industry analysis – Page 2

Would I Buy A Phablet?

One of the more unique smartphone designs in the market are ones that sport a 5.3″ to 6.1″ screen and are called Phablets by some in the industry. We call them tweeners as they are a cross between a large smartphone and a small tablet but in a single package. Samsung popularized this form factor with its 5.3″ Galaxy Note that was released last winter and they sold about 10 million in 2012. Some analysts believe that Samsung is on track to sell around 20 million Galaxy Note 2’s in 2013. Up to now, the market for these Phablet’s has mainly been in Korea and other parts of Asia and while available in the US, the market for it over here is quite small compared to its demand in Asia.

At CES, Huawei upped the ante in phablets with the introduction of their Ascend Phablet that sports a 6.1 inch screen, the largest screen used in products in this category. It seems that Huawei is trotting this out to see what the market response will be to it and once they determine if a smartphone this large might fit in the market. Depending on the market response, they could either back it big time or adjust the screen size downward if the sweet spot for Phablets is with screens more in the 5.3″ to 5.7′ range. Like Samsung, Huawei believes there is a market for Phablets and seems committed to building smartphones in this larger size going forward.

To date, most smartphones have screens under 5 inches and we don’t see that changing anytime soon. Smartphones with smaller screen sizes will have the lions share of the market for many years to come. What is interesting to me is that when I actually held Huawei’s 6.1 inch smartphone in my hand at the Huawei booth at CES, I could actually see myself using it, but not as Huawei might expect. To me this was a small tablet that just happened to have a cell phone radio in it. I would never hold this up to my ear as a phone and if I had one, I would only use it with a Bluetooth headset (this is how I primarily use the iPhone now, paired with a BT headset).

Since getting the iPad Mini, with its 7.9″ screen, it has become my go to tablet. While I still use my original iPad, it is with a Bluetooth keyboard and I use it more as a mini-laptop in this configuration. What I have learned though is that the iPad mini, or a smaller tablet, is ideal for content consumption but not as ideal for content creation or productivity. While I do appreciate the 7.9″ screen in my iPad Mini, I was just as comfortable with Huawei’s 6.1 Ascend if I used it mainly as a small tablet.

Markets Driving Phablet Demand

There are two market dynamics emerging that could actually make these phablets important products in various markets. The first one is emerging markets. We in the west would be fooling ourselves if we think that masses of people in emerging markets could afford both a smartphone and a tablet. Even with grey market tablets going for cheap prices, the issue of carrying two devices with them all of the time is just not reasonable. Apparently, Samsung saw this trend early on and has taken aim at the emerging market with their phablets, hoping that the desire for a single device that serves as a smartphone and tablet resonates with them. Indeed, the reason for a forecast of 20 million Galaxy’s Note II’s in 2013 is that most of them will start finding their way into emerging markets and filling a real need, especially if Samsung gets the prices of this product into price ranges acceptable to this market. In these markets, one is better than two.

The second market developing has broader implications for us in the west. If you sit back and try and visualize our digital future, it is pretty easy to see that most of us will have many screens in our digital lifestyles. We will have a screen in our smartphone, tablets, PC’s, TV’s, Car, appliances, etc. If they are all connected to our digital stuff in the cloud, then the screen that is closest to us at our time of need is the one we will most likely use.

In most cases, the closest screen is our smartphones. However, when desiring to access our digital “stuff” or the Web, many of us who have tablets often to go to our tablets for one major reason, it has a bigger screen and is easier to use especially when surfing the Web or reading docs and email and getting other forms of content.

However, this implies that we now carry with us two devices at the very least, a smarpthone and a tablet. What if we could get both in a single device that is highly portable? It that were the case, perhaps a smartphone even with a 5.3-inch screen would be too small; but one with perhaps a very pocketable one at 6.1″ might be just right. I was easily able to put the Ascend 6.1 in my back pocket as I do now with any spare smartphone I happen to be testing at any given time.

One Size Doesn’t Fit All

One other thing we are learning from our research is that one size does not fit all. Based on individuals needs, they may actually need a larger screen on their smartphone because they would be easier to read due to age, eyesight problems, individual choice, etc. As a small tablet, this larger screen size also works well for the same reasons, along with its ultraportablity. We believe it will start to be pretty clear to all device makers that one size does not fit all and that they may need a range of screen sizes in the smartphone and tablets to meet new user demands in the next 12-18 months.

If both of these market trends play out as I suggest here, and the concept of a two-in-one device catches on in emerging markets and demands increase in mature markets, all smartphone vendors may have to seriously consider doing phablets of their own. As strange as this may seem to us western thinkers, there is a real possibility that a market for phablets could actually emerge and become quite important in multiple markets around the world. Yet if we take a step back and look at the vast array of sizes and forms of our current automobile market, then we understand the role personal preference and they need to have a lineup of products to cover a wide range of uses. So in fact vast variance in smartphones and tablets actually makes sense due to mature market characteristics.

Should Apple Make a Hybrid or Convertible PC?

In a Tech.pinions piece I wrote a few weeks back, I stated that in our talks with IT directors they have been sharing with us their interested in the hybrids or convertibles that are just starting to get into the marketplace. Products like Lenovo’s Yoga or HP’s Elitebook Convertible are attractive to them for various reasons, but the main one is that instead of having to support a separate tablet and laptop, these converged products give them both in a single package.

An IT capable tablet might cost $600 or $700 and an IT grade laptop might cost upwards of $900- $1300 depending on configurations. These convertibles or hybrids are priced around $900-$1300, which is cheaper than buying a separate laptop and tablet combined. Thus, cost of support and cost of ownership is reduced and with IT budgets being stretched these days, lower priced, yet highly functional devices like these hybrids or convertibles makes a lot of sense to them.

We are also seeing some real interest in hybrids and convertibles with SMB and some consumers as well. The compactness of having a 2-in-1 device seems to be of real interest to them as well. At a personal level, I have used a Bluetooth keyboard with an iPad for over a year and in many cases, this has replaced my laptop. However, I still need my laptop to handle what we call heavy lifting tasks like managing my media, doing large spreadsheets or complex documents.

Looking to the Future

In my 2013 predictions column last week, I suggested that hybrids and convertibles could be a sleeper product next year and could catch on with business users in a big way. However, in this same column I made a bolder prediction that Apple would create something I called the AirPad or iPadAir that possibly would be ultrathin like the current MacBook Air and be more like an actual laptop but the screen would detach and become an iPad. Since I made this prediction I have had a lot of calls and emails from people who today have iPads, but tell me they would love to have an iPad/laptop combo device and they would be first in line to buy it.

There is one big problem with my prediction of an Apple hybrid though. Apple CEO Tim Cook has gone on record saying that Apple does not believe this type of device makes sense. They appear heavily opposed to this idea and seem to stand strong around the idea that a laptop is a laptop and a tablet is a tablet. At the moment, you can’t argue with their logic as they are selling a record numbers of MacBooks and iPads, and they may be right. Hybrids and convertibles from the PC crowd have only been out for a short time. Microsoft’s Surface product being the poster child for hybrids also clouds this issue since it acceptance in the market has been lukewarm at best.

Given the type of work we do at Creative Strategies, we get to see a lot of products behind the scenes before they ever hit the market. Over the last three months, we have seen about a dozen hybrid’s or convertibles that will hit the market in Q1 or Q2 of 2013 and some of them are stunning in their design and functionality. On some of them, the screens stay attached and either slide down over the keyboard to become a tablet, or they twist and fold down to also become a tablet in its own right. In our work, we define these types of products as convertibles.

We have also seen a lot of what we call hybrids, in which the screen completely detaches from the keyboard and becomes a much lighter stand-alone tablet. In both cases, some of these are ultra-thin and extremely well designed and I can’t help but believe that when these products hit the market interest by business users and consumers will be piqued. Hybrids dual functionality as a full laptop as well as a real tablet, along with lower pricing than if you bought the tablet and laptop separately, will resonate with many people.

I have also been hearing that the PC side of the house is very bullish on these two-in-one designs and since most of them fall under Intel’s ultrabook designation, they will be heavily promoted next year as part of an increased campaign to get people to buy Ultrabooks. Because of the innovative designs in hybrids and convertibles, which are really eye catching with most priced under $1000, this duality of design and functionality should get a lot of attention next year.

What if the Market for Hybrids Takes Off?

If our prognostication that hybrids and convertibles are correct, and they really take off, Apple will have to look harder at possibly creating a similar type of product for their customers. Today they just let them go out and buy a third party keyboard and force their users to piece together their own hybrid solutions. We have talked to a lot of people who have done this and just love the fact that in a very small package the iPad becomes a powerful productivity tool as well as one that they can use for consumption of media, pictures, etc.

There is strong precedent as well that a product Apple said they would never do they eventually bring to market anyway. Steve Jobs said Apple would not get into phones. And he also said he believed 7” tablets were worthless. However, market dynamics have a way of changing Apple’s position on products they dismiss as not being viable for them to do.

That is why I believe that if hybrids and convertibles really strike a chord with consumers, Apple will have to respond to this possible threat to them, especially in business markets where these types of products are garnering a lot of interest now. Imagine a MacBook Air like design with an iPad tablet that detaches. Given Jony Ives brilliant design acumen, I could imagine an Apple hybrid that would not only be competitive with the PC crowd, but one that would re-define the market for these types of products in the future.

We are in the very early stages of bringing hybrids and convertibles to business users and consumers, so it is too early in the cycle to predict with any certainty the level of adoption of hybrids. But our early research in this area continues to point to the fact that these types of products could be attractive to a large amount of users, and if they do take off and become a threat to Apple, it would not surprise me if Apple responds in kind and creates a product that could turn this market upside down.

Reflecting On 2012

What a year 2012 has been. From some of the most exciting and historical product launches, wild and ill-concieved acquisitions, ugly court battles, and more, has made this year one worth reflecting upon. One thing is certain and agreed upon by the Tech.pinions columnists, that we are entering one of the most–if not the most–innovative time in human history. We are still only scratching the surface with personal computing. We expect the next decade plus to be both a land grab of opportunity for those ready to solve problems for the mass market of tomorrow, or a tragic wasteland of once industry titans who failed to understand and embrace disruption and re-invent themselves on a regular basis.

We the Tech.pinions columnists felt like this week was worth taking time to reflect on the last year and think about the new year and we encourage our readers to do the same. So we are all taking the week off from the daily column and will resume next week. Until then, we thought we would share some of the most read and most talked about columns from 2012. Enjoy and Happy Holidays!

The PC is the Titanic and the Tablet is the Iceberg. Any Questions?

Pinch-to-Zoom and Rounded Corners. What the Jury Didn’t Say

iPhone Naysayers

Chrome OS, not Android, is Google’s Future

Ten Things I Prefer to do on my Surface vs. My iPad

We Are Entering the True Era of Personal Computing

The iPad Put a Fork in the Tablet Controversy

How the iPad Mini (and other 7″ tablets) Could Impact Future PC Sales

Facebook is for Old People

Despite Competition, Apple’s US Market Share Gains

Happy Friday to anyone working today–or not working–and poking around the inter webs. Although it’s the Friday before the holiday break, some interesting data came out from the Kantar Worldpanel today that I thought I would highlight. Kantar’s latest smartphone sales data is showing that despite the increased competition, Apple has actually grown its smartphone platform market share in the United States.

Global Consumer Insight Director Dominic Sunnebo stated:

“Apple has reached a major milestone in the US by passing the 50% share mark for the first time, with further gains expected to be made during December.”

Other data from the report highlights platform share in other parts of the world and the various changes. However, despite all the questioning I continually see from the investor community of whether Apple can remain competitive despite increased competition, increase in latest Android smartphone subsidies from carriers, other platforms like Windows Phone 8 emerging, yet amidst those questions and what seems like steep odds, Apple is actually gaining market share.

Keep in mind this is all being done with a limited iPhone lineup. One current generation, and two legacy products still selling well in the marketplace. I’ve said for a while now that Apple is competing against an army of Android devices. The continual sales numbers and marketplace demand for the iPhone remains incredibly impressive despite the massive Android army they are competing with.

That alone is enough to show this market is not acting like many of the pundits and financial analysts assume. Many assume this market looks like the PC industry of old where the market is dominated by one single platform. Wrong on every level.

Take a deeper look at this chart (click on it to enlarge it) as it is very telling in a number of areas. First iOS grew from 35% to 53% in the US market, a change of 17.5% from the same period a year ago. Android went from 52.8% to 41.9% in the US market, a decline of 10.9%. The US market is arguably the most mature smartphone market on the planet. I wonder the degree other markets, as they mature, begin to look like the US, keeping in mind the carriers and how and what devices they subsidize over others. All things equal, however, may paint a similar picture. And don’t think for a second the US an insignificant market and/or litmus test for others. No sane executive at any OEMs believes that and in fact I continually hear from them how important the US market is.

This is a huge market and keep in mind the total addressable market for smartphones is not static but it is dynamic. It is growing by hundreds of millions of new customers every year and will do so for at least the next five years. So to say Apple has increased market share in the US, means that they are also attracting new customers and benefiting from the TAM expansion, arguably more than any current vendor.

I’m yet to write my predictions for 2013, and I will the week following the holiday break. But I believe the smartphone market will look very different this time next year and perhaps not in some of the ways assumed by the pundits.

My Tech Industry Predictions for 2013

Each year, about this time, I put out a list of predictions for the coming year. I have been doing this for 23 years and over that time have I have had a reasonable level of success with these predictions. I have had some spectacular failed predictions too, like the year I said Microsoft would buy RIM. Because of our work and research, we get to see a lot of technologies in the works behind the scene as well as look at the data and numbers and make some educated deductions about the tech trends for the new year.

