June 14, 2015 at 00:57How Apple Designs Non-existent Devices
On s'engage et puis ... on voit ...
Are you still trying to develop the perfect device or application? Afraid of releasing an unfinished product? Delay the launch further and further?
In 2004, Guy Kawasaki wrote in his book “The Art of the Start” about the art of entrepreneurship and the introduction of new products to the market, based on experience with Apple. Before the advent of modern technology giants such as Apple and Microsoft, the approach they used to launch their products was virtually non-existent. In the success story of two long-standing rivals, there is much more adventurism than we think today. It is now they have great potential for the implementation of any adventures, at the beginning of their activity, not one of them disdained to go through bootstrapping.
Apple chef Evangelist wrote that one of the prerequisites for bootstrapping is to enter the market as soon as possible - the product or service should be launched to the market immediately. Enterprises must act according to the scheme “delivery - completion - delivery - completion - delivery - completion - delivery ...” (and not “completion, completion, completion, delivery”). This approach has its pros and cons:
- Immediate cash inflow.
- Objective reviews from the consumer.
- A tarnished reputation in case of quality problems.
Since a tarnished reputation can subsequently turn into a serious obstacle to business, it is always damn difficult to make a choice between supply and improvement. In making this decision, the following issues must be considered:
At that time, Apple was trying to immediately bring out their new products, regardless of the degree of their development for the above reasons, but it seems that at the present time they have moved to a more advanced model of product output.
Apple, as you know, always tries to keep information about its future products locked up, but this does not mean that the company is waiting for the completion of the development of the device for creating native software. Moreover, both software and hardware do not appear in the bowels of the company from scratch, developed independently of one another. How do you manage to come up and prototype product ideas with limited information or access to devices? Consider in general terms this process.
In fact, Apple is trying, as far as possible, to minimize the time and resources in the early stages of development, and to limit access to the product prototype as much as possible. Instead, the approach involves falsifying the functionality of the device or program being developed in order to improve the development process before real resources go into the project.
For example, the process of developing an application for the Apple Watch that did not exist would begin with a series of static images and false interactivity, using the capabilities of the simplest animation of a program such as Keynote, without any programming at all. For starters, I would have to use a rather crude layout.
The idea is that using fakes of the application and the equipment on which it will work, you can get experience with the use and feedback of testers that will affect the development of the product, even before the prototype is made or at least one line of code is written.
This reflection affects the development process itself, making it less costly, and more importantly, more flexible. At the same time, the required flexibility of the development process can be achieved only if the fake is carefully and skillfully worked out so that it is not perceived as an obvious fake. Unlike the mode of real programming or production.
For both employees and third-party developers, it is important that Apple, when launching a new device, already has information about the trial operation of software, although not every developer can work with finished products.
The development cycle consists of three repeating parts. Development of a fake application or device, testing with real users and feedback, after which the fake is finalized taking into account the feedback results and the next version of the “product” is released. Thus, product development does not physically begin until it is actually required to further advance the entire process; hardware can be modeled using software and other workarounds, including covertly replacing automatic processes with manual ones.
Apple's strength, and what helps it stand out from its competitors, is its current ability to deeply develop products, especially impressive, with such a significant degree of closedness of early samples, which, in turn, is very important for all developers who feed the growing ecosystem of applications and devices running on iOS and its derivatives.
Are you still trying to develop the perfect device or application? Afraid of releasing an unfinished product? Delay the launch further and further? In 2004, Guy Kawasaki wrote in his book “The Art of the Start” about the art of entrepreneurship and the introduction of new products to the market, based on experience with Apple. Before the advent of modern technology giants such as Apple and Microsoft, the approach they used to launch their products was virtually non-existent. In the success story of two long-standing rivals, there is much more adventurism than we think today. It is now they have great potential for the implementation of any adventures, at the beginning of their activity, not one of them disdained to go through bootstrapping.
Apple chef Evangelist wrote that one of the prerequisites for bootstrapping is to enter the market as soon as possible - the product or service should be launched to the market immediately. Enterprises must act according to the scheme “delivery - completion - delivery - completion - delivery - completion - delivery ...” (and not “completion, completion, completion, delivery”). This approach has its pros and cons:
pros
- Immediate cash inflow.
- Objective reviews from the consumer.
Minus
- A tarnished reputation in case of quality problems.
Since a tarnished reputation can subsequently turn into a serious obstacle to business, it is always damn difficult to make a choice between supply and improvement. In making this decision, the following issues must be considered:
- Does a product or service overtake competing products at the current stage of development?
- Is it possible to choose a small and isolated geographical area or market segment for the supply of a product or service, which will limit the potential damage to reputation?
- Is there a tolerant and understanding group of buyers willing to become experimental rabbits?
- How much does the product correspond to the idea of bringing new meaning to the world?
- How does it satisfy customer needs?
- Can the product or service in its current form cause the buyer any harm or in any way endanger it?
- Are In Vitro Tests Enough to Transfer In Vivo?
At that time, Apple was trying to immediately bring out their new products, regardless of the degree of their development for the above reasons, but it seems that at the present time they have moved to a more advanced model of product output.
Apple, as you know, always tries to keep information about its future products locked up, but this does not mean that the company is waiting for the completion of the development of the device for creating native software. Moreover, both software and hardware do not appear in the bowels of the company from scratch, developed independently of one another. How do you manage to come up and prototype product ideas with limited information or access to devices? Consider in general terms this process.
In fact, Apple is trying, as far as possible, to minimize the time and resources in the early stages of development, and to limit access to the product prototype as much as possible. Instead, the approach involves falsifying the functionality of the device or program being developed in order to improve the development process before real resources go into the project.
For example, the process of developing an application for the Apple Watch that did not exist would begin with a series of static images and false interactivity, using the capabilities of the simplest animation of a program such as Keynote, without any programming at all. For starters, I would have to use a rather crude layout.
The idea is that using fakes of the application and the equipment on which it will work, you can get experience with the use and feedback of testers that will affect the development of the product, even before the prototype is made or at least one line of code is written.
This reflection affects the development process itself, making it less costly, and more importantly, more flexible. At the same time, the required flexibility of the development process can be achieved only if the fake is carefully and skillfully worked out so that it is not perceived as an obvious fake. Unlike the mode of real programming or production.
For both employees and third-party developers, it is important that Apple, when launching a new device, already has information about the trial operation of software, although not every developer can work with finished products.
The development cycle consists of three repeating parts. Development of a fake application or device, testing with real users and feedback, after which the fake is finalized taking into account the feedback results and the next version of the “product” is released. Thus, product development does not physically begin until it is actually required to further advance the entire process; hardware can be modeled using software and other workarounds, including covertly replacing automatic processes with manual ones.
Apple's strength, and what helps it stand out from its competitors, is its current ability to deeply develop products, especially impressive, with such a significant degree of closedness of early samples, which, in turn, is very important for all developers who feed the growing ecosystem of applications and devices running on iOS and its derivatives.