First Google Android phone spotting reveals bulky iPhone rival

[AppleInsider]

The first smartphone based on Google's Android mobile platform could hit the U.S. market as early as October, according to new reports, but a video of the handset leaked on the Internet reveals a device which lacks the elegance that's already drawn millions to Apple's iPhone.

People briefed on the search giant's plans tell the New York Times that the HTC-manufacturered handset, know amongst Internet circles as the "Dream," will go on sale by the holidays -- possibly even earlier depending on how long it takes the Federal Communications Commission to weigh in with approval.

It's expected to be the only Android phone available in the U.S. this year and will be sold exclusively through T-Mobile, the nation’s No. 4 wireless carrier. A video (below) of the supposed device making the rounds on the Internet is said to match the one seen by the Times' sources, confirming its authenticity.

Like the iPhone, the Dream has a full touch-screen and will be able to run a slew of applications written by third-party developers for the open-source Android operating system. Conversely, it will also feature a physical "full five-row keyboard" that's exposed by sliding the display component upwards, mimicking the functionality of T-Mobile's Sidekick handset.

While the Dream is "apparently a hot item to show off in Google's cafeterias these days," those familiar with the device describe it as "big and bulky," and nowhere near as sleek as iPhone that's forever altered the landscape of the mobile industry. The Android software itself is similarly not up to par with standards set by Apple, leaving it feeling "less-elegant, less-user-friendly" just months before its slated to be unleashed into the wild.

Still, the Dream is just one of "several devices" Google is testing with its new mobile software, offering hope that other smartphone makers will be able to compensate for the inadequacies of the initial HTC handset when they begin rolling out their Android phones sometime next year. The more pressing issue appears to be whether Google is adequately prepared to provide its ring of developers with the support and expertise they need to go head-to-head with an already thriving fleet of software makers that have hitched onto Apple's mobile platform.



Some early Android supporters have already expressed frustration with the company for favoring a small subset of developers with advance releases of Android's Software Developer Kit, exposing them to newer features and bug fixes ahead of the general community. Meanwhile, those carriers and hardware manufacturers that do have access to the latest Android codebase haven't experienced a clear path to success either.

Among their complaints have been language translation problems with software and an overall lack of support from Google, whose emphasis on the anticipated launch of the Dream through T-Mobile has crowded out other carrier's attempts to get help launching their own array of Android devices.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=4499)

[SpamSandwich]

Given that Android is only in its first iteration, I'm not too concerned with limited functionality or other such growing pains... give it some time, kids.

[Ireland]

Darth Vadar.

[deep]

I'm so creeped out by the heavy breathing

[GQB]

Given that Android is only in its first iteration, I'm not too concerned with limited functionality or other such growing pains... give it some time, kids.

That's what Gates said about Windows.
These guys can't come up with anything more 21st century than f***ing desktop folder icons?

[GQB]

duplicate.

[moo083]

I love Google and everything, but when comparing Apple and Google, you have to keep in mind that Google has never released a consumer grade OS to the masses before and Apple has done it time and time again. As much as I like Google, they are not an OS company. So while I will keep an Android ear open, I'm not expecting to seriously compete with the iPhone. It might compete well with Windows Mobile. Anything is better than that crap.

[DimMok]

Bring it on.....

We will bury these cockroaches.....

[technohermit]

I love Google and everything, but when comparing Apple and Google, you have to keep in mind that Google has never released a consumer grade OS to the masses before and Apple has done it time and time again. As much as I like Google, they are not an OS company. So while I will keep an Android ear open, I'm not expecting to seriously compete with the iPhone. It might compete well with Windows Mobile. Anything is better than that crap.

Maybe it will have 22nd century features, like cut copy and paste. :lol:

[wizard69]

Looks like I'm not the only one that thought Darth Vader was invoked in this video LOL. ;) :) ;)

On the serious side that video was just about useless on the iPhone.

Interestingly I'm not opposed to a physical keyboard on such devices. It is just that I don't see how youbcan keep the size of the phone under control. If apple comes out with a larger iPod Touch a slide out keyboard might work well on it. Or maybe a slide out screen that can cover for a keyboard. I just don't see current tech making such possible in a phone the size of iPhone.

Dave

[Virgil-TB2]

Good article but do you have to drag out this troll every single time an article about Android is in the offing?
... Some early Android supporters have already expressed frustration with the company for favoring a small subset of developers with advance releases of Android's Software Developer Kit...

*Some* die-hard OSS evangelists are upset over this, but it's simply not the gigantic issue it's being made out to be and doesn't deserve to be repeated ad nauseam in every single article about the subject. It's also inaccurate in the way you report it.

Additionally, it's very, very interesting that Googles (debatable but definitely valid) response to this criticism is never mentioned in the same articles. Google's known position is that they are taking a well-known and in some circles respected approach to OS development, by trying to prototype the basics of Android somewhat privately, before the code is released in full to the OS community. You may disagree with this, but it's a valid choice to make. Others make it, Google made it, and to describe what they are doing as "favouring" particular OS developers is disingenuous to say the least.

I understand that sites like this are heavily biased towards the developer community, but a little objective reporting isn't going to hurt anyone. If you are going to include this canard in every single article on Android, at least have the decency to cover both sides of the issue in full.

You are putting words in Googles "mouth" here that were never said and attributing actions to Google that they never performed.

[Booga]

Good article but do you have to drag out this troll every single time an article about Android is in the offing?


*Some* die-hard OSS evangelists are upset over this, but it's simply not the gigantic issue it's being made out to be and doesn't deserve to be repeated ad nauseam in every single article about the subject. It's also inaccurate in the way you report it.

Additionally, it's very, very interesting that Googles (debatable but definitely valid) response to this criticism is never mentioned in the same articles. Google's known position is that they are taking a well-known and in some circles respected approach to OS development, by trying to prototype the basics of Android somewhat privately, before the code is released in full to the OS community. You may disagree with this, but it's a valid choice to make. Others make it, Google made it, and to describe what they are doing as "favouring" particular OS developers is disingenuous to say the least.

I understand that sites like this are heavily biased towards the developer community, but a little objective reporting isn't going to hurt anyone. If you are going to include this canard in every single article on Android, at least have the decency to cover both sides of the issue in full.

You are putting words in Googles "mouth" here that were never said and attributing actions to Google that they never performed.
Some good criticism... besides, there are plenty of other things developers are hating about Android, from all published reports. Such as that it's a LOT harder to do some of the things that are easy with the iPhone SDK on the Android SDK. Apple not only benefits from decades of OS experience, they also already had an entire development library and toolchain avaialble that they just had to augment for the iPhone.

[echosonic]

The Google phone wil be as well-received as a fart in church. Watch.

[ekeefe41]

Here is what i believe; it is based on nothing more than my opinion.

The iPhone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st GUI-based Macs.

The iPhone is tightly controlled by Apple.
So were the 1st GUI-Macs.

The iPhone will fail the same way the original Macs did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on its head.

Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did lose the PC war you know.

[TenoBell]

Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.

The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's

The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's

The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.

Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.

This whole thesis is completely wrong simply based on the fact that the Macintosh is still tightly controlled by Apple. The Macintosh is currently growing faster than the entire Windows market.

The original Macs did not fail. How exactly are you gauging success or failure? Apple as a company lost direction because of poor management, not because of its business model.

Apple did not really start the mobile phone as a "mini computer". They simply have done it better.

[teckstud]

That thing looks like the bastard child of an iPhone bred with a Sidekick!:lol:

[Mr Macintosh]

Looks like something thrown together real quickly. I noticed from the video that the screen is not very responsive. I hope this is due to the touch screen and not the app. Maybe in a few years they will have a more polished app than what was just shown cause I would not even give that a second look...

:err:

[ekeefe41]

This whole thesis is completely wrong simply based on the fact that the Macintosh is still tightly controlled by Apple. The Macintosh is currently growing faster than the entire Windows market.

The original Macs did not fail. How exactly are you gauging success or failure? Apple as a company lost direction because of poor management, not because of its business model.

Apple did not really start the mobile phone as a "mini computer". They simply have done it better.

What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???

6.1%

They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)

[Capnbob]

ekeefe41 - tenobell nailed it, but just to add... people will consider their cell phone a mini computer, and for most users, they will just want it to work and do what they need it to do (which is not a very high bar).
Geeks may want to open their phone up and add flux capacitors but most (a much larger global user base than PCs) want it to do the basic job they need it to do - phone, surf, media, few cool apps etc.
The history of the PC wars is not relevant. Apple had many opportunities to win and screwed the pooch every time. Apple may have run aground in the past but it is now on the crest of the wave in delivering that market-driven model in the iPhone and pretty well in the Mac too.

[ekeefe41]

ekeefe41 - tenobell nailed it, but just to add... people will consider their cell phone a mini computer, and for most users, they will just want it to work and do what they need it to do (which is not a very high bar).
Geeks may want to open their phone up and add flux capacitors but most (a much larger global user base than PCs) want it to do the basic job they need it to do - phone, surf, media, few cool apps etc.
The history of the PC wars is not relevant. Apple had many opportunities to win and screwed the pooch every time. Apple may have run aground in the past but it is now on the crest of the wave in delivering that market-driven model in the iPhone and pretty well in the Mac too.

I think your being short sighted..
Think about the computing power of an iphone.

Now try to imagine what phones the same size of the iphone will be able to do in 5 years.

