Nearly 10,000 iPhone users were accessing the Microsoft employee email system last year, say two people who heard the estimates from senior Microsoft executives. That figure equals about 10% of the company’s global work force.
link: Microsoft Employees Love Gadgets, but iPhone Fans Lie Low – WSJ.com
I vehemently disagree with this premise:
Nokia did not take advantage of any of the opportunities that it had by being in first place. It failed to leverage its partnerships with carriers, manufacturers, software developers, and content companies.
link: The Below Average CEO: Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo Of Nokia (NOK) – 24/7 Wall St.
When disrupted, large incumbents invariably fail to respond adequately to the threat.
You can only blame management if the threat is symmetric and they fail to take up the challenge. This failure almost never happens.
Asymmetric competition is intractable in almost all instances. This failure always happens. A response in kind by management is usually worthy of dismissal “for cause”.
Apropos the IP lawsuit between Apple and HTC, it’s perhaps instructive to look back at memorable patent suits. The following excerpt tells the story of how patent royalties were litigated for weapons that the litigants also used as belligerents against each other.
The tale shows that not even global war can affect the outcome of patent law.
From American Rifle http://www.amazon.com/American-Rifle-Biography-Alexander-Rose/dp/0553805177, Roosevelt’s Rifle Chapter, Pages 271-278.
On April 5 1905 the Treasury approved royalty payments of 75 cents per rifle plus 50 cents per thousand clips, up to a ceiling of $200,000. Seven months later, on Novemeber 6, Mauser’s accountants were pleased to receive the first (for $11,367.53) in a four-year-long series of checks adding up to the $200,000 maximum.
[General William Crozier who became Chief of Ordance of the Army in 1901 overseeing production for the nation’s weapons] made an energetic start on the new .30-06 bullet, introduced on October 15, 1906. Early the following year he received an ominous visit from a very polite but insistent representative of Deutsche Waffen Munitionsfabriken (DWM), maker of the Spitzer bullets for the Mauser rifle. The .30-06, he said, was a near-copy of DWM’s “projectile for hand-firearms”, which had been submitted to the Patent Office on February 20, 1905–about the same time, suspiciously, that Crozier had been finalizing the financial details of the settlement with Mauser–and approved on January 22, 1907.
The good news was that DWM had a far weaker case than Mauser’s–it was difficult to demonstrate that the shape and dimensions of such a common item as a bullet were unique–and Crozier’s patent attorneys advised him to fight the case. Crozier, again fearful that the newspapers would find out about this charge (even if it was trumped up by an opportunistic DWM), decided to fend off the accusers by stalling. He appointed his deputy, Lieutenant Colonel John Thompson (inventor-to-be of the famous tommy gun), to take care of the negotiations in the hope that they would go on for years.
…
In the summer of 1914 [8 years after the accusation] his deputy Thompson had finally run out the clock regarding Ordnance’s alleged infringement of DWM bullet patents. DWM had made repeated offers to Thompson asking him to settle quickly, and each time they had been rebuffed. On July 18, 1914, less than a month before the outbreak of the cataclysmic Great War, in which millions of men would be killed by pointed bullets, DWM finally lost its patience and sued the government in the U.S. Court of Claims for royalties on 250 million Spitzer bullets totaling $250,000. Ten days later, when Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, the suit was deferred.Crozier’s position was saved by the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915 and the U.S. declaration of war on Germany in April 1917. Upon entry to the war, under authority of the Trading with the Enemy Act, the government created the Office of Alien Property Custodian to oversee the seizure of enemy-owned or enemy-controlled assets. To Crozier’s immense relief, the DWM patent was ruled to be U.S. property, and the attorney general dismissed the company’s suit out of hand.
Crozier retired in 1919 and escaped the censure for the fallout from a reinvigorated lawsuit launched by DWM in 1920 [two years after the WWI ended]. Having given up on obtaining a favorable patent-infringement judgement, DWM’s lawyers focused on whether the alien property custodian’s seizure of the patent had been lawful. Impressed by DWM’s argument that its bullet was protected by previous treaty, a tribunal ruled the U.S. government in violation and awarded DWM damages of $300,000.