With that in mind, here are my top predictions for 2013.

1: Augmented Reality will go mainstream in 2013

Companies like Zappar and Arusmus have some great technology that adds an AR touch to published content, posters, and physical places. AR technology has been in the works for many years, but the demos I have seen from these two companies have me believing that 2013 is the year that AR becomes very important to the mobile world. More importantly, many of these AR companies have created great relationships with movie studies, game makers, publishers, and more, and their technology is already showing up in many of their products. I wrote about these two companies recently (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2412990,00.asp) so check out some of the examples I have at the end of this column to get a visual sense of why I think AR will be big in 2013.

2: US Power Grid hit by Hackers

Call me paranoid but the more I read about security hacking from China, Eastern Europe and the Middle East, the more I am concerned about the safety of our various networks. While IT networks of all types remain a main target, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned recently that successful attacks have been made on computer control systems of American electricity and water plants and transportation systems. Security experts point out that many of these water and electricity plants have old architecture that is not tied to networks but many of them do and could be a target. Those impacted by Superstorm Sandy already know how the lack of power and electricity could impact their lives. So imagine if a power grid is taken down in large metropolitan areas and the impact it would have on individuals and businesses. I applaud our security experts on their diligence in combating all security threats and really hope that if our power grid does come under attack, they can head it off. By the way, this is one prediction that I hope I am very wrong about.

3: Google’s ChromeBook gets more consumer attention-Chrome laptops will gain traction in 2013

Acer and Samsung’s Chromebooks are priced around $250 and has become an attractive alternative for consumers as price continues to be a real issue with this market segment. I know that this only works when it is connected but the proliferation of public WiFi makes this less of an issue going forward. We all know that an HTML Web browser as an OS will someday happen and the Chromebooks are a good first step. Buyers of these laptops will also serve as an important testbed for us industry watchers in 2013 and could give us important hints about how this market will develop over the next five years.

4: Hybrids and convertibles get high interest in IT

In our discussions with IT directors recently we have heard that they are quite interested in hybrids or convertibles aka laptop and tablet combo devices. Today, with tablets part of the BYOD trend, as well as their own purchases of tablets for specific internal use, these IT managers are now forced to support three devices-PC, Tablet and Smartphone. The idea of just having to support a convertible or hybrid, instead of a separate laptop and tablet, is quite attractive to them. The first generation of these products, such as Lenovo’s Yoga, HP’s Elitebook convertible and Dell’s XPS DUO are being bought in good numbers from IT types who are starting to test them inside their organizations and newer models that are even more powerful will be out by Q3. All this points to potential growth of hybrids and convertibles within IT beginning in 2013.

5: Mobile Malware will be up 100% on consumer devices

For decades, the PC was the only real target for malware, security breaches, and targeted attacks. But with mobile devices soon surpassing the amount of PCs shipped each year, these devices have become major targets for all types of malware. In fact, we believe mobile devices will become the biggest target for hacking by the end of the 2013 because all of these devices are tied much more closely to personal identities and personal information then PC’s.

6: Intel Becomes a top 3 Foundry

There have been various reports from Asia suggesting that Intel’s current fabs are not operating at full capacity due to reduced demands for computer chips in 2012. Although there are others from the semiconductor world who feel demand for chips will increase next year, they believe the biggest benefactor of this growth will be foundries that produce chips made by ARM. If it is true that Intel’s fabs are under utilized, it would not surprise me if they move to extend their fabs to the likes of Apple and others who wish to leave Samsung and may be concerned that TSMC cannot keep up with their needs in the future.

7: e-Book sales over take the amount of physical books sold in retail

The move to eBooks is in full swing. One key reason is that tablets have become the #1 eBook reader and we will sell close to 230 million tablets in 2013. Amazon’s Kindle Reader app is on just about every tablet available, this there is no lack of digital e-books readers already in the market with more coming in the future. The ease of purchasing and keeping libraries up to date on all of your digital devices is the big draw. Plus the fact that about 1000 books can fit on and average reader. This is why you can see e-Books becoming the largest growth area in book distribution next year.

8: 7″ tablets dominate tablet sales

Given the price of the 7″ tablets, which can be as low as $79 but most hover around $199, it is not a surprise that these sized tablets will dominate the market in 2013. But what is not obvious is how they will impact the PC market. The problem for consumers with 10″ tablets is that with a cheap Bluetooth keyboard, it is almost a mini-laptop. Also, since many consumers can do about 80% on a tablet that they can do on a PC, many consumers are either extending the life of their current PC, or if they buy new ones, they purchase cheaper models since they see them sitting idle most of the time. The traditional PC does not go away because they are still needed for heavier computing tasks like managing their media, creating digital movies, etc.

However, if consumers begin to adopt 7″ tablets in big numbers, they may go back to buying new laptops since 7″ tablets are mainly for consumption and are not good at all for traditional productivity tasks. Many industry execs hope this theory is right since it could actually help laptop sales grow in 2013 instead of subtract as many have suggested it will. I believe that next year consumers will sort out which tablet is best for them and in doing so will finally determine the role the PC will handle for them in the future.

9: Apple creates a Hybrid tablet/PC with iOS

I am going out on a limb with this last prediction. But one of the more interesting developments with 10″ tablets is that if you add a Bluetooth keyboard, it becomes a mini-laptop. The Android and Windows side of the tech market are moving quickly to create tablet/laptop combo devices and business and consumers alike are showing interest in these kind of products. If these types of products gain serious traction, I believe Apple may need to respond to this growth threat in the same way they have now entered the 7″ tablet market despite the fact that Steve Jobs told everyone that Apple would never do a 7″ tablet. But imagine a sleekly designed hybrid that perhaps has the design lines of the MacBook Air but the iPad screen detaches from its ultra-thin keyboard. For lack of a better term I call it the Macbook AirPad or iPadAir. I know Tim Cook has denounced this type of design suggesting it is like attaching a “toaster to a refrigerator.” But a sleek and elegant iPad/keyboard device designed by Apple would be of interest to a lot of people, me included.

Why IT buyers are Excited About Convertibles and Hybrids

[dc]W[/dc]hen Steve Jobs introduced the iPad in 2010, he went to great pains to emphasize that the iPad was mainly for content and media consumption. Interestingly, he never even suggested that it could also be used for any form of productivity. But in a subtle way, he did push its role in productivity. That came via a very short announcement handled by Apple’s Sr. VP of marketing, Phil Schiller when he stated that Apple would also create versions of Pages, Numbers and Keynote for the iPad when it launched.

From the iPad’s entry into the marketplace, consumers immediately determined that they would like to have productivity apps and business related programs, along with their music, videos and basic email. Within two months of its launch, companies like SAP, Oracle, Salesforce.com and many others started to buy iPads and began writing business related apps as a part of their pilot programs. Also, many IT managers anticipated quite correctly that the iPad would be added to the list of consumer devices they would need to support based on the BYOD trends that started with smartphones.

Of course, the key to supporting smartphones and tablets in IT is MDM (mobile device management) software. Apple was smart enough to put hooks available for most 3rd party MDM programs thus making it possible to adopt iPads within IT programs relatively quickly. Surprisingly, Google and its Android OS did not architect these hooks in early releases of this OS and consequently, it missed the early stages of IT integration of tablets into their programs. Only recently has Google addressed this issue and we should see more Android tablets being modestly accepted into IT deployments in the future.

Once the iPad got into business settings, the work-flow of a user changed. In the past, they would take a laptop to meetings and use it to access information they might need for that meeting. But once the iPad came out, the laptop stayed on the desk and instead they took the iPad with them. This is especially true for companies who wrote their own programs so all of the key data a person might need in a meeting was available now on their iPad too.

But there is one technology developed for the iPad that I don’t think Apple anticipated. Almost from the beginning, Bluetooth keyboards designed specifically for the iPad started showing up. Over time, companies like Logitech created keyboards that even look like a cover for the iPad in its design as they did with their Logitech Ultrathin keyboard cover. In fact, the addition of a keyboard to an iPad virtually assured that an iPad could now be a real productivity tool in its own right.

But there is an 80%-20% rule that is in play here that makes life for IT managers more difficult. This rule states that 80% of what you can do on a laptop can now be done on a tablet. However, that 20% is tied to what we call heavy lifting tasks, such as graphic design, large spreadsheets, data management, creating major reports or documents, etc. The bottom line is that business users still need a laptop or desktop even if they have a tablet to supplement more of their mobile computing needs during the day.
This means that they now have to support a laptop, tablet and/or smartphone, and with many of these coming in the back door via BYOD (bring your own device).

New Corporate Hardware

In our research discussions with some IT managers, they have told us that they would like to minimize the amount of products that they support and are seriously eyeing what we call hybrids or convertibles that can do heavy lifting, yet serve as a truly mobile tablet in a single device. We define convertibles as a tablet/laptop combo where the screen does not detach, such as Lenovo’s Yoga. Hybrids we define as tablet/keyboard solutions where the screen does detach and serves by itself as a pure slate tablet. At the moment the industry interchanges these definitions but that should sort it self out in the near future.

The Good News and the Bad News

The good news is that the PC OEMs also saw this demand and consumer/IT interest in these types of products and are all moving forward with innovative designs. Lenovo, HP, Dell, Acer and others all have solid offerings in place that give the IT directors an option to have a single device that works as a full PC as well as a stand alone tablet. Given IT managers desire to streamline the amount of products they have to support, we believe that hybrids and convertibles are a sleeper device that will be in great demand next year by business users of all types, including SMB. It would not surprise us if consumers who want to do more productivity on their laptops increase the demand for hybrids and convertibles as well.

The bad news for these OEMs is that this could impact demand for traditional laptops in the future. The PC market has declined this year and its growth going forward will be anemic at best. Tablets have been a major disruptor in many ways. For example, consumers tell us if they can do 80% of what they do on a laptop now on their tablet, they may just extend the life of their current PC or laptop since it mostly sits idle. Or, if they do buy a new laptop or PC, they will buy a cheap one with updated processors and memory knowing full well it will be used less and less as tablets meet most of their needs.

But for IT managers, merging the two into one has a lot of merit for them, especially if the hybrids and convertibles have enough power and battery life to handle the heavy lifting tasks that will continue to be important to a business user. The fact that these products will be serviced as a single device, instead of two, is a key reason that we believe hybrids and convertibles will become a major growth segment in IT sales. It would not surprise us if savvy consumers move in this direction too since a dual-purpose product in many ways can be attractive to them to for similar support and economic reasons.

PCs Gone Wild

One of the most exciting things happening in the industry right now is the diverse innovation coming from Windows PC OEMs, who are making every type of form factor imaginable. Looking specifically at the traditional PC industry and traditional PC OEMs, I have never seen such a wide array of innovative products flood the market place and more are coming.

All of this is being driven by Windows 8 and Microsoft’s bold approach to build an OS that can support such a diverse range of hardware. I have been using many of these devices and I have some observations.

The first thing that strikes me is how different of an experience one can have with the same Windows 8 OS but with different hardware. Back in the old days, you could select a Windows laptop and expect basically the same experience across the board. Those days are gone, for now at least.

Some form factors perform better as a traditional notebook. Others perform better as a tablet. The touch and trackpad experience varies from device to device. The performance of certain devices is drastically different. Some have drastically better battery life than others. The key point I am making, and the observation that really struck me, is that the device landscape for Windows 8 has become one of trade-offs. To maintain the level of form factor innovation we are seeing around Windows 8, OEM and ODMs will be making key decisions of which trade-offs to make in order to bring certain devices to market with certain features at certain price points.

There has never been an environment like this before and my fear is that it is extremely confusing for interested buyers. Just as the OEMs and ODMs will need to make specific trade-offs, so will certain consumers need to be aware and comfortable with those trade-offs. Although trade-offs and compromises have always been apart of the PC shopping experience, it is severely exasperated to an entirely new level.

Consumers shopping for PCs will be forced to examine the features and functions they value (and at what price) more than ever before. I am intrigued by the kind of impact this internal reflection could cause in the marketplace. The reality is that there are a massive amount of PCs in the market that are 4 years old or older. I’ve come across a range of data on this and from all what I have seen, it appears a conservative number is in the 100 to 120 million range. If we are starting with that number as a base then we would initially think that many consumers are in the market for an upgrade, and in fact they are. However, the hardware diversity and bold transition of Windows 8 may have adverse effects as consumers truly begin shopping with a more refined set of needs, wants, and desires, than ever before.

Interestingly, I came across a story at USA Today which highlighted a survey from a Windows security software company called Avast. In this survey Avast gauged the awareness and likelihood of those in the market to upgrade to Windows 8. Of the 135,329 Windows users who responded to the survey, 33% indicated that they were probably not going to upgrade to Windows 8 in the immediate future and 41% said they were definitely not going to upgrade to Windows 8 in the immediate future. Now the nugget of data that came out of this quantitative survey that got a lot of press yesterday was this: Of those 135,329 Windows users who indicated they were in the market for a new PC, 42% said they were going to switch to an Apple product.

Now many may say, that is one survey and often we have to take data like this with a grain of salt as Ed Bott did in his breakdown of that poll. But I have seen data from a number of other research companies and vendors that all back up this concern and relative uncertainty. However, a key point remains. A large section of the market is hesitant, and a large section of the market is looking at all their options, even if it means switching platforms. Doesn’t necessarily mean they will switch, but they are considering all their options–that is a key point.

