The secret to success is ignore your customers

[the stranger]

How To Succeed Like Apple

 

The Secret The secret to success in consumer technology is to ignore your customers. Let me rephrase that. The secret to success in consumer technology is to make the products that you want, not the ones you think your customer wants. In fact nearly all the great new ground-breaking products were built by people who were solving their own problems and satisfying their own demands, rather than trying to satisfy consumer demand.

 

Intriguing article. Very applicable to mainstream artistic endeavors.

 

[Coaster]

hey it works for digidesign.

[blue2blue]

There's much truth there, and though the thinking isn't particularly new and certainly not original, it's worth remembering.

 

Basically he just wrapped the current disenthused thinking about focus-group product development and shaping around a snappy headline and hooked it up with Apple's current product release cycle.

 

 

Movie and TV crits have been saying the same things for a while, as have product design academics and critics...

 

But, of course, like most facile wordsmithing wrapped around a snappy one-liner, it's not just superficial but vulnerable to finding large, gaping exceptions. Apple did not design its successful products in a vacuum, without user testing. It's certainly cagier than most companies, and arguably has to be. Like the gossip mag industry it so closely resembles, the Apple rumor blog/mag micro-industry seems like it's working 24/7, with each node in it trying desperately to break exclusive...

[SomeoneYouKnew]

 

The secret to success in consumer technology is to make the products that you want , not the ones you think your customer wants .

These things should be synonymous, if you have any vision about what is desirable.

 

Now if the phrase was "what your customers tell you they want", that's an entirely different story. Customers are biased by the status quo. What they think they want is often very different from what they will want, once they see what is actually possible.

[Anderton]

Catchy headline, but...

 

Actually the secret of Apple's success is to identify a market that already exists but isn't being served properly, then come up with a product that DOES do what customers want.

 

There were GUI computers before the Mac.

There were media players before the iPod.

There were smartphones before the iPhone.

There were tablet computers before the iPad.

 

In each case, Apple figured out why the existing products didn't click with consumers, and made products that did.

 

I understand the point of the article. The example I always give is of a Keyboard magazine reader survey that asked readers what they wanted. No one mentioned having lessons with notation, but Dominic Milano had a gut feeling they'd like it if they had it, then went and implemented it in the mag with zero support from readers. It became a huge success, but only because Dom believed his gut more than the reader survey.

 

Given my examples above, that's not what Apple's doing. And no, I'm not bashing Apple...unless you think that it's a bad thing to look at someone's idea and improve it greatly. I don't think it's a bad thing, it's how progress happens.

[Anderton]

 

These things should be synonymous, if you have any vision about what is desirable.

 

 

We have a winner!!!!!

[Ernest Buckley]

Catchy headline, but... Actually the secret of Apple's success is to identify a market that already exists but isn't being served properly, then come up with a product that DOES do what customers want. There were GUI computers before the Mac. There were media players before the iPod. There were smartphones before the iPhone. There were tablet computers before the iPad. In each case, Apple figured out why the existing products didn't click with consumers, and made products that did. I understand the point of the article. The example I always give is of a Keyboard magazine reader survey that asked readers what they wanted. No one mentioned having lessons with notation, but Dominic Milano had a gut feeling they'd like it if they had it, then went and implemented it in the mag with zero support from readers. It became a huge success, but only because Dom believed his gut more than the reader survey. Given my examples above, that's not what Apple's doing. And no, I'm not bashing Apple...unless you think that it's a bad thing to look at someone's idea and improve it greatly. I don't think it's a bad thing, it's how progress happens.

 

 

I`m convinced that people who start these threads (the ones that bash Apple directly or indirectly) are the same ones who can`t believe we have a US President who isn`t white.

[FestivalOfHate]

There are those who fill existing needs....because they are underserved...others might invent something pretty cool, with the vision that people might like it...a new song fits the later category...but I think just about every product including music goes through a test phase...family, friends, colleagues...if it pops with them..then the general public might buy off on it.

