Eh bien, dans une étude sur la Stratégie de HTC, nous avions déjà prévu en 2009 les difficultés que RIM aura s'ils ne modifient pas significativement leur business model essentiellement basé sur leur système de messagerie, en rentrant dans la bataille des smartphones et des market places.
Le BB messenger, principal raison du succès de RIM à l'époque où la 3G n'était pas encore arrivée, était le seul réel système de messagerie mobile en temps réel. L'arrivée de la 3G avec les applications Skype, MSN et maintenant Whatsapp et Viber sur les smartphones auront enlevé à RIM leur principal avantage compétitif. Ne pouvant concurrencer les iPhone, Android et Windows phone sur les principaux facteurs de succès de leur éco-systèmes respectifs, à savoir le système d'exploitation, les appareils et leur market place, RIM était voué à la chute.
Les tentatives faites par RIM avec le Torch et leur nouveau market place n'ont pas vraiment pris. Du coup, ils étaient contraint à se battre à armes inégales en face de poids lourds, et donc rentrer dans la spirale infernale baisse d'activités-réduction de coûts. Du coup, un nouveau plan social sera annoncé prochainement, et l'entreprise mise en vente.
Et voilà qu'un poids lourd pourrait se porter acquéreur, avec Facebook qui a les poches remplies par leur nouvel introduction en bourse.
Quel est l'intérêt de Facebook de racheter un malade comme RIM?
Il faut voire ça dans la nouvelle révolution numérique Web 3.0, qui a amorcé une convergence sans précédent des différents systèmes informatiques, télécoms et appareils. Ainsi, l'appareil, qu'il soit ordinateur, téléphone, tablette, TV, Game Box,... n'est plus qu'un périphérique qui permet tous types d'utilisation multimédia. On peut ou on pourra donc téléphoner (visio), regarder la télé, surfer sur le net, jouer,... à partir de n'importe lequel de ces périphériques.
Avec son nombre impressionnant de membres et de temps de captage de leur attention, Facebook rentrera de pleins pied dans cette nouvelle bataille de captage d'audience ou d'attention des personnes. Il n'est donc pas surprenant qu'après RIM, Facebook ne crée un TV box et ne vienne titiller d'avantages Google et Apple. Ainsi, la page Facebook sera la page de départ de la TV, ordinateur, téléphone,... Et on pourra donc téléphoner à partir de son profil Facebook.
La révolution continue, et la bataille aussi :-)
Showing posts with label Technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Technology. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Thursday, March 8, 2012
New iPad or iPad 3 or iPad S or iPad+: is it really worth all this?
Once again, Apple guys proved that they are marketing Geniuses. Doing this huge Buzz around the New iPad for just a few products evolutions. Unbelievable how daring they are, or how blindlessly they are loved by their fans.
In the same way the iPhone 4s is super close to the iPhone 4, the New iPad is super duper close to the iPad 2. What's weird though is the name of the new device: The New iPad. Everybody was expecting the device to be called the iPad 3, but I am not sure if it would have been really understood by the clients. Is it a good branding? I am snot sure that it is, unless they will start again the numbers in the following one. Otherwise, what would be called The New iPad when the next one will arrive in one year? The Old New iPad?
Now what's new in this Device?
From the external design, almost nothing.
- The screen is a new retina which significantly enhances the quality of the image; For sure it's an amazing display
- The A5X processor, obviously quicker, is needed to support the new screen
- The 5 megapixels cam which was launched on the iphone 4s
- The 4G - LTE integration
- New pictures and videos applications
For the details of these evolutions, you can check out Apple's website, they explain them in a much sexier way than I do ;-) ( http://www.apple.com/fr/ipad/#video )
And as when the iPhone 4s was launched, the question we ask our selves is if it's worth all this communication around the "new" device, which, in other industries such as in the Automotive, they would'nt even dare call it a face lift. At the best, a new version with a new engine and some new functionalities.
And here comes another question: in technological devices, how much is the importance of external design v/s the inside components? Before Apple created the iPod's/iPhone/iPad's magical trend, how much did people care about the external design of laptops v/s their performance?