I think people's phones will replace there computers for social networking email chating.... who knows what else. There will be a "Killer app" to make everyone to use there phone as a computer. It just hasn't been made yet.

I could be all wrong, it's just ideas floating around in my head.

[Booga]

Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.

The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's

The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's

The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.

Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.
This is the conventional wisdom, but personally I don't think that's why Windows became ubiquitous over MacOS. DOS/Windows was cheaper, was more directly applicable to the folks spending the money (mostly just businesses in the 80's), and once the hardware platform was established ran on existing hardware.

None of that is applicable here. In fact, considering the installed base of existing iPhones, the new subsidized price, and the applicability to both business and home users (who are spending a lot more than they did in the 80's), I'd say the iPhone has all the advantages over Android this time.

If anything, RIM's the one to watch here. The corporate world is theirs to lose right now and they're starting to put feelers out into the consumer space. I don't see Android being very relevant.

[teckstud]

ekeefe41 - tenobell nailed it, but just to add... people will consider their cell phone a mini computer, and for most users, they will just want it to work and do what they need it to do (which is not a very high bar).
Geeks may want to open their phone up and add flux capacitors but most (a much larger global user base than PCs) want it to do the basic job they need it to do - phone, surf, media, few cool apps etc.
The history of the PC wars is not relevant. Apple had many opportunities to win and screwed the pooch every time. Apple may have run aground in the past but it is now on the crest of the wave in delivering that market-driven model in the iPhone and pretty well in the Mac too.

Many people who buy the iPhone do not even realize that it is a smart phone to begin with and think it's a cell phone as it is marketed. This accounts for a large part of the sales percentage of it to smart phones overall.
It should be really compared as a percentage of both cell phones and smart phones combined. And there the percentage is probably not that significant.
The real test is whether corporate America adopts it and this has yet to be witnessed.

[city]

Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.

The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's

The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's

The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.

Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know."Price" lost the PC war. IBM almost went under too. That isn't going to happen with iPhone.

[mjtomlin]

The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control.

It's funny that people to this day still think that was the cause of the Mac's tiny fraction of the market share, it is in fact a completely short-sighted and flawed assumption. The Mac, along with every other OS vendor; AmigaOS, NextStep, BeOS, DR-DOS, countless others, were shoved out of the market by Microsoft (IBM's Frankenstein's Monster) and it's unethical business practices.

At that point in history, it was about applications and compatibility. In this modern age it's all about the content (the data), which is now mostly open and cross-platform compatible thanks to the advent of the Internet and a need for standards. It doesn't matter how tight your control is over your own platform anymore as long as you support the standards that everyone else supports.

The market the Mac originated in is not at all anything like the market the iPhone is in. And to try and draw comparisons between the two platforms is a bit ridiculous.

[Foo2]

They did loose the PC war you know.

Tell that to Steve Ballmer. See how he feels about that right now. On second thought, never mind. All you're likely to get out of him is "Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! I! LOVE! THIS! COMPANY! HEE-HAW!"

[ekeefe41]

All you guys are saying "price won the PC war".
Well what caused the price difference?

The ability to install the windows OS on and hardware made for competition.
Competition breeds price drops.
Competition also breeds also new developments.

This all still fits my point...
Apple=Socialist Computing
Windows=Free market computing

Again the iphone business model looks the same to me.

[anantksundaram]

ekeefe41 - tenobell nailed it, but just to add... ....

I agree.

And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......

[Foo2]

I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......

The moral: this too shall change. The iPod might even become a bigger success.;)

[teckstud]

I agree.

And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......

..and the complete and utter failure of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the AppleTV......

[mbmcavoy]

It seems apparent to me that a major reason for the dominance of PCs was/is customizability.

In the past, a basic computer was only suitable for the most mundane tasks. People had to consider their uses, then carefully pick-and-choose the hardware components to get the best bang for the buck. The typical user was tech-savvy, and was able and willing to do this. The openness of Windows supported this basic need, while few alternatives did. Apple struggled through those times.

I believe Apple's market share is rising largely due to the fact that a basic computer is now capable of doing what 80% of the market needs. There are still users that needs specialized hardware (gamers, etc), or people that are used to the status quo. The existence of the Mac Pro and calls for an xMac attest to this.

So, how does this apply to phones? Sure, some people need a basic phone, and others need a high-end smartphone. Android may allow the same OS to support a wide range of hardware - but is it going to enable the hardware customization of a Windows PC? No.

First, a modular phone would almost surely not be compact, light, and durable enough for actual use. You may have a few different handsets to choose from, but you won't be able to mix & match, or upgrade components individually.

Second, the phone companies are keeping tight control over the handsets. It is too much of a revenue stream, and a significant differentiator (ie, if you want an iphone, go to AT&T). They won't let generic modular phones happen.

If the iPhone does fail to Android, it won't be becuse of open-hardware "PC Phones".

[ekeefe41]

I agree.

And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......

Funny, everyone i know hates that they are forced to use Itunes if they buy an ipod. I like Itunes....

Let me be clear, i am an Apple fan. I just think the smart cell phone industry will be the next big thing. If one OS could become the defacto OS for the industry.... well watch out.

RiM, Apple, Windows moble, Palm
Pick your poison.

Given Apple can only be installed on apple hardware....
Well... make your own assumptions.

[teckstud]

I agree.

And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......

Both iPods and iPhones are successes due to their hardware more than anything else.
The futuristic white click-wheeled iPos and sleek glass iPhone are what really made the success more than anything else- the coolness factor.

[Daniel0418]

That's what Gates said about Windows.
These guys can't come up with anything more 21st century than f***ing desktop folder icons?

I want to agree with you but it's really rediculous. 21st century technology is folder icons. I would rather have the folder then flip through 100 unlabeled homescreens with no option of a different backround. I would love copy/paste but guess what. iPhone has been out for a year and a half and it's still not happened. Everyone complains about vista I don't have it personally but I wouldn't mind it. I know like 20 people with it and none of them complain. I have only heard people who have macs complain about vista lol so funny. Google phone platform may be good may not be who knows but the iPhone is very very lacking in very east to fix subjects. I know because I have the 3g and my lady has the 1st gen.

Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1

[mdriftmeyer]

Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.

The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's

The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's

The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.

Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.

It will fail just like the iPod, right? This isn't 1985 and the board of Apple is moronic and allows Jobs to be just the Chairman while they find someone to run the company as CEO.

This is 2008 and Steve knows how to run Apple and basically an OS company better than anyone else on the planet.

Microsoft would never have become the 800lb gorilla if Apple wasn't so retarded as to listening to a former CEO of Pepsi convince them to oust Jobs. In hindsight, NeXT was formed along-side PIXAR so the world has received much more due to their ignorance--it just took a damn long time to drudge through crap to get to where we now stand.

[anantksundaram]

..and the complete and utter failure of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the AppleTV......

Care to explain why/how AppleTv is a "...complete and utter failure"? Compared to what?

(FWIW, I've now had @TV for about 6 months, and I have to say that my overall experience with it has been fantastic: It has amazingly simplified my multimedia life at home. Do you own/use it?)

[anantksundaram]

Funny, everyone i know hates that they are forced to use Itunes if they buy an ipod.......

Wow, and yet, it has a 75% market share in the US.

(This is what economists call "cheap talk.")

[Booga]

All you guys are saying "price won the PC war".
Well what caused the price difference?

The ability to install the windows OS on and hardware made for competition.
Competition breeds price drops.
Competition also breeds also new developments.

This all still fits my point...
Apple=Socialist Computing
Windows=Free market computing

Again the iphone business model looks the same to me.
Economy of scale breeds price drops, too. And that's why Apple can make an iPod cheaper than anyone else. The fact that they can also sell an iPod for more than most others is also interesting, and why their margins remain so insanely high. But if it came to a pure MP3 player price war, Apple could win. By the time Android comes around, Apple will also be buying all the phone parts in bulk and have suppliers locked in for long term cheap parts.

And when it comes to building an iPod, it's all about Han Hai's ability to compete in a free market, not Apple's. Apple bids out manufacturing to low bidders, who are competing with each other to build their device cheaper.

There are a lot of interesting questions if you want to make these comparisons. Will Android software purchased for a T-Mobile phone run on a Verizon Android phone? What about operating system updates? I feel like Google is basically just another MontaVista, WindRiver, or RedHat playing at the Apple game.

[ekeefe41]

So, how does this apply to phones? Sure, some people need a basic phone, and others need a high-end smartphone. Android may allow the same OS to support a wide range of hardware - but is it going to enable the hardware customization of a Windows PC? No.


Ahhhh... yes it does.
Different hardware company will make different competing hardware with different configurations and options.

Samsung will make a different phone than HTC....

[TenoBell]

What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???

6.1%

They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)

You are working on old assumption and business logic from the 90's. Marketshare is important to a degree, but certainly not the entire story.

Apple's current ability to sell computers over $1000. Apple's revenue, profit, stock price, and market valuation. Versus Dell and HP go to show that their are other factors just as important as market share.

You've missed how Windows need to be everything to everybody has proven to be a liability. Windows is not able to have the ability to change the way Apple can change Mac OS.

[ekeefe41]

Wow, and yet, it has a 75% market share in the US.

(This is what economists call "cheap talk.")

I didn't say people didn't buy them, i said people didn't like it....
Most Windows users if given the opportunity would cut the ties of Itunes and Ipod.

