Apple does not innovate, Cook makes sense


In 2012, Wang Xing, founder and CEO of the US Mission, said in an interview with China Business News: “Defining innovation, or understanding the gap between us and the United States, I think so: innovation is to solve problems better.When the environment is the same and the needs are the same, there is no need to innovate again; but when users have different needs, we need to use different methods.” Wang Xing was a typical entrepreneur of C2C (Copy 2 China), which imitated the United States.Facebook, Twitter and Groupon founded the intranet, the rice network and the US group.Today, the US group has a market value of 53.1 billion US dollars, becoming a super platform for local life services in China.However, it is ironic that Wang Xing believed that the “innovation difference between China and the United States” was reversed today. In the mouth of Apple, the head of Apple, which was once regarded as the benchmark of innovation, we heard a similar statement.Cook may not be giving reasons for Apple not to innovate, but from his remarks we can find out why Apple is no longer innovative.Cook Innovation On September 11, Apple released three new iPhones. The product information is exactly the same as the previous rumors. More lenses bring better photos, stronger processors and more memory.High performance, and more colors.No 5G, no new design, no new features that make people shine, iPhone 11 becomes the first new iPhone that does not increase prices.At the same time that the iPhone was released, Apple also brought an iPad and an Apple Watch, which was lacking.Before the press conference, I thought that Apple could no longer stimulate my change of opportunity; after watching the full conference, my evaluation was: It was really boring.The only thing that surprised people was that Apple paid more and more attention to the Chinese market. After the press conference, Cook was interviewed by Tencent Technology reporters for the first time.In the interview, he talked about Apple’s understanding of innovation. He believes that innovation is not necessarily a change, but a better one: “Innovation is not necessarily a change, innovation is actually to do something better. SoIf the change in appearance can make the function better, or the hand feels better, or make the phone size better, the appearance change can bring many changes, so if it can be better, this willWe have achieved our goal. But if we only change it for change, we think it is wrong. Because if you change it just for change, it is equivalent to dispersing the energy that is focused together, and this kind of energy is originally.Can be used as a real innovation. But now, it has lost the focus of attention, in order to make a difference.” Cook is right, the purpose of innovation is to be better, not to be different, otherwise it will be ruined.The technology industry does have some innovations for innovation, such as folding screen phones and retractable lenses.However, when we return to the word of innovation, we will find that Cook is sophistry.“Being better” is motivation and result, and “innovation” is thinking and process.Plagiarism can be better, optimization can be better, if we only want to get better, we won’t own a car, we will only have a faster carriage.The new generation of iPhones has indeed become better. Every generation of iPhones is better than the previous generation. Consumers are not fools. If they don’t change at all, it’s impossible to change machines. Isn’t every generation of iPhones innovative?The key to our discussion of innovation is whether there is a way to break the rules and make the results better. Such breakthroughs can be new technologies, new designs, new features, and new models.The feature phone is a handheld mobile phone, and Jobs makes the iPhone an open system, no longer has a keyboard, and becoming a smart device is a great innovation.Smart phones make performance better than innovation, and the iPhone’s use of sophisticated fingerprint recognition or face recognition technology to optimize the unlock experience is an innovation.Unfortunately, similar to this “new”, the iPhone 11 has none. In the past few years, the iPhone will be imitated by friends. The iPhone is now imitating friends. For example, the iPhone 11 is the Android phone.Under.Some people say that the theme of the Apple conference should be “To Android”; others said that this time the iPhone sent an Android phone, I don’t know how to copy it.After Steve Jobs left, Apple no longer has any innovations and obviously does not respect the facts. Since then, the iPhone and Apple have a lot of remarkable innovations, such as Apple Watch, such as Face-ID, but this time the innovation is more Jobs.The legacy is either an inertia.The iPhone 11, is a generation of products that are insulated from innovation.How many fruit powders would be unfamiliar when Apple unveiled an unprecedented chart on the processor of Samsung (Samsung and Huawei) at the press conference?Perhaps because it has nothing to do with innovation, Apple’s press conference needs “to pay tribute to innovation.”The path of innovation is indeed, as Cook said, innovation can’t change for change. We can’t equate the difference in form with “changing differently” and innovation. In the technology industry, there are many kinds of innovation.Path, we have a simple arrangement: 1, micro-innovation: small-pointed incremental improvement When it comes to China’s innovation, the first word I think of is “micro-innovation”, which is a lot of Chinese technology companies.Especially