Apple Will Last 100 Years

[stridemat]

The Economist reports that IBM will be celebrating its centenary next week. The article goes onto suggest how IBM lasted this long:

IBM’s secret is that it is built around an idea that transcends any particular product or technology. Its strategy is to package technology for use by businesses. At first this meant making punch-card tabulators, but IBM moved on to magnetic-tape systems, mainframes, PCs, and most recently services and consulting. Building a company around an idea, rather than a specific technology, makes it easier to adapt when industry “platform shifts” occur

More interestingly than this, the article goes on to look at the tech giants of today to ask the question "which [...] look best placed to live to 100?"

Apple

The most obvious example is Apple (founded in 1976). Like IBM, it had a near-death experience in the 1990s, and it is dangerously dependent on its founder, Steve Jobs. But it has a powerful organising idea: take the latest technology, package it in a simple, elegant form and sell it at a premium price. Apple has done this with personal computers, music players, smartphones and tablet computers, and is now moving into cloud-based services (see article). Each time it has grabbed an existing technology and produced an easier-to-use and prettier version than anyone else. This approach can be applied to whatever technology is flavour of the month: Apple has already shifted from PCs to mobile devices.

Amazon
Dell
Oracle
Microsoft

Microsoft (1975) is hugely dependent on Windows, which is its answer to everything. But software for a PC may not be the best choice to run inside a phone or a car. All these firms are wedded to specific products, not deeper philosophies, and are having trouble navigating technological shifts.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Soon Apple will take over the world.

 

[Steve121178]

Soon Apple will take over the world.

 

[maflynn]

Its foolish to project any company to lasting 50 years never mind 100 years. Look at how quickly apple was on top of the computing market back in the 80s to almost disappearing in the 90s.

Sure apple has more money in the bank then many small nations and they are pointed in the right direction, but it only takes one bad CEO to tank the company. Which is possibly why investors get nervous when they talk about Job's replacement.

 

[velocityg4]

Its foolish to project any company to lasting 50 years never mind 100 years. Look at how quickly apple was on top of the computing market back in the 80s to almost disappearing in the 90s.

Sure apple has more money in the bank then many small nations and they are pointed in the right direction, but it only takes one bad CEO to tank the company. Which is possibly why investors get nervous when they talk about Job's replacement.

Steve Jobs probably has a group of engineers that are working on an iSteve. To make all decisions for the company in the future.

 

[maflynn]

Steve Jobs probably has a group of engineers that are working on an iSteve. To make all decisions for the company in the future.

No question that Steve built up a strong and talented core of leaders but after he's gone, there's no guarantee where apple will head 10 years after his departure or 20 years etc.

I don't want to sound like a downer, just pointing out while apple is firing on all cylinders, has a boat load of cash and has some great products. We cannot say that they are positioned to last a 100 years.

 

[Bernard SG]

If there's only one tech company set to last 100 years, then it's Apple. The nature and philosophy may change drastically over time but the brand is strong at a point that is almost terrifying. It's everywhere.
If you compare to Microsoft & Windows, Windows and Office are used by much more people than Apple stuff, however, they're invisible. Apple's logo seems to be omnipresent despite a more modest user-base.

 

[Stella]

If there's only one tech company set to last 100 years, then it's Apple. The nature and philosophy may change drastically over time but the brand is strong at a point that is almost terrifying. It's everywhere.
If you compare to Microsoft & Windows, Windows and Office are used by much more people than Apple stuff, however, they're invisible. Apple's logo seems to be omnipresent despite a more modest user-base.

The same thing was probably said about Sony too... and look at them today.

Markets / Trends / competitors change too quickly to say for certain a company will be around / still dominant in 20, 50 or 100 years time. Consumers are flickle, today's fashion item is the next decades sad item.

 

[LethalWolfe]

If there's only one tech company set to last 100 years, then it's Apple. The nature and philosophy may change drastically over time but the brand is strong at a point that is almost terrifying. It's everywhere.

One tech company besides IBM, right?

You can't rely on branding alone because consumers are so fickle. I think the basic nature and philosophy have to stay the same in that you are selling a service or experience, not a particular product. The physical product you make, whether it's an iPod or a server, should only be seen as a means to deliver that service/experience.

For example, Dell is a company that sells computers and is hurting now that computer sales are hurting. Apple, on the other hand, is a company selling a 'computing experience'.


Lethal

 

[vincenz]

Well, only 65 more years to go, right?

 

[ratzzo]

At its current rate of growth, I'd say 100 years is nothing. We'll see what happens when good ol' SJ is forced to resign as CEO. That'll be Apple's big challenge: to overcome the gigantic shadow of its main figure and brain.

If there's only one tech company set to last 100 years, then it's Apple. The nature and philosophy may change drastically over time but the brand is strong at a point that is almost terrifying. It's everywhere.
If you compare to Microsoft & Windows, Windows and Office are used by much more people than Apple stuff, however, they're invisible. Apple's logo seems to be omnipresent despite a more modest user-base.

It's because of Apple's marketing plan. You think every time a Mac appears on a TV series they haven't been previously paid for by Apple? Every TV series has Macs in them, and seeing how almost everyone watches these, they are having pretty much continuous ads. Also, the fact that all their products wear an Apple logo is also a way of advertising-marketing.

Windows's strength lies in software. Because Apple is mostly hardware, you see Apple logos everywhere. But I can assure you there are five windows copies per every apple logo you see out there

 

[*LTD*]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple will last long as consumers perceive value in the brand.

