“一份国内很知名的经济类报纸曾做了一个读者调查，想知道读者最想了解什么。你当然猜得出来：排在第一位的问题是，什么领域将是未来两三年经济发展的热点。我被问到是否能就此做一篇文章，从一个顾问的角度预测一下未来发展的热点。
我没有写这样一篇文章。但我一直想写一篇文章告诉我的读者，未来两三年的热点并不重要。热点终究是要过去的，一个企业真正关心的应该是它拿什么立足于市场，能让企业十年、二十年还能靠它生存、发展。如果要考虑热点的话，考虑十年、二十年后的热点对一个企业更为重要。通常我们把这个能力称为眼光或远见。
企业致富之道其实只有两个，一个是投机，一个是投资。投机者可以看作是游牧民，在到处寻找肥沃的土地。我们知道，这样的好事在现在的世界上越来越少；投资者则在耕耘自己的土地，为未来的收获播种种子，或者为自己的未来培育“摇钱树”。投机可能带来一时的好处，投资却能使企业有一个长远的发展。
即使在充满投机气氛的股票市场上，真正长期赢利的也不是那些投机家，而是像巴菲特这样的被华尔街誉为“最成功的基金管理人”的投资者。巴菲特对他所选择的公司就象天主教徒选择自己的配偶一样：要么是一个可以终身为伴的人，要么就根本不去过问。凭着这样的投资理念，巴菲特三十多年实现了平均每年23% 的投资回报率，而同期道琼斯指数的回报率不过是12%至13%。
但投资眼光还不是企业管理的最高境界。最伟大的企业家是那些有极强使命感的人，这样的企业家几乎不可能不成功。因为相对于他们的使命感及长远目标来讲，摆在他们道路上的任何障碍都是微不足道的。用西方人经常讲的一句话来说，就是“有意志的地方就永远有道路”。
有强烈的使命感以及依靠远见取得成功的最好例子是比尔-盖茨。还在他十几岁的时候，他就预见到低成本计算机会对世界产生冲击性影响。“让每个家庭，每张桌子上都有一台计算机”也就成了微软公司的使命。十九岁的盖茨对未来做了一次展望，并以此作为他理想生活的基础，现在看来他是正确无比的。盖茨在为世界创造了众多的百万富翁的同时，自己也变成了世界上最富有的人。对自己成功的秘密盖茨一言以蔽之：“运气是一个因素，然而我想最重要的因素还是我们最初的远见。假设盖茨追求当时的热点（硬件！），或者每两、三年根据热点转变一下自己的方向，我们今天谁也不会
2008年2月11日星期一
苹果的成功 简单的生活
1982年，摄影师Diana Walker给当时27岁的Steve Jobs拍了这张照片。当时已经是亿万富翁的Jobs说: "我那时单身, 我所需要的也就是一杯茶, 一掌灯和一个音乐播放器"。
今天苹果的最简设计应该从某种程度上源于这种简单和专注于创新的生活方式。有志于创新吗? 专注一些, 你的生活也不要太复杂。
译言上的这篇文章引用了Steve Jobs的十句金玉良言，以下摘抄：
“领袖和跟风者的区别就在于创新。”
创新无极限！只要敢想，没有什么不可能，立即跳出思维的框框吧。如果你正处于一个上升的朝阳行业，那么尝试去寻找更有效的解决方案：更招消费者喜爱、更简 洁的商业模式。如果你处于一个日渐萎缩的行业，那么赶紧在自己变得跟不上时代之前抽身而出，去换个工作或者转换行业。不要拖延，立刻开始创新！
“成为卓越的代名词，很多人并不能适合需要杰出素质的环境。”
成功没有捷径。你必须把卓越转变成你身上的一个特质。最大限度的发挥你的天赋、才能、技巧，把其他所有人甩在你后面。高标准严格自己，把注意力集中在那些将会改变一切的细节上。变得卓越并不艰难 - 从现在开始尽自己最大能力去做 - 你会发现生活将给你惊人的回报。
“成就一番伟业的唯一途径就是热爱自己的事业。如果你还没能找到让自己热爱的事业，继续寻找，不要放弃。跟随自己的心，总有一天你会找到的。”
