Over the years they have been consistently wrong:

- They recommended IT managers to choose OS2 over windows

- In September 2001 they recommended that companies using Microsoft IIS for web hosting should switch to alternative products in light of increasing Internet worm attacks

- In October 2006, Gartner issued a statement that they believed Apple Computer should abandon its hardware business and instead license it to alternative PC manufacturers, such as Dell.

When I read their analysis, it gave me the impression they view technology like accountants that check only the cost but omit the benefit.

On the iPhone, Gartner said in InformationWeeks several obstacles stand in the way of its fitting into the enterprise:

1. Lack of support from major mobile device management suites and mobile security suites
2. Lack of support from major business mobile e-mail solution providers
3. The operating system platform isn’t licensed to alternative hardware suppliers so there are no backup hardware suppliers
4. Feature deficiencies, such as no removable battery, which could increase the need for support
5. At this point, it’s only available from one US operator
6. It’s an unproven device from a vendor that’s never built an enterprise-class phone or mobile device
7. A high price estimated at $500
8. A clear statement from Apple that it’s focussed on consumer, not enterprise, business

In my view, these objections are biased :

- Point 1,2,6. Lack of support or unknown or unproven device: It is a new device! It has always been the case for new device. Early adopters and innovators will go forward while followers will wait and see. Some corporations such as Goggle, Apple, Intuit, Cirque du Soleil are innovators. If we were to follow this logic, there would not be any innovations in America.

- Point 3. The operating system of Blackberry wasn’t licensed to any alternative hardware up to 6 months ago. Why is it a problem for Apple and not for RIM?

- Point 4. Removable batteries. This is new battery technology and Apple has reason to design this way. So you have to wait and see if it is a good system design choice.

- Point 5. Only in US. It is a problem for only those traveling a lot around the world.

- Point 7. High price. For what it does, it is a computer, phone camera, and ipod, it is not bad.

- Point 8. Yes Apple focuses on the customer but many products designed for large audience have their place in corporations (word, excel, ….) . Why is it a problem?

The Economist retains 4 lessons from apple:

1. Innovation can come from outside. In the case of Apple, the GUI (graphical user interface) was invented at the Xerox Park by a group that included Larry Tesler who later went to Apple to work on the Apple Lisa and the Mac. The Ipod OS (operating system) was designed by Pixo, an external firm. To do so, making a network of innovators, university and start-up is important.
2. Design around the user’s needs and simplicity, not the demand. You sell with demand but design by focusing on the user’s needs. When Ipod was launched there was no demand but Steve Jobs stuck to his instinct. In fact Apple as always integrated technology and simplicity with users in mind. Macintosh, Ipod and now the Iphone are all great innovations, but they were not the first. The characteristics of those innovations are not the novelty in functionality but the simplicity and user experience. It gives access of these novelties to a wider audience.
3. Ignore what the market says today and target new customers. The Ipod is an example. The simplicity makes the Ipod accessible to a wider audience. This innovation created the demand and consequently the market. Steve Job stuck to his instincts
4. Fail wisely. Most of the Apple success came from previous failures. The Mac emerged from the Apple Lisa failure, The Iphone is a response to the original music phone project with Motorola. When failure arises, learn form it.

In my view, the most important aspect is the Apple culture. It is not an engineering driven company but a design driven company. Decisions are not based on technical constraint. Of course, designers listen to engineers but they will sometimes ask them to go back to the drawing board and think again and be creative to achieve the design goal. For example Bill Atckison wanted the screen of the original Apple Lisa to be white instead of the traditional black in order to imitate the paper. Engineers at the time were strongly opposed saying it would consume more memory etc…but Bill stuck to his point and the engineers found innovative ways to achieve Bill’s design goal.

By being firmly centered on design and the user, more often than not, engineers will find a way to make the impossible possible. That culture is what in my view makes Apple stand out.