[js1]

Great and innovative products rarely happen by committees. They happen because someone has the guts, instinct, skill and authority to make the calls. Steve Jobs - without him, Apple isn't the Apple we know. The IPod was considered a joke in the industry when it was released, a fringe product at best. Opening Apple Stores when Gateway had just gone down the dumper - insanity. Changing processors AND OS in one blow - seven levels of crazy there. I'm willing to bet, no, guarantee that any of those decisions would not have survived a focus group.

 

In audio, Keith Barr was a good example. Record 8 track digital on home videotape, AND sell it at that price point?

 

The people that I know that do this extremely well are endlessly curious about technology, people, problems and how it all connects. Always asking, "what if... ", and "how could we...", and often, "why the hell???" They aren't arrogant. They ARE passionate.

 

Why hasn't Microsoft done a great phone, portable device or tablet? It isn't because they haven't got enough smart people. Maybe more like they have too many. With too much invested in the status quo. Oh, and while I'm coming up with examples... why didn't the record industry come up with a viable digital strategy?

 

js

[the stranger]

I`m convinced that people who start these threads (the ones that bash Apple directly or indirectly) are the same ones who can`t believe we have a US President who isn`t white.

 

If you're implying I'm a racist because I started an Apple thread, well I'd say that's quite a stretch.

 

I thought the idea of the article was applicable to musical/artistic endeavors. I stated as much in the original post. I don't recall doing any bashing (directly or indirectly). The article was interesting. Are you sure it isn't you that has some agenda?

 

[offramp]

Yeah, I have to chime in that that was an amazing stretch, in a number of directions.

[Lee Flier]

Yeah... that was a huge WTF there. The OP wasn't bashing Apple at all, and even if it was, comparing someone who doesn't like a company's practices with a racist is just .

[the stranger]

I've never even bashed Apple. Yes, in other threads I have criticized a number of their practices. But, I don't have any use for blanket bashing them as a company.

 

And yes, I've got plenty of criticism regarding the current administration. And it has everything to do with their actions and absolutely nothing to do with anybody's skin color. I leveled all the same criticisms at the previous administration and all the preceding ones all the back to Reagan. But it seems that now if I show concern for the same issues I did when Bush Jr. was the at the wheel, I'm a racist.

 

Feel free to try and paint me with whatever broad brush the media puppets gave you. I'm sure it's a hell of a lot easier to to try smear somebody than counter the facts.

[blue2blue]

I`m convinced that people who start these threads (the ones that bash Apple directly or indirectly) are the same ones who can`t believe we have a US President who isn`t white.

I'm not sure there's such a direct correlation, Ernest. I've been accused of bashing Apple a few times (mostly due to my concerns about what I've seen as their efforts to undercut the open software paradigm as well as their heavy handed politicking, distortions and deceptions about the HTML5 standards process) and not only do I believe there's a non-white president, I voted for him enthusiastically and will do it again when I have the chance.

 

 

 

You don't have to go very far -- at all -- to find some people who are both hardcore Apple partisans and also hard-core anti-Obama types. Just like there are plenty of others who are supporters.

 

Honestly, I just don't see a correlation and such facile but unsupported claims rather cloud several issues.

 

[blue2blue]

More than a stretch.

 

And, whatever Ernest intended, I can see how someone who didn't know Ernest or other parties might assume that's precisely the intended implication.

[mfergel]

So what the heck has Gibson been thinking with some their resent releases????

[Anderton]

I leveled all the same criticisms at the previous administration and all the preceding ones all the back to Reagan.

 

Oh, so you admit you hate white people too? Racist!!

 

Actually, if I had to paint you with a particular brush, I'd say you're anti-stupidity. Which is okay with me

 

And I totally "got" that the purpose of thread was to relate the article to artistic endeavors, and whether, say, you should or should not pander to what a focus group says about your particular audience. I thought that was definitely worthy of discussion. And I thought my post about Apple capitalizing on what came before was a response to your premise - for example, Paul Simon re-packaging African highlife, or the Police re-packaging reggae. Or the Stones or Zeppelin re-packaging the blues, for that matter. All of them had greater commercial success than the people they re-packaged, just like Apple.

