Can you list the break through technologies you saw while following CES this year, ones that will be multi-billion dollar success stories and will change the face of the industry?
Driverless cars springs to mind.
Plus the lots of interesting developments in robotics, drones, wireless power and 3D printing. There were a lot of smaller start-ups giving glimpses of the future at CES this year.
I think the last paragraph is really the sum of Apple's true threat....
Itself...
We're seeing examples of this from it's very buggy software releases.. The hardware is rock solid still, thankfully.. but Apple really, really, really needs to get a handle on it's cloud and software (iOS and OS X)..
The buggy nature of the last few major releases are killing their 'it just works' motto.
I agree. In UI design, function and form are one, and too much of the function is being harmed in favor of the form/appearance. A top to bottom review of iOS 8 is needed and perhaps Jony Ive needs some of his responsibilities over iOS and OS X handed off to a seasoned UI designer.
Something that Dilger doesn't fully address is the deterioration of the technology tradeshow as an effective announcement environment.
The bigger companies are able to make big announcements at any given time, many following Apple's "we'll do our own launch events" philosophy..
Other big companies (Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, etc.) have largely abandoned CES as a venue for major product announcements, which is why Apple's own actions dwarf what goes on at CES today. Nobody important goes to CES, it's a ghetto.
Tradeshows were important before the rise of ubiquitous online media. People didn't get their tech news on their smartphone or wifi-enabled notebook computer back in the Nineties. You sat down and opened your copy of Electronics News, BYTE, PC World, whatever. Tradeshows allowed journalists to go see what various companies were doing so they could write about it for their weekly or monthly periodicals.
Today companies can issue a press release on PRNewswire and reveal the announcement on their website or invite journalists to a private event, which can be published within hours.
The era of the general interest technology tradeshow is long gone. CES used to be two shows, the January one called Winter CES, and one in about June called Summer CES. The summer show died a long time ago, although videogame-focused E3 took its place (with varying levels of interest/success). The big computer show COMDEX is a dead dinosaur. Macworld is now on hiatus, probably for good.
Apple knew by the mid-2000s that the tradeshow was not an ideal product announcement setting. In October 2001, they announced the iPod at their own invitation-only media event, the model for every non-WWDC Apple announcement in the past seven years. Even in 2001, there was enough coverage on the Web for quick publishing. It also resulted in the most myopic post by a tech writer ever:
By the time Apple announced the iPhone in 2007 at their penultimate tradeshow appearance, the importance of the ability to network with the distribution channel had largely dissipated, partly because of online communications, but also because Apple themselves had built a highly successful retail store chain and online store operation.
Highly specific industry (NAB, National Association of Broadcasters) or application shows (Oracleworld, Dreamforce, Apple's WWDC, Google I/O) still make some sense, but the usefulness of a general interest technology tradeshow has vanished.
^^^ The primary purpose of a trade show is for businesses to make deals and determine interest in their offerings. If there's interest, manufacturing and distribution follows. It's not a mall.
Great article. Being the greatest company in recent memory has also led to having one of the most manipulated and artificially depressed stocks in history. In a saner world AAPL would be at $150 right now. After a jump to about $112 in the past week, it's back to $107.82
In what way isn't the Panasonic GH4 a breakthrough 4K camera? An awful lot of people think it is. Olympus have a twin voice coil autofocus in their new 40-15mm f2.8 zoom that apparently delivers quite fast focusing.
Separating the two parts of my post, the latter regarding photography ... my standards in judging are different there. Yes .. Nothing at all in the show was Apple type paradigm shifting. Once in the photography and video mind set though there were several incremental advances but if there was a paradigm shift I didn't see it. For example, I'm looking for the new lens and sensor break throughs we read about on Ars and Verge type sites, such as multiple DOF and POV data in a single image that can be manipulated in post ... that sort of thing. Science fiction coming true is what floats my boat ...:D
We all know what the best camera is -- the one you have with you ...
But what happens when you have both an iPhone and a top of the line pro camera (and attendant lenses, etc.) with you.
Surely, the iPhone can handle some photography-related tasks better than the camera ...
Surely, the camera can handle other photography-related tasks better than the iPhone ...
Wouldn't it be nice if each were designed to exploit the capabilities of the other when used together -- but remain functional when used standalone?
I can envision a minimal camera shell with sensors, optics, lens/accessory-attachment capability, electronic connectability * -- and little else ...
* WiFi at minimum, but direct connect preferred
I can visualize an iPhone 6S Plus ** that slides into the minimal camera shell, connects electronically, and provides all the computer, sensor, manual/automatic camera control and communication capabilities not available (too expensive or too difficult to use) in the camera ...
