10.04.2007

Encouraging Innovation


I wrote this article for the latest CPU Magazine. Partners like ATI, AMD, Microsoft, Intel, and Nvidia are very important to our industry. Without their push to enable innovation we would live in a very boring place. I think it helps us view a different perspective of our industry if we view them as enablers of innovation rather than the creators of our own innovations.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Over the years, I have enjoyed watching how the competitive landscape in our industry has changed based on various dynamics and customer needs. We have seen consolidation in some segments, and certain companies have vanished into thin air. We have also seen small, new companies become giants in very little time, including Apple, which at one point was in some rather dire straits and now has a market cap that is much higher than a certain company that doubted them a decade ago. (Hint: this company used to be the No.1 PC maker.)

If there’s anything I’ve learned in this business, it’s that consumers are much smarter than they used to be. In the case of the consumer electronics industry, there is a noticeable difference between the technical knowledge exhibited by today’s consumer and that of five years ago.

Take, for instance, TVs. I remember a time when walking into a Sony store was like a walk into the future, but these days it’s like a blast from the past. In the past, shoppers often largely based their buying decisions on which brands they trusted, but now we see customers basing their decisions on their technological needs and wants. Sony’s executives got a little too comfortable with the power of their own brand, assuming that it would carry the company forward no matter what the competition had to offer—boy, were they wrong! Looking at some of the offerings from Pioneer, Sharp, Samsung, and HP, it seems obvious that the TV market is highly competitive, and only companies who truly understand their customers will know what to do in order to grow their business. Brand is important, but it’s not sustainable unless you continually revisit your brand promise and make adjustments as the market demands them.

As more vendors jump into the PC market, more commoditization takes place. Instead of focusing on the customer, they are focused on “speeds and feeds,” and instead of working to differentiate their products, they depend on partner companies like ATI, AMD, Intel, Microsoft, and Nvidia to innovate for them. The end result of that is what you see in stores every day: rows and rows of boxes with “sticker marketing” and price tags. Sticker marketing is when retail PCs come festooned with branding stickers from Microsoft, ATI, Nvidia, Intel, and AMD.

I understand the purpose of sticker marketing; it helps send dollars back to OEMs so they can offer lower prices and be more attractive at retail. But I believe in the end these programs are actually a disservice both to consumers and to the companies that participate in them. Sticker marketing promotes commoditization and devalues innovation from an OEM standpoint. Instead of focusing on such programs, component companies should probably think about working with OEMs on cool platform innovations so PC buyers can benefit from them.

Don’t get me wrong, these partners are key to our industry, but it’s unfortunate that we depend on these “enablers of innovation” to become “creators of innovation.” After all, these companies are not as intimate with our customers as we are; working with people who buy our products on a daily basis puts OEMs in the best position to know what they really need.

Things seem somewhat dire in certain segments of the market. People are shifting from desktops to notebooks for reasons that have little to do with specs. The best many companies can do to differentiate is to offer higher levels of service or faster shipping, but still something is missing; perhaps the total experience.

I believe, as do many of my colleagues, that the desktop space has tons of room for growth. People talk about “customer experience” without actually thinking about what it means. By simply asking 20 of your customers what they wan.t, studying their habits, and understanding what people complain about, you’ll soon start to remove the clouds that hamper innovation. I also believe that the notebook market will continue to be a major growth segment, but that shouldn’t come at the expense of desktops.

If you’re a regular visitor to this page, you’ll probably see that this all ties together. The PC industry isn’t where it should be today as a whole, but there are small pockets of change at work today, and we’re glad to have been a part of affecting such change.

6 blogger comments:

jorge said...

Haha, you're right on the nose about Sony and how they've lost touch with reality.

What's funny as a side note is that you can buy the same Sony products cheaper from Best Buy than you can buy them from Sony stores themselves.

Not to mention that 'no name' branded equivalents to Sony's products have really stepped up their quality in the last decade or so. Sony used to be the name you could trust, certainly, but now I can go into almost any store and find a TV that has the same warranty period and structure, performance, and aesthetic and design qualities that used to justify Sony's prices. Now there is no reason to buy Sony.

You mention the buying experience as something that seems to be missing in the market today. Not so. People don't want a buying experience, they want the experience of the product being in their hands when they need or want it. I'd personally rather deal with a cold faceless company any day if I can have my desktop in 3 days compared to a company that was friendly and approachable but took two weeks to make my machine.

That's why web-based sales have become so popular. Not many people enjoy dealing with other people when buying something unless they have to. I think the buying experience was a trend that is giving way to efficiency. Those that aren't efficient and therefore fast, will die out.

