| Thursday, August 27, 2009 |
06:21 - Still thinking different after all these years
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/26/AR2009082603925.html
|
(top) |
Jason Snell:
However, in contrast to Microsoft--which offers a confusing array of full and upgrade versions of Windows, all of them requiring that users enter a unique serial number in order to prove they're not pirates--Apple continues to rely on the honor system for Mac OS X. Not only does Snow Leopard not require the entry of any serial numbers, but the standard version of Snow Leopard is a bootable "full install" disc that doesn't actually check for the presence of Leopard in order to install. This also means that if at a later time you want to wipe your hard drive and reinstall Snow Leopard, you won't have to first install Leopard and then run a separate Snow Leopard upgrade on top of it. (That sound you hear is a thousand IT managers sighing with relief.)
Whoever is behind this philosophical cornerstone of the Mac OS X experience (be it Steve, or just someone who thinks an awful lot like him), I hope he never leaves.
It's not unlike how Apple has always treated its digital property, such as iTunes DRM; they've always seemed to be less interested in jealously guarding every possible penny (the way a record label or movie distributor would be) than in creating a positive user experience. Pricing, unboxing, downloading, installing, sharing... it's all engineered to be inviting, effortless, natural, and mutually respectful, to the point where people who complain about obtrusive DRM or installation headaches look like cranks.
The obvious downside is that it's a huge risk. Giving customers this much leeway looks like an invitation to have your lunch eaten. Pirated Snow Leopard installers will be all over the file-sharing sites, available for anyone to grab and use. iTunes DRM has been cracked, and even without that there are ways around it, especially with DRM-free music downloads, which give customers free rein to purchase once and then distribute freely, just like in the bad old days.
But apparently Apple can either absorb this hit to their bottom line (not surprising considering their ascendancy, but interesting considering what might happen if their fortunes begin to falter), or their customer base is somehow more honorable than the public at large.
I wonder if the latter is a self-enforcing phenomemon? Apple customers consider themselves "too good to cheat" (or at least they feel a camaraderie with the company as a kind of thank-you for not loading up their OS install discs with registration keys), and non-Apple customers think of Apple as the land of the goody-two-shoes, not worth venturing into even for the free stuff?
And if so, would that help explain the Mac's long-standing charmed life in the malware/virus arena?
Whatever the underlying reasoning behind this approach to the market—whether it's the result of careful social engineering and intricate calculations, or just a happy accident—it sure seems to be serving Apple well. I just hope it doesn't all come tumbling down once they reach a certain critical mass in the marketplace.
UPDATE: David Pogue (via Chris M. in comments) says:
The App Store Effect says this: if you cut a software program's price in half, you sell far more than twice as many copies. If you cut it to one-tenth, you sell far more than 10 times as many. And so on.
It's a little counter-intuitive, but this principle has paid off beyond anyone's wildest dreams. The numbers are staggering: as you've probably heard, iPhone/iPod Touch fans downloaded 1 billion apps within 9 months. Some iPhone programmers have become millionaires within months--yes, selling $1 software--because of this crazy math. $20 may sound like more than $1, but not when 1,000 times more people buy at $1.
I can't help wondering if Apple has the App Store effect in the back of its mind with Snow Leopard. If the previous Mac OS X version sold for $130, then Apple would need five times as many Snow Leopard sales to equal the revenue.
Well... maybe that's true as a general rule, but not if Snow Leopard requires that you already own Leopard. The number of new Snow Leopard buyers isn't going to wildly outstrip the number of buyers of previous OS X versions based on a 90% discount, because it's only available at that discount if you've already bought the previous versions. Otherwise you have to drop $169 on the "box set" Snell describes, which includes iWork and iLife. And that's not small App Store potatoes (though it's still a bargain compared to a typical Windows license).
If Snow Leopard were available as a standalone product for $29, that would definitely be one thing. But the fact that it's not is such a major point that I'm really surprised Pogue missed it. (Unless it wasn't common knowledge back in June.)
|
|
Brian Tiemann
