win!
When I was in high school I did OK in history but I always wondered why it was part of the curriculum. Older and wiser, I now understand that history is one of the more important subjects because if we understand it, we can learn from it and not repeat past mistakes. | |
| | | | AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | Re: Trying to understand the point of the article. This assumes the only way to "win" is to have a higher market share - which clearly is not the case. Even if it were, no single Android manufacturer on a single product family has a marketshare that comes anywhere close to the iPhone. Not an Apple lover, but we have to look at this objectively. | |
| | | |  Link LoggerPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
Calgary, AB
kudos:3 | Apple doesn't care, nor have they ever cared about being #1 in number of products sold, the number they care about is mark-up per product sold which is an area they are clearly #1 in and really it has worked out rather well for them, and it also explains the whole patent thing as well.
--
Vendor: Author of Link Logger which is a traffic analysis and firewall logging tool | |
|
| |  elwoodbluesElwood BluesPremium
join:2006-08-30
HarperLand
·Cybersurf Intern..
| said by Woody79_00:Apple is sliding, but not for the reasons mentioned in this article.
They won't lose market share overnight mind you, but i do think Windows Phone 8 will be a worthy competitor,
Windows phone isn't going anywhere. It like KIN will be an udder failure. There will be products with Windows 8 phone, OS installed, but if they sell is another question.
--
No, I didn't. Honest... I ran out of gas. I... I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake....... | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Trying to understand the point of the article. Give them time, what they've been doing all theses years is learning.. everyone and every company fails one point or another, don't count them out of the mobile area they could change the whole idea of how our phones / tablets / tv / and desktops interact and people would never think anything of it | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Trying to understand the point of the article. said by Cobra11M:Give them time, what they've been doing all theses years is learning.. everyone and every company fails one point or another, don't count them out of the mobile area they could change the whole idea of how our phones / tablets / tv / and desktops interact and people would never think anything of it
Seriously? They have been trying since Windows CE and they STILL keep screwing it up. Microsoft has way too many engineers working on the project and not enough designers who know what the common person wants. That's why Apple does so well with their iPhone. | |
|
| elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | The point of the article is that Apple's hubris will be its end.
While they'll lay claim that Samsung cost them billions for rounded corners, they refuse to acknowledge the true value of content, and the true cost of assured delivery for 2K streams.
Like Google before them, they seem to believe that their "innovation" (2K LED TV with search feature) entitles them to no-cost network privileges, as well as someone else's content.
Apple could actually bring everyone to the table, and induce a fundamental change in the marketplace, but they aren't willing to share the revenue stream or invest in the network.
Jobs would have understood the enormity of the challenge.
The current management does not. | |
| | | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Trying to understand the point of the article. quote:
Apple could actually bring everyone to the table, and induce a fundamental change in the marketplace, but they aren't willing to share the revenue stream or invest in the network.
.
Wrong. Apple's system is a proprietary system, it is not like Microsoft or Google which other vendors are willing to take part of and endorse it. It is just a matter of time before Apple's market share declines and declines real bad. Apple unfortunately will be just a "mortal" company once all of these people that upgrade every version come to their senses and realise that they are being duped, like a friend of mine who upgraded for a family of 8 at the expense of his savings for @ 5 years until he lost he job, now he and his family are homeless. And Apple has his money. In Apple's favour, they already know this hence they are hoarding their cash. They also make good computers. I heard that they were in talks to stop making Apple computers. They do that then they will fall into the Abyss. Iphone, Ipad, and others will decline but people, especially the graphics industry needs their computers. | |
|
 skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
4 edits | Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... ...with ZERO formal business education and certainly ZERO practical experience, particularly in marketing.
Strategy PRECEDES products in marketing dumbass. You think they just shit the iPhone one day? You don't think there were hurdles in marketing, endless hours of planning and strategy? And when they do, do you think they'll clue you in on their progress? Every one of these tech companies has a comprehensive marketing strategy in place for every product they produce, especially Apple. Apple, Google, Samsung, Acer, Asus, Microsoft...NO ONE develops a product and THEN develops a plan to market it. Even R&D programs like Microsoft Surface have EXTENSIVE marketing plans behind them. No one spends that kind of money without some consideration about how to monetize it.
