iPhone versus Android.
As Google's open-source Android operating system has gained market share recently, iPhone OS has come under fire for not offering some of the features that Android does.
One of those features is multitasking. The average phone consumer might not care about multitasking per se. But I'd bet that same consumer would like to play music from Pandora at the same time they're browsing the Web or checking messages in Mail. So iPhone OS 4.0 can do a kind of multitasking.
Apple has also been criticized for acting as gatekeeper of the App Store, deciding which apps will and won't be sold. Android Market allows third-party developers to post their applications without prior approval. At the iPhone 4.0 event, fobs said that Apple's policy isn't going to change.
I think Apple would rather be seen as a heavy-handed arbiter than as the purveyor of a product that runs bad stuff. Losing control of the App Store would be tantamount to losing control of the iPhone end-user experience. And if you haven't noticed, Apple does not like to give up control.
Apple versus Google.
Apple lobbed another bomb at Google at the iPhone 4.0 event. The new OS supports iAd, a technology that will allow developers to embed ads in their apps. It's a direct threat to Google and other mobile ad networks.
Not surprisingly, the iAd announcement was greeted with hysterical predictions about the coming ad-filled-app apocalypse. (Lots of apps already have ads, if you haven't noticed.) But Apple is hoping to leverage the economics of the App Store to revolutionize mobile advertising, in much the same way that Google revolutionized Web advertising.
Apple versus Adobe.
Shortly after the iPhone 4.0 event, it was revealed that new iPhone Software Developer Kit guidelines ban applications developed with tools not approved by Apple. That change was seen as a poke in Adobe's eye. Adobe's new CS5 software suite includes the ability to compile iPhone versions of Flash apps.
Apple doesn't want Flash-created apps on the App Store for a simple reason: They could turn the iPhone into just another mobile platform. If developers can create an app once and then compile it to run on any smartphone, they might stop making native iPhone apps.
That might sound good if you sell Flash development tools. But it's not good if you're a discriminating user or if you own a smartphone platform. Apple wants iPhone apps to feel like they were made just for the iPhone. It doesn't want App X for iPhone to be indistinguishable from App X for Android.
No Surprises.
Apple's machinations have prompted some to complain that they're now disillusioned with the company. I think that's absolutely appropriate; I don't necessarily agree with all of Apple's strategic moves myself. But I think I understand them.
Apple is neither a charity nor a public utility. It's a profit-making corporation. Yes, under Jobs's guidance, its mission is to make innovative, exquisitely designed products--but those products must make money.
Much of the criticism of Apple's strategic moves actually stems from the attraction people feel for those products: When the desire to use Apple's products meets distaste for Apple's corporate moves, there's frustration.
Not only can Apple not please everyone, it's not remotely interested in doing so. When you're successful, your competitors take notice and react. In the last few years, many companies have been noticing and reacting. As the iPhone 4.0 event showed, Apple's management is moving aggressively to gain competitive advantage. Whether those moves are the right ones remains to be seen. But I don't think there's any mystery as to why Apple's making them.
No comments:
Post a Comment