The personal computing landscape has changed drastically in the last 3-4 years in that those who bought PCs in that time frame, who are now in the market for a new one, have a much more complex landscape than ever before. The competition for those in the market for upgrades will be fierce and more importantly consumers will be more savvy to their own personal preferences with these devices.

There are a number of scenarios I can see playing out from optimistic to catastrophic for the PC industry and I will look at each briefly.

Tablets and Premium PCs

If you read my column where I shared some high level thoughts on the Surface then you understand my view that the product is not the best tablet nor is it the best notebook. Because I feel the pure tablet form factor perfectly serves the mass market needs, my gut is that consumers will shop for a no compromise tablet. However, we know that the traditional PC still plays a role. So I can see a scenario where consumers buy the best tablet and the best notebook, thus truly giving them the best of both worlds. This doesn’t necessarily mean they buy them in the same year but the point remains that I see a scenario where it could play out this way.

If this happens, and consumers take this road in large numbers, it is very good for many players in the PC ecosystem. An interesting thought on this scenario, is that generally speaking a well made premium PC will have a longer life cycle, thus extending the refresh rate perhaps even longer than it is today for traditional PCs.

Tablets and Low Cost PCs

The other scenario I can see happening and one that may be a bit more troubling for certain companies, is one where consumers buy a no compromise tablet and a very low cost PC. If you buy my logic that the traditional PC form factor over serves the needs for a large section of the mass market, then a key question remains. If consumers, as they reflect and become in line with their true PC usage, realize that the tablet can do upwards of 80% of what they primarily do on a daily basis, then why would they spend lots of money on a product that will not get used every day, week, etc. If the tablet becomes the personal computer and the traditional PC just sits in the other room and is only used for some tasks, then in my opinion the traditional PC loses its perceived value in the eyes of consumers.

In either scenario, the life cycle of the PC is extended and the refresh rate the industry used to enjoy with PCs will most likely shift to tablets. Lower cost PCs may need to be refreshed more often but in this scenario the profit opportunities are not in PCs they are in tablets.

This scenario is one that not every OEM today is poised to compete in and could be challenging for some. The reality is the industry has changed dramatically. Consumers have become way more in tune with what they want and why they want it. That shift will have profound impacts on the types of products we see and who the winners and losers in the market may be in the future.

The PCs gone wild trend of form factor innovation is not just necessary it is a necessity if companies are going to stay in the game, compete, and have sustainable business going forward. I’m excited about the innovation in PC hardware we are seeing today and I am even more excited for what is around the corner.

Microsoft’s Retail Gamble

Over the weekend, I went to Microsoft’s large store that is in the Westfield Shopping Center in San Jose. Like a few similar Microsoft stores, it is across from an Apple store and I suspect that Microsoft is hoping to lure some potential Apple product buyers away from Apple with this strategy.

Luckily, there are seats right outside Microsoft’s store, so as I waited for my wife, who was off shopping, I planted myself in these cushy chairs the mall has and just watched people come and go through Microsoft’s doors. The first time I did this was mid week, three days after the store opened to much fanfare. I watched the store for 45 minutes that day and in that time frame, Apple hosted about 130 customers while the Microsoft store had only about 12 visitors. Even more troubling at the time, the 12 that did go in, came out empty handed, while well over 20 people left Apple’s stores with iPads, Macbooks, and even two iMacs were sold.

This was before the launch of Windows 8 and Microsoft’s Surface tablet. So this time I assumed that the Microsoft store would have a lot more customers, and they did. I counted about 40 in the store this time. However, during the 45 minutes I sat out front of the store, I saw nobody leaving the store with any Microsoft product at all. But across the way at Apple’s store they had about 120 people inside and a line of 30 outside waiting to pick up preordered iPad Mini’s and the new iPad 4. And I counted at least 35 people carrying Apple products out the door while sitting there.

The good news for Microsoft is that people who were in the store were checking out the Surface, Windows 8 and many of the laptops and touch based ultrabooks that were on display. But the bad news is that most of them were Looky-Lou’s, drawn in mostly to see the new Windows 8 touch OS and the much advertised Surface. Also, while every salesperson in Apple’s store was engaged with a customer, I counted 6 Microsoft store employees standing around trying to look busy.

The Changing Retail Frontier

Now, I realize that Microsoft is new to the retail game, while Apple has been perfecting their store concepts for over 10 years. And my “research” was not scientific in any way and was just observations by me, a pretty seasoned market researcher trained to observe consumer buying patterns and usage models. I am sure that Microsoft sold many products of various sorts during the day, but by comparison with the Apple store across the way, I doubt it was even close to the daily sales Apple had in that store or any other store Apple has around the world.

Regardless of what Microsoft made that day in products sold, having their own retail stores is critical to them given the competitive landscape. I understand they will open at least a dozen new stores world wide in 2013 and more in the future. Of course, the competitive reason for doing so is because of Apple’s extreme success with their stores and how it has affected Microsoft’s fortunes. More importantly, Apple’s stores have reprogrammed how consumers think about buying tech products and getting personal service once they buy an Apple product.

In fact, I don’t think we can underestimate how the Apple stores have impacted retail in general. The idea of having a sales person standing there with an iPhone payment device and instantly checking a person out is revolutionary. And if you have the new Apple Store software app on your IOS device, you can even check yourself out now.
The man behind Apple’s stores, Ron Johnson, is now CEO at JC Penny’s and is trying to apply this same kind of store experience to a very old retail model. While he is having trouble getting this company to move quickly to be more user friendly, I have no doubt that he will eventually be successful in changing JC Penny’s retail model with new store designs as well as how people are eventually serviced.

Microsoft’s retail stores are important for them and the industry for another reason. All of their partners, except Sony, don’t have the money and the wherewithal to do their own stores and need to rely on Microsoft to become not only a dedicated retail outlet for their products, but to also serve as trained sales people who know the products and can intelligently sell them.

This will always be a problem for Microsoft retail since they carry dozens of different laptops, tablets and smartphones making it more difficult for their salespeople to know the products they sell intimately. This in fact has proven difficult in many big box retailing organizations as well with a highly diversified and fragmented product offering. In Apple’s case, they have key products with iOS and key products with the OS X and while they have many products in their mix, that mix is 10 times smaller than what Microsoft can sell through their stores. Consequently, Apple’s staff knows their products in and out and I am often surprised that even the non-genius staff can answer tough questions when I have gone into their stores and needed an answer about a problem I might be having at any given time.

When it comes to retail, Microsoft has no choice but to keep these stores going and expand their potential reach. And for most of their partners, they need Microsoft to serve as the only Windows focused retail outlet that can represent them properly. I have no clue when these stores will break even and be profitable, but Microsoft’s retail gamble is in full swing and they can not turn back if they plan to gain any ground on Apple and Google.

How the iPad Mini Could Impact Future PC Sales

[dc]N[/dc]ow that the iPad Mini has been out for a while and many of us at Creative Strategies have been testing them, it is becoming clear to us that this 7.9” form factor or most 7” inch models will literally become the most important tablet for consumers in the future. There are a lot of reasons for this, but the main one is that it is light, thin, and in the iPad’s case, delivers a best in breed tablet experience. Also, these smaller tablets will always be cheaper than larger tablets because the BOM cost for a smaller version will always be less than the bigger models.

But as I have personally used the iPad mini for some time now, I have begun to see my usage patterns with tablets change significantly. Before the iPad Mini, the tablet I used the most was the original iPad. Although I also used my Kindle Fire HD often for reading and media consumption, the iPad was my real go-to device. And it became even more important to me once I added the Logitech Ultrathin keyboard to it since it now was used for content consumption as well as productivity.

However, there is an 80/20 rule with tablets that is becoming an important metric when it comes to tablets and PCs. It turns out most consumers can do about 80% of the most common tasks they do with a PC on a tablet, and any other key tasks, such as media management, large spreadsheets, music server, etc are designated to the laptop. But once I started using the iPad Mini, I found that it now became my go-to-device because of its lightweight, small size and literal duplication of everything I have on the iPad as well as the full iPad experience.

But there is an interesting twist to this. When my only tablet was my iPad, I defaulted to my laptop for heavy lifting tasks. But once I started using the iPad Mini, I found myself-defaulting to the 9.7” iPad with its keyboard as my main productivity device and found that in this case, a 90/10 rule kicked in. That means that I spent 90% of my time on these tablet solutions and only about 10% on my laptop.

Now I realize that this may not be a broad trend, but we are hearing the same type of storys in our consumer interviews. Although fresh and not fully completed research, many people who have an iPad Mini and are sharing similar stories. Almost all that we talked to told us that the role of the laptop has diminished for them significantly since they got the iPad, and were now using the iPad Mini more frequently than their larger iPads.

When I asked them if they were interested in buying a Windows 8 PC, their comments were pretty consistent. They said that if the PC were only used 10-20% of the time, they would most likely just extend the life of their PCs or laptops instead of buying new ones. And if they did buy a new PC or laptop, it would be the cheapest they could find, as they could no longer justify a more expensive and powerful version if it mostly sat at home and used for such a short time for more data or media intensive apps.

I suspect that this scenario with consumers may play out a lot more in the future, and at the very least, their tablet does handle the majority of their daily digital needs. The PC as we know it today will continue to lose its primary role in the home given its lack of use more often than not.

Even yesterday on a call with analysts Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang made a key point. He said:

consumers realize “a great tablet is better than a cheap PC.”

If this trend does play itself out as I have suggested, the impact on the traditional PC market could be dramatic within two-three years. As consumers buy lower cost and small tablets that will only get better in performance, screen clarity, and apps, it supersedes their PC use and demand for PCs and laptop will decrease significantly.

As my colleague Steve Wildstrom stated on Wed, PCs will not go away, but will soon play a different role for consumers than they have in the past. But if tablets increase their role as the dominant device for consumers to access the majority of their digital needs, than the impact on PC demand has to be impacted down the road. In fact, some key industry insiders call this the PC Cliff, suggesting that we could see a time in the not-so-distant future where demand for PCs fall by a steep amount, giving way to tablets that will take over their role as the major growth segment and primary of the PC industry.

Interestingly, there could be a silver lining for traditional PC vendors if they innovate quickly. In my comments above, I mentioned that the iPad Mini has now become my go-to tablet while the original iPad with the Logitech keyboard is now my cross over device handling consumption and productivity. And my use of my laptop has declined as a result of this. But for me, the iPad with a keyboard has become kind of a laptop replacement. It is touch based, lighter than any laptop I could ever own, and has an average 10-hour battery life and runs most of the apps I need, as well as giving me a very rich Web browsing experience.

But my iPad with keyboard is really what we call in the industry a hybrid, which has a touch based tablet tied to a detachable keyboard. Microsoft’s Surface falls into this category as does HP’s Envy X2 that they call a convertible. The nomenclature for this seems to be ever changing but we define a convertible as a tablet/keyboard combo that does not detach and a hybrid, a tablet with a detachable keyboard.

The interest in the hybrids as we define it is extremely high, although the demand for Windows RT based hybrids like the Surface is somewhat muted since it does not have backward compatibility with existing Windows apps. Instead, the hybrids we are seeing great interest in, both with consumers and business users, are Windows 8 devices that use an x86 chip and has full backwards compatibility with existing Windows software like HP’s Envy 2 Convertible. But if the scenario I suggest plays out, it will be these hybrids that drive “laptop” sales in the future, while demand for more traditional laptops will wane considerably.

I believe that the iPad mini and smaller tablets will be even more disruptive to the traditional PC market than the iPad has been to date. We can envision a time soon where a user has a 7” tablet mostly for content consumption, email and Web browsing, and a hybrid to pick up any productivity slack they may have. The bottom line is, the more consumers use tablets of either size, the more they realize that the laptop or PC in the home is overkill, and decide to either just keep the one they have longer or buy the cheapest PC they can for any extra computing needs they may have that a tablet cannot do.

I fear that a PC cliff is not far off and we are urging all PC vendors to seriously consider the ramifications of what these smaller tablets will mean to their future PC and laptop demand.

When is a Tablet not a Tablet? When It’s a Surface

Let me start this column out with some context on Windows 8. My mind has changed to a degree about Windows 8 and in particular touch based notebooks and UltraBooks. Several of the Windows 8 PCs I have been using are pure notebook form factors with solid touch-screens. I was never as negative on the addition of touch screens on notebooks as others in the industry, primarily because for over a year now, I have been using my iPad heavily in many work contexts with a keyboard accessory. So the idea of having a keyboard in front of me and touching a screen rather than using a mouse is an everyday way of life. I genuinely believe that many will welcome and enjoy the addition of touch in Windows 8 on many notebook form factors.

I’ll also add this point, Windows 8 may be one of the better Windows releases, if not the best I have seen in some time. I’ll write more on that later and I realize I may be in the minority with that statement.

But now I want to turn my attention to Surface, and more than just Surface, Windows 8 on devices that look and feel more like a tablet.

Just Because You Touch a Screen Doesn’t Make it a Tablet

Simply because a piece of hardware has the ability to touch it, does not make it a tablet. The traditional metaphor of a PC is the desktop / notebook mode. In this mode the screen sits on a desk, or a lap, and is used at arms length. Tablets on the other hand blow that paradigm wide open because they are built to be used while being held—mostly one handed— and operated solely by touch. Tablets are designed, and their experience is designed, to be more intimate and more personal. This does not mean the addition of a keyboard to a tablet is not useful, only that it is not required for most common tasks.