Just ask someone who uses windows. You may have a hard time finding one. Only like 90% of people that have a PC use windows.

[teckstud]

Care to explain why/how AppleTv is a "...complete and utter failure"? Compared to what?

(FWIW, I've now had @TV for about 6 months, and I have to say that my overall experience with it has been fantastic: It has amazingly simplified my multimedia life at home. Do you own/use it?)

Compared to ? Nothing- it doesn't matter. Nobody talks about it anymore . It has no buzz. It's relegated to the back of the store. I could go on and on. It's a joke.

Yes I own it- rarely use it- and I should have bought a MiniMac instead. At least then I could do 100 times more functions with it than the Apple TV.
I feel that the Apple TV is nothing more than an iTunes digital jukebox- put $'s in it to rent or buy more from Apple.
However, I've learned a BIG lesson- never buy first G anything again.

[TenoBell]

Funny, everyone i know hates that they are forced to use Itunes if they buy an ipod. I like Itunes....

They are not forced to use iTunes there are other options. With over 100 million voluntary downloads of iTunes. The majority of the market likes it.

Let me be clear, i am an Apple fan. I just think the smart cell phone industry will be the next big thing. If one OS could become the defacto OS for the industry.... well watch out.

There is no need to for one OS to rule everything. Windows has shown that does not really work.

[ekeefe41]

You are working on old assumption and business logic from the 90's. Marketshare is important to a degree, but certainly not the entire story.

Apple's current ability to sell computers over $1000. Apple's revenue, profit, stock price, and market valuation. Versus Dell and HP go to show that their are other factors just as important as market share.

You've missed how Windows need to be everything to everybody has proven to be a liability. Windows is not able to have the ability to change the way Apple can change Mac OS.

Your talking about the hardware company that is Apple. Yes they are profitable in comparison to the other hardware venders.

I'm talking about OS's

[teckstud]

Wow, and yet, it has a 75% market share in the US.

(This is what economists call "cheap talk.")

(and what Europeans call "monopolistic behaviour")

[ekeefe41]

They are not forced to use iTunes there are other options. With over 100 million voluntary downloads of iTunes. The majority of the market likes it.



There is no need to for one OS to rule everything. Windows has shown that does not really work.

http://www.yamipod.com/main/modules/home/

Yea... that looks like allot of fun.

[penchanted]

Many people who buy the iPhone do not even realize that it is a smart phone to begin with and think it's a cell phone as it is marketed. This accounts for a large part of the sales percentage of it to smart phones overall.
It should be really compared as a percentage of both cell phones and smart phones combined. And there the percentage is probably not that significant.
The real test is whether corporate America adopts it and this has yet to be witnessed.
I am not sure why you think that Apple is marketing this as a cellphone rather than a smartphone when the ads I've seen all highlight "surfing twice as fast", "finding your way twice as fast" and "downloading twice as fast". Were it not for the closing shot of accepting a call (without any corresponding voiceover), it would be easy to think this is just an internet device rather than a cellphone.

Apple has thus far exerted little public effort to compete directly in the corporate marketplace, preferring instead to aim the iPhone as a consumer device which is usable in a work environment. At this point, I think corporate uptake of the iPhone is all gravy to Apple.

The real test is how well it sells. Period. If Apple captures 1% of the cellphone market, they will have hit their publicly stated sales goal.

[TenoBell]

Your talking about the hardware company that is Apple. Yes they are profitable in comparison to the other hardware venders.

I'm talking about OS's

Apple is profitable because of the integration of its hardware and OS.

[TenoBell]

(and what Europeans call "monopolistic behaviour")

A monopoly in itself is not bad. To abuse your monopolistic position is bad.

[TenoBell]

http://www.yamipod.com/main/modules/home/

Yea... that looks like allot of fun.

Apple's competitors need to step up their game.

[Rot'nApple]

They lost the PC war

Lawsuit about IE tightly integrated in MS os in the US.
E-mails about lack of concern for security and holes in os from MS themselves.
Lawsuits about monopoly in the EU.
Zune.
Vista's perception (rightly or wrongly), not that great. MS vows to avoid Vista mistakes in Windows 7 - http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/08/15/ms.windows.7.updates/
Just wait for Windows 7.
We like our business model for the mobile phone market. - Steve Ballmer.
Stock price flat, flat flat!

If that's winning, I'm glad Apple lost the PC war! - :\

[solipsism]

I didn't say people didn't buy them, i said people didn't like it....
Most Windows users if given the opportunity would cut the ties of Itunes and Ipod.

Just ask someone who uses windows. You may have a hard time finding one. Only like 90% of people that have a PC use windows.
I think most people like it. There are other solutions out there. If you want to manually put your music on your iPod or even run Linux on it you are free too, but I think most people are drawn to the iPod because of—not in spite of—the ease of use brought on by the union between the iPod and iTunes.


Your talking about the hardware company that is Apple. Yes they are profitable in comparison to the other hardware venders.

I'm talking about OS's
Since Apple makes OS X specifically to run on its own HW it's a bit disingenuous to only compare the OS sales here.

[teckstud]

I am not sure why you think that Apple is marketing this as a cellphone rather than a smartphone when the ads I've seen all highlight "surfing twice as fast", "finding your way twice as fast" and "downloading twice as fast". Were it not for the closing shot of accepting a call (without any corresponding voiceover), it would be easy to think this is just an internet device rather than a cellphone.

Apple has thus far exerted little public effort to compete directly in the corporate marketplace, preferring instead to aim the iPhone as a consumer device which is usable in a work environment. At this point, I think corporate uptake of the iPhone is all gravy to Apple.

The real test is how well it sells. Period. If Apple captures 1% of the cellphone market, they will have hit their publicly stated sales goal.

There is no mention of a data plan- many people assume that texting is the same thing. Where does it mention data plan in either TV or print adds?
Many cell phones have web features.

[Olternaut]

Tell that to Steve Ballmer. See how he feels about that right now. On second thought, never mind. All you're likely to get out of him is "Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! I! LOVE! THIS! COMPANY! HEE-HAW!"

Did someone mention.....DEVELOPERS??? :lol::D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zEQhhaJsU4

[Silencio]

Microsoft won the OS war because Gates outsmarted Apple under John Sculley, IBM's top brass, and most of the rest of the nascent high tech industry, period. That doesn't prove the superiority of the Windows business model so much as it proves the incompetence of Microsoft's then-competition.

Apple has much smarter leadership now and IMO seems to have learned the lessons from the past. The market has also seem the downside to the Windows business model: lack of innovation, lack of accountability (Dell blames Windows bugs, Microsoft blames Dell hardware), a vast amount of mediocre choices of hardware and software when most people would rather have fewer but higher-quality choices. The market is taking a second look at Apple's way of doing things and Apple's computing marketshare is growing as a result.

Back directly on-topic: I don't think any one mobile OS is going to ever gain a Windows-like majority. I see iPhone and RIM as being the two dominant players, with a healthy percentage of Android and Symbian thrown into the mix. I am skeptical about the long term prospects of "design by committee" platforms being able to truly achieve excellence, but they will gain their share. With all this competition, the mobile OS market will be much more healthy and vibrant than the stultified desktop computing market dominated by Windows. Happy days!

I also think Windows Mobile is doomed as a significant player in the mobile OS market. I see a lot of their third party partners defecting to Android or other Linux-based OSes. Why should their hardware partners trust them anymore?

[Cubert]

GD! That guy either needs to lose weight or get a CPAP machine.

[penchanted]

There is no mention of a data plan- many peolpe assume that texting is the same thing. Where does it mention data plan in either TV or print adds?
Many cell phones have mobile web.
So by this definition, the LG Dare and Samsung Instinct are marketed as cellphones rather than smartphones. I guess people like paying extra for a phone to just make calls.

[Rmacuser]

Additionally, it's very, very interesting that Googles (debatable but definitely valid) response to this criticism is never mentioned in the same articles. Google's known position is that they are taking a well-known and in some circles respected approach to OS development, by trying to prototype the basics of Android somewhat privately, before the code is released in full to the OS community. You may disagree with this, but it's a valid choice to make. Others make it, Google made it, and to describe what they are doing as "favouring" particular OS developers is disingenuous to say the least.


Can you point to a link with Google's valid response to the criticism? Their public silence on Android is deafening. I can not find anything recent regarding their strategy.

[rhowarth]

Care to explain why/how AppleTv is a "...complete and utter failure"? Compared to what?


Compared to the iPod say? I'm a geek, and I have lots of geeky friends. Everyone I know has an iPod (or 2 or 3...), but I don't know a *single person* who owns an AppleTV.

For me they blew it when they didn't include a DVD player. I'd quite happily have ditched my existing DVD player and bought an AppleTV instead, just to have the latest gadget, and who knows, by know I'd probably be buying and renting all my movies from the iTunes store. As it is, I considered it briefly, looked away, and never looked back I'm afraid.

[teckstud]

So by this definition, the LG Dare and Samsung Instinct are marketed as cellphones rather than smartphones. I guess people like paying extra for a phone to just make calls.

You have an option with the Dare not to get a data plan. I know nothing of the Instinct.
You have no such option with iPhone.

[solipsism]

Compared to the iPod say? I'm a geek, and I have lots of geeky friends. Everyone I know has an iPod (or 2 or 3...), but I don't know a *single person* who owns an AppleTV.

