The Great Apple Blunder of 2007
04/20/2007 09:37 Filed in: Technology
By delaying Leopard to focus on the iPhone, Apple is missing a crucial opportunity to take advantage of Vista's lukewarm reception.
There's an old saying, "strike while the iron is hot." That means that sometimes there is only a small window of time to act strategically in a particular situation. Historically, Apple has not been very adept at incorporating this principle into their ongoing marketing strategies. The internet has plenty of websites that describe the most notable of Apple's blunders as any quick Google search demonstrates. Of course, the most memorable Apple blunder in my opinion was in 1985 when John Sculley refused to take seriously Bill Gates suggestion that Apple license its OS to other computer makers. In those days there was no standard interface on PC's. They ran ran one program at a time, usually launched from the DOS command line. Had Sculley followed Gates' suggestion, and history had turned out a bit differently, the 80% or so average of you who use Windows who visit this site on any given day might actually be using the Mac OS today instead. Incidentally, in November, 1985, Microsoft released Windows v. 1. It was nowhere near the functionality of the Mac OS which was still fairly new at the time.
Today, while I'm sure that there are a few exceptions here and there, I would guess that most folks like me who use a Mac do so by choice. That's true for a lot of Windows users, too, but for many it's not true. I would guess that for many Windows users, if given good compelling reasons to switch, and given the ability and opportunity to do so, they might just make the move.
That brings us to the current situation here in 2007. This year saw the release of a new Windows OS, Vista, and the promise of a new Mac OS, Leopard (OS X 10.5). Originally, Steve Jobs promised that Leopard would ship pretty much at the same time as Vista. That didn't happen, but we were told that Leopard would ship before the end of the Spring (which if held true would have probably been pretty close to the beginning of summer).
Then on April 12, Apple made a surprise announcement: Leopard will be delayed until October so that Apple's engineers can concentrate on bringing the iPhone to market. I'd simply link to the announcement, but there's no separate page for it. It's in the list on Apple's "Hot News" page and presumably will eventually scroll off once other news items are added. But here it is in its entirety. If you've already read it, simply move on to the next paragraph.
Apple has been making computers for 31 years, this month. But due to the success of the iPod, iTunes, and the release of AppleTV and the upcoming iPhone, Apple Computer made the decision earlier this year to change its name to Apple, Inc. to reflect its diversity of product offering. In my opinion, the above announcement regarding the delay of Leopard says clearly that this is a company stretched way too thin. Computers are what made the company. No Mac user such as myself should begrudge these other products because in many respects, they've added to Apple's bottom line and in that regard have supported the ongoing development of Mac hardware and software. Yet, going all the way back to the mid-eighties and the context of that infamous Gates' memo, the Mac OS has been the underdog--the underdog that could've been the top dog.
Two days ago I had lunch with the owner of a computer/network consulting company for which I used to work a few years back. 99.99% of his company's work relates to Windows networks and workstations. Occasionally if he has a Mac issue, he sometimes will still call me, but that hasn't happened in a while. In the midst of our conversation, he made the statement, "By the way, I hate Vista." I was really taken aback by this. I've got a copy of Vista installed on my MacBook in Parallels. To be honest, I kinda like Vista, perhaps if nothing else because the interface somehow feels more Mac-like to me than previous versions of Windows. But then again, I only have a couple of Windows programs that I occasionally run, and I don't run these everyday. Vista is not mission critical for my work. I don't use Vista all day long. But he went on to describe clients of his who've had nothing but trouble with Vista.
And he's not alone. Certain federal agencies have placed a ban on upgrading computers to Vista. Earlier this week, a northwest CIO made headlines because he is contemplating moving his organization from Windows to Macs. Yesterday, I read that Dell Computers "will restore the option to use Windows XP on some of its home systems, marking a potentially damaging blow to Microsoft's hopes for the newer Windows Vista." Many of the individual complaints I've heard about Vista have to do with this or that scanner or assorted peripheral not working with Vista due to lack of drivers. People have short memories because I remember hearing similar complaints about Windows XP in 2001, but eventually solutions were found for most problems. Nevertheless, while people have always complained about Windows in one form or another, I don't remember ever seeing this much discontent and this much balking to the idea of upgrading to a new Windows OS.
And that brings me back to the old "strike while the iron is hot" idea. It's already too late to take advantage of it, but Apple was handed a prime opportunity to take advantage of Vista's shaky reception by pushing the Mac as a more suitable upgrade. Granted, the current Mac OS (Tiger) is extremely stable and can hold its own against Windows, but what a missed opportunity on Apple's part not to offer their new OS, Leopard, at the same time as Vista!
But this is the new Apple, Inc., not Apple Computer. And I believe that what a lot of Mac users feared when the name change was announced is coming true--the computer division of Apple is taking a back seat to its other product offerings. In spite of their growth, Apple's announcement to delay Leopard not only proves that they don't have the resources to steer two new technologies simultaneously, but also that the older product takes a backseat to the newer.
Of course, Apple is betting on the iPhone becoming a huge success. And maybe it will. But who knows? And I'm sure there's a rush to get the iPhone to the market before the copycats bring forth their phones. Personally, I'd love to have one, but not at that price tag. Plus, we all know that the first generation iPhone will not be the one to get. Let the early adopters suffer through the first incarnation and then the rest of us who want to can get one when the second or third generation is released (in the meantime, I haven't renewed my Sprint contract).