Steve Ballmer made a specific statement about Surface that I want to point out. He said:

Windows 8 is the greatest example of the PC meets the tablet – Steve Ballmer

This quote is a prime example of the way Microsoft thinks about Windows and computing. It highlights that they are still using the old school PC metaphor of computing being done on a desk or lap, at arms length, while stationary. And the Windows 8 platform, as well as the Surface, and many other tablet centric Windows 8 PCs fully conform to this metaphor.

Just look at how Surface was designed and where its value is being positioned. With a kickstand (to prop it up), and a keyboard, AND in landscape mode. All the same features of a notebook. In reality the Surface is a unique new form factor, but it is still largely dependent on the traditional PC computing paradigm. It is designed to converge these two experiences rather than innovate on their differences.

It is important to add here that I am a mature tablet user. I have been using the iPad since the beginning and have it fully melded into all areas of my life in key ways. I also heavily used many tablet PC devices well before Surface. Many writing about Surface rightly point out that it should not be compared to the iPad. I agree, for many of the reasons I point out above, and more to the point that I am not convinced Windows 8 is actually a tablet OS—yet. But to the extend comparing is necessary, it is because the iPad is the gold standard of a tablet experience on the market today.

Ballmer said that Windows 8 is the PC meets a tablet. My response to him is that the iPad is the re-invention of the PC.

That Tablets Advantage is Portrait Mode

I firmly say, and stand on my conviction that the iPad has not only re-invented the PC but changed the computing paradigm for a few reasons — Portrait mode and touch computing (accomplishing complex computing tasks that once required a mouse and keyboard via touch).

I wrote a long analysis on computing in Portrait mode, where I highlight the many advantages of this mode of computing for things like writing, reading, browsing the web, etc. I use portrait mode primarily on my iPad. Only some things like games and a few other apps use landscape exclusively. The iPad, and nearly all of the 275,000 tablet apps and growing not only support both portrait and landscape but they are built uniquely to take advantage of both modes.

Conversely, Windows 8 and Surface, appear to be built primarily for one mode—landscape. Given that Windows 8 is built for a 16:9 format this is not surprising. The software was architected for landscape. Although, the screen can be used in portrait mode, doing so presents a far less enjoyable experience than in landscape. For some this may not be a problem but for me it was a fundamentally counter experience to what I consider a pure tablet experience. Many popular apps, including MSFTs own app store, are built only for landscape mode. A mode that while leaning back in bed, or a couch, etc., is just not comfortable to hold for long periods of time.

I’ve been adamant that browsing the web in portrait mode if far better than in landscape. As is reading books, magazines, etc,. Take a look at the side by side screen shot of the NY Times on Surface and on iPad. Both in portrait mode.

What happens when you orient Surface to portrait mode, due to the 16:9 aspect ratio, is that everything gets smaller. Where when you flip the iPad, and even Android tablets, the text size stays the same in some cases, or shrinks slightly in others. What you get in portrait mode is more text on a screen, that even when smaller is not crunched or impossible to read. You are able to see more of the web page on the Surface because of 16:9, only the text was much harder to read. Of course you could zoom in or tap in, but that required some time to get the web page consumable. Not a deal breaker, but also not ideal.

Oddly enough two experiences I had were not horrible in portrait mode and you will be baffled by one of them. The first was the Kindle app, which just as I described about the iPad never changed the text size when flipping from portrait to landscape. Which being able to view significantly more text on the screen than the iPad in portrait was a welcome addition. The other experience was with the desktop version of Internet explorer on the Surface. I pointed out a few weeks ago the odd solution of having two different versions of Internet Explorer. In that article I complained that the desktop version of Internet Explorer was not as touch friendly as its Windows 8 app brother. However, it turns out that desktop Internet Explorer is more portrait mode friendly than its Windows 8 app brother. When using Internet Explorer on the desktop, the web operates more like the iPad. When you flip the screen between portrait and landscape the text stays the same size and you simply see more on the screen. Go figure.

Landscape obviously has its advantages in many scenarios like movies, some games, etc. But, in a broad set of tablet use cases portrait is equally and sometimes more important. A true tablet in my opinion provides an excellent experience in both landscape and portrait modes.

All of that to say that there may some hope for Windows 8 from a pure tablet standpoint. Some apps gave me hope while others caused me to shake my head. Portrait mode in Windows 8 will require some specific software approaches from companies and developers who understand portrait and landscape mode and the key tablet use cases for both. It is simply not there yet holistically.

Conclusions

There are more things I like about Surface, and Windows 8, as PCs but not as tablets. I believe that those consumers in the market for a tablet, are not in the market for a PC. Therefore for the tablet market, I am not convinced Surface, or either flavor of Windows 8 is a solution. We will see if this changes or not.

I know many happy Surface customers and many of them have never really used an iPad and are fully in Microsoft’s ecosystem. This may be the recipe of success for Windows 8 PCs.

For Apple, it means they still have no true tablet competition, particularly with the iPad.

Don’t consider this column a review of Surface. That is coming, as their are many things I like about it as a touch based PC, gestures in particular. The main point I am trying to get across is that we need to think about PCs and tablets differently.

When it comes to the tablet discussion, we will need to dive deeper into the 7” form factor role. A form factor Microsoft is avoiding. If Microsoft wants to be serious about tablets, they will need to think long and hard about how to approach the 7” form factor.

I’m sure there is a market for these type of converged devices, but the question is how big? I can see people buying the best pure breed tablet and a very low cost notebook as an equally compelling solution. A solution which actually may be the best of both worlds not a compromise of both worlds.

There is still more to be said in this discussion. Things like how does the iPad stack up to the Surface as a PC? Especially if one does not care about Office. Some may say you can’t compare the Surface to the iPad in terms of a tablet and I may not totally agree but I see their point. However, some may also say you can’t compare the iPad to the Surface in terms of a PC. For that I say we will see.

The Personal Computing Land Grab

It is hard to describe what is happening right now in the personal computing industry than anything other than a massive land grab. The land grab I speak of does not apply as much to traditional “old school” computing devices like desktops and portables, but it does apply to smartphones and tablets.

The point that continues to be forgotten, is that there are still billions of people who do not have a smart phone, tablet, or other form of primary computing device. This point is understandably forgotten because so many in the mainstream media only focus on the here-and-now and that is ok. But in the here-and-now many tend to focus on the market share point as if the market is as big as its going to get. The reality is that specifically with smartphones and tablets we are in the midst of the largest global total addressable market (TAM) expansion we have ever seen.

Just a quick look at some numbers highlights this. Right now we sell around 80-90 million traditional PCs every quarter. That market is not currently expanding. If we believe, as I do, that the tablet market is larger that the traditional PC market, then the upside is still significant. Approximating up to the current quarter, there are less than 20 million tablets sold worldwide on average every quarter. Which means the opportunity is to add tens of millions of new tablet buyers each quarter with the current growth rate of 50-60 percent a year. Smartphones sell just over 100 million world wide every quarter, similarly growing at about 40-50% year over year. Which means tens of millions of new customers will be buying smart phones globally every quarter. This market expansion is being driven by new customers, first time buyers, and that is the key to the land grab.

This global expansion is being driven primarily by Post-PC devices of a highly mobile nature. The limiter with old school PC devices was and still is the form factor. Desktops and portables, due to their design, simply had limited use cases. Namely, you had to be stationary. With a desktop, you sat at a desk and couldn’t move. With a portable, you could move from one location to another but still needed to be stationary to use it. Tablets and smartphones break the computing paradigm of being stationary and bring mobile computing into new places. This is why the market opportunity for tablets and smartphones is much larger than desktops and portables—mobility.

The key to this land grab is entry points, and they key to defending your land is ecosystems.

Getting Consumers To Move Onto Your Land

Step one is get consumers on to your land. If we trace Apple’s strategy back just over 10 years, this was the iPod. The iPod, with its simple yet powerful value proposition, is the product that set the stage for Apple. The iPod could arguably be explained as the catalyst for the post-pc era.

This battle to get consumers onto your land is the single biggest reason the pace of innovation is picking up. Many were shocked that Apple refreshed as many products in their product line just before the holiday quarter. The truth is that most if not all of the refreshes, new product launches, etc, are targeting new customers or ones who have not upgraded in quite some time. Take the iPad Mini for example.

As hard as it is to believe not everyone has an iPad. Yet there is still extreme interest around the tablet form factor. Apple is convinced that once people start using iPads, they have profound and some times life changing experiences. Our own internal consumer research confirms this as well. So for Apple, primary strategy number one, is to break down the barriers to owning an iPad. Apple’s focus is to bring premium features to the market at mainstream prices. We could debate that point all day but an objective look at the pricing and features of all products in the market would validate the point. With every upgrade the brought to their holiday lineup, they stayed true to that formula. And as Tim Cook said, “we are not taking our foot off the gas.” Most Apple competitors aren’t in total control of the gas pedal, yet alone have enough money to keep their foot on the gas. Strategically, this is a key point in the land grab.

Microsoft, and their partner ecosystem, also understand the land grab. Microsoft had, and still has, most of the land of traditional desktops and portables. Key point number one for them is to maintain that land but expand into new ones. Hence their aggressiveness with new form factors across the board. Windows 8’s success hinges on its ability to move into new land during this land grab, namely post-PC devices. This is also where uncertainty still remains about the platforms ability to do so.

The Sticky Ecosystem

Hardware and software get consumers in the door, or onto the land in my analogy. The services are the part of the ecosystem that keep people loyal. iCloud, iTunes, iMessage, etc., are examples of this for Apple. XBOX Live, XBOX Music, Office related services, SkyDrive, etc., are examples of this for Microsoft. All of these services act as glue tying their hardware and software services together in relevant and useful ways for consumers.

The strategy is to get consumers onto your land and keep them there with a strong and useful ecosystem. To some degree these ecosystems are mature and to some degree they are not. The services element of this is one of the most exciting upsides and is still full of unexplored territory.

There is much land still to be grabbed. The pace of innovation is going to continue to accelerate because of it. But this competition will make each competitor better and in the end bring to us, the consumers, some of the most exciting, useful, and enjoyable technology products never before imagined.

Why a SoftBank Investment in Sprint Could be Disruptive

There were multiple stories over the last few days about a potential investment from SoftBank in Sprint. The idea would be that Softbank could leverage some of Sprint’s technology, especially the Clearwire architecture, for use in Japan as well as bringing Softbank’s mobile payment system to the US market via Sprint. Also, a cash infusion from Softbank would allow Sprint to build out their LTE network faster than planned.

However, none of the articles I have read convinced me that these writers actually know what SoftBank’s real intention is and why they would really want to invest in Sprint, a company that has seen declining subscribers and a slowing of revenue. However, SoftBank is the kind of company that could surprise people in the end with why and what they want from Sprint.

SoftBank is known as a maverick company in Japan and their colorful founder and CEO, Masayoshi Son, often called the Steve Jobs of Japan, is just about as eccentric as Steve Jobs was. I served on the Comdex board of advisors for 18 years and in the late 1990’s when Comdex was sold to SoftBank for over $600 million dollars, I got to meet Mr. Son and get to know a little about how he thinks and operates.

I happened to be overseeing a conference for Phoenix Technologies back then and Mr. Son, who had a tight relationship with Phoenix, was asked to come and present at this event at Spanish Bay around the time he bought Comdex. One of the things he said that got a lot of media at the time is that his vision for SoftBank was a 300-year vision, and he was planning all projects, and acquisitions, with this in mind.

But he also shared a story that kind of gives you a feel for how he really operates too. He told us that when he was planning to enter the Japanese telecom market, he had been lobbying with the government to open up what is a stringently controlled market highly influenced by the government backed telecom provider NTT. He told us that after four or five meetings with government officials, he was getting nowhere with them.

So, one day he went back to the top government official’s office and barged in with a can of gas and locked the door behind him. According to my notes from this event, he showed the can of gas to the government official and told him he would pour it on himself and light it if he did not listen to him and promise to take action. We all had a good laugh at this story and thought he just made it up to illustrate a point. But it turned out this is exactly what he did and to his credit, he got the complete attention of the top telecom official and other government executives and within a year they allowed SoftBank into what was their closed telecom service industry.

Over the last decade, SoftBank has become one of the most powerful companies in Japan’s telecommunications market and has investments in all types of businesses and ventures around the world. It turns out that Mr. Son really is serious about a 300-year vision and is putting the pieces in place to make SoftBank a mover and shaker in a lot of industries for a long time to come.

While some question SoftBank’s ability to make such a huge investment given the leveraged debt it already has, if anyone can do it, it would be Masayoshi Son. And if he did so, the technology direction and transfer of technologies most likely would benefit both and, more importantly, would make Sprint more competitive with AT&T and Verizon. In fact, the CEO’s of Verizon and AT&T have to be looking at a potential deal between SoftBank and Sprint with concern. They are acutely aware of Mr. Son’s track record as one who shakes up industries and has a way of moving companies he has bought or put money into in new directions that many cannot predict.

While the technology and business reasons we can ascertain from both companies strong points make sense, I have a sneaky suspicion that Mr. Son has another motivation behind this move. Sources tell me that Mr. Son and SoftBank have been very interested in the US telecom market and been amazed at the slow development of extremely high-speed Internet connections available for business users and consumer users alike.

In Japan, SoftBank has made ultra high speed Internet connectivity of at least 75 megs per second, the cornerstone of Mr. Son’s telecom push and has plans to give consumers consistent speeds of well over 100 megs per second in the works today. Now these are wired connections but even so, this is huge compared to the measly 12-15 mgs I get from Comcast in my home if all conditions are right.

