The Real Competitive Advantage of the Apple Ipod
Introduction
The contemporary press is flooded with articles and commentaries extolling the phenomenal success of Apple's iPod. It seems everyone has an opinion as to how design has contributed to the dominance of Apple in this lucrative, emergent market, targetedif not lusted afterby savvy high tech giants Sony, Samsung, Dell and Microsoft.
But I suspect that something more clever is afoot; that Apple's design strategy is in line with something we call "value transference." And if my suspicion is correct, the technology at the heart of the iPod will have little to do with their long-term competitiveness in the consumer electronics realm.
Each new iPod embodiment brings a fresh form, feature, function and cost based analysis: The New York Times' David Pogue offers good consumer reports on a consistent basis. Frog Design's Luke Williams suggests that the "clean" look of this product is an intentional consequence of references to the white ceramic and polished chrome tropes of the humble bathroom design experiencewe keep calling the iPod such a "clean design" expressly because it references these materials and finishes; Susannah Cullinane of the BBC News suggests that the central iPod design elements were borrowed from the similarly successful Regency TR-1 transistor radio launched in 1954; Engadget's Clicker columnist Stephen Speicher postulates how Apple is poised to use the new iPod to capture the portable video market; still others propose that Apple is looking to control the cell phone handset, or video remote markets, with future generations of this product.
These reflections on design strategy are interesting, and speculating on future target markets is always provocative. But I suspect that something more clever is afoot; that Apple's design strategy is in line with something we call value transferencea dynamic strategy that can be quite successful in technology markets. And if my suspicion is correct, the technology at the heart of the iPod will
The contemporary press is flooded with articles and commentaries extolling the phenomenal success of Apple's iPod. It seems everyone has an opinion as to how design has contributed to the dominance of Apple in this lucrative, emergent market, targetedif not lusted afterby savvy high tech giants Sony, Samsung, Dell and Microsoft.
But I suspect that something more clever is afoot; that Apple's design strategy is in line with something we call "value transference." And if my suspicion is correct, the technology at the heart of the iPod will have little to do with their long-term competitiveness in the consumer electronics realm.
Each new iPod embodiment brings a fresh form, feature, function and cost based analysis: The New York Times' David Pogue offers good consumer reports on a consistent basis. Frog Design's Luke Williams suggests that the "clean" look of this product is an intentional consequence of references to the white ceramic and polished chrome tropes of the humble bathroom design experiencewe keep calling the iPod such a "clean design" expressly because it references these materials and finishes; Susannah Cullinane of the BBC News suggests that the central iPod design elements were borrowed from the similarly successful Regency TR-1 transistor radio launched in 1954; Engadget's Clicker columnist Stephen Speicher postulates how Apple is poised to use the new iPod to capture the portable video market; still others propose that Apple is looking to control the cell phone handset, or video remote markets, with future generations of this product.
These reflections on design strategy are interesting, and speculating on future target markets is always provocative. But I suspect that something more clever is afoot; that Apple's design strategy is in line with something we call value transferencea dynamic strategy that can be quite successful in technology markets. And if my suspicion is correct, the technology at the heart of the iPod will