Covering the digital giants, by Jon Fortt
Type Size  -  +
November 25, 2007, 12:49 pm

A chat with Apple’s iPod and iPhone marketing czar

iPod family
The iPod family. Image: Apple

Greg Joswiak has what you might call a busy job — he’s charged with marketing two of Apple’s biggest hit products, the iPod and the iPhone. That might sound easy considering the buzz Apple’s product announcements generate, but there’s more to the task than promotion; he works with the company’s engineering teams to decide what the next iPods and iPhones will look like, what features they’ll have, and what they’ll cost. He’s also got a knack for product positioning; Apple (AAPL) insiders say that in his previous job managing Apple’s overall hardware marketing, he pushed for the company to produce a 14-inch iBook, despite the misgivings of CEO Steve Jobs. The product turned out to be a hit. To get his sense of the future, I talked to Joswiak about the iPod and iPhone’s holiday prospects, and the company’s plans for expansion.

For a long time you managed Apple’s Mac laptop business, which is also going gangbusters these days, and I know you were really involved in discussions about how those products were designed and positioned in the product family. How was that job different from managing the iPod and iPhone?

First of all I manage product marketing and product management — I don’t actually own the engineering. But we work very closely with them, as you know, on the features we create and what the product’s going to be about. I look in a lot of ways at some of the similarities.

The first similarity you’ve heard me talk about before: Apple is in a pretty unique position because we’re a world-class hardware designer and a world-class software designer. It’s rare enough to be on one of those lists, and we’re the only company I can think of that’s on both of those lists. So whenever we design a product, we try to take advantage of that capability that we have, to engineer the hardware and the software together so we can take full advantage of each.

As you know, a lot of companies have difficulty with that – if you’re a hardware company, getting the software company to do what you need; or if you’re a software company, to get the hardware vendors who can actually do the right hardware. We’re more fortunate. We can move faster, and we can create products that are, I think, a better experience for our customers.

What’s different? Right now I think the iPod’s U.S. market share is 77 percent, so obviously it’s been just this huge hit — 120 million of them sold. Obviously we had to deal with growing a much smaller market share with our Mac business, and of course that has been growing very nicely.

It wasn’t an easy road getting here, though. You guys put a lot of energy into laptop development, for instance.

We made some courageous decisions back when the market had gotten pretty tough for tech companies, back in 2000 and 2001. And I always like to think about the success that we’re having now, much of it goes back to decisions we made then. Because a lot of companies were laying people off, tightening the belt, and if you remember, we were very vocal about saying we were going to innovate our way out of this. And we made some courageous decisions. We didn’t lay people off. Instead we invested in our products like we never had before. We invested in the OS X transition.

And to your point, on portables, we invested in not only revamping the hardware line, but you could say we over-invested in portables, even though they were only about 20 percent of our mix then, with the realization that there’s no reason that they couldn’t sell as many portables as we could desktops. We created an applications division that was all about how to create software that was better on the Mac than anywhere else you could get it. And of course we started this whole music business, and we started a retail division. Those are all pretty dramatic things to do during hard times.

There are some fears, and maybe even some signs, that there are some more hard times on the horizon — maybe not on the order of 2001, but some tougher times, particularly with the consumer. How are you feeling about that?

Well, the iPhone’s gotten off to a pretty good start, as you’re aware. For the 74 days, to sell a million units, that took 22 months for the iPod. We tend to certainly, as product people, focus on creating great products. When we do that, it’s up to the market to decide, and so far they’ve been fairly positive about what we’re doing. I’m not an economist, but I believe in creating great products.

We reported pretty good earnings in October for the September quarter, a record quarter for Apple, and I think you can clearly see that this is the best iPod product lineup we’ve ever had. And now the iPhone’s not just selling in the U.S., but now we’re here in Europe having just launched it in the U.K. and Germany last Friday, and now of course bringing it to our French market on November 29th. You know, it’s pretty exciting.

The iPod has grown from being a single 5-gigabyte music player into a five-tier product line, counting the shuffle, nano, classic, touch and iPhone. Early on, you used to say that Apple was focused on just making a great music player. What are some of the risks you might face in continuing to push this beyond being just a music device?

If you remember, I think I used to say that we never wanted to forget that first and foremost, the iPod was a great portable music player. And a lot of times people will have a hit product and kind of lose their way, forget what the product was about.

