Apple: Is this really a dangerous moment?

Summary: Macworld is right around the corner. Apple's business has never beenbetter.

Macworld is right around the corner. Apple's business has never been better. Yet everyone is looking for the storm clouds.

The big question: What's really worth worrying about? Indeed, the larger Apple gets, the more worrywarts emerge. The high wire act only gets higher.

Fast Company says the following:

This is also a dangerous moment for Apple. In a way the company has never seen, the barbarians are massing at the gates. From hardware to software to services, major competitors with serious R&D and marketing budgets are laying siege to the House of Jobs. As Apple moves into new markets, it has made powerful new enemies, some working in concert. Nokia, for example, is banding with telecom companies to offer its own touch-screen hardware in an effort to sway subscribers from the iPhone and Apple's exclusive partner, AT&T. MP3 players from the likes of iRiver, Microsoft, SanDisk, and Toshiba are getting slicker all the time, targeting the iPod at a fraction of the cost. Vivendi Universal scuttled a long-term licensing deal to offer its music on iTunes and is talking with other music companies about building a download store of their own. Likewise, Amazon has created its own iTunes antagonist, Wal-Mart has been low-balling its way into the market, and subscription music sites such as Rhapsody are spending mightily to win consumers over to vast Web-based music catalogs available for a flat monthly fee. Even the tree ­huggers are coming after Apple, threatening to sue under a California consumer-protection statute if certain allegedly toxic chemicals aren't removed from the iPhone.

Bottom line: Jobs' Macworld spiel better be worth about $100 billion--the difference in Apple's market cap from a year ago.

Then again we've heard these worries before. Let's assess some risk:

Everyone has a touch screen: This threat is real if you believe that the only reason people buy an iPhone is the touch interface. I don't believe that. One thing is certain though--touch screen technology will be in every phone. It's not a big differentiator. Threat level: Nil.

MP3 rivals: We've heard this before. Some folks love the new stuff from SanDisk. I still see plenty of iPods out there. Threat level: Minimal.

Content: NBC pulled its content from iTunes today, but Fox is apparently willing to wheel and deal (Techmeme). These content deals--on the video side at least--could be worrisome. Look for Apple to budge a few inches on this one to keep the content flowing on iTunes. Threat level: High, but Apple can afford to budge given it owns the music industry. Music will also be a commodity.

Open standards: This one could be tricky for sure. Fast Company says that Apple's ecosystem is based on "a hermetically sealed system."

If a customer buys one Apple (all resources) device, she'll buy two, three, even four more--at a premium price--rather than dilute the experience with other brands. In an age increasingly defined by interoperability and technical collaboration, Jobs still refuses to license Apple's operating system. He won't allow music and videos downloaded from iTunes to be played on other MP3 players. He won't permit music downloaded from competing stores to play on the iPod. And in enforcing his exclusive deal with AT&T for the iPhone, he went so far as to disable or "brick" the device of anyone who dared "jailbreak" it for use with another carrier, or who downloaded third-party applications for features Apple hadn't built in. Today, there are an estimated 250,000 iPhones that haven't been hooked up with AT&T, and even Apple's COO, Timothy Cook, assumes they have been unlocked and attached to ­another carrier. That means almost 20% of iPhone customers want the hardware but not the closed ecosystem built around it.

All of that's true, but the big question is this: Will being hermetically sealed be an issue the larger Apple grows? For now, no one cares. And at last check Microsoft and other proprietary companies have done pretty well. Threat level: To be determined.

Rising expectations: What the Fast Company riff and other recent developments--Leopard's problems for instance--reflect rising expectations about everything that is Apple (market cap, customer service, quality, the next bit hit). The bigger you get the more people bitch about you. Ask Facebook. Threat level for Apple: Very high.

Topics: Hardware, Apple, iPhone, Mobility

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

26 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Message has been deleted.

    NonZealot
    • Wow, and you let itanalyst posts stand?

      Amazing! Regardless, let me remove the one word that probably got my message deleted. The point of my post is still 100% valid:
      [i]The only dangerous moment for Apple will come when genetic engineering can be used to raise humanity's average intelligence. As long as there is an abundant supply of people willing to overpay for commodity products, Apple will continue to be successful.[/i]
      NonZealot
      • Wow

        I guess you would be engineered out of existence. The idea that MACs are
        expensive and over priced is a myth. You want a cheap mac get a mini. You want
        something more get an iMac.. you want the best get a pro. The hardware cost is at
        a price that is in line with the same level of tech for a pc. Now lets talk software
        you think MS office is worth $399 when I can run iWork which does the same for
        $79... $99 for a family 5 pack. If you actually did any research and actually
        understood what you were talking about you would realize that the reverse of your
        post is more accurate. When $MS also sells its OS for $299 when I got my family
        pack of Leopard for $199.

