Everyone loves an underdog. We root for them. We identify with them. And for the last few decades, one of our favorite underdog brands has been Apple, and for good reason: They made computers user-friendly. They made computers fun. They made them accessible to kids and artists and creatives. They made computers cool, from the packaging to the user experience, even down to the way we shop. The Apple brand was built on the underdog premise, on a revolutionary and pioneering spirit. On being – and thinking – different. Apple went deep instead of going wide. It wasn’t interested in being the biggest, it just wanted to be the best. And that is something that resonated with millions of users worldwide.
You see, Apple didn’t build a customer base: It built itself a tribe, a nation, a religion, even. You’re either a Mac or a PC, after all. And of the two, only one has an identity, a recognizable calling card: that ubiquitous forbidden fruit that announces to the world “I don’t play by your rules. I’m a Mac.” The rest are just… well… PC. That amorphous blend of Microsoft and IBM and Dell and HP and the rest. The little gray boxes sitting on desks. Little black laptops with the blue screens and overheating batteries and obnoxiously long boot-ups. Nothing nearly as cool as the sleek works of art you see peppering coffee shop tables with their glowing little logos that say “yes, I too am one of the cool kids.”
Then Apple changed the game again by rethinking the way we consume music, media and games with iPod. And if that wasn’t enough, Apple then set their sites on reinventing the mobile phone too. And now, with iPad, Apple stands to reinvent the way we look at computing, creating and consuming content, and may in turn very well change the publishing industry forever.
Apple’s secret hasn’t just about generating envy. There was more to the brand’s appeal than designing pretty and cool. Apple didn’t become the king of brands by just being product-focused. It engineered a culture. A belief system. It became the most popular example of what a love-brand can achieve, by making a point not to follow traditional corporate mantras of growth for the sake of growth, and of market share as a battle cry. It shifted the model. It colored outside the lines, and it made a point of inviting us all to come along and be rebels too.
Remember this?
And this?
Of course you do. We all do. These ads made Apple.
And so here’s where things get tricky: For most if not all of our adult lives, Apple has been the underdog brand. The rebel. The kid who wouldn’t sell out. Time and time again, Apple itself told us and reminded us that it was one of us. The little guy with brains and courage and the odds stacked against him. Now ponder this: What happens when the proverbial David becomes Goliath? How will Apple’s brand manage the transition from being the underdog to becoming the biggest technology company in the world?
Or rather, how is it managing that transition since, according to the BBC, Apple finally overtook Microsoft two months ago and became the biggest kid on the block?
That’s right: Apple isn’t the underdog anymore. In spite of Microsoft’s decades-long choke hold on the broad PC market, on enterprise OS licenses, digital properties like MSN, its outstanding success in the game console world with X-Box, and some activity with Windows mobile phones and Zune, Apple managed to edge them out this year, thanks to its astounding successes with iPod, iPhone, and pretty soon, iPad as well.
Now consider that Brands and cultural archetypes are often joined at the hip. Nike is the goddess of victory. Apple draws much of its contextual foundations from Judeo-Christian mythology – from its forbidden fruit logo to the David vs. Goliath narrative it injected into its marketing. When the narrative changes, when the brand’s role shifts and archetypal points of reference dissolve, what happens to how we process emotions and attitudes towards that brand? How do we rebuild its context subconsciously?
Think about this: Apple is now bigger than Microsoft. Let that sink in for a minute. Say it out-loud: Apple is bigger than Microsoft. What does that mean for a brand whose very identity has always been tied to being “the other” technology company? How will public opinion shift in response to its changing role? Its new position in the market? And when the criticism starts piling up, how will Apple respond?
And believe me, it will. In fact it already has.
In the age of Social Media, where companies are expected to engage with customers, respond to attacks and manage angry users in minutes via Twitter, Facebook and other social platforms, will Apple’s notable reluctance to join the conversation and comment on attacks now come across as arrogance? Will mounting quality control problems due to its success and new requirements of scale begin to dull its once quasi-mythical luster? Will Apple become another embattled giant, much like Microsoft was when it was the one sitting on the throne?
Not that Mac fanboys will ever abandon the brand. And not that Apple will stop re-inventing how we think about technology, media, usability and devices either. Apple is the future of consumer technology, at least for the next decade. Plain and simple. That is, as long as it doesn’t forget what it felt like to be the underdog, the “other” company, the band of rebels who focused on quality instead of volume. Something to think about: It’s hard to convince consumers to “think different” when you own the market – when it’s now the other guys who think different. (I’m looking at you, SONY. Here’s your shot at a comeback.)
At any rate, all of this to say, watch what happens next. Expect Apple to find itself under attack more often. Expect more law suits, more complaints, more criticism in the press and on blogs and on the twitternets. More stories of failure and problems and concerns. Now that Apple is the king of tech, it is walking around with giant bullseye on its back – something it has never experienced before -and you can be sure that every little mistake it makes will be scrutinized and exploited for all its worth, not only by its rivals (Microsoft already started), but by anyone with a chip on their shoulder. How Apple manages their new place in the world, a world it doesn’t always play nicely with, will be interesting. Stay tuned.