For me they blew it when they didn't include a DVD player. I'd quite happily have ditched my existing DVD player and bought an AppleTV instead, just to have the latest gadget, and who knows, by know I'd probably be buying and renting all my movies from the iTunes store. As it is, I considered it briefly, looked away, and never looked back I'm afraid.

I know of several you do and like it for what it is. Why put a DVD player in it when that is older tech. There would have been countless replies as to why Apple didn't include Blu-ray, HD-DVD, or have multiple versions of the AppleTV for this. I had hoped Apple would eventually offer an add-on solution that would utilize that USB2.0 on the AppleTV for optical drive support once the HD optical format war was over. It looks like Apple is only focusing on networked media.

My parents love it because of the ease of use for renting movies and buying a missed TV show from time to time. To them that makes the $229 price tag quite feasible, which really isn't much when you consider the cost of DVD and VHS players back in the day and adjust for inflation for the ease of use for near-instant viewing.

Unless teckstud, I don't see it as a failure and enjoyed it after my 3 returns of the device, but it's not for everyone's needs. Last week I even talked one friend who absolutely loves his iPhone 3G (his first Apple product) from buying an AppleTV for his home media system. He's an IT guy, too, so I would have thought he'd have checked different options first. I sent him pros and cons of several systems, and I expected, he's undecided as none of them are a perfect solution.

I would like an option for the device to play more media types natively and not require video to be imported into iTunes first. I love iTunes for music, but not for video. At very least it could b an advanced option where the user can turn on disk support which will read shared folders of LAN based machines.

[Booga]

Apple needs to kill the AppleTV as a separate product, and just integrate all its software into the iPod. Give people a reason to buy the bigger iPods again. Video out connectors have been available for awhile for the iPod, and could serve the same purpose as the AppleTV while continuing to lock in Apple's iPod dominance.

[solipsism]

You have an option with the Dare not to get a data plan. I know nothing of the Instinct.
You have no such option with iPhone.

Nope and I think they should offer it without a data plan. I had thought that the lower than average data plan rate worked out because it was required by all iPhone owners so I felt that that requirement was justified, but in the past year the average data rate plan has lowered and the iPhone rate plan increased to match others so that hypothesis is pretty much bunk now.

Unless the iPhone data usage is at least 50% higher than AT&T had previously anticipated. I look forward to the August numbers of smartphone internet usage.

With will probably lead to a "Why would you want an iPhone without a data plan?" I wouldn't, but I figure there are people that want to consolidate their current cell phone and iPod, and perhaps have ample access to WiFi hotspots.

[solipsism]

Apple needs to kill the AppleTV as a separate product, and just integrate all its software into the iPod. Give people a reason to buy the bigger iPods again. Video out connectors have been available for awhile for the iPod, and could serve the same purpose as the AppleTV while continuing to lock in Apple's iPod dominance.

There is no way any iPod could handle what the AppleTV can handle. For instance, the AppleTV has 1000BASE-T, 802.11n, and 720p capabilities.

[thompr]

All you guys are saying "price won the PC war".
Well what caused the price difference?

The ability to install the windows OS on and hardware made for competition.
Competition breeds price drops.
Competition also breeds also new developments.

This all still fits my point...
Apple=Socialist Computing
Windows=Free market computing

Again the iphone business model looks the same to me.

ekeefe-

It took a while (and a lot of advances by Apple and mistakes by Microsoft) for people to realize that the tight control results in a higher quality product. They even realize that the quality difference is large enough to justify spending a $1000 for the cheapest Mac instead of $400 for some bargain basement PC. Even though Windows still dominates the desktop OS market, many users will admit that the Mac OS is superior but that they are stuck using Windows for whatever reason. Many of those reasons are starting to break down, which is why the Mac OS is regaining share as people enter the computer upgrade cycle.


Bottom line: I think that your argument is outdated and that Apple's business model that failed for so long will ultimately prove the right choice.

Thompson

[rnaoncfixd]

I am more surprised that no one said that the Google phone will fail because it's starting out on T-Mobile. I have t-mobile and a BB pearl, and I gotta say, signal strength amongst other things, crap out quite often. Then again, I have a friend who has the 1st gen iPhone and I get better signal than he does in most locations.

On another note, I think the only people who can take out Apple, is Apple itself. With the latest news on the iPhone 3G's inconsistent signal problems, MobileMe fiasco, and missing features that are on basic phones that are cheaper or for even for free, they're not shining too bright in the spotlight either.

As far as Vista goes, I don't hear so much complaints about Vista as much as I hear about Office '07.

[awmawm]

I know like 20 people with it and none of them complain. I have only heard people who have macs complain about vista lol so funny.



I have been a Windows users from day one and have been "enjoying" Vista for about a year now. Vista slowed down my daily mundane tasks working with Outlook, Word, EXCEL and surfing. Even though my previous XP notebook was 2 years old when I replaced it with a new Vista machine, everything on the XP notebook was faster. Talking to other people who "upgraded" to Vista experienced similar issues. And the regular updates do not help either - the last ones on August 12th messed up the computer of a colleague; luckily, mine was not affected. Meanwhile, I have been watching over the shoulders of a number of friends who effortlessly do work on their Macs. My frustration with Vista has been so great that I will likely switch to a Mac when the new Mac Book Pro comes out. That's why I am lurking around this board...

[rnaoncfixd]

... the regular updates do not help either - the last ones on August 12th messed up the computer of a colleague; luckily, mine was not affected. Meanwhile, I have been watching over the shoulders of a number of friends who effortlessly do work on their Macs. My frustration with Vista has been so great that I will likely switch to a Mac when the new Mac Book Pro comes out. That's why I am lurking around this board...


Was that what that was? I am not used to working on a PC and I'm at work, creating 3D graphics and elements. I just updated the Vista OS thinking that it was like my Mac OS and everything would be honkey dorey after the update; ya'know make things faster. Instead it F***ed up my system and it runs slower and crashes the program more often.

[8CoreWhore]

And yet another out of focus video. :no:

[Foo2]

Did someone mention.....DEVELOPERS??? :lol::D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zEQhhaJsU4

Ballmer is indeed an inspiration, not only to his company but to the industry as a whole.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIk4qTKmKzE

[Cleverboy]

Darth Vadar.
This is NOT the Droid you're looking for. :lol:
And yet another out of focus video. :no:
Kind of makes you feel dirty after watching it, doesn't it?

~ CB

[Gon]

None of that is applicable here. In fact, considering the installed base of existing iPhones, the new subsidized price, and the applicability to both business and home users (who are spending a lot more than they did in the 80's), I'd say the iPhone has all the advantages over Android this time.

If anything, RIM's the one to watch here. The corporate world is theirs to lose right now and they're starting to put feelers out into the consumer space. I don't see Android being very relevant.Does RIM do anything of relevance outside North America? Honest question.

Android is more open. That's an advantage that builds up. No telling how much they can eat into Mobile OS X.

[JeffDM]

Many people who buy the iPhone do not even realize that it is a smart phone to begin with and think it's a cell phone as it is marketed. This accounts for a large part of the sales percentage of it to smart phones overall.
It should be really compared as a percentage of both cell phones and smart phones combined. And there the percentage is probably not that significant.
The real test is whether corporate America adopts it and this has yet to be witnessed.

Given how it's advertised on TV and such, bringing up maps, finding restaurants and such, I don't see how people wouldn't know that it's not a smartphone. Do they need to see a stylus or a lot of buttons to realize it's a smart phone?


I didn't say people didn't buy them, i said people didn't like it....
Most Windows users if given the opportunity would cut the ties of Itunes and Ipod.

Just ask someone who uses windows. You may have a hard time finding one. Only like 90% of people that have a PC use windows.

"everyone you know" is problematic because it introduces selection bias.

Last I heard, there are options out there to hook up iPods to other programs. They aren't promoted widely that I can tell. I think iPods can even be managed using a Linux computer, which iTunes doesn't support.


And yet another out of focus video. :no:

Also, we need a video of Balmer overdubbed with "Tripods, Tripods, Tripods!"


..and the complete and utter failure of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the AppleTV......

Open vs. closed doesn't really tell the whole story on anything. There may be many factors in initial adoption (early adopters), then there may be other factors in cascading adoptions (mainstream acceptance).


This whole thesis is completely wrong simply based on the fact that the Macintosh is still tightly controlled by Apple.

Mac is not as tightly controlled though. While you can only buy the machines under one brand, but it's considerably more open than iPhone. At least one can develop their own software for free and distribute it many different ways, without the requirement of a silly choke point under the guise of protecting us from malware.

[solipsism]

Does RIM do anything of relevance outside North America? Honest question.

Android is more open. That's an advantage that builds up. No telling how much they can eat into Mobile OS X.

If I recall correctly, they are now in India and moving into China this year. That is like 600 Billion potential customers... and that is just from a rural village in the Zhang province.

[coffeetime]

As reported by Stephen Cobert:

http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/videos.jhtml?videoId=179247

[piot]

I have only heard people who have macs complain about vista lol so funny.

What's funny is that you obviously didn't "hear" most of the tech press complaining about Vista for the best part of 2 years.

Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1

By the way ... three years ago Microsoft computers with XP were outselling Apple Macs by 50 to 1. So what is your point exactly?

[TenoBell]

Compared to ? Nothing- it doesn't matter. Nobody talks about it anymore . It has no buzz. It's relegated to the back of the store. I could go on and on. It's a joke.

