| Why is it so hard to understand? Apple's objective isn't to become the largest. Apple does not see this as a winner-take-all platform war. Apple's core values are all about it's ability to change things, it's ability to think different, it's ability to move forward without obstacles. Apple wants to make, and sell, the best and most beautiful devices they can imagine. For that they don't need to "own the market", their platform doesn't even need to "win". Whenever Apple thought that their platform was limiting their ability to innovate they have dumped the platform and build a better one. That's the kind of business Apple is. Apple doesn't compete with Nokia for the €40 phone market, Nokia does a great job already in that market. Apple is competing in the high-end smart phone market and only in this small market does it want to "win" in any sense. Apple sometimes finds itself in a situation where there is not competition, that's fine too. Just don't expect Apple to make something cheap for the lower-end of the market. More often then not, someone else will fill that niche soon enough. Apple only needs two things: (one) An open market of multiple competing platforms with shared open standards and protocols so that devices can work together. (two) Something special to differentiate itself by, often a level of quality and total integration, the realization of a coherent idea. About the only thing Apple can't accept is a market where someone else controls an essential part of the market, may it be either some piece of hardware, or software, a protocol, or even the structure of the market itself. To have someone else control the market would mean that someone else controls the speed of change. It would severely limit Apple's ability to innovate. And it's ability to innovate is the heart and soul of Apple. |
In the US (not everywhere), they aren't hitting that note because they continue to be weighed down by AT&T. All those awesome features don't mean anything if you spend all your time bitching to your friends about dropped calls (which is all I hear from my non-techie friends here).
AT&T were shamed at the last WWDC over tethering and such, and they've been shamed again over new price plans which aren't necessarily consumer friendly, over continued awful service, over what Jobs himself said was "things have to get worse to get better... which means things will get really great soon." It used to be that Jobs would cancel a supplier to spite anyone who dared accidentally unveil a release before Apple did, and now it's a company that will let its brand get tarnished by having consumers kicked in the balls for five years straight.
Apple's exclusivity deal is anything but friendly to their customer base, and that is the key difference between the Apple of old and the Apple of new. People are upset not because the iPhone isn't great, but because Apple are acting like pricks, like they have done with Google and Google Voice, like they have with other App Store rejections (I find the "replicating iPhone features" particularly rich in comparison with all the spam apps on the App Store), like they have done about saying nothing to the consumer about why AT&T is sucking and why Apple appear to be doing nothing about it.
The Apple of old wouldn't have hamstrung their customers the same way Apple is now doing. Putting the user first was their mission. In the US, on the iPhone (less so the iPad), that is starkly not the case.