In my opinion, thanks to Apple's trend breakthough, the cursor shifted significantly from the practical/reasonned buying attitude to the emotional one. Therefore, the external design took a much bigger importance, which strengthens the feeling that despite big performance improvements in major elements (processor, screen, cam,...) most of the customers won't feel like it's a really "New Product". Will I want to sell my iPad 2 or iPhone 4s to buy the new ones? Of course not!
I must admit that Apple is super strong in Marketing, being able to give momentum to product improvements, and blending it as if it's a new product. But until when will they be able to play this game?
The competition is getting stronger, with Android and Windows OS becoming seriously close to iOs in terms of stability, user's experience,... and much better in terms of personalization (for Android). In addition, Samsung, HTC, Motorolla and Nokia made huge efforts on their products designs and features. For how long will Apple resist by introducing these slight improvements?
Nevertheless, let's admit that Apple are geniuses when it comes to managing their products life cycles. It's obvious that the iPad2 is still one of the best if not the best tablet on the market. So why should they launch a brand new product with new external design and take the risk that the design would'nt be as liked, spend money on production/supply costs when they still can continue growing with the current one. Just by improving the performance and being able to sell it as a "New" product, they continue maintaining their sales curve and amazing margins.
The good part is that I will still be happy to use my iPad 2 for at least a year, and will see by than what will come out on the market.
Cheers Steve, your pupils are still maintaining the path ;-)
In the same way the iPhone 4s is super close to the iPhone 4, the New iPad is super duper close to the iPad 2. What's weird though is the name of the new device: The New iPad. Everybody was expecting the device to be called the iPad 3, but I am not sure if it would have been really understood by the clients. Is it a good branding? I am snot sure that it is, unless they will start again the numbers in the following one. Otherwise, what would be called The New iPad when the next one will arrive in one year? The Old New iPad?
Now what's new in this Device?
From the external design, almost nothing.
- The screen is a new retina which significantly enhances the quality of the image; For sure it's an amazing display
- The A5X processor, obviously quicker, is needed to support the new screen
- The 5 megapixels cam which was launched on the iphone 4s
- The 4G - LTE integration
- New pictures and videos applications
For the details of these evolutions, you can check out Apple's website, they explain them in a much sexier way than I do ;-) ( http://www.apple.com/fr/ipad/#video )
And as when the iPhone 4s was launched, the question we ask our selves is if it's worth all this communication around the "new" device, which, in other industries such as in the Automotive, they would'nt even dare call it a face lift. At the best, a new version with a new engine and some new functionalities.
And here comes another question: in technological devices, how much is the importance of external design v/s the inside components? Before Apple created the iPod's/iPhone/iPad's magical trend, how much did people care about the external design of laptops v/s their performance?
In my opinion, thanks to Apple's trend breakthough, the cursor shifted significantly from the practical/reasonned buying attitude to the emotional one. Therefore, the external design took a much bigger importance, which strengthens the feeling that despite big performance improvements in major elements (processor, screen, cam,...) most of the customers won't feel like it's a really "New Product". Will I want to sell my iPad 2 or iPhone 4s to buy the new ones? Of course not!
I must admit that Apple is super strong in Marketing, being able to give momentum to product improvements, and blending it as if it's a new product. But until when will they be able to play this game?
The competition is getting stronger, with Android and Windows OS becoming seriously close to iOs in terms of stability, user's experience,... and much better in terms of personalization (for Android). In addition, Samsung, HTC, Motorolla and Nokia made huge efforts on their products designs and features. For how long will Apple resist by introducing these slight improvements?
Nevertheless, let's admit that Apple are geniuses when it comes to managing their products life cycles. It's obvious that the iPad2 is still one of the best if not the best tablet on the market. So why should they launch a brand new product with new external design and take the risk that the design would'nt be as liked, spend money on production/supply costs when they still can continue growing with the current one. Just by improving the performance and being able to sell it as a "New" product, they continue maintaining their sales curve and amazing margins.
The good part is that I will still be happy to use my iPad 2 for at least a year, and will see by than what will come out on the market.
Cheers Steve, your pupils are still maintaining the path ;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)