That’s why I was always proud of, for example, the way we first brought video to the iPod with the fifth-generation iPod. We gave it a larger display, but we made the product smaller and we made the music quality better. So even though we were giving it this great new feature of video, we made the primary experience better. We just did the same thing with the third-generation nano. We gave it a bigger display, we gave it video capability, yet the product is the same size volumetrically as the nano it replaces.

That’s what I mean about being focused on what your primary use is. All along, from the early days, we gave the iPod other great things that it could do. We gave it calendars, to-dos and contacts and things of that sort. We have been relentless in the innovation we’ve brought to the stage, and every year coming up with something that seems to be a big hit for that holiday, and blowing people away.

I think the software development kit (SDK) that’s going to be available for the iPhone is very interesting, because we think that with the revolutionary multi-touch interface and the phenomenal product that the iPhone is, and certainly having OS X underneath it, that it’s going to be an unbelievable platform for developers.

Of course what we want to make sure we’ve done is keep the phone safe and reliable, and that’s why it’s taken us a little while to get this SDK out. Especially now that we’ll have a real SDK which means legitimate developers are going to come into the space. There are all kinds of fantastic and great things that they’re going to do.

What’s your philosophy on how best to handle an open iPod and iPhone? I know Steve Jobs has said you guys will have to balance openness with safety and security, and clearly there are a lot of developers out there who are determined to develop software for this thing, even if they’re doing it sooner than you’d like. What kinds of challenges will that present?

One of the things Steve talked about in his open letter is something Nokia’s doing, which is requiring a digital signature. That way if there’s something wrong with an application, you have a way to track it back to where it came from. So one of the things we want to do, again, is create a development environment that is going to maintain the security and reliability of the iPhone yet at the same time offer developers some really cool things that we can do.

And it is hard. Again, Steve commented on this in his letter, those two things can run in opposition to each other, and that’s why it takes some time to figure out how to do it correctly. That’s important to us, and I think we’re on a good path to that.

And checking IDs at the door is one way to do that, I guess?

Yeah. You know where it came from, and then it also keeps people more honest.

Something that strikes me about this holiday season is that it’s the last one before the iPod, through the iPod touch and iPhone, becomes a genuine open software platform. How does that influence the way you look at holiday sales of the iPod touch and the iPhone in particular?

You’re right, I think it’s a big deal for iPod touch, it is also a big deal for the iPhone. One of the things that was interesting when we brought out the iPod touch in September was, we had two kind of opposing questions. There were people who asked us if we were fearful that the iPhone was going to cannibalize the iPod touch, and some said are we fearful the iPod touch was going to cannibalize the iPhone.

And our response, which I think has turned out to be pretty accurate, was hey — one’s an iPod and one’s a phone. If you’re in the market for a phone, we think we’ve got the best phone in the world with the iPhone. If you want an iPod, we have a whole choice of iPods including the iPod touch. And they really are different, in that you’re either in the market for an iPod or a phone. And the sales for both responded well. Our sales went up pretty dramatically at the time when we decreased the price on the iPhone, and certainly we saw the iPod touch get off to a pretty dramatic start.

Developers see the opportunity already. You only have to look and see how many were creating iPhone applications without permission, when they actually had to break it, as it were, to do it. I think that was a good indication as to how much the developer community loves the iPhone, how much they see an opportunity to create great things. With the SDK, I think it’s going to bring more legitimate developers into it, as well as having the grassroots, small developers, which I think is awesome. Sometimes these one- or two-person teams have created the most dramatic things.

On the marketing front, I’ve noticed that the way you guys have been talking to potential customers about the iPod has changed over time. It started off talking more about speeds and feeds, about how many thousands of songs you could fit in your pocket, and the latest iPod touch commercial is different from that in the way the whole thing feels and sounds. Can you talk about how the marketing challenge has changed since the early days?

Sure, I’d love to. First of all, I don’t think we ever talked about speeds and feeds.

OK, I guess that’s true.

That was one of the things that we went out of our way to do. We gave capacity, because that was one of the things that was important for people to understand, but we actually tried not to make it like a computer. Much sometimes to journalists’ chagrin. They wanted to know, hey, what’s the processor, where are you getting this component, where are you getting that. We never wanted to get into that. We didn’t want to make it a speeds and feeds product, other than of course, people had to know the capacity.