To be clarified a failure it has to be judged by some type of metric. Apple holds the largest marketshare of downloadable content, video and audio.

Yes I own it- rarely use it- and I should have bought a MiniMac instead.

Your personal use of the AppleTV is not a valid metric for how well it is doing in the wider market.

[webhead]

Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.

The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's

The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's

The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.

Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.


Your analogy is completely wrong for several reasons. The situation today with the iPhone is totally different then when the Mac was introduced in 1984. Back then the mac was the first GUI computer made and apple did loose the PC war (although they are still a better platform) in that they are not the dominant PC force in the world today. But the iPhone is not the first smart phone pocket computer on the market, there are already lots of pocket computer smart phones out there, blackberrys etc. It's the iPhone that is poised to swoop in take over the market and dominate, much like microsoft did to the mac in the old days. Apple did not start this tech revolution as you say, but they are in a position now to revolutionize it and potentially dominate much like microsoft did. But in reality I don't think any company can dominate the smart phone market like microsoft has with windows, there are already so many smart phone out there that it would be a bit ridiculous to think that one phone will come in and grab the kind of dominance that microsoft did with windows. There is plenty of room for successful iPhone, blackberry and android phone systems, no need for any of them to win a war. I think it's unreasonable to postulate that the iPhone will "fail" as you have, because compared to the already entrenched success of the blackberry I would say the iPhone is doing really well and is already a success and non-failure. It's the iPhone that is playing the microsoft like roll of entering the smartphone market late and stealing away the industry from the already established companies who thought they had it all sewn up, much like apple though with the original mac.

[TenoBell]

Mac is not as tightly controlled though. While you can only buy the machines under one brand, but it's considerably more open than iPhone. At least one can develop their own software for free and distribute it many different ways, without the requirement of a silly choke point under the guise of protecting us from malware.

That statement was made more in the context of how Apple controlled the Mac in the 80's vs how Apple controls the Mac now. My point is that its essentially the same. Apple's problems in the 90's had little to do with how the Mac is controlled and more to do with company management.

I don't think the point of the app store is to protect us from malware. I believe point is to establish a development culture of apps that all behave responsibly with respect to the limited resources of the device and respect the deals Apple has in place in wireless carriers.

[ekeefe41]

Lawsuit about IE tightly integrated in MS os in the US.
E-mails about lack of concern for security and holes in os from MS themselves.
Lawsuits about monopoly in the EU.
Zune.
Vista's perception (rightly or wrongly), not that great. MS vows to avoid Vista mistakes in Windows 7 - http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/08/15/ms.windows.7.updates/
Just wait for Windows 7.
We like our business model for the mobile phone market. - Steve Ballmer.
Stock price flat, flat flat!

If that's winning, I'm glad Apple lost the PC war! - :\

Are you kidding?
90% of personal computers in the world run a windows based operating system. Yes things are starting to turn and Linux and Apple are starting to make headway.

For the last 10 years windows was the only game in town.

Is apple a better computing experience? i think so, but to deny what Microsoft accomplished from 1995-today is well.... dumb.

[solipsism]

For the last 10 years windows was the only game in town.

It wasn't the only the game in town. There is OS X and several versions of Linux and Unix. These didn't pop up over night, Unix has been around a lot longer than Windows has. regardless of how much growth Apple can achieve they will still be a minor player to Windows when you look at the very limited view of looking only at the OS so long as Apple doesn't design its OS to run on any HW.

[TenoBell]

Are you kidding?
For the last 10 years windows was the only game in town.

Ironically I quit using Windows in 1998, 10 years ago.

Is apple a better computing experience? i think so, but to deny what Microsoft accomplished from 1995-today is well.... dumb.

That goes with what Rot'nApple posted. MS accomplished these things in part by lying, cheating, and stealing.

[webhead]

Unbelievable what people think wining the war is, and why Microsoft came to dominance. The worst products are always the best sellers. The Ford fiesta was once the best selling cars in North America. Was it the BEST car in NA? NO NO NO NO!!!! So why was it the best selling car? Because it was the cheapest piece of junk out there, so lots of people bought it. BMW does not want to make crap cars like the ford fiesta so it has a very small market share as a result. Apple was never interested in making cheap crap computers, they want to make the BEST computers and that means making your own software and hardware. Would BMW be better if they didn't make their own engines and keep tight quality control on their cars? No, BMWs are better cars because BMW has tight control over what they make. I can't stand it when people equate apples tight control to being a socialist way and the PC is the free democratic way. In any other industry keeping tight control over your product is considered a good thing! Apple has a comparable market share in computers to BMWs market share in the auto industry, it would be a real shame if BMW suddenly started making ford fiestas in order to grab a 90% market share like Microsoft has because the quality of the BMW car would go down.

But none of this has anything to do with android. It hopefully will be a great system and have lots of success. Android does not have to loose for Apple to succeed. There is plenty of room for apple, RIM and android to do very well and to all thrive much as do all the car makers in the world. The monopoly of MS in the computer OS is really an anomaly in the business world, very few industries have a monopoly like that and the smart phone industry has lots of players, no need to think any single one will "Win the war".

[iVlad]

Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.

The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's

The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's

The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.

Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.

You kidding right?
Why people always think that Apple wants to be dominant in Computer Industry? There's no war between mac and pc. Apple is just a great business machine that makes money of great products.
Macs have never failed. Apple failed few times. iPhone will not fail because iPod never failed. Who you think will create a phone that is 100% open and 100% customizable with cheap price and no string attached? Google? I don't think so. This phone exist in a world where companies dont work for profit.
:smokey:

[GQB]

I think your being short sighted..
.

First, its "I think you're...", not 'your'.
Second, you can tell someone who's just trying to just get attention by picking a fight on a thread by the fact that they respond to each reply immediately... zero posts between replys. Indicates an interest in pushing buttons, not discourse.
Finally, anyone who can't see the difference between trajectory (Apple up, MS down) and monopoly driven market share is pretty clueless.

[GQB]

http://www.yamipod.com/main/modules/home/

Yea... that looks like allot of fun.

So which is it?
1) iTunes sucks and we're all being tortured by 'having' to use it, or
2) iTunes makes alternatives look like crap (i.e. is better.)

[TBell]

People today largely don't understand the context of the Apple versus PC competition. Apple was a small company with a small budget that was struggling against an entrenched market already using PCs. Moreover, those PCs were associated with IBM, which at the time could do no wrong. It isn't like Apple and IBM started off at the same time, and Apple ended up on the bottom. Finally, Apple might have not won that battle, but unlike most other competitors long gone, APple is still around.


This whole thesis is completely wrong simply based on the fact that the Macintosh is still tightly controlled by Apple. The Macintosh is currently growing faster than the entire Windows market.

The original Macs did not fail. How exactly are you gauging success or failure? Apple as a company lost direction because of poor management, not because of its business model.

Apple did not really start the mobile phone as a "mini computer". They simply have done it better.

[jeffhrsn]

What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???

6.1%

They lost the PC war, get over it.

Who said the "PC war" is over? In the scheme of things, it's just started.

[iPeon]

This is the conventional wisdom, but personally I don't think that's why Windows became ubiquitous over MacOS. DOS/Windows was cheaper...

Windows being cheaper was not the factor at all. Apple created it's own market from scratch whereas MS piggybacked itself onto IBM's existing enterprise market. A huge market! IBM hired MS to develop for them and virtually handed them that market. MS did nothing but ride the wave then steal ideas from Apple. That is THE reason and only reason why MS is where it is today.

So Google creates a "PC" like OS for cell phones. So what? Where's that single mass market to place that OS into? IBM controlled the entire enterprise market hence MS succeeded in plating it's OS with one stroke. Who controls the cell phone market? No one. Too many players here. It's an entirely different situation.

[beingnickb]

Apple as a company lost direction because of poor management, not because of its business model.

Poor management bred a poor business model. I am not sure why you think their business model from 1985-1995 was good.

[jeffhrsn]

Compared to ? Nothing- it doesn't matter. Nobody talks about it anymore . It has no buzz. It's relegated to the back of the store. I could go on and on. It's a joke.


Wow. A "joke"? Did you have any clue what you were buying when you whipped out your credit card? :no:

It's a stellar product that is just before its time. I have every new rental sitting on mine for the entire family to enjoy at their leisure. No returning discs in a hurry - no missing a movie because you were too busy the week it came out.

Oh, and no more burning home movie DVDs. I haven't had to buy a single DVD-RW in I don't know how long.

Oh, yeah...forgot to mention the music streaming to the main entertainment room.

Not bad for a "joke". :lol:

[solipsism]

Poor management bred a poor business model. I am not sure why you think their business model from 1985-1995 was good.

There were certainly many faults during that time, but I'm guessing TenoBell is referring Apple's unwavering integrated SW/HW model and lack of desire to produce profit-less, budget PCs.

[aplnub]

Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1

Outsell is one thing, but out perform is another. AAPL is performing so the company has to be selling more hardware than MS ran computers because their stocks are not.

Also, Apple's virus to computer ratio looks a lot better than MS's Vista's.

[TenoBell]

There were certainly many faults during that time, but I'm guessing TenoBell is referring Apple's unwavering model of integrated SW/HW model and not producing profit-less, budget PCs.

Yes that is exactly what I was talking about.

[TenoBell]

Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1.

XP still outsells Vista.