Given the extremely slow moves of the cable and telecom companies of getting ultra-high speed connectivity to their customers, if SoftBank and Sprint began moving the needle so to speak, quickly in this direction, it would put huge pressure on the competitors to follow suit. I for one would love to see this happen and not only see Sprint become a more solid competitor to AT&T and Verizon but with SoftBank, perhaps become the catalyst to get all of us Internet connectivity speeds at least equal to what they have in Japan now.

Of course, there are still regulatory hurdles to overcome as well as scrutiny by anti-trust organizations for this SoftBank/Sprint deal to happen. And then there are the banking issues to deal with too. However, if the heads FCC, FTC and other regulatory agencies see a Japanese man in their lobby with a can of gas, it is not a terrorist. It’s just a maverick Japanese business man who is frustrated with the slow movements of the FCC and telecom companies to provide really high speed bandwidth to the US and I suggest they be ready to talk to him seriously and be prepared to move faster on these key issues than they are today.

Netbooks, Tablets, and Good Enough Computing

You may have caught my title and asked “aren’t Netbooks dead? Why are you bringing them up?” That is an excellent question and while Netbooks are mostly dead (they are finding a role in emerging markets) they taught us something very interesting that sheds light on the tablet phenomenon.

Since our firm tracks the computing industry extremely closely, we were doing quite a bit of analysis on the market for Netbooks. Although it was short lived, which we predicted, they taught us something that is fundamentally important to understand. Which is that there is a massive market for computing devices that are good enough.

An Important Evolution

When the Netbook began its rise as a category we started looking at what were the driving factors for their market success. From our consumer interviews we learned a number of interesting things.

First was that most buying a Netbook were not looking to replace a notebook, rather they were looking for a less expensive 2nd, 3rd, 4th, computer for their home and/or family member to be able to get online, do simple tasks, etc. What became clear was that not every member of the household had a personal computer in an average home and many consumers appreciated the low-cost and small size of many Netbooks to fill this void. These products represented a low-cost way to get multiple new PCs in the home for simple tasks and more importantly alternate screens for web browsing. Large numbers of consumers told us that the few PCs they had in the home were constantly being fought over, mainly for web browsing. Netbooks looked like an easy way to get everyone in the home a PC screen of some type. Many knocked the category at the time and believed Netbooks were just truncated PCs, however, they were good enough for the mass market.

But our interest in Netbooks went further into the experience consumers had with them. More often than not consumers mentioned how the capabilities of the Netbook were sufficient for most, and in many cases all, of their every day needs for a personal computer. This led to the good enough computing reality that has opened the eyes of many in the industry. As innovations become saturated and mature, at some point distinct elements of those innovations reach a point of good enough or diminishing returns. At this point, further innovations in the same areas become less apparent and obvious. This is particularly true of things like semiconductors, displays, broadband, etc. In all these instances there comes a point in time where the advancements become harder to distinguish.

An analogy I’ve used frequently when discussing good enough computing is one related to Intel. Back when Intel was pushing Moore’s law heavily and MHZ and then GHZ was a big deal, we could objectively see the speed and performance advancements by simply opening a program like Word or Excel. I recall at many IDF conferences, Intel opening an MS Office program and showing how much faster it opened on the latest generation over the previous. Today, no such example exists for the casual observer to notice the performance benefits of new generation silicon. CPUs have reached a point of good enough for the mass market. And Netbooks brought this realization to light.

Good Enough and Smart Enough

It was this realization and learnings around Netbooks that led us to believe that tablets would be as disruptive as they have been. Tablets, like Netbooks, have taken advantage of the good enough computing paradigm but done so by adding something Netbooks did not–touch. I’ve written extensively on the concept of touch computing and why I believe it is foundational to the future of computing so I won’t go into too much detail here. Touch and the tablet form factor made the good enough experience for consumers even that much more compelling, forcing them to evaluate if they need anything else as far as computers go. Some consumers may need more than a tablet, and some may not, the point is they will decide what works best for them.

The full realization in all of this, is simply that there is a massive section of the market that does not have extreme demands with technology. When we were doing market analysis around Netbooks, we asked consumers the tasks they did with PCs on a regular basis. From that research we learned that the vast majority of those we spoke with, who fell into the early and late majority, used less than five applications daily and none of them were CPU intensive (arguably playing Flash video is CPU intensive but that is a debate for another time).

The key takeaway to understand with good enough computing is that many of the key features and innovations that originally drove demand diminish (i.e CPU speed, memory, resolution, # of apps, etc.) This means that future product generations need to appeal to customers in new ways that go beyond the elements which are good enough. I believe that too often companies get stuck putting too much emphasis on the elements of their products which are already good enough for the mass market, thus those features get glossed over, when in reality they should shift their emphasis to what is new or unique. Quality product marketing, messaging, and positioning will be at a premium going forward.

What appealed to the mass market of computing the past few decades will not be what appealed to them now in a mature and post-mature personal computing landscape. Understanding good enough computing does not mean that you stop innovating. What it does mean, however, is that it will be absolutely critical to be careful not to pre-maturely bring key innovations to market and risk having the mass market not understand the value of them. The key, rather, is to carefully and strategically bring key innovations to market at precisely the right time in which the mass market will value them.

How 7-Inch Tablets Could Help Notebooks Make a Comeback

If you follow much of what I write you may be familiar with the solutions based thinking approach I frequently mention. The fundamental aspect of a solutions based approach to personal computing understands that multiple screens working seamlessly in conjunction together will equal personal computing. Personal computing does not mean a single personal computer any longer. In the post-PC era it means many personal computers working together in a whole.

I have used this philosophy when outlining how different screens in conjunction together pair well and equal a computing whole. For example when I wrote about the combination of desktops paired with tablets as a solution. I’ve even wrote about this with regards to 7″ tablets and their role with traditional notebooks–which is the focus of this column.

There is ample data surfacing from different parts of the industry to support the claim that the iPad has been disrupting traditional PC sales. This is true and it is happening for reasons which I outline here in my column on why I believe tablets are the future.

Yet there are segments of the market that still need and require a traditional notebook. To be entirely honest I am not sure which camp I am in yet, whether the tablet + desktop is the solution for me or 7″ tablet + notebook is the solution for me. Until I fully experience the latter the jury will be out.

This brings up a key point and it relates to how product segments mature. Traditional PCs are mature and consumers are so familiar with their needs, wants, and desires with traditional PCs that when they buy them do so extremely intentionally to meet the needs, wants, and desires they have established for themselves.

Tablets on the other hand are not a mature category yet with regards to the mass market and are therefore still maturing as a product segment. It will most likely take customers at least two generations of owning a tablet to fully establish their needs, wants, and desires for a tablet PC. This is where the 10″ v. 7″ tablet form factor will come into question.

If you are like me, upon using the iPad I began using my notebook less. Due to its size, convenience, battery life, robust and simple interface, etc., I found and still find the iPad to be extremely efficient in both my work flow and my non-work based personal computing tasks. Like fellow TIME columnist Harry McCracken, I reserve my notebook for specific tasks and use my iPad for everything else.

However, Harry and I, along with many others who find this solution suitable, may only represent one segment of the market. We are served with this solution but perhaps others will not be. This is where 7″ tablets will make the discussion that much more interesting.

Upon getting the Nexus 7, I set my iPad aside and committed to using it as my primary tablet. Upon doing so, I found that I pulled my notebook out quite a bit more than when I used my iPad as my primary tablet. This was not a surprise for me since I had already had an assumption that 7″ tablets were not general purpose computing devices like 10″ tablets but instead are better suited for media and entertainment only. I still believe this is the case and will remain the case. If you have experienced the Kindle Fire or Fire HD you will probably feel similar. None of the products I just mentioned took much time away from my notebook like the iPad does. But this did re-enforce a point that I feel is important. Which is that 7″ tablets will help to rejuvenate the notebook market. At least in terms of notebook upgrades.

Part of the reason tablets have been disrupting PC sales is because for many segments of the market there are more questions than answers around tablets. They are not sure yet how far a tablet can take them in terms of personal computing. Consumers need to experience tablets to fully come to a conclusion as to whether they can replace some or all of their computing needs and what other products they may need as a part of a solution. Some may conclude they still need a traditional PC some may not. But the question around tablets and the fact that we have heard from many notebook intenders that they are delaying the purchase of a notebook because they want a tablet only re-enforces this point.

Many consumers are in the market for a tablet but are not quite out of the market for notebooks. As the tablet market matures and consumers come to conclusions about a tablet and the role a touch based computer will play in their personal computing ecosystem, it will allow them to make more informed decisions on the solutions they require. For many of those who have put off buying a new notebook perhaps once they realize they want a 7″ tablet but still need a notebook, they will then decide to upgrade. That being said, Notebook refresh cycles will no longer be the same with tablets and smartphones taking over the 2 year average life cycle.

Although, I expect the next few years to be rough waters for Windows PC makers, I feel it is key that those who desire to continue making notebooks, develop a strategy for 7″ tablets.

Observations and Opinions About Apple Retail

As Tim pointed out earlier in the week, Apple competitors have many things to be worried about. Strategically, however, Apple’s retail presence would be one of the biggest things keeping me up at night if I was competing with Apple.

Unlike most companies, Apple sells directly to the end customer who will be using their products. Apple has and owns a clear and distinct relationship with their customers. Many other companies sell to retailers, or the channel, and therefore have a more hands off relationship with their customers. In fact, for many non Apple customers, if a relationship exists it is with a retailer and it is weak at best.

Looking forward to the next decade, and perhaps longer, Apple’s retail strategy and presence will be one of the driving forces helping set them apart from the competition and engaging in an ongoing relationship with their loyal customers.

Steady, Healthy Growth

Earlier this week Apple inevitably became the most valuable company in history. I firmly believe that their retail strategy played a key role in making this happen. I also firmly believe that their retail strategy will continue to play a key role in continuing their value growth.

To get a better picture of what is happening with Apple retail I made a chart looking at retail store visitors per quarter going back to 2009. On top of the retail visits data, I layered on key milestones of product sales for specific quarters. I also added at the bottom how many stores were open at key points in the growth cycle.

As you look at the above slide, the following observations stand out. It is obvious that Apple is on a steady growth trend. Apple’s growing retail store presence globally, as well as their growing number of visitors per quarter, remains on a steady upward trend along with nearly every other part of their business.

Notice also that with each growth trend, a new baseline was established. With each growth cycle a new normal was established with the exception of the last holiday quarter. The same is true with key product sales like Macs, iPads, and iPhones. They may dip slightly but not below past year-over-year growth. My chart shows that this is true since 2009 and my guess it goes back even farther.

Therefore, there is no reason to assume Apple’s steady growth trend will not continue going forward. In fact, Apple’s growth is following closely the growth of key segments of the market. Year after year as the total addressable market for smartphones and tablets grows. As it does so do all areas of Apple’s business. Interestingly Apple’s Mac business is also growing even as the market for traditional PCs stays relatively flat. I believe Apple retail has something to do with that. Since key markets still have a massive amount of headroom (particularly in China) to grow we can be assured that Apple’s ability to capture share of that growth is more than likely.

The key in this scenario in my opinion is that consumers have a premium shopping experience with Apple retail. Apple’s latest quarterly retail revenue came in at $4.1 billion which is admirable in itself but Apple still does more sales from the channel than they do from their own retail presence. But these retail outlets exist for more than just driving sales.

The Best Place to Experience Apple Products

The nearly 400 Apple retail establishments exist to support at a fundamental level that I highlighted at the beginning of this column, which is to manage and actively engage an ongoing relationship with their customers. Part of that relationship is the freedom to discover. This is why Apple stores are constantly packed. Consumers are going in and looking at products and experiencing new ones. Apple has intentionally designed their stores to maximize and showcase the best experiences with all their products. This is something that is void in all other retail establishments where electronics are sold. These stores don’t just carry Apple products but also a highly selective and curated selection of third party products that help maximize the value of Apple’s ecosystem.

Other parts of the relationship that are key to Apple retail is training through free workshops and support through the Genius bar. I am continually shocked at how many people I see taking the free workshops and learning how best to use the new Apple products they bought. Every time I go into Apple retail stores their training centers are packed. Consumers we interviewed who took the time to get trained on their products overwhelmingly were glad they did it and felt empowered to use their products to their full potential. You are hard pressed to find anything remotely similar with other personal computing platforms.

Lastly, I firmly believe that Apple retail plays one last role holistically with consumers. They create loyalty. Apple has had no problem growing a large loyal base of customers but the trick is to attract new customers and keep them loyal. The data continues to show that Apple is continuing to bring upwards of 50% new customers to Apple products within key product segments. Keeping new customers loyal is key. Apple doesn’t struggle with a tremendous amount of churn and Apple’s retail will continue to play a role in that reality. There are many fundamentals on why Apple’s platform establishes loyalty but retail remains a key part of this strategy for many of the reasons I outlined above.

Apple retail, in my opinion, is one component of the many fundamentals to their strategic and competitive advantage. I continue to keep a watchful eye on all information and quarterly reports related to Apple’s retail because the health of their retail will tell us a lot about their overall health and growth opportunities as a company going forward.

And keep in mind, Apple has barely scratched the surface in China.

What Really Scares Apple’s Competitors

I was recently talking with some of Apple’s competitors and they gave me some interesting feedback on how they feel about Apple. The first thing they told me is that they really respect Apple and find them to be very important to the industry in general. And to a company, they feel an exceptional team of leaders runs Apple and they fully expect Apple to have a leadership role in PCs, tablets and smartphones for many years, even with Steve Jobs out of the picture.