Meanwhile there's virtually no money being spent on Apple TV in terms of their overall spending. The hardware is already engineered, the OS already engineered...both for other platforms. Packaging that hardware and tweaking the software are nothing for a company with a $600B+ market cap and $300K in profit per employee. They can set that money on fire every day and not miss it. They're expected to have $200B in CCE by EOY13.
If the marketing strategy doesn't go as planned, shit happens, but that doesn't mean that strategy didn't exist or even that it wasn't well thought out. And when Apple does work out that strategy and their TV products hit, all of the 2nd run tech companies will copy that winning marketing strategy, right down to the icons, claiming Apple wasn't he first to develop the set-top box or interactive TV and it was all obvious (obvious to everyone after Apple does it).
It's quite unbelievable. The Journal should be embarrassed to have someone so obviously clueless on the payroll. | |
| |  LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... said by skeechan:...with ZERO formal business education and certainly ZERO practical experience, particularly in marketing.
17 yrs on the WSJ Editorial Board would seem to indicate a high degree of knowledge of business processes, negating your ad hominem attack.
You don't think there were hurdles in marketing, endless hours of planning and strategy? And when they do, do you think they'll clue you in on their progress?
--
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-plat···onalism/ | |
| | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
| Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... Watching professional football doesn't make you an expert in professional football, and gives you ZERO insight into future planning by coaches or what play should be run next. Watching Einstein doesn't make you a theoretical physicist. Watching surgeons doesn't make you a doctor. Being a community organizer doesn't make you a chief executive. Doing those things does...except in the case of chief executive where evidently some people are incapable of on-the-job training.
You can watch all day and night and NEVER grasp an understanding of WHY things happen as they do.
Without a formal business education AND experience in business, there is no understanding the fundamentals of marketing, namely that strategy ALWAYS precedes products, PERIOD. And even after products, the strategizing never ends. They're the type of people that buy into a FB IPO. They're the type of people who think the Volt was a great idea not having the foresight to understand why it was a really dumb idea but after the fact point out the obvious...that it was a dumb idea.
Meanwhile where is the zero-sum maneuvering? iOS is still an important platform for Google. Google is default search in iOS and OS X. Apple is still Samsung's LARGEST components customer. Adobe is still a huge vendor for Apple's users (despite keeping flash off iOS). Microsoft sells MS Office for Mac, and Bing is a search choice in OS X. There is no zero-sum maneuvering going on. Apple developed Safari...IE went away from OS X...was that zero-sum maneuvering too? No, this is nonsense.
The article is a mix of horseshit and the obvious...suitable for Cramer's knumbskull audience maybe but the Journal should expect better of editorial writers. | |
| | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... The Volt wasn't a dumb concept. It's too early because we don't yet have the technology to make it cheap enough and go far enough on a charge so it meets most everyone's expectations of a car.
Likewise, Microsoft's Window CE of the 90s and it's touch interface wasn't a dump concept. Microsoft just couldn't see past the Windows Start Menu and a stylus to understand that folks wanted to use their fingers. They also didn't create the hardware and hardware manfucturers were constrainted by costs and available screen/touch technology. | |
| | | | | | | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... said by rradina:The Volt wasn't a dumb concept. It's too early because we don't yet have the technology to make it cheap enough and go far enough on a charge so it meets most everyone's expectations of a car.
Actually, the Tesla S is the Volt done right. But it costs way more than the Volt.
»www.teslamotors.com/models/featu···formance
The Volt would be a better seller if it had a pleasing design - the current version looks like it was designed by a PHB. | |
| | | | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... The Volt would be better if it didn't cost almost $90K per unit to produce while selling for about 1/3 that. | |
|
| | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 | They're wrapping $50K around every car...