我把这段话浓缩为：“做我所爱”。去寻找一个能给你的生命带来意义、价值和让你感觉充实的事业。拥有使命感和目标感才能给生命带来意义、价值和充实。这不 仅对你的健康和寿命有益处，而且即使在你处于困境的时候你也会感觉良好。在每周一的早上，你能不能利索的爬起来并且对工作日充满期待？如果不能，那么你得 重新去寻找。你会感觉得到你是不是真的找到了。
“并不是每个人都需要种植自己的粮食，也不是每个人都需要做自己穿的衣服，我们说着别人发明的语言，使用别人发明的数学...我们一直在使用别人的成果。使用人类的已有经验和知识来进行发明创造是一件很了不起的事情。”
带着责任感生活，尝试为这个世界带来点有意义的事情，为更高尚的事情做点贡献。这样你会发现生活更加有意义，生命不再枯燥。需要我们去做的事情很多。告诉 其他人你的计划，不要鼓吹，也不要自以为是，更不能盲目狂热，那样只会把人们吓跑，当然，你也不要害怕成为榜样，要抓住出头的机会让人们知道你的所作所 为。
“佛教中有一句话：初学者的心态；拥有初学者的心态是件了不起的事情。”
不要迷惑于表象而要洞察事务的本质，初学者的心态是行动派的禅宗。所谓初学者的心态是指，不要无端猜测、不要期望、不要武断也不要偏见。初学者的心态正如一个新生儿面对这个世界一样，永远充满好奇、求知欲、赞叹。
“我们认为看电视的时候，人的大脑基本停止工作，打开电脑的时候，大脑才开始运转。”
过去十年中，大量的理论研究表明，电视对人的精神和心智是有害的。大多数电视观众都知道这个坏习惯会浪费时间并且使大脑变得迟钝，但是他们还是选择呆在电 视机前面。关掉电视吧，给自己省点脑细胞。还有，电脑也会让你的大脑秀逗，不信的话你去跟那些一天花8小时玩第一视角设计游戏、汽车拉力游戏、角色扮演游 戏的人聊聊看，你也会得出这个结论的。
“我是我所知唯一一个在一年中失去2.5亿美元的人...这对我的成长很有帮助。”
范错误不等于错误。从来没有哪个成功的人没有失败过或者犯过错误，相反，成功的人都是犯了错误之后，做出改正，然后下次就不会再错了，他们把错误当成一个警告而不是万劫不复的失败。从不犯错意味着从来没有真正活过。
“我愿意把我所有的科技去换取和苏格拉底相处的一个下午。”
十几年来，世界各地的书店里涌现出海量的关于历史人物的书籍。这些人物包括苏格拉底、达芬奇、哥白尼、达尔文以及爱因斯坦成为人们灵感的灯塔，而苏格拉底排在第一位。西塞罗评价苏格拉底说：“他把哲学从高山仰止高高在上的学科变得与人休戚相关。”把苏格拉底的原则运用到你的生活、工作、学习以及人及关系上吧，这不是关于苏格拉底，这是关于你自己，以及关于你如何给你每天的生活带来更多的真善美。
“活着就是为了改变世界，难道还有其他原因吗？”
你是否知道在你的生命中，有什么使命是一定要达成的？你知不知道在你喝一杯咖啡或者做些无意义事情的时候，这些使命又蒙上了一层灰尘？我们生来就随身带着 一件东西，这件东西指示着我们的渴望、兴趣、热情以及好奇心，这就是使命。你不需要任何权威来评断你的使命，没有任何老板、老师、父母、牧师以及任何权威 可以帮你来决定。你需要靠你自己来寻找这个独特的使命。
“你的时间有限，所以不要为别人而活。不要被教条所限，不要活在别人的观念里。不要让别人的意见左右自己内心的声音。最重要的是，勇敢的去追随自己的心灵和直觉，只有自己的心灵和直觉才知道你自己的真实想法，其他一切都是次要。”
你是否已经厌倦了为别人而活？不要犹豫，这是你的生活，你拥有绝对的自主权来决定如何生活，不要被其他人的所作所为所束缚。给自己一个培养自己创造力的机会，不要害怕，不要担心。过自己选择的生活，做自己的老板！
2007年9月6日星期四
Wanted: VPs of Design---------More designers are reaching the executive ranks. But where are they getting the general business knowhow they need?