[anantksundaram]

To be clarified a failure it has to be judged by some type of metric. Apple holds the largest marketshare of downloadable content, video and audio.



Your personal use of the AppleTV is not a valid metric for how well it is doing in the wider market.

Heh heh, I think you're wasting your breath (and your bandwidth) trying to explain to this teckstud guy. :lol:

[anantksundaram]

First, its "I think you're...", not 'your'.
Second, you can tell someone who's just trying to just get attention by picking a fight on a thread by the fact that they respond to each reply immediately... zero posts between replys. Indicates an interest in pushing buttons, not discourse.
Finally, anyone who can't see the difference between trajectory (Apple up, MS down) and monopoly driven market share is pretty clueless.

Well said. And, 'nuff said. :smokey:

[AllNamesAreTaken]

All you guys are saying "price won the PC war".
Well what caused the price difference?

The ability to install the windows OS on and hardware made for competition.
Competition breeds price drops.
Competition also breeds also new developments.

This all still fits my point...
Apple=Socialist Computing
Windows=Free market computing

Again the iphone business model looks the same to me.

:lol: Good grief, Okeefe...you funny, dude!

"Competition" - you say? This from the company that got sued over its monopolistic practices? And which just managed to duck out from most of the penalties from it when it realized the importance of Washington connections and got favorable Justice Dept and judicial treatment?

Explain the "new developments" part to me, I'm not seeing it. I see it in Apple's product line, I'm not seeing it much from Dell, HP, Lenovo, or <cough> MSFT.

The part that really got me was the silly Apple=Socialist computing, Windows=Free Market pairing.
I refer to the well documented monopolistic practices of MSFT, and would include its repeated attempts to extend that monopoly thru its WMA DRM, DirectX and other initiatives.

If anything had the look and feel of "socialist computing" (whatever that is...) it would be the schlock that passes for software emanating out of Redmond: clunky, slow, ugly, buggy crap that's always 3-5 years behind the curve. It's going the way of the American auto industry -- poorly designed, cheaply made, and not worth paying for.

That last part isn't anti-American (proud to be one, just wished Detroit could give us something to be proud about is all) -- just stating the obvious.

[solipsism]

What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???

6.1%

They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)

First of all, if you define it as a war then you also see it as the war is ongoing because OS X, Unix and Linux are being installed every day. But is it really a war as you'd like to define it as a 1:1 ratio of an OS to OS unit sales comparison? For instance, Windows running on vending machines and point-of-sale systems really be counted along with consumer PC users? I don't think so, but it's only you and others like you who are concerned with the number of OS units sales among all systems, not Apple otherwise they would sold their OS to the masses long ago.

You also don't look at the fact that OS X is sold only on Macs per Apple's choice, not to their chagrin, so your war variables are false from that standpoint too. By your argument, PCs with modern components have lost the PC war because PCs with outdated components selling for $400 heavily outsell more expensive PCs. That is just ludicrous.

In closing, Apple has an 8.5% marketshare in the US (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/07/16/apple_passes_acer_to_become_third_largest_u_s_pc_v endor.html). It's ranked third, which is very impressive when you consider the average selling price and the minimum selling price of both their desktops and notebooks compared to the top two. If unit sales, not profit, are what matter to you I respectively recommend that you never start your own company.

[Daniel0418]

What's funny is that you obviously didn't "hear" most of the tech press complaining about Vista for the best part of 2 years.



By the way ... three years ago Microsoft computers with XP were outselling Apple Macs by 50 to 1. So what is your point exactly?

my dad has a mac PowerBook and he has a custom built pc and he never complains about vista. My girlfriend and her mother both have dells with vista they don't complain and my lady is a graphic designer for epitaph records. I would like a MacBook and a nice dell notebook I would love to have both. Way I have noticed is mac users are the biggest bitchers I have ever met lol. My iPhone is less then satisfactory I hope MacBooks aren't the same. The most funny thing about all of this is the war between the two companies I don't hear this much complaining from people About other competing markets. A lot of this is based on opinion, experience, and what is available to you. So everyone just... Please.... Relax! Enjoy the product you have and shut up. That goes for me too!

[teckstud]

To be clarified a failure it has to be judged by some type of metric. Apple holds the largest marketshare of downloadable content, video and audio.



Your personal use of the AppleTV is not a valid metric for how well it is doing in the wider market.

I was asked if I owned one and was merely responding to a question and your personal feelings of denial in its failure is also not a valid metric measurement. That metric you quote is for iTunes not Apple TV. More people download and rent for iPods than AppleTv. Your comparison is baseless.

[teckstud]

Heh heh, I think you're wasting your breath (and your bandwidth) trying to explain to this teckstud guy. :lol:

I am so glad to see you are in such a happy minority that thinks AppleTv is such a success.:lol:
You must be holding your breath with your foot in your mouth again- you can take it out now.

[LonerATO]

Wow I love how this thread has gotten so far off track. I have been a apple user since the IIe came out. I used to sell cellphones and can say this 95% of the customers that come in want a free phone and don't want to spend over $60 for a plan. Android can easily taking on apple in the cellphone market due to those factors. I know many of us have no problem shelling out the money of the monthly plan while a vast majority do not or will not. You have Moto, LG, Samsung and HTC all able to make a phone using a free OS with all of Google's free goodies . I mean you can trash Google for making a weaker looking OS but the fact is that Android will more than likely dominate in both China and India since it will be a free OS. Yes Apple makes the OS for the iphone so its not a big deal there but for most of the other companies they have to dump money into their own OS costing more money. Android can take a ton of business since any carrier can opt to carry a Android based device. AT&T is the only US carrier with the iphone so it is a closed market to about a 120 million customers in the US. Apple to dominate in all markets would have to give up their revenue sharing to get all carriers to buy into the iphone and then they could take a massive chunk of the market.

[teckstud]

Wow. A "joke"? Did you have any clue what you were buying when you whipped out your credit card? :no:

It's a stellar product that is just before its time. I have every new rental sitting on mine for the entire family to enjoy at their leisure. No returning discs in a hurry - no missing a movie because you were too busy the week it came out.

Oh, and no more burning home movie DVDs. I haven't had to buy a single DVD-RW in I don't know how long.

Oh, yeah...forgot to mention the music streaming to the main entertainment room.

Not bad for a "joke". :lol:

Everytime I need to search for music on AppleTV, I cringe. I'd rather use my Mac with Airtunes - it's much easier to search music files then AppleTV- even an iPod is easier to search.
Good for you for renting out the entire iTunes video rental catalogue- you are #1 ATV rental customer! I just hope your family get some exercise in because you have to sit for all those movies each @ 24 hours minimum and watch them all within 30 days. :lol:

Ok it's not a "joke"- but it is a "flop". In fact Forbes magazine even nicknamed it the "iFlop".

[solipsism]

Ok it's not a "joke"- but it is a "flop". In fact Forbes magazine even nicknamed it the "iFlop".
Before or after the inclusion of movie rentals? A flop because it's Apple's weakest product or a flop compared to other media extenders (this one is rhetorical)?


PS: Off topic: If you are a FaceBook user this is pretty funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrlSkU0TFLs

[LonerATO]

http://design4dough.wordpress.com/

http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future

don't know if you guys have seen this but hey it looks like my iphone "borrows" designs from a movie and isn't that original with the rest of their products =p

[solipsism]

http://design4dough.wordpress.com/

don't know if you guys have seen this but hey it looks like my iphone "borrows" designs from a movie and isn't that original =p

It is uncanny at first glance, but I wouldn't call that a slam dunk argument. There were candy bar devices about that width and haptic touchscreen devices with finger sized buttons before the iPhone. It's only natural that the buttons be of a certain general size for the finger and the width of the device be wide enough to be useful but not too wide to fit comfortably in the hand (something RiM took to its maximum). Black cases with chrome trim was also been popular before the iPhone. Could their have been an Apple designer who saw that and thought it would make design for the iPhone? Sure! But is it more likely that it's a backwards discovery seen by an observant film viewer because of the iPhone's popularity? I think so.

[Slackpacker]

YouTube Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTIfGCLKIXA&feature=related)

Watch the end of the Video with the Android running Google Street View... powered by GPS... Very neat.

Google is Holding out. Where is it for iPhone?:mad:

[ncee]

What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???

6.1%

They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)

If you mean they lost the war, and still have 15, 18, 20+ BILLION dollars CASH in the kitty … then your right, sucks being Apple.

Skip

[TenoBell]

don't know if you guys have seen this but hey it looks like my iphone "borrows" designs from a movie and isn't that original with the rest of their products =p

I don't know if Apple touts its designs as original. Designers have been creating tools built around the need for human interface for thousands of years. Much of what we do today is built on very old concepts. Nothing is new.

What Apple does today was very common back in the 50's and 60's. It was common for companies to hire great industrial designers for their products. They would hire famous artists to create their corporate logos and accomplished music composers for corporate jingles.

[TenoBell]

I was asked if I owned one and was merely responding to a question and your personal feelings of denial in its failure is also not a valid metric measurement. That metric you quote is for iTunes not Apple TV. More people download and rent for iPods than AppleTv. Your comparison is baseless.

I didn't say whether or not I thought AppleTV was a failure. I was asking you by what metric were you declaring it a failure.

How do you know Apple's leading media download share is only for the iPod and does not include Apple TV?

[guinness]

Bring it on.....

We will bury these cockroaches.....

