Apple could very well launch an e-reader of its own, one that vastly improves on Amazon’s market-leading Kindle. Specifically, Apple could develop a reader that utilizes their leading touchscreen technology so that readers can intuitively flip through pages of magazines or books (a feature the Kindle currently lacks), develop their reader so that media is presented in color (the Kindle is gray scale), and provide a larger viewing screen. And while Steve Jobs has previously denied a desire to get into the e-reader market, Apple is apparently full-go towards developing and launching their own tablet computer. Such a device could be a “Kindle-killer”.

After months of speculation, it appears we will get our first look at Apple’s tablet on January 27th which will likely ship in March of this year.  Additionally, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that HarperCollins is in negotiations with Apple to make their titles available in an enhanced electronic format for the release of Apple’s tablet:

Brian Murray, the chief executive of HarperCollins, said in December that e-books enhanced with video, author interviews and social-networking applications could command higher retail prices for publishers than current e-books. Many of the country’s largest publishing houses are worried about the sale of new bestsellers for only $9.99 in the e-book format. New releases of enhanced e-books could sell for $14.99 to $19.99, a person familiar with the situation said.

Apple’s tablet wouldn’t simply be directed towards Amazon and the e-book, e-reader market. But like many of Apple’s products, it will have the potential to disrupt multiple industries at once. With the potential to provide enhanced features, publishers may be able to create some leverage over the 800 lb. gorilla at the moment, who has decided that most e-books need to sell for less than $10.

My initial thought is that while betting against Apple in the device space has not exactly been a good move, I am not convinced that enhanced e-books will be able to attract a high price-point from customers. The practice certainly worked with DVDs, but besides wanting an enhanced graphic display and color interface for many e-books and e-magazines I have not had a gnawing urge for author ‘extras’.

Not exactly the kind of glowing review they were hoping for. But as the article notes, this is version 1.0. We’ll see if they work out the bugs.

Jeff Bezos is trying to do to book publishers what Steve Jobs of Apple did to the music industry. With its iPod and iTunes Store, Apple carved out a largely virgin market so fast that it was able to wrest control of the digital-music distribution system and thus dictate what the record labels could do. With Amazon jamming (its latest earnings are sky-high even as other online retailers are in a state of malaise), Bezos may sense similar opportunity, a moment when he, in true Jobs-like fashion, could colonize this growing niche for the Amazon ecosystem. Should that happen, book publishers would have more to fear than just being squeezed. Amazon could phase them out completely, treating them as the ultimate middlemen orphaned by a new technology.

Essentially, Amazon is looking to bypass traditional publishers through its massive electronic distribution channels (Amazon.com and the Kindle device) as well as its on-demand publishing technology.  Rather than dealing with the publishers, Amazon could strike deals with the largest authors (those that provide the bulk of the revenues from ‘hits’ that traditional publishers require to keep operating) by offering wider distribution and increased royalties.  This could fundamentally alter the publishing industry, if not destroy its current incarnation.

While this is interesting, there is another part of the article that deserves attention: the risk Amazon could face down the road from Apple.

Amazon is faced with a dilemma. While they expend countless resources to create a high-demand e-book market (creating larger consumer demand, testing various designs and functionality in terms of the reading device with those consumers, etc.), Amazon will bear the brunt of creating this massive new market. Ideally, the investment pays off as Amazon then dominates that newly created market. However, the article points out that there could be a disruptive competitor waiting in the wings to take advantage of that market: Apple.

The article speculates that Apple could very well launch an e-reader of its own, one that vastly improves on Amazon’s market-leading Kindle. Specifically, Apple could develop a reader that utilizes their leading touchscreen technology so that readers can intuitively flip through pages of magazines or books (a feature the Kindle currently lacks), develop their reader so that media is presented in color (the Kindle is gray scale), and provide a larger viewing screen. And while Steve Jobs has previously denied a desire to get into the e-reader market, Apple is apparently full-go towards developing and launching their own tablet computer. Such a device could be a “Kindle-killer”.

Apple has made a name for itself as a disruptive innovator, most recently shaking up the digital music player and music industry with the iPod and iTunes as well the cellular market with the iPhone. In both cases, Apple didn’t attack and steal market share at the low end of the market (as Christensen suggests). Rather, they attacked the market with high-performing products set at market-leading price points. In the case of iTunes, Apple did manage to keep prices quite low ($0.99 per song), but the iPhone was a high-priced and high-performing digital music player. With the release of their tablet and a built-in e-reader, Apple would again be attacking a market from the high-end.

Is this unique to Apple? Are they a “luxury disruptor”? They’ve seemingly developed an infrastructure and design team that allows them to pivot into new markets with high-end products and to extract high-prices despite the existence of lower-priced, established competitors. I am wondering if this is replicable, or if Apple is simply an outlier when it comes to innovation and execution.

Curious as to readers’ thoughts.