My Photo

Ordering Information

Tomi on Twitter is @tomiahonen

  • Follow Tomi on Twitter as @tomiahonen
    Follow Tomi's Twitterfloods on all matters mobile, tech and media. Tomi has over 8,000 followers and was rated by Forbes as the most influential writer on mobile related topics

Book Tomi T Ahonen to Speak at Your Event

  • Contact Tomi T Ahonen for Speaking and Consulting Events
    Please write email to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com and indicate "Speaking Event" or "Consulting Work" or "Expert Witness" or whatever type of work you would like to offer. Tomi works regularly on all continents

Tomi on Video including his TED Talk

  • Tomi on Video including his TED Talk
    See Tomi on video from several recent keynote presentations and interviews, including his TED Talk in Hong Kong about Augmented Reality as the 8th Mass Media

Subscribe


Blog powered by Typepad

« It Opens Like a Book - How 'Good' Would a Fold-Open Screen Be Like? Anticipating Samsung Innovation | Main | Seeing First Nokia Smartphone HMD Numbers - What does this all mean? A first stab at the big picture for Nokia return to smartphones (Updated 3x) »

October 12, 2017

Comments

Jim Glue

Hi Per,

Interesting take on the discussion. I was just trying to highlight the importance of getting color RIGHT. Even Android's largest maker doesn't get colors "right". Maybe not as awful as Google...but "pleasantly contrasty and punchy" is not a virtue. Let the icons and photos BE contrasty and punchy and display them as they are. ELSE...if you edit photos...you have no idea what you are actually doing to them.

As for Android vs the iPhone....there are NO Android device makers color calibrating their screens.

But sure...if you are worried about or interested in Google's ad business...Google is safely secure in that Android will continue to be able to sell the user data/information from 2-3 billion people.

The iPhone, meanwhile is on year 10 and the Mac past year 30. Apparently Apple can handle the pressure of intense competition, and do so from a minority market share...just fine.

Tester

@Jim Glue:

"The iPhone, meanwhile is on year 10 and the Mac past year 30. Apparently Apple can handle the pressure of intense competition"

1. This is wrong. Apple has been making computers for more than 30 years but putting the first Mac into the same category as today's is just clouding the picture. It's an entirely different system and on top of that Apple "could handle the pressure" so well that they nearly went bankrupt.

2. The same was thought of companies like Nokia and Blackberry, too, and they went down when the pressure became too high.

You just cannot extrapolate future success like that. We do not know what the future may bring, and it may ultimately something that Apple may miss. Remember: They no longer got a Steve Jobs, the just got Tim Cook who hadn't managed to broaden the product portfolio one bit - on the contrary: Everything Apple makes is so hardwired to other Apple hardware that there's little chance to grow the customer base. This strategy cannot and will not work long term.

John A

Delta Airlines will move over all their employes to Apple, they will get rid of the Surface tablets and all Windows phones. So it seems that pulling out of the mobile will affect Microsoft business in all areas beside the phones itself to.

Jim Glue

Yes, Apple has been making computers since the late '70's. But the Apple II/III series eventually lost out in the market to IBM/Msft DOS. And Apple wasn't the tiny minority producer either, it was the #1 producer until IBM clobbered them.

The Mac platform is very much similar to the iPhone. Only worse. The original Mac was mostly a toy. Ground breaking, sure, but you couldn't really DO much with them. Not too different from the original iPhone not having 3G, a good camera, any video etc. You could at least do the three things Apple sold them on: phone, iPod and web

Everything about the Mac being a minority platform is true about the iPhone...except the Mac was/is FAR less well positioned as the iPhone.

Long before the internet made local software "not such a big deal" the Mac was able to attract quality software. Nothing like the software catalog of Windows...but enough such that all the bases were covered and a dozen or so real gems that made the Mac an attractive platform for a certain audience.

Meanwhile the iPhone has the BEST software ecosystem which off sets the platform leveling web apps that keep the Mac from being a tough choice today.

Get this. The Mac has sold for 30 years even though it's been more expensive the entire time. For the last 15 years or so...grossly more expensive than what you can get from a cheap Windows computer. Not grossly more expensive than a proper equivalent Windows PC...but most people have gotten along just fine with cheap PC's.

Even so, there are people willing to pay for quality, support, ease of use and who preferred the Mac ecosystem.