Every Tuesday, John McGuire, the director of product design for the hip San Francisco-based bagmaker Timbuk2 Designs, spends two hours with a tutor, Erin Lowenberg. A veteran merchant at Gap (GAP) under Mickey Drexler, Lowenberg helps the 28-year-old McGuire review developing product lines, prepare for presentations to the management team, align his line planning with revenue goals, and learn other essential business tasks that he wasn't taught in design school.
"School prepared me well for the day-to-day stuff that we do as designers," says McGuire, who joined the bagmaker 18 months ago and now heads a team of five at the 60-person company. "To me the gap is in understanding the bigger picture—how product design merges with branding and revenue planning and so on."
Bringing Designers into Management
McGuire's knowledge gap isn't unusual. "You're not taught about corporate finance or management at design school," echoes Kirt Martin, principal design manager at Turnstone, a subsidiary of furniture giant Steelcase (SCS). While many design schools offer corporate-sponsored courses intended to expose students to how design happens in the real world, and some design schools—such as the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford and the Illinois Institute of Technology's Institute of Design—are integrating business training into their curricula, the majority of schools still focus on core design skills like drawing and three-dimensional fabrication. Which means most design school grads lack the basic management, finance, and strategy knowhow that will help them be effective in the corporate world.
"There is a shortage of people with management and leadership skills," says Thomas Lockwood, president of the Boston-based Design Management Institute. A decade ago, when few companies gave designers a seat at the executive table, this lack of business training among designers was less of a problem. Lockwood points out that in large corporations, it used to be common for designers to be divided among different departments—graphic designers within corporate communications or marketing, industrial designers as a part of product development or engineering, interior designers within facilities management, etc. There was no centralized design department, and therefore no need for a companywide director of design with a broad set of business skills.
Today more companies are welcoming designers to the executive level. "There's been a big change in the number of VPs of design compared with just three years ago," says Peter Lawrence, director of the Boston-based Corporate Design Foundation. IBM (IBM), Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) have all appointed vice-presidents of design in the past couple of years; Nike (NKE), Apple (AAPL), and other design-savvy companies have recognized design at the executive level for much longer. Which raises a critical question: Where can designers climbing the corporate ladder get the business training they need to be effective?
Filling the Education Gaps
While there's no standard answer, companies and individual designers alike are taking steps to address the problem.
For a designer in a small business, McGuire is lucky to be getting formal, one-on-one mentoring. "He has a great eye and his products are great for the brand," says Timbuk2 Chief Executive Perry Klebahn, who arranged for the sessions
(Klebahn also teaches at Stanford's Institute of Design, where students are required to work in interdisciplinary teams in order to get broad exposure to related disciplines.) "But it's important that he learns the business side, that he stretches his mind."
The word "stretch" also comes up in conversation with Lee Green, vice-president of brand and values experience at IBM. "We have something we call a stretch assignment—an opportunity to do something that's outside your comfort zone," he says. For Green, who joined Big Blue as a designer 28 years ago, that meant taking a management job in marketing in 1988 and then a job in advertising as a way to expand his knowledge and skills. In 1993, then-CEO Lou Gerstner asked Green to become director of corporate design.
"IBM is great at providing diverse opportunities for people that want the exposure," says Green, but he adds that he thinks it's unusual for designers to take those stretch positions because many prefer to focus on the discipline that they specialize in.
