RSS10 things Apple did right in 2009
By Joe Wilcox | Published December 23, 2009, 5:44 PM
Apple's 2009 execution was nothing short of spectacular, given the sour economy and CEO Steve Jobs' medical leave. Apple executives handled both circumstances, which might have sunk another company, with finesse and subtle but direct aggressiveness. I had a difficult time narrowing the did-good list to just 10 items. I'll post a did-wrong list later today or just after midnight tomorrow. For now, I present the list of 10 things Apple did right in 2009 -- in no order of importance. They're all important. Apple:
1. Kept Mac prices high. While Windows PC competitors slashed computer prices -- and so their margins and profits -- Apple held above-$1,000 pricing firm for iMac, Macbook Pro and Mac Pro. The higher pricing surely didn't seem to hurt Mac sales, which were strong all year. Meanwhile, low-cost netbooks sapped Windows PC margins and profits. Apple did right by lowering prices at the high end, which simply opened up more sales over $1,000, where Apple has more than 90-percent revenue share for computers sold at U.S. retail, according to NPD.
2. Told everyone: "There's an app for that." The recession gave many companies reason to cutback advertising budgets. But Apple kept the marketing strong, across different media types, including online, print and television. By far, iPhone advertising dominated the lot, with increasing emphasis on the applications. It was a smart move, considering that the 3GS model was an evolutionary product lacking compelling new features.
3. Appropriately priced Snow Leopard. Apple reaps high margins from software. Given the economy, Apple could have easily justified the usual $129 pricing for Mac OS X 10.6 (aka Snow Leopard). Instead, Apple offered the software for $29 -- or $49 for a five-user Family Pack -- to Leopard users (not that there is anything really stopping older Mac OS X users from upgrading). Some vocal Mac blogs have called the pricing appropriate, as signaled by the "Leopard" in the name; Apple added few new features, so lower pricing was justified.
That's a rather inane way of thinking. Improved Exchange support is a huge new feature improvement. I've criticized the Mac OS X user interface as being tired, but not the reworked plumbing. There is plenty of new engineering in Mac OS X 10.6, just not where most users will see it. Snow Leopard is the most important Mac OS X release since v1.0 shipped in March 2001. The lower pricing encourages existing users to upgrade to 64-bit architecture, preparing the Mac market for Mac OS X 10.7.
4. Lied about Steve Jobs' illness. This one makes both lists, because Apple's execution was both good and bad. Using "lied" surely will inflame hardcore Mac fans, but "misled" simply doesn't apply here. The lying started in December 2008, with the announcement that Apple would pull out of Macworld from 2010, which really masked something bigger: Jobs wouldn't give the 2009 keynote. Apple dished out information piecemeal, ending with announcement of Jobs' six-month medical leave.
Apple grappled with a difficult problem: How much outsiders, particularly investors, identified the persona of Steve Jobs with Apple's success. Timing complicated matters. The late-September 2008 stock market crash hit Apple hard, as it did other public companies. Apple had legitimate concern about how news of Jobs illness might affect Apple's falling share price. The stock hit its bottom for the year in late January, about the time Apple announced Jobs' six-month medical leave. Withholding information may have prevented a short-term run on shares. But as I'll explain in the did-wrong list, Apple may lose long term.
5. Updated the $999 Macbook. In late 2008, Apple tossed potential buyers one older model white MacBook for under $1,000. Apple updated features throughout the year, later introducing a redesigned model with good features for the same $999 price. For consumers looking for a cheap Mac, Apple delivered a no-compromise laptop (That's no-compromise compared to other Macs; I add this for benefit of commenters comparing to Windows PCs).
6. Put Phil Schillers' marketing skills to work. Super-secretive Apple broke the silence several times during 2009, using its marketing chief as mouthpiece. Schiller addressed developer concerns about App Store approvals in a surprisingly proactive fashion. I would describe Schiller as "Mr. Likable." He's the right man to mollify angry or confused developers or to quiet raucous bloggers bashing Apple. In November, he made the interview rounds explaining the App Store approval and rejection process. Business Week got a big interview. Sigh, too bad the new owners sacked senior columnists not long later.
7. Lowered iPhone pricing to $99. In conjunction with the June launch of iPhone 3GS, Apple continued selling the 8GB iPhone 3G for 99 bucks. The lower price point opened a new market segment of iPhone buyers, which includes teenagers. For example, according to ComScore, among U.S. consumers planning to buy an iPhone within three months, more than one-third said the iPhone 3G. For many buyers, the iPhone 3GS' $199 starting price is simply too much for their budgets.
