When Google overtook Apple as the most valuable
company in the world a few days ago, there was wide media coverage—as one would
expect of such epoch-making events.
Comments from the fanboys on both sides came fast
and furious as to which company deserves the accolades more than the other, which
one is more innovative, or which one superior in terms not just of stock market
but in sheer technological or design prowess.
I cannot help but remember that about two decades back
when the Cupertino computer maker (computer maker!) was struggling, many journalists
would begin their articles thus: “Troubled computer maker Apple…” (It’s another
matter that many of the same journos couldn’t later stop going gaga over Apple’s
iPhone and iThis and iThat.)
Another point to note in case of both Google and
Apple is that they represent the end consumer side of computing rather than the
enterprise side—which is why as an enterprise technology writer, I have tended
to ignore them. But that’s not the case anymore: with the increasing
consumerization of IT having an impact on enterprises and with BYOD a frequently bandied about term in CIO circles, the inroads that these two behemoths
have made in the hallowed portals of biztech are just too deep and wide to
mistake them for mere bylanes.
And yet, there are, IMHO, certain existential and fundamental
differences in how the two firms work, live, strive, prosper and struggle.
Having said that, I believe both (or other avant-garde technology stars that show
similar sparks of genius in the computing universe) are necessary as well as
desirable.
If one were to distill the essence of the two
giants into tiny philosophical catchphrases, one might come up with this:
Google is a “Don’t be evil, do-gooder force unleashed by its founding duo”
while Apple is the delicious icon borne of its late design-obsessive marketing
whiz who is recognizable by his first name, last name, beard or even the turtleneck
he wore. (If you Google “Steve + turtleneck,” you’ll likely come across
this interesting story behind the why of the turtleneck tidbit.)
The story of
Google is replete with search algorithms, PhDs, swanky culture and
free-time-stealth-mode projects; while the tale of Apple is spun out of superlative
design skills, maverick behavior, marketing bravado and supply chain dominance.
If Google is about software architecture and data
analytics, Apple is about an iconic product at the center of its resurgence; if
Google is for a long string of continuous innovations some of which become
self-driving machines, Apple is about an exquisite mix of style-and-substance rolled
out in tune with the moment (and the moment repeats in well-orchestrated
cycles).
Google, which seems to defy the G of Gravity in
its rising fortunes, is trying to subsume the Alphabet, the very first of which
is A (and A is for Apple as most techno buffs learned in mobile class). But then,
A is also for Android—and tell ya what, this A is getting bigger all the time!
You can find rhyme and poetry in both companies,
in addition to the innovations that their engineers, architects and designers
come up with every so often.
That is why both are on my list of Smart Watches
and why I said that we might need both to get along in the increasingly
bewildering space of technology. A realm that is now constantly defined by the
quest for simplicity (hiding behind a gargantuan back-end complexity).
There are domains where the two companies’ paths
cross, and there are products and services where they overlap; but it is hard
to imagine a world—at least at this moment—where any one of them is A for
Absent.
(Image credit: SearchEngineLand.com)
