Jason Abrahamson

I’ll conceded that I (nobody special) am particularly critical of Steve Jobs and his larger than life narcissistic personality that radiates from everything Apple, but he did make some good points at D8. One of which was the future of computing. Though I agree that there will be a continued shift into mobile computing, I don’t entirely agree with his viewpoint. His otherwise cynical and poor comparison of “trucks” to “PCs” leaves me wondering if he’s really paying to the car market — especially since leading right up to $5.00 a gallon gas GM was the world’s largest automaker selling Trucks and SUV’s.

For those of you that don’t know what I’m talking about, Mr. Jobs said that PC’s would be pushed aside in favor of smaller more compact technologies like tablets and smart phones (and in an effort of full disclosure, he was describing the “personal computer” including Apple). His analogy was that of people moving away from Trucks, or large vehicles if you will, in favor of smaller compacts as they moved from rural areas to the metropolitan city.

Though I agree, and have stated before that I think mobile computing is the next big wave, I don’t see it eliminating PC’s, in fact, I think it will grow it.

See the problem with Job’s analogy is that he doesn’t understand his customer, or more specifically he does understand his customer, all 4% of the personal computer market share. A survey done as late as 2009 shows that Americans to this day still want their cake and eat it too. This one highlights that Americans don’t want smaller cars, they just want more fuel efficient cars. Americans, who are the largest consumers in the world, don’t want smaller things, they like big things. Big powerful things.

American’s don’t want smaller more portable TVs, they want big energy space saving TVs. How many people’s houses do you walk into and they brag about their 12inch TV? The largest consumers in the world want it all. They want PC’s and phones. They want an iPhone, and a Laptop. Heck they even want a tablet.

As my father always use to tell me, you can’t change a zebra’s strips. People still want a traditional computer, with a traditional keyboard, and a nice big traditional screen. If they didn’t then Dell and HP wouldn’t make 17 inch screen laptops that weigh next to nothing. Going further, businesses who are among the quickest to adopt and embrace new technologies, are also among the slowest to phase out antiquated technology. I can’t tell you how many NT 4.0 ADP server’s I’ve seen in my career.

Every generation has an evolutionary path. This generation is the entitlement and no-patience generation. That generation is going to lead the mobile revolution with their desire for on demand media all the time. The second problem with this generation is they’re rarely if ever satisfied. They, probably more so than their parents, want it bigger, they want it better, and they want it faster — if they didn’t shows like “My Super Sweet 16″ and “Suzy Orman” wouldn’t exist. People would buy watches they could afford and wouldn’t have to wait till Suzy told them they couldn’t.

So though I agree mobile technology is the future of the industry, I disagree with Jobs that it’s going to eliminate the PC. I think if anything its going to drastically increase the desire for a PC. Take my brother for example. He is by no means a computer aficionado but he thought the iPhone was a cool toy (and it is). After buying the iPhone he ended up buying a new computer for himself. Puzzled I asked why, and he said “This does things my iPhone doesn’t.” It will be impossible to take the entire computing experience and cram it onto a tablet or a smart phone. If they did that then it wouldn’t be something new, it would just be a really small computer — and as we said before, people, specifically Americans, don’t do anything small. They want it bigger, they want it better, and they want it faster.

So I have to agree with the equally narcissistic, but notoriously bad tempered Steve Ballmer on this one. Ballmer addressed job’s assessment of a shrinking PC market and said he saw a growing one — I see that too. I also see a larger piece of the pie going to Apple in the future (sorry Ballmer) that is if Job’s doesn’t drive the company into the ground first (sorry Jobs).

Will see how it all plays out, oh, and not to change the subject, but for those of you cheering that Apple has surpassed Microsoft in market value keep something in mind. Steve Job’s the man is estimated to be about 1/8th of Apples Market value, which means that if he died tomorrow Apple’s value would theoretically lose $25 billion dollars. It’s also worth noting that Enron, Lehman Brothers, and Bear Sterns proved it doesn’t matter how much you’re worth, its about how much you make.