But when I asked them what they actually fear about Apple, their answer was interesting. I had expected them to say things like Apple has great industrial design. Or their $117 billion cash position gives them a huge advantage over all competitors. Or even that since Apple owns their hardware, software and services, they can make them work together seamlessly, which also gives them a huge advantage over competitors.

But the consensus from those I talked to about what really scares them about Apple is the fact that Apple sees the future and then creates products that people want even if people do not know they want them. This has befuddled them for 15 years or since Steve Jobs came back in 1997 to rescue Apple. Most of the OEMs create their products along a more evolutionary timeline. They create new desktops, laptops, smartphones and even tablets with the idea of just making them faster and better looking.

But Apple takes a very different line of attack. They approach their future products in two ways. The first thing they do is to look at an existing product and find its flaws. Then they redesign it around what they believe consumers want and then tie it to advanced software and services to eventually create complete solutions. This is the cause of Apple’s competitor’s first fears about Apple and having to compete with them.

For example, first thing they did this with was the iPod. Apple did not invent MP3 players. But they looked at the early versions and realized its flaws. The first generations of MP3 player designs were less than interesting and the process of getting music on to them was difficult. So they figured that they could add their industrial design magic to it and build an ecosystem of software and services that made buying and playing music and eventually video simple to do so that today they still own 70% of the MP3 player market. After 11 years on the market they still don’t have a serious competitor in this space.

They did something similar with the iPhone. They did not invent smartphones, but they reinvented them with the iPhone and have made this smartphone one of the most popular in the world today. Of course, this market is so big that competitors came in very quickly and thanks to Android, the competition for smartphones is fierce. But Apple led the way and continues to be a most important competitor. I fully expect their new iPhone 5 to set sales records when it comes out in Sept.

The iPad followed a similar path. They did not invent tablets. In fact, Microsoft was the lead player in this space until Apple reinvented the tablet with the iPad in 2010. But here again, Apple applied great industrial design to their tablet, tied it to their ecosystem of hardware and software and currently maintain a 70% market share in tablets.

But there is a second way Apple approaches the market that really strikes fear in them. Steve Jobs had what has often been called a “gut feel” for what consumers wanted in a tech product and would envision them years before the products would even come out. When I met with Steve Jobs the second day he came back to Apple in 1997, Apple was in deep financial trouble and we now know they were about two months away from going bankrupt. I asked him how he would save Apple and he told me that he would focus meeting the needs of their core customers and then added that he would focus on industrial design.

The idea of industrial design being important to saving Apple was foreign to me and I really could not see how that would work. But two years later he brought out the candy colored iMacs and reset peoples thinking about what a computer could or should look like. Then he focused in creating all-in-one Mac’s and made sleek design key to this and all of his next generation laptops.

Apple also saw the future of laptops well before the competitors and added their industrial design magic to the MacBook Air. Now, five years after the MacBook Air first shipped, the PC competitors are just now bringing out similar types of ultra thin and light laptops called Ultrabooks.

It is this anticipation of what people will want in a tech product and Apple’s ability to not only see the future and then create the products people want even if they don’t know they want or need them that makes life difficult for those who compete with them. Even while the rumors fly about Apple’s next major reinvention, which most likely will be the interactive TV experience, it would not surprise me if the folks at Apple have peered into their crystal ball and are working on something really cool in some area of technology none of us have even thought of today. Having to live with this type of threat from Apple is what keeps their competitors up at night and always looking over their shoulder as Apple leads and they are forced to follow.

The PC is Not Dead

I chose this title because so many still associate the term PC with a notebook or desktop computing form factor. Let me first start by re-affirming my conviction that tablets as well as smartphones are in fact personal computers. The reality is that consumers are using a multitude of devices to accomplish what we have always considered computing.

It is no secret that I am bullish on tablets growth potential. With all the data I am seeing around consumer adoption of tablets world wide, it is hard not to be. But my perspective on the tablet form factor has always been that the tablet, and even to some degree the smartphone, does not replace a computer with a larger screen like a desktop or notebook. Rather these other devices simply take time and even some tasks away from the classic PC.

I still believe consumers will own computing devices with larger screens, more processing power, more storage, etc. However, the big struggle many in the industry are facing is the reality that the classic PC is no longer the only device in consumers lives. When the category for notebooks was a huge growth segment, it was being driven by two things. First, the fact that the category was maturing and prices were coming down. Second, because notebooks were the only mobile personal computers in consumers lives. All of this has been turned on its head with tablets and with smartphones to a degree.

The perspective that needs to be emphasized on this topic is that although the classic PC is not going away, its role is changing.

There is No Longer a Dominant Screen

The classic PC for many years was what we liked to call the “hub of the digital lifestyle.” It was the primary screen used for computing tasks in consumers lives. Other devices like iPods and early smartphones for example, had a level of dependence on the notebook or desktop. Even when the iPad first came out this philosophy was employed and was dependent on the PC to an extent. The desktop or notebook was the center and other devices revolved around them in this role. This is no longer the case for many and will soon no longer be the case for the masses. As more consumers fragment their computing tasks to be done on a number of screens, each screen will find a role as a part of a holistic computing solution.

The Cloud Becomes the Center

Although no single screen becomes the center of a consumers computing lifestyle, another solution takes the place. And that is the cloud. Personal clouds will be the glue that tie all our devices together. This is clearly evident with Apple’s latest OS release OS X Mountain Lion. This is the first classic PC OS which embraces the paradigm I just described, where no single computing device is the dominant screen. Many of the same apps, the same data, the same media, all available on every Apple screen.

Whatever screen is the most convenient for a consumer to use to look at an email, answer an email, browse the web, watch a movie, listen to music, check Facebook etc., at the exact time they want to do it, is the right screen for the job. The important word here to understand is convenience. Our research shows that people grab the screen that is closest or easiest to access to do a task the second they want to do it.

If I am in line at Disneyland and I want to do the above tasks, then my smartphones becomes the right screen for the job. If I am on the couch with my tablet near me, then it becomes the right screen for the job. If I am sitting at my desk with my notebook or desktop then it becomes the right screen for the job.

The beautiful thing about OS X Mountain Lion is that it enables and even encourages this computing philosophy I just described. Which is:

– let the consumer choose the right screen for the job
– make sure they have access to any and all programs, documents, and media
– anytime, anywhere, on any Apple device
– so that no matter which of their Apple screens they have or choose to use, IT becomes the right screen for the job.

This is the beauty of the cloud and the clouds role as the center of our personal computing infrastructure.

The classic PC used to be the center to which other screens depended on. But now that role as shifted to the cloud. This reality, not just tablets, is what is disrupting the classic PC.

The market is embracing this concept of screens (whether they know it or not) and will soon be conditioned to depend on the cloud rather than any one screen. It is for this reason, that in Apple’s case, iCloud is just as important of a platform as iOS and OS X. Other platform and hardware providers need to confront this reality and find their place in it.

The Classic PC Still Plays a Role

This is why I am emphasizing that the classic PC still plays a role. It does not go away but its role does change and, perhaps more importantly for hardware companies, the classic PC lifecycle has changed. Some hardware manufacturers may emphasize its role more than others. Some software platforms may embrace its role more than others.

Consumers will not abandon the classic PC. Because of this role change in classic PC usages, I believe some classic PC manufacturers will be confronted with some very challenging pricing economics in the very near future. (More on this in a later column)

My conclusion, however, is that anyone who does not have a clear focus on the cloud as the center and has a weak strategy for the rapidly changing role of hardware is headed for some very rough waters.

Why Apple Stands Apart From the Competition

I have been covering Apple now for 31 years and have a pretty good feel for how Apple works. Of course, how they worked changed over the years depending on who was CEO at the time, but there have been a few guiding principles that has driven the company from the intro of the Mac in 1984.

I was sitting in the third row of the De Anza Flint center when Steve Jobs unveiled the Mac. My first reaction upon seeing it was “that does not look like any computer I have ever seen.” But as he got the Mac to say hello to us and started showing us how it worked, I began to realize that Apple did not think like the PC vendors I knew at the time.

In 1984, all computers were square boxes and most of them were painted battleship grey. And when it came to ergonomics, it was clear to me that not much thought was given to its design. Although Compaq’s first PC, which looked like a Singer sewing machine, did break the mold of past PCs, it was not long before they started making PCs in square box designs and basically copying what IBM and others were doing with their PC designs.

But the Mac broke all conventional wisdom of what a PC would and should look like and in my notes of the event, I wrote that Apple clearly thinks differently then the other PC vendors at the time. Little did I know that this term, or the grammatically incorrect “Think Different” theme would eventually become a major marketing campaign for Apple as it strove to set itself apart from the rest of the PC vendors schlepping PCs that all looked the same.

Think Different, Be Different
The first way Apple sets itself apart from the crowd is to “think different” and not let what others do impact the products or services that they themselves create and bring to market. This has to be a very freeing feeling for Apple execs as they continue to put themselves in the drivers seat and create new products and even new categories of products that have driven innovation desktops, MP3 players, smartphones, tablets, and laptops over the years.

Team Players
There is another important way that Apple sets themselves apart from their competitors and that is in the way they run and control their own company. I have worked with a multitude of companies over the years and so much of their decision making process is done by committees and having to get approvals and partnerships from one of their “silo businesses” before they can move ahead. This is why many companies have so many problems keeping up with Apple and the market. Their individual businesses seldom talked to each other and getting approvals on any device or project took serious coordination between these silo businesses to get anything done.

But Apple has one central executive committee that works together seamlessly to design products and make decisions on how the company moves forward. Also, they own their own hardware, software OS, software apps, and services, as well as their new Cloud architecture so they can tie everything together neatly. There are no silos inside Apple and all decisions are made by this single executive committee. That is why all they do works together so seamlessly. This difference of the way Apple runs their company compared to competitors can’t be emphasized enough. And it gives them a big edge over the competition because of that.

But the third reason Apple is set apart from their competitors is design.

At the Fortune Tech conference in Aspen this week, former Apple executive Tony Fadell summed it up pretty well. He told this stellar audience that “great design principles are pervasive in the Apple DNA.”

In Steve Job’s Stanford commencement speech, he spoke about his love for calligraphy and how this influenced his thinking about design and how this drove him to be a perfectionist. And you can see this design DNA in everything Apple brings to market. Although Steve Jobs is not with us any more, Jonathan Ive is now tasked to embed this design DNA in all of their products and teach it to new Apple employees as the company grows.

Over the last few years I have been often asked how to compete with Apple. At the moment, if you look at pretty much all of the smartphones and even new laptops like the Ultrabook as well as competing tablets, they all are mostly copying Apple’s smartphones, tablet and thin Macbook Air designs. So when I am asked that question, I tell these folks that if they really want to compete with Apple, they need to start innovating on their own and stop simply trying to copy Apple. These folks often shrug when I tell them this and point out that Apple’s products sell and they just follow Apple’s lead. But what they are really saying is that they have companies that are run very differently then Apple, that they have little design skills and that they must lean on others to drive any innovation.

The good news is that at least a few ODM’s are getting their own internal design teams and I am starting to see some really new and interesting products, especially coming out of Taiwan and Beijing. But even with that, the OEM’s are slow to react and continue to let Apple lead while they follow.

The bottom line, unless these competitors start innovating on their own, is that Apple will continue to have at least a two year lead on them and thanks to their ways of “thinking different,” management style and design DNA, will keep their competitors following them instead of truly leading the market forward themselves

Why I am Convinced Tablets are the Future

During the course of many conversations I have been having lately with industry insiders there is still a drastic underestimation of the importance of tablets. There are some I talk to who get it but I still feel that largely the sentiment around tablets and the iPad in particular is that it is a toy and not a personal computer. So in this column I am hoping to articulate my view on this subject.

More Consumption and Light Production Than Heavy Lifting

I know thinking objectively from other peoples vantage points is a challenge for many people. I am close friends with many of these people. However considering many different views and specifically trying to get inside peoples heads and see things from their perspective is something I greatly enjoy. That probably explains why I love anthropology and ethnographic research. The key point is that just because one consumer can not replace their laptop with a tablet does not mean that another consumer can not. Consumer preferences and usage models are not universal.

My conviction, which stems from my observational research with consumers, which we conducted at Creative Strategies, is that a large amount of consumers do not do complex things with their computers. I recall some research we did four years ago trying to gauge the importance and perceived demand of increased CPU performance by mass market consumers. In this research consumers shared with us how they use their PCs. What we observed was that the majority of consumers we interviewed used less than five primary applications on a daily basis and none of those applications were CPU intensive.

To further highlight this observation I want to share a chart containing some research from Alpha Wise and Morgan Stanley. In a large survey with mainstream consumers, their research findings came back very similar to our observational research. Specifically that roughly 75% of the time consumers were not using their PCs to do things we would consider “heavy lifting.” Although I am not sure that term applies to the mass market consumer.

Now the question I have after looking at that chart is: Which of the above tasks can not be done on an iPad? The answer is none.

Now if you are like me and you have large numbers of friends, family, social acquaintances, people who come up to me when they see me using my iPad with a keyboard at Starbucks, etc., then you probably give advice on what types of technology to buy. So when I ask them what they use their computers for, the answer almost always comes back the same. Not much they say, I mainly browse the internet, check email, watch videos, and occasionally need to make a spreadsheet or use a word processor.

