[neovintage]

I'm a little skeptical about this one. For one, when doing corporate strategy and deciding what to build, you need to understand the dynamics and deficiencies in the marketplace. So at some level, someone within the organization had to evaluate using either primary (focus groups, surveys) or secondary (already published studies and facts) research to see if the idea or product was viable. Now I'm guessing that secondary research might be more the norm at Apple because primary research might give people that are in the potential target market an idea of what new products are in the pipeline. Apple wouldn't want to give hints at what it's doing by performing primary research.

I'm not staying they have to do tons, they need to have some understanding of who they're going after.

[philwelch]

When Jobs returned, they already made Macs by default. The iPod was Tony Fadell's idea, but that was for a market that didn't really even exist yet, so it's hard to see how market research would help. They just tapped into the universal human need for music with that one. The iPhone was likely based on a deep understanding of how much cell phones generally suck and a vague recognition that cell phones are a huge enough market to accept a new niche player.

I'm not sure how product research would even help. It's great if you're refining an existing product or entering into a well-understood market, but Apple's game is to reshape the market around itself, rather than reshaping itself around the market.