May 23rd, 2008
Wired has a look at a report by Forrester Research, which wraps Apple’s own previously announced intentions in a jacket of flair and researchedness. Wired eats it all up, so someone should at least have a more critical look at their main points.
“Apple intends to reinvent itself as a digital home provider over the next five years,” Forrester says. “Its goal, we believe, is to provide hardware, software, and installation services to create an integrated digital experience.”
Well… yeah, because Apple’s top honcho Steve Jobs said this himself back in 2006. Here’s what he presented at WWDC 2006: Apple is in your den, Apple is in your living room, Apple is in your car, Apple is in your pocket.
Top notch innovative research, guys. Next, Forrester lists a number of products that Apple will use as a means to conquer our homes:
A server product that doesn’t include the word “server” (think Time Capsule)
No. Apple makes products that mom and pop users can plug in and have ‘just work’. Media streaming, perhaps, but a server product a là Windows Home Server… unlikely.
A universal music controller
Right, because Apple is really into comprehensive remote control devices.
A networked clock radio
This is where they really dive into the deep end; the James Bond kind, with sharks, and bad guys in white suits laughing hysterically. A networked clock radio? Really? Is this the product of thorough — and I’m guessing expensive — research?
Digital frames
They accompany this with the following explanation:
Yes, they abound [sic] already, but Forrester sees them as interconnected nodes, delivering HD quality still and video images and Bose-quality sound that is stored centrally. Command and control? Touch screens, of course, and an AppleSound remote.
Bose-quality sound? Really? Do these people actually experience life beyond flashy press releases? While I admit that having large video devices on the wall might be a cool area for Apple to get into, I can’t help but point out that this market exists already: flat screen TVs.
Lame. Another reason to disregard groups like Forrester entirely.