Mashable has recently announced that Samsung has sold twice as many devices as Apple in Q3 of 2012.It’s been pretty interesting how over the time the mobile argument has shifted from Apple versus Google to Apple versus Samsung. The Apple versus Google comparison didn’t make a ton of sense. Both Apple and Google are vastly different companies and you can tell by how they measure success of their mobile strategy. Apple measures success of their mobile strategy by the number of devices sold. Additions to iOS, introduction of the iCloud and Siri are all manoeuvres to retain or cause users to purchase new devices. Google measures their success by the number of accounts activated on Android devices. In order to facilitate this, Google gives away their software for free (OS and Tool sets), allows developers to publish their apps for free and more recently introducing high end hardware for cut throat margins.
The Apple versus Samsung argument is a (pardon the pun) closer apple to apple comparison. Both are hardware manufacturers who measure their success on units sold. And Apple has come out hard in their fight against Samsung – harder than they have against any organization. The most telling sign of course has been the $1B lawsuit that Apple levied against Samsung and won. There are a couple of interesting things about the lawsuit in general
It’s not about innovation
Both Apple and Samsung (through the Android ecosystem) have ideas that are not uniquely their own within their devices. Some really glaring things are the pull down gesture to show the notifications that are now on Apple devices have been a well-known Android paradigm since launch. The same can be said with putting icons on top of one another automatically creating groups has been a well-known Apple paradigm for a while now.
It’s not about money
Don’t get me wrong – $1B is a lot of money and I’m sure Samsung is not happy about losing $1B. But both Apple and Samsung are multi-hundred billion dollar companies. Apple doesn’t need the $1B to enhance their business and losing $1B will not hamper Samsung’s efforts in the market.
It’s about messaging
The one interesting thing to me that came out of the whole lawsuit was messaging. The message which Apple sent to the American people who is their power base is that Samsung is a copycat and a cheat; they are stealing and profiting on American innovation. At it’s heart, this is where Apple has been hurting the most. Apple has traditionally been the masters of brand and messaging. They have always been able to capture the imagination of their consumers by showing them how to purchase less than bleeding edge technology to its fullest. Samsung has copied much of Apple’s marketing playbook and has reaped much benefit from it.
So it will be interesting to see how this continues to play out. The end benefit though is better consumer products assuming that Samsung doesn’t get trapped in a quagmire of lawsuits
I recently read this post through my google feed titled Google Still Doesn’t Get How to Beat Microsoft Office a while ago and thought this would be a great segway to some observations I had about Google Apps. For some context, I’m an avid Google Apps user. I use it for my personal domains (i.e. for both my business as well as my private domains) as well as professionally in an enterprise setting. The feedback in general are mixed like most things – some people love it, some people are ambivalent about it and some people loathe it. No real surprises there. I’m in the camp of those who really like it. Although I have Microsoft Office installed on every device I have – I even pay for a TechNet license so that I can always have the latest and greatest software available – but I find myself using it less and less for most things. For the most part, my needs can be met by using the word processor, spreadsheet and, yes, even the presentation app that they have. They are no where as good as Microsoft Office but for me they do the job. Even more importantly for me, no one has yet to complain when I either share with them my document either in through Google Docs or through the attached documents.
I’m working for a relatively young company now – we’ve been existence for less than a couple of years but we’re striving to grow. While I’m a tech-head, I would say most of my colleagues aren’t but they aren’t afraid of tech either. I suspect that we’re the sort of company that Google is targeting for and it’s a smart play, in my opinion. I suspect that many new tech startups use Google Apps as their default enterprise collaboration software because it’s free and relatively painless to set up. You get a whole bunch of really powerful tools to go with it even if you didn’t intend to use it to start. There are better tools in market than any of the Google Apps products but nothing easier to set up and nothing that works more seamlessly together. This is actually very similar to the Microsoft Office strategy back in its heyday. In a lot of ways, it’s actually a smart play not to worry about backwards compatibility. In the market that Google seems to be addressing, it’s not high on the priority list. And it’s actually one of the things that have persistently hindered Microsoft from growing as quickly as it needed because it was constantly going back to ensure software was compatible to products that are sometimes more than a decade old. In technology, that’s at least 5 generations old – it’s like trying to ensure that we can support horse buggies today.
In short, Google isn’t playing to win in the short term. Google seems to be attacking Microsoft but not head-on. It’s betting on the future and I think it’s a smart bet. It seems to be doing tactically and strategically. It also shows that Google knows it target market and isn’t wasting it’s effort on features that aren’t nearly as relevant as other things in the pipeline for them. I’d love to actually see some stats on this to see if my hypothesis holds.