Apple’s Key Weaknesses

Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) is among top tech companies, as measured by market cap, and continues to dominate in categories the company invented or popularized. While it seems that Apple is at the top of its game, several weaknesses have emerged that the company should address if it is going to stay on top in this ever competitive environment.

Many of Apple’s loyal customers see the company’s tightly controlled software and services as a major strength as it allows Apple to control all aspects of the devices it produces. Overall, however, this puts an additional burden on Apple’s development cycle as software, security and many other details become an in-house responsibility.

On top of this, Apple is in the business of running licensing agreements for its content sales including iBooks, iTunes, Apple Music and the App Store. From a management perspective, this muddies the water on what Apple should focus on. The biggest revenue generation is coming from hardware, but the closed nature of Apple’s ecosystem forces the company to be in all the other businesses in order to offer the same features as competing devices. Contrast this to Samsung: By plugging into Android and the rest of Google Inc.'s (GOOG) ecosystem, Samsung can focus on iterating the hardware and innovating on the design of its devices rather than having to police third-party apps or roll out operating system updates.

(For more on Apple and the iPhone, check out: iPhone: Apple's Strength and Weakness.)

The high product expectation for each new version or model that Apple has created may ultimately prove to be the company’s biggest weakness. Apple has developed an amazing brand that is associated with products that work perfectly and designed in such a way as to feel both advanced and natural at the same time. These high expectations mean that Apple can’t throw experimental products or services at the market without hurting its brand.

This inability to iterate quickly makes it harder for Apple to innovate as rapidly as Google does in the services space or as fast as Samsung in the hardware space. So Apple has to depend on its leadership and employees being so far ahead of the curve that the slower release schedule still results in Apple leading the market. So far, Apple’s been able to keep its edge in most of its major product lines, but the size of its lead is getting smaller.  At the same time, other tech manufacturers have caught on and are themselves rolling out upgrades and new models on a regular basis as well. For example, Samsung's Galaxy S line of mobile phones sees a new release every year or so now.

(For related reading, check out: Which Is Better: Dominance or Innovation?)

The last weakness isn’t unique to Apple, but it has emerged as a big one. The question is whether CEO Tim Cook can provide the leadership Apple needs to stay on top of the device game. Following Steve Jobs is a tough act, particularly when his second run at Apple took the company to the top of the technology sector. Jobs was behind the core products that continue to drive revenue at Apple, whereas the major post-Jobs release, the Apple Watch, has yet to impress. That’s not to say that iterations like the iPhone X don’t require leadership, but it may require a different kind of leadership to keep Apple’s reputation for visionary products.

(For more, check out: Apple Watch: Upcoming Success or Clear Failure?)

Frankly speaking, there are hundreds of tech companies that would love to have Apple’s weaknesses as long as they also had the strengths to pull on. These include a massive war chest, a powerful brand and much of the infrastructure still intact from its streak of hit products. That said, Apple needs to get back to that pace of innovation or the company simply will not be able to deliver to the incredibly high expectations of their core customers. If the brand erodes, Apple’s competitors will continue to close the gap and eliminate the premium Apple can charge for its product and service offerings. Steve Jobs is gone, and Apple needs to keep finding its way without him – something that the company has historically struggled with.