or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › U.S. carries most of iPhone, iPod touch market, for now - report
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

U.S. carries most of iPhone, iPod touch market, for now - report

post #1 of 72
Thread Starter 
More than half of all iPhone and iPod touch users worldwide are from the U.S., though international popularity of both devices is currently outpacing growth in America, a study released Thursday shows.

Though the U.S. currently has an estimated 54 percent of the iPhone and iPod touch users, the Mobile Metrics Report from AdMob for June 2009 study suggests that international sales are currently growing faster than in the U.S. In January 2009, the U.S. made up 61 percent of global usage.

The iPhone is shown to be twice as popular as the iPod touch in the U.S., with the AT&T handset carrying a two-thirds market share of devices that run the iPhone OS.

While that ratio holds true in Latin America, overseas the iPhone has a significant market share lead over the iPod touch. For example, in Eastern Europe, more than 90 percent of users on the platform have the iPhone over the iPod touch.

Still, in the overall global calculations weighed heavily by U.S. dominance, the iPhone carries a two-to-one margin.



"In other words, iPhones comprised 68% of worldwide iPhone OS devices and the iPod touch made up the other 32%," the report reads. "This ratio has remained constant over the last several months, implying a similar growth rate for both devices worldwide."

During its quarterly earnings conference call Tuesday, Apple revealed that there are 45 million iPhone and iPod touch devices in consumers' hands worldwide. AdMob based its estimates on 16 million iPhone and iPod touch users who accessed their network in June 2009. The company has a network of more than 7,000 publishers and 2,500 applications worldwide.



Other findings from the report:

Following the U.S., the United Kingdom, Germany, and France each have over 5 percent of users. As a region, Western Europe has a 26 percent share of iPhone and iPod touch users.
An estimated 13 million iPhones have been used in the U.S. since the phone launched in June 2007, while more than 1 million iPhones have been used in Germany, France, and the UK.
An estimated 12 million iPod touches have been used in the U.S. More than 1 million iPod touches have been used in the United Kingdom and Canada.
Google's Android mobile operating system increased 25 percent month over month, and has 5 percent worldwide market share -- slightly ahead of Windows Mobile.
post #2 of 72
fail to see the significance of this!
post #3 of 72
I hope this puts an end to the arguments by some here that the Touch line sells as many, or more devices than the iPhone line.
post #4 of 72
The significance is that there is HUGE growth potential for Apple in the rest of the world. If you are an investor or a stock holder in Apple stock, this is useful information.

Having said that I would have thought consumption of these Apple products abroad would have been higher.
post #5 of 72
Looks like Apple has turned 2009 America into the Japan of 1984 when everyone there ran around with Walkmans. Except those products were made in Taiwan not China.
post #6 of 72
Here in London you can't walk for 5 minutes without seeing an iPhone (not that that's a bad thing )
post #7 of 72
Any figures showing what percentage of phone users in each country have an iPhone? It's not surprising that the US has the biggest portion of sales when it's got a much larger population than most other developed nations.
post #8 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I hope this puts an end to the arguments by some here that the Touch line sells as many, or more devices than the iPhone line.

Not that I'm one of those (and I suspect iPhone outsells iTouch, but not by much), but these statistics are from an ad agency that monitors internet access (not device sales), so to me it is not that surprising that more iPhones access the web than iTouches: the iPhone can use both telephany and WiFi while the iTouch is limited to WiFi.
post #9 of 72
Interesting to me that the Touch has a higher percentage of users in the Americas than in the rest of the world. I'm sure this has much to do with the widespread use of CDMA here.
post #10 of 72
my favorite part is that Android is already ahead of WinMo.
post #11 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHKOsta View Post

Interesting to me that the Touch has a higher percentage of users in the Americas than in the rest of the world. I'm sure this has much to do with the widespread use of CDMA here.

And/or perhaps AT&T's notoriety here?
post #12 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Stevenson View Post

Not that I'm one of those (and I suspect iPhone outsells iTouch, but not by much), but these statistics are from an ad agency that monitors internet access (not device sales), so to me it is not that surprising that more iPhones access the web than iTouches: the iPhone can use both telephany and WiFi while the iTouch is limited to WiFi.

