“All signs point to iPod’s nascent Nano becoming a huge hit. Apple’s iPod is a divergence brand if I ever saw one. And the new Nano enhances Apple’s reputation as the country’s most brilliant exploiter of divergence concepts,” Laura Ries writes for The Origin of Brands. “Divergence products create a new category, have a new name, and perform a single function. Example: Gameboy in handheld games, Palm in handheld computers, Nokia in cellphones, Lexus in luxury Japanese cars, BlackBerry in wireless email.”
“Unlike divergence devices, convergence products try to bring two categories together. Most companies are chasing this dream with products like interactive television, the tablet computer, the TV computer, and the smart phone,” Ries writes. “But even Apple made the error of partnering with Motorola for the ROKR phone which can play iTunes. The early reviews were mostly negative and sales have been dismal. Yet critics still insist that Apple needs to hurry up with a true iPod/phone combo. And that they face a big risk by not going after the iPod-phone market quickly. Even though the ROKR is a failure, critics don’t ever question the validity of the convergence theory but rather insist that product execution is at fault.”
Ries writes, “Wrong. What iPod needs to do is stay away from phones all together [sic]. Animal species don’t combine and neither do product categories. While flying cars, auto boats, interactive television and smart phones capture the imagination of the public, they seldom do well in the marketplace. Think about it. An auto boat at best will only float like a car and drive like a boat. A Nano will beat the combo device every time.”
Full article here.
Unless, of course, Apple produces an iPhone which clips onto the iPod nano or an Apple iPhone into which an iPod nano slips.
Related articles:
If Apple isn’t working on their own iPhone, they’re making a stupid mistake – September 12, 2005
Fortune’s Lewis: Apple iTunes software the only cute thing about Motorola’s ROKR mobile phone – September 21, 2005
Consumer Reports: Apple’s iPod nano ‘sizzles,’ Motorola ROKR mobile phone ‘fizzles’ – September 21, 2005
BBC: Motorola ROKR iTunes mobile phone design ‘feels like yesterday’s phone by UK standards’ – September 17, 2005
Hands on review of Motorola ROKR Apple iTunes mobile phone – September 12, 2005
Motorola ROKR iTunes-enabled mobile phone greeted with cool response – September 12, 2005
Music phones pose no threat to Apple iPod – September 09, 2005
Does Apple need a mobile phone of its own design? – September 09, 2005
USA Today: Motorola ROKR iTunes mobile phone provides ‘snazzy’ first impression – September 08, 2005
NYT’s Pogue: Motorola ROKR iTunes phone ‘great-sounding, reasonably priced and a lot of fun’ – September 08, 2005
Apple’s iPod nano will make competitors whimper, Motorola’s ROKR inexplicably bland – September 07, 2005
Tech pundit Enderle: ‘iPod Nano is a hit,’ Motorola ROKR ‘simply doesn’t have enough Apple in it’ – September 07, 2005
Apple announces Motorola ROKR iTunes phone, Cingular partnership, iTunes 5 – September 07, 2005
Apple, Motorola & Cingular debut world’s first iTunes mobile phone – September 07, 2005
Motorola ROKR Apple iTunes mobile phone availability dates for Europe, North America, and Asia – September 07, 2005
Yeah, Evgeny, you (and I) can – and do – watch movies, listen to music and write comments on MDN with the same computer. But, given a choice, I watch movies on my TV+dvd player and take my iPod+itrip to my living room (and my stereo) when I want to listen to music. My computer doesn’t even come close in comparison. It can do it all, sure, but with some very significant tradeoffs.
Why not a phone that is also a remote? Or a remote that is also a wireless phone? Would rid me of at least one thingy. A stove that is also a boom box? After all, i usually listen to music in my kitchen. Would I be happier? No. These combos sound crazy you say? Are you sure? Really??? The iPod and the mobile phone happen to be “in” things at the same time, and they look similar, so people automatically think that combining them would be the best thing since brie.
Steve Jobs realise that purity of function has a value. That’s why he isn’t even including a radio on the iPod. He hasn’t been much wrong yet, has he?
I HATE CELL PHONES!!! There I said it and now I feel so much better. I see cell phones as electronic dog leashes. I don’t want people to know where I am or what I’m doing 24/7. Nobody damnit!!! Not even my husband.
When I go shopping for food, I don’t want to be disturbed by “Can you pick me up a six-pack?” while I flirting with the stock boy on aisle six. Sheesh!!!
Apple doesn’t need to get into the phone business.
The only solution to the phone I’d like to see:
Bluetooth in the iPod, paired with my phone. When the phone rings, I’ll just hit a button and my music pauses and the phone comes in over the earbuds. For all I care, they can use the same headphones the ROKR uses.
Same idea as the bluetooth headset.
I forgot, I’d like caller ID on my iPod and to be able to dial from my contacts.
I quite agree with you, iDon’t. I have my iPod for myself and my cell phone for others (whether it’s others wanting to contact me or me wanting to contact others). Like you, I’ve also begun developing an allergy to the “the-phone-everywhere-always” syndrome. Kinda like my tv commercial allergy. Junk time allergy.
_I_ actually want some input as to when people can talk to me. My iPod is a way to _increase_ that control, and allow me time that _I’ve_ chosen exactly how to spend. I can go into orbit all by myself listening to Masterplans first and greatest. My phone takes that away. Should just anyone be allowed to interrupt “Crystal Night” during the most orgiastic and deeply moving part? I don’t think so, dude. Maybe it depends on whether you use your iPod for quality listening or just as an extension to junk radio? I dunno …
> MacDailyNews Take: Unless, of course, Apple produces an iPhone
> which clips onto the iPod nano or an Apple iPhone into which an
> iPod nano slips.
Or just be the guy who designs a replacement battery cover for the RAZR to allow a nano to securely attach to it. My naRAZR made with a $14.95 battery cover is still thinner than that ROKR abomination from Motorola.
MW: HAD ….as in Motorola HAD a chance to do it right with the ROKR if they HAD let Apple design it. Now both companies are embarrassed.
ron: No fair, you beat me to it.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”angry” style=”border:0;” />
Okay, so the Jack-ass came from Redmond, i believe.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cheese” style=”border:0;” />
Technology changes paradigms.
I don’t think the ability is there to do the iPhone convergence thing just yet, but is inevitable that one day Apple will be able to an iPhone not much bigger than a Nano.
Then it’s game over, everyone will have to have one.
At that time, when the technology is there, Apple will have to do it or someone else will. I think this is why they did the ROKR, just to stay in touch so they have the expertise to implement anything they like if/when they feel they need to.
IMHO
MDN: “Time”. As “In the fullness of …”
There’s a reason Apple trademarked “iPhone” and why it’s not being used with Motorola’s ROKR phone. The iPhone will come, when Apple is ready. It won’t be an iPod replacement; it won’t be a PDA; but it will be another way to get people to buy Macs and iPods.
Trademarks. Apple (and everybode else) trademarks a lot of things they never use. Partly I imagine for defensive reasons. They wouldn’t want SonyEricsson to do an “iPhone”, would they? Partly just in case. Having said that, of course Apple may decide to do a phone someday, and then iPhone would be the very obvoius name. And I would very likely buy one. Would complement my iPod nicely.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
As for convergence, I’m not convinced. There will be phones that also are mp3 players, of course. But will they be a significant threat to “pure” mp3 players. Not sure about that one. How did the VHS/TV combo pan out? DVD/TV? How many convergent devices do you use? And use preferably for these tasks? And out of all possible convergences? Not many, not many.
Not sure, not sure at all.