本文由半导体产业纵横（ID：ICVIEWS）编译自the verge
Apple's liquidation not only means the end of the company's era, but also a reflection of the fall of smartphones from beloved gadgets to ordinary goods.
One day in early 2008, my friend excitedly showed me his new phone. He loaded a website, handed his phone over the table, and I curiously swiped the screen through the page. Although the speed is a bit slow and the operation is not very smooth, the realism is stunning. "Look, this is the future. He excitedly said, "I have internet on my phone." ”
At that moment, it was as if I saw something fragile and great slipping through my hands. I know that it will be everywhere in the near future, but at the moment, it still seems so far away. And that's exactly what happened, even though change didn't happen overnight. In the early days, the iPhone, while powerful and fascinating, did not dominate. I still used a BlackBerry Curve until 2012. At that time, the market was flooded with various brands of mobile phones, Nokia, Motorola, HTC, Palm, etc., each with its own characteristics. However, over time, they seem to be gradually being replaced by the same device – and that is the iPhone.
Even if you have only a little exposure to mobile technology, you can feel the unique energy emanating from the launch of the new iPhone. These press conferences not only attracted the attention of industry insiders, but also attracted the attention of the general public. They have truly become what people call "big events" and make everyone stop by them.
However, over time, this vibe has gradually changed. Last fall, after weeks of intensive testing of the iPhone 15 Pro, the perception of iPhones was, "They're just phones." ”
While Apple has been trying to convince us that its products are different, the reality is brutal: the iPhone is just a phone after all. For most people – even those who sell them all day long – the launch of new phones has become commonplace and is no longer an exciting event. Buying a new phone is more common and necessary than upgrading the washing machine in your home.
Mobile phones have become as indispensable as home appliances in our lives, and this is an inevitable trend. For consumers, this may not be a problem, but it is certainly a huge challenge for Apple, a company that relies heavily on iPhones to make huge profits. While Apple has struggled to expand its product line for years, the iPhone remains its most important cash cow. Apple has a strong will for us to believe that the brand name on the phone is crucial.
In order to maintain its market position, Apple has taken various measures to strengthen the dependence of users on its ecosystem. Now, however, these efforts appear to be at risk of collapsing.
Time flies, and people have moved away from the amazement and shock brought by the first iPhone. It's not just a change in feeling, it's a true reflection of market data. According to IDC's authoritative report, smartphone sales have been declining in six of the past seven years. Among them, the improvement in the durability of equipment is seen as an important reason for the decline in sales. Today, almost every flagship phone, including Apple's lineup, is fully waterproof, which means it's safe from unexpected situations like fresh water immersion. However, my 2016 iPhone SE was not spared, which made me realize the importance of improving the durability of the device.
The IDC report also points to some of the more subtle factors: "extended replacement cycles". This brings people into the realm of sensation. Nowadays, people are no longer in such a hurry to change their phones every few years as they used to. In the early days, smartphones had obvious shortcomings in many aspects: short battery life, unsatisfactory camera performance, limited processor performance, and high-quality mobile gaming was a distant dream. However, over time, these problems have improved dramatically and become more and more insignificant.
Apple's unique position as one of the top three companies in the United States by revenue is that it is the only company on these lists that makes huge profits primarily by manufacturing and selling mobile phones. Apple has been particularly affected when the smartphone market has declined, while giants like Amazon and Walmart have been able to respond to market changes with relative ease.
Therefore, for many years, Apple has been actively looking for other ways to make money to reduce its over-reliance on iPhone sales. To a large extent, it has been a success, especially with the expansion of services such as the App Store and Apple Music. However, despite this, the iPhone is still Apple's main source of wealth. According to Apple's financial report for the first quarter of fiscal 2024, net sales reached a staggering $119.6 billion in the three months ended December 30, 2023, with iPhones contributing a whopping $69.7 billion. In comparison, the services business was the second largest business segment, contributing only $23 billion.
In the early days, the iPhone earned a reputation as a platform for perfecting new concepts with its superior performance and novel features, rather than just being the first to do so. While it's not the first phone to implement face unlock, a high refresh rate screen, or a telephoto camera, users trust it to consistently implement these novel technologies, even if it may have been a bit unsatisfactory at first. However, as Apple continues to accumulate proprietary features and services in its closed ecosystem, such as the App Store, iMessage, FaceTime, Apple Wallet, and more, and solidifies its leadership position in the U.S. market, a clear fact emerges: Apple is resistant to anything that could threaten its position.
This attitude became especially evident after the successful launch of Apple's products, where the company took a series of defensive moves. iMessage, for example, has quickly gained traction since its launch in 2011, reaching 140 million users by 2012. However, in 2013, the need for cross-platform compatibility became more and more prominent, and seamless communication became an urgent expectation for users, rather than a chaotic green and blue bubble, switching between SMS and non-SMS. It's not just a problem that Android users want to fit into, but more importantly, blocking Android users from using iMessage instead gives iOS users a worse and less secure experience.