I don't think it matters as much as you think. Besides, look at iPod sales and revenue. As iPod sales fell, so did revenue. Since we know that Apple sold 5.2 million iPhones this quarter, in order for iTouch sales to equal that, they would have had to be more than half of all iPod sales. Apple did say that Touch sales were up 130% from last year Q3. Since the cheapest Touch costs more than all iPods other than the poor selling Classic, revenue for iPod sales should have been sharply higher. Since it wasn't, we can deduce that Touch sales are a much smaller percentage of iPod sales than that, and started from a much smaller base last year.

The figures in the charts simply confirm what the arithmetic tells us.
post #13 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I hope this puts an end to the arguments by some here that the Touch line sells as many, or more devices than the iPhone line.

What it should also put an end to is folks claiming that it is fine for Apple to ignore major aspects of the U.S. market.

Quote:
In January 2009, the U.S. made up 61 percent of global usage.

Numbers like that show that claims about ignoring CDMA or other standards are silly. Claiming that ignoring someone like Verizon and Sprint which together easily make up 50% of the U.S. cell phone market. Ignoring them when the U.S. is such a large percentage of the world market means they are ignoring major numbers, 30% of the entire market is given up for free.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #14 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

Any figures showing what percentage of phone users in each country have an iPhone? It's not surprising that the US has the biggest portion of sales when it's got a much larger population than most other developed nations.

ok, the US has a population of around 300 million, and has 50% of the iPhone sales, the rest of the world has a population of around 5.6 billion and has 50% of the iPhone sales, and you still find that suprising?

Also, that report lists Asia/Oceania with 10% of the iPhone/iPod touch share, when they currently have a 44% share of the cellphone market..

The only thing that report shows is the iPhone/iPod touch is more popular in the US and Canada, than the rest of the world, which is nothing suprising.
post #15 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Numbers like that show that claims about ignoring CDMA or other standards are silly. Claiming that ignoring someone like Verizon and Sprint which together easily make up 50% of the U.S. cell phone market. Ignoring them when the U.S. is such a large percentage of the world market means they are ignoring major numbers, 30% of the entire market is given up for free.

What's interesting though is this:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ow_report.html

Sales and usage are moving overseas.
post #16 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't think it matters as much as you think. Besides, look at iPod sales and revenue. As iPod sales fell, so did revenue. Since we know that Apple sold 5.2 million iPhones this quarter, in order for iTouch sales to equal that, they would have had to be more than half of all iPod sales. Apple did say that Touch sales were up 130% from last year Q3. Since the cheapest Touch costs more than all iPods other than the poor selling Classic, revenue for iPod sales should have been sharply higher. Since it wasn't, we can deduce that Touch sales are a much smaller percentage of iPod sales than that, and started from a much smaller base last year.

The figures in the charts simply confirm what the arithmetic tells us.

Ah, but the iPhone doesn't earn less for Apple than the Touch. An iPhone is $600-$700. YOU pay $199 or $299, but AT&T pays Apple the full price.
post #17 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akac View Post

Ah, but the iPhone doesn't earn less for Apple than the Touch. An iPhone is $600-$700. YOU pay $199 or $299, but AT&T pays Apple the full price.

And, your point is what, in relation to the sales numbers?
post #18 of 72
"An estimated 13 million iPhones have been used in the U.S. since the phone launched in June 2007."

"An estimated 12 million iPod touches have been used in the U.S."

How does that mean that there are twice as many iPhone users as iPod Touch users?

Somebody's statistics are all balled up.
post #19 of 72
The conclusion to be drawn from all this, and something I learned by the time I was in eighth grade and had traveled to 11 different countries is, normal people in other countries have a much, much higher rate of common sense than United Statesians.
post #20 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

my favorite part is that Android is already ahead of WinMo.

Winwha?

