I'm currently in the school in Paris and so thought I could help clarify. The main programme doesn't accept people above 30 but they do run a separate one which is tailored to those people - for example, it's not a given that they'll have to be here 24/7
My parents could not text, could not make a phone call, couldn't use GPS before the iPhone. As soon as they picked up that phone, they could work it perfectly. Sure, the component parts of the solution were already there but that doesn't create a product that people use.
I should be clearer on the payments issue - this isn't a technology problem. All the technology is already there. But, I don't think Apple will serve as a what you would call a middleman They will create an experience that people can actually use. The component parts add up to nothing if no one will use them. Living in a market where NFC is fairly ubiquitous, I watch most people simply ignore it's there at all.
>Wearables have been around for years
There is nothing truly compelling about any of the wearables I have seen or used over the last two years. I never said 'everyone' in the market was copying Apple. I think products like Pebble have done a great job. I was referring to the huge number of products thrown out by Samsung, Sony, LG in the last few months that give off a certain ring of desperation.
>it is rather incredible when they are given any.
My guess is that the first company to move, let's say 50 million wearables, will be Apple. Pick any smart watch and try and sell it to a non-techie. Most people will not buy it. If those products were developed in a vacuum, away from Apple's influence, over the next few years I think people still wouldn't buy them. People value design, user experience mixed in with those new technologies. I don't understand how you cannot credit them at all. Microsoft had commercially available tablets long before Apple did. No one bought them. And most people aren't buying wearables and will not until Apple enters the market. You may call that timing but I don't - it's much more than that.
I acknowledge that payments are more ubiquitous than smartphones, tablets and wearables were when Apple entered the market. That does dilute my payments argument a bit. Maybe a middle ground can't be found here but to give them no credit at all seems rather ludicrous.
I live in Ireland where a fair few retailers support NFC payments and I have a card that has it. Most people don't use it.
Apple will be the first company to convince the rest of my technophobic family to actually use the technology. You're not wrong, in payments they will certainly take more credit than they are due. But, they will increase the uptake more than anyone through their implementation and you have to give them credit for that.
The interesting thing about that insight is that it does seem as though people are trying to copy Apple before they have even entered the arena. They will probably, fairly or unfairly, also get credit for creating the wearables market. My best guess is that Apple will freeze the market on Sept 9th with a product that is far superior. If they do, that conversation may ring true in the next few months.
I probably give them too much credit and you give them too little - seems like a reasonable balance.
Also, completely agree that Wholefoods are not entering because of Apple. Seems a poor assumption to be making