Article: How Apple Does It
Article Source: http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1118384,00.html
According to the article, Apple was successfully able to revolutionize technology and capture the consumer market by its diversity -- by creating its own hardware (ie. Macbook laptops), its own operating systems (ie. Mac OS X), its software (ie. Safari web browser), and consumer-friendly devices that connected and facilitated the use of these devices (ie. iTunes store). As quoted from the article, "if you smooshed together Microsoft, Dell, and Sony...you'd get something like the Apple technological biosphere." Common sense would indicate that producing so many different branches would cause inefficiency and that companies might be better off specializing in specific pieces. However, in the instance of Apple, Steve Jobs argued that by taking all the steps under wing, he was able to push for specific innovations and make sure that he saw his vision the whole way through. He gave his explanation through a story, which he called "The Parable of the Concept Car:" the concept for a car design looks great in the beginning, but after it is sent to a different engineering team who declares it impossible, it gets worse. Then after it is sent to the manufacturers who also doubt its potential, the product gets worse.
At Apple, instead of having separate stages of sequential development, the teams work together throughout and fluidly collaborate in all steps towards production. Workers at Apple boast that their meetings are efficient and everyone is on the same page. Moreover, with Jobs in control at all stages, he was able to be nitpicky and argue for exactly what he wanted. The article was written in 2005, when the iPod nano first came out. As a tiny, shiny, and compact piece of metal that played music and with easy-to-use buttons, the iPod swept the markets like wildfire. Jobs fought for the iPod’s blueprints, designed its complements, and oversaw the entire process until it reached success.
The resounding theme of the article was that Apple's approach at integration was what made it successful. However, the author conceded that other companies like Microsoft, which focused on operating systems, were also able to reach the pinnacle of success by specialization. It was a combination of integration and control, in Apple’s case, that made it so user-friendly and popular.
Article Source: http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1118384,00.html
According to the article, Apple was successfully able to revolutionize technology and capture the consumer market by its diversity -- by creating its own hardware (ie. Macbook laptops), its own operating systems (ie. Mac OS X), its software (ie. Safari web browser), and consumer-friendly devices that connected and facilitated the use of these devices (ie. iTunes store). As quoted from the article, "if you smooshed together Microsoft, Dell, and Sony...you'd get something like the Apple technological biosphere." Common sense would indicate that producing so many different branches would cause inefficiency and that companies might be better off specializing in specific pieces. However, in the instance of Apple, Steve Jobs argued that by taking all the steps under wing, he was able to push for specific innovations and make sure that he saw his vision the whole way through. He gave his explanation through a story, which he called "The Parable of the Concept Car:" the concept for a car design looks great in the beginning, but after it is sent to a different engineering team who declares it impossible, it gets worse. Then after it is sent to the manufacturers who also doubt its potential, the product gets worse.
At Apple, instead of having separate stages of sequential development, the teams work together throughout and fluidly collaborate in all steps towards production. Workers at Apple boast that their meetings are efficient and everyone is on the same page. Moreover, with Jobs in control at all stages, he was able to be nitpicky and argue for exactly what he wanted. The article was written in 2005, when the iPod nano first came out. As a tiny, shiny, and compact piece of metal that played music and with easy-to-use buttons, the iPod swept the markets like wildfire. Jobs fought for the iPod’s blueprints, designed its complements, and oversaw the entire process until it reached success.
The resounding theme of the article was that Apple's approach at integration was what made it successful. However, the author conceded that other companies like Microsoft, which focused on operating systems, were also able to reach the pinnacle of success by specialization. It was a combination of integration and control, in Apple’s case, that made it so user-friendly and popular.


