[Zoom]

This thought occurred to me in another thread, but I thought it would be interesting subject to toss around, given the heavy debates on the iPod pricing.

I think Apple is missing an obvious win-win marketing scheme here. Apple fans make up only 5% of the personal computer market. There's no reason why Apple's iApps and iDevices need to work only on Macs, though. Software can be ported and hardware just needs software (drivers) and standard physical ports, which PCs have. However, you would like them to work better on Macs because you want to bring in PC converts - there should be a reason why you'd want to use the SW or HW on a Mac over a PC.

Add to that some history. Apple fans have been religiously loyal to the brand for years, often paying much more than their Wintel neighbors for the same or less functionality (albeit more elegant and stable, usually). Very often, "cross platform" games and hardware are more expensive for Macs than for Wintel, even when they're nearly identical. Driver support is typically poor for Wintel-oriented hardware on Macs (like video cards and input devices). Software lags in release dates.

Why not turn the tables? This could be our time!

Apple gives away the latest and greatest iApps for free to Mac owners. The apps come bundled with the Mac systems and updates are free online. If the app came out after you bought the computer, you need to buy it, but all upgrades are free for Mac users. Wintel users, on the other hand, always have to buy it. There's never a bundling situation for them. In fact, Apple can charge them more for these apps - after all, it takes time and money to port these apps, right? (Sound familiar?) And yes, we focus on the Mac versions first because they're our base customers...

"Version 3.0 of iTunes will come out 6 months after we release it for Mac... oh, and it won't quite have the full feature set for you Wintel folks because, well, you don't have a Mac..."

And as for hardware, Apple is now in that game. There's no reason the iPod can't work on a PC with FW. Let them buy them for God's sake! Give them a basic version of iTunes, lacking some bells and whistles, of course. In fact, maybe that's how you justify the cost difference. Bundle the drivers and iApps with the iDevices (but remember, Mac folks can download them for free)....

"Oh, your driver doesn't work right? We'll get right on that... right after we release a newer, cooler driver or iApp for our Mac folks.... shouldn't be more than a couple months, just hang tight."

In essence, I'm saying we should subsidize the Mac faithful by selling to the vast PC crowd. Apple's iApps and iDevices are certainly cool enough to appeal to anyone, so let them have them - and charge them for the pleasure! Pass those savings back to us. We get discounts on the iDevices when we purchase them with a Mac system - DEEP discounts. We also get the latest and greatest drivers and iApps for free (download). This would get Mac apps and devices in front of Wintel users and give them reasons to switch camps.

God, wouldn't it just be so nice to turn this Wintel world upsidedown??

[Zoom]

Am I bitter? Nah.

[-Q-]

I think that's a logical bit of reasoning that does make a certain amount of sense, but there are a couple of things that will prevent that from happening:

Apple's goal is to sell more Macs. While providing iPod functionality to a PC user would sell more iPods, I don't think it would ultimately sell more Macs for one reason: someone will develop/hack together an application that would allow for better integration on the PC side. Would it be as seamless or as intuitive as the iTunes/iPod combination? No, but PC users are obviously willing to put up with kludgy interfaces, otherwise they wouldn't be PC users.

That application would then remove the need for a person to buy a Mac, defeating the purpose entirely. Because hasn't the Mac (for the most part) always been easier to use and have better features than the PC? That stand alone idea has failed to increase the Mac's market share (ignoring the blunders of the mid-90s of course).

Ultimately, I think this is part of a bigger picture plan that reinforces what the digital hub is supposed to be. Each component works seamlessly with the other and compliments each other. Jobs wants to make sure that the Macintosh is the best (and for right now, only) place a customer can get the true digital hub experience. That's why the Image Capture app works the way it does. You plug in the camera, IC downloads the pics into a quick, easy-to-view slide show. It's the integration!

Will this be easy? Nope. Selling the iPod to PC users would do good things to the bottom line for Apple in the short term. But Jobs' vision is a long term one that will require that Apple sell the ease of use benefit of the Mac that compliments the Digital Hub positioning. By providing PC functionality, you remove the uniqueness that is the Mac.

My two cents. :-)

Edit: forgot to mention that I think the iPod is overpriced, but a great compliment to the digital hub vision.

[ 10-24-2001: Message edited by: -Q- ]

[Zoom]

Originally posted by -Q-:
<STRONG>

Apple's goal is to sell more Macs. While providing iPod functionality to a PC user would sell more iPods, I don't think it would ultimately sell more Macs for one reason: someone will develop/hack together an application that would allow for better integration on the PC side. Would it be as seamless or as intuitive as the iTunes/iPod combination? No, but PC users are obviously willing to put up with kludgy interfaces, otherwise they wouldn't be PC users. </STRONG>

I still think it holds. You're missing some points here.