Meanwhile the iPhone has double to triple the market share of the Mac and of a market that is 4 times or so larger. With the Mac, Apple was a top 10 to top 5 computer maker. With the iPhone, Apple has become the largest and most profitable company of any kind in the entire world. That might change when Saudi Arabia goes public with Aramco.

This whole time the iPhone has been at best, 2nd place as a platform. At best 20% market share. And during the period Apple has climbed to world's #1 company, far less than 20% (current sales).

Yes, at one time, Apple was run so poorly that they were mere weeks from bankruptcy (which wouldn't have ended the company, they would have reorganized). At any point, if Apple starts doing dumb things....they can destroy themselves. But that's a truism for any company, not a relevant criticism to Apple's current operations.

What HASN'T EVER harmed Apple is being a minority player selling premium products. Apple has built the most profitable company in the world by NOT running their business like Nokia, Samsung, Msft or Google.

When you can see an existing, long term track record of success...doing the very things you say is going to lead to their harm....but they succeed instead....it's your THEORY that's wrong.

You write like Apple is facing stiff competition. When haven't they? The PC world was very competitive. IBM, HP, Compaq, Dell and many more that appeared competitive at the time but didn't survive as Apple did.

The mobile world was MATURE...or so everyone thought. Nokia, Motorola, RIM, Palm, Samsung, Microsoft, Sony-Erriccson, Verizon, Docomo, China Mobile. They scoffed at the idea that a computer company was just going to waltz in and succeed in the ferociously competitive mobile business.

There was a gold rush on as mobile phones were more ubiquitous than tooth brushes, TV's, radios, and literacy. Apple did waltz right in and took 2/3rd of the gold of the entire industry. No, not the existing industry, Apple rode the rising tide of profits to be made as the world switched to smartphones and took 2/3's (or more) of ALL of that profit.

Who's the competitor? ZTE, Oppo, Vivo? I think not. Apple is THE apex competitor.

Apple just never even WANTED the role that Nokia had. Apple didn't want the role Google now has. Apple didn't want to be delivering commodity devices at razor thin margins with 50 different models a year using a design-by-committee OS that they only partially controlled.

And we haven't even mentioned the iPod which ruled market share and cost a LOT more...and Msft, Sony and others had deep pockets and couldn't unseat Apple.

Apple could stop producing quality products. Apple could do a lot of things wrong, and if they kept doing them wrong long enough, could fall. But that's true of EVERY company.

What you are projecting is Apple falling while doing the very things that make up Apple's success. You are predicting the things that have NEVER mattered to Apple's success will, by God SOME DAY, topple Apple.

You're just wrong. Your theory needs updating to accommodate Apple's success as the success has been sustained long term already.

Per "wertigon" Ekström

@jim:

There is always the exception to the rule.

Apple is like a driver driving a junk car. The car should not be able to win a race - and yet it does.

Looking at how it actually wins those races though, they employ very, very risky high yield tactics, like waiting until the very last moment to brake in every curve, or even use off road shortcuts in some places.

If you keep using that kind of tactics to win races, then sooner or later the odds will beat you.

They are still a very, very skilled driver , but their luck is running out.

Jim Glue

Or...your model doesn't take into account how Apple is successfully running a sustainable business. You think Apple's way is risky...because you can't account for how they continue to succeed.

Long before Apple, there have been examples of successful companies producing a more premium experience of an otherwise commodity item. BMW, Mercedez, Coach, Prada to name but a few.

Take Sony. There was a time when all of their products were more expensive than anyone else. And they had a good business even though somebody else would always come out with cheaper version of the same things. Only Sony could make a Walkman...but everybody and his brother came out with portable cassette players with headphones. It's actually kind of sad how Sony has lost it's way. It wasn't because they made innovative products and sold them for MORE. It was because they lost their innovative edge.

Samsung makes phones just as expensive as an iPhone...they just ALSO make every form of cheap crap phone too. Apple doesn't want the low margin business, so they don't even try.

People thought iPhones were too expensive. Then Apple raised the price $100 when they came out with the 6+. They effective raised the price $100 again when they made the difference between the low end memory and the mid tier memory such a good deal that most everybody bought the mid tier upgrade. And this Friday the $200 jump happens for the iPhone X who's sales will be only limited by supply.

