There are two core facts we have to deal with in the mobile arena.
First, Apple's enemies are legion. Everybody and their dog wants to
crash Apple's party and steal its customers - or at least make
something good enough for the rest to buy.
Apple fights this by working to create the perception that what it
makes is better.
The second problem is more straightforward: battery power. Mobile
devices have to operate for hours without being plugged in - the longer
the better. Apple's improvements with power management contribute to
the perception that its product line is better.
This is a basic win-win scenario.
Processing Power Perception
Back in 1999, when Apple was first selling computers with the
G4 processor, it advertised
the Power Mac G4 as a
supercomputer
on your desktop. Apple used an ad with tanks surrounding a G4 Power
Mac, as if it was a military secret. Apple was trying to create the
perception that it was more powerful than Intel-based PCs of the era.
This was a battle of perception that Macs were better.
Around this same time, people loved to run benchmark comparisons.
Aside from boring things like file opening times and calculations per
second, people wanted to compare how fast real software ran. One
obvious comparison program to check was Photoshop. Based on Apple's
tests, it was 90% faster on a G4 than on a Pentium III. Other tests
were less spectacular, but still in Apple's favor.
The Tide Turns
Then Apple moved to Intel chips in 2006, and the benchmarks turned
against it (see Windows XP Is Faster, but
Mac OS X Is Superior in Many Ways), and suddenly one of the Mac's
premier applications (Photoshop) was running better on Windows. It is a
big negative in the perception department to be slower than the
competition. Clearly Apple was not happy about these results. Adobe
Photoshop was slower on Intel Macs in 2006 because it was a version
written for Apple's PowerPC Macs. Adobe didn't ship a version for Intel
Macs until April 2007; until then, Photoshop depended on Apple's Rosetta
technology, which converted PowerPC software on the fly so it would
work with Intel CPU.
Thanks so much to Adobe for dragging its feet and creating the
biggest smack down to the perception that Apple's new Intel-based Macs
were as powerful as Windows PCs.
Flash vs. HTML5
In a battle of perception, it is better to match the competition
than be behind them. That is why Apple likes HTML5. If it sucks, that's
okay, because everyone will be comparable, and Apple can revamp Safari
to make the most of the situation.
With Flash, Apple is out of luck waiting for Adobe (with a
questionable history) to fix things. This is not a good place for
Apple. Why buy Apple's "overpriced" stuff if it is slower than a
Windows PC?
Battery Life Perception
In the perception game, Apple has come out with its own processor
for the iPad. Apple lists very few specifications for its A4
processor.
Why? Because it doesn't have super duper specs. It is trimmed down
to be especially battery saving. The processor is estimated to use as
little as 1/2 Watt. Compare that to a notebook CPU, which can use 40 to
60 Watts - or a desktop that burns 120 Watts.
Selling energy savings is not as sexy as selling processing power,
so Apple hides the low power nature of the device and lets battery life
speak for itself.
Why No Flash for iPhone OS Devices?
Guess what? Apple has put itself in a spot for more negative
comparisons. If Flash runs better on Android, Apple looks bad. Even if
Android devices have terrible battery life and tons of other issues,
the talking point turns against Apple.
Suddenly Flash support becomes more important than battery life. But
Apple knows that the average customer wants mobility with a mobile
device. It cannot let Flash dominate the product perception.
At this point Apple trusts no one but itself. It must maintain
perception to have its products sell.
Adobe hasn't been the greatest at keeping support for Apple's
changing standards up to date. Which would you chose in this situation?
Adobe has been a good developer, but not good enough to trust you
company's future with.
All the
other things Steve Jobs said about Flash are true. What he didn't
say is that Adobe is not going to be in control of Apple's success.