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #21 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

What it should also put an end to is folks claiming that it is fine for Apple to ignore major aspects of the U.S. market.



Numbers like that show that claims about ignoring CDMA or other standards are silly. Claiming that ignoring someone like Verizon and Sprint which together easily make up 50% of the U.S. cell phone market. Ignoring them when the U.S. is such a large percentage of the world market means they are ignoring major numbers, 30% of the entire market is given up for free.

This was also my first thought after reading the article.
post #22 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

What's interesting though is this:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ow_report.html

Sales and usage are moving overseas.

Does it have a choice? If you saturate your self-imposed segment, you have no place else to go or sell.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #23 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankenSigns.biz View Post

Having said that I would have thought consumption of these Apple products abroad would have been higher.

The iPhone business model is geared towards expensive fixed monthly contracts. The majority of mobile phone users outside the US, prefer and use the pre-paid model. So from the outset, the iPhone is pretty much excluded from consideration by the majority of non US phone users.

Although the iPhone is available without a contract, the price is too high for most users.

An interesting metric I would like to see, far more so than the pointless subject of this article, is how many iPhone users can claim the cost as a tax deduction or have it provided/reimbursed by their employer.

I am currently in the market for both a new phone and a larger capacity iPod. Neither the 32gb iPod Touch nor the iPhone are under consideration because I consider them to be too expensive.
post #24 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Numbers like that show that claims about ignoring CDMA or other standards are silly. Claiming that ignoring someone like Verizon and Sprint which together easily make up 50% of the U.S. cell phone market. Ignoring them when the U.S. is such a large percentage of the world market means they are ignoring major numbers, 30% of the entire market is given up for free.

I think Apple is thinking globally.

post #25 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Does it have a choice? If you saturate your self-imposed segment, you have no place else to go or sell.

It's not saturated by a long shot. Estimates are that eventually, in a few years, 75% of all cells sold will be smartphones. With AT&T having almost 80 million subscribers, that leaves a good 60 million almost 50 million of which will eventually buy a smartphone who hasn't already. As AT&T's numbers go up, that number will go up also.

What's happening is that with 85 other countries now selling iPhones, the increased awareness is pulling those numbers up faster. When China comes on board, the numbers will jump again.
post #26 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It's not saturated by a long shot. Estimates are that eventually, in a few years, 75% of all cells sold will be smartphones. With AT&T having almost 80 million subscribers, that leaves a good 60 million almost 50 million of which will eventually buy a smartphone who hasn't already. As AT&T's numbers go up, that number will go up also.

What's happening is that with 85 other countries now selling iPhones, the increased awareness is pulling those numbers up faster. When China comes on board, the numbers will jump again.

Meaningless statistics. Any zero dollar feature phone has more PDA functions than the Apple Newton. In the future, any zero dollar feature phone will have more PDA functions than the current iphone --- but you won't regard these feature phones as smartphones in the future.
post #27 of 72
I would say yes, you will regard those as smartphones. Inevitably what counts as an advanced smartphone today will be the common phone tomorrow.

But LG and Samsung will not be able to invest in the same software and hardware capabilities of the most advanced phone at any one time.


Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

Meaningless statistics. Any zero dollar feature phone has more PDA functions than the Apple Newton. In the future, any zero dollar feature phone will have more PDA functions than the current iphone --- but you won't regard these feature phones as smartphones in the future.
post #28 of 72
Not entirely, the iPhone is bringing many new customers over to GSM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Numbers like that show that claims about ignoring CDMA or other standards are silly. Claiming that ignoring someone like Verizon and Sprint which together easily make up 50% of the U.S. cell phone market. Ignoring them when the U.S. is such a large percentage of the world market means they are ignoring major numbers, 30% of the entire market is given up for free.
post #29 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I would say yes, you will regard those as smartphones. Inevitably what counts as an advanced smartphone today will be the common phone tomorrow.

But LG and Samsung will not be able to invest in the same software and hardware capabilities of the most advanced phone at any one time.