RitaSue Siegel, a headhunter who has placed myriad designers in upper management and executive positions, insists that all major corporations offer executive training programs to high-potential employees, including designers. She points, for instance, to Procter & Gamble (PG) where "designers get training in memo writing, giving winning presentations, and finance for nonfinance managers." As an example, she singles out Jon Denham, a former associate director of design for P&G hair care, whose broad business training helped him land a job as first-ever vice-president of design at another major consumer products company (a move soon to be announced).
Harvard Summer Camp
Still, designers at many companies must go outside their corporate walls to develop their business skills, to organizations such as Lockwood's Design Management Institute. DMI publishes a quarterly magazine and, in partnership with Harvard Business School, case studies, and it also offers seminars and workshops on various aspects of design management. Interest in the subject, says Lockwood, "has been growing. This year we expanded our program with seven new classes."
Recognizing the need five years ago, Harvard Business School, in partnership with the AIGA, a professional association for design, created Business Perspectives for Creative Leaders, a five-day summer program covering everything from product development and marketing to business strategy and customer relationship management. It's significant that the curriculum presents these subjects through the eyes of a business executive or client.
"You're sitting there in a room full of executives from Nike, Old Navy (GAP), and so on," says Turnstone's Martin, who attended this summer's workshop. "These folks are experts, but you get to the corporate finance section and it's like you're in a room of third graders."
The most valuable lesson, says Martin, was learning the case study method. "Designers carry around a lot of passion, and that's important," he says. "And a company needs to have some people who get really excited about a new product or idea. But other times it's not healthy. You need to be able to deconstruct an issue, to analyze it, and Harvard really helps you do that."
He points to a Corona case that charted the beer's improbable rise from a brew that tasted so bad you needed to squeeze a lime into it to the No. 1 imported beer in America. "They did it by listening to their customers and incorporating what they heard into their marketing," he says. "It's basic, but it reminds me that we can't sit in Grand Rapids and just produce furniture that we are passionate about. We have to be out there in the field and deliver what our customers want."
IBM's Green sees the biz-knowledge gap among designers narrowing as more companies involve designers earlier in the pipeline, exposing them to business strategy debates and so on. "When teams work collaboratively across disciplines, the lines between roles blur and everyone benefits," he says.
The point is not, of course, that all designers should be getting joint MBA degrees. "In many ways, the fact that many design managers never went to business school is an advantage," says the Corporate Design Foundation's Lawrence. "The unique training that they bring to bear is a positive thing."
Staying Creative
Erin Lowenberg, the Timbuk2 designer's tutor, agrees. "In my experience, successful apparel and accessory businesses allow design to stay pure," she says. "If design gets too focused on the numbers, it is my opinion the product gets too safe, maybe even boring. What if there is a trend out there that no analysis could possibly support? Design should be able to bring it to life and present it with enthusiasm and passion. That's when the good merchants take some buying risks and retail magic happens."
Still, while the core design team should be insulated from business pressures to do their best work, that doesn't change the fact that design leaders can be more effective if they have some basic management and business skills. For Siegel, the headhunter, programs that teach designers business skills are part of a bigger trend. "There's a whole transformation of the HR profession into the strategic role of talent management," says Siegel. "Companies focused on talent management develop proactive, long-term strategies for acquiring, assessing, developing, and retaining employees—designers and nondesigners alike."
Whether as part of a larger management initiative or not, the companies that help their design leaders grow by offering them in-house executive training or by supporting outside programs are the ones whose designers are able to make the most positive impact on corporate strategy and on the bottom line.
"School prepared me well for the day-to-day stuff that we do as designers," says McGuire, who joined the bagmaker 18 months ago and now heads a team of five at the 60-person company. "To me the gap is in understanding the bigger picture—how product design merges with branding and revenue planning and so on."
Bringing Designers into Management
McGuire's knowledge gap isn't unusual. "You're not taught about corporate finance or management at design school," echoes Kirt Martin, principal design manager at Turnstone, a subsidiary of furniture giant Steelcase (SCS). While many design schools offer corporate-sponsored courses intended to expose students to how design happens in the real world, and some design schools—such as the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford and the Illinois Institute of Technology's Institute of Design—are integrating business training into their curricula, the majority of schools still focus on core design skills like drawing and three-dimensional fabrication. Which means most design school grads lack the basic management, finance, and strategy knowhow that will help them be effective in the corporate world.