Meanwhile the Essential phone, 2 months after delivery just lowered their price by $200 in hopes of spurring sales.

Some folks think the iPhone 8 isn't selling well. As proof they are talking about the sales of the iPhone 7 (which had it's priced reduced by $100)! What a glorious problem to have for Apple.

Per "wertigon" Ekström

@Jim:

No, Apple is an anomaly that will be corrected in time. You see... Mercedes does not maintain their own infrastructure. Neither does BMW, Coach, Prada etc etc. Yet Apple does, and what is more, with current strategy they have to keep maintaining that infrastructure.

And, in an infrastructure race (which this is), time has shown again and again that it is not the best technology that wins in the long run, but the most widespread. Microsoft still pwns Linux and MacOS in the desktop arena, not because it is better but because it is the most widespread. IE dominated in browser market share at one time, and only got dethroned because MS stopped caring completely. The Metric system has at this point more or less kicked out the last remnants of the imperial measurements. And so on, and so forth.

So no, not impressed by Apples achievements, because ultimately, they will mean very very little. Apple will make a fuckton of money in the process, sure, but they are becoming more and more irrelevant in the phone space by the day... Just like Microsoft. :)

Winter

@Per
"Apple will make a fuckton of money in the process, sure,"

For some people that is the one and only measure of success. Arguing against that position is pointless. The words you use do not mean the same thing.

@Per
"but they are becoming more and more irrelevant in the phone space by the day... Just like Microsoft."

Wrong comparison. MS is becoming irrelevant because the world moved away from their platform. Apple is becoming irrelevant because they are reaching a smaller fraction of users.

The whole mobile industry is worth $2T or so. Apple's revenues are around $250B, i.e., 12% of that. That is a lot, but not in any way dominating. Apple simply does not drive the mobile industry in any way. As Apple are hoarding money, the influence of all this money might even be negative, as it extracts money from the market that is not put back into hiring people, building factories, or developing technology.

John F

@Per,

Sometimes, trying to win an argument at any cost or denial of simple facts makes people look fanatical, delusional or ignorant, and sorry to be harsh but

No, Apple is an anomaly that will be corrected in time.
So no, not impressed by Apples achievements, because ultimately, they will mean very very little.

Wow, having an opinion, great, making a fool of yourself in an open forum is sad.

So, the most successful company ever, the almost dead to the top of the world, etc the creation of so many transformational things ... the list of achievements that no one will even consider denying, Tomi has praised some of them ...and you say those things, now I understand your position here, bitter and hateful and resentful

So, moon landing, Lindberg, conquer of Everest, Jesse Owens, The Beatles and The Stones...

They were just anomalies that in time everyone conquered, did better or fell out of favor. unimpressive achievements that will mean little because after Owens there was Lewis and Mozart is a pathetic figure because few people listens to his music and Pet shop boys sold more albums

Ford Model T and its innovative way to manufacturing means little beaches the Japanese did it better...

Don't be so bitter, hating so much and blindly makes u a grumpy person.

I, personally don't like Facebook, Roger Federer, Elon Musk, German football..... but to deny such amazing success stories because "i" say so or want to be blind to it, would make me bitter moron

Jim Glue

Apple is distinct, that is true. But the notion that cheaper commodity products always win isn't all that you think it is. Apple has stood in the face of that, and succeeded...and has done so for long enough time that only the willfully foolish continue to deny it.

Consider Apple vs IBM. First...is acknowledging that Apple was competing against IBM and not Microsoft. There is an iconic photo of Steve Jobs before the IBM building giving it the finger...no such photo of Steve Jobs in front of Msft's building.

IBM (really a small skunkworks team in FL) created an open platform and licensed the OS from Microsoft. Combine that with IBM's "nobody got fire for buying IBM" reputation and position in the computer industry and the PC revolution was getting started.

Apple had the very successful Apple II and people could make add in cards...but it wasn't open for complete cloning like IBM's.

Enter the IBM clones and the PC revolution took off like a rocket, swamping Apple and killing off ALL other PC platforms from serious competition besides a couple short lived home systems.

Apple came out with the Mac...which though arriving first with a usable commercial GUI, never put a dent into the IBM compatible business. Before the Mac ever could, Msft had cloned it with Windows. Apple survived by inventing the laser printer and with Aldus Pagemaker launched the desktop publishing revolution.

