How Not to Do Market Analysis

Nick Farrell of the Inquirer writes:

Where Steve Jobs made his mistake was that he marketed the Ipad as a utopian device that can do everything that all his other products can. This is dangerous for Apple because if the Ipad can be a laptop, an Iphone, a e-reader and a music player then you do not really need any of those devices.

Save for the laptop and the iPhone, that's precisely the point.

While no doubt Apple could be hurt if a bunch of people stop buying MacBook Pros and instead buy iPads, that's assuming too much. I think what may happen is where you see families buy fewer computers, but more iPads. For example, you might see each child get an iPad, instead of several children sharing a slightly more expensive MacBook. Overall, that's a big gain for Apple. (And, just like netbooks, don't expect the iPad to entirely kill off more powerful computers needed for things like making home movies or doing major photo touch up.)

Farrell really misses the point when he notes, “Jobs may as well forget launching an Apple version of a Kindle or a PSP, then.” Obviously, the iPad is intended as Apple's answer to the Kindle and one of Apple's competitors to the PSP (along with the iPod touch and iPhone). The idea that Apple would still want to launch single-use models seems to go against the whole convergence direction both Apple and the general industry are following. Note that Apple didn't launch a phone and a widescreen iPod and a small web surfing device back in 2007, either. It launched the iPhone to do all three.

The iPhone is secure because, as its name implies, it is a phone and the larger, heavier iPad is not. If anything, Apple has untapped opportunities to make the iPad and iPhone work together. The iPod touch may be harmed, but if Apple can get people to pick up a $500 or $600 iPad over a $200 iPod touch, I don't think they will lose much sleep over that.

HT: John Gruber