|
I'd argue that none of those devices delivers on our four needs as fully or as conveniently as Apple. For example, even though Pebble is aiming for all four needs, it has used less-convenient technology to deliver on those needs — admirable as the early entrant but insufficient at this stage in the market. Samsung, on the other hand, has created a device that promises to meet these four needs fully, but as a company it doesn't have the market power to draw other app makers into the environment as quickly as Apple can, giving Apple an app variety advantage from its first day on sale — as the mobile payment system announcement demonstrates. And in the mind of the potential buyer, Samsung and the others suffer vis-a-vis Apple because none can offer the reassurance — itself a form of comfort — that the company behind it has delivered on this before.[/en笔者敢断言，任何一个类似的电子产品销售商都无法像苹果公司那样满足消费者的四大需求。比如，即使Pebble旨在满足人们的四大需求，它所采用的技术相对复杂——初次发行时还能吸引消费者，但是无法长久符合市场需求。至于三星，创造了一个标榜能够满足四大需求的设备，但是三星公司却无法像苹果公司一样创立属于自己品牌独有的应用市场，这就给苹果公司足够的空间出售本公司的应用产品，作为一个手机支付系统而运营。同时，在潜在的消费者心目中，三星和其他品牌与苹果品牌正面交锋，只会惨败，因为它们都无法保证其产品的舒适性，这也是公司之前所提倡的理念。
[en]That's another secret to Apple's dominance. Once it established itself as a company that could meet these needs, people tend to trust the brand more — maybe more than it deserves, but certainly more than other entrants — giving it an advantage that other brands need to fight just to get people to listen; that's why so many competing companies literally use Apple in their marketing, comparing their own products and features to the one's that seem to hog all the attention: Apple's. Apple seems to own the conversation. Other, highly-regarded smartwatches already exist, but now people are talking about Apple's proposed definition of a smartwatch.
|