"There is a shortage of people with management and leadership skills," says Thomas Lockwood, president of the Boston-based Design Management Institute. A decade ago, when few companies gave designers a seat at the executive table, this lack of business training among designers was less of a problem. Lockwood points out that in large corporations, it used to be common for designers to be divided among different departments—graphic designers within corporate communications or marketing, industrial designers as a part of product development or engineering, interior designers within facilities management, etc. There was no centralized design department, and therefore no need for a companywide director of design with a broad set of business skills.
Today more companies are welcoming designers to the executive level. "There's been a big change in the number of VPs of design compared with just three years ago," says Peter Lawrence, director of the Boston-based Corporate Design Foundation. IBM (IBM), Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) have all appointed vice-presidents of design in the past couple of years; Nike (NKE), Apple (AAPL), and other design-savvy companies have recognized design at the executive level for much longer. Which raises a critical question: Where can designers climbing the corporate ladder get the business training they need to be effective?
Filling the Education Gaps
While there's no standard answer, companies and individual designers alike are taking steps to address the problem.
For a designer in a small business, McGuire is lucky to be getting formal, one-on-one mentoring. "He has a great eye and his products are great for the brand," says Timbuk2 Chief Executive Perry Klebahn, who arranged for the sessions
(Klebahn also teaches at Stanford's Institute of Design, where students are required to work in interdisciplinary teams in order to get broad exposure to related disciplines.) "But it's important that he learns the business side, that he stretches his mind."
The word "stretch" also comes up in conversation with Lee Green, vice-president of brand and values experience at IBM. "We have something we call a stretch assignment—an opportunity to do something that's outside your comfort zone," he says. For Green, who joined Big Blue as a designer 28 years ago, that meant taking a management job in marketing in 1988 and then a job in advertising as a way to expand his knowledge and skills. In 1993, then-CEO Lou Gerstner asked Green to become director of corporate design.
"IBM is great at providing diverse opportunities for people that want the exposure," says Green, but he adds that he thinks it's unusual for designers to take those stretch positions because many prefer to focus on the discipline that they specialize in.
RitaSue Siegel, a headhunter who has placed myriad designers in upper management and executive positions, insists that all major corporations offer executive training programs to high-potential employees, including designers. She points, for instance, to Procter & Gamble (PG) where "designers get training in memo writing, giving winning presentations, and finance for nonfinance managers." As an example, she singles out Jon Denham, a former associate director of design for P&G hair care, whose broad business training helped him land a job as first-ever vice-president of design at another major consumer products company (a move soon to be announced).
Harvard Summer Camp
Still, designers at many companies must go outside their corporate walls to develop their business skills, to organizations such as Lockwood's Design Management Institute. DMI publishes a quarterly magazine and, in partnership with Harvard Business School, case studies, and it also offers seminars and workshops on various aspects of design management. Interest in the subject, says Lockwood, "has been growing. This year we expanded our program with seven new classes."
Recognizing the need five years ago, Harvard Business School, in partnership with the AIGA, a professional association for design, created Business Perspectives for Creative Leaders, a five-day summer program covering everything from product development and marketing to business strategy and customer relationship management. It's significant that the curriculum presents these subjects through the eyes of a business executive or client.
"You're sitting there in a room full of executives from Nike, Old Navy (GAP), and so on," says Turnstone's Martin, who attended this summer's workshop. "These folks are experts, but you get to the corporate finance section and it's like you're in a room of third graders."
The most valuable lesson, says Martin, was learning the case study method. "Designers carry around a lot of passion, and that's important," he says. "And a company needs to have some people who get really excited about a new product or idea. But other times it's not healthy. You need to be able to deconstruct an issue, to analyze it, and Harvard really helps you do that."