It was BEYOND a stupid concept. | |
| | | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... Regarding cost, isn't that what I said captian obvious? | |
| | | | | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
| Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... Oh, yeah, other than losing a shitload of money on it and making a car NO ONE WANTS all while being bankrupt and needing tens of billions from the taxpayers via the Bank of China, it was a great idea.
Evidently someone has to point out the obvious from time to time because the obvious is beyond the grasp of some people. Too bad no one pointed it out to GM executives...or they did and were ignored which would explain at great deal about why Gov't Motors is an epic failure and is still in hock to back-broken taxpayers to the tune of $40 billion with zero prospect of paying it back. | |
| | | | | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... So tell us more, oh captain, about the Nissan Leaf or the all-electric version of the Prius. Are they all stupid too or when they were giving out brains, was GM the only one holding the door? | |
| | | | | | | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
3 edits | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... While Toyota and Nissan aren't bankrupt, those two are also STUPID money losing ideas, but not nearly as stupid as a bankrupt company living off the taxpayers doing it. Nissan, like Gov't Motors loses a fortune on each unit sold and because no one wants them, they, like GM, Nissan are now resorting to even HIGHER per unit losses to spur sales by cutting prices. I guess they were absent on the day they taught how economies of scale work. You can't wrap $50K around a car and make it up in sales volume...you just lose more $50Ks that way. There is no demand to support an economy of scale that would support this dumb idea and they're dumb for not realizing it before they started.
Doubling down on dumb ideas is yet another dumb idea to add to their long list of dumb ideas. And the only thing dumber than making one of these disasters is actually buying one. | |
| | | | | | | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... Any links that show how much money all of them are losing on electric cars? Where's the source of this information about how much money everyone is losing? | |
| | | | | | | | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
4 edits | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... »www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/···20120910
GM tries to dispute, amortizing development costs over the entire life of the program, however due to low demand they're having to constantly idle the plant and offer even heavier discounts...there is no "entire life" of the program at the rate they're going. They can't sell what they're currently making without wrapping even more money around the car including taxpayer money. Imagine how many fewer they will sell when Government Motors isn't able to fleece the taxpayers for 1/4 of the sticker price and fewer still as more competitors enter the market with their failed-before-launch products.
And by no "entire life" I mean that competitors will compel government motors to do another redesign of the car LONG before the development costs can be recouped. The current model isn't selling and they're having to cut prices so sharply there isn't margin left to pay off the development costs. Obviously they can't sell the current model as is forever, like all models they need constant refreshing to keep up with competitors and that is also expensive.
And it's an even dumber idea to buy one
Cruze Eco, $22000 (with navigation and auto trans at Cars Direct daut kaum) and $1800/yr to drive
Volt, $33000 even after taxpayer subsidizing (which isn't up front you pony all $40K up front and get a tax credit thanks to other taxpayers come April 15th) + $650/yr to drive if you only drive your 20 miles at a pop (no gas ever ever)
$33000 - $22000 = $11000 premium for the Volt over a nicely optioned Cruze Eco. But the Volt does save you $1150 a year in energy supposedly. If you never put a drop of gas in it you can JUST break even if you drive it for about 9.5 years assuming you never have to replace the battery pack or anything. Oh and that battery pack, even with advancement is expected to cost over $2500 in 2025, even without considering inflation which given Fed debt monetization isn't looking so good going forward. Don't consider the taxpayers are paying for $7000 of that and you can tack on another 6+ years to break even. I don't know about you, but I don't drive cars for 10-20 years.
Government motors loses a fortune on the car. Consumers lose a fortune on the car. The car is a REALLY stupid idea from start to finish.
But if you still think it's a great idea, that's okay. | |
|
| | |  ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3 | said by skeechan:Apple developed Safari.
Yeah...we try and not tell anyone that. | |
| | | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... It's better than IE ever thought of being. | |
| | | | | | ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3 | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... said by skeechan:It's better than IE ever thought of being.
*shrugs* I can at least navigate to sites with IE. For whatever reason Safari always made my usual sites vomit and become non functional.
