Michael Anthony Dennis

The Apple watch I believe is one of the less favorited Apple products from consumers. I expected a product like the Apple watch to completely shake up the watch industry. I read an article explaining a few reasons as to why this innovation is slowly failing.

1. The Apple watch is too costly. Many consumer’s willingness to pay is not at the price of the watches.
2. There is a lack of mainstream acceptance of the wearable devices.
3. The watch cannot be used without an iPhone.
4. The brand name convinces individuals on what type of product it is. Is it a sports wearable or an “iphone in a watch” device.

I think the problem with the smart watches, specifically the Apple watch, is exactly what you said. It’s stuck in between 2 segments while not excelling in either. If we consider it a watch, Apple loyalists are a condition to their target market. The reason being, like Leeya mentioned, you’d need an Apple phone to use it. So now their target market is smaller. Also, if it is being considered a watch then customers who typically spend that much on a watch will buy a luxury watch for aesthetics, manufacturer origin, etc. These high spenders typically don’t purchase digital watches so Apple would have to create that new market. There’s just so many barriers and I think that’s why high-end smart watches like Apple’s will continue to do poorly.

I would argue that it is hard to make a claim that “smart watches” are failing just because of differing values of success. For example, the Apple with the Apple Watch is selling something bigger than just a smart watch. Instead of focusing on functionality, integration could be much more important due to its diversity in the market. On the other hand, FitBit is focusing less on integration and more on functionality or mobility. Due to my idea of what Apple is trying to sell, it is hard for me to categorize the Apple Watch without including the products intended to be paired with the watch (Phone, laptop, etc).

In my opinion, I think that business analysis type positions will be for the most part safe from head count reduction due to the creative aspect of the role. Personally, I find this very exciting about the career path of an MIS major.
I find it morally okay to create a humanless business run by IT systems, however I don’t think this will be the case. I think while most larger companies will move in this direction, there will be a push back and an increase in smaller, mom and pop shops because of the human interaction. Plus some companies just wont be able to afford the technology.

Arguing the morality of an automated business one way or the other is, in my opinion, a boondoggle. Businesses exist to make money, not to pay your salary. Automation should be the ultimate goal for any process. Let them take all the jobs, who wants to do them anyway?

To me the real question is what happens when the bourgeoisie control the machines and no longer need employees to operate. Will there be the equivalent of the French Revolution, with people fighting drones in the streets or will the government re-appropriate wealth and establish a basic income?

Barring the total collapse of society, I’d love a Siri to work as a BA/PM and I’m sure my coworkers would agree, it’d make my life a lot easier.

I think that certain high level jobs will safe from automation for the foreseeable future, if for no other reason that people who are not in the technology field likely will not trust technology as much as more technologically inclined people will.

The morality of automation is an interesting question, ultimately I think that this issue should sort itself out as the cost savings from automation will likely have to be passed on to consumers. If automation results in mass unemployment that won’t really benefit business at all because consumers will not be able to afford their products, so this issue will probably have to be solved by a combination of lower prices and a more futuristic tax system that will be more of a government issue than a business issue.

One interesting thing to look at would be how much revenue certain companies (particularly retail companies) generate from their own employees.

I image the Business Analyst position to be safe from automated Intelligence headcount reduction. As a BA, we provide solutions to issues that companies have whether it be AI or cloud computing services. That role will still be needed for companies to determine the outcome of their companies. AI would most likely take jobs from individuals who work in industries such as manufacturing, production or customer service. I don’t necessarily see a company be run by IT systems anytime soon, nor do I think its morally right. Human emotions and internal feelings are significant to making business decision and I do not think a business run strictly by technology can satisfy customers.

This is a cool new innovative idea that Amazon has come up with, and it will undoubtedly shake up the entire retail industry if they see success from their initial adaptions of these stores. Certainly many economical issues come to mind when discussing mass automation like this, and there will likely be a great deal of push-back from a lot of people; however, at the rate we’re currently improving on our technologies, I do believe that mass automation is inevitable in the near future. By proving to be cheaper and more efficient than humans, the only glaring argument to this new IT-driven economy is the loss of jobs for much of the population. Having said all that, I can see this technology spreading globally within the next 10 years unless drastic measures are taken to prevent such a future from emerging.