SlashGear Japan
In Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass, there is a line from the Red Queen, in which she states, “It takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.” In evolution, this is a theory that is also known as an “arms race to nowhere”, in which two different species evolve in tandem, one after the other, in an infinite loop. The reason, is because as one system evolves, then the other must evolve with it, just to keep pace.
And so the system is unending and essential for the survival of a species.
It’s no different in the technology ecosystem. In fact, it’s a lot more evident there, as we can see the fruits of these evolutionary developments as clear as day. We watched as the iPhone became the iPhone 3G, and while it may not have been leaps and bounds ahead of its predecessor in a lot of ways, we witnessed the 3G become the 3GS. And in turn, we saw almost every other major phone manufacturer develop phones to counter the iPhone. You’ve heard of them: the mythical iPhone killer.
And yet, perhaps it’s not the original equipment manufacturers (OEM) who are striving for this pivotal title. More often than not, at least here in the United States, the title of an iPhone killer is sought after more by the carrier. Sprint’s first foray into this tangled web could have been the exclusive Samsung Instinct. T-Mobile’s attempt, while belated, was the G1, manufactured by HTC. And Verizon, the network juggernaut, looked to Research In Motion (RIM) to hopefully take the crown with the release of the BlackBerry Storm.
But did any of these first attempts succeed? The media, and probably the mass of Americans in general would tell us that they didn’t. In fact, most of them would tell us that they failed miserably. The iPhone is still just as legendary, still just as loved (and hated) as it ever was, and even if Apple continues to release minor updates and no physical changes, the end result will be the same: mass consumption.
But, truth be told, it probably is the OEMs who are aspiring for bigger and better things.
And so, the manufacturers are called upon by carriers all over the world, and probably more so here in the States, to make something breathtaking and revolutionary. But, why should HTC, RIM, or Nokia care? They still have their fan base. Even in today’s market, there are still die hard Windows Mobile fans; there are still Nokia evangelists; and people who would rather die, than be parted with their BlackBerry.
The truth is, the evolutionary arms race to nowhere, within the technology ecosystem, means the ultimate victory for the consumer; because even if the BlackBerry fan doesn’t care about the iPhone, its features, or even its App Store, you can certainly bet that RIM does. They don’t want you to eventually see that the iPhone 3GS can do this, that, and has an app for everything else, while your BlackBerry Tour’s lasting feature is a physical keyboard or the Storm has a screen that clicks. They’re upgrading their Operating Systems (OS) to look flashier, to do more than ever before, because of the iPhone’s impact on the market.
We’ve seen the evolution of these changes, these aspirations from the manufacturers, even as it looks like Apple is perfectly complacent keeping the iPhone right where it is. HTC released the Hero, which brought Android to a whole new level. And, from out of nowhere, Palm released the Pre, which for some, gave the iPhone its first run for its life. And as Apple continues to produce mobile phones, you should expect the rest of the world to watch and create their own devices in its reflection. Not its shadow, because each of those other devices have their own appeal and draw. None of them can be labeled a disaster, simply because they do not ascend to the level that the iPhone has ascertained in such a short time.
In the end, as consumers, we cannot forget to look at every aspect to a phone. Physical sex appeal of a device is one thing for sure, as no one wants to be seen walking around with an ugly phone in their hand. But, that can only go so far. Manufacturers shouldn’t be sitting idly by, waiting to see what the next “great” thing Apple creates is. Instead, they should be doing their own innovations. We should expect more out of them on a constant basis. But, as the Red Queen Effect shows us, we need to wait for one species to evolve, before we can expect the others in the ecosystem to follow suit. The Arctic Hare, in trying to stay alive while the Arctic Fox hunts him, evolves to run faster. The Arctic Fox must evolve to catch the speedier hare, or it will lose out on that food supply.
