iPhone and Consumer's Mistaken Desires.

Admittedly, it is rather trite to write about something as contemporary as the iPhone. In a month, you're not likely to find a single post about the thing, and right now the net is awash in commentary on this single topic. Amazingly, interviews at CES focused heavily in Apple, who doesn't even attend CES! Remind me to hire Steve Jobs to hype my next invention. It doesn't have to be an original idea. It just needs a minimalist approach and he'll declare bold, and the world will declare it good. In the days following the announcement stock for Apple jumped over $10/share, adding about 10 billion dollars to their investment portfolio. So many companies think that solid revenue earnings, reliable growth, and reasonable ROI (return on investment, I looked it up) are the key to making your stock price. But that's not the case. It's all about public opinion of the company. Do they come out with cool new things with Steve Jobs hyping them? If they do, they get $10 billion. If they don't, they end up in the innovation slush pile.
But forgive me, this is turning into a bitter rant, and off the topic I wish to actually address. The iPhone is an excellent case study in consumer confusion. Now, I must insert a disclaimer. I am actually relatively new to the area of product development, having only been involved for 2.5 years. In that time, I've seen right and wrong ways to do things. Through it all, one fact remains abundantly clear: People don't actually know what they want. They think they do, but it's an assumption. This is my gripe with Apple: They don't release products that are actually good for the consumer. They release what the consumer believes they want. The customer is happy, true, but ultimately worse off for buying into a company that panders to their desires rather than try to educate them and make them more wholly satisfied.
Given the huge number of Mac'philes that aren't reading this anyway, I'm going to insert another disclaimer regardless: The iPhone is not a bad piece of engineering. It's no doubt marvelously constructed, and has several features that are both innovative and endearingly clever. However, they're not worth $600, and some features touted and getting consumers genuinely excite are actually not what consumers really want. Specifically, I'm referring to the touch screen and complete removal of a keypad. This is a topic where, despite my lack of experience, I can claim some degree of authority. People like tactile feedback. 'Old school' phone designers have put tremendous amounts of effort into the tactile response of their keypads. The RAZR is sexy/slim, but also has a rewarding keypad. Touch screens obliterate the clicking sensation. You can't replace it with a sound, it's something you have to feel. Most people don't know this. They've never bothered with touch screens or, when they do, use a stylus. For products I've worked on, the development schedule has actually taken a hit to better improve the feel of a button, because don't like it unless you can feel and hear that satisfying click. Everyone believes that 1) Apple is a house of total innovation and 2) Apple comes out with new products therefore conclude that Apple is innovative. I beg to differ. There are maybe two or three features in the iPhone that are truly unique, but alternative products (all in ones, not separate products) exist already that either meet or exceed this products capabilities, for equal to or lesser prices.
The difference? Steve Jobs. He knows what people think they want to hear, and tells them that. For that, he gets $10 billion for his company, and people receive a product that will ultimately make them suffer. You've got a product with an unsatisfying touch feedback, and you're out $600. Sure it's hip, and you're a cooler person to own one (my mom thinks I'm cool!), but form has truly conquered function.