Commoditization did what commoditization always does. Drove down prices...took away differentiation...took away profits. The PC business became such a loser that IBM sold it off to Lenovo.

So who lost? IBM or Apple? IBM now goes around telling everybody how great Macs, iPads and iPhones are. IBM makes the case that while Macs cost more initially, over the lifetime the cost of a Mac is cheaper than the cost of a PC.

Apple finds a way to be relevant and differentiated. The worse time in Apple's history was when Apple leadership tried to be more like everyone else. It was a disaster that ended when they brought Steve Jobs back who killed all the plans to run their business the normal way (they were licensing the Mac OS to clone makers!) and went back to the Apple way.

Apple makes the OS, Apple makes the hardware, Apple makes a set of first party apps and services, Apple makes the store and distribution channel, Apple makes the development tools (language, frameworks, etc.). Apple is even now making the CPU's, GPU's and other specialty chips.

It's the OPPOSITE of commoditization and allows Apple to offer a superior, integrated product. You can debate the superior part all you want...taste is personal. But Apple has proven there is a market for what they deliver, and that it's a sustainable and lucrative market.

Commodity PC's with their very cheap prices and much MUCH larger software catalog and 90% market share has never killed the Mac business. No PC company is doing better for themselves selling Windows PC's than Apple is selling Macs. The top 5 Windows PC companies combined do not have a better business for themselves than Apple has with the Mac.

Then there came the iPod. Apple came in to an already commoditized business and took it over with a high priced product...snatched 75% of the business and never let go. Only the end of the stand alone music player at the hands of the smartphone ended the iPod. The entire run of the iPod was filled with both commodity and high priced competition (Msft, Sony).

Then came the iPhone which laid waste to EVERY existing competitor and platform. Fierce competitors. Mighty companies. Titans who invented and controlled the platform. Might telco's who were the gatekeepers. Apple brought them all to their knees. Apple reshaped the relationship between telco and phone manufacturer. The big telco's spent hundreds of millions advertising AGAINST the iPhone and they all caved...every one.

You think Apple is the one "facing stiff competition"? Apple IS the Apex predator, taking whatever business they CHOOSE to take.

You say Apple isn't driving mobile. Really? Nobody believes Apple is setting the agenda more than Samsung who LONGS to have what Apple has.

Remember keyboards and how they were NEEDED? Apple ended that.

Remember how phones needed user replaceable batteries? Apple ended that.

Remember how phones HAD to have a 3.5mm jack? Now they are going away in Android phones too.

Remember when finger print scanners where shitty and nobody followed Motorola's Atrix? Apple ended that. Apple made it the standard that all serious smartphones have the tech.

Remember how shitty Samsung's face unlock is...you know, THIS YEAR's flagship? They are all scrambling to come up with a competitor to FaceId.

Remember how NFC and Android payments beat Apple by a couple years? Yep, but now Apple servers 90% of the mobile payment value EVERYWHERE Apple Pay is available (20 countries).

Remember when no mobile phone needed 64bit chips and it was "all marketing" for Apple to do it first? The next DAY Samsung president put out a press release that they too would have 64bit phones (took them a year).

Remember when Google tried Google glasses and it went nowhere? Remember all those "put your mobile phone on your face" gadgets that have gone nowhere? Remember how far behind Apple was alleged to be? You know, cuz Apple makes working products before releasing them? Well, Apple yet again has taken a giant leap frog with their AR with ARKit and processors so fast they can do the computations needed.

If Apple does it, everyone follows. Apple doesn't come out with EVERYTHING first...but Apple is never pressured to quickly adopt anything. Apple sets their own pace, but everyone else dances to Apple's tunes.

Per "wertigon" Ekström

You guys still fail to see my argument.

Again. Apple *is* making a fuckton of money. But their iPhone revenues and units will never be as high ever again - unless the increased revenue from the increased ASP makes up for the loss in unit sales.

Their units will most probably start showing a terminal decline these coming two quarters (terminal as in, won't ever recover, but might show a slight uptick every now and then).

So they need something to quit this decline or else they are, well, fucked, long term.

A patient with cancer can still have good days. That does not mean the cancer went away - it meant they had a good day, nothing more or less. Apple has cancer, and business as usual will not save them from this. It's that simple.