Interestingly the overwhelming majority of conversations I have had around this topic, the person asking me the question is already leaning toward an iPad because they recognize it can do most of what they need it to the large majority of the time. So the question generally centers around whether or not they need a new notebook or whether they should just get an iPad and keep using their old notebook.

The long and short of it is that unless the person asking the question is a power user, creative professional, etc., it is very hard to not recommend them getting an iPad and just keep using the notebook they have for the less than 15% of the time they may possibly need it. You can probably guess what my advice generally is and I know many happy consumers who have taken this path.

Things We Hold We Love

Now I want to make one last point. The fascinating thing about tablets besides the points I made above, is that we don’t just touch them when we use them, we hold them. I am convinced there is something psychological about this that makes the tablet more personal than a notebook. With a notebook we touch (the keyboard and mouse / trackpad) but we don’t hold it while using it. The notebook form factor is not conducive to this usage model because it must be sitting on a flat surface, like a desk, table, or lap to be used.

We also hold tablets much closer to our person while we use them the majority of the time. Whereas with notebooks, we keep them at arms length. This fundamental difference in closeness is another reason I believe there is a deeper psychological attachment and lure to tablets than with notebooks.

If I was to rank emotional attachment to devices of a personal nature I would say the smartphone comes first, then the tablet, then the notebook. Smartphones and tablets we touch to use and hold to use, while the notebook we just touch, and I use the word touch loosely with the notebook form factor because it is not a touch computer like the smartphone and tablet–and I am not convinced it ever will be.

The fundamental truth is that there is a distinctly different relationship consumers are beginning to form with tablets that they never developed with notebooks. We continually hear in consumer interviews how much people love their iPads and can not live without it. Had this attachment developed with notebooks they wouldn’t have delegated them to the back room. And think about the millions (and growing) of kids who are developing this relationship with tablets in their formative years. I am confident my kids will have no use for a notebook in the future. Desktop maybe, or perhaps central home server, but notebook– not so much.

Following my logic, it should not be tough to see why we are so bullish on tablets. There are the above reasons, along with many more than I have time to get into (but will in our upcoming tablet report, shameless plug), which are all transforming and reshaping this industry before our eyes. The challenge is not everyone sees it.

PC Growth isn’t Flat, Windows Is

We are living in fascinating times as the personal computing industry is undergoing its biggest transformation since its inception. Tablet computing is leading the charge and forcing nearly everyone in the industry to relearn what they knew about personal computing and its future.

There is no doubt that personal computing is evolving and transforming. With my role as an industry analyst, I believe it is important to present information to the industry which reflects what is accurately happening in the market at any given time. It is for this reason that I believe that not including tablets in industry wide PC sales numbers and forecasts is disingenuous and does not accurately reflect market conditions.

Recent quarter estimates from IDC and Gartner made headlines as they point out that PC growth is remaining relatively flat. There are more theories surrounding this point than I have time to get into but the bottom line is that there is simply no growth happening right now with desktops and clamshell notebooks.

So what is happening in the market and what can we learn about the current conditions within consumer markets? A series of interesting data points lead to an important observation. That observation is that PCs aren’t flat or in decline, demand for the Windows platform is.

Horace Dediu at Asymco created a fascinating chart and series of data points where he broke down the Windows platform advantage and how it is eroding. In the following chart he created he points out how in 2004 the Windows platform peaked in its multiple of Windows products shipped per single Mac shipped. After 2004 multiples began to decrease and starting in 2007 with the release of the iPhone, there is a steady and rapid decline of the Windows platform advantage.

This chart can be summed up with the following significant point Horace makes in his article:

“If we consider all the devices Apple sells, the whittling becomes even more significant and the multiple drops to below 2. Seen this way, Post-PC devices wiped out of leverage faster than it was originally built. They not only reversed the advantage but cancelled it altogether.”

Now turning to the flat notebook and desktop growth trend. My conviction is that tablet computers (defined as tablets with screen sizes larger than 9.7 inches) is an evolution of the computing form factor but still a personal computer. This is why I agree with Canalys who includes tablets as PCs in their market data.

I shared my opinion about tablets and the new era of personal computing in this column.

If we were to include tablets into the data for personal computers we would see that the market is not in decline but actually a steep incline. In fact if we were to include tablets into personal computer shipment forecasts for 2012 we would see over 100% year over year growth.

By choosing to not include tablets we will be lucky if we see 20% growth in this calendar year. But as I stated at the beginning of this column, to not include tablets in PC shipments would not be an accurate reflection of what is happening in the market.

We can debate semantics all day as to whether or not tablets should be considered PCs. All the while our interviews with consumers are consistently proving that they are using their iPads as computers to do many, and in some cases all, of the regular tasks they used to do with their notebooks. Given the ways we see consumers using iPads there is simply no denying that the iPad is a personal computer. Some people will have their personal computing needs met by a tablet, others by notebooks, and others by desktops, or even perhaps some combination of the three.

The iPad, and tablets in general, simply represent an evolution of the form and function of a personal computer. Therefore we should count them as PCs but breakout their specific shipment growth amidst other computing form factors like we do already with desktops and notebooks.

Now obviously if we did this we would show that most if not all of the PC growth belongs to Apple. But as I said at the beginning I am interested in accurately presenting what is happening in the industry and most of the growth does in fact belong to Apple.

So now the question remains as to whether or not Windows 8 will be the great equalizer and inject growth into PCs, both clamshell and tablet, for non Apple vendors. That is a question I will let linger until a later time.

However, this fact remains and needs to be continually emphasized. If we step back and look at what is happening holistically in the personal computer market, it is clear that we are not in a phase of flat or declining growth, rather we are at the beginning of a rapid and exciting growth phase.

It’s Time for New Industry Innovations

First I wanted to thank the many folks who through Facebook, twitter and other social media found out that I had a heart attack that led to a triple bypass. So many of you sent get well notes and notes of prayers and good thoughts and they were all greatly appreciated. The doctors told me I was 30 minutes from a major stroke and 60 minutes from losing 50% of my heart muscle. I am glad I listened to my body and went to emergency and that saved me.
I am now in serious healing mode and am told I will be good as new by Sept . That is why I have not written any columns here at Tech.pinions for about 6 weeks. Only now am I getting my strength back to start writing again.

One interesting by product of this is the fact that for 2 weeks I was completely disconnected. I suppose if you keep a guy on morphine you can keep him disconnected. So once I was switched to a regular room the first thing I asked for was my iPad and Macbook Air. It took me a week to catch up and when I got home I devoured as much industry info I need to do my job.

Although a lot of news passed under the bridge, to be fair, I found nothing earth shattering. Even more disappointing was as I perused the products from Computex and they all seemed the same. Most of what I saw was just some type of variation on the same theme. This was played out later in the week when Microsoft introduced their Surface Computer. It too was a variation of things already done albeit with their version with their unique touches to it.

It seems to me that the industry is at a standstill. Where is the innovation going to come from? Where is the next iPad that revolutionizes personal computing? Where is the new user interface that change how we interact with our computer? Where are the flexible screens that would change the way we view things? When does the network become the computer?

It appears to me that Apple leads and then the industry spends the next 5 years catching up. That has been good for Apple but devastating for competitors. At some point, the industry needs to step up and make some bold steps of innovation on its own. HP has one of the richest labs known to man. They need to commercialize some of their great technology. Xerox PARC is known for their technology and mostly for things that got away such as Postscript, The Mouse and the graphical User Interface. They have great stuff Inside. In fact, nearly all of the OEM’s have innovation labs of their own and it is time for them to dig deep and start innovating from within.

I expect Apple to continue to innovate and lead, but for this industry to really make some strides and start changing the compute landscape dramatically, it is going to take more then Apple to make it happen. I am normally an industry optimist but those two weeks away from everything has made it clear that we are kind of stuck in a circle. Apple innovates and the rest of the industry spends the next 5 years playing catch up. Apple should innovate but the rest of the industry needs to innovate as well and at warp speed. If they do, the future of personal computing can be bright. If not, it will only be bright for Apple.

Touch Computing and The Re-Birth of the Software Industry

It seems like you can’t go anywhere in Silicon Valley without hearing about someone who’s making an app. Apps are all the rage these days and software engineering is one of the hottest jobs all over the world. But in the not too distant past, there wasn’t this much excitement around software.

In fact, I have heard from many executives who have been around a while that the excitement around software and apps today reminds them of the same excitement around software when personal computers were first gaining steam.

Although there are some similarities between the industry today and the PC software industry when it was first getting started, the excitement around software today is taking place on an entirely different kind of computer. The excitement around software today is entirely focused on touch computers like smartphones and tablets.

Smartphones are contributing and are the device that began this new app economy but tablets are where the next real software innovations will be focused on in my opinion. I say this because I am a big believer in the tablets ability to take significant time away from the traditional PC. Our research indicates that consumers are comfortable doing the vast majority of tasks they used traditional PCs for in the past on their tablet. Because of that point we feel the tablet represents one of the most exciting platforms which will lead a new software revolution.

Starting Over

I think a strong case could be made that much of the focus of the software industry over the past few decades has been on professionals and the workplace. In my opinion, only in the last five years have we had what I would consider a pure, mature consumer market. The maturity of the consumer market for personal computers is the foundation that has led to the rebirth of the software industry. If the first phase of the software industry was focused largely on businesses, then the next phase will be largely based on consumers.

Although we can articulate what is happening by proclaiming that the software industry is being reborn, in all actuality it’s starting over. The first software phase was all about creating software for desktops and then eventually laptop computers. Both were driven primarily by mouse and keyboard input mechanisms. The software generating all the excitement today is fully around touch as an input mechanism. Given the drastic differences between touch computing and mouse and keyboard computing, software developers are reinventing or at the very least re-imagining their software around touch computing. It is this reinventing and re-imagining of the software industry — brought about by touch computing — that leads me to believe it’s almost like it’s starting over more than it’s being reborn.

New Hardware Is Driving New Software

This rebirth of the software industry is being driven primarily because of new hardware that’s selling like hotcakes to the masses. Although it’s easy to get excited about all the shiny new smartphone and tablet hardware, it’s important to remember that hardware is only as good as the software it runs. I could own the most amazing and elegant piece of hardware, but if it runs poor software, it’s no better than a paperweight.

When I speak with software developers who are driving this new phase of software, they’re largely focused on the iPad and the iPhone. These two platforms are giving software developers valuable experience in gaining expertise, making the next generation of touch software much more personal. This is important because new platforms incorporating touch are on the horizon based on Windows 8.

Windows 8 presents a radical departure from the normal desktop/notebook operating system that Microsoft usually churns out. Windows 8 will be the first OS to combine a touch-based operating system (called Metro) with a mouse-and-keyboard operating system and a familiar Windows interface. These two experiences combined together will lead to a new generation of notebooks, desktops, and tablet-notebook hybrids, all with touch interfaces.

Regardless of your opinion about Microsoft’s approach with Windows 8, the reality is that over the next few years, touch computing is coming to a wide range of laptops and desktops.

What’s Next?

That’s a great question, and my answer may surprise you. I believe the next big software craze will be around television. I know it may seem crazy to think about running apps on your TV, but that’s what I think is next. Google is already going down this path with Google TV, letting software developers make apps for the big screen; Samsung is also doing this with its line of Smart TVs. And there’s speculation that Apple has big plans for the TV industry — if that’s true, I believe apps will be a part of the strategy.

Even though there are products on the market that let you run apps on your TV, those developers have yet to re-imagine their apps on the big screen. Just as software developers are having to re-imagine their software for touch computing, they will have to do the same thing for the TV.

We live in extremely exciting times and things will get even more exciting. I firmly believe we will see more fascinating innovations centered around personal computing hardware and software over the next 10 years than we ever saw in the past 30 years of the PC of the industry, and I’m glad that we’ll get a chance to observe them firsthand.

Why Apple is Wrong About Convertibles

On Apple’s last earnings call, CEO Tim Cook responded to a question on Windows 8 convertibles by saying, “You can converge a toaster and a refrigerator, but those aren’t going to be pleasing to the user.” At first glance, this makes total sense, and from the company that brought us iPod, iPhone and iPad, this has wisdom. But as we peel back the onion and dig deeper, I do not believe Apple is correct in their assessment. As I wrote here, I have long-believed that convertibles would be popular in 2013 and I still believe convertibles will be a thriving future market, albeit not as large as notebooks or tablets.

Mashups between two devices are rarely successful, particularly in mature markets like PCs. I have researched, planned and delivered 100’s of products in my career, and very rarely have I seen two purpose-built products combined to create something real good. The problem becomes that by combining two products, the result becomes good for no one. The primary reason this becomes the case is that you have to make tradeoffs to make the combined product. By combining most products, you are sub-optimizing the separate product and what they uniquely deliver to their target markets. Convertibles have that possibility, but if designed appropriately as I outlined previously, this won’t happen.

Cars give us a few examples to work from. As the car industry matures, we see more and more specialization. There are now sedans, coupes, mini-vans, SUVs, mini-sedans, sports cars, trucks, truck-hybrids, etc. Specialization is the sure sign of a mature market as consumer’s tastes have gotten to a point where they know exactly what they want and the industry can profitably support the proliferation of models. Industry support is a very important in the industry must be able to afford all this proliferation. The auto industry supports this through common parts that are shared like chassis, engines, and electronics.

What does this have to do with convertibles? Ask yourself this question: If my SUV could perform like a Cayman Porsche, would I like it? Of course you would; it is called a Porsche Cayenne. The problem is, you could pay up to $100,000 for it. Want your sedan to drive like a Cayman? Just get a Porsche Panamera. The problem, again, is that is around $95,000. The expense isn’t just about the brand. Porsche invested real R&D and provides the expensive technology to make these “convertibles” perform well.

