Back to the Past: Apple becomes more closed with each new device
By Tom Foremski - January 28, 2010
In 1976 Apple was one of the first of the microcomputer companies -- selling kits that hobbyists could build, then selling fully assembled systems.
In those early days, every microcomputer company had its own hardware and software, there was very little that was common between companies and that was seen as the key to success.
As businesses began using Apple microcomputers, IBM jumped in and created the first standard platform -- the PC -- a relatively open hardware and software system using common of-the-shelf parts. Microsoft provided the operating system and made it available to anyone. It led to hundreds of IBM PC clone makers and the modern PC industry was born.
Apple stayed proprietary and closed. It later experimented with licensing its technology to Mac clone makers but that didn't work out.
Gradually, it moved onto industry standard Intel chips, it adopted PC standards such as USB, and made its disk operating system files compatible with the PC world.
With the arrival of the Internet, the browser on the Mac offered the same user interface as on the PC, and it became a common software platform. At that point, there wasn't too much difference between the Mac and PC worlds. And that's still true for Macs and PCs today -- In fact, you can (unofficially) port the Mac OS to a PC systems and it runs Mac apps.
But over the past ten years, since the introduction of the iPod, iPhone, and now the iPad, Apple is becoming less and less open, it using fewer standard components and chips, and far fewer Internet technologies common to Mac/PC desktop and laptop systems.
The iPhone and iPad, for example, doesn't support common Internet platforms such as Adobe Flash or Microsoft Silverlight. That means you cannot watch streaming video from Hulu, or Netflix.
And while iPhone chips are available from other manufacturers, the iPad runs only on the A4 processor -- an Apple designed chip that no one else can buy.
Why is Apple becoming more proprietary and closed? Because that's how you make money.
Proprietary and closed systems mean you can only get it from Apple. If you have great apps, content, and a great user interface (user experience) you can charge more money than if you produce a copycat system that is easily available from many manufacturers. Less competition means larger profits.
There's money in closed systems...
It's a lucrative formula and that's why with each new device, Apple is moving further back to its proprietary roots because that's where you can make a lot of money.
Thanks to iPod, iPhone sales, Apple is now a $50 billion a year revenue company. Since the iPod was introduced in October 2001, its share price has multiplied by more than 23 times from $8.78 to $207.88.
The strategy works, and it works great.
What's puzzling though, is that Apple has a very enthusiastic, early adopter customer base, which consists of people that are big supporters of open standards, and open platforms.
Yet these "Fanboys" haven't seemed to have lost their enthusiasm for Apple products despite the increasingly closed nature of Apple.
Maybe that will change with the iPad, which is a much more closed system than any of Apple products from the past ten years. Will the Fanboys rebel? Will it matter if they do? Probably not.
Analysis: iPad Is an iDRM Storefront For Apple Ambitions To Dominate All Digital Media Sales
« Analysis: iPad Is an iDRM Storefront For Apple Ambitions To Dominate All Digital Media Sales | Main | Haiti Stories Dwarf Apple, State Of Union Stories »
Posted to AppleWatch
January 28, 2010 | Permalink | Comment | Subscribe to SVW
- Top Stories:
- PearlTrees - A Way To Curate Your Web
- Disruptive Technologies Disrupt
- The Dead Horse Business Model...
- There's A TED Conference Near You... TEDxSF Is On April 27
- Were Google Hackers Amateurs Or Chinese Cyber Commandos?
- Farmville valued $1B More Than Twitter By The Smart Money
- The "Heinz 57" Media Business Model
- The Need To Teach Bootstrapping In Business Schools
- Criminal Penalties Coming For US Internet Companies That Don't Protect Human Rights Abroad
- Be Careful Of "Dark Territorial Atavism" When Making Changes To Your Web Site
- Intel Number 2 Suffers Stroke...
- Shakeup At Financial Times...
Comments (4)
I don't get the iPad hype.
If I want up-to-the minute information I'm likely to be carrying a smartphone anyway. So what differentiates a good ebook is a high quality (e ink) display designed to read for long periods, long battery life, no ongoing data charges, and a large screen.
So the iPad scores 1 out of 4?
30X earnings for a company that makes computers and phones ... hmmm ....
As you say it's only the 40+ generation that remembers Apple's stumbles back in the 80s & 90s - and I think there are way less closed options around now like Calibre for ebooks.
Disclosure: I haven't shorted Apple ... but someone should ... (-:
Posted: January 28, 2010 10:33 PM
Your revisionist history is somewhat amusing. Lets be clear, the IBM PC was only open because they were late to the game (microcomputer market) and needed a solution fast. They used off the shelf parts and even licensed their OS from someone else (because they had no choice). The only think proprietary was the 4k bios which of course was reverse engineered by Pheonix technologies. IBM later tried to close the system with its Microchannel architecture in 1987, but it was too late by then.
Further, I don't understand why idiots in the media are trying to read too much into the Apple A4 chip. It's the same ARM based technology used by everyone else in the market including Qualcomm, nVidia's Tegra, etc. Apple is simply using the economies of scale to produce a less expensive overall product and one in which Apple has some control over in terms of performance and power dissipation. Should Apple be bound to third party SoC solutions? If so, why? If this gives them a competitive advantage over others, then I say more power to them.
Posted: February 4, 2010 10:04 AM
"Maybe that will change with the iPad, which is a much more closed system than any of Apple products from the past ten years."
I don't quite understand why you're saying things like that. IPad is not more proprietary than iPhone - it's been already reported that you can run the iPad OS on the iPhone. And surely you'll be free to jailbreak your ipad just as you can do with the iphone.
Of course money is important factor here but still the above statement is not true. It's just sensationalizing something that has been there ever since the Mac got introduced.
Posted: February 4, 2010 1:03 PM
Steve, yes, IBM accidentally created an open standard and then tried later to bolt the barn door. Microsoft and Intel made sure that their 'open' standard would suceed through cross-licensing technologies and selling software and hardware to anyone. Apple is doing the right thing by constructing a more closed platform because it can lock-in premium pricing for its products, and gain a performance/proprietary edge in the market. To that extent, Apple has moved away from the more open platform of its desktop and laptop computers.
Posted: February 4, 2010 1:07 PM