Steve Jobs' Apple displayed a rather fascinating
balance between design and utility. Granted, it
often shifted more toward the design side, which
resulted in problems like Antennagate, but that
tended to happen when Jobs wasn't around. He
made sure the products worked well and looked
good -- he understood the need to do both.
After Jobs left Apple in the 1980s, there were
clearly changes to Apple's products. However, it
wasn't until Windows 95 launched that folks
actually seemed to look at Apple very differently,
and not particularly favorably.
By any financial measure, Tim Cook has been
doing a great job -- but traditional CEOs tend to
work tactically, sacrificing the future to hit ever-
higher present heights until what becomes an
increasingly fragile house of cards comes
crashing down.
Here's a look at what the beautiful Apple Watch
and the sexy new MacBook can tell us about
whether Cook is moving strategically -- like Jobs
did -- or more in line with other Apple CEOs, who
eventually failed.
I'll close with my product of the week -- what is
suddenly a much better deal in smartwatches:
the Fitbit Surge.
The Apple Watch
Apple has been successful largely by bringing out
new standalone products that work in a diverse
ecosystem. The iPod didn't take off until it
interoperated with Windows PCs, and both the
iPhone and the iPad interoperated not only with
Windows PCs, but also with a massive number of
non-Apple Web servers, including Amazon Prime
and Netflix.
The Apple Watch harkens back to the iPod in
that it initially works only with iPhones. (The first
iPod worked only with Macs and didn't sell that
well). What that means is that unlike the other
products, it isn't an ideal way to bring new
customers into the Apple family. They'd have to
buy both the iPhone and the Apple Watch to get
there. That is a significant cost barrier to entry.
Part of the attraction of the iPod, iPhone and
iPad has been that they give status to the user.
Like those who drive premium cars, people who
bring out an Apple product are seen more
favorably, because Apple's brand is connected to
quality products and experiences that it is
assumed smart people want to buy.
However, the Apple Watch carries risks. We
aren't used to seeing people talk to their wrists,
and we're even less used to seeing people
alternate between talking to their wrist and
holding their watch to their ears, as they might
have to in an environment with excessive noise
(like a bar, airport or business conference).
In addition, we've seen people struggle to get
their phones to work with boarding passes and
airport scanners, shrinking or expanding the
image while the TSA or airline employee messes
with the phone. Now imagine what this is going
to look like on a wrist, with all of the people
behind them in line getting increasingly annoyed
and vocal.
Finally, let's take the US$10K Apple Watch.
Unlike a Rolex or other watch in this price range,
this is still a tethered iPod mini on your wrist. It'll
largely be obsolete in 12-24 months. I think the
folks who pay that kind of money are going to
look pretty foolish in that future time frame, even
though I doubt they will see it coming this year in
their rush to buy an exclusive new Apple
product. The funny thing about rich people is
that most get there by not making foolish
choices -- and this one looks really foolish.
Strangely, the cheapest Apple Watch appears to
be the one that gives you the best value. Its
price is more in line with other smartwatches,
making it the smartest version. The lowest-cost
option is also the most like the very focused
iPod, which first showcased Apple's newfound
success around this time last decade. When the
smartest/best product in a luxury line is also the
cheapest, that's good for you -- but typically not
so good for the vendor or the brand.