Now you Apple lovers can do either:

1. Live in denial a decade more and be in total shock once death occurs
2. Accept that yes, there is a cancer, but dammit, it will be a great decade!

Whenever you are ready to embrace the loss, we'll be waiting here over at the Android darkside... We have cookies... Tasty, fat dripping, juicy cookies... ;)

Per "wertigon" Ekström

@Piot:

If success is measured by the amount of money you have in the bank then yes they have succeeded.

If success, however, is measured by how long you can keep a company profitable and afloat... They are about to lose that.

Incidentally premium Android will not be plagued by the same problems Apple will have, since they are the same ecosystem as the rest of the world.

You can't be an infrastructure provider in a world where your infrastructure doesn't play ball with the rest of the world, and it's as simple as that. Especially not if you are a niche provider like Apple.

Again, this will be obvious within the coming 10 years. We're just seeing the start of it.

Abdul Muis

@PWE

I think in 2 year we will know the result of fashion driven tech experiment of iPhone 8 / iPhone X. Will iPhone 8 make the iPhone X the most successful ever iPhone. Or iPhone X validate that galaxy s8/note 8 in the same fashion league as iphone, and offering a 3 tier pricing (S8, S8+, note 8)

Abdul Muis

@Piot

It is very obvious that Tim Cook is not a good CEO. He just a good manager. After the death of Steve Jobs, he just following what jobs have outlined for the company.... I called this "APPLE ON AUTOPILOT".

The thing is... The autopilot of Jobs-alpha-1 program is almost over....

Abdul Muis

@Jim

"Remember how shitty Samsung's face unlock is...you know, THIS YEAR's flagship? They are all scrambling to come up with a competitor to FaceId."

Google now... There's a comparison of FaceID with retina scan of Samsung... and steve Wozniak even talk about.... And the winner is...

Abdul Muis

@Jim

"Remember how NFC and Android payments beat Apple by a couple years? Yep, but now Apple servers 90% of the mobile payment value EVERYWHERE Apple Pay is available (20 countries)."

90%??? Where do you get this number?

Abdul Muis

@Jim

"But sure...if you are worried about or interested in Google's ad business...Google is safely secure in that Android will continue to be able to sell the user data/information from 2-3 billion people."

I'm getting tired of seeing you spreading LIE.

Tomi T Ahonen

Hi gang

I'll wade into this 'eternity question' that crops up all the time about Apple and its ecosystem. We KNOW how this ends. We have SEEN this movie. It is a RERUN. The OS war for smartphones is EXACTLY like other OS wars and it is a platform war. So. Case 1, Platform War. World's first home VCR platform, Philips N 1500 system. Vs 2 Japanese younger and better rivals: Sony Betamax and the VHS alliance. Philips could not get global acceptance of its European system and was crushed. Philips joined with some European allies to try a late entry with yet another incompatible VCR system, VC 2000 and by then their fate was sealed. If you don't get global footprint - you are DEAD. You are NOT VIABLE.

Apple iOS has a good presence in rich countries, it has a perfectly viable size in many of them, but it is non-existent in India, Africa etc - and will never have a global reach. Google's Android won this war. It is a certain absolute truth, that you will never reach a mass market in Nigeria or Pakistan or Egypt or Sri Lanka or Iran or Tanzania or Zaire with.. iOS. This is the Philips N 1500 situation, perfectly.

Is that one case study relevant in telecoms? We have the evidence in telecoms, AFTER the Philips failure. The platform war of the GSM vs CDMA standard. CDMA had a presence on four of the six inhabited continents, GSM was on all six. CDMA at its peak had about 15% reach of mobile consumers, GSM by then was nearing 80% with 1G and some Chinese standards covering the rest of the mobile subscribers. (Does 15% market share sound familiar?) Could CDMA survive? No. It died. The vast majority of CDMA networks switched over to GSM. The rest built an escape plan (WCDMA) to JOIN into the future built by GSM and its 3GSM vision. CDMA died. If you have

We have the end game case study. The final battle of the VCR wars, Betamax vs VHS. Beta had a far smaller user base and far less manufacturers, in the end only Sony (one manufacturer against all others? Sound familiar?) and then the CONTENT industry abandoned Sony. That is when it ended. Video rental stores (remember those?) stopped carrying Betamax tapes. Movie studios started to first release VHS tapes before Betamax, and then some studios stopped totally releaseing Beta versions and only VHS versions of their movies. This was the end.