Washington immediately appealed the decision, and the case lurched on interminably, for another seven and a half years, until it was finally settled on the last day of 1928, a generation after its beginning. The judgement stood. With interest added on the original $300,000, the United States owed a German company $412,520.55 [for the rights to the bullet they used against Germany in two World Wars].
Read more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springfield_1903 “Still, the 1903’s used so many design features from the German Mauser that the U.S. government paid royalties to Mauserwerke”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spitzer_(bullet)
I always thought Windows 2000 was the point of over-service for Microsoft. The book linked below puts a date on the point when Microsoft could and should have created an autonomous division whose task would be to create the platform that would eventually disrupt its core business.
Clearly Microsoft did not do this but Apple, with iPad, did.
In September 1999, Kodesh wrote a memo to Gates and Ballmer under the heading “Starting from Scratch.” We need to kill Windows CE for those categories, he argued. Win32 is not an advantage; it’s a tax on device design. It served to further Microsoft’s strategy but not to help consumers. Given all their other alternatives, electronics manufacturers wouldn’t pay the tax. Kodesh wanted to take a small group of developers and work solely on developing the best software for information appliances, unconstrained by the needs of the rest of the company. Gates rejected the suggestions. “It’s very disappointing you feel that way,” he told Kodesh. “We don’t have time to start from scratch.”
link: Who Fatally Wounded Microsoft? It Was Bill Gates. « Mike Cane’s iPad Test
[Donna Dubinsky] called the decision to spin off PalmOS a “huge strategic error.” “As RIM, Apple and Palm all have demonstrated, these devices need to be highly integrated hardware and software developments in order to optimize the user experience,” Dubinsky wrote in an e-mail to The Associated Press. “When Palm no longer could advance the OS, and had to create a new one, it lost several years.”
Donna gets it.
link: Palm Inc. teeters in crowded smart phone market – Yahoo! Finance
[Rob Glaser] said with those “super” abilities, mobile has a great potential, but if Apple gets its way, the wireless industry could end up like the MP3 industry. The other option is for things to go the way of the PC, which he considers more horizontal.
“As of today, Apple is the clear winner. It’s incredible what they’ve been able to do in a vertical paradigm,”
link: Former RealNetwork’s CEO Rob Glaser Says For Now Apple Has Won – Yahoo! Finance
Sorry Rob, you’re still missing the whole point. It’s not incredible, it’s the only way to go. What’s incredible is that anybody tried to do it differently.
148apps.biz cites 191,080 apps seen
appshopper.com says 192,591 apps approved
www.148apps.com says 191,140
Missed by a mile. 200k by April 1st, easy.
On the eve of iPad sales start, and the soon-to-be classic quotes from iPad experts, it’s time to play back some of the classic iPhone expert predictions from yesteryear:
“[iPhone] just doesn’t matter anymore. There are now alternatives to the iPhone, which has been introduced everywhere else in the world. It’s no longer a novelty.” – Eamon Hoey, Hoey and Associates, April 30, 2008
“We are not at all worried. We think we’ve got the one mobile platform you’ll use for the rest of your life. [Apple] are not going to catch up.” – Scott Rockfeld, Microsoft Mobile Communications Group Product Manager, April 01, 2008
“Microsoft, with Windows Mobile/ActiveSync, Nokia with Intellisync, and Motorola with Good Technology have all fared poorly in the enterprise. We have no reason to expect otherwise from Apple.” – Peter Misek, Canaccord Adams analyst, March 07, 2008
“[Apple should sell 7.9 million iPhones in 2008]… Apple’s goal of selling 10 million iPhones this year is optimistic.” – Toni Sacconaghi, Bernstein Research analyst, February 22, 2008
“What does the iPhone offer that other cell phones do not already offer, or will offer soon? The answer is not very much… Apple’s stated goal of selling 10 million iPhones by the end of 2008 seems ambitious.” – Laura Goldman, LSG Capital, May 21, 2007
Motorola’s then-Chairman and then-CEO Ed Zander said his company was ready for competition from Apple’s iPhone, due out the following month. “How do you deal with that?” Zander was asked at the Software 2007 conference. Zander quickly retorted, “How do they deal with us?” – Ed Zander, May 10, 2007
“The iPhone is going to be nothing more than a temporary novelty that will eventually wear off.” – Gundeep Hora, CoolTechZone Editor-in-Chief, April 02, 2007
“Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone… What Apple risks here is its reputation as a hot company that can do no wrong. If it’s smart it will call the iPhone a ‘reference design’ and pass it to some suckers to build with someone else’s marketing budget. Then it can wash its hands of any marketplace failures… Otherwise I’d advise people to cover their eyes. You are not going to like what you’ll see.” – John C. Dvorak, March 28, 2007
Even if [the iPhone] is opened up to third parties, it is difficult to see how the installed base of iPhones can reach the level where it becomes a truly attractive service platform for operator and developer investment.” – Tony Cripps, Ovum Service Manager for Mobile User Experience, March 14, 2007
“I’m more convinced than ever that, after an initial frenzy of publicity and sales to early adopters, iPhone sales will be unspectacular… iPhone may well become Apple’s next Newton.” – David Haskin, Computerworld, February 26, 2007
“Consumers are not used to paying another couple hundred bucks more just because Apple makes a cool product. Some fans will buy [iPhone], but for the rest of us it’s a hard pill to swallow just to have the coolest thing.” – Neil Strother, NPD Group analyst, January 22, 2007
“The iPhone’s willful disregard of the global handset market will come back to haunt Apple.” – Tero Kuittinen, RealMoney.com, January 18, 2007
“[Apple’s iPhone] is the most expensive phone in the world and it doesn’t appeal to business customers because it doesn’t have a keyboard which makes it not a very good email machine… So, I, I kinda look at that and I say, well, I like our strategy. I like it a lot.” – Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO, January 17, 2007
“The iPhone is nothing more than a luxury bauble that will appeal to a few gadget freaks. In terms of its impact on the industry, the iPhone is less relevant… Apple is unlikely to make much of an impact on this market… Apple will sell a few to its fans, but the iPhone won’t make a long-term mark on the industry.” – Matthew Lynn, Bloomberg, January 15, 2007
“iPhone which doesn’t look, I mean to me, I’m looking at this thing and I think it’s kind of trending against, you know, what’s really going, what people are really liking on, in these phones nowadays, which are those little keypads. I mean, the Blackjack from Samsung, the Blackberry, obviously, you know kind of pushes this thing, the Palm, all these… And I guess some of these stocks went down on the Apple announcement, thinking that Apple could do no wrong, but I think Apple can do wrong and I think this is it.” – John C. Dvorak, January 13, 2007
“I am pretty skeptical. I don’t think [iPhone] will meet the fantastic predictions I have been reading. For starters, while Apple basically established the market for portable music players, the phone market is already established, with a number of major brands. Can Apple remake the phone market in its image? Success is far from guaranteed.” – Jack Gold, founder and principal analyst at J. Gold Associates, January 11, 2007
“Apple will launch a mobile phone in January, and it will become available during 2007. It will be a lovely bit of kit, a pleasure to behold, and its limited functionality will be easy to access and use. The Apple phone will be exclusive to one of the major networks in each territory and some customers will switch networks just to get it, but not as many as had been hoped. As customers start to realise that the competition offers better functionality at a lower price, by negotiating a better subsidy, sales will stagnate. After a year a new version will be launched, but it will lack the innovation of the first and quickly vanish. The only question remaining isif, when the iPod phone fails, it will take the iPod with it.” – Bill Ray, The Register, December 26, 2006
“The economics of something like [an Apple iPhone] aren’t that compelling.” – Rod Bare, Morningstar analyst, December 08, 2006
“Apple is slated to come out with a new phone… And it will largely fail…. Sales for the phone will skyrocket initially. However, things will calm down, and the Apple phone will take its place on the shelves with the random video cameras, cell phones, wireless routers and other would-be hits… When the iPod emerged in late 2001, it solved some major problems with MP3 players. Unfortunately for Apple, problems like that don’t exist in the handset business. Cell phones aren’t clunky, inadequate devices. Instead, they are pretty good. Really good.” – Michael Kanellos, CNET, December 07, 2006
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” – Ed Colligan, Palm CEO, November 16, 2006
Nostalgia was better in the old days…
The Amazing Recovery: Here’s Everything That’s Happened Since The Dow’s March 9, 2009 Low
iPad Death Watch : AAPLinvestors
You can’t go wrong betting against this bunch.