** the iPhone 6 Plus' size [almost] exactly matches the back of my granddaughter's Cannon
<p>Something that Dilger doesn't fully address is the deterioration of the technology tradeshow as an effective announcement environment. </p><p> </p><p>The bigger companies are able to make big announcements at any given time, many following Apple's "we'll do our own launch events" philosophy..</p><p> </p><p>Other big companies (Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, etc.) have largely abandoned CES as a venue for major product announcements, which is why Apple's own actions dwarf what goes on at CES today. Nobody important goes to CES, it's a ghetto.</p><p> </p><p>Tradeshows were important before the rise of ubiquitous online media. People didn't get their tech news on their smartphone or wifi-enabled notebook computer back in the Nineties. You sat down and opened your copy of Electronics News, BYTE, PC World, whatever. Tradeshows allowed journalists to go see what various companies were doing so they could write about it for their weekly or monthly periodicals.</p><p> </p><p>Today companies can issue a press release on PRNewswire and reveal the announcement on their website or invite journalists to a private event, which can be published within hours.</p><p> </p><p>The era of the general interest technology tradeshow is long gone. CES used to be two shows, the January one called Winter CES, and one in about June called Summer CES. The summer show died a long time ago, although videogame-focused E3 took its place (with varying levels of interest/success). The big computer show COMDEX is a dead dinosaur. Macworld is now on hiatus, probably for good.</p><p> </p><p>Apple knew by the mid-2000s that the tradeshow was not an ideal product announcement setting. In October 2001, they announced the iPod at their own invitation-only media event, the model for every non-WWDC Apple announcement in the past seven years. Even in 2001, there was enough coverage on the Web for quick publishing. It also resulted in the most myopic post by a tech writer ever:</p><p> </p><ul> <li><a href="http://beta.slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-ipod">"<span style="color:rgb(46, 46, 46)">No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." -Rob Malda, a.k.a. CmdrTaco, Slashdot</span></a></li></ul><p> </p><p>By the time Apple announced the iPhone in 2007 at their penultimate tradeshow appearance, the importance of the ability to network with the distribution channel had largely dissipated, partly because of online communications, but also because Apple themselves had built a highly successful retail store chain and online store operation.</p><p> </p><p>Highly specific industry (NAB, National Association of Broadcasters) or application shows (Oracleworld, Dreamforce, Apple's WWDC, Google I/O) still make some sense, but the usefulness of a general interest technology tradeshow has vanished.</p>
But that wouldn't fit in with the narrative the op was trying to put and devalue his point.
^^^ The primary purpose of a trade show is for businesses to make deals and determine interest in their offerings. If there's interest, manufacturing and distribution follows. It's not a mall.
Even if it a product shown goes into mass production the lot of us here ain't buying.
Great article. Being the greatest company in recent memory has also led to having one of the most manipulated and artificially depressed stocks in history. In a saner world AAPL would be at $150 right now. After a jump to about $112 in the past week, it's back to $107.82
Stocks compete in a hermetically sealed environment that rises and falls largely based on its own internal pressures.
The stock market's relation to stocks is like the NFL Is for football teams. It's a step removed from reality.
"Fifteen years ago, Microsoft hoped to own tablets, phones and PCs, and detailed its roadmaps to get there at CES. Five years ago, Google and its Android and Chrome partners similarly aimed to take over tablets, phones and PC computing via CES introductions.
So far, all Google has done is give away its software to the same hardware makers who were unable to achieve Microsoft's vision. Samsung, which represented more than half of Android, has seen its profits collapse while Google itself has earned very little from its half decade of efforts to push Android (and Chrome). "
Weird, Google seems to be doing just fine. Got any solid facts to back up your assertion that android's profits for google is failing?
"It turns out the same thing can happen in technology companies that get monopolies, like IBM or Xerox. If you were a product person at IBM or Xerox, so you make a better copier or computer. So what? When you have monopoly market share, the company’s not any more successful.
So the people that can make the company more successful are sales and marketing people, and they end up running the companies. And the product people get driven out of the decision making forums, and the companies forget what it means to make great products. The product sensibility and the product genius that brought them to that monopolistic position gets rotted out by people running these companies that have no conception of a good product versus a bad product.
They have no conception of the craftsmanship that’s required to take a good idea and turn it into a good product. And they really have no feeling in their hearts, usually, about wanting to really help the customers." - Steve Jobs from Steve Jobs: The Lost Interview
Hopefully Apple gets some serious competition real soon.
what on earth do you mean? apple has minority market shares in both computing and mobile. they have a plethora of competitors and cannot be mistaken for a monopoly in any sector. that they have insanely great success and profitability despite this is largely attributed to their higher quality products.
Comments
A show of products you'll never buy.
Wo ist das Diesel?
Can you list the break through technologies you saw while following CES this year, ones that will be multi-billion dollar success stories and will change the face of the industry?
Driverless cars springs to mind.
Plus the lots of interesting developments in robotics, drones, wireless power and 3D printing. There were a lot of smaller start-ups giving glimpses of the future at CES this year.
I agree. In UI design, function and form are one, and too much of the function is being harmed in favor of the form/appearance. A top to bottom review of iOS 8 is needed and perhaps Jony Ive needs some of his responsibilities over iOS and OS X handed off to a seasoned UI designer.
Something that Dilger doesn't fully address is the deterioration of the technology tradeshow as an effective announcement environment.