Going on that, it appears Apple's got the next 5-7 years locked up, at the very least.

 

[Bernard SG]

The same thing was probably said about Sony too... and look at them today.

Markets / Trends / competitors change too quickly to say for certain a company will be around / still dominant in 20, 50 or 100 years time. Consumers are flickle, today's fashion item is the next decades sad item.

Sony while I agree it used to be quite strong, was nowhere near the Apple phenomenon we're observing currently. Sony has always had strong competitors and some brands that were even ahead of them in terms of quality and technology but were also much more expensive.

And by the way, Sony is not exactly dead, perhaps it will last 100 more years too; Sony is not doomed yet, they can manage a come back but they need to be focused.

It's because of Apple's marketing plan. You think every time a Mac appears on a TV series they haven't been previously paid for by Apple? Every TV series has Macs in them, and seeing how almost everyone watches these, they are having pretty much continuous ads. Also, the fact that all their products wear an Apple logo is also a way of advertising-marketing.

Windows's strength lies in software. Because Apple is mostly hardware, you see Apple logos everywhere. But I can assure you there are five windows copies per every apple logo you see out there

Well yes, that's what I'm saying, about Microsoft v. Apple. It's about visibility. But that's extremely powerful and significant for sustainability.

It's not only about seeing Mac in TV series -and news and talk shows and everything on TV) - as well as in Starbucks where you could be brought to believe there are no other computers on the Globe, it's also the iPod in its different flavors, the iPhone and now the iPad that are basically omnipresent in everyday life.

Marketing is only a part of the story. If those products were average, Apple wouldn't be where it is.

 

[*LTD*]

It's because of Apple's marketing plan.

Marketing only sustains you for so long. If there's nothing substantial, consistent, and desirable at the core of your products, you won't last.

A lot of people here can't seem to wrap their head around the fact that one company can be that successful nearly all the time. Quarter for quarter, year after year.

But it is possible, and it's happening as we type on this forum. Look at what Apple does product-wise, in development and execution, Apple's interfaces - how they work, the philosophy behind their design decisions, and then look at what everyone else does. The differences are like night and day.

 

[FX120]

There are several big Asian manufacturers coming up on their centennial. Samsung, Toshiba, Hitachi were all founded in the 1930's, and Panasonic was founded in 1918.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

That article sounds really biased. Anyone who did any knowledge on Microsoft would know that they have embedded OS's for everything from PoS machines to cars, phones, and PC's.. They're more prevalent than Apple.

 

[*LTD*]

That article sounds really biased. Anyone who did any knowledge on Microsoft would know that they have embedded OS's for everything from PoS machines to cars, phones, and PC's.. They're more prevalent than Apple.

POS is right.

But any POS system can be traded out for a different one and no one would care. Zzzz . . .

 

[xlii]

Its foolish to project any company to lasting 50 years never mind 100 years. Look at how quickly apple was on top of the computing market back in the 80s to almost disappearing in the 90s.

Sure apple has more money in the bank then many small nations and they are pointed in the right direction, but it only takes one bad CEO to tank the company. Which is possibly why investors get nervous when they talk about Job's replacement.

For all we know in 100 years tech companies may be as relevant as companies that make accessories for horses are today.

 

[maflynn]

For all we know in 100 years tech companies may be as relevant as companies that make accessories for horses are today.

that's my point

 

[LethalWolfe]

That article sounds really biased. Anyone who did any knowledge on Microsoft would know that they have embedded OS's for everything from PoS machines to cars, phones, and PC's.. They're more prevalent than Apple.

While this is true MS is still anchored around Windows and Office. While MS has branched out in many areas (industrial, mobile, entertainment, etc.,) the core of the company hasn't changed much and the looming question is how fast, and how effectively, can the giant ship that is MS adjust its course. MS won the 'pc' war, but how quickly can they embrace and adapt to the future instead of fighting it?

POS is right.

But any POS system can be traded out for a different one and no one would care. Zzzz . . .

I'll assume you've never worked in retail if you think all Point of Sale systems are equal.

For all we know in 100 years tech companies may be as relevant as companies that make accessories for horses are today.

That's kinda the point of the article.

If you build a company and your perspective is that you make accessories for horses then your company will inevitably close its doors once horses get replaced by cars and other machines. If you build a company and your perspective is that you make accessories for personal transportation, which currently centers around horses, then your company has the opportunity to remain viable as long as people need to get from point A to point B.

Technology companies in some form will always be around but what changes is the product being sold.


Lethal

 

[rovex]

I never understood why Sony have yet to release an Iphone killer like Samsung, they are more than capable of doing so and the brand's heritage only accentuates this sentiment.

 

[maflynn]

I never understood why Sony have yet to release an Iphone killer like Samsung, they are more than capable of doing so and the brand's heritage only accentuates this sentiment.

I hate the term iPhone killer, I thought that term was dead.

Sony/Ericsson has made a lot of mis-steps in the mobile market and they admitted this a while back. I think they're trying to regain their footing with some new phones. Not sure how they'll stack up against other android phones or the iPhone.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

I think Apple has to be ready to pounce on the personal home robot industry once it is viable.

Apple has a way of setting consumer expectations in products. Imagine the first line of home robot companies coming out. Only homes with tech savvy teens will get much use out of them. And then picture what Apple will do with it.