[IBM]

>I don't know why people think competing against Apple is hard or impossible.

You just made the case against this. The fact that they won't make an IoT blender is why they're hard to compete with. Apple is the polar opposite of Google in so many ways but a big one is their organizational mentality of "more wood behind fewer arrows". Apple is the batter in a no-called-strike baseball game (to borrow a Buffett quote) which means they're only going to swing when they get a fastball right over the plate.

Apple has high margins but it's actually because they have the lowest costs. In Porter's terms, they're the benefit leader but they're also the cost leader.

>Find something Apple isn't doing, doesn't seem interested in doing, and use their business model.

This isn't actually competing with them then. This advice is probably valid, but you're basically saying to just be the Apple of some other industry (like Keurig or Nespresso).

[astrodust]

I'm saying Apple has amply demonstrated a business model others can apply, and it's not like Apple singularly invented this model. They just borrowed from other companies like Nikon, Canon, BMW and others, adapting and perfecting it for the business they operate in.

There's a lot of other industries that need an Apple and don't have one. Who is the Apple of toilets? Of mattresses? Of 3D printers? Of blenders?

Some have leaders that succeed not based on having a superior product, but by their crushing marketing pressure and omnipresent retail representation. They're ripe for disruption.