AppleInsider StaffApple senior vice president and executive team member Jon Rubinstein does not believe in digital device convergence theories, which suggests that the iPod, cell phone, and digital camera are on a collision course with each other and a single unified device.
"Many companies believe in [the convergence theory], but I personally do not," said Rubinstein. "It's important to have specialized devices."
In fact, Rubinstein believes the iPod, cell phone, and digital camera will all continue to thrive in their individual markets for at least another decade. "Most people still take photographs with their digital camera rather than their cellphone," he says. "And there's a simple reason: digital cameras take better pictures."
Asked whether Apple has considered a reentry in PDA market by evolving the iPod into such a device, both Rubinstein and Apple vice president Phil Schiller (who also sat in the interview) seemed strongly opposed.
"PDA's would not be good business for Apple," Schiller said, explaining that PDAs are a niche market for specialized applications. Basic functions of PDAs, such as date planners and address books, have long been available on most cell phones "and now the iPod," added Rubinstein.
Likewise, Rubinstein and Apple appear weary of investing their energies in the cell phone handset market beyond the iTunes phones being made available from Motorola. "It's a concern," said Rubinstein, "because the Motorola phone is no replacement for the iPod." Instead, the company plans to wait out the response to the first iTunes phones to see the market's reaction.
Recently analysts have called for Apple to consider its own foray into the cell phone market, which stands 13 times larger than the digital music player market, with an estimated 774 million cell phones to be sold this year.
"On the iTunes phone I can load 100 tunes," said Rubinstein ."However, with the iPod my whole music collection becomes mobile."
One thing Rubinstein is not concerned about is iPod market share suddenly eroding like that of the Sony's Walkman, which sold over 340 million units in the 80s and 90s.
"The iPod is substantially more difficult to copy than the Walkman was," he claims. "It's a whole ecological system of different elements which coordinate with each-other precisely: the iPod, iTunes, iTunes Music Store and Internet."
Humorous update: It took our lovely readers only minutes to locate several toasters which, yes, actually do brew coffee as well.
-m.jpg)
Charles Martin
Christine McKee
Wesley Hilliard
Malcolm Owen
Andrew Orr
William Gallagher
Sponsored Content
36 Comments
He's wrong.
There are phones with cameras that are good enough for 4x6 prints today, and they will only get better. A dedicated camera will always be superior, just like a dedicated iPod will always be superior, but unless one is comfortable carrying all three with them at all times, there is benefit to having a phone with these features.
This is why there is no coffee making toaster. If both devices were portable and both shared a large number of similar components, they would be merged.
The ROCKR sucks because it was designed to suck. Give it a 2mp camera and it would compete with low end digital cameras. Remove the artifical iTunes restrictions and it would start to compete with the iPod.
Apple, design a real iPhone and I would *easily* pay $500+ for it.
"Most people still take photographs with their digital camera rather than their cellphone," he says. "And there's a simple reason: digital cameras take better pictures."
Right, but if you could have a cell phone which could take pictures as good as a digital camera, then wouldn't you rather carry around 1 device rather than 2?
I think that he's correct for now simply because there isn't an all-in-one device which does everything well enough ("well enough" being the key phrase there). But I know that personally, I hate carrying around 3 different devices just so that I can answer calls, listen to music, and take decent quality pictures on a whim. 4 if you want to play decent quality video games or watch movies.
I think that it's very possible to create a good all-in-one device today which is a reasonable size, but that there's more money to be made off of selling devices (and related services) individually. It'd take a company which doesn't already have a vested interest in keeping things this way to do it, but then they would likely have a hard time partnering with existing service providers who are already partnered with other companies who want to hold on to their specialized market.
So it'll take a very large company with enough industry influence (ie. one who also owns or funds service providers) to do it. And that'll take a while -- around a decade sounds about right.
Anyways, I don't agree with him that convergence theories are wrong. People want an all-in-one device because it will take up less space and simplify their lives. Maintaining and keeping multiple devices in sync with each other is just a pain.
Converged devices will *always* lag behind the dedicated devices. That's just the way it goes. Sure, a 2MP camera in a cell phone is good enough for many things, but the bar keeps getting bumped up.
Basically, take the suite of devices you want to integrate. Select 70% of the features from each, 50% if you want the final unit to be as small as any one of the original ones. That's your converged unit.
So in that sense, yes, universal convergence is a red herring... but as shown in the marketplace, sometimes 50% is good enough, ala cell phones with cameras.
Personally, I don't understand the phone fetish myself, but that's just me. The interface is clunky as hell, and the whole infrastructure is a mess. Drop back to a simple idea of 'communication', and I'm with you, but why it has to be a *phone*, I have no clue.
but why it has to be a *phone*, I have no clue.
Because then you can charge people for phone service, and charge extra for internet service, and then even more for online gaming service. Add to that text messaging service, music service, ringtones, streaming video service, etc, etc. The cell phone is the only device I know of where you are charged almost every time you press a button on it.
Thank goodness for some sense at Apple. I agree with Jon Rubinstein 100%!!!! Come on folks -- a multifunction printer/copier/scanner/fax machine is never as good as standalone units that do the same thing. Jon Rubinstein is right, folks! Convergence devices will *NEVER* be as good as one of the single items that they're trying to emulate.