(link above reproduced below due to bandwidth issues with their servers.)
“Any tablet computer, including Apple’s eagerly anticipated iPad, will face serious problems in generating big sales. Tablets look cool, but the reality is they don’t do anything new.” Michael Comeau, Minyanville, 5 March 2010
Dvorak:”I’m telling you, look at this product coming out of India called the Adam.”
Curry: “A-D-A-M?”
Dvorak: “Yeah.”
Curry: “And it’s a what it’s a pad?”
Dvorak: “It’s an iPad Killer. And I hate to use that term since the iPad is probably dead anyway.”
No Agenda Podcast, Adam Curry & John C. Dvorak, 25 February 2010
“Fewer capabilities (than a netbook) but a similar size? Not a good start.”Lee Gomes, Forbes Asia Magazine, 5 March 2010
“We of course build plastic mock-ups that we show (to customers)…we had a slate form factor. The feedback was that for (our) customers it will not work because of the need to have (a physical) keyboard. These were 14-year-old kids, who, I thought, would be most willing to try a virtual keyboard but they said no, we want the physical keyboard.” Mika Majapuro, Worldwide Sr. Product Marketing Manager, Lenovo, 22 February 2010
“The Apple iPad is not going to be the company’s next runaway best seller.” John Dvorak, MarketWatch, 12 February 2010
“It’s a nice reader, but there’s nothing on the iPad I look at and say, ‘Oh, I wish Microsoft had done it.’” Bill Gates, Microsoft, 10 February 2010
“The rally has been especially kind to seemingly racy stocks such as Apple and Google. Both have pole-vaulted to market-surpassing gains over the past 12 months, despite the fact that the former’s hamster-wheel of innovation (to borrow an apt phrase from my Fool colleague Joe Magyer) may have hit a snag with the iPad. ” Shannon Zimmerman, The Motley Fool, 10 February 2010
“It’s not a tablet, it’s an extension of the iPod Touch. It has some new kinks, but generally speaking it’s using the iPhone OS. It’s more like a smart phone than a personal computer. It’s the Newton reborn. What’s missing most is the communications aspect.” Andreas Haas (former Apple executive), CEO, Axiotron (Modbook), 7 February 2010
Before Jan 20th, 49 percent of people said they didn’t think they needed an Apple Tablet. That number jumped to 61 percent after the announcement. Fifty-nine percent of buyers wouldn’t pay extra for 3G coverage. Whether this device becomes a big hit is anyone’s guess but based on this study it sure looks doubtful.” Retrevo, 5 February 2010
“Yet it’s hard to see how the iPad, in the form unveiled last month, will come close to transforming daily life as much as the iPod or iPhone. The challenge with the iPad will be less about improving an established market than building a new one.” Arik Hesseldahl, BusinessWeek, 5 February 2010
“I added it up and … like 800 people are going to buy the iPad. . . . It’s not that the iPad is a failure. It’s just a product ahead of its time. No one should actually buy this iPad — between its inevitable first-generation bugs, fulfillment problems, and buyer’s remorse over added features and price drops, it’s heartbreak waiting to happen.” Molly Wood, CNet, 31 January 2010
“It was a bigger iPod Touch. I question whether those features would be enough to get people to buy new machines.” Satoru Iwata, President, Nintendo, 29 January 2010
“The company once notorious for its ability to upend convention and revolutionize markets may no longer have what it takes, worry some technology journalists. Call it the iPad or the iPlod, but the message seems clear: Apple may have lost its mojo.” Jeremy A. Kaplan, FOXNews.com, 28 January 2010
“What’s the single most worrisome thing about the iPad? It’s Apple’s monopoly on distribution of applications. ” Harry McCracken, Tecnologizer.com, 29 January 2010
“The tablet market has only succeeded as a niche market over the years and it was hoped Apple would dream up some new paradigm to change all that. From what I’ve seen and heard, this won’t be it.” John Dvorak, MarketWatch, 29 January 2010