He points to a Corona case that charted the beer's improbable rise from a brew that tasted so bad you needed to squeeze a lime into it to the No. 1 imported beer in America. "They did it by listening to their customers and incorporating what they heard into their marketing," he says. "It's basic, but it reminds me that we can't sit in Grand Rapids and just produce furniture that we are passionate about. We have to be out there in the field and deliver what our customers want."
IBM's Green sees the biz-knowledge gap among designers narrowing as more companies involve designers earlier in the pipeline, exposing them to business strategy debates and so on. "When teams work collaboratively across disciplines, the lines between roles blur and everyone benefits," he says.
The point is not, of course, that all designers should be getting joint MBA degrees. "In many ways, the fact that many design managers never went to business school is an advantage," says the Corporate Design Foundation's Lawrence. "The unique training that they bring to bear is a positive thing."
Staying Creative
Erin Lowenberg, the Timbuk2 designer's tutor, agrees. "In my experience, successful apparel and accessory businesses allow design to stay pure," she says. "If design gets too focused on the numbers, it is my opinion the product gets too safe, maybe even boring. What if there is a trend out there that no analysis could possibly support? Design should be able to bring it to life and present it with enthusiasm and passion. That's when the good merchants take some buying risks and retail magic happens."
Still, while the core design team should be insulated from business pressures to do their best work, that doesn't change the fact that design leaders can be more effective if they have some basic management and business skills. For Siegel, the headhunter, programs that teach designers business skills are part of a bigger trend. "There's a whole transformation of the HR profession into the strategic role of talent management," says Siegel. "Companies focused on talent management develop proactive, long-term strategies for acquiring, assessing, developing, and retaining employees—designers and nondesigners alike."
