The other day in class we discussed the possible internal opinions regarding the Iphone and Ipod. The argument was whether the Ipod would eventually be rendered obsolete to the Iphone. It was an interesting topic of conversation: Why would someone buy an Ipod and an Iphone? I don’t think they would. Why spend the extra money when you could just buy the Iphone to begin with? One students argument was that a parent may first buy an Ipod for their child, before an Iphone, so that they could test out the technology without having all of the power of an Iphone. I think that if that were the case a family wouldn’t want to spend money on both devices when they are so similar. The Ipod will eventually be phased out. The demand for a device that simply plays music is indeed obsolete to a device that can do almost anything (the Iphone) . The Iphone is basically an Ipod that can make phone calls, draw maps, and create recipes. I think that as the sales of the Ipod continue to fall that Apple should seek an alternative revenue stream. It should adapt to the market and create something entirely new, or continue to improve the designs that they already have in place.

http://ipod.about.com/od/decidingwhichipodtobuy/tp/Top-7-Differences-Betwen-The-Iphone-4-And-Ipod-Touch.htm

 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/28/business/worldbusiness/28iht-mattel.4.7289869.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Mattel Inc. was hit with a devastating blow in 2007 when it learned that many of its factories in China were producing products with paint that had dangerous levels of lead. Originally the company thought that it was an isolated issue; “a single failure, from a single vendor who made a big mistake.”(3) Soon it realized that this was in fact not the issue, and that it was a wide spread crisis. Some of Mattel’s trusted producers had apparently opted for a cheaper paint outside of Mattel’s approved list of paint suppliers. This decision by the vendors ultimately resulted in a very unfortunate situation for Mattel.

The negative impacts that this ordeal had on Mattel definitely tarnished its reputation as one of the top toy companies in the world. However, if they did not publically announce this safety issue and had kept it away from the public it would have been an unethical and immoral decision. Despite the fact that this calamity had a huge negative impact on the company, it had a moral obligation to protect its stakeholders and spend capital to revaluate the safety of all Mattel products.

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!