It's not like the auto industry where customers perceive quality by the length of time it takes to make a car. PC buyers are starting to realize that more often than not, a PC builder that takes MORE time to build a PC has fundamental problems with component availability, which can mean their suppliers don't have as much confidence in them.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you completely I used to buy sony. But I havent for years now, apart from the PS2. What i want to know is why hasnt someone come up with a PC hybrid, designed to do enough. Say a Dual core machine with 2 laptop GPUs but standard size disk/s. It wont break records but it will do many things very well without costing 2K. Or am I just dreaming. Hey maybe HP can do one for me?

Colin said...

I do agree that there needs to be more OEM innovation, however...


I don't necessarily agree that sticker marketing is a barrier or even just a hurdle to innovation. Sticker marketing is just a kickback for meeting certain volume purchasing milestones. HP has been doing it for years and you say yourself that HP is an innovation epicenter. If innovation were truly a priority with the OEMs then they would use the sticker marketing kickbacks for R&D. I would argue instead that the innovation paridigm shift needs to occur not with sticker marketing, but with the mindset of OEM decision makers. (Sticker marketing can still be ugly though, look at the hp blackbird and apple products as an example of the opposite).

I also disagree with the point you make about lowering PC costs as a disservice to customers. While I like the enthusiast PC as much as the next guy, what about the people who can't afford one? I don't see any disservice in enabling PC purchases to a wider socio-economic spectrum.

Lastly, I bought and absolutely love my Sony Bravia HDTV as well as my Sony ES audio equipment. I also had a great SonyStyle store customer experience. When my HDTV went on sale two months later, they called me and refunded the difference.

Anonymous said...

I very much disagree with your "enablers of innovation" slant... you only need to look at the current PC industry to see that innovation isn't being "enabled," it's being homogenized. The sticker marketing you mentioned is about all that separates one PC from the next... Dell at one time overcame this issue with excellent customer service but, with today's outsourcing, even that has deteriorated to lowest common denominator. I wrote white papers years ago regarding the upcoming ubiquity of virtualization and multi-processing but it took almost a full ten years to realize it. That's an eternity in the computing industry.

The truth is that the so-called "enablers of innovation" have contributed greatly to the stagnation of the industry. The claims of being consumer-centric are mostly catch phrases... it's about volume and the bottom line. Steve Jobs seems to truly understand the industry's worst kept secret... it's about the user experience, so much so that many are willing to pay the "Apple tax" to get it. Yet even his impressive efforts are just the tip of the iceberg.

Most of the technologies upon which we rely do not enable US. Relying on the consumer's greater knowledge of technology is a recipe for failure... with today's information overload, the company that can integrate technology SEAMLESSLY into people's lives is the company that will own the future. Only when automacity is achieved can people truly experience the benefits of technology... I don't want to think about configuration or maintenance, just give me stuff that allows me to DO things. There will always be people that enjoy getting their hands "dirty"... there is always going to be someone that would rather soup up a Honda than buy a Porsche. But the overwhelming majority would buy (or at least fantasize) about buying the Porsche. For some people, creation is part of the experience but for many the EXPERIENCE is part of the experience. As long as Steve Jobs is the only one attempting to provide a truly unique computing experience, innovation will just be marketing lingo.

Anonymous said...

I hate to break it to you, but in terms of the personal computer Steve Jobs has received more credit than he deserves.

He modified a version of Linux to make it idiot friendly. He integrated everything he could into one unit, making it even more simplified. Simplification, not innovation.

That's it. The rest is marketing and form. The Mac does things that a PC can do, but in many cases much less. The guts of the Mac are still the same as any other PC but in terms of function the Mac is relegated to nothingness for the time being due to the lack of software out there for it. Therefore the Mac doesn't do as much as a regular PC unless you're satisfied with the 'i-junk' software that comes with a Mac or unless you can suffer the dearth of applications that small-time programmers create for the Mac.

If anything, Steve Job's vision to bring an innovative computing experience to his loyal devotees has made the Mac irrelevant and phony. It USED to be a powerhouse in graphics, but now nothing is special about a Mac.

The Mac has survived as long as it has in SPITE of Steve Jobs, not because of Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs has become the modern P.T. Barnum, where he uses marketing and leverages trends and fears to survive in the computing world.

I'm so sick of people praising Steve Jobs.

Anonymous said...

Hi
I add your blog at htttp://www.electronicecg.blogspot.com
Please exchange link with me.