And while we’re on the subject, check out this piece by BBC.com in which I am quoted saying something half-way intelligent, for once.
Wow.
It’s real.
Apple is bigger than Microsoft.
It is, in a sense, a very real shift in the technology market.
And I wonder if the hint of malaise and self-satisfaction hasn’t already crept in a little bit already.
Let me explain:
I spent the better part of an hour this morning exchanging emails with a fellow employee (a hardcore, dedicated Mac user) why I felt that the overall Apple personal computer experience (not the iPod, iPhone, or iPad experience, but the Apple PERSONAL COMPUTER experience) was vastly overhyped.
The reason we were having the discussion at all is that a month and a half ago, I started using an Apple PC for the first time ever, after having spent a number of years on both Windows and Linux.
And my reaction to my brand new, 24″ iMac Core2 Duo has been, “Really? You people have been hyping THIS as the “Great Computer Experience Revolution?”
Yes, the screen is gorgeous, I won’t deny it. And yes, the side-mounted DVD burner is cool, and all that.
But unless I’m just not poking under the hood enough, Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard has been one giant pile of “Meh, who cares?”
One caveat: I’m not using the iLife Suite (I’m a marketing and technical writer. Adobe Suite, MS Office, and my text editors are my bread-and-butter), so I may be missing out on what some people consider the “Killer App” of the entire platform.
But for a typical business user, like me, Mac OS X 10.6 is a non-starter. The Finder file manager app is infinitely inferior to both Windows 7’s, and the current file manager champ, Dolphin for KDE, and I’m constantly fighting it to do simple file management tasks that are fast and easy in both Windows and Linux.
The sheer volume of free and open source utility apps for Windows makes it a far, far more valuable proposition for me in the long run. And yes, I know there are some for Mac OS too, but the fact is, if you need a utility for something, you can almost always find it for Windows.
I’ve never really liked iTunes as a music management app (MusicMatch Jukebox, before Yahoo screwed it up, was by FAR the best music player on the market, and even now I like Amarok for KDE better).
And as far as Adobe Suite, and MS Office, does it really matter which platform they’re on any more?
Now, I realize that the simplicity of the Mac OS interface, and the general lack of having to go “under the hood” that much can be a huge benefit for some users. But for me, my first heavy “delve” into the world of Apple has been largely underwhelming.
The moral of the story of all this is, I think, that the biggest danger to Apple, now that they’re the technology market leader, is to simply say, “We’re Apple. You’ll buy our stuff because of the name and logo.”
Having no prior loyalty or exposure to Apple AT ALL, I was simply experiencing their PC product for the first time “As is,” and to me, it was incredibly unremarkable.
Like other major brands, they have enough of a loyal fan base that they’ll never die completely. But if they want to remain the largest player in the market, they will definitely have to rethink–really rethink–who and what they are, and where they go from here. Otherwise, they’ll never capture people like me as “brand enthusiasts.”
So, Big is Beautiful — again? As far as I understand, the story is about market capitalization, nothing else. If Apple sells more iPhones, iPads, i-This-and-Thats, so what?
Somewhat like Steve, I live by productivity apps. The rest has no meaning.
Now don’t get me wrong. I’m not an evangelist of any company or platform. I side with the company that helps ME achieve MY goals. They’re toolmakers, not religions.
Point taken. And I won’t argue your POV. I can totally relate. I love Apple’s stuff too. I’m a huge fan of their devices, of the way they think about design, and even of the way they blend technical, design and emotional narratives to produce so much win.
For some, however (many, in fact) “Mac” is a religion. My brother converted to it in the 80’s. I work with cultists almost daily. They’re real. 😉
As a long-time fan of Apple, I have to say that I think their record of dominance in the smartphone space is a blip. It won’t last, and in fact it is already turning around to Google’s favor. As someone once said (paraphrasing), “Google is poised to be the ‘Microsoft’ of mobile, and Apple is poised to be the ‘Apple’ of mobile.” Apple had first mover advantage, and it has taken a couple years for the others to catch up. But because Google is playing the open-platform approach, they will “win” the game of marketshare. Meanwhile, Apple users will continue to look at Android as merely different flavors of carob, while the iPhone is real chocolate. Just try to convince someone so used to different flavors of carob that they should switch phone providers for one flavor of chocolate. The average person won’t see a benefit there.
Apple is already losing marketshare to Google in the smartphone space. This is expected. Hell, Apple will probably fall to sub 20% marketshare in the next 10 years as more and more Android appliances come online (from smartphones to tablets to god-knows-what). But you know what’s also expected? Critics hawing about how Apple has lost its mojo and how they should finally embrace the virtues of carob.