8. Supported HTML 5 in Safari 4. Some people may see Safari's HTML 5 support as mere marketing, seeing as how the standard isn't finalized. Oh but it is so much more. Apple doesn't want Flash on iPhone, but that's how most video is delivered on the Web. If Apple lets the Flash cat out of the bag, it will try to claw out App Store's eyes. The last thing Apple wants is a rival development platform on iPhone (and even HTML 5 risks some development competition in the browser). But no Flash means no video outside of Apple technologies.
By supporting HTML 5, Apple:
- provides a browser platform for plug-in free RIAs, rich Internet applications, which could generate more cross-platform apps or services for Macintosh and eventually iPhone.
- opens the way for plug-in free audio and video streaming -- no Flash required -- on Safari for computers and eventually the mobile browser.
For today, iPhone's browser offers limited HTML 5 support, but that does include audio and video tags and HTTP streaming. Microsoft Silverlight video streaming, using Internet Information Server Media Services, over HTTP to iPhone is one example of what's to come.
9. Took out Psystar. Apple's legal battle with the Mac cloner was more than about intellectual property rights. Apple needed to win, which it effectively did earlier this month, in order to establish important precedents (legally and concretely) against software piracy. Psystar's Mac cloning was the most visible misuse of Mac OS X licensing since Apple started offering Intel-based computers four years ago next month. Unlike Microsoft, Apple doesn't use product activation, which wasn't a big problem when Macs used PowerPC chips. Apple can control piracy more on trust, which is enforced by its end-to-end, software-to-Mac model. Hackintosh threatens that model, which Apple has now successfully defended.
10. Opened new retail stores. Apple launched the first Apple Store during a recession. Why should another recession be reason to stop opening new ones? At a time when the weak economy caused major chains to close, including Circuit City this year, Apple continued its retail expansion. It's a smart investment in the brand, product sales and customer service.
Apple opened the 280th store, on New York's Upper West Side, in November and plans another 40 or so store openings in 2010. Sales per store is about $26 million, and Apple consistently claims that half of Mac buyers are Windows users.
Lemme address the points from the various replies to my posts...
I'm NOT gonna compare Mac laptops which are all expensive to expensive PC laptops when 90% of people don't need more than what a $400 laptop gives them. So for 90% of people AUTOMATICALLY a Mac is a STUPID investment.
Now for the remaining 10%, even there it makes little sense to get a Mac due to limited software and hardware. I want dozens of choices for every piece of software and hardware I use.
I'm not sure where you got the notion I like to build my own computers. I hate it... It used to be fun back in the 90's. It's no longer fun (other things in life are more enjoyable to me -- one of which is philosophizing here hehehe) and it's no longer even saving money! Back then time was inexpensive -- now if I don't save $20/hr I ain't spending that hour to do it myself. Of course I'd still spend hours to learn PRACTICAL things since their value is much more than $20/hr. My latest project being DIY wireless alarm systems that are still monitored by a third party (only much much cheaper than ADT/Brinks).
Anyway..there's usually a pre-made desktop with the approximate specs I need. Worst case I change a video card. I ain't that picky with the actual computer hardware as long as its very cheap. If it doesn't boost performance by min 20% - it's simply not worth the effort to me.
I don't spend any time in maintaining my computer. I have no idea where you Mac people fail with using a PC, but it must be something simple enough to teach you: Windows 7 with UAC and FREE Microsoft anti-virus will protect even the majority of careless people FROM THEMSELVES. Note that even before WinXP, I've NEVER had a problem with viruses, toolbars/slowness etc. I guess I'm just smart enough to READ THE LITTLE WORDS NEXT TO PRE-CHECKED CHECKBOXES WHEN I INSTALL SOFTWARE. And I download EXEs from relatively safe places (private torrent sites)... Plus I actually have a daily backup -- a dual/mirrored TeraByte constantly connected to the laptop via USB automatically backing up (securely) late at night... Securely = I/someone/something cannot easily delete old backups.
