Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Why do we always wait for apple's stuff before making a i[blank]-killer??

<< < (8/12) > >>

jojo99:
My question still stands: if other companies see this, why don't they give it a good effort to do that also?!  So what if apple already did it?  So what if it's nothing new?  Apple doesn't care.  Why should they?-superboyac (June 06, 2010, 11:51 PM)
--- End quote ---

I'll tell you a secret.  In marketing/sales there is a concept called "validation". 

You see, it costs a great deal of money to put together a team, to allocate resources, to create something totally new.  Companies (and particularly their shareholders) don't want to find out that they went off on some tangent that proves to be a dead end, throwing good money out of the window. 

So big companies with resources play follow-the-leader, waiting until someone else proves that a market exists, that there will be buyers willing to pay for a product in some specific area.  This is called validation.  Once validation has been proven, it is then presumed safe to follow that leader.

steeladept:
...I'm saying, why don't other companies try to ramp up their effort in providing a pleasant customer experience?  I still hate that Apple has dictator control on all their stuff, so that's why I'll never willingly get one, but I'm not going to deny that their UI is brilliant.
-superboyac (June 06, 2010, 11:51 PM)
--- End quote ---
Wow.  That sums up my feelings about Apple (as well as their competitors) exactly!  Nice SB.

steeladept:
The appeal of the I-Pad is primarily in the concept. The user interface helps but it is hardly made up for by what the I-Pad actually is to consumers. Something new. Something cool. Something revolutionary.

Similarly, the I-Pod is not heralded as a popular mp3 player because people primarily oogled at the interface. They oogled at the scroll wheel more. They oogled at the culture who is so in love with the I-Pod.

Even the Iphone if you took away the availability of the app store, it was oogled not because of it's interface which isn't really that perfect but because of it's touch screen capability mixed with a modern look that many phone companies at the time just weren't focusing on.
-Paul Keith (June 08, 2010, 12:26 PM)
--- End quote ---
I find it interesting that you don't consider the scroll wheel or the touch-screen interfaces.  These are, indeed, a significant - perhaps the single most significant - factors that made these devices so popular as you pointed out, but if you note, these are the "User Interface", aka. UI, elements that SB was talking about for their respective devices.  You can say it is a concept if you like, but the concept is that of a better UI, not of some amorphic "feeling" you get because you have this feature.

40hz:
For me, the hardest pill to swallow is just how good Apple is at those things they're good at - despite an utter lack of graciousness - and their generally shabby treatment of friend and foe alike.

wraith808:
For me, the hardest pill to swallow is just how good Apple is at those things they're good at - despite an utter lack of graciousness - and their generally shabby treatment of friend and foe alike.


-40hz (June 18, 2010, 12:49 PM)
--- End quote ---

+1

You can say what you want, but it's more than fanboyism, and it's more than a finger on the cultural pulse.  Both of these only get you so far, and Apple has gone further than that.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page