A friend on Twitter pointed me at this article on how Blackberry could have avoided becoming a footnote in business study classes looking at the Kodak Moment.
I am surprised that someone who works for an Advertising Agency fails to point to the obvious factors in Apples success. When none of the others were directly advertising to the consumer on TV, Apple were. When few were advertising handsets in the Press Apple did. Others at that time had stopped advertising above the line because they were selling products via Partners those partners were the Mobile Operators who used the coop funds to pay for in store and brochures which lets face it looks old and out of date compared to Apple.
NOTHING on a iPhone was new to the mobile industry what was fresh was the promotion and development of the aspirational quality of the handset. It has been helped by the "exclusivity" model used by Apple to "limit" mass market appeal. This fashion label allowed Apple for a time to lead the Smartphone market but was quickly overtaken in terms of volume by Samsung who used it's Far East cooperation ethos to appeal to those that where anti-Apple to grab the market.
The big question is will my Grandchildren read that Apple was just another Levis Strauss in that it helped establish a sector, almost died, had a return to fashion and then a slow but inevitable decline?