[Anderton]

I read Ernest's response and in his defense, I think he was drawing a parallel with intransigence between the two types of posters. I don't think he was saying Apple-bashers are racists, but that the impulse that causes people to bash Apple is the same impulse that causes people not to accept Obama's race - and that impulse isn't about racism, but holding to an opinion and not letting go.

 

That said, I still don't agree with how Ernest saw the thread. But I don't think his response was about calling anyone a rascist.

[Lee Flier]

 

And I totally "got" that the purpose of thread was to relate the article to artistic endeavors, and whether, say, you should or should not pander to what a focus group says about your particular audience. I thought that was definitely worthy of discussion. And I thought my post about Apple capitalizing on what came before was a response to your premise - for example, Paul Simon re-packaging African highlife, or the Police re-packaging reggae. Or the Stones or Zeppelin re-packaging the blues, for that matter. All of them had greater commercial success than the people they re-packaged, just like Apple.

 

 

This is true, but I think it's also important to note that they didn't achieve that success by pandering to a particular "target market;" they really didn't need to check with anybody, they were convinced that they had something compelling that people would want to listen to. And they were right.

 

Of course, for every Stones/Police/Paul Simon/Apple/whoever there are lots of other people who think they have something compelling and the public doesn't agree. So, some try to hedge their bets by pandering to a specific market and listening to focus groups and all that. And there's no doubt some people succeed by doing that, but are the products they create really any better? Pretty rarely.

[Anderton]

This is true, but I think it's also important to note that they didn't achieve that success by pandering to a particular "target market;" they really didn't need to check with anybody, they were convinced that they had something compelling that people would want to listen to. And they were right.

 

Which again follows the Apple parallel.

 

Some try to hedge their bets by pandering to a specific market and listening to focus groups and all that. And there's no doubt some people succeed by doing that, but are the products they create really any better? Pretty rarely.

 

Depends on what you think of, say, the Brill Building writers. I don't know for sure, but I think the reason why their pandering worked was because the writers were basically the same kind of people they were writing for

[Geoff Grace]

To say that President Obama isn't white just isn't true, unless "white" is defined the rigid, old-fashioned way as European descent only, with no trace of any other genetic material.

 

If that's the case, then I'd bet we've already (unknowingly) had a president who isn't white. In fact, I'd bet that a large percentage of Americans we consider as white are by that definition not "purely" white.

 

While it's healing to think of President Obama as our first African American president, it's also a sign of the future to think of him as our first obviously multiethnic president.

 

With an ever increasing percentage of Americans of mixed ethnicity coming into being, we are finally becoming a true melting pot as a society.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[brianbotkiller]

 

hey it works for digidesign.

 

 

 

DING!

[samtrips]

I read something once about here in the UK, BT (British Telecom, the phone company) were offered the rights by the government to look after mobile/cellphone numbers like they do for household telephones. This was some time in the early 80s I think - I'm not sure when all the privatisation actually occurred, later on I suppose but anyway - they would have had sole control of the market had they taken up the option.

 

They conducted a huge survey and most people surveyed said they wouldn't bother using mobile phones, they didn't see themselves needing such a product. So BT passed on what would have ended up being a MASSIVE cash cow.

[UstadKhanAli]

To say that President Obama isn't white just isn't true, unless "white" is defined the rigid, old-fashioned way as European descent only , with no trace of any other genetic material. If that's the case, then I'd bet we've already (unknowingly) had a president who isn't white. In fact, I'd bet that a large percentage of Americans we consider as white are by that definition not "purely" white. While it's healing to think of President Obama as our first African American president, it's also a sign of the future to think of him as our first obviously multiethnic president. With an ever increasing percentage of Americans of mixed ethnicity coming into being, we are finally becoming a true melting pot as a society. Best, Geoff

 

[Anderton]

With an ever increasing percentage of Americans of mixed ethnicity coming into being, we are finally becoming a true melting pot as a society.

 

Once you have to start asking people for their ethnicity to verify that you're hating them for the right reasons, it gets REALLY complicated...

 

I although I suppose we're starting to see the birth of "tech racism." Like if something comes out with a white case and an Apple logo, some people automatically swoon over it, and some people hate it...maybe it's just human nature to "judge books by their covers."