Despite calls for Apple to open up cross-platform use of iMessage, there is a conservative stance within the company. Apple executive Eddy Cue proposed an Android version of the iMessage app in 2016, but was opposed by Craig Federighi. Federighi bluntly stated in an internal email that the presence of iMessage on Android will only remove the barrier for iPhone families to give their children Android phones. Tim Cook is known to hold a similar view, arguing that if he wants to use iMessage with his family, he should "buy her an iPhone".
This strategy is evident throughout the Apple ecosystem, whether it's FaceTime or watches, and users are met with resistance when trying to take Apple products out of their closed campuses. While we can speculate about Apple's motives for peripherals and services, when it comes to iMessage, the motives are not mysterious: Apple blocked iMessage for a decade precisely to keep iOS users loyal and maintain its closed ecosystem. This has been made clear many times by Apple's executives, both internally and publicly.
Customer lock-in is only one aspect of Apple's problem, and the challenges facing the platform itself and its developers cannot be ignored. Since its inception, Apple has imposed strict controls on its app store, imposing restrictions on the developers who can build apps for the platform, making it an important pillar of the company's bottom line.
When the app store launched in 2008, it established its core business model: Apple would take a 30 percent commission on the sale of each app. This model was further cemented with the addition of in-app purchases, requiring developers to use Apple's own payment processing system and pay the same 30% commission. This strategy has become even more pronounced with the rapid expansion of the app store, which has grown from 500 apps to 1.8 million apps today, bringing in more than $60 billion in revenue for Apple in 2020 alone.
However, as the app store has grown, Apple's strict controls have sparked more and more controversy and criticism. Developers have complained that Apple's app review process lacks transparency and fairness, making it difficult to predict which apps will be listed and which will be rejected. At the same time, developers also expressed dissatisfaction with Apple's high commission, although Apple later adjusted the commission of subscription fees, from 30% to 15% after the first year, but this fee is still a heavy burden for small developers.
In the face of criticism and skepticism, Apple has adopted a more flexible and reactive strategy in recent years, introducing policy changes more frequently than in the early days, trying to respond to the concerns of developers and users while maintaining control of the platform. However, this strategy has led to a complex and confusing set of "fixes". Certain types of apps have undergone a shift from being banned to being quietly allowed in app stores, and app store policies have also made it difficult for some services such as Kindle and Netflix to be on iOS because they allow users to purchase subscription content outside of the app. Although Apple has provided exceptions for these apps, it has also sparked controversy over other developers trying to take advantage of this category.
Today's Apple, its strategy is reminiscent of Microsoft in the 90s. Microsoft, as the dominant player in the PC market at the time, also used various means to maintain its position, including imposing restrictions on Windows in order to crack down on potential competitors. Microsoft succeeded in curbing the rise of Netscape by bundling its own web browser for free with its operating system, and when it realized that Java might make it easier to migrate software from Windows to other systems, Microsoft did not hesitate to undermine Sun's efforts and instructed its allies not to assist the company.
However, history has proven that it is short-sighted to rely solely on suppressing competitors and limiting the openness of platforms to maintain market position. You can temporarily deal with the competition by playing whack-a-mole or fending off the barbarians at the door, but this will only last for a short time. In the long run, an open, fair, and innovative platform is the key to attracting developers, users, and staying competitive.
The iPhone is at the heart of the U.S. Department of Justice's antitrust case against Apple.
Apple's journey to liquidation began in court. In 2020, Epic Games filed a lawsuit against Apple and Google's app store fee model, specifically against Apple's industry standard of 30% commissions. After a trial, the court upheld Epic's claim, but on the condition that Apple allow app developers to direct users to payment methods other than Apple Pay. Then, in 2022, the European Union introduced a series of regulations aimed at limiting the power of big tech companies, and Apple was among them. In the face of external pressure, Apple has pledged to support the RCS standard on iPhones, and this updated version of the SMS/MMS protocol incorporates more features similar to iMessage.
However, Apple's challenge doesn't end there. Last month, the U.S. Department of Justice formally filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple, accusing it of illegal monopolistic practices in its smartphone market operations. At present, this legal process has just begun, and it is expected that the trial process will be quite lengthy, possibly for several years. Historically, the U.S. Department of Justice's antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft began in 1998 and lasted until 2007.
In response to the new EU policy, Apple has begun implementing a series of reforms: adjusting the commission structure of app stores, opening up third-party app stores, and adding a selection screen for users so that they can freely choose their preferred web browser. However, this may be just the beginning – app developers are unhappy with Apple's "malicious compliance" under the DMA (Digital Markets Act), and European regulators are investigating it in depth. It seems that Apple's challenges and scrutiny will continue to ferment in the future.
*Disclaimer: This article was created by the original author. The content of the article is his personal point of view, and our reprint is only for sharing and discussion, and does not mean that we agree or agree, if you have any objections, please contact the background.