        Crawl back under your rock.
        jahrends
        • Who said anything about MS?

          Why do Apple zealots believe that all computer comparisons [b]must[/b] be made to MS? OS X has some advantages when compared to Windows but has [b]no[/b] advantages, [b]not even one[/b] when compared to Linux.

          [i]MS office is worth $399 when I can run iWork which does the same for $79... $99 for a family 5 pack.[/i]

          You are proud for spending $99 for iWork when OpenOffice is 10X better and costs $0 for a family pack of 4,000,000,000? Like I said: overpay for a commodity product.

          You are proud for spending $299 on Leopard (what a DISASTER, have you read anything about the gaping holes in that OS??!!) when Linux is 10X better, has better eye candy (Beryl puts Aqua to shame), and works on [b]any[/b] computer instead of being artificially and onerously limited through the use of a TPM DRM chip to overpriced, underpowered Macs?

          As far as the Mac "myth", sorry bud but it is true. When you start with consumer requirements and price out a computer, the Mac ends up costing about 2X what you would pay for something else.
          [url=http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-11048-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=32859&messageID=606795] High end computer comparison [/url]
          [url=http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-10533-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=34986&messageID=644972] Middle of the road computer comparison [/url]
          [url=http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-11048-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=32859&messageID=604568] Low end computer comparison [/url]

          The only way Apple zealots can twist reality so it looks like the Mac isn't outrageously overpriced is to start with a Mac and desperately try to configure a computer to match it but this ignores the Mac's biggest disadvantage: a complete lack of customizability. When you start with a consumer's requirements and build a computer, let's be kind and just say that the Mac doesn't fare well.

          snicker, smirk :)
          NonZealot
          • Do not compare Apples to Oranges

            First off, you cannot start talking to the average consumer about linux and OpenOffice, both of which the majority has not even heard of. As a psychologist, I'm not going to throw out terms people will not understand - jahrends was only directly comparing consumer-based products, MS Office to iWork, OS X to Vista/XP (didn't specify i don't think), and Mac vs. PC's. I agree with you that Linux and OpenOffice are great choices, but don't sneer down at the average consumer.

            It is true that MS Office is more expensive than their Apple counterparts; however, MS Office is usually worth the extra money, if the person can benefit from the additions. Leopard is not cheaper than Vista/XP in a single pack because Leopard is not offered with an upgrade price as Vista has. You can get a Vista Basic upgrade at $99 and Vista Premium upgrade for about $140 at Amazon. Most people need an upgrade, not the new product because the average consumer will almost always buy a computer pre-installed with an OS. Therefore, Leopard and Vista are similar in price.

            Lastly, your references to computer comparisons are extremely flawed. You cannot compare a consumer desktop with one processor, to a Mac Pro which is a workstation with two processors, fully-buffered memory, etc. You have to compare workstation (Mac Pro) to workstation (say, Dell precision T5400 or T7400, which runs into problems b/c Dell's now feature Penryn, while Apple has been behind the 8-ball announces their Penryn updates) and consumer desktop (iMac) to consumer desktop (Say, Dell XPS 420). What you will find in these comparisons is that the Mac Pro, while having significantly less customization options, beats all Dell precisions in price for comparable features. However, workstations are rare for non-professional buyers. The iMac to XPS 420, does show that the iMac is slightly overpriced, again due to lack of options.

            Because Apple only has three lines of Mac, a significant number of high-end consumers fall in between an iMac and Mac Pro - an unacceptable oversight by Apple. But please, do not compare a Mac Pro workstation to consumer desktop.
            fridgeymonster3
          • Total Zealot is a confused individual

            He thinks he is parodying what he calls "Mac Zealots" but all he is really doing is revealing what a total "anti-Mac" zealot he really is. I think a Mac user stole his girlfriend or something. His posts have very little to do with objective facts.
            MarcB_z
          • funny stuff. thanks!

