It is amazing to think about Apple in terms of its size and influence on computing compared to IBM. And that makes me wonder who is going to replace Apple 30 years from now, or if Apple will have a 100+ year run like IBM has. I hope they get a chance to repatriate their cash hoard.
I've thought about this a lot, and here's my .02 on the matter.
If you look at politics now, there's a decidedly anti-elitist trend. This is why Trump got elected. I felt the movie "Hell or High Water" portrayed the ex-Bay Area/other "creative class" cities' zeitgeist really well. There are just a huge number of people struggling to get by, trying to make their mortgage payments, in tons of debt.
At the same time, I find Snap fascinating. Anecdotally, it seems to appeal to young people, people bored working low-end jobs, and others I wouldn't call "rich". And despite the CEO's dumb comments about "a social network for rich people", there's a raw, back-to-basics, "for normal people" feel they've worked hard to cultivate.
I think that if Apple isn't careful, they could be seen as an elitist, out-of-touch, "rich person" phone company. Like, "this is the phone for people who drive E-Class Mercedes. I want a phone for people who drive a truck, drink Miller, and watch football". I could totally see this happening if the Asian Android manufacturers keep nipping at their heels. At some point, phones are going to hit saturation in terms of how much new functionality people care about. And I think there will be a space for a device that's further downmarket, more affordable, and not as aspirational/elitist as an iPhone. It would be a phone that does about 80% of what an iPhone does today, GPS, video calls, camera, good battery life, etc., but without some of the really "gadgety" recent stuff on the iPhone, like 3D touch.
I also think that if computing overall moves to more of a conversational/message-oriented paradigm, it's going to cause the form factor of phones to change a lot, and become more "invisible" in favor of simpler devices, or even a pair of headphones that talk directly to a mobile network.
The other thing to keep in mind, history shows incumbent tech companies aren't "replaced", they're just outgrown by new ones. IBM is _still_ selling mainframes, just not PCs or mobile phones. So the more likely case is, some new thing comes up and has even broader appeal than Apple products. Granted, it's hard to see how that could happen with their sales volumes, but that's what history suggests.
You make some excellent points. I don't have any way to evaluate whether or not class politics will play a role in their future success or lack thereof, I strongly agree that changing form factors and purposes will be interesting. If you imagine a '5G' world where the large swaths of a place are suffused with enough spectrum to essentially create a gigabit network everywhere, can you disintermediate the phone company completely with direct addressed communication channels ? And what will that mean when we are consuming dramas and music directly from the production companies servers with perhaps blockchain micropayments. It will definitely be different :-)
I think it will be interesting, for sure (SV developer here)
I think the class politics thing is a big deal, though. I just read fb interns are now getting paid 8k/month. You certainly can make the argument that they're creating enough value to justify that level of comp but it's not hard to see how this must chafe people, esp. in low-COLA areas. Mix in the fact that Apple has basically made "high-end luxury" their brand, and I think it's inevitable some backlash will result in the next decade. Esp. when you consider that Uber, Airbnb, etc. are all "Silicon Valley" companies.
