”If you are not willing to risk the usual, you will have to settle for the ordinary.”—Jim Rohn
Success is a very unusual term. One person’s success is almost certainly considered by another to be a failure. There are few ways to measure success that everyone would agree on, even when you are talking about Apple products.
While it would be hard to argue the monumental success of the iPod in the early 2000s and the iPhone later in the decade, there are many that would say the iPad has been less than successful. I don’t agree with that assessment.
The problem—if there is one—of having two blockbuster products, back-to-back, is that everyone thinks your next release should be on that same level. The chances of that happening is almost nil.
Even though the iPad sold almost 25 million units in the last fiscal quarter, it’s not up to the 75 million that the iPhone sold. For a lot of people that’s the measure of success, without taking into account that they are completely different products, serving different markets.
So, how will we measure the success of Apple Watch? Will it be pre-order sales? Perhaps, first weekend sales? Number of overall units? How about total quarterly profit? The number of magazine covers it’s on?
The measurement of success will be different for almost everyone. But I don’t believe that any of those are as important as one measure of success that will be a bit more difficult to track: are people still using Apple Watch after three months.
That to me will be the true measure of success for Apple Watch. I have no doubt the initial reviews will be outstanding; I have no doubt pre-order sales will be through the roof; and I have no doubt that Apple will take a significant percentage of the nascent smartwatch market.
What we don’t know is how long people will use Apple Watch.
There will be a percentage of people that will take to the Internet and declare Apple Watch a failure because it was a novelty item. I accept that. While I think many of those people will be missing the big picture, I don’t think Apple Watch is for everyone.
With a $349 starting price tag, Apple Watch will be an attractive purchase for a lot of people outside the tech market. It’s those people that are important to the future of Apple Watch.
Remember back to the iPod and iPhone—it’s when they passed by the tech crowd and into mass market adoption that they truly became iconic products. That’s what Apple Watch has to do, and I think it can.
There will be growing pains with Apple Watch, as there are with any new technology. I don’t expect the watch to be flawless—no product ever is, but it’s up to Apple to make sure the value proposition is there for normal, everyday users.
From what I’ve seen so far of the Apple Watch and iPhone combination, Apple, with help from its developers can do it.
The more people you see wearing Apple Watch one, three, six months after purchasing the device, the more successful it will be. That is a measure of success that will take time, but it’s very important.
Editor’s Note: This story was first published in The Loop Magazine. You can download the magazine free for iPhone and iPad.
“Nascent smartWATCH market” not smartPHONE.
If people are still using it will be a great measure. But I think another great measure of success for us will be if Apple puts out a second revision without panic or desperation.
“Remember back to the iPod and iPhone—it’s when they passed by the tech crowd and into mass market adoption that they truly became iconic products.”
It will most certainly be later revisions of Apple Watch that accomplish this feat. Even with the iPod and the iPhone the very first version weren’t the mass market hits they would eventually become. The first revisions is for us techies. Once the Apple Watch becomes faster, thinner, more refined and 3rd party apps are polished, I have no doubt Apple Watch will have mass market appeal.
I think one of the main problems Apple has is that it deals in such large volume that every product they release is a “success” if you only base that on sales or popularity. The very popularity of their products is actually masking whether or not they are “good,” because good and popular are far from the same thing.
only when the goalposts have been moved. for decades apple-trolls would say, “Apple doesn’t sell many Macs — see, they’re no good!” now that they sell a bajillion products the measure of success has been moved and they say, “Apple sells so many you can’t tell if they’re any good!”
the agenda is the same, the narrative changes slightly.
Eh, Apple hasn’t been afraid to rapidly churn out a new revision, and I think that has more to do with an attitude against caring about looking desperate.
With that said, I don’t think Apple will produce a new revision in some sort of very quick timeframe because A) I don’t think some magical new technology advance would produce a superior model so quickly (unless they saw that story about aluminum batteries and went to town!) and B) a lot of the virtue in a RevB product will be in adapting the watch to how people use it. Apple is in part banking on app developers making the case for Apple Watch for Apple. If it sees how that’s being done, it has a greater incentive to strengthen those use cases.
Even if they do produce a second, publicly different revision quickly — and I agree, they probably won’t — it isn’t necessarily desperation.
I mean, lots of people were pissed at the iPad 4, but it wasn’t a move of desperation.
“From what I’ve seen so far of the Apple Watch and iPhone combination, Apple, with help from its developers can do it.”
You are missing a comma before “can do it”.
Why were people “pissed” at the iPad 4? I know many who did not understand the lightning port, but it was over due for a change from the old 30 pin.
I’m not sure it needs to be “faster” or thinner. What is really needs is a better battery, more power efficient design – so it can be “always on” for days without a worry of needing a recharge – also being water proof to 100m would be nice (or maybe a rugged version of it)… and by always on, I mean the screen should be always on. Maybe Apple could make a dual mode screen – that is super power efficient, but not maybe as good as the tiny color retinal display… and it would switch back & forth seamlessly?
Completely agree. Although from the first reviews it sounds like it could stand to be faster. And let’s be honest that one’s a given, it will get faster. The always on display and 100m waterproofing will prove to be a bigger challenge, I think. But those two features would most likely make this device more appealing to traditional watch wearers.
oye – well being popular and “good” are not always the same thing, though they are related, depending. I mean MS Windows is “popular” or maybe even infamous… yet that does not mean it is much good (though it is mediocre – mediocrity is king of computers!)…
The tables have turned, though – where people like gadgets to simply “work” and Apple has THE eco system to make that happen – as software and hardware are in a “good marriage”… not a bad one (like Win/Tel).
If you see what Jobs said – back in the day – he did want Apple to eventually become like Sony – and if you look at Apple today and maybe Sony 10 or 20 years ago – Apple is that and more (and also less). And that is the thing – Apple and iTunes -for all its problems – is at its core – generally better than most alternatives for most people – though some would never admit this and Apple (or Android or Windows) is never going to be great for everybody – (again some people may never admit this) and my main issue with Windows is they tried to be everything to everyone – on many levels and they often failed more than succeeded, but one was suck with the Windows “solution” because, “hey – its Windows!” or hey its Microsoft!.
The iPad and iPad 2 each had about a year from introduction to discontinuation; the iPad 3 only made it seven months before the iPad 4 was introduced. A lot of people felt that they got less than full year out of their iPad 3. Thus, they were pissed at the iPad 4’s existence.
Silliness, of course. The iPad 3 is still supported, and is still the same iPad as the day it was introduced.
Personally I measure success by usage. So what if Android sells more units. Who is using it and how.
That major companies and schools are buying iPhones and iPads means a lot to me. That Apple gets featured as top accessibility device for non verbals like autistics means a lot to me. That major hospitals like Johns Hopkins jumped on ResearchKit means a lot to me.
Sure you can change the app icons on your Samsung, sure you can see the file system, sure you have 20k levels of pressure sensitivity that you won’t use more than 100 of. But will you help to eliminate the life impeding symptoms of Parkinson’s, will your Watch potentially one day act as an early warning device for epileptics, and so on.
Is your product so overwhelmingly recognized at folks use its name as a generic term for the entire class.
These are the things by which I measure success. Not the specs, not the sales, but what folks are doing with what they get
Apple isn’t to blame for their idiot attitudes. If they had waited 18 months to release the iPad 4 to achieve the whole “iOS hardware in the fall after the developers have the summer with the new iOS betas” people would have lost it over that as well.
I totally agree with you. I was just asked why people were pissed at the iPad 4. 🙂