Does THAT sound familiar? We have SEEN this movie before. It ALWAYS ends the same way. The small guy in the platform war, when it is at that scale - the small dude dies. Or his platform withers away to near meaninglessness. (Loch Ness, what a mess, I am rhyming who coulda guess(ed).)

Apple WAS HERE BEFORE. When the Mac stopped growing - the developers started to abandon it. Soon GAME DEVELOPERS stopped making Mac games and only did Windows versions of their games. That was the end signal. YES the Mac went onto live up to today, but its viability as a complete platform for developers was over. The Mac became a niche platform serving some (while very powerful) industries like the advertising and media industries but in the PC era, most applications had ONLY a Windows version and some had BOTH Win & Mac and only a few specialist industry areas (serving advertising and media industries) worth under 3% of the global economy - were served with 'Mac Only' type of apps. Most of the independent app developers in the PC era (excluding Microsoft's monopoly based business) were game developers (duh) and they developed for Windows, not for the Mac.

This meant, then... that kids - KIDS - didn't want Macs because they didn't run the GAMES.

Why is it that Apple attempts by all possible hysteria maintain the illusion that the iOS is a viable ecosystem? Because APPLE KNOW THIS. They've LIVED THROUGH IT. They know PERFECTLY WELL, that the end starts when the developers figure out the reality and stop making iOS versions. That day is REALLY CLOSE NOW.

We've seen THIS MOVIE with the MODERN ERA APPLE. TWICE. The iPad? Was supposed to be the miracle media platform that you could launch paid newspapers and magazines onto the iPad and make yourself a rich publishing billionaire overnight. Yeah. Go talk to all the failed iPad mags. That bubble burst years ago. We've SEEN THIS MOVIE BEFORE.

And in the modern iEra, how about the miracle of the apps economy to the wrist? the iMiracle? There is no iMiracle to the wrist. The iOs opportunity to the wrist was the thinnest sliver for some health nuts and that has now been plundered and there is no more gold in that waste of a gold rush. We've seen this movie before.

The iPhone is not immune to the EXACT SAME REALITIES that applied to APPLE before in the Windows OS wars, to the new post-iPhone Apple twice with the iPad and Apple Watch. The iPhone only was riding the biggest wave that ever existed (smartphones, still cresting) and because of the SIZE OF THAT WAVE, this illusion of Apple somehow defeating reality, has lasted longer. It is an ILLUSION.

The TRUTH is out there. We deal with the truth here. The TRUTH is, that Apple can NEVER be a viable smartphone OS for a global reach. That is CERTAIN. They have LOST the platform war.

If Apple had managed to then have so many rivals, that a smaller slice is viable (like in 3-way race in gaming consoles, Xbox vs Playstation vs Nintendo, each at roughly 33%) then there COULD BE A CHANCE, as I have said many many MANY times early in the smartphone wars, that there WAS ROOM for a smaller player to be fully viable globally, as long as the race had many players. Thanks to the ineptitudes of Microsoft and Samsung (Tizen?) and the hara-kiri of Nokia, there were only 2 platforms left. And now 12% won't cut it for Apple. Their platform WILL SEE THE EROSION OF SUPPORT.

You have seen me occasionally use the term 'inevitable'. I VERY rarely use that term. I used it only when I truly am convinced that some tech trend will happen (barring management insanity like Stephen Elop befalling a company). And I have said for a while now, that this end to Apple is INEVITABLE. The iOS is NOT viable as a global platform. Already now Andoid has far more developers and apps and is in many markets already the larger revenue generator. iOS is DESTINED to become a NICHE like Mac OS became. For niche audiences only. A very LARGE niche yes, if they have 10% of global handsets say year 2025 but still only a niche. Most developers can safely ignore iOS by then.

And what happens to GAME DEVELOPERS? They will see the users and reach and money and follow it, and soon the moment comes, when game developers don't BOTHER TO RELEASE iPhone versions !!! This is INEVITABLE. 12% is FAR TOO SMALL to bother with your first edition games if the alternative is 88%. And no matter how much some apple fanatics will yell 'but our users are richer' the game developer says - I need USERS. I need REACH. I will go with Android. That is the NEXT STAGE that WILL INEVITABLY COME.