The $100 difference between Mac Mini and a cheap PC isn't that important. As I've said, even if Macs were CHEAPER I wouldn't buy them because the eco-system is more important to me: the infinite amount of software & hardware that talks to my computer... plus the fact I already know an insane amount of software packages inside out, problem solutions etc for the PC world which translate to dozens of thousands of dollars in TIME if I wanted to become such an expert on Apple eco-system products & solutions... Unlike most Mac users (all the ones I've met...), I don't like feeling ignorant about something I use 10+ hrs a day (a computing platform)... Knowing more means efficiently doing 14 workhours in less than 8... Most Mac users are happy being fed "Apple-certified" solutions and simply ignore any problem they have (as a tiny inconvenience) until Apple addresses them. Apple & third party Apple devs are at 1:50 ratio or maybe even 1:100 ratio compared to Microsoft's, wayyy wayy beyond the 1:20 Apple:Microsoft OS marketshare ratio. That clearly translates to the tiniest problems being solved faster by Microsoft or some third party. So you don't have any problems? Good for you! Stick to your Macs and work wayy wayy less efficiently than me because I *always* find better ways to do *anything* with some extremely rare tool made ONLY FOR THE PC. So you choose "crippled, user-friendliness forcing you into ONE WAY streets" and I'll choose "absolute power and efficiency giving me worldwide highways"... Nobody said everyone's needs are the same...
Re the history of Apple -- yes, I'm fully aware... I've spilled thousands of words on how history will repeat itself with Apple dying again (permanently this time). Apple hasn't picked up jack in the 2000's. They're still insignificant (OS market) and are branching off to new fields (iPhone) BEFORE grabbing at least 20% of PC market. That means, very obviously to anyone looking at their competition: Apple will LOSE BOTH... The iPhone will actually be what helped kill Apple faster -- it'll prove Apple cannot keep up and are a myth of greatness/leading. Marketing cash will NOT be even CONVERED by marketed-product profits. Marketing will slowly die down... People will completely forget about the one-hit-wonder iPhone and the other one-hit-wonders from Apple (Mac Air etc).
There is absolutely no way Apple can survive the next decade. NONE. You are wasting your time every single time you learn something new on your Mac which is done differently on the PC. You'll need to relearn it all... Sorry...
Score: 0
|I would add
#11 - Switch their retail systems to iPod Touches. I think this is a very important strategic move for them. There is a massive market for retail POS and warehouse applications and the Touch is a perfect device for it.
I would actually swap it for #9 because I don't think Psystar was ever a real problem. Apple are winning legal cases all the time, it's just part of business.
Score: -1
|apple haters must will be coming out of thte woodwork on this post! lol I was never apple lover or hater, now that I actually own a few mac products I can see why there are so many apple lovers... the apple hating is easy to figure out; they dont own any apple products.
Score: 2
|Adrian...you are DEAD NUTS correct! I had the same quick flash two months ago when I bought my first Mac Mini, then iMac, then Macbook, then Macbook Pro, then MacPro at the age of 72..in a frenzied buying spree I was so blown away by Apple/Mac products. From From Marketing skill to Operational Excellence...my Apple Products so FAR surpass the capabilities of MS-PC's...that I find it both magical and mystical! I am a Chem Engineer and certainly not a newbie computer user...yet I had always shunned Apple products as "eliteist toys".. HAH...the laugh was on me! I am still head over heels impressed with my seven new Mac computers...from the entry level Macbook...to the screaming MacPro...they BLOW MS-based PC's OUT OF THE WATER!
Saderball, retired Naval CDR fighter pilot
Score: 0
|Of course I don't own any Apple product, EVEN IF IT WAS CHEAPER: I'm a PC expert and use infinite amount of tech that's deeply intergrated to PCs. AND SURPRISINGLY I DON'T FEEL RAPED/HANDCUFFED AT ALL! I actually feel I am paying LESS than what all this stuff is worth to me... (and no, I'm not gonna go throw money away on Apple when PC things cost less than what I'm willing to pay for them -- there's always a good place to invest that excess cash -- unrelated material things, biz opps, and home/life improvement).
Score: 0
|Oh, and saderball -- spare us your psychologically-influenced happy-purchase validation. You didn't buy all this gear post-Win7...now did ya. You jumped the gun and you would NOT DO THE SAME again if you REALLY had the choice...
Consider this simple fact:
You give me all the money you spent on Apple and via Apple's well-greased money machines (songs, apps, etc) as well as other hardware and software you use in that oh-so-goodie new platform, and I will CLEARLY be able to build a BETTER SETUP due to my VAST KNOWLEDGE AND CREATIVITY AND WILLINGNESS TO RESEARCH, plus my remorseless use of piracy... and then we'll present your setup vs. my setup to some new comer who never used a computer in THEIR LIFE!
Guess what? You run this experiment 100 times and not less than 100 times will the person say he's getting a better experience on MY PLATFORM. I'm gonna have so much excess cash I'd be able to give him a GAMING MACHINE with 3D, an unbeatable OFFICE MACHINE with automatic scanning/OCR, etc etc.