Then I would regard my cell phone to be a super-computer because my cell phone is thousands of times faster than the super computer that got us to the moon.

You may as well believe Steve Jobs when he said that the G4 Cube is a 'supercomputer'.

The definition of a smartphone will be different in the future as well.
post #30 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

Meaningless statistics. Any zero dollar feature phone has more PDA functions than the Apple Newton. In the future, any zero dollar feature phone will have more PDA functions than the current iphone --- but you won't regard these feature phones as smartphones in the future.

Newton? Are you trying to make a bad joke here?

Feature phones are junk. Don't even bother to mention them. And if you don't understand what the iPhone is, what it does, and the future direction Apple is taking, then don't bother to make remarks that are pointless other than an attempt to denigrate it. Feature phones will disappear over the next few years.

You don't understand the stats, so you disregard them. Good thinking!
post #31 of 72
I will give lower end handset makers like LG and Samsung the benefit of the doubt. I beleive they will adopt better operating systems that use more sophisticated apps. There will be a lot more phones that feel like the current iPhone (even if not technically equal) that are free with contract.


Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Feature phones are junk. Don't even bother to mention them. And if you don't understand what the iPhone is, what it does, and the future direction Apple is taking, then don't bother to make remarks that are pointless other than an attempt to denigrate it. Feature phones will disappear over the next few years.

You don't understand the stats, so you disregard them. Good thinking!
post #32 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Newton? Are you trying to make a bad joke here?

Feature phones are junk. Don't even bother to mention them. And if you don't understand what the iPhone is, what it does, and the future direction Apple is taking, then don't bother to make remarks that are pointless other than an attempt to denigrate it. Feature phones will disappear over the next few years.

You don't understand the stats, so you disregard them. Good thinking!

I used the Newton as an example because we are in a mac forum. But I can use the PalmPilot as an example as well. What did the original PalmPilot has --- a contact manager, personal notes, event reminders, address book --- my dad's $50 prepaid feature phone can do all of that.

I precisely don't know what future direction Apple taking --- that's why I am saying that whatever the future smartphone will be, it ain't going to be fitting the definition of a current smartphone is right now.

Feature phones will continue to rule the world --- but tomorrow's feature phone will be smarter than all the current smartphones. It's a moving target.
post #33 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

I used the Newton as an example because we are in a mac forum. But I can use the PalmPilot as an example as well. What did the original PalmPilot has --- a contact manager, personal notes, event reminders, address book --- my dad's $50 prepaid feature phone can do all of that.

I precisely don't know what future direction Apple taking --- that's why I am saying that whatever the future smartphone will be, it ain't going to be fitting the definition of a current smartphone is right now.

Feature phones will continue to rule the world --- but tomorrow's feature phone will be smarter than all the current smartphones. It's a moving target.

I don't agree because as you have just pointed out, what the Newton could do for $1,000 back when that was a lot more than $1,000 now, what smartphones do now, will be a lot cheaper in the future, squeezing featurephones mostly out of the mix. Featurephones were the first move to smartphones. An older technology both in hardware and software.

In a couple of years, they won't be needed much. There will be a few around at very low prices, but not too many. Below even them, will be phones for a few bucks that are basic, but most phones will be smartphones.

I don't know why you deny that. Even right now, in a very severe recession, where cheaper, simpler phones are losing sales, smartphone sales are higher than ever, and their percentage of the market has grown substantially.

After the recession, that movement will increase.
post #34 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't agree because as you have just pointed out, what the Newton could do for $1,000 back when that was a lot more than $1,000 now, what smartphones do now, will be a lot cheaper in the future, squeezing featurephones mostly out of the mix. Featurephones were the first move to smartphones. An older technology both in hardware and software.

In a couple of years, they won't be needed much. There will be a few around at very low prices, but not too many. Below even them, will be phones for a few bucks that are basic, but most phones will be smartphones.

I don't know why you deny that. Even right now, in a very severe recession, where cheaper, simpler phones are losing sales, smartphone sales are higher than ever, and their percentage of the market has grown substantially.