Though, your best bet today is to ditch both of those and use Firefox, Opera, or Chrome. | |
| | | | | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 | Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... No thanks, I need a browser that doesn't render like dog poopy...which means webkit and I'm content with Safari although Chrome would be tolerable if I had need of an alternative, which I don't. | |
|
| | AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | said by Linklist:17 yrs on the WSJ Editorial Board would seem to indicate a high degree of knowledge of business processes, negating your ad hominem attack. Understanding a process is not the same as successfully executing a strategy - he's making a guess just like any other poster on this thread. | |
| | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
| Re: Holman Jenkins is a NOBODY... ...or even understanding the concept of marketing strategy. The Journal should only hire journalists with strong business credentials so that they have a snowball's chance of actually understanding the subject about which they write, especially when it comes to editorializing. To editorialize at all one must have strong knowledge about the subject otherwise it's just dung flung on a wall.
Hard news is a different animal than editorializing. There you need someone with investigative skill, but this an editorial written by someone with no clue. | |
|
|  Jodokast96Stupid people really piss me off.Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
kudos:2 | said by skeechan:Strategy PRECEDES products in marketing dumbass. You think they just shit the iPhone one day? You don't think there were hurdles in marketing, endless hours of planning and strategy? And when they do, do you think they'll clue you in on their progress? Every one of these tech companies has a comprehensive marketing strategy in place for every product they produce, especially Apple. Apple, Google, Samsung, Acer, Asus, Microsoft...NO ONE develops a product and THEN develops a plan to market it. Even R&D programs like Microsoft Surface have EXTENSIVE marketing plans behind them. No one spends that kind of money without some consideration about how to monetize it.
Guess you never heard of Pentax then, huh?  | |
|
robo74
join:2003-10-23
Harvard, IL
kudos:1 | Yawn You would think Apple could come up with a solid product(s) that would sell like 5 million within a few days and make lots of profit...maybe they could call it the iPhone or something.
But they wouldnt do that, or else they would be a solid company with shares hitting $500.... they could only dream....
They call it "opinion" for a reason.
Now back to reality folks... | |
| Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
| DBS the last innovator the CATV Industry allowed! Direct Broadcast Satellite was the last video entertainment service the CATV Industry allowed access to programming. That was before the CATV industry realized DBS would become a competitor rather then being an alternate delivery method to customers the CATV industry did not want to spend the money to serve. When DBS was introduced the CATV industry had already bought off most developers and city governments to prohibit the installation of any satellite antenna. If the CATV industry had any idea that the FCC would eventually would declare invalid any policies, rules or regulations prohibiting the installation of satellite antennas under One Meter, the CATV industry would have blocked Direct Broadcast Satellite access to programming.
Once subscribers had access to DBS they dumped crappy 55 channel analog CATV in favor of 200 channel DBS. The CATV industry was forced to spend money instead of hording it and develop Digital Cable in order to compete with DBS. The CATV industry learned their lesson and will fight tooth and nail to prevent any alternate innovative access to video entertainment, that might perturb their business model. I hope the management at APPLE or any other potential competitor, does not hold their breath waiting for access to programming. | |
| |  Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | Re: DBS the last innovator the CATV Industry allowed! You're forgetting C-Band Satellite. You could get any channel you wanted.
The reason DBS took off is due to the small dish and stationary position. | |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Apple TV is destine for failure Simply because the content owners are also the delivery. Because there is no real competition in content delivery or production, There is little incentive to follow methods that shake things up.
So while the world is ready, the customer is ready. I figure the owners and the transit being owned by the same parent companies mean that even Apple does not have the power to force the hand of the content companies.
Unless Apple decides to go into the business of content production, Which of course brings one back full circle to the cable issue where the carrier is also the creator.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| NeosumPremium
join:2000-06-03
Oakland, CA | Not this year and probably not next year... With analysts and so-called professionals predicting Apple's downfall every year, eventually they'll be right. Whether that'll happen next year, or 10 years from now still remains to be seen.