Your platform, simply put, sucks.
Score: -1
|I liked what you wrote, saderball. I have used Macs since 1989 beginning with the very compact Mac SE/30 (built-in 9" black/white monitor) and my latest now a MacBook Air. From the time I began using and owning Macs, there was a curious scorn I would sometimes receive from people. Back in the 90s, many of my PC friends scorned the Mac because it didn't have many games for it. True, compared to the PC world, there aren't as many Mac games. I didn't care though because I was never interested in games.
I think your point that a lot of the scorn comes from a preconceived notion that Mac computers are elitist. That belief still carries on today by a lot of PC users. I don't know why the maintain that attitude. Honestly, Macs are not that much more expensive, if at all, to COMPARABLE PCs from major manufacturers like HP, Dell, Sony etc. Still, there is the lame stereotype that Macs are that much more expensive. Yes, indeed you cannot get an ultra cheap $400 model laptop from Mac but you have to compare with comparable models. When people do that, they notice that Macs are not particularly expensive compared to comparable PC models. But will those people listen? Of course not.
Score: -1
|You sound like someone who likes to build their own computers etc. etc. In that case, it may be cheaper for YOU. But don't forget that lots of people (myself included) prefer not to build our own computers and rather have a pre-made computer so that we can have a peace of mind and MOVE ON to do what we WANT TO DO (like you suggested) with what computers are made to do. We don't want to tinker with the computer and put much effort into maintaining it. There's none of that with Macs. You hardly ever need to spend time and money to maintain them. It's not throwing away money to buy Macs.
Say you build your own desktop computer for $400 to $500. You can get a Mac Mini for $600. Is the $100 to $200 difference so much money that you would call it "excess cash to invest in'"? Not really. It's pocket change. Many people don't know how to build their own computers and are not interested.
Score: -1
|That was a bit of an idiotic remark. You can buy Windows 7 for Macs. Macs can run Windows 7.
What you are saying is that people are stupid for using the Mac platform. That's what it boils down to it. I've heard that for years. Keep shouting.
Score: -1
|What a sour bunch of Apple haters these commenters are.
Apple is a influential and successful company with a dedicated and passionate following. Get over it.
Score: 0
|The thing that Apple does right for many years, is convincing Apple fan boys, that it's ok to pay 3 times the price of a PC for a MAC...How they do it? I really don't know...It must be an Art of some sort. Maybe they have secretely hired Uri Geller to achieve that...
Score: 0
|They do it like cults do it. They convince you that you are so special to belong to their group. They convince you that you deserve to have the best. I remember hearing Steve Jobs saying that his customers are "special" and "different" and are "more creative". Nevermind the fact that statistically, OBVIOUSLY at least 10x more creative work is done on PCs... But I guess you could never measure the "quality". Yes, indeed, the Mac creative output is of utmost quality hehehehehe
Serious businesses will not insult your intelligence by calling you "special" only if you buy their sh*t. Apple gets away with it because there is a certain percentage of people who psychologically need to hear that..and feel that. It *is* an art form, but like all logical fallacies, it'll eventually lead to cognitive dissonance and the natural flow to the logical: pay for stuff what they're really worth this time...
Score: 0
|You really need to compare comparable machines. A comparable Dell laptop or Dell desktop is going to be about the same price as an Apple laptop or desktop. You can make this comparison with any major PC maker. The prices are comparable. The exaggeration that Macs are 3x more expensive than PCs is false. You haven't made the actual comparison. You only state mistaken knowledge.
Score: -2
|You have to remember for the Mac fans the statement "There Can Only Be One" is a major tenant of their faith. If their savior hasn't talked about an item it can't be real and should be shunned. When dealing with a member of the Apple faith the only point is Apple. Once you understand the boundaries you can work around them but never through them.
Score: 1
|I'm quite simply amazed that anyone could have made a list of 10 things that Apple did right.
Based on a few that made the list, it certainly seems like you were desperately seeking anything to complete that list, Joe. ;)
Score: 8
|Maybe article should be renamed "10 unique innovations that aren't improvements by Apple this year" that would certainly draw interest by everyone.
Score: 4
|It sounds less like Joe writing this list, and more like Jobs himself, especially with a list saturated with things that are "right" for Apple, and not necessarily for its consumers.
Score: 1
|hehehehe my sentiments completely. I saw *nothing* new in that list. Apple can spend all the money in the world in marketing, but when their iPhone users single-handedly move AT&T to the WORST NETWORK STATUS in Consumer Reports feedback letters, you just know the floor is shaking (VIOLENTLY) under their feet...