Whether as part of a larger management initiative or not, the companies that help their design leaders grow by offering them in-house executive training or by supporting outside programs are the ones whose designers are able to make the most positive impact on corporate strategy and on the bottom line.
iPhone为什么会成功？(from http://blog.sina.com.cn/taodong)
“1984年，我们推出苹果机（Macintosh），它不仅改变了苹果公司，也改变了整个电脑行业。2001年，我们推出iPod，它不仅改变了我们欣赏音乐的方式，也改变了整个音乐产业。今天，我们要重新发明手机。”
掌声中、镁光灯下，苹果掌门人史蒂夫·乔布斯以上面几句充满激情、充满煽动性的开场白，将他的最新产品iPhone推到了世人面前。世界上不知道有多少CEO在学习这篇经典的开场白，也可以肯定所有手机制造商的CEO对iPhone制造出的轰动效应深感妒嫉和焦虑。
乔布斯不愧为超一流的推销员。笔者不是电器发烧友，也不是苹果的铁杆追随者。不过，面对扑面而来的媒体报道和的确新颖的手机设计，笔者也忍不住想在iPhone亚洲发售时（2008年）买上一部。
千呼万唤之后，6月29日，iPhone终于在美国推出。连夜的排队等候以及上号登记的延缓，都不能减低人们对iPhone的热情。根据今日美国/盖洛普的抽样调查，90%的新手机拥有者对iPhone感到满意或极度满意，85%表示会向亲友推荐。这是一次极其成功的新产品发布。
iPhone真的那么好吗？这是一个2G手机，又大又重，没有按钮键盘，推出时间比预定迟了整整6个月，价钱比同类产品贵一倍。如果诺基亚或摩托罗拉CEO这么做，早就被董事局赶下台了。
乔布斯“重新发明”的手机有明显的缺陷。首先，iPhone采用2.5G的EDGE技术传送数据，这是基于目前网络接入现状而选择的让步，但因此（至少目前）失去了许多3G功能的应用，而且网络传输速度偏慢。其次，记忆容量偏低。售价499美元的iPhone，内存为4G，刷新了手机的内存记录，不过这个容量还是远低于30G和80G的iPod，且苹果操作系统及应用占用了其中的700MB。作为手机和音乐播放机，容量足够了，但是如果需要传送、储存录像或游戏，则显得捉襟见肘。第三，iPhone内置电池的工作时间肯定偏短。液晶面板是消耗能量的大户，iPhone恰恰以此作招牌。使用文件标明电池工作时间为5小时，即便属实，iPhone的电池也仅勉强达标。
新手机的重要卖点是点触式屏幕。新颖的设计、宽大的屏幕无疑很有吸引力，触击输入给人以“酷”的感觉。不过在目前技术水平下，屏幕输入速度远慢过键盘输入，是不争的事实。这对习惯利用掌上电脑（如Blackberry）发送电邮的商务用户，是一个致命的缺陷。
但是，iPhone的成功，在于它推销的不仅是一件电器，而且是一种体验。每个人都拥有手机，每个人都经常憎恨自己的手机。相比电脑，手机中的软件永远是小儿科，操作步骤复杂，User-Unfriendly。乔布斯的手机中，注入了人性的色彩，软、硬件设计从使用者舒适度出发，通过转换屏幕令通话、听歌、上网、发电邮变得更加轻松。这个宗旨，与苹果机在1984年摒弃文字指令、采用icon点击，是一脉相承的。将电脑上的操作系统植入手机，是革命性的进步，发出指令不再需要许多次的键盘操作，还给用户一个轻松的体验。
潮流是iPhone成功的另一个要素。新手机价格远高过其他品牌，但人们却趋之若鹜，因为它代表品位，代表社会地位，代表生活方式，手机主人可以向亲朋好友炫耀。苹果的品牌和设计，为用户带来功能以外的附加值，消费者不仅愿意花费500美元买手机，而且愿意每月多付35美元使用AT&T的套餐。
iPhone的营销策略，应该成为MBA课程的案例。乔布斯宣告“重新发明手机”和一阵媒体炒作之后，苹果居然隐声匿迹近6个月，拒绝提供进展报告，拒绝详述手机款式、功能。直至发售前几个星期，才逐步有选择地发布信息，勾起人们的期待和想象，让渴望中的“粉丝”和炒作中的媒体当免费的推销员，公司适时地在火上浇一点油。
苹果的成功和索尼的失败，有着强烈的对比。两家公司均定位于高端电器销售，高价位、高质量，均具有排它性，设计自成一统。它们都通过推出不同品种的产品，企图将消费者包围在自己的、排它的产品群中，以此获取高额的利润和持续的购买。