the innovative way of Internet companies.In my opinion, the essence of micro-innovation is to follow the rules as a whole and to innovate in some local details.Typical case: QQ is not the first IM, and most of Tencent’s businesses have precedents.Tencent can achieve the ultimate user experience in some details, with one or two small features to win the opponent.Xiaomi does not have its own operating system, but is based on Android custom MIUI. When imitating the main experience of iOS and other systems, it has made some micro-innovation, such as unlocking method – this is also the innovative way of most ROM.Who is the micro-innovation, and there is a lot of different opinions. One kind of saying is that the media is wrong with the people. There is another saying that Zhou Hongyi proposed that in his view, micro-innovation is about user experience innovation, just grab andDo a good job, you can impress the user’s heart.Micro-innovation did the following: 1. Standing on the shoulders of giants.Significantly improved efficiency, time savings, and less chance of error, so I think it can be called “imitation after innovation.”2. Reduce innovation costs.Micro-innovation does not violate intellectual property protection, and at most bears moral blame.It only changes a certain point in the local area, innovation failure will not affect the overall situation, but also can run small steps, achieve a certain point to the extreme, and achieve a “single point breakthrough.”3. Compatible with user experience.Micro-innovation does not significantly change the product’s existing experience, users do not need to re-learn, it is a kind of “gradual improvement”, is a gentle and innovative way.This innovative approach is low risk and fast, and is suitable for large companies.Although some people say that this kind of innovation is “pseudo-innovation”, it is still favored by big companies. Tencent has achieved great success through this model. WeChat has become the benchmark of App innovation today, whether it is public number, small program, WeChat payment, Jiugongge.It is a major innovation in the world, and even Zuckerberg has publicly stated that it is too late to learn WeChat.2. Destructive innovation: Contrary to the gradual improvement of micro-innovation, the destructive innovation model emphasizes fundamental, holistic and model innovation.Destructive innovation means creating a new market and value chain, a new alternative to the old model, so it is also called “disruptive innovation”.The creator of the theory of disruptive innovation is Professor Harley Kristin of Harvard Business School, and the professor has a concept that is better known: the innovator’s dilemma.The root cause of big companies’ difficulty in innovation is that policy makers have been making wise decisions in the past to ensure that dozens of seniors are prosperous, but historical success has become a burden and it is difficult to meet destructive innovation.The most typical destructive innovation case in China is 360 free antivirus.By freeing anti-virus, 360 later came to the fore, destroying the old security market, and Kaspersky, Rising and other veteran players were eliminated. It is difficult for these players to follow up on free anti-virus. It is too late to follow up.Similarly, Xiaomi’s Internet mobile phone model, Taobao’s free mode, and Uber’s shared economic model are all radically changed from the model to subvert the old market.This kind of innovation requires huge risks for mature companies. For small businesses, it is low-cost or even the only way to eat.In people’s intuitive impressions, this innovation is the real innovation.”Digital Survival” author Nicholas Ponti has explicitly opposed micro-innovation in The Big Talk: “Progressive improvement is the enemy of innovation, this is a disease. In the past 50 years, there have been many major technologies, butIn the last 4 or 5 years, progressive improvement has become the mainstream, which has produced many good products, good companies, but this gradual improvement has hindered the pace of innovation.” Micro-innovation and subversive innovation are often contradictory.Appeared in the same company.In the early stage of 360, success was achieved through destructive innovation, but the follow-up switched to micro-innovation. Destructive innovation may only be one time. Micro-innovation can come every day; Xiaomi, micro-innovation in products, but destructive in business modelInnovation, business model is easier to innovate than products, and does not need to change user habits; Tencent, initially QQ, WeChat and other products are micro-innovation, but then there are a lot of subversive innovations, such as the public number.The smaller the company and the faster the development, the more pro-destructive innovation; the bigger the company, the slower the development, the more micro-innovation.3. Edge innovation: From edge to center edge innovation is the innovative way advocated by Kevin Kelly, the author of Out of Control. It has the same effect as destructive innovation, but emphasizes the source of innovation, not the process and result.Kevin Kelly believes: “The commonality of edge innovation: low quality, high risk, low profit, small market, not confirmed by the market, it is precisely because these commonalities make the edge of innovation within large companies relatively difficultMany of the disruptive innovations are actually generated from the outside, and in external innovations, the dominant players are a large number of emerging startups that were initially ignored by big