First, remember there's a cost issue, too. These things are FREE or discounted for Mac users. Money speaks to Wintel people, more than elegance and stability. They're numb to aesthetics and ignorant of robustness. But money they understand. There would be a significant financial incentive to switch to Mac. All these apps and devices would be cheaper. After all, this is how we lost many of these people in the first place.

Second, as for someone writing a kludge, it's gonna happen whether Apple does it or not. Someone is going to write a shareware app that allows them to use an iPod on a FW-equipped PC, possibly bridging it to existing MP3 software or their own player. So, why shouldn't Apple do it, too, and make some extra money? Hell, Apple could even offer development kits for it if they don't want to bother with the apps themselves. Just licensing the APIs can make you money.

Third, if Apple does as I've suggested, they help the overall slumping PC market in general which helps everyone. People need new reasons to buy PCs. When the pie gets bigger, all players win - even if they don't expand marketshare.

Fourth, the ultimate Digital Hub experience will always be better on a Mac system - most likely by explicit design (not exposing all features to Wintel users) or just plain practicality (not working on Wintel ports until the Mac stuff is done).

I think this works. Let's get some discussion going!

Didn't apple make this mistake with laser printers? They developed this great new printer for home use and never made it work with IBM PCs and compatibles. They ended up missing out on tons of profits and cornering the laser printer market.

Making digital devices that interface beautifully with a Mac may encourage new users. But allowing Windows users an opportunity to use an Apple product on their machines is a smart business move. It helps extend the brand name. It allows them a first hand opportunity to see that Apple products work great. Plus after surrounding themselves with great Apple digital devices, the next time they get a new computer, they might actually consider getting an Apple computer. All of these products work great with my Windows PC, why not replace the Digital Hub and make the experience even better.

[PookJP]

The iPod's not enticing enough to sell any Macs. It's a great MP3 player, but herds of PC users aren't going to flock to the Mac just for a cool Walkman. Thus, Apple should make all the money they can by letting PC users buy it too.

- Pook

[Zoom]

Originally posted by PookJP:
<STRONG>The iPod's not enticing enough to sell any Macs. It's a great MP3 player, but herds of PC users aren't going to flock to the Mac just for a cool Walkman.</STRONG>

No, of course not. But this is hopefully the first in a suite of digital devices, the sum total of which should be very compelling.

Addie, the laser printer thing is an interesting tidbit. The iPod isn't that revolutionary - after all, there lots of other MP3 portables already in existence. But I think you can argue that the potential profits from opening this device to the heathen masses should far outweigh the development costs. And if done correctly, it should still give people reason to switch to a Mac down the road when this plethora of cool devices are available that work so beautfully with a Mac.

[sadie]

Originally posted by -Q-:
<STRONG>
Apple's goal is to sell more Macs. While providing iPod functionality to a PC user would sell more iPods, I don't think it would ultimately sell more Macs for one reason: someone will develop/hack together an application that would allow for better integration on the PC side. Would it be as seamless or as intuitive as the iTunes/iPod combination? No, but PC users are obviously willing to put up with kludgy interfaces, otherwise they wouldn't be PC users.

That application would then remove the need for a person to buy a Mac, defeating the purpose entirely. Because hasn't the Mac (for the most part) always been easier to use and have better features than the PC? That stand alone idea has failed to increase the Mac's market share (ignoring the blunders of the mid-90s of course).
</STRONG>

You need to think more long-term. Nobody will buy a Mac just for their walkman. But if a PC user who has never even *thought* of macs goes and buys the best MP3 player for their PC, and it's an iPod, and their first taste of an Apple product is a pleasurable one, then they might just start wondering if two computers down the line, they might try a Mac.

Steve Jobs 'vision' products like this is about the long-term public consciousness, not just today's sales.

[Zoom]

I definitely think the iPod is just the first of many products to come, and The Plan (tm) is to get the attention of PC users and people who still don't have a home computer yet. No one is going to switch to Mac just s they can use an iPod, but once you have 4-5 killer peripherals it becomes hard to ignore that thought.

Here's a question, though. If you port the apps to Windows, how do you make sure the Apple experience is still much better? Okay, there's the obvious superiority in the OS on the Mac itself, but I mean the "digital lifestyle" part. Let's say you port iTunes 2.0 to Windows and it has that same nice interface, auto-syncing, etc. Do you have to actually disable functionality on the PC version to make the Mac version more attractive? As I mentioned earlier, you can delay the release of the Windows versions (it takes time to port the apps), which might be enough of an annoyance.

I'd hate for Apple to focus only on the Mac market for the iApps and iDevices, but I'd like the experience to be much better on the Mac so that people might actually consider switching platforms. But how do you do best do that?