The Street: Features can't sway Apple customers' trust

Out of the box, the AppleTV is a bit "boring"... but once you load 3rd party software on there, the thing absolutely rocks!

Check out Xbox Media Center for Apple TV, Plex, and Boxee.

I agree with Average White Boy. Jobs isn't thinking about retaining brand loyalty, or playing it safe. He still wants to change the world, and the slate has the potential to unlock a whole new way of how we use computers.

Of course, Apple aren't infallible, and they could screw it up. But while everyone is still playing catch up, you know that they're aiming to change the game again, and you've got to applaud that.

Sorry but I say BS to the ideas expressed in the article. Specifically if the slate isn't great that it will tarnish Apple's reputation.

You said: "all it takes is one botched product to tarnish a formerly sterling reputation."

Of course botched is a relative term.

Let's assume the slate is not perfect out of the box. The key will be how Apple handles whatever needs to be fixed.

In my experience they will jump on the problem(s) fix them and if need be give customers credit, a gift or accept returns. That would enhance Apple's reputation not tarnish it.

If it turns out to be less popular than expected Apple will either backseat it like Apple TV or in a worse case senario allow it to fade out of existence.

In the meantime it will continue to improve the slate, the iPhone, iPods Macs and software. Those sales will continue.

Apple will be full steam ahead regardless of the slate results, although I am optimistic about the slate. If, as rumored, Steve is happy with the slate that would bode well for slate sales and the user experience.

If Apple does intro a tablet, I hope it is a 10" Macbook Air with the screen on the face of the device, running OSX with a seamless (updateable) iPhoneOS emulator able to run iPhone Apps.

Now that *would* kill the market for everyone else.

This reminds me of Macworld 1997 when Steve Jobs came back to the company and mentioned that the brand loyalty was one of the most important assets to the company.

Sometimes a company needs to take risks especially if they want to keep moving forward. You think that Apple should just play it safe to protect itself from making mistakes. That in itself is a big mistake. There is always a chance of a product failing but Apple is going to do everything possible to make this tablet a success. Since it's probably going to be a more powerful Touch, I wouldn't think Apple is jumping off into some void.

How long should Apple wait to introduce a tablet? Or maybe not introduce one at all? That's crap. I think Apple has something to prove. There are probably plenty of indications that they can do well selling the tablet where other companies failed. I think Amazon took a larger risk than Apple with the Kindle since it doesn't have nearly the marketing clout and no retail stores. I give Amazon credit for going up against the naysayers that think tablets are a waste of time or have a lousy form factor. I believe if Apple can build a decent product and offer applications and content for it, it should do relatively well and move the whole publishing industry forward. Currently the publishing industry is not doing all that well and is at a crossroads. Stagnate or go digital. At least the Kindle and Apple's tablet gives them a chance to go digital. Get the consumers excited about reading again.

Let the consumers decide and ignore the tech pundits that already have their minds made up that no tablet can be a success mainly because past tablets failed or somehow a tablet doesn't seem quite right to them. Thank goodness Apple didn't listen to braindead idiots when it announced the iPod or iPhone. If Apple fails with the tablet, then that's the breaks, but at least they'll give it their best efforts.

"Apple currently holds a monopoly on brand trust..."

But Google currently holds a monopoly on stabbing their hardware vendors in the back, does that make them even?

Well, when all else fails, the competition might as well as have their CEO or head PR person wear a turtleneck sweater and try to maintain a veneer of visionary erudition yet with that 'everybody-could-love-this-person' appearance. :-)

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and all that jazz, after all.

Seems like that's a tough thing to duplicate. An overexcited man with sweaty armpits doesn't quite seem to convey the proper imagery to excite the masses. And so it goes...

Using feature-by-feature comparisons may work in a commodity market, but the iPod/iPhone marketplace isn't really a commodity market.

If it was, the Creative-series music players, and the Zune would have been a huge success.

The reason they failed to capture the market is three-fold:

1 - The market has already adopted the iPhone (having sold many millions of phones) with a satisfaction rate unheard of in the cell phone market.

2 - Apple's user interface designers obviously have a lot more experience and are much more talented than most of Apple's competitors.

3 - Apple's customer support is second to none.

4 - The Google phone/apps needs to have new features that aren't possible on the iPhone. Currently, there aren't that many new innovations on the Google phone that couldn't be accomplished with a software update to the iPhone.

For the Nexus to be successful, they will have to make sure they take care of points 2 to 4 to make up for ground lost in point 1.

Initial indications are that Google and HTC are failing in the customer support area - each sending customers to each other in order to get support.

HTC hasn't had a steller record when it comes to supporting basic cell phones, and these phones are much more feature laden and will require much better support than HTC has become accustomed to.

They have a long way to go. That's not to say the Google Phone is a bad phone, just that they will have to go beyond being a good phone to get people to take notice.

Many reviews I have read say that the Google phone is good, but nothing special. With reviews like that, for an innovative new product, they are already starting off on the wrong foot.

The advantage Apple has in this case is that nobody has figured out what a tablet computer is for. The attempts so far have served to show us the possibilities, but everyone is pretty clear these incarnations are not what the product needs or wants to be. It's similar to where mp3 players were pre-iPod or smartphonse pre-iPhone: the players gave us a glimpse of what might be, and started the consumer conversation. Apple waited until it could define the experience. They've gotten pretty good at this, and the stage is pretty well set for them with a tablet. If they've still got their Mojo, they won't announce anything until they can define the marketplace, and thereby their own measurement of success.