4 Responses to “An iPhone Arms-Race to Nowhere”
Neil2112 September 2, 2009
It’s interesting Evan equates the development of the iPhone to the theory of evolution for two unrelated reasons.
Firstly, the development of the iPhone was deliberately orchestrated, it didn’t just poof into existence out of irradiated warm mud. The phone was purposefully conceived and designed. Numerous complex components, next to useless on their own, are brought together to form a functioning unit. If even one minute part of the hardware or software were not perfectly designed the phone would be a brick.
It’s a work of genius, and Apple should be given due credit.
Next, Apple came out of absolutely nowhere to make a game-changing product that made everything else look clunky.
Customer satisfaction ratings for it are head and shoulders above entrenched players like Nokia and the like. Blab all you like here, the verdict is in. More people love their iPhone than users of any competing product.
Ed Colligan, Palm’s then CEO, dismissed Apple’s iPhone; “We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not just going to walk in.”
Well, they did and it took you two years to copy it.
NeutralEvan Selleck September 2, 2009
The concept of the article is your second point, just elaborated. While I emphasize that the physical aesthetics of a device can’t be held to account for the full capacity of a phone, or its capabilities. Secondly, the article shows that Apple is the definitive piece in the mobile market at this point, and that all other manufacturers, even the “big ones”, are doing their best to not only emulate the iPhone, but defeat it.
As for the use of the theory of evolution, it’s not that broad. The Red Queen Effect is a focused aspect of it, and a concept that is used in technology, business, and even media all the time.
NeutralNeil2112 September 5, 2009
You’re absolutely right Evan. I wonder though, how was it even possible for an outsider like Apple to so ‘easily’ beat the big guys at their own game? Mr Colligan is no fool, so how was Jobs able to appear to overtake them from standstill (as it were) when Palm et al had been running all this time? Do you even remember what we had before the iPhone? I have to think hard.
I’ve watched the iPhone keynote 10 times at least. Nobody had the slightest clue what to expect, and the entrenched players were made to look like dinosaurs.
Discussion of The Red Queen Effect and its parallels within the fields you mentioned are interesting. I particularly enjoy it simply because the parallel *must* (but never can) account for the fact that in technology the process of change is a product of perspicacious design and skillful engineering whereas in nature it’s accepted as being utterly random.
Also interesting is that in every instance that I’ve seen, species are depicted as changing in tandem, each to outdo the other. That’s dandy, but they’re never shown as changing from one species to another. In the Red Queen models, dogs remain dogs and foxes remain foxes.
This raises innumerable questions. Where did the massive diversity come from? How does a mammal turn into a bird? How on earth does a fully functioning tear duct just evolve?? If all creatures change to keep up why do so many appear to be static when their ancestors are found in supposedly much older strata?
Anyway. With the iPhone, I think Apple has devised an ecosystem so clever and human that nobody (not even Redmond) can match it. The Foxes are all running, but the Hare is leading the chase.
Great article Evan. Thanks.
-1Evan Selleck September 5, 2009
That was a great comment Neil,
While I’d love to get into an obviously great conversation about evolution, the Red Queen Effect, and how it relates to the rest of the world from animals to humans, we’ll have to focus on the iPhone for now. In which case, I would have to say, that I agree with you wholeheartedly.
When the iPhone came on the scene, no one knew what to expect. And then when it blew up as it did, with everyone clamoring to get one, I think all of the major players were struck hard. They realized that user experience goes a long way. In fact, in this day and age (thanks primarily to the iPhone), it’s paramount when running a mobile phone. Compared to Windows Mobile (even 6.1), the iPhone is like a children’s picture book, while the former is a novel from Tolstoy.
Whether or not someone is a fan of the iPhone, or Apple, or even Steve Jobs is irrelevant at this point. Because if you’re a WinMo, webOS, Symbian, Maemo, or Android fan, you inevitably owe the evolutionary pace of the phone you hold in your hand to Apple. They made it possible, in the time frame it has happened.
+4