I think what has changed over time is certainly early on, people had to understand what an iPod was about. You had to understand the whole message of a thousand songs in your pocket. So some of the early advertisements had to set up some of that foundation. In a market like the U.S., where we have 77 percent market share, that’s really not required. People understand what the iPod is – it’s become a cultural phenomenon here. So we can change the way that it’s marketed.

But when we go into other markets, sometimes some of the international markets, maybe our market share isn’t as high. It’s large in most of the big countries – the U.K. I think is about 58, Japan is about 60. But when we went into Europe a couple of years ago with advertisements, when France was in single-digit market share and Germany was in single-digit market share, we again had to establish the “thousand songs in your pocket.” We ran advertisements that were more foundational than the silhouette ads that we’ve done. And we saw market share rise pretty significantly — again, our latest French and German market share is about 28 percent each. That’s a pretty significant rise over a two-year period.

When you mention that, it sounds like you guys have plenty of headroom still in overseas markets to sell a bunch of iPods. Is that the way you feel about it?

Absolutely. I think that’s a huge opportunity for us internationally. Again, it depends on the country. I’ve mentioned the big ones where we’re either at or near 60 percent, Australia, Canada, U.K., Japan. But there are other markets where we’re in our 20s, at or near 20 or 30. That’s a significant opportunity because not only can we grow share, but we don’t have, in any of these markets, an incumbent to beat. We’re actually competing against “Other” – the off-brands that somebody’s trying to sell only on price, and not establishing any value in the market, which gives us a better opportunity because we’re the ones that are actually building value in the market. As a result, it becomes easier to grow your share against “Other” than it is against name-brand, well-established competition.

And it sounds like PC penetration is increasing in a lot of overseas markets where some people thought it never would. Is that a leading indicator for potential iPod sales since iTunes is a key piece?

Yeah, that’s certainly one of the metrics I look at. I certainly look at, to your point, iTunes as part of the experience, which means it goes back to having a Mac or a PC. There’s a pretty good likelihood if there’s a PC out there that iTunes is on it. There’s more probability then of getting an iPod.

Are consumer markets in Asia a place where you’re focusing marketing? Do you get much of a holiday season bump there?

Asia varies. Japan is obviously part of Asia, and we’re already very established there and we’re obviously still committed to trying to grow that market — we’re at or around 60 percent market share there, as you look at the weeklies in October. But in a market like China, I think we’re the number-one market share, but it’s like 8 percent – it’s a very fragmented market. So again, there’s lots of opportunity for growth there.

Are the holidays big in China?

Obviously there’s variability within countries, and within markets even within countries. Certainly, for example, the holidays have become much bigger in Japan. But we tend not to break out all of our sales, especially for the iPod, on a geographic basis.

Well, are you still having fun? The iPod is huge now. I remember when you guys were underdogs and every time you came out with something, people were saying, ‘This probably won’t work.’ Now whenever you guys are coming out with something, everybody’s saying ‘This is probably going to change the universe.’

Yeah … you know, I think sometimes there are still skeptics. When we brought the iPhone out, as much excitement as it had, there were people who wanted to nay-say. But you’re right. When we announced we were going into retail, back in those hard times that I talked about, people thought we’d be out of the retail business in a couple of years. When we were investing so much in portables, people were saying they didn’t get it because cheap desktops were where the sales were.

And the iPod — people thought we were insane. We launched it six weeks after September 11, if you remember. People thought, again, what are we doing launching a whole new business at a time when we ought to just be tightening the belt? We actually even ran TV commercials that first holiday quarter, even though there were only so many iPods to sell. So certainly opinions have changed over time, but there are always naysayers.

We do our best to try to understand what customers are going to want down the road. I’m fond of the Wayne Gretzky quote — you skate to where the puck is going to be. We try to understand as we develop our product road map, what’s going to be exciting in the future. And that’s one of the advantages we have over our competitors. Our competitors tend to put the cross hairs on where we are now, and by the time they come up with a product that tries to match where we are now, we’re beyond them. We’re one or two generations beyond, moving faster than they are.

Public telephone systems are very controlled in general. For example, your equipment *does* have to get certified by the *government* before you can sell your product to consumers.

The reason, simply, is that our economy depends on the public telco infrastructure to function. Plugging in a non-standard device at your house that results in the telco switch at the other end reboot effects other people. What if some of the other lines on your offline switch were used by the hospital, fire/rescue, or connected several busy ATM’s to a bank?