            Just too funny that a dyed in the wool mac zealot would see it that way. <br>
            YOU are what he's parodying! Ha ha.
            <br>
            You-just-can't-make-this-stuff-up. LOL!
            <br><br>
            on the facts and knowledge side of things, i've seen your posts MarcB, and you have no idea what you are saying. None. Try it if you want to go whimpering into the corner with your tail between your legs.
            xuniL_z
  • RE: Apple: Is this really a dangerous moment?

    This article is flawed in many points. It doesn't take into account Apple's recent removal of digital rights management from it's iTunes tracks, which allow playability on any device. Also, Apple has opened up its technology more than ever over the past 7 years, which is a major reason why Apple's market cap has increased (Intel Mac's, Windows on Mac, open-source widgets and iPhone apps, etc.). Also, even with unlocked iPhones (which are even being sold in Europe) Apple still makes over $200 net off of each iPhone sold, so the unlocking is more of a loss to AT&T rather than Apple. Finally, none of this takes into account the marketing prowess that Apple has mastered. There are devices out there that are technologically superior to Apple's, there always have been, but nobody makes you need it better than Apple does.

    One more thing: music will be a commodity? Who writes this stuff?

    - JM
    jmxnyc
    • Lost in they hype

      I notice that people accuse Steve Jobs of trying to keep people from using the music
      they buy from iTunes where they want but it was finally revealed recently that he is
      fighting with the content owners to remove the DRM from the music so that the tracks
      can be played any where. You see apple stands to win bigger if ALL of their music can
      be played on any device because then apple gets that halo effect from the iTunes
      library for more people to want to buy iPods. More people buy iPods more people buy
      Macs... and so on and so on...
      jahrends
  • The sky is falling!!! The sky is falling!!!

    Not to say that Apple will always be king of the hill, but I'm not ready to unload my Apple stock just yet. The Mac part of the business is just picking up steam. I personally know about a dozen PC owners who say their next machine will be a Mac.
    Userama
    • OS X set free

      I still say it is in the works for OS X to be set free into the wild. Those people that
      THINK that MACs are expensive will load OS X onto their current PC. Figure out that
      they can't stand Windows instability and will make their next machine a MAC.

      To paraphrase a post in another blog. OS X on a pc is a gateway drug to an Apple
      Macintosh.
      jahrends
      • As long as Apple is seeing record sales

        of Macs, OS X will stay where it is.
        frgough
  • Apple doomed...

    As my rep and I were sipping cognac and enjoying fine cigars, we toasted to the demise of Apple. Apple has to go away and they need to disappear fast. I have held the party line and banned all non-Microsoft products from our company. I am sick and tired of hearing industry pundits talk about iPods and iPhones and Macs. I want to go back to the good old days of industry analysts attending Microsoft launches and airlifting gold copies of code.
    Mike Cox
    • 5.1

      Not your best.
      r_widell
  • Apple - Not in danger... in command

    What is really dangerous is when people who have no clue what they are talking about
    write for seemingly legitimate publications like Fast Company. It delegitimizes the
    publication. The reason others want Apple to open up OSX is that nobody can
    compete with it. That is not a dangerous position to be in. Apple?s dangerous moment
    will be when they quit innovating, and that danger is not even on the horizon.
    hellojon
    • A transformation only Apple can generate

      Apple's pace is awesome and every industry that it involves itself with is having a
      difficult time keeping up, let alone understanding what's going on.

      Only Apple knows what's going on.

      The fear of Apple is not only from the businesses with which it competes, but also
      from a fearful user base. They fear Apple is aiming to take over the world. Far from
      it. Apple wants to transform the world and be an aesthetic force in the modern age.
      That's humanizing.

      They're finally fulfilling the potential that languished during the 80s and 90s.
      YinToYourYang-22527499
      • Apple's biggest challenge

        is death by middle management. They are getting to a size
        where middle management rot becomes a very real threat.
        The stumbles with Leopard are the first hint.
        frgough
  • This article is nothing more

    than an exercise in useless punditry and deadline meeting. Better to publish something stupid than not to publish at all.
    MarcB_z
    • Yet....

      you took the time to read all of it (don't deny it, every word) and respond multiple times. <br>
      for a total waste of a blog, you sure don't mind wasting your time on it. <br>
      You are a classic Mac zealot that is so easy to spot, it wouldn't be much easier if you announced it every time you posted.<br>
      My thanks goes out to you again. You are a very funny guy.
      xuniL_z
      • S.T.F.U. YOU ASSHOLE !!! <NT>

        <NT>
        Intellihence