“It is a humorous world in how Microsoft is much more open than Apple,” Frank Shaw, Microsoft, Corporate VP, Corporate Communications, 29 January 2010
“When Steve Jobs first demonstrated the Apple Mac, he used the words “insanely great” to demonstrate the full graphical display of the computer. It’s a tag that has stuck around to this day among Apple fans. But, today’s comments from Jobs that the iPad is a “magical, revolutionary” device ring hollow.”Dan Wayne, apc mag, 28 January 2010
“All the people (including me) who felt underwhelmed by the iPad initially might have missed its true potential. Put another way: the iPad is all about software. Forget the sleek form factor – that’s just a prerequisite. Ironically, it’s the software and services that Microsoft never ‘got’, that Apple totally does get.” Dan Wayne, apc mag, 12 February 2010
“Nothing from the iPad specs that I’ve seen really shows any great cause for celebration. Unless Apple has also developed some new type of power source, such as nuclear cells or magical hamsters on tiny spinning wheels for the iPad, don’t expect the claims about battery life to hold true. ” John Breeden II, Government Computer News, 28 January 2010
“Ultimately, the iPad is a large iPod touch: a great device to draw your inspiration from, but perhaps not the seismic shift in technology that we were expecting.” Claudine Beaumont, The Telegraph, 28 January 2010
“Behold: The Apple iFlop Neither “truly magical” nor “revolutionary,” the cluelessly named Apple iPad tablet device has dropped like a shiny wedge into the gadget game, dividing tech watchers in to opposing views — the critical and the adoring.” Scott Moritz, TheStreet.com, 28 January 2010
“9 Worst Things About The Apple Tablet:
1. No Flash
2. Its screen
3. Its price
4. Closed App Store
5. Its name
6. No multitasking
7. No camera
8. No USB
9. AT&T deal
Bianca Bosker, Huffington Post, 29 January 2010
“What do the new Apple iPad and Google’s Nexus One have in common? Both were DOA: Disappointing On Arrival. Why is the iPad a disappointment? Because it doesn’t allow us to do anything we couldn’t do before. Sure, it is a
neat form factor, but it comes with significant trade-offs, too. No 16:9 widescreen, for example.” David Coursey, PC World, 28 January 2010
“E-readers will outsell iPads because of the simple economics of the consumer device market. It’s triple the weight and 30% thicker than an e-reader. You need two hands to hold it. It’s got a backlit screen, and it’s too expensive to give one to everyone in your house.” Russ Wilcox, CEO E-Ink (makers of Amazon’s Kindle), 28 January 2010
“It seems like a high priced, unnecessary trinket to me.” Paul Thurrott, SuperSite for Windows, 27 January 2010
“Apple iPad – failure, joke or fiasco? Pick one” Linen DeFiller, MillionFace.com, 27 January 2010
“The press weren’t cheering and whooping. I didn’t see anybody pee their pants … Not one! The only people I saw cheering were the people who work at Apple down in the front two rows … Al Gore was going crazy. I wanted to see more. It’s a big iPod. What is there to do there? Play a video game on a bigger screen? I thought it [iPad] was ‘paving the cow path’ (enshrining a makeshift solution).” Dan Lyons aka Fake Steve Jobs, 27 January 2010
“Let’s face it, the Internet was designed for the PC. The Internet is not designed for the iPhone. That’s why they’ve got 75,000 applications — they’re all trying to make the Internet look decent on the iPhone.” Steve Ballmer, Microsoft, 21 October 2009
Apple (AAPL) is on track to build 5 million iPads in the first half of 2010, according to FBR Capital chip analyst Craig Berger.
link: Apple To Build 5 Million iPads In First Half 2010, Analyst Says – Tech Trader Daily – Barrons.com
5 million by June sounds a lot more likely than 2 million by October.
Until we get some real data, my target remains 5 million sold for calendar 2010, but I would not be in the least surprised if it was 10 million.
In either case, iPad will sell better than the iPhone out of the gate.