Since the iPhone bridges computer software to carrier’s public GSM phone networks, Apple has to balance regulatory compliance with the ability to extend the functionality of the end-user’s device.

For example, let’s say Bob writes a program that causes the GSM radio to broadcast a storm of meaningless packets at full power. This could un/intentionally cause the phone to jam nearby cell conversations. If that nearby call was to 911 during an emergency, Apple and Bob will likely face some expensive lawsuits.

Code-signing allows Apple to CYA. It prevents Bob from anonymously releasing his program into the world. That way, should the FCC some nocking (or a attorney representing a class-action), Apple can refer both back to the real culprit: Bob.

Posted By althocks, NE, FL : December 10, 2007 1:45 pm

Great interview. Here is a graphic that is very revealing on how iPhone is winning the cell phone war - naysayers not withstanding.

Tom O’B

http://humanvoice.wordpress.com/2007/11/20/what-is-cool/

Posted By tomob : November 27, 2007 5:31 pm

You folks don’t get it, do you.

Code signing doesn’t make you safe. The NSA’s applications are not signed by Apple.

Code signing simply puts you at the mercy of the code signing authority. These companies are using fear to cement their position as middlemen.

Would you like all your purchases pre-approved by the government? No? Then why would you want them pre-approved by Apple or Nokia or Microsoft?

Posted By Patrick Henry, New York, NY : November 27, 2007 11:03 am

To answer your question:

“Mr. Joswiak, why does Apple feel it is necessary to require digital signatures for iPhone applications but not for Mac applications?…”

The new Leopard OS supports digital signing of applications. It is not required, but is available for Mac developers. Below is a link from the Apple Developer web site on this topic:
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Security/Conceptual/CodeSigningGuide/AboutCS/chapter_2_section_3.html

Posted By Xavier De Leon, Denver, CO : November 27, 2007 8:59 am

Great Interview! It’s nice to get insight from another key player in the Apple game.

Posted By Christian, Montreal,QC : November 27, 2007 8:34 am

On digital signatures - everything is going this route. OS X Leopard uses code signing. Third-party apps aren’t required to use it since it’s new to the OS, but I can see a time when unsigned apps will at least prompt an “Are you sure” dialog at launch.

So with the iPhone SDK, everyone is starting fresh. So why not just use the more secure model at the get-go? Makes sense to me.

I do hope Apple allows signed apps to be downloaded from anywhere the developer chooses, not forcing developers to use Apple’s online store as the sole means of distribution. I don’t see that as necessarily connected to digital signatures. If Apple goes the restrictive route here, expect another developer backlash.

Posted By Mitch Cohen, Douglas, MA : November 26, 2007 2:37 pm

Are you sure this is a Fortune article? You didn’t bash Apple. Oh wait that’s Philip and his distorted reality blog. Carry on.

Posted By Nodack Phoenix. Az : November 26, 2007 1:43 pm

Excellent article. Balanced and informative.

As a shareholder I hope that the marketing department revisits the pricing of its european phone plans. They are simply too high for the UK/European market and are resulting in abysmal iphone take-up here.

That’s bad for the product, bad news for Apple and for me a shareholder…

Posted By Jason Kingston, London, UK : November 26, 2007 1:40 pm

Why not ask the obvious hard question?

Here, I’ll compose it for you:

“Mr. Joswiak, why does Apple feel it is necessary to require digital signatures for iPhone applications but not for Mac applications? In the past, Steve Jobs suggested an open iPhone development environment might endanger AT&T’s phone network, but that doesn’t explain why there’s no open development environment for the iPod touch, and nor does it jive with the fact that the open Mac development environment does not endanger Comcast’s or AOL’s Internet network.”

This is important to ask because, in reality, the reasons for Apple was reluctantly dragged into providing an SDK at all and the reasons it will be crippled when it arrives are: Apple will require digital signature for iPhone applications is because Apple needs to protect its revenue streams — For example, Apple will not allow IM applications because AT&T wants SMS revenue, and Apple will not allow removal of the iTunes Store icon from the main menu. On a Mac, the user can write their own IM applications. On a Mac, you can remove any application you don’t want to see. You can modify every menu. Yet, there is no security crisis on the Mac, just as allowing non-signed applications and a truly open iPhone would not lead to a security crisis on the iPhone.

In other words, when a corporate executive feeds you a load of bull, don’t just accept it, question it. Do your job as a journalist.

