Back to the
Apple TV / iPad
In 2007 the new version of OS X — a product which had been such a focus of Apple all that decade with regular updates — was delayed. OS X Leopard wouldn’t be coming out until late October. The new focus: the iPhone and its software. Was the delay a sign of things to come?
In October 2010 Apple held a press event for ‘Back to the Mac’, where OS X Lion was revealed. Their annual Worldwide Developers Conference earlier in June had been primarily focused on the latest iOS software development kit used to create apps for iPhone and the newborn iPad. The usually operating-system-centric event had resigned the Mac to the background, leading to the dedicated event showcasing it several months later.
In 2013 iOS 7 was unveiled, with a new ‘flat’ design. Somewhat surprisingly, the beta only ran on iPhones, with the wholly formed iPad version only available for testing months later. The redesigned system software and apps also differentiated the iPad less from its sister than it had in earlier iOS versions.
The story for the past few years: iPad sales have reached their peak. Mac sales are slightly on the rise. And the iPhone is selling like gangbusters.
Is the growth of the iPad and Mac not as strong as the iPhone because of the waned interest from the public, or also partly because of the waned interest from Apple?
A rough formula for a compelling modern Apple device seems to be: well-made hardware + friendly operating system + intuitive preinstalled apps + lively third-parties providing apps & media. Every year these must be tended to, and updated or even have aspects remade. This will ebb and flow, with one year focusing more on some aspects, and the next year more on others.
If they aren’t tended to, then the product becomes stale and unfocused, and is no longer compelling.
The new Apple Watch seems to be the strongest non-iPhone device that Apple will continue developing because it requires an iPhone, is designed to make using the iPhone more pleasant, and Apple hopes their desirability will continue to grow with their mutual dependence on each other. It is also new and its potential unit sales uncharted.
A New Apple TV & a New iPad
Apple has always called its TV accessory a ‘hobby’. It was an honest public label on how much attention it could devote to developing the product. It also brought in far less profits per-device than a high-tech iPhone.
Now, in May 2015, comes news that a newly designed Apple TV will be introduced at the June WWDC keynote.
Also rumored for later 2015 is a larger iPad, with more ‘professional’ features, such as a larger screen, a hand-held stylus, and possibly a port for connecting external devices.
Neither device has been abandoned — Apple TV has been receiving new channels with a healthy regularity, and iPad is the focus of a enterprise-software partnership with IBM — but neither device has had the same attention from Apple as the iPhone.
The iPhone deserves to be the focus, for it is the product that has lead to Apple becoming the most powerful player in the technology industry.
However, for it to focus on keeping the iPhone as compelling to buyers as it was the year before, must the other products be slightly sacrificed? Maybe the iPhone will be the life blood of Apple for the next ten years or more. But with the current industry wisdom of creating an ecosystem of products that all work closely together, how important is it for Apple to keep every spinning plate they have balanced on its pole?
Will the Apple TV and the iPad be soon given a rigorous spin, hoping that will keep them going for a good couple of years? Or will Apple make them as nurtured a product experience as the iPhone? Either way, Apple will plan to further strengthen their whole ecosystem and bring each product closer to be more dependent on one other.
How will Apple’s executive leaders be able to manage a greater range of products, with responsibilities as ‘Design’, ‘Software Engineering’, ‘Hardware Engineering’, ‘Worldwide Marketing’, ‘Operations’, and ‘Internet Software and Services’ being broadened over the years? Will it lead to broader success?
Had they hoped their new ‘flat’ design language would be simpler to implement, both for itself and for third-parties, across a wider range of products used in handhelds, on watch faces, within cars, and on television screens? A less demanding requirement that they hoped allowed them to do more with less?
Apple’s quality control in hardware manufacturing operations meant a fault in the Apple Watch’s taptic feedback module was rectified before close to no devices reached the hands of customers.
Apple’s quality control in software, which unlike hardware can be modified with downloadable updates after shipping, meant a fault with iOS’s cellular services was released to iPhone users the world over, and meant issues in OS X are still present many months after being released to customers.
So what does the release of new Apple TV and iPads and Apple Watch mean to not only their product experiences, but those of the other product lines? Will they all resonate together, like a well practised orchestra? Or will a few misplayed chords and misplaced sheet music threaten to ruin the allure? Steve Jobs when introducing the iPad called it ‘magical’. How much was due to the concept of the product, and how much was due to its attentive execution? Is Apple — is any company — up to managing the wide range of products it now nurtures?
