By Richard Bloch
The other night I had this strange dream that Apple (AAPL) opened up a chain of gas stations. People were waiting for hours in long lines for the privilege of paying a couple of dollars more per gallon because using their new "gasoline pump interface" was such an amazing experience.
I have no idea what Freud would say, but it got me thinking about how the Apple user interface (UI), which to a great extent represents its brand, could end up dominating how many people control things in their homes.
A few months ago I got a new furnace, so of course it comes with a new thermostat. No more turning a dial for me. This is a nifty programmable thermostat, which does me little good because I lost the instructions and it’s not intuitive at all. Sure, I could probably find instructions online, but it’s not exactly on my top-10 list of things to do.
At least it didn’t come with a remote control, or I probably would have lost that too.
I think I would have gladly paid an extra $200 for an Apple thermostat if such a thing existed. That’s nothing compared to the cost of the furnace, but I’m sure I’d be able to figure out how to use it without having to go online to find the instructions.
This begs the question of why even have a thermostat device. Why not control the temperature through an iPad or iPhone "home control app"? What a cool way to start the coffee maker! Or maybe even tell my clothes dryer to turn itself off for awhile if I happen turn on the microwave.
This isn’t new. Organizations large and small have predicted such a vision for years, but I wonder if Apple shares a vision like this?
Apple TV: No go-to-market strategy
For many families, the one home device that’s controlled most often is the TV, which is rapidly becoming less and less a "TV" and more and more a like a room’s "main display screen."
So it’s interesting that The Balanced Bull (among others) have suggested that the Apple TV digital media device might be a catalyst for future growth. So far, Apple categorizes Apple TV as a "hobby product," but there are rumors that Apple is building an actual TV. And there’s some speculation that Google TV could provide a similar catalyst for Google (GOOG)
There’s only one problem, the legacy "TV" aspect of the TV, the part that receives various "channels." According to Steve Jobs, it’s not a problem of technology or vision, but that there’s no viable "go-to-market strategy" for this product – at least not yet.
"The TV is going to lose”
Back in June at the All Things Digital D8 Conference, Steve was asked about innovation in the TV market and whether Apple was planning to "bring in a new human interface to make television truly interactive.”
Here’s some of what he had to say. You can watch the video clip here.
The problem with innovation in the television industry is the go-to-market strategy. The television industry fundamentally has a subsidized business model that gives everybody a set-top box for free — or for $10 a month — and that pretty much squashes any opportunity for innovation because nobody is willing to buy a set-top box. Ask Tivo … Ask VUDU. Ask us. Ask Google in a few months. Sony’s tried. Panasonic has tried. A lot of people have tried. They’ve all failed.
So all you can do is add a box onto the TV system … Well, you just end up with a table full of remotes, a cluster of boxes, a bunch of different UIs, and that’s the situation we have today.
We decided what product do we want the most – a better TV or a better phone? Well the phone won out, but there was no chance to do a better TV because there was no way to get it to market.
What do we want – a better tablet or a better TV? Well probably a tablet, but it doesn’t matter because if we want a better TV, there’s no way to get it to market.
The TV is going to lose until there is a viable go-to-market strategy. Otherwise, you’re just making another TiVo … It’s not a problem of technology. It’s not a problem of vision. It’s a fundamental go-to-market problem
And as Steve points out, when Apple was planning to build a phone, they could partner with a carrier who could serve almost anyone. But there’s no real national cable operator. And what’s the incentive for cable channels (okay, "legacy content providers”) to cooperate? I’m not happy about it, but I’m sure ESPN really likes the idea of getting $4 per month from the cable "package” I buy, even though I never watch ESPN.
Steve used the term "balkanized” to describe this fragmented distribution channel. As he pointed out, "I’m sure smarter people than us will figure it out but that’s why when we say when Apple TV is a hobby, that’s why we use that phrase.”
Okay, I get it now. But I still want my Apple thermostat.
As for the Apple gas stations I saw in my dream? I don’t think so. And I’m definitely giving up spicy snacks before bedtime.
No comments:
Post a Comment