
A Steve Jobs email exchange that captures Apple’s strategy - peter123
http://qz.com/118293/the-steve-jobs-email-exchange-that-perfectly-captures-apples-strategy/
======
natch
This hardly captures Apple's strategy. It appears to offer an insight into one
step in their strategic thinking for one issue, but the title of the post is
quite misleading.

~~~
johnrob
This absolutely captures their strategy. They are clearly building a walled
garden for their own benefit, while selling it as the user's benefit. I can't
imagine users complaining about having the option to switch to android.

~~~
_yields
> while selling it as the user's benefit

I disagree.

Facebook, Google, Microsoft have a walled garden, in-fact every company on
earth thinks on how to keep customers from leaving.

The difference between Apple and others is that Apple products are far
superior, i can't imagine myself using __any __Microsoft product if Apple
provides it.

~~~
eloisant
Well, no.

Google releases pretty much all of its products on iPhone. Apple doesn't
releases anything on other platforms and when they do because they have no
choice (iTunes on Windows), they do it poorly.

~~~
deveac
Well, Google certainly builds walls for its garden. Looking at things like
nuking Reader in favor of G+, nerfing its applications on iOS compared to
Android (funny how quickly iOS got turn by turn Google Maps once Apple
released its own map application), and even initiatives like Free Zone in
developing nations that provide free internet only for checking G+, gmail, and
sites opened directly from a Google search). Just look at the shenanigans
Google is pulling right now with Microsoft and getting Youtube on mobile
there.

All of these companies throw walls up for the sake of profits and strategic
benefit. Different heights, different locations, some hard walls, some soft,
-but they all build them.

The entire free Android operating systems itself is just vendor lock-in for
Google, which is an advertising (not search) company.

~~~
cromwellian
Actually, you're wrong, sometimes the iOS apps have features that Android
doesn't have yet, for example, iOS Maps actually had the new Maps interface
before Android. Also, Google has Google Takeout, which lets you leave Google
and take everything with you.

Android is not vendor lock in, because Google isn't the vendor in this
scenario, Samsung, Amazon, Sony, etc are. For example, Amazon doesn't include
Google's services, and Samsung is clearly moving in the direction of pushing
their own stuff in front of Google's.

~~~
deveac
_> Actually, you're wrong, sometimes the iOS apps have features that Android
doesn't have yet..._

I didn't say they didn't, nor did I even imply it. Understand that this
doesn't change the fact that Google witheld app features from other OEMs and
kept enhanced versions for its own partners for competitive reasons. Just
because Apple did it too doesn't mean Google didn't (as I already pointed
out).

 _> Android is not vendor lock in, because Google isn't the vendor in this
scenario, Samsung, Amazon, Sony, etc are._

I was talking about walled gardens, and wasn't making an arbitrary distinction
of "vendor" lock-in.

As I was saying though, from the standpoint of a walled garden, Android as a
free operating system has been remarkably successful as a soft wall for
Google, getting their advertisements on more handsets more quickly than any
other method. Instead of risking consumers switching, they are eliminating
competitors before consumers even get the option to switch. OEMs have been
keen to adopt an OS that cost them next to nothing and played nice with
branding and in house apps.

Clearly Amazon and Samsung modifying the OS is a concern of Google's, and they
are combating this with native apps, web apps, and their own competitive
offerings (hardware included).

~~~
cromwellian
What you're basically saying is that Google used open source to create a
protective ecosystem that prevents other vendors from taking over with their
own moats.

Chrome serves the same function. It ensures Google is not blocked by browser
default search engine changing, it prevents other people's walls. But would
you claim Chrome is "vendor lock in"?

Android is primarily a defense mechanism. If Apple and Microsoft together had
nearly 100% of the market for the mobile web, they could change the default
search engine to Bing and sink Google overnight.

Android if anything, preserves choice and prevents lock-in, because unlike
iOS, it is an open OS, and vendors can always change the defaults.

------
Xorlev
If anything, the inability to purchase (easily) from the Kindle app really
pushed me to stop using my iPad and start using my Android products.

Haven't looked back.

~~~
warcher
It's a large reason why I won't touch any of Apple's media offerings. If
they're not running the Netflix/Amazon model, where they've committed to
making it available on all the major platforms, it's a non-starter for me. I
really like a lot of Apple's products at the moment. It hasn't always been
like that. It seems naive to believe it will stay that way forever either.

------
salem
This touches on one of the big issues with the agency model, Apple's 30% cut
of IAP, and the rule requiring all digital goods purchases go Apple IAP made
Apple the only bookstore on apple iDevices, outside the browser. IMHO, when
the iPhone was the leading smartphone in the US, that wasn't a walled garden,
that was a market leader leveraging that power to take another market in an
anti-competitive way.

------
dsaber
I've always believed it's time for Apple to embrace running some of their
software on other platforms. Not only would it take the competitive advantage
away from other companies providing multi-platform products, but it would also
show confidence in their products that users will ultimately use their
products for the best experience. Sure, some products may not make sense on
other platforms (e.g., Mac OS X), but many others do make sense.

In many ways, history is repeating itself here with Microsoft and Apple 20
years ago.

------
dm8
Out of curiosity, why did he think Apple had far superior payment system? I
personally think Apple's payment gateways no better than Amazon Checkout or
Google Checkout experience.

~~~
nickconfer
Three reasons.

1) Apple has more active credit cards than Amazon.

2) If someone were to purchase a book on an iOS device it is more likely they
have an active credit card on their account than an Amazon account with an
active credit card.

3) One payment system is easier for customers to understand and trust.

Steve's wording here may have indicated better technology in his mind, but I
doubt that is true, given amazons incredible focus on taking credit card
payments accurately and quickly. Reasonably though the reasons outlined above
would be good reasons it was better overall, even if it really wasn't consumer
friendly in the end because of the lock-in.

~~~
MatthewPhillips
#1 #2 state the same thing, and although it may be true, I can't think of any
way this makes the payment system "far superior". Is Amazon something you only
use once and it's a hassle to have to enter in your credit card?

#3 is not something anyone believes, even you.

I'd counter with iTunes hysterically bad receipt notifications. Typically you
get a receipt between 3 days to 2 weeks after you buy something. Every time I
receive an iTunes receipt I have to strain to remember way back when I bought
the thing the receipt is for.

~~~
wavefunction
iTunes is a horrible store front, so I had to vote you up. Maybe it was
acceptable for what was available when it launched but it's coming up on 10
years later and basic features that would aid discovery are still missing.

------
abalone
It says a lot about their attitude, but I wouldn't say Apple's strategy is
100% predicated on switching costs. Not even close. They entered the phone
market as an underdog, for one thing.

As for attitude though, it does perfectly capture what they consider
"superior", i.e. stuff Apple does (platform-mediated payments), not
necessarily stuff that benefits users (portability).

------
airencracken
So the gist is that Apple is all about vendor lock-in.

Well, no surprise there. That's been the case for a long time.

------
c0mpute
How are these emails being leaked? Part of the ebook case they had? Otherwise
I would imagine companies would take their email seriously...

Perhaps a good practice for companies to completely delete emails after a few
days? (Its impractical, but maybe there is a need?)

------
jeffehobbs
.epub in a Dropbox folder forever. Screw _all_ these guys.