companies. “Edge-based innovation makes today’s non-mainstreamTomorrow becomes mainstream. Today’s non-mainstream technologies are often small companies. Some of them will be potential destroyers of big companies. They are always gray rhinos. Once the time is ripe, they will emerge.At the edge of the sinking market, the focus of aerial drones in Dajiang has not entered the mainstream vision for many years. Today, the headline in 2012 is doing the recommendation algorithm for thousands of people, and the rise occurred in the last three years.Large companies take precautions, invest in some small emerging companies, or adopt an internal entrepreneurial system, in order to establish an “extra-legal place” to allow marginal innovation to occur internally. WeChat generated under the horse racing system is an example, according to the normal path WeChatSuch a product should have been born in the MIG of the roots of Miao, and was eventually born in Guangyan, 100 kilometers away.4, cottage-style innovation: for the cottage is the name of the cottage culture is “anti-authoritative, counter-mainstream and carnival, deconstructive, anti-intellectual and post-modern representation of the subculture of the phenomenon of mass culture.” In the eyes of some radicals,The cottage itself is an innovation, especially in the hardware industry.On the one hand, it has greatly shortened the product development cycle, bypassing the red tape of government approvals, and quickly meeting user needs, rude but effective, such as cottage TV boxes; on the other hand, the cottage industry makes the whole market faster, smartphones can doThe price of less than 300 yuan is even lower. The pirated Office allows Chinese people to have computer office conditions earlier.This kind of innovation model may be wrong, because one party will be hurt, but it is the most efficient and effective. Whether it is the Internet or hardware products, there is always a “pious imitator” for excellent products. Why is the cottage not?One is?Because if there is no commercial conflict of interest, why do people reinvent the wheel?If the side of the cottage is open to share, it will go to the “open source model” recognized by the industry.Apple, once a representative of disruptive innovation, can always launch amazing technology products from generation to generation, whether it is the ultra-thin MacBook that Steve Jobs took from the kraft envelope, or the iPhone that later laid the foundation of the mobile Internet.In the great innovation of the history book, the iPhone has also had many innovative products in the past ten years. The iPhone 4 brings the retina screen; the iPhone 4s brings the voice assistant Siri; the iPhone 5s brings the fingerprint recognition; iPhone6s brings 3D Touch; iPhone 7 brings a linear motor; iPhone X brings a Face ID.iPhone 11, pawn.According to Cook’s words, the iPhone 11 is still innovative, and the experience has indeed become better. If it is innovation, it can only be regarded as a gradual innovation. The author of “Digital Survival” by Nicholas Ponti was held in Baidu Baijia.The Big Talk said: “Progressive improvement is the enemy of innovation. This is a disease. In the past 50 years, there have been many major technologies, but in the last 4 or 5 years, progressive improvement has become mainstream.A lot of good products, good companies have been born, but this gradual improvement has hindered the pace of innovation.” Apple is a typical case.The consequences of not innovating From the development of technology giants such as Apple, IBM, Microsoft, Huawei and Alibaba, technology companies must have a long-term foundation. The most important thing is to do the following: The first is innovation.The essence of science and technology is to use technology to solve real-world problems. The essence of innovation is to better solve the same problem.If newcomers can solve problems better, they can shake the old market with stable structure. If technology companies do not continue to innovate, they cannot maintain their market position, just as functional phones are replaced by smart phones and text messages are replaced by WeChat.Well-behaved technology companies don’t talk about innovation, but they do it in action. Innovation is not unconventional, but a better way to solve user problems – many products that look different./Features/designs are of little value. Only products that solve problems better in different ways are truly innovative products.Apple, which was once very innovative, is no longer innovative.The iPhone 11 is not a better solution to the problem. It is not without a better experience. It is not a better way. A better way is unprecedented. It can provide a reference for the industry.The second is technology.Only by constantly investing in technology, especially basic technology, technology companies have innovative raw materials that can be left unchecked.There are two types of attitudes toward technology. One type focuses on research. For example, Baidu, Huawei and other giants are increasing their investment in basic technologies every year. Many technologies will not produce commercial value in the short term, but they will produce results.One type of application, such as Apple, Tencent, Netease and Alibaba, is good at applying mature technology to actual products, but now both types are learning from each other. Alibaba emphasizes basic technology, and Baidu is increasingly emphasizing application scenarios.The third is culture.Innovation must be sustainable, not relying on one person, because no one can always go with the