The bigger companies are able to make big announcements at any given time, many following Apple's "we'll do our own launch events" philosophy..
Other big companies (Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, etc.) have largely abandoned CES as a venue for major product announcements, which is why Apple's own actions dwarf what goes on at CES today. Nobody important goes to CES, it's a ghetto.
Tradeshows were important before the rise of ubiquitous online media. People didn't get their tech news on their smartphone or wifi-enabled notebook computer back in the Nineties. You sat down and opened your copy of Electronics News, BYTE, PC World, whatever. Tradeshows allowed journalists to go see what various companies were doing so they could write about it for their weekly or monthly periodicals.
Today companies can issue a press release on PRNewswire and reveal the announcement on their website or invite journalists to a private event, which can be published within hours.
The era of the general interest technology tradeshow is long gone. CES used to be two shows, the January one called Winter CES, and one in about June called Summer CES. The summer show died a long time ago, although videogame-focused E3 took its place (with varying levels of interest/success). The big computer show COMDEX is a dead dinosaur. Macworld is now on hiatus, probably for good.
Apple knew by the mid-2000s that the tradeshow was not an ideal product announcement setting. In October 2001, they announced the iPod at their own invitation-only media event, the model for every non-WWDC Apple announcement in the past seven years. Even in 2001, there was enough coverage on the Web for quick publishing. It also resulted in the most myopic post by a tech writer ever:
By the time Apple announced the iPhone in 2007 at their penultimate tradeshow appearance, the importance of the ability to network with the distribution channel had largely dissipated, partly because of online communications, but also because Apple themselves had built a highly successful retail store chain and online store operation.
Highly specific industry (NAB, National Association of Broadcasters) or application shows (Oracleworld, Dreamforce, Apple's WWDC, Google I/O) still make some sense, but the usefulness of a general interest technology tradeshow has vanished.
"What's CES?"
No, you're confusing CES with DEMO.
How can Apple "upstage" other companies when it doesn't even attend nor have products to show at CES? Click-bait. Thank god for adblock.
Hey @digi ...
We all know what the best camera is -- the one you have with you ...
But what happens when you have both an iPhone and a top of the line pro camera (and attendant lenses, etc.) with you.
Surely, the iPhone can handle some photography-related tasks better than the camera ...
Surely, the camera can handle other photography-related tasks better than the iPhone ...
Wouldn't it be nice if each were designed to exploit the capabilities of the other when used together -- but remain functional when used standalone?
I can envision a minimal camera shell with sensors, optics, lens/accessory-attachment capability, electronic connectability * -- and little else ...
* WiFi at minimum, but direct connect preferred
I can visualize an iPhone 6S Plus ** that slides into the minimal camera shell, connects electronically, and provides all the computer, sensor, manual/automatic camera control and communication capabilities not available (too expensive or too difficult to use) in the camera ...
** the iPhone 6 Plus' size [almost] exactly matches the back of my granddaughter's Cannon
Think of the possibilities!
Even if it a product shown goes into mass production the lot of us here ain't buying.
But that wouldn't fit in with the narrative the op was trying to put and devalue his point.
That may be the case, however my post complies with the revised commenting guidelines, specifically this part:
"We definitely want you to:
Source: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/184333/appleinsiders-updated-commenting-guidelines
Stocks compete in a hermetically sealed environment that rises and falls largely based on its own internal pressures.
The stock market's relation to stocks is like the NFL Is for football teams. It's a step removed from reality.
So far, all Google has done is give away its software to the same hardware makers who were unable to achieve Microsoft's vision. Samsung, which represented more than half of Android, has seen its profits collapse while Google itself has earned very little from its half decade of efforts to push Android (and Chrome). "
Weird, Google seems to be doing just fine. Got any solid facts to back up your assertion that android's profits for google is failing?
Wo ist das Diesel?
Michael Spindler?
Do I win the doughnut?
That's right. Most new product introductions do not succeed.
I found two possible errors:
1- "largely to to Verizon Wireless abandoning BlackBerry"
There are two to's.
2- "At the same time, Android launched a series of new 4G phones"
Android never launched a phone, it's an OS.
"It turns out the same thing can happen in technology companies that get monopolies, like IBM or Xerox. If you were a product person at IBM or Xerox, so you make a better copier or computer. So what? When you have monopoly market share, the company’s not any more successful.
So the people that can make the company more successful are sales and marketing people, and they end up running the companies. And the product people get driven out of the decision making forums, and the companies forget what it means to make great products. The product sensibility and the product genius that brought them to that monopolistic position gets rotted out by people running these companies that have no conception of a good product versus a bad product.
They have no conception of the craftsmanship that’s required to take a good idea and turn it into a good product. And they really have no feeling in their hearts, usually, about wanting to really help the customers." - Steve Jobs from Steve Jobs: The Lost Interview
Hopefully Apple gets some serious competition real soon.
what on earth do you mean? apple has minority market shares in both computing and mobile. they have a plethora of competitors and cannot be mistaken for a monopoly in any sector. that they have insanely great success and profitability despite this is largely attributed to their higher quality products.