Likewise for extremely pleased Windows 7 users, laughing at their family members who TRIED the Mac experience and suffered on that "user-friendly" platform no-less failures, and drastically more complexity and lack of compatibility. iTunes, for example, is probably the lousiest piece of software I've ever seen in my life. It has no logic to its idiotic behavior whatsoever, and I literally felt my ballz being grabbed by Steve B. Jobs the moment I tried to set someone free from it.
Apple will fall very very soon. A gimmick here and there has NEVER sustained a business in the world. EVER. Neither has technology alone. Only EXTREMELY HIGH VALUE PROPOSITION.
Joe: here's a better title for your BetaNews article in 2015: 10 things Apple should have done to stay in business. hehehehehehe
Score: 1
|@RollDatKernelMyBrotha You need to read my other list for that: http://www.betanews.com/...rong-in-2009/1261639826
I would call 2009 Apple's year of iteration, rather than innovation. Iteration worked well for Apple this year, but innovation would have sowed the seeds to reap after the recession ends.
Score: 1
|The "sustaining this gimmick" has been going on for about a decade now. By the way, how old are you actually? Are you in high school or perhaps still in college? Maybe that is why you didn't know about the struggle Apple went through in the 1990s? That was a period when Apple really faltered. In the 2000s, it picked up itself through re-thinking how it did things. The rise is not a gimmick when it has been ongoing for about a decade.
You don't have to enjoy using Mac and no one is forcing you to do so. Yet, you have a vehement attitude about it as if someone were forcing you to use Macs. Given that, why are you so angry? You are free to leave iTunes, iPods, iPhones, Macs etc. and use something else. Don't get yourself angry by not seeing the door, which is unlocked and already open for you to exit or re-enter as you please.
Score: -2
|99$ per iPhone is the best thing that ever happened to Apple and AT&T - at this price point dumbphones are not competitive, and AT&T gets to collect additional 40$ every month. It's a proposition no average phone user can refuse.
Score: -1
|#4 - in no way is this something Apple did right. In fact, what they did is probably illegal. You cannot keep information like that hidden from the public at a public company. You can be sure that if the stock hadn't recovered so well in the past year, there would be a class action lawsuit against them, and it would be an almost certainty that Apple would lose. We still may see some legal action on the matter in the future.
Score: 8
|Certainly mishandled, but they might be safe from legal action due to HIPA (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/).
Score: 0
|@smist08 - privacy laws regarding officers of public companies are not the same as for individuals. HIPPA does not apply. Any event that can materially affect a public company must be disclosed by the company as soon as it is known to the company insiders. Certainly in the case of Apple, which has something of a cult of personality surrounding its CEO, the status of his health and his plan to step back from control of the company, even temporarily, could have a real affect on the stock price.
Score: 2
|dkratter is right. It can be seen as a way to manipulate the stock value. Well... it was. But Apple followers could never sue their beloved company. They wouldn't wanna see it hurt in the least bit.
That said, as long as nobody sold/bought massive amounts of stock after knowing Jobs's status before it was made public, the gov probably can't do much - no inside trading occured.
Score: 1
|It wouldn't be the beloved users that would sue, it would be the large shareholders, namely banks and investment companies, they do not care if Apple gets hurt, so long as they get their money.
Score: 1
|and how is the fact the Apple did not wish to make a statement about Steve Job's Illness illegal right away illegal? They are not obligated, as far as I know to disclose this info right away. They can if they feel it is needed, which they eventually did. I for one find it smart that they did not concentrate on that matter until it was felt it needed to be done.
This isn't insider trading people!
Score: -2
|@dracodos - how about you read what we all just said, instead of ignoring it and stating an opinion as if no one had said anything. The answer to your question is already there.
Score: 1
|@dkratter. I agree. See the same item as #5 on the other list: http://www.betanews.com/...rong-in-2009/1261639826
Score: 1
|doesn't seem like Apple really did anything
Score: 3
|I created 2 formulas designed to mathematically determine if this is innovative or not:
If CompanyX Create Improvements And > X value THEN CompanyX=Innovative
If CompanyX Create Improvements And < X value THEN CompanyX=Not Innovative
Only thing I can't figure out, what arbitrary value is "X"? (scratches head in bewilderment)
Score: 0
|Why don't Americans understand privacy?
Score: -6
|I hate Apple
Score: 0
|I like Apple. They've always had great customer support when things went wrong for me.
Score: 0
|