Taking a Byte Out of an Apple by Ranak Jones
Recently, I have had debates with people regarding Apple i-whatever and Google’s Androids. First, let me say this, I could give a shit about either of them. Sure they have cool features, basically a PC (or at least a NetBook) in the palm (ah, the predecessor) or your hands. To me, it is just a phone. I am not making the differentiation between phone (iPhone) and OS (Android). I am talking whole package. Don’t get me wrong, there are some cool things that they can do, but I don’t cream my pants over them. Essentially, the differences are: iPhone is user-friendly, Droid is customizable; iPhone has fewer viruses, Droids are cheaper (most); iPhone has more control over its Apps to assure quality, Droid believes that quality will come through the Free Market System, where the public decides what is good and bad. Both have valid qualities and beliefs. I draw two analogies from this. The first one is Capitalism vs. Communism (the theoretical versions of both, not the bastardized versions that are claimed). Capitalism has very little control over the what is sold, Communism has strict controls. In Capitalism anyone can enter the market. In Communism only a select few. Apple=Communism, Android=Capitalism. I am not bashing Apple because it is more Communistic (technically it is more Socialist, semantics). Communism as an ideal is good. It means everyone is equal, and helps each other out. But we don’t live in that ideal world. Just the same, Capitalism gives everyone the chance to succeed. It also gives everyone the chance to fail. Anyway, this was just a very general analogy. The second one is Microsoft and Apple of the 80s. This time Apple takes the role of Microsoft, and Android that of Apple. Microsoft made everyone conform to their standards, just as Apple is doing today. This all has to do with market position. When you’re the top fruit you can dictate. When you’re not, then you try to appease the user by making yourself customizable. Apple did earn the right to be top fruit by marketing itself as the underdog for so many years. Now they still retain some of that status, the one where people want to be original. Great marketing by the company that sells uniformity to individuality-seeking consumers. You can make the case that this is more Microsoft vs. Linux since the Android is based on the customizability that Linux touts, and maybe I should, but I’m not willing yet to concede Android is only a niche product. They still can try to claim the underdog title. Oh, what about the Windows-based phones…simply, they are crap, only worth the time when you have a bowel movement. I have other point and examples, but I’m not writing a thesis paper here, so argue with me, tell me I’m wrong. Give me your justifications, and we’ll discuss.