After the recession, that movement will increase.

It's a function of how much carriers are subsidizing the iphone in a recession, not really a function of smartphone sales.

On Thursday, AT&T announced their massive iphone numbers --- yet Verizon share price went up more than AT&T. On Friday, Verizon announced that they were beaten by AT&T in subscriber net adds for the quarter --- yet Verizon share price went up and AT&T share price went down.

He who sells the most to the middle class wins --- that means feature phones, quad bundling and family plans --- all the mundane stuff.
post #35 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

It's a function of how much carriers are subsidizing the iphone in a recession, not really a function of smartphone sales.

It's not being subsidized any differently than when AT&T began to subsidize it. We don't know what the future will bring, but there's no reason to believe the subsidy will change.

Quote:
On Thursday, AT&T announced their massive iphone numbers --- yet Verizon share price went up more than AT&T. On Friday, Verizon announced that they were beaten by AT&T in subscriber net adds for the quarter --- yet Verizon share price went up and AT&T share price went down.

And you think that smartphone are the only reason why these massive companies make or lose money?

One major reason why AT&T's profit went down that 15% was because of them losing 970,000 landline subscribers. Landlines are mostly paid off. Companies make more profits off that. When subscribers leave, those profits are lost. The other reason was, as you put it, the massive iPhone numbers. It's understood that AT&T pays Apple the full subsidy price when the phones are sold, bringing down the profits for the quarter when an extra large number of phones are sold, and remember that last year, same quarter, Apple ran out of iPhones to sell, so they sold less than a million. That comparison isn't a really good one therefor, but investors are a shaky lot. The next quarter, after the 3G came out, more than made up for it because of all the pent up demand.

If that hadn't happened, a profit drop this quarter wouldn't have been from the iPhone sales.

In addition, Verizon is doing better with FIOS than AT&T is doing with U-verse, as I think it's called.

I also think that when AT&T mentioned that they wouldn't have exclusivity for the iPhone forever, that helped bring the stock down as well. Even though his statement was obvious, by actually stating it, ticklish investors got nervous. You know how that works.

Quote:
He who sells the most to the middle class wins --- that means feature phones, quad bundling and family plans --- all the mundane stuff.

When you consider that most smartphones sell to the middle classes, and with the same plans as feature phones have, but better, then it's easy to see that the future for featurephones isn't going to be a good one.
post #36 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It's not being subsidized any differently than when AT&T began to subsidize it. We don't know what the future will bring, but there's no reason to believe the subsidy will change.

And you think that smartphone are the only reason why these massive companies make or lose money?

I also think that when AT&T mentioned that they wouldn't have exclusivity for the iPhone forever, that helped bring the stock down as well. Even though his statement was obvious, by actually stating it, ticklish investors got nervous. You know how that works.

When you consider that most smartphones sell to the middle classes, and with the same plans as feature phones have, but better, then it's easy to see that the future for featurephones isn't going to be a good one.

It's being subsidized differently --- that's why AT&T had to give profit margin warnings.

And that's why precise point --- smartphone isn't the only way to make money. The true and trusted family plan and quad bundling are the way to go --- even AT&T said it themselves on Thursday when they said they know they don't have the iphone exclusivity forever (and then promptly stated out that 60% of the iphone users have family plans).

Statistics for "smartphone" are all over the place --- the true and trusted American smartphone definition is still regarded to be the Blackberries, which are sold to businesses and enterprise users.

I think we just fundamentally disagree with the definition of what a smartphone is and how smartphones are sold basically as high-end feature phones. The smartphone market isn't that big if you take out all the Nokia N-series phones --- which are sold as highend feature phones.
post #37 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

It's being subsidized differently --- that's why AT&T had to give profit margin warnings.

It's not. The only difference in this is when Apple went from an unsubsidized phone in the beginning, where AT&T paid them part of their monthly revenue to the plan that's been in place since the subsidy that's allowed the $199 and $299 phones.

Are you saying something different? Because if you are, you'll have to show what that other change is.