苹果的大包围远没有完成，不过它的布局还算理想，从电脑到音乐，再到多媒体手机。索尼的大包围却已千疮百孔。传统家用电器堡垒一个接一个地失守，连新任CEO霍华德·斯丁格（Howard Stringer）寄以厚望的playstation 3也惨淡不已，销量不仅只有老对手任天堂的Wii的1/4，也不及游戏领域新手微软Xbox的一半。
索尼的产品质量一流，颇具体验，但是走不出售卖硬件的俗套。索尼电器已经与潮流无关，市场营销策略未见改善。它的最后一个产品创新，是7年前的playstation，而固执坚持排它战略更成为其发展的枷锁。
在质量得到保证的前提下，注重体验、创意、潮流、营销。乔布斯为正在努力爬上制造业增值链的中国企业上了一课。
掌声中、镁光灯下，苹果掌门人史蒂夫·乔布斯以上面几句充满激情、充满煽动性的开场白，将他的最新产品iPhone推到了世人面前。世界上不知道有多少CEO在学习这篇经典的开场白，也可以肯定所有手机制造商的CEO对iPhone制造出的轰动效应深感妒嫉和焦虑。
乔布斯不愧为超一流的推销员。笔者不是电器发烧友，也不是苹果的铁杆追随者。不过，面对扑面而来的媒体报道和的确新颖的手机设计，笔者也忍不住想在iPhone亚洲发售时（2008年）买上一部。
千呼万唤之后，6月29日，iPhone终于在美国推出。连夜的排队等候以及上号登记的延缓，都不能减低人们对iPhone的热情。根据今日美国/盖洛普的抽样调查，90%的新手机拥有者对iPhone感到满意或极度满意，85%表示会向亲友推荐。这是一次极其成功的新产品发布。
iPhone真的那么好吗？这是一个2G手机，又大又重，没有按钮键盘，推出时间比预定迟了整整6个月，价钱比同类产品贵一倍。如果诺基亚或摩托罗拉CEO这么做，早就被董事局赶下台了。
乔布斯“重新发明”的手机有明显的缺陷。首先，iPhone采用2.5G的EDGE技术传送数据，这是基于目前网络接入现状而选择的让步，但因此（至少目前）失去了许多3G功能的应用，而且网络传输速度偏慢。其次，记忆容量偏低。售价499美元的iPhone，内存为4G，刷新了手机的内存记录，不过这个容量还是远低于30G和80G的iPod，且苹果操作系统及应用占用了其中的700MB。作为手机和音乐播放机，容量足够了，但是如果需要传送、储存录像或游戏，则显得捉襟见肘。第三，iPhone内置电池的工作时间肯定偏短。液晶面板是消耗能量的大户，iPhone恰恰以此作招牌。使用文件标明电池工作时间为5小时，即便属实，iPhone的电池也仅勉强达标。
新手机的重要卖点是点触式屏幕。新颖的设计、宽大的屏幕无疑很有吸引力，触击输入给人以“酷”的感觉。不过在目前技术水平下，屏幕输入速度远慢过键盘输入，是不争的事实。这对习惯利用掌上电脑（如Blackberry）发送电邮的商务用户，是一个致命的缺陷。
但是，iPhone的成功，在于它推销的不仅是一件电器，而且是一种体验。每个人都拥有手机，每个人都经常憎恨自己的手机。相比电脑，手机中的软件永远是小儿科，操作步骤复杂，User-Unfriendly。乔布斯的手机中，注入了人性的色彩，软、硬件设计从使用者舒适度出发，通过转换屏幕令通话、听歌、上网、发电邮变得更加轻松。这个宗旨，与苹果机在1984年摒弃文字指令、采用icon点击，是一脉相承的。将电脑上的操作系统植入手机，是革命性的进步，发出指令不再需要许多次的键盘操作，还给用户一个轻松的体验。
潮流是iPhone成功的另一个要素。新手机价格远高过其他品牌，但人们却趋之若鹜，因为它代表品位，代表社会地位，代表生活方式，手机主人可以向亲朋好友炫耀。苹果的品牌和设计，为用户带来功能以外的附加值，消费者不仅愿意花费500美元买手机，而且愿意每月多付35美元使用AT&T的套餐。
iPhone的营销策略，应该成为MBA课程的案例。乔布斯宣告“重新发明手机”和一阵媒体炒作之后，苹果居然隐声匿迹近6个月，拒绝提供进展报告，拒绝详述手机款式、功能。直至发售前几个星期，才逐步有选择地发布信息，勾起人们的期待和想象，让渴望中的“粉丝”和炒作中的媒体当免费的推销员，公司适时地在火上浇一点油。
苹果的成功和索尼的失败，有着强烈的对比。两家公司均定位于高端电器销售，高价位、高质量，均具有排它性，设计自成一统。它们都通过推出不同品种的产品，企图将消费者包围在自己的、排它的产品群中，以此获取高额的利润和持续的购买。
苹果的大包围远没有完成，不过它的布局还算理想，从电脑到音乐，再到多媒体手机。索尼的大包围却已千疮百孔。传统家用电器堡垒一个接一个地失守，连新任CEO霍华德·斯丁格（Howard Stringer）寄以厚望的playstation 3也惨淡不已，销量不仅只有老对手任天堂的Wii的1/4，也不及游戏领域新手微软Xbox的一半。
索尼的产品质量一流，颇具体验，但是走不出售卖硬件的俗套。索尼电器已经与潮流无关，市场营销策略未见改善。它的最后一个产品创新，是7年前的playstation，而固执坚持排它战略更成为其发展的枷锁。
在质量得到保证的前提下，注重体验、创意、潮流、营销。乔布斯为正在努力爬上制造业增值链的中国企业上了一课。
订阅：
博文 (Atom)