Nevertheless, Apple missed a great opportunity by delaying Leopard and putting all of it's resources on a market it has no history in. And they did it on the risk of an unproven product. Hopefully it will work out for the best, but by the time Leopard is finally released, Vista's kinks may well be worked out, and the iron will no longer be hot.
Today, while I'm sure that there are a few exceptions here and there, I would guess that most folks like me who use a Mac do so by choice. That's true for a lot of Windows users, too, but for many it's not true. I would guess that for many Windows users, if given good compelling reasons to switch, and given the ability and opportunity to do so, they might just make the move.
That brings us to the current situation here in 2007. This year saw the release of a new Windows OS, Vista, and the promise of a new Mac OS, Leopard (OS X 10.5). Originally, Steve Jobs promised that Leopard would ship pretty much at the same time as Vista. That didn't happen, but we were told that Leopard would ship before the end of the Spring (which if held true would have probably been pretty close to the beginning of summer).
Then on April 12, Apple made a surprise announcement: Leopard will be delayed until October so that Apple's engineers can concentrate on bringing the iPhone to market. I'd simply link to the announcement, but there's no separate page for it. It's in the list on Apple's "Hot News" page and presumably will eventually scroll off once other news items are added. But here it is in its entirety. If you've already read it, simply move on to the next paragraph.
iPhone has already passed several of its required certification tests and is on schedule to ship in late June as planned. We can’t wait until customers get their hands (and fingers) on it and experience what a revolutionary and magical product it is. However, iPhone contains the most sophisticated software ever shipped on a mobile device, and finishing it on time has not come without a price — we had to borrow some key software engineering and QA resources from our Mac OS X team, and as a result we will not be able to release Leopard at our Worldwide Developers Conference in early June as planned. While Leopard's features will be complete by then, we cannot deliver the quality release that we and our customers expect from us. We now plan to show our developers a near final version of Leopard at the conference, give them a beta copy to take home so they can do their final testing, and ship Leopard in October. We think it will be well worth the wait. Life often presents tradeoffs, and in this case we're sure we've made the right ones.
Apple has been making computers for 31 years, this month. But due to the success of the iPod, iTunes, and the release of AppleTV and the upcoming iPhone, Apple Computer made the decision earlier this year to change its name to Apple, Inc. to reflect its diversity of product offering. In my opinion, the above announcement regarding the delay of Leopard says clearly that this is a company stretched way too thin. Computers are what made the company. No Mac user such as myself should begrudge these other products because in many respects, they've added to Apple's bottom line and in that regard have supported the ongoing development of Mac hardware and software. Yet, going all the way back to the mid-eighties and the context of that infamous Gates' memo, the Mac OS has been the underdog--the underdog that could've been the top dog.
Two days ago I had lunch with the owner of a computer/network consulting company for which I used to work a few years back. 99.99% of his company's work relates to Windows networks and workstations. Occasionally if he has a Mac issue, he sometimes will still call me, but that hasn't happened in a while. In the midst of our conversation, he made the statement, "By the way, I hate Vista." I was really taken aback by this. I've got a copy of Vista installed on my MacBook in Parallels. To be honest, I kinda like Vista, perhaps if nothing else because the interface somehow feels more Mac-like to me than previous versions of Windows. But then again, I only have a couple of Windows programs that I occasionally run, and I don't run these everyday. Vista is not mission critical for my work. I don't use Vista all day long. But he went on to describe clients of his who've had nothing but trouble with Vista.
And he's not alone. Certain federal agencies have placed a ban on upgrading computers to Vista. Earlier this week, a northwest CIO made headlines because he is contemplating moving his organization from Windows to Macs. Yesterday, I read that Dell Computers "will restore the option to use Windows XP on some of its home systems, marking a potentially damaging blow to Microsoft's hopes for the newer Windows Vista." Many of the individual complaints I've heard about Vista have to do with this or that scanner or assorted peripheral not working with Vista due to lack of drivers. People have short memories because I remember hearing similar complaints about Windows XP in 2001, but eventually solutions were found for most problems. Nevertheless, while people have always complained about Windows in one form or another, I don't remember ever seeing this much discontent and this much balking to the idea of upgrading to a new Windows OS.
And that brings me back to the old "strike while the iron is hot" idea. It's already too late to take advantage of it, but Apple was handed a prime opportunity to take advantage of Vista's shaky reception by pushing the Mac as a more suitable upgrade. Granted, the current Mac OS (Tiger) is extremely stable and can hold its own against Windows, but what a missed opportunity on Apple's part not to offer their new OS, Leopard, at the same time as Vista!
But this is the new Apple, Inc., not Apple Computer. And I believe that what a lot of Mac users feared when the name change was announced is coming true--the computer division of Apple is taking a back seat to its other product offerings. In spite of their growth, Apple's announcement to delay Leopard not only proves that they don't have the resources to steer two new technologies simultaneously, but also that the older product takes a backseat to the newer.
Of course, Apple is betting on the iPhone becoming a huge success. And maybe it will. But who knows? And I'm sure there's a rush to get the iPhone to the market before the copycats bring forth their phones. Personally, I'd love to have one, but not at that price tag. Plus, we all know that the first generation iPhone will not be the one to get. Let the early adopters suffer through the first incarnation and then the rest of us who want to can get one when the second or third generation is released (in the meantime, I haven't renewed my Sprint contract).
Nevertheless, Apple missed a great opportunity by delaying Leopard and putting all of it's resources on a market it has no history in. And they did it on the risk of an unproven product. Hopefully it will work out for the best, but by the time Leopard is finally released, Vista's kinks may well be worked out, and the iron will no longer be hot.