We have SEEN THIS MOVIE. When the developers understood this with the Mac, they abandoned the platform. When the developers understood this with the iPad, they abandoned the plaform. When the developers understood this with the Apple Watch, they abandoned the Apple Watch. This is INEVITABLE end to iOS hopes of being any kind of 'equal' to Android.

BTW Google is being smart about this. They KNOW they have won. They don't WANT Apple to go away into its corner and sulk. They WANT to pretend there is still a battle between these two, because Google know they have ALREADY WON the WAR. The longer Apple puts its efforts into marketing the rival app platform - the better it is for Google. Once the stagnation hits in (Apple stops trying, see Philips N 1500, Sony Betamax, CDMA) then the excitement level among app developers drops, and this is not as good for Google. See how stagnant it made Microsoft after Apple threw in the towel with the Mac in the PC wars.

There is only one way this ends. And the beginning of the end HAS STARTED. It started when I told you. When I said Google's Android has won the war. When I told you, Apple iOS is destined to LOSE MARKET SHARE. And from there, what has happened? Apple so far has lost one FOURTH of the peak share it held when I wrote that. And ALL OF YOU agree, that Apple cannot CLIMB out of this decline it has with iOS.

We have SEEN THIS MOVIE. I have never been wrong when I use the term 'inevitable' and it IS inevitable that app developers start to realize, they don't need an iOS app. And that is the sign for most 'regular' analysts, that gosh, iOS was an illusion; its fate is the same as the Mac or Betamax or CDMA or Philips N 1500.

That does NOT mean that Apple dies. Apple will live on happily ever after but their iOS ecosystem will only serve the dwindling flock of iSheep who will continue to pay the iTax. The BIG HURT comes when the game developers abandon iOS (I don't see that in the near future yet) and when that comes, the iPhone becomes a has-been phone option for the youth. It signals a dangerous sign for a new era of iPhone market share declines in coming years. Currently the youth love the iPhone. In some years it will be as popular with kids as a Blackberry would be today. When game developers abandon the iPhone, that is a major source of new pain (past this current stage of 'oh my god, Apple is no longer growing' that will fuel several cycles of despair among those who thought Apple was running on some economic miracle system).

There, once again my thoughts on the subject...

Apple will be a healthy company with fiercely loyal customers but it has zero chance of maintaining the current illusion of a global reach digital platform. As that image crumbles, part of Apple's glory, youth loyalty, and ability to turn obscene profits will disappear. And THEN there will be VALID criticisms of why did Tim Cook take a golden goose and kill it. Why did Tim Cook preside over the obvious collapse. Why didn't Tim Cook run OBVIOUS strategies to expand his reach when there WAS a chance, with lower-cost phones and solutions to expand their user base, like I've proposed with the iCamera.

That will all be blamed on Tim Cook, the CEO who threw a world empire away. So who was singing here the praises that Tim Cook is some kind of genius?

Those of our readers who get this, are saying again and again the same refrain - Apple is being short-sighted about this, milking their iSheep for maximum profit today, at the cost of long term viability. There is only one way this goes. Inevitable.

Tomi Ahonen :-)

Tomi T Ahonen

PS on the platform wars

YOU my readers have seen ME predict on the platform wars.. I gave PERFECTLY CORRECT forecasts, not one mistake, on the CDMA-GSM platform war, and how the erosion started and how it ended.

I have you PERFECTLY CORRECT forecasts for the biggest tech platform in HISTORY up to that point - Windows - and how its end came (in mobile, and now dwindling also on the PC side). I forecasted PERFECTLY how the STAGES came of how Windows on mobile died, and the two big moments to look for is the market share growth turning to decline (happened with CDMA, with Windows and with iOS) and then the ecosystem seeing the erosion (happened with CDMA, happened with Windows for mobile, and is about to happen next with iOS).

I told you BEFORE it happened, what to LOOK FOR. Even with iOS. Nobody else told you when the peak was coming. I warned you. I told you what signs to look for. I told you that the moment iPhone was world's largest (as Nokia was collapsing) I warned that is not sustainable and why. Even when there is a totally unforseen 'once in a lifetime event' like Stephen Elop madness - I was able to tell you how that game went (and how it impacted iPhone and how Google and Samsung were going to be the big winners, not Apple, out of Nokia's and Symbian's fall and most importantly - I was able to tell you why - and to tell you BEFORE IT HAPPENED).

