
What is Steve Jobs so afraid of? - alexandros
http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/What-is-Steve-Jobs-so-afraid-of/1287515970
======
achompas
Answering the blog title: nothing. He's dishing on competitors like always.

A better answer: this is a tired story, author. Can't we be more creative than
"Android v. iOS is today's Windows v. Mac?" Why would Jobs worry about
Android's market share if we'll see an iPhone on Verizon in January? That's
another 1-2 million handsets sold. Why would he worry about Android tablets
when the iPad dominates (edit: _is_ ) the tabloid market? Answer: he isn't--
he's just smack-talking.

The author argues that, by Jobs' logic, the iPhone is "too small to create
compelling apps." This is a straw man, though--tablets have nothing to do with
phones. Each device has a different use, as made evident by how developers
create separate apps for iPhone vs. iPad. Jobs's main point was that a 7"
screen delivers a sub-optimal tablet experience.

Sorry guys, I just _really_ hate linkbait articles.

------
glhaynes
A week ago, people talked about 7" tablets as though they weren't that
different from 10" tablets. Yesterday, Jobs injected a (by all appearances
extremely successful) meme that they're a very different, vastly inferior
thing. This, right before the holiday season in which Apple hopes to sell a
ton of 10" tablets and hopes that not many competing 7" tablets will be sold.
Hey, they've got a soapbox, why wouldn't they use it?

~~~
code_duck
He kept mentioning price as if it was the only reason that someone would want
a 7" tablet - 'because it was $50 cheaper'. I saw that as totally manipulating
the listener.

I think it would be a great size, personally. I'd love something bigger than
my iPhone but smaller than an iPad, and that's what my mother described she
wanted, too.

~~~
glhaynes
He talked _way_ more about his opinion that 7" tablets didn't provide enough
usable area for real tablet apps than he did about price.

~~~
code_duck
Hmm, I suppose I must have just read a selection of his comments.

As others have noted, the 'no usable area in 7 inches' idea makes absolutely
no sense, considering the size of the iPhone and iPod Touch.

I think that mainly, they don't want to saddle developers with an in-between
device as it would be onerous, costly and confusing for us. As much as I'd
like a 7" tablet, it's smart of Apple to keep things as simple as possible for
now.

~~~
chc
> As others have noted, the 'no usable area in 7 inches' idea makes absolutely
> no sense, considering the size of the iPhone and iPod Touch.

Jobs is talking about _tablets_ , not _phones_. The iPod Touch is not merely a
small iPad. If you look at an iPhone app and an equivalent iPad app, you'll
see that they often have radically different interfaces. Jobs' point, as I
take it, is that a seven-inch screen is too small for the kind of apps the
iPad runs.

~~~
code_duck
Exactly, and I think that's what he said, that it would be a nether region in
between a tablet and a phone. However, I don't agree that this size would not
be desirable and useful. I want one.

If I had an iPad, I'd use it for the same things I use my phone for - web
browsing, skype, music, reading books, email, photos and games. Why would this
size not be appropriate for those tasks? What is it that Steve Jobs thinks
people do with iPhones and iPads, if not the aforementioned?

------
andreyf
_What is Steve Jobs so afraid of?_

Easy. He says it right in the call: he's fighting for developer mindshare.
That's the reason one of the first things he says is that Apple is activating
70k more devices per day to run your iOS apps than your Android apps (200k vs
270k). He's afraid that if there's a significant drain of developers like Joe
Hewitt to Android, what Steve sees as the superior "integrated experience"
he's creating in iOS (iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, iTV) won't be nearly as
useful.

------
javery
The stock took a hit today for one reason only - sell the news.

