Hacker News Reader

Comment by hyperpallium2 | Hacker News Reader

Isn't this ordinary commoditization? Provided Apple keeps innovating, they'll keep ahead. They have a head start, and innovatiin is their corporate organizing principle, from hiring to advertizing. They leave commodity profits on the table.

The danger is if China has a monopoly on know-how, i.e. if it's not a "commodity". But that doesn't seem to be the case.

However, one day, the iphone will be "good enough", and customers won't pay extra for further innovations... and unless other product lines or new ones (glasses? cars? others?) catch fire, Apple will settle down to become like Sony.

View on HN

The commodification argument. People have been saying the iPhone is good enough for a decade so far (in fact from before it even came out) and there's no sign of their losing their grip on the high end of the market. In fact this has been said generally about Apple computers since the 80s at least. Hence Apple's unofficial corporate slogan, "Proudly going out of business since 1976".

The fact is nobody even tries to do the level of integration between software and hardware that Apple does. It's hard to compete with an opponent when you don't understand what they are doing, or why they are doing it, or why it works and it's very clear their competitors don't understand any of those things.

As long as the competition sit on their hands following the 'theoretically' ideal business 101 commodification strategy, which hasn't worked for 40 years now, it will continue to not work. But here we are, generations of business managers at Apple's competitors have come and gone and the wait them out strategy keeps losing.

It is also partly marketing. Apple has a lot of other pieces of the puzzle like privacy and racial equality and other socio-political issues well rounded up.

Loyal Apple fans and customers really like to identify with these principles.

Apple does this really well and most Chinese companies are transactional in nature and have been adversely affected by many political and humanitarian issues that are part of their ethos.

I find it hard to believe that people are choosing Apple products over competitors because of anything to do with "racial equality". Especially since most of the components are manufactured in China, therefore by buying an Apple product (or basically any other piece of modern consumer electronics), you're helping to fund a racist ethnostate that's currently committing genocide.

What has Apple done to promote racial equality beyond the same vague performative gestures as every other major Western corporation?

Seems like to many people making nice statements about racial equality and donating money to black only initiatives is enough.

Working with actual genocidal governments is fine though, I mean it's what you say that matters, not what you do.

It's worth noting that 80% of Samsung smartphones are manufactured in Vietnam these days. Something people often forget even in today's geopolitical environment.

I wish Samsung used that fact in their marketing, I think it would really play well.

I’m curious how most Americans feel about Vietnam. Yes, it’s been 50 years, but the war was a huge part of a decade of internal turmoil and a pretty significant defeat for our military.

Samsung may feel that it’s risky to trade on that name in the U.S. market.

Vietnam might not be as bad as China but it still doesn't exactly have a stellar human rights record.

Acyutally, according to TFA, it's the whole ecology of supply chains in one place (an infrastructure) that is difficult to replicate.

Perhaps similar to silicon valley, with investors and many kinds of skilled labour, all in one place.

It's ironic that you make that comparison to silicon valley because silicon valley was the progenitor of these supply chains.

If the supply chains can move across the ocean once then surely they can move back again.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com