Letters to the Editor
-
Is it really Apple that's "not even close"?
I always find it interesting when companies (and others) either intentionally bluff with the polar opposite or unintentionally do so out of psychological impulse. The cheater is always first to accuse others of cheating.
First, it's standard business practice for a market leader to simply deny the existence of a 2nd or 3rd ranked competitor. Even acknowledging their existence empowers them. Historically Microsoft has tended to follow this strategy. When a competitor becomes a meaningful threat, it begins to defy the obvious situation and damages your credibility to continue in that vein so you acknowledge but downplay. That's what you have here.
Second, is the proof that Microsoft should and probably is thinking exactly the opposite. This comes from the dynamics of technology adoption, corporate life phases and the "facts on the ground" in financial statements of the "Wintel" bloc compared to Apple.
It's clear that Wintel PC vendors and Microsoft itself have entered "middle-age" or the region of market technology adoption where cost rather than innovation is the primary focus. The fact that Apple instead remains on the innovating leading edge (as proven by their products, margins and financials) proves hardware commodification need not cause of middle-age. This rightly should scare the Wintel bloc. Controlling one's margins when a competitor can not is probably the most powerful competitive advantage known.
Market share can come and go but Apple's better margins tell the real competitive story.