There are similarities and differences between the Porsche Panamera and Windows 8 convertibles:

Price: Buyers will only need to spend an extra $100-200 more than a tablet to get a convertible. Many will make that choice to have the best of both worlds. The average U.S. car is around $33,000 while the Panamera is around $100,000, three times the average. One argument Apple could have is that if future, full-featured tablets become $299, the added price could be too much to pay for the added convertible functionality.
Low “Sacrifice Differential”: This is Apple’s strongest point, as in many mashups, combining two products results in something that isn’t good for any usage model. “Fixed” designs will need to be less than 13mm thick and the “flexible” designs (ie Transformer Prime) need to be less than 18mm thick with keyboard. Otherwise, the convertibles will be too thick to serve as a decent tablet at 13mm or thicker than an Ultrabook over 18mm.
Transformation capabilities: Convertible form factors like the Transformer Prime can convert into a “notebook” with an add-on peripheral, but cars cannot. I wish there were a 30-second add on kit that could turn my Yukon into a 911 Porsche but there isn’t. Related to PC convertibles, if you have ever used the Asus Transformer Prime, you know what I am talking about. It is one of the thinnest tablets, and when paired with its keyboard, is only 19mm thick. One of the great features of the Prime is that the keyboard provides an extra 40-50% battery life boost that actually adds utility. Windows 8 for the first time supports the lean-forward and lean-back usage models. As a tablet, the users uses it with Metro. As a “notebook” clamshell form factor, the users can use Metro and then use Windows 8 Desktop with the trackpad and keyboard. This has never existed before and Apple doesn’t have this capability in iOS or OSX.

I do believe that convertibles ultimately will have space in the market as they serve to eliminate, for some users and usage models, redundancy of having two devices. OEMs must be particularly careful in how thick they make them. The original iPad was around 10mm and that was pushing some of the boundaries, particularly with reading books. The thicker the designs, the less desriable they become as they will not make a very good tablet. Flexible designs like today’s Asus Transformer Prime, when connected with Windows 8, could be a lethal market combination as it combines a thin tablet and a keyboard when you want it. Gauging by how much shelf-space is devoted to iPad keyboards, I must conclude that consumers are snatching these up in high volume.

I believe Apple is wrong about convertibles, but on the positive side, Apple’s warning gave the entire industry pause for thought. Interestingly, it provided the opposite effect of what I believe Apple intended, which was to freeze the market. Instead, it indicated that Apple was not going to do it, which motivated more OEMs to build, given they wouldn’t have to worry about Apple. While the volumes for convertibles won’t be as large as tablets or notebooks, I do believe they have a place in the market in the mid-term.

The Challenge of Competing With Apple

One of the more interesting questions I get asked as an industry analyst, that has followed Apple since 1981, is why Apple is so successful? And another question I often get is, why Apple’s competitors can’t make any headway against them? These are honest questions and to those really not familiar with Apple, the companies rise and current dominance in non-PC devices is somewhat puzzling.

There are many books out about Apple these days that talk about everything from Jobs’s history, tenets of Apple’s business models, to secrets about Apple’s internal management ideas. And most know that they differentiate themselves through great industrial design, incredible software and a rich ecosystem of software and services. However, after years of watching Apple close up and personal and having dealt with every one of their CEO’s from the beginning, as well as interacting with various Apple execs over the years, I would like to suggest that the reason Apple is hard to catch is that there are five additional principles, that guide Apple, that makes competing with Apple so difficult.

For any products that Apple creates, the people who create them have to want it themselves.

So many times, in projects I do with other tech companies, the goal is almost always based around the technology first and then if people really want to use it second. Geeky engineers are dazzled by the technology at their disposal and often create something because they can. But Apple’s approach is quite different. The engineers who are creating Apple products actually make them for themselves. And Jobs was the chief “user” of Apple products when he was alive. All of their products are based on his intuition that represented the real customer. And his engineers had to come to grips that in designing a product, it has to be something that they personally would have “technolust” for and could not live without.

The products have to be easy to use

Steve Jobs was a stickler on this point. While industrial design is a critical component of any product they make, if it is not easy to use, it is considered worthless to the consumer. This is what drove their user interface designs from day one and is still the mantra pushed to their software and hardware engineers every day they come to work. All of the products they create have to be intuitive, easy to understand, and learn. As technology has become more intricate and users want more features, the task of keeping things simple is sometimes difficult. And Apple creates tools for power users to rookies, which can mean a broad range of ease-of-use issues. But even with that, Apple is the only company I deal with where ease of use is more important then the product itself and Apple makes this a critical goal of their approach to creating anything for the market.

Keep things simple

I was in Paris for the last two weeks and had talks with various French telecommunication officials on many mobile computing issues. But one conversation I had in particular emphasizes this keep-it-simple point. We were discussing how to compete with Apple, a major pastime for all Apple competitors and carriers these days, when the question of why Apple is really successful came up. And one exec nailed it when it when he said he felt that the real reason Apple is successful is because they have one product, in this case the iPhone, and minimize the decision making process for the consumer by making things simple. The person speaking was with a carrier in France and he said that in their stores, they have to have as many as 25 different models of phones available. That makes it hard for his staff to be really knowledgeable about all of them all of the time and their customers just have too many options to choose from.

But Apple only has one iPhone model and anyone who has gone into an Apple store understands that every staff member there knows a great deal about each of the four major products they carry in their stores. They don’t have 5 iPhone models to choose from; they have only one. While this may seem limiting given the amount of smartphones available to users, the truth is the reverse. Our company has done consumer research for over 30 years and consumers constantly tell us that while choice is nice, in reality they want the process of choosing a tech product to be simple and easy to do and not complicated by a plethora of choices.

Yes, there are tech savvy people who like more choices and sometimes even like complexity, but from years of experience as a market researcher, I can tell you that in the end, the majority of users are not tech savvy and keeping things simple for them is a plus. Apple understands this and is never tempted to add multiple versions of an iPhone, iPad or even more then one or two types of iPods to make buying an Apple product simple. And consumers seem to appreciate this considering the huge number of iDevices they are selling each year. I know the tech media and techies are the most vocal about this issue of choice, but in the end, while choice is good for competitive pricing, what non-techie consumers really want is simplicity.

Offer great customer service and in-store experiences

Steve Jobs understood one of the major conundrums of technology. That conundrum is that even if you create products that are easy to use, the variety of things people want to use their technologies for often creates complexity, and because of this, consumers at all levels may need some hand holding from time to time. I was one of the most vocal critics of Apple when they introduced their first retail store in Tokyo in 2002 and thought it was crazy for them to try and go into retail. At the time, and even today, tech retail stores are in decline and big box stores like Costco and Walmart sell products on price and nothing else. I thought that if price were the issue, an upscale retail store would be DOA. Wow, was I and other naysayers on Apple’s store strategy wrong about this.

Apple uses this conundrum to their advantage. Because they keep product SKU’s simple, the salespeople inside their stores know their products really well. Notice that when you go into an Apple store and are greeted by one of their sales staff, you are not asked “how can I help you?” Instead they ask “What would you like to do today.” They go right to the heart of any technology users question that is always related to what they want or need to do with the technology they are interested in.

And once you explain your needs, in most cases they can take care of it on the spot. Or if you need more hand holding, they turn you over to the Apple Geniuses. No wonder 50% of people buying Apple products are new to Apple. Apple’s products are simple to understand and use but if you do have a problem, Apple can take care of it at their stores or over the phone quickly.

Apple only makes a product if they can do it better

Apple normally doesn’t invent a new product or product category. Sure, they did invent the first commercial PC with the Apple II and the Mac improved on PC’s with a graphical UI and the mouse input. But since these were introduced in the late 1970s and early 1980’s, all of their other products were recreations of existing products. They did not invent the MP3 player-they reinvented and made it better. They did not invent the smartphone-they reinvented it. And they did not invent the tablet-they reinvented it. Or in essence, they made it better.

As Apple designer Johnny Ives said recently, “Our goals are very simple – to design and make better products. If we can’t make something that is better, we won’t do it. Clearly, Apple applied that thinking first to iPods, smartphones and more recently, to the iPad.

Apple stays at least two years ahead of their competitors.

This is the one that scares Apple’s competitors the most. While those competing with Apple are just getting products to market that are competitive with a current Apple product, Apple is already working on the products at least two years out. For example, the new iPhone that will most likely go to market in Oct, was designed and signed off two years ago. And the iPhone they are working on now is for the fall of 2014. The same goes for the iPad. The new iPad that we will most likely see next March was signed off two years ago. The one they are working on now we will probably see in 2015. This is a nightmare for Apple’s competitors and will continue to be for some time. Besides having geniuses in design, software and retail, they also have the cash to invent components, manufacturing processes, etc., which almost makes it impossible for the competition to make any real headway against Apple. And don’t let the fact that Android has become the #1 smartphone OS make you think that it is the big winner. Yes, Android has gained ground by the sheer numbers of companies and products pushing Android. But the real measure of success is in the profits and Apple is making as much as 70% of all the profits in smartphones and about 85% of the profits in Tablets. Just ask any Android competitor which they would like more, market share or profits and you get the answer to the real measure of success in this market.

These five principles may seem a bit simplistic given the fact that they also have great software, industrial design and a powerful eco system of content, apps and services as part of their success equation. However, I can tell you that from my three decades of following them, that it is these five key principles that are what really makes them successful. And as long as they adhere to them, it is pretty likely that Apple will continue to grow and command a relatively large share of the market in the product categories where they compete and continue to give their competitors real headaches for some time to come.

Dear Industry: Focus on Profit Share Not Market Share

The interest in the tech media world around market share is fascinating. Each quarter reports come out, for the quarter only, pointing out different vendor and software platform market share for things like tablets and smartphones. As interesting as it is to look at market share of hardware and software platforms, it is more interesting and relevant to look at profit share–a metric I think is more important.

Apple is perhaps the best example in this metric as a recent statistic points out. Asymco shared that in the smartphone segment Apple obtained 73% of operating profits, Samsung 26% and HTC 1% while everyone else lost money. Apple continually captures significant profit share of the markets they compete in, and to Apple profit share is more important than market share.

A common thread of thought in the tech industry, which I believe seriously lacks perspective, is that industry history will repeat itself to the degree that a platform will have the majority share of a market for a long period of time. What I truly believe many are waiting for or looking to happen is for the “open platform” like Google or Windows will rise to dominate the market since open should always win–a premise I reject. If anything I would place my bet on the closed system in a pure mature consumer market.

In my last Dear Industry column I pointed out many reasons why I don’t believe history will repeat itself. My whole argument is based on other consumer goods in other mature markets where there is simply not a dominant market share leader. Again this is true because consumer preference drives segmentation in mature markets.

If you look at other companies in mature or post mature markets like consumer goods or automobiles, you find that each of them focus more on operating efficiency in order to maximize profit share. Of course they would love to see their market share increase dramatically but in post mature markets consumers are driven by personal preferences. Consumers driven by personal preference know what they want and why they want it. Because of preference driven choices, market share shifts simply don’t happen often due to preferences being established. Think Coke and Pepsi, or Mercedes and BMW, or Nike and Adidas.

There are, of course, a number of differences between the computing market and consumer goods. But there is something about consumer markets that I think is interesting that may shed light on how to focus on profit share over market share.

A Deeper Look at Consumer Preference

What is interesting about consumer preference is that it is largely subjective. Although their preferences become refined over time that refinement often comes from subjective perceptions rather than objective ones.

To what extent subjective refinements around personal preference take place over time as consumers shop for computing products is yet to be determined. However, as the market for products like smartphones and tablets matures; I have a hunch that many early perceptions and experiences happening currently with technology products will shape future consumer preference.

On that point, a common foundation shaping consumer preference is the experience they have with a brand, product, or service. If consumers have a poor experience with a brand, product, or service, it becomes increasingly difficult to win them back. The importance of first impressions with consumers can not be overstated.

Understanding consumer preference is a key to understanding how to focus on profit share.

Create Features of Value

The second key point to drive better profit share is to focus on creating features consumer segments find valuable. If you look at any mature product strategy striving for profit share you find that the strategy is to maintain price but layer on features with each new product generation.

The key to that specific product strategy within a segment is to identify value and anticipate future value through research and development. Companies that do that well continually introduce new features that the market segments they are focusing on find valuable. Creating features of value is one of the better strategies to maintain a desired price within a segment and to avoid a race to the bottom.

Specifically in regards to the computing segment it is important to create products that do things better than other products on the market. Right now I am seeing a number of smartphone vendors start do this around the camera. The HTC One X for example is touting several features specific to the camera that is differentiated from the pack. For this strategy to work a “better” camera needs to be perceived as a feature of value that is important enough to sway consumers.

In an increasingly segmenting market feature centric products and product experiences are key to sustainable differentiation. When this strategy is employed it creates a better foundation to focus more on profit share of a specific segment.

Of course operating efficiency is key as well to drive better profit share. But both of the above points of understanding consumer markets and focusing on creating valuable products and experiences will shape operating decisions all the way down to the supply chain.

A strong argument can be made that by focusing on profit share by creating valuable features and experiences could lead to better market share. My overall point is that the right way to approach strategic product and roadmap decisions is to focus more on strategies that drive profit rather than market share.

Companies that employ a market share only strategy run the risk of gaining no market share and making no money.