We? Sorry, but it's just a phone/OS, and competition is always good. Google does have the resources and people to make a good/great phone, but this is only the first possible version.

[Slackpacker]

We? Sorry, but it's just a phone/OS, and competition is always good. Google does have the resources and people to make a good/great phone, but this is only the first possible version.

Apple has to work on the stability of the iPhone.... Right now 2.0 is shaky thats where they need to work. I have to restore my iPhone weekly because freaky apps keep hosing it.

All you Androids underestimate what Apple has done. Its going to take Google quite some time to copy what Apple has done with the iPhone.

[MacTel]

Well, we'll see just how Android will succeed and succeed it will since the iPhone will still only be on the AT&T network. If the iPhone could be offered in various forms on different carries then the Android would be less successful like every other platform competing with the iPhone.

Apple needs the competition so it may learn how to better their product but the Android platform can use some pointers from Apple at this time.

If anything Android may cause some casualties in the phone OS wars. Namely Palm and Microsoft will lose their home-grown OSes. Palm is more prepared to do that and MS will throw a ton of money to prevent that but in the end MS may just be another software vendor competing for space on the iPhone, Android, or Symbian OS phones. Pocket Office anyone?

[PG4G]

Apple has to work on the stability of the iPhone.... Right now 2.0 is shaky thats where they need to work. I have to restore my iPhone weekly because freaky apps keep hosing it.

All you Androids underestimate what Apple has done. Its going to take Google quite some time to copy what Apple has done with the iPhone.

iPhone OS 2.1 is looking very firm. With the latest beta loaded on my iPhone 3G, i am quite impressed.

There are several things you should remember at this time:

1. The OS is the first time release at 3rd-party-level. Its bound to have bugs.
2. The OS is affected by the programs it runs, and iPhone OS is currently being blamed for program bugs. This is why Apple was hesitant to open the platform - do they want the blame for the bugs?
3. Apple was, sadly, way overstretched by management this year. The iPhone OS guys had far less time to bring this OS up to par, and were still releasing versions after gold master. Shows how tight it was as the 3G started shipping with a lower OS than the final 2.0.

Apple are adding in so many under-the-hood changes to make the OS more dynamic for developers, I think we need to be patient.

We are begging for more stuff, like IMs that work when the program is closed. The least we could do is give them a break on bug issues. After all, they have already addressed major bug issues with 2.0.1.

Lets just be a bit more forgiving.

As for android? Well... Google's good at what they do. Can they pull this off technically? Yes. Can they pull this off and keep the developers, customers, and companies happy at the same time? They are having it hard on this issue at the moment.

Will it sell? Its the same old war: quality v openness. We can tweak android a heck of a lot more, but I believe the iPhone is the superior device. The problem? Consumers are dumb. They want a phone that does everything forever. They want it to surf the internet with IM at the fastest speed all the time, and play music, and take calls, and still have power left after five days. They want control to change everything.

The problem? When they stuff up the device by their alterations, or they drain the battery life to about an hour, they will do one thing:

BLAME THE DEVICE. This is not a computer in a consumer's eye. Its a gadget. Gadgets stuffing up is the gadget-makers fault, not the software alterer's issue. On a computer they understand they may stuff it themselves. With a phone? They blame. Even if its their fault that they can't restore it cos of all the viruses they didn't protect against.

Apple is protecting its reputation and quality by taking the control themselves.

Google had better hope it doesn't get the wrong end of the stick when users destroy the software then complain.

[justflybob]

Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1

Nice. So if thirty million people decide to jump off a cliff, but one million don't, the thirty million people are smarter or better off? Most people I know still don't know squat about what makes one platform/phone/political party/law/country/city/car/food/ etc. more advanced or better than another for whatever reason. Simply put, most people are moron sheep and follow what herd they belong to.

I would actually PREFER that Apple keep a smaller market share. I don't want the gene pool of products diluted because some moron can't understand why they may be better at whatever they were designed to do and the product focus is changed because of it.

[Gon]

Its the same old war: quality v openness.How are those opposed to each other? I generally find open software and systems better quality on several counts. Both an open and a closed system can be improved immeasureably, but ultimately, the closed system has limitations. If it didn't, we'd call it an open system.

If what you are thinking of is more about quality vs features, that's only a question of tucking the features far enough out of sight that they don't bother the user that would be bothered by them. I wouldn't find it a problem if I had to enter a cryptic incantation in Terminal once to make the phone accept unsigned apps. Categorically disallowing them does not help any customer, and it hurts many. For me the difference is easily worth buying or not buying an iPhone. Understand that unlike sandboxing, which does protect the phone's operation, insisting on being the sole distributor of apps (through the required signing mechanism) is an almost pure money and power grab from Apple. It has nothing to do with security.BLAME THE DEVICE. This is not a computer in a consumer's eye. Its a gadget. Gadgets stuffing up is the gadget-makers fault, not the software alterer's issue. On a computer they understand they may stuff it themselves. With a phone? They blame. Even if its their fault that they can't restore it cos of all the viruses they didn't protect against.If the device can be bricked by running software on it, that *is* the manufacturer's fault for not building a good sandbox, or better yet, allowing the user to wipe the device and start from scratch. It is simple to do by allowing an emergency USB mass storage mode and putting up a clean phone image for download.

I'm not saying stupid people wouldn't still bark up the wrong tree, but if you aren't calling for Apple to start acting as gatekeeper for all software that can run on Macs, you have no reason to cheer them for doing that on iPhone.

[tyler82]

Google is a very creative company but they have never had style. Apple has a much more dynamic and fluid vision for Web 2.0 than Google, which is probably why they are now more valuable than them!

[teckstud]

How do you know Apple's leading media download share is only for the iPod and does not include Apple TV?

I don't - and thats not what I said -and therefore I refuse to respond anymore if you can't read and comprehend.

[teckstud]

Before or after the inclusion of movie rentals? A flop because it's Apple's weakest product or a flop compared to other media extenders (this one is rhetorical)?


1.) Both
2.) Apple's weakest product since the iPod HI Fi. What would you compare it to? I would compare it directly to the Mac mini first.

A flop because it got an upgrade on July 10th, Take 2.1, and the AppleInsider didn't even bother to post a thread about it.
Need I say more?:no:

[solipsism]

A flop because it got an upgrade on July 10th, Take 2.1, and the AppleInsider didn't even bother to post a thread about it.
Need I say more?:no:

You expect us to believe that Forbes called it a flop because AI didn't do an article about the AppleTV? Which, by the way, they did....• http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/07/10/apple_releases_itunes_7_7_ahead_of_iphone_2_0.html


edit:
What would you compare it to? I would compare it directly to the Mac mini first.

I would compare to other products in its category. Saying it's a failure because you don't want it or that it's not as successful as the iPod is silly. It's a media extender and should be compared to other Media Extenders to see it's specific rank among such devices. Now, if you want to say that all media extenders are failures as they stand due to a low adoption rate over traditonal optical media players, then fine, that would be a legitimate argument.

Even Mr. Steve Jobs himself stated earlier this year that no one had gotten it right when referring to the AppleTV. They still refer to it a "hobby" and don't include it as one of its "3-legs" (Mac, iPod. iPhone) so we know that Apple doesn't see the current iteration as major money maker, but that in no way implies a flop either, as stated above. Do you think that any product a company makes less of compared to their other products a flop? Are the N95 a flop because Nokia sells many more of their cheaper, simple handsets? Of course not.

It's all relative and until you decide to compare to other like devices and not go on your personal feelings of the product's usefulness to you you can't make such a determination.

[anantksundaram]

I don't - and thats not what I said -and therefore I refuse to respond anymore if you can't read and comprehend.

It would help if you could take the trouble to write in a manner that makes it comprehensible for the reader. :)

[Mac-sochist]

It would help if you could take the trouble to write in a manner that makes it comprehensible for the reader. :)

All of his posts can be broken down into the following invariable points:

1) If I don't want to run right out and buy a product, then its very existence is a crime against nature.

2) Apple can do no right.

3) Every Apple product is a flop no matter how many units it sells.

Just in the interest of saving time....

[TenoBell]

How are those opposed to each other? I generally find open software and systems better quality on several counts. Both an open and a closed system can be improved immeasurably, but ultimately, the closed system has limitations. If it didn't, we'd call it an open system.

I don't know if I agree. Both open and closed systems have equal positives and negatives.

The negative of the closed system is obviously the limitation of ideas to improve software. But equally the negative of an open system can be a lack of cohesion and singular vision in the final product.

From what I see the best is a mix of open and closed.

[LonerATO]

Google is a very creative company but they have never had style. Apple has a much more dynamic and fluid vision for Web 2.0 than Google, which is probably why they are now more valuable than them!

I wonder where you get the fact that Google has never had style? No style due to their first OS? Can you please tell me when Apple had web 2.0 products in place besides webkit and iTunes. Go look at all of Googles products in the more section you will see adSense,Gmail,Google Maps/Streetview, Google Blogger, Google Groups and Google Notebook to name a few. You have no clue what you are talking about so gg friend.

[solipsism]

I wonder where you get the fact that Google has never had style? No style due to their first OS? Can you please tell me when Apple had web 2.0 products in place besides webkit and iTunes. Go look at all of Googles products in the more section you will see adSense,Gmail,Google Maps/Streetview, Google Blogger, Google Groups and Google Notebook to name a few. You have no clue what you are talking about so gg friend.