~~~
ojbyrne
It seems a little weird because given the expected announcements tomorrow,
there should be plenty of rumors to pump up things.

~~~
jonhendry
There are probably other investors who will pull out after the announcements.
They're just waiting for the second bit of news to sell.

Means nothing, really. Unless the announcement tomorrow is just about 'ipod
socks' again.

------
charlief
Misleading: "Investors punished Apple for its gangbusters quarter. The stock
opened at $303.49 today, after closing at $318 yesterday"

It was omitted that the stock rallied after the open and closed at $309.49.
Investor reaction was not as negative as portrayed in the article, especially
given that today was a down day on the broader market.

Some people are picking out a peak for Apple to get out, and selling on news
is nothing extraordinary.

------
asnark
I agree with KeyFrame. Article is FUD.

 _What is Steve Jobs so afraid of?_

He's not afraid. He's bragging.

------
siglesias
If tomorrow's presentation weren't about the Mac Jobs would have had this
discussion right a the beginning of his keynote, as he does before talking
about any product. He doesn't have a platform to talk about iPhone or iPad
this fall, so he gives us talking points via the conference call.

------
mikeryan
I don't think Steve is afraid of Google/Android. I think he's pissed. I think
his single minded focus and belief is that Apple makes the single best smart
phone/ecosystem for users and gets pissed when Google and Android say that
theirs is better for consumers in some way.

------
8ren
I think it's inevitable for the integrated iPhone to be displaced by the
modular Android (or some nascent modular tech), because integrated devices
only provide competitive advantage at certain points of market development -
where performance matters more than customization, price etc. The disruption
guy (Clayton Christensen) talks about this.

To be a leader, Apple's solution has got to be to always be on the leading
edge of a wave. Once the iPod is commoditized, the iPhone, then the iPad, and
very soon after that, there needs to be something else. Consider: are iPod
sales growing as fast as they used to? Apple wisely cannibalizes its own
sales, but can only do so while its competitive advantage is needed by the
market (viz. performance from integration).

This is traditional tech surf-style: intel, TI, HP, Sony and so on. You need a
continuous pipeline of new products. (Maybe iTunes is an exception that can
last significantly longer, perhaps over many generations.)

Steve knows all about this. Perhaps he hopes it's different for consumer
products...? but I think the tech elements still dominate, which the example
of Sony seems to confirm.

BTW I discovered recently that Larry Ellison (whose Oracle is suing Android)
calls Steve his "best friend".

~~~
glhaynes
People have been predicting the commoditization of iPods for nearly as long as
there have been iPods, but Apple continues to hold on to consistent market
share (it's been around 70% for as long as I can remember) and continues to be
able to price iPods competitively and profitably. What's gonna change to make
this much-predicted commoditization come true?

~~~
8ren
I may have used the wrong word with commoditized.

Firstly, Apple has done a great job of riding the engineering curve, from the
first iPods, down to several versions of the iPod shuffles. During that
period, performance was crucial, partly because it enabled a smaller battery,
and therefore a smaller and more convenient size overall. It does seem that
iPods are now as light and can carry as many songs as anyone could want - that
is, there is little room left for improvement _that people will pay for_ (and
I believe the last version of the Shuffle - v.3 - didn't sell that well, even
though it was _tiny_ ).

At this point, the iPod market is ripe for commoditization. Since tech
advances have made performance factors no longer an issue, there's an opening
for the less efficient modular approach to offer other benefits, like cheaper
price, more configurable and so on. But there's a problem.

iPod sales are down. They are being cannibalized by iPhones and iPads. That
is, performance is now so good, that people would rather carry something
heavier than an iPod Shuffle in return for more functionality (like movies,
phone calls, internet and apps). I haven't checked, but I imagine the current
iPhone probably has similar weight & size to the first iPod.

In these new categories, performance again becomes a premium: people would
love a faster iPhone, that has more memory, that is lighter (where "love"
means "would pay for").

To summarize: the iPod digital-music-player category wave didn't last long
enough to become commoditized.

But note that my key point remains: Apple needs a pipeline of products, where
its integrated approach gives a competitive advantage.

------
RoyG
Or, you can accept the obvious answer: the 7" screen doesn't have enough real
estate. It's a tweener cum bastard child, too large to be a phone form factor,
and too small to do many things that work well on the 10" screen, but not
smaller.

------
charlief
"Judging by today's nip at Apple shares, I'm not the only one."

Google, RIM, and Microsoft are all down today too so maybe investors are
really really confused... or maybe it is simply a down day for the broader
market.

------
colinplamondon
Tablet apps != phone apps.

------
ditoa
BetaNews has gone downhill year on year in quality. I remember reading it back
in 2000 and it was a decent site but now it just has these poorly written FUD
"stories" about nothing of any real value.

------
s1rech
too much armchair psychology in my opinion ("this demonstrates the fear of
Jobs...").

------
utunga
Well, but it wasn't just Steve's presence on the call.

The actual official guidance (for future revenue) was significantly less than
investors were looking for.

Expected December revenue was significantly less than you might hope for the
season and an expected margin decline as they plan 'aggressive pricing' may
not have sounded encouraging to some investors.

<http://www.creditsights.com/csnext/_hpc/_121/104932.htm>

------
napierzaza
Kind of dumb.

Companies talk about their competition and future plans. So expectations in
regards to competitors are on the table. People always try to coyly ask about
future products etc.

~~~
brianpan
Agreed.

Although I will say that Steve sounds much better "unscripted" on stage, than
he did tripping over the scripted statement.

Also, on the screen size, I think Steve's point is if it's going to be small,
you should be at the very least be gaining pocket portability. Otherwise, 10"
is as small as Apple thinks a touch UI should go. Personally, I think the
reason Apple isn't going to do a 7" device is more about iPad's 2x
compatibility of iPhone apps. Adding a 3rd size makes that compatibility story
confusing.

