Should Apple diversify more like Sony?

[hob]

Haha, i seem to have started quite a healthy discussion here, but as usual I've gone off and forgotten about it for a few days.

I've always remembered the phrase "jack of all trades, master of none"... this is apparent in devices like my mobile phone.

It's a Sony Ericsson K600i. It has not one, but two cameras on it, a built in high-speed 3G modem, and the ability to play MP3/AAC (maybe even WMA) files.

The pitfalls of this device are, the camera is awful, there's only about 2MB onboard memory so playing any albums is out of the question... of course when it comes to the telephony side it's fine. I can send texts, place calls and browse the internet (even on my powerbook via bluetooth!)

My point is - I would LOVE this device to be able to do everything, but I can't see any phone camera beating my Canon for the next 10 years....

On the original poster's thought....NO. They shouldn't expand into products that don't integrate well with the Mac.

I never said the "products" wouldn't integrate well with the mac
If Apple made a phone/camera/printer/gps/car it would presumably integrate very well with the mac!

http://www.nokia.com/A4136001?newsid=1054096

Thanks for that link Blue!

The BBC ran an article on that survey and some of the numbers weren't quite so impressively in favour of one-device when you broke them down more by country etc. 87% of Americans wanted their devices to remain separate (tough to see in context whether it was just phone/camera or all functions) whereas those in India had a majority in favour of keeping them separate.
Statistics... huh!

I'd say that's maybe because the average American can afford to buy 10 devices whereas your average Indian might be a little less wealthy?

I certainly would prefer one device that did it all - but only if it did it all well.

 

[Sesshi]

Phones are what Apple needs to get into to leverage iTunes. Motorola just did not understand the concept and even Jobs didn't look too keen on it. The problem was that too much of the design was Motorola and not enough Apple. The problem on Apple's end is the R&D costs to be able to engineer a phone on their own. It's not like the 1G iPod for sure that way, where they lifted a number of off-the-shelf stuff to engineer a player. However it was pretty obvious that Apple was taking baby steps towards introducing a phone with the Motorola connection. They need to get a 'true Apple' phone out, or Sony has every chance of succeeding where it lost with the Walkman.

 

[Applespider]

Phones are what Apple needs to get into to leverage iTunes. Motorola just did not understand the concept and even Jobs didn't look too keen on it.

Leave the phones as they are; just build a mini-Java iTunes client (since more and more phones support Java) that lets you specify a playlist of x size to pull over from your regular computer iTunes. Oh look... now iTunes is available on every phone on any network. Forget buying songs over the phone (it's too long-winded and I don't want my album purchases showing up on my phone bill) just let me hear what I've already got.

My k750 takes good enough pictures for quick snaps and I've got the odd song on it to use as an alarm/ringtone but there's no way it's replacing my camera/my camcorder or my iPod. And while I can use it as a Bluetooth modem, it's not replacing my ADSL2+ broadband connection either.

 

[Thomas Veil]

I'd say they've got the creative market sewn up (with the help of Adobe) and the only thing they might start to need to make is HDTVs for Post production...

Actually, I just got a big, glossy catalogue in the mail the other day from Sony. They've now got a pretty complete video suite, including counterparts to Final Cut, GarageBand and other components. No Sony version of Shake, but they do have pre-made motion backgrounds, which Apple has not yet got into.

Looks like a concerted effort to give Apple and Adobe a run for their money in the video market.

I knew this wouldn't take long, why is it that people just can't accept the fact that Apple products are worth their cost. Must be a PC thing, because every PC user I know throws that in my face. They think everything should be little or no cost, face it, Apple is a quality machine not some POS box made up of cheapest bidder parts.

Some industry experts think that Apple is close to saturating the high end market, and the only place left for them to expand (in computers) is the lower end. That doesn't mean cheap junk...just that they may have to accept lower margins on things like Mac minis if they want to continue to expand their market share beyond 5% or so.

It would probably be a smart move on their part. Better to slowly expand, at a little less profit per machine, than to remain satisfied with the status quo. More people buying Macs means more people buying Mac software, like iLife and OS X upgrades...and eventually, more Macs....

 

[hob]

Some industry experts think that Apple is close to saturating the high end market, and the only place left for them to expand (in computers) is the lower end. That doesn't mean cheap junk...just that they may have to accept lower margins on things like Mac minis if they want to continue to expand their market share beyond 5% or so.

It would probably be a smart move on their part. Better to slowly expand, at a little less profit per machine, than to remain satisfied with the status quo. More people buying Macs means more people buying Mac software, like iLife and OS X upgrades...and eventually, more Macs....

I think they would do well to offer a couple more Displays - on the lower end. Maybe not "Cinema Displays", perhaps "Mac Displays" - 15" and 17", similar design to the CD, but in Apple White?

If you could buy a Mac Mini and a Mac Display for say... £650-£800, I think they'd get a few more mac mini customers...