You don't have to take my word on it. I am here giving free advice on my own initiative because I have a loyal readership who bought my books and read this blog and engage with me, and I trust they would like to hear my thoughts. You do not have to trust me on any of this. I know when I DON'T know. And I will tell you clearly, I 'think it will go like this'. And occasionally I use the word 'inevitable'. On that I have never been wrong. So take these thoughts with that in mind. There is nobody else who has talked about these platform wars this clearly and foreseen the recent wars so perfectly (I wasn't publishing back when the VCR wars were happening or the PC/Mac war, I did have some thoughts even back then haha as I was closely involved in those businesses too).

Tomi Ahonen :-)

Tomi T Ahonen

Now on the Apple Pay bullshit

The ONLY reason Apple Pay is even 'viable' today, is because it launched in those laggard dinosaur markets that were last to mobile payments like the USA and Australia. Most of Europe had mobile payments for a decade before Apple Pay. HALF of Europeans use mobile payments. Just Japan alone - one of iPhone's best markets - the Japanese mobile payments industry CRUSHES the GLOBAL Apple Pay payments turnover. And Japan has a population slightly more than a third of the size of the USA. And mobile payments in Japan ALONE crush TOTAL worldwide iPhone Apple Payments combined (including the very rare uses of it inside Japan itself).

The Japanese mobile wallet system has been chronicled on this blog from its inception and its various developments celebrated already BEFORE THE iPHONE WAS LAUNCHED.

Apple pay is a silly proprietary wallet by a niche provider. Its as silly as releasing movies only for Sony branded TV sets! In India the regulator has already mandated inter-wallet operability among mobile payment providers. This sensible approach is already in use in many forward-thinking markets, starting with, DUH, Japan and South Korea, the global leaders in all things mobile and digital, in particular the UNDISPUTED leaders in mobile payments (with all due respect to Scandinavia, the Philippines and haha, Kenya)

So take your Apple Wallet and ... haha

Apple Wallet will live a long and happy death in the major markets that lagged in mobile payments, and the USA alone is big enough to give it a long long death, similar to other regional stupid alternative tech platforms like Philips N 1500 and CDMA.

PS the winner? Google. Inevitable. Banks should be afraid. Be very afraid.

Tomi Ahonen :-)

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Available for Consulting and Speakerships

  • Available for Consulting & Speaking
    Tomi Ahonen is a bestselling author whose twelve books on mobile have already been referenced in over 100 books by his peers. Rated the most influential expert in mobile by Forbes in December 2011, Tomi speaks regularly at conferences doing about 20 public speakerships annually. With over 250 public speaking engagements, Tomi been seen by a cumulative audience of over 100,000 people on all six inhabited continents. The former Nokia executive has run a consulting practise on digital convergence, interactive media, engagement marketing, high tech and next generation mobile. Tomi is currently based out of Hong Kong but supports Fortune 500 sized companies across the globe. His reference client list includes Axiata, Bank of America, BBC, BNP Paribas, China Mobile, Emap, Ericsson, Google, Hewlett-Packard, HSBC, IBM, Intel, LG, MTS, Nokia, NTT DoCoMo, Ogilvy, Orange, RIM, Sanomamedia, Telenor, TeliaSonera, Three, Tigo, Vodafone, etc. To see his full bio and his books, visit www.tomiahonen.com Tomi Ahonen lectures at Oxford University's short courses on next generation mobile and digital convergence. Follow him on Twitter as @tomiahonen. Tomi also has a Facebook and Linked In page under his own name. He is available for consulting, speaking engagements and as expert witness, please write to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com

Tomi's eBooks on Mobile Pearls

  • Pearls Vol 1: Mobile Advertising
    Tomi's first eBook is 171 pages with 50 case studies of real cases of mobile advertising and marketing in 19 countries on four continents. See this link for the only place where you can order the eBook for download

Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009

  • Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009
    A comprehensive statistical review of the total mobile industry, in 171 pages, has 70 tables and charts, and fits on your smartphone to carry in your pocket every day.

Alan's Third Book: No Straight Lines

Tomi's Fave Twitterati