COMMENTARY
When I look at the main screen of the iPhone, I see
something missing: four buttons. In the main area,
there's a 4-by-3 grid of 12 buttons: SMS, Calendar,
Photos, and so on. Along the bottom, there are four
buttons that give pride of place to the most essential
services: Phone, Mail, Safari (Web), and iPod. In
between, there's room for four more buttons, turning the
top portion of the screen into a 4-by-4 grid.
Those nonexistent buttons are surely worth hundreds of
millions. If you're AOL or Microsoft, can you really
afford not to be on the iPhone's main screen? After all,
the iPhone had one of the most successful product
launches in history: Apple sold 270 000 in just the
first two days (29 and 30 June).
Photo: Apple
|
|
|
Early last month Apple cut the price of an 8-gigabyte
iPhone from $599 to $399. (At the same time it
introduced a WiFi-enabled touch-screen version of the
iPod). But the iPhone is still thought to be highly
profitable. According to a teardown analysis by market
research firm iSuppli Corp., in El Segundo, Calif., the
hardware costs for the 8-GB version are only US $266.
There may be other expenses, such as royalties or
shipping, but there may also be other revenue—big
revenue. An analyst for the Minneapolis-based securities
firm Piper Jaffray has opined that Apple gets a
commission of $11 per month from AT&T for each
iPhone contract. Apple expects to sell 10 million phones
by the end of 2008, so that would come to $1.32 billion
in 2009 alone.
Though the company won't say, I think that there's
even more revenue coming to Apple, and it's contained in
the value of those home-screen buttons. Right now,
Google Maps is one of the honored 12. But the label
doesn't say “Google Maps,” it says “Maps.” Imagine the
CEO of AOL telling Apple's Steve Jobs, “We're spending
$25 million to make our MapQuest service better than
Google Maps, and we're willing to give you another $25
million to put us there instead of them.” After all,
mapping is a major gateway to shopping and spending.
Where's the nearest department store or gas station or
fast food outlet? Ask your phone. The age of mobility is
still in its infancy, and some of these applications
haven't been written yet. But as cellphone users come to
rely on always-on data connections as they move around,
such services will become increasingly important—and lucrative.
Ian Lao, a senior analyst at Scottsdale, Ariz.-based
In-Stat, a market research firm that specializes in
telecommunications, agrees. “There's a lot of value
locked up in each of those buttons,” he says. “But it's
hard to put a value on them. It's easily over $10 million.”
We saw a hint of the iPhone's potential as a gateway
for e-commerce with September's announcement of a new
feature. When the iPhone, or its new sibling, the iPod
Touch, comes within Wi-Fi contact of a Starbucks, an
additional button, labeled iTunes, will appear on the
main screen. Pressing it instantly downloads the song
currently playing in the coffeehouse.
Apple's control over the iPhone's 12—or 13 or
16—buttons is controversial in two ways. The first is
reminiscent of the Microsoft antitrust case. A key point
of dispute was that Microsoft gave center stage to its
own Web browser, Internet Explorer. That positioning was
generally thought to be the single biggest reason IE's
market share quickly overtook all its competitors,
including one-time browser giant Netscape Communications
Corp. Regulators in the United States and especially in
Europe fought to force Microsoft to divorce the browser
from the operating system and keep it from being the
default Windows browser.
The iPhone will never have anything like the market
share Windows has. In fact, Apple's 10-million-unit goal
amounts to a mere 1 percent of the 1-billion-unit global
cellphone market. All the same, wouldn't it be better
for consumers—to say nothing of AOL—if the Maps icon
were neutral with respect to mapping services, and
similarly for other buttons? When you first get the
phone, you would go through a series of questions. Do
you want Google Maps, MapQuest, or an application of
your choosing that you can download? Should your Weather
button lead to The Weather Channel instead of
AccuWeather? How about a user-defined button that you
could assign to AOL's Moviefone on your iPhone but that
your daughter could assign to Facebook on hers?
The second controversy surrounds what's called network
neutrality. The issue is whether a telecom carrier like
Verizon Communications, in New York City, should be
allowed to discriminate among the different data packets
that cross its network. For example, given that Verizon
offers cablelike television services to its customers,
it might want to cut off or impede the delivery of data
from companies that compete with it in providing movies
on demand, such as Netflix or Blockbuster. Or Verizon
might, in exchange for a hefty sum from Google, speed
the results of Google searches but not Yahoo searches.
Yet Apple is already favoring Google for its maps
service as well as Starbucks and Apple's own iTunes
music service.
To be sure, achieving the equivalent of network
neutrality on the iPhone runs up against a special
complication, because these buttons often lead to
services that are customized for the device's unique
touch screen, which is larger than the display on any
other PDA-like phone. Still, if the iPhone continues to
be a big success, a service provider like AOL would
probably be happy to customize MapQuest and Moviefone
for it. We can expect companies to start clamoring for
this kind of neutrality by January, when the MacWorld
conference is held. Meanwhile, Apple zealots are already
clamoring for iPhone 2.0, without, it seems, any regard
for how many buttons it has.