Tyler didn't say they weren't talented, he stated that they have no style. I agree with this statement, though that is what they wish to do. As much as I like the simplistic, utilitarian Google search I would really prefer a little effort with their other web apps.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3011/2769432289_5fa021aa05.jpghttp://farm4.static.flickr.com/3241/2769432287_0322562fe1.jpg

There are some limitations here as Gmail is designed to be used with older browsers but a simple User Agent check could determine the type of page to be loaded. It really does look like it was designed by—not just built by—coders. The same has gone for cellphones for too long and despite the iPhone's shortcomings it has woken up handset manufacturers to actually design a better UI. But I don't foresee this happening with Android for the reason described above.

[teckstud]

All of his posts can be broken down into the following invariable points:

1) If I don't want to run right out and buy a product, then its very existence is a crime against nature.

2) Apple can do no right.

3) Every Apple product is a flop no matter how many units it sells.

Just in the interest of saving time....

You don't know what you're talking about. Hyperbole will get you nowhere.

1.) I ran out and bought an AppleTV and it even though it was a waste and I should have bought a Mac mini, I would never go so far as to call it a "crime against nature". That I reserve for George W. Bush.
I will also be running out to but a new 2G iPod Touch once it's released this September. There are many Apple products that I don't want to run out and they are incredible- Mac Pro, XServe, etc.

2.) Where do you get that from? I've been using Mac for 9 years and currently have numerous Apple products.

3.) Most Apple products are not a "flop". Put down your Koolaid cocktail, Apple has had and still has them.
I didn't call AppleTV a "flop"- Forbes magazine did that. I called it a joke.

[teckstud]

It would help if you could take the trouble to write in a manner that makes it comprehensible for the reader. :)

Has anybody else noticed that there is a core of 2-3 Koolaid board members on here that will defend each til the depths of their glasses?:lol:
Anantsundaram must be their chairman.

[DavidW]

(and what Europeans call "monopolistic behaviour")

No. The European government has no problem with iTunes being the dominate software for managing music files. It's nothing but free software to manage your music files on a computer or on an iPod, It's the iTunes Store that the European government has a problem with. The iTunes Store has over 75% of the digital music downloads. Even though the store can only be accessed through the iTunes software, this is not the issue. The issue is that it's files can only be played on an iPod MP3 player. (Though they can be played on any computer with iTunes.) But that's not entirerly true. It does take a little more work, but iTunes Store bought music files (ACC) can be converted to play on other MP3 players. And iTunes can make that conversion for you.

The issue is not that you are forced to use the iTunes software with an iPod. But that you are forced to own an iPod to play the digital music purchased from the iTunes Store. Or that the iTunes Store is the only place you can buy digital music for your iPod. Neither of these issues are true.

[piot]

It's the iTunes Store that the European government has a problem with.

The issue is not that you are forced to use the iTunes software with an iPod. But that you are forced to own an iPod to play the digital music purchased from the iTunes Store.

Are you sure that is the issue? I understood that the EU had a problem with iTunes variable prices over different EU countries. Is there an EU case pending against Apple for tying Fairplay to iPods?

[DavidW]

What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???

6.1%

They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)

If you want to compare OSX to Windows (all versions) then yes 6.1 % to 90% is not too impressive. And you can say that Apple lost the PC war.

But if you compare the 6.1% Mac hardware to that of Dell, HP, Acer, Sony, Toshiba, Lenovo, IBM and others. Then you can hardly say they lost the PC war. I can name more computer hardware companies, that were around when Apple started selling Macs, that are no longer in business. Than you can name computer hardware companies that still are. Gateway, Compaq, e-Machine, Bell, AT&T, Xerox, Commodore, Amiga, Radio Shack, Micron, Quantex, just to name a few.

The fact that Apple was able to survive the on slaught of Dell speaks volume for their business "model".

The vast majority of the celll phone market will always be the "free" cell phones with no data service. There is very little money to be made OS wise in this market. So having the majority OS in this market doesn't count for squat. They give away apps in this market so that people get their phones. Apple will gladly give all of this market to MS so that Balmer can gloat about how they own the cell phone OS market.

So if Apple "only" gets 6.1% of the whole cell phone market but it's 50% of the included smartphone market, I would hardly call that losing the war. Remember, Apple not only makes money selling the iPhone hardware. They are making money selling software for the iPhone. Just like how Apple makes money from iPods users buying songs from the iTunes Store. Apple can make money from iPhone users when they buy software (and games) from the ITunes AppsStore. And when downloading digital movies (for purchase or rent) takes hold, the iTunes Store may become the biggest online store for all digital media. Not a bad business model if you ask me.

[DavidW]

Are you sure that is the issue? I understood that the EU had a problem with iTunes variable prices over different EU countries. Is there an EU case pending against Apple for tying Fairplay to iPods?

Yes. the lockdown of iTune Store to Fairplay to iPod was (I believe) the first case brought against the iTunes Store.

And there's also a case against the iTunes Store selling certain configuration of an album one way in one country but not in another. (e.g. you may be able to buy the individual tracks off a certain album in the UK but not in France or Germany. Where you must buy the whole album.)

The main trouble is that the record industry see Europe made up of a bunch of different countries and treats each differently. Where as the EU see all the countries as one and must be treated the same. Apple must abide by what the record industry want if they are to sell their music in the iTunes Store.

[guinness]

Tyler didn't say they weren't talented, he stated that they have no style. I agree with this statement, though that is what they wish to do. As much as I like the simplistic, utilitarian Google search I would really prefer a little effort with their other web apps.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3011/2769432289_5fa021aa05.jpghttp://farm4.static.flickr.com/3241/2769432287_0322562fe1.jpg

There are some limitations here as Gmail is designed to be used with older browsers but a simple User Agent check could determine the type of page to be loaded. It really does look like it was designed by—not just built by—coders. The same has gone for cellphones for too long and despite the iPhone's shortcomings it has woken up handset manufacturers to actually design a better UI. But I don't foresee this happening with Android for the reason described above.

Like the HD-based iPod interface, the UI that Google uses can be described as simple and clean, besides if I've more concerned about loading the page quickly, the less background fluff, the better.

Google's UI is also very consistent between serivices as well, settings option links on the upper right, services links on the upper left.

[jeffhrsn]

Good for you for renting out the entire iTunes video rental catalogue- you are #1 ATV rental customer! I just hope your family get some exercise in because you have to sit for all those movies each @ 24 hours minimum and watch them all within 30 days. :lol:
.

Who said anything about renting from ATV??? Comprehension issues? Read again. :no:

[solipsism]

Like the HD-based iPod interface, the UI that Google uses can be described as simple and clean, besides if I've more concerned about loading the page quickly, the less background fluff, the better.

Google's UI is also very consistent between serivices as well, settings option links on the upper right, services links on the upper left.

The iPod OS has been simple and clean and that has been mostly nice and while most of Google's webapps are simple but I wouldn't call them clean. Even that log in page in its simplicity is an unclean mess of advertisement for Gmaill.

[JeffDM]

Like the HD-based iPod interface, the UI that Google uses can be described as simple and clean, besides if I've more concerned about loading the page quickly, the less background fluff, the better.

?

A few sentences of text is far more conducive to quick loading than big graphics. That gMail login has 32k of images, Apple's is 192k.

[Gon]

I don't know if I agree. Both open and closed systems have equal positives and negatives.

The negative of the closed system is obviously the limitation of ideas to improve software. But equally the negative of an open system can be a lack of cohesion and singular vision in the final product.That's not an inherent problem. You can develop any open system the same as you develop a closed system. The difference is you don't lock it down.

[Mac-sochist]

You don't know what you're talking about. Hyperbole will get you nowhere.

1.) I ran out and bought an AppleTV and it even though it was a waste and I should have bought a Mac mini, I would never go so far as to call it a "crime against nature". That I reserve for George W. Bush.
I will also be running out to but a new 2G iPod Touch once it's released this September. There are many Apple products that I don't want to run out and they are incredible- Mac Pro, XServe, etc.

2.) Where do you get that from? I've been using Mac for 9 years and currently have numerous Apple products.

3.) Most Apple products are not a "flop". Put down your Koolaid cocktail, Apple has had and still has them.
I didn't call AppleTV a "flop"- Forbes magazine did that. I called it a joke.

Well, since there's no way anyone could read any of your previous posts to verify what I said, I guess you showed me!:rolleyes:

Too bad they can't access your dozens of repetitious, insane rants against the MacBook Air, your theory that since it's smaller, it should be cheaper, and your hysterical attempts to paint it as a "flop" when it was their fastest-selling laptop.

But anybody who feels that way about Dubya can't be all bad; just don't embarrass yourself by quoting Forbes magazine on a tech forum. They're about as knowledgeable as Consumer Reports.

[piot]

Yes. the lockdown of iTune Store to Fairplay to iPod was (I believe) the first case brought against the iTunes Store.

Sorry David, but I cant find any reference to this. Got a link?
A few consumer organizations have made some huffy noises but that's about it.

[DavidW]

Sorry David, but I cant find any reference to this. Got a link?
A few consumer organizations have made some huffy noises but that's about it.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070311-eu-commissioner-criticizes-ipod-itunes-tie-in.html

http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/france-and-germany-pile-on-the-eu-itunes-anti-drm-pressures/

http://digital-lifestyles.info/2007