Did I get in enough carob/chocolate metaphors? Yeah, I think so. God, I frickin’ hate carob.
Great points all. I think you’re right.
First off, being the largest technology company does not make them ubiquitous. They do not own the lion’s share of the computing market, nor the tablet pc (yet, although I would imagine they eventually will) or the software market.
They have control of one area, mp3 players.
They have never really been a Microsoft competitor, at least not until the Zune.
At the end of the day, Apple is a technology company, Microsoft is a software company that’s trying to become a technology company, so no, I’m not surprised that Apple jumped to the head of the class.
However, they are certainly no Goliath, not yet. Not until there is a Mac in every home and an iPod in every pocket (which will never happen).
Plus, let’s remember, none of this is possible, none of it, without Bill Gates. Without that investment, Apple is done as of the mid-90’s and we aren’t even having this discussion. Apple owes everything to the one person that they choose to publicly mock, how sad.
Yeah, the definition of “technology company” might be in question here. You make some excellent points. Though Microsoft hasn’t just been a software company for a while. X-Box is hardware AND software AND Social (X Box Live is in essence a social community platform). Their MSN suite is media. Zune is a media player. But, sure, Apple was into hardware from the start. Microsoft evolved into it decades later. Still though, those lines are vanishing.
Thanks for the great comment.
Good peice OB
I have the same perspective as you. Apple has always thrived as being ‘the other’.
In fact, Apple’s main value – innovation – is limited to the innovators, the others.
I really do think Apple are getting too much width. My thoughts are that they need to stop spreading their width and begin building deeper again. I think this is what the iOS eco-system will do for them – allow deeper benefits on their platform for developers and customers.
But then, they do have the opportunity to take the world. Do they *not* take the opportunity, in the name of being the company with the edge?
And also, is it possible to maintain the Apple edge with an audience as big as theirs is becoming?
Scott
(PS – thrilled for you re: BBC. It’s a good time to know you!)
Solid analysis Olivier. A fair presentation by a Windows and Blackberry user, too. Well done for that.
You know I’m one of those raving fans, an early applicant for the cult of Apple in 1984. I’m also a huge fan of companies who tune in to the people in their marketplace, value them, and humbly attend to them.
Of late, Apple has apparently totally bought into the full package of Goliath arrogance. Goliath truly felt that
• his reputation
• his size, and
• his fan base (the Philistine army)
were sufficient to win the day.
Goliath looked down on David literally and figuratively. He was offended that such an unworthy adversary would approach him.
David knew that honor was on the line (as well as his own life, for sure). David was driven by what he saw as a righteous cause. It was far more to David than a simple grudge match or power play.
Goliath was attacking David’s worldview, his faith, his family, and his entire way of life.
Rest assured, there are already MANY DAVIDs out there already. For starters, Apple should beware of the Goliath dressed in David’s clothes (Google in the form of Android). The other Goliath in David’s clothes, SONY, could easily take on Apple (if SONY could ever figure out who they are). And, there’s one more Goliath in David’s clothes on the horizon—let’s not rule out Nokia. At the moment they’re goofing off with proprietary stuff, but hopefully they’ll jump over their own walled garden and take on Apple.
And then, there are all the real Davids out there we’ve yet to even hear about. Who’s to say some bright mind in Brazil, or Africa, or Bangledesh, or anywhere in the world, can’t take on an American Goliath?
Keep you eye on Apple. They may continue plodding the path of pride and wind up declining from Goliath to Dagon.
Kudos to you Olivier, for demonstrating a simply way to create compelling content. I wrote about you. ; )
See, I knew you’d have something really solid to add if I threw in some Biblical references. And there’s that dagon Dagon guy again. 😀
Terrific article Olivier, and well done on getting mentioned on the BBC.
I was thinking about going Apple earlier this year. I didn’t (actually, not decided what I’m going with, but likely to be a PC) mainly because they still care about pidgeonholing. The day they create a 13 inch laptop with a matte screen, I’ll buy Apple. Until then, I’m going with PC – they care about business.
Mind you, I have an iPhone and iPod, so what does that say about me?
By the way, what are all these blog links to the right and below?
Nice article Olivier. While it’s true that Apple now has a larger market cap than Microsoft, it is still tiny when it comes to total user market, employees, and revenue. Apple’s share of the PC market is still well under 10%. On the other hand, they dominate the MP3 player market and are making real headway into the smart phone market. And, of course, they are creating an entirely new market with the iPad. So Apple’s challenge is how to exist as a David in some markets and a Goliath in others? Can the Apple brand sustain both stories?
I think it can. At its core, the challenge for Apple will be not to change. Not to be seduced by the power of being #1. More on that soon. 😉
Nice post … In fact, it’s the coolest post I read this month and deserve a Facebook share!
Thanks!
can i use your picture on my group logo for linkedin?