I've explained why AT&T said what they said. did you read it? Because that's what AT&T said as well.

Quote:
And that's why precise point --- smartphone isn't the only way to make money. The true and trusted family plan and quad bundling are the way to go --- even AT&T said it themselves on Thursday when they said they know they don't have the iphone exclusivity forever (and then promptly stated out that 60% of the iphone users have family plans).

My family is on an iPhone family plan. Why are you mentioning it? We're talking about the phones, not the plans, which are available with most phones. In fact, AT&T has stated that they make more money on iPhone users, because they spend more, and switch far less.
I'm not sure what you mean by "quad bundling".

Quote:
Statistics for "smartphone" are all over the place --- the true and trusted American smartphone definition is still regarded to be the Blackberries, which are sold to businesses and enterprise users.

That's a statement you are making to try to divert the question. I doubt that anyone here in the US would agree with you about your definition.

Quote:
I think we just fundamentally disagree with the definition of what a smartphone is and how smartphones are sold basically as high-end feature phones. The smartphone market isn't that big if you take out all the Nokia N-series phones --- which are sold as highend feature phones.

That's ok. You can make up your own definition if you want to. Just don't expect anyone else to agree with it.
post #38 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's ok. You can make up your own definition if you want to. Just don't expect anyone else to agree with it.

Fundamentally, you think that the definition will remain the same.

Yesterday's full size adult hamburger is today's kid's meal (go and take a look at old black and white footage of fast food places). Yesterday's mainframe is today's linux wrist watch. Yesterday's laptop is today's netbook.

The world changes --- and so is the definition of smartphones. Maybe in 10 years, the definition of a smartphone is the installation of a desktop OS and what we will call a featurephone will have features that are 10 times better than the current iphone.

I don't know what precisely the future definition of the smartphone will be --- but I do know that it will be different than today's definition.
post #39 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

Fundamentally, you think that the definition will remain the same.

Yesterday's full size adult hamburger is today's kid's meal (go and take a look at old black and white footage of fast food places). Yesterday's mainframe is today's linux wrist watch. Yesterday's laptop is today's netbook.

The world changes --- and so is the definition of smartphones. Maybe in 10 years, the definition of a smartphone is the installation of a desktop OS and what we will call a featurephone will have features that are 10 times better than the current iphone.

I don't know what precisely the future definition of the smartphone will be --- but I do know that it will be different than today's definition.

It doesn't matter what will be called a smartphone in 10 years. You might notice that there are still mainframes, and they aren't on people's wrists, because you aren't understanding what a mainframe is.

Kids meals today aren't the same as adult meals were. Yesterdays laptop was 10 to 20 pounds, and was the best performing portable computers of their day.

Today a laptop is still a much higher performer than an almost toylike netbook.

And smartphones will get more powerful, but they will still be the same concept.

It's the idea of "concept" that you are missing here.

It's not the power of the device that matters when comparing a device from different time periods. We all know that computers are much more powerful today.

A mainframe isn't a mainframe because it meets some mark of flops. It's a mainframe because of the input/output abilities, and the ability to run simultaneous programs, terminals and such. The design is totally different. A desktop computer can therefor never be a mainframe no matter how many flops it can perform.

We have the same situation with the other devices. It isn't the raw power, but what they do that defines them. A featurephone doesn't run programs from an almost unlimited number available. They run a few programs that the provider usually supplies or sells. Their OS doesn't allow freeform programs. There are limitations and restrictions on the functionality. Often features are hardwired in, and you can't add any through software.

Smartphones are different, as they are open ended.

When the iPhone first came out, Jobs said it wasn't a smartphone, though others were calling it such. He was right, because there weren't any third party programs available yet, and the OS couldn't handle them. Even when the "cloud" versions came out, it didn't make it into a full implementation of a smartphone. Only after OX 2, and programs did that change.

A smartphone can have weak hardware, and still be a smartphone, though it may not be a good one. It can be fairly cheap, or expensive.

Featurephones can cost more than smartphones, but are much more limited in moving out from their initial specs. I