From Jon Fortt: Your question isn’t as smart as you think it is, Patrick. Mobile devices like the iPhone and iPod touch are bigger targets for malicious programs for two reasons. One, they’re the most popular products in their categories. Two, they are more networked by nature (the iPod touch has built-in WiFi), yet people aren’t used to protecting themselves against malicious programs on these devices. So Apple has good reason to be concerned here, and to use digital signatures.

Posted By Patrick Henry, New York, NY : November 26, 2007 1:17 pm

Fantastic interview.
Great to see that others than Steve are allowed in such a detailed way to talk about what the company has been doing.

Posted By Hans, Wouw, Holland : November 26, 2007 12:02 pm

Great interview.

Posted By Bill, Albert Lea, MN : November 26, 2007 7:51 am

I bought an 2nd gen ipod for my wife to use for recording/listening to university lectures in 2003. We now have 4 ipods, an imac, G5, 2 power books and my wife is on her 2nd powerbook at work… ya, Apples’ marketing works

Posted By Paul R, Ayr, Ontario, Canada : November 26, 2007 6:33 am

Jon, great going on the interview.

The article also reminded me that when Apple began to deploy its brick and mortar retail stores, they were doing at the tailend of Gateway computers coming off some very disappointing results from its poorly margined retail stores. Obviously Apple was facing a gamut of scepticism compared to Gateway’s failed retail model. Apple has maintained resilience in the face of adversity by innovating and it looks like they’re doing it again with the “salon” style retail model.

Posted By Donovan : November 25, 2007 7:11 pm

Fantastic interview.

I have also been drinking the Kool-Aide for the past year. When I heard that the iPod was going to have video I picked up my first 100 shares (50.00/shr). I then bought an iPod w/video (30gig) for my wife. I liked it so much that I bought a second generation Intel iMac. I then got an iPod for Christmas; bought another for my daughter and then a tiny one for my little boy. We travel with music all of the time. I have important notes and schedules stored in my iPod as well, as well as schematics.

The Mac is just easier for the home environment. From the iPod to the Mac, it is just intuitive. Bonjour finds all of my devices without running complicated set up programs.

As for the stock, well this is the quote that should convince you that $80 Sandisk players and crazy-always-copying-never-innovating Microsoft Zunes are a waste of your time:

“Our competitors tend to put the cross hairs on where we are now, and by the time they come up with a product that tries to match where we are now, we’re beyond them.”

THAT SHOULD BE THE APPLE MOTTO. IT IS VERY TRUE!

Rick

Posted By Richard W,, Seattle, Washington : November 25, 2007 5:50 pm

Excellent article! Is clear that these guys knows where are they going and how to do it. I think they must be very proud of wearing Apple management shirt! On the other hand I’ll continue wearing the stockholder one!
Congratulations for the editors.
Fernando Chain (from Argentina)

Posted By fernando chain, buenos aires, argentina : November 25, 2007 4:50 pm

sounds like Apple is so faar ahead of everyone. WOW!!!

Posted By Anonymous : November 25, 2007 2:40 pm

Jon, nice article. I am keeping my Apple stock!

Posted By Dean, Boise, Idaho : November 25, 2007 1:49 pm

Great discussion! When I visited an Apple store for the first time, my next move was to buy stock in Apple. My next move was a laptop,then an IPhone and finally a Mac Desk top. I’m converted. Keep those great products coming!

Posted By Walter, Middletown, New York : November 25, 2007 1:17 pm
CNNMoney.com Comment Policy: CNNMoney.com encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. Please note that CNNMoney.com may edit comments for clarity or to keep out questionable or off-topic material. All comments should be relevant to the post and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. By submitting your comment, you hereby give CNNMoney.com the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying information via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. CNNMoney.com Privacy Statement.
Jon ForttA senior writer for Fortune, Jon Fortt focuses on technology and innovation in Silicon Valley - a subject he's been reporting on since his days as a rookie reporter for the Lexington (Ky.) Herald-Leader. Before joining Fortune in 2007, Jon had reporting and editing stints at Business 2.0 magazine, and the San Jose (Calif.) Mercury News, Silicon Valley's hometown newspaper.
Subscribe to Big Tech: RSS feed | email newsletter
* : Time reflects local markets trading time.† - Intraday data delayed 15 minutes for Nasdaq, and 20 minutes for other exchanges.• Disclaimer
Powered by WordPress.com.