Despite the negative press, iphone 5 and ios6 is a success. No matter how people want to look at it, whether they feel it was a sub par upgrade, its sales numbers and upgrades speak for itself. This is why they're called opinions and we all have our own. When Apple starts burying iphones in the Nevada desert, then they'll be in trouble.
--
My blog »writingforprofits.net | |
|  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Despite how big or successful. . . . . you are, go up against legacy VIDEO,,,,, LOSE!
even apple. theres just too much money there! | |
| |
See 8 replies to this post | |
Netkeys
join:2000-12-08
Fort Lauderdale, FL | History will repeat itself Just look at Apple's history.
Get ride of Job's and they slide. Bring back Job's and they succeed.
But as good as Apple might be they can't bring him back this time and the map fiasco shows the writing on the walls. He's gone a month and things are already slipping.
Yes they did sell 5 million Iphone 5 but where experted to sell 6 to 10 so they didn't meet expectations. That's 13 to 50 percent below projections.
It won't happen over night but it will happen as history has shown. | |
| |
See 7 replies to this post | |
| | Even the brilliant can be stupid Steve Jobs was stupid thinking he could do anything with TV. That whole market needs to fail before we see any real change and innovation. As long as TV still has billions of zombies continuing to pay for that crap the entertainment industry doesn't think it has to be priced better, made easily accessible, and innovative. | |
| | AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | Re: Even the brilliant can be stupid said by FLATLINE:Steve Jobs was stupid thinking he could do anything with TV. That whole market needs to fail before we see any real change and innovation. As long as TV still has billions of zombies continuing to pay for that crap the entertainment industry doesn't think it has to be priced better, made easily accessible, and innovative.
... and this post is probably the best description of why Apple has not yet moved aggressively in the "television space" to date. | |
| | | | said by FLATLINE:Steve Jobs was stupid thinking he could do anything with TV. That whole market needs to fail before we see any real change and innovation. As long as TV still has billions of zombies continuing to pay for that crap the entertainment industry doesn't think it has to be priced better, made easily accessible, and innovative.
You are the closest as to the real reason for Apple TV failing.
Look how Apple treated people with iTunes. They demand 30% off the top and tell you what you can sell your content for. Sorry Apple, TV doesn't work that way and since you bullied your way into the music industry, video producers already know your tricks. Think they will play ball by your rules? Not going to happen.
And it doesn't matter if Apple could buy any content company, they still have to deal with the ones they can't buy. | |
|
| | CNN Money & Forbes Both have been saying this since last year. 2012/2013 will be their end. And the problem with Samsung will be the draw, especailly when Samsung wins for their chip. | |
| | AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | Re: CNN Money & Forbes Well, one day they will be making the correct call, nothing lasts forever - I mean, who would have bet 6 years ago RIM would be done for? | |
| | AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | Like Microsoft, Apple is Apple's own worst enemy. Microsoft hasn't been on the decline for years due to outside competitors, including Apple - it's due to internal stagnancy that goes all the way to the top. | |
|
XJakeX
join:2005-03-05
Coventry, RI | Time to sell The potential for growth at Apple is minimal now. Might be time to sell. | |
| | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Time to sell quote:
The potential for growth at Apple is minimal now. Might be time to sell.
.
Not sell, rather short the stock when it falls. All the way to about $60.00. I am waiting patiently for that day, it will make me a lot wealthier than I am right now. Unlike Microsoft which have recurring revenues though their stock price is flat, they still routinely make 10 - 15 billions in profit per quarter, primarily because of Windows and residuals from vendors. Apple makes products, gives them away and that is it. No where in the league as Microsoft. | |
| | | | Maybe if steve jobs was still around ,he would keep apple awesome | |
|
| | FCK the Journal I hate when these newspapers have to exaggerate headlines just to get people to read them and when you really get into the article it's all bullshit.
The iOS Maps isn't a Fiasco like they want to call it. Google is playing hardball with Apple and other companies and it's obvious that Google wants sell and promote its Android platform.
So there's no real headline here, just yellow journalism at its best. | |
|
| |
|
|