company. Only by transforming innovation into a temperament, spirit or gene of the enterprise can we ensure that the company always has the ability to innovate, notBy relying on the founder or a manager, to achieve this, only through culture to internalize.Apple can have today’s performance after Steve Jobs leaves, can launch epoch-making products such as iPhone X, not because of the vast majority of professional managers Cook, but Steve Jobs to make taste and innovation into Apple culture, passed down, this is a cultural heritage,Although Steve Jobs has passed away, we can still see the shadow of Steve Jobs in today’s Apple. Apple has lived up to expectations and brought new products in the post-Steve Jobs era such as iPhone X. The market value has exceeded $1 trillion.These three points are often complementary: only strong enough technology can support the realization of innovative ideas. Only a culture with innovative genes can provide soil for innovation, and then stimulate employees’ creativity and dare to invest in technology.As long as a technology company has done the above three points, or some of them, it has long-term competitiveness.In a long enough time horizon, they will continue to rise with the development of technology and the rise of the economy, and achieve a long-term foundation.However, after the release of the iPhone X, Apple’s innovation, technology and culture have changed significantly in the past two years.The iPhone XS and iPhone 11 no longer have any innovations, directly related to technology and culture.For technology, Apple has always adopted the idea of ​​using third-party mature technology, and R&D investment accounts for the bottom of the technology giant. In Cook’s words, Apple is good at integration.However, due to the lack of autonomous network core technology, Apple has fallen behind on 5G, and it is likely to fall behind in the future. This time, the iPhone did not launch the 5G version. The reason that Cook told Tencent Technology is: “At present, (5G) still hasA little ahead, we studied the market and found that the entire market, whether it is the infrastructure or the chip is not mature enough, is not enough to launch a high-quality product.” Cook believes that 5G is immature, many problems need to be resolved, etc.Other companies have solved it. Apple has come to harvest again. The touch screen, fingerprint recognition and FaceID that the iPhone introduced before are all such ideas. It is not the first thing, only the best, Apple has done it.Many people say that Cook said that Apple is very confident in the 5G era.However, this is a huge lie.Let’s take a look at what Apple did when it was 4G: 4G was released in China in December 2013, but Apple’s iPhone 5 released in 2012 has already supported 4G early (National Bank does not support it). In 2013, iPhone 5s started supporting.4G.Was the 4G network ready at the time?Is the 4G industry mature?No.5G iPhone can’t come out, there is only one reason: the technology is uncertain, the core is Apple’s lack of core.A13 emphasizes performance. The Huawei Kirin 990 and Samsung Exynos 980 released a few days ago have successfully integrated 5G and NPU (AI processor) into SoC. If Apple wants to make 5G iPhone, who wants the chip?You see, it is obvious that the technology is not good. When it came to Cook, it became an immature industry. Cook stressed that the iPhone 11 was developed four years ahead of time to show Apple’s forward-looking layout, but Huawei developed 5G, but ten years ago.If Apple believes that 5G is not important, it will not acquire the Intel baseband division this year. Cook said one set and Apple made one.It is difficult for Apple to continue to innovate and it seems to be a fate.Andreessen Horowitz founding partner Ben Horowitz pointed out in “The Three Characteristics of the Great Founders”: “Professional managers are experts in how to maximize profits and reduce operating costs, but when looking for and discovering new product cycles, theyNot good at it. It is much easier for a founder to learn to maximize the product cycle than to let a professional manager learn how to discover new product cycles.” Discovering a new product cycle means innovation, and innovation is the core driver of technology companies.If you don’t create a new product cycle, but maintain the original product cycle, it will be replaced by more innovative products, and this replacement cycle is quite fast in the technology industry.Professional managers are better at extending the product life cycle. This is Cook’s current efforts. However, how long can Jobs’ core product life cycle be extended?It is an important issue.The essence of technology companies is to solve the problems of the business world through new technologies, inventing a new product to solve the problem, but can not stop because of the new technology, products and models to better solve the problem.Therefore, technology companies have always been continually investing in technology to create new products and better solve problems.If Apple can’t do it, it’s only a matter of time before it falls.In 2014, Apple’s chief designer and design soul Jonathan Yves admitted in an interview with the British media “Sunday Times”: “If one day Apple loses the innovative genes, I will leave this job for more than 20 times.Year of the company.” In 2019, Jony Ive announced his departure from Apple. Prior to this, he had been with Apple for 27 years.Welcome to add luochaozhuli (Remarks: Enter the group) to share the exchange.Pay attention to Luo Chao channel (luochaotmt) and read more exciting content..