Previously I highlighted my feelings that Steve Jobs might be the most valuable asset and greatest hindrance to Apple. Few remember the Apple dark years, this is where Apple fans so conveniently forget it was Bill Gates and his billions that gave Steve Jobs the capital to bring Apple back from the dead. Arguably though, it was Steve Jobs that took Apple there to begin with — and it looks as though he might very well do it again.

Money isn’t in hardware, its in software. Microsoft proved that theory long ago. If you want to control a market space you either be a pioneer with about 100 mile head-start or License your product to everybody else.

In the smart phone market RIM was the pioneer with about 100 mile head-start. RIM was so far ahead of their competitors in the smart phone market space its taken years for others to catch them — and will take many more to oust them. Apple was a johnny come lately to a crowded party dominated by RIM, Palm and Microsoft. With that said though, nobody can deny they made one heck of an entrance. Apple has certainly hogged most of the attention from Microsoft, and nearly kicked Palm out of the party.

Apple revolutionized and raised the bar for all the competitors. Apple has also controlled every aspect and development of the product. They’re also sticking to Steve Job’s refusal of not licensing their software to other hardware manufacturers. This will likely prove to be a very costly to Apple in the long run — just as it was 25 years ago. Google’s AndroidOS has been eating away at Apple’s coveted market space, and has grown so aggressively that they outpaced Apple to rank number 2 in the US market last quarter. Apple will have a difficult time keeping up with Google since Apple is locked into a 5 year deal with AT&T. Even after the deal, the damage will have already been done. With Android being just as good as iPhone, and not being heavily controlled there will be little incentive for other US Carriers to pick up the iPhone.

If that wasn’t enough bad news for Apple, Verizon is in talks with Google to produce an Android based tablet, and Archos will bring the first Android tablet to market.

The most important thing worth noting here is that Google already built and shipped their own phone, NexusOne, which Verizon and Sprint both nixed from their lineup in favor of the HTC Droid Incredible. Thus showing that the quickest way to control a market space is in fact through licensing.

The iPod is what brought Apple back from the dead. It opened up the world to Apple, iPhone is what turned Apple into the powerhouse it is today. Without the iPhone, Apple is nothing more than a company making MP3 players and overpriced computers.

Will Steve Job’s control freak antics sink Apple once again? It’s far too soon to tell, but no matter what this doesn’t look well for Apple. The glasshouse keeps getting broken windows.

PCWorld is reporting that Apple trying to get out of dodge with an Anti-Trust case. Their stock has taken a beating being down 3% today.

The bigger problem is how do you respond? Steve Jobs has come out in public support and explanation of their practices. As a company this puts Apple in somewhat of a bind. It’s estimated that Steve Jobs is worth about $25Bn or 1/8th of Apple’s total value. We’re not talking about stock or net-worth, we’re talking about assets. If Steve Job is considered an asset, his value to Apple is estimated at $25Bn dollars, or as I said, about 1/8th of Apple’s total market value.

So now what does Apple do? To change or alter their position would not be in alignment with the opinion of the most valuable asset to the company, but to not alter their position can and would likely result in a length legal battle — one which could leave Apple vulnerable.

A DOJ ruling could look similar to US vs MS in which entire divisions are no longer allowed to share any information. That would mean that iTunes or the Apple Store could not collaborate on integration into the iPhone. That could prove to be an incredibly fatal blow to the simplistic and seamless end user experience Apple so covets. That wouldn’t be all though, other platforms would have to be more widely accepted on their platform — thus making the stability of the device questionable – bringing problems faced by Microsoft, RIM, and Google — all leading competitors in the market space.

Since the beginning, Steve Jobs has always been a control freak. His insistence on not allowing Mac OS on any non-apple platform, his dictation of distribution, advertising, and fierce control of Apple’s reselling led to his demise in the 80′s. As my father always said, you can’t change a Zebra’s stripes, and there is no doubt that Jobs is the puppet master behind what are arguably more anti-competitive practices than Microsoft ever practiced. Could Jobs prove to be Apple’s most valuable asset but biggest hindrance at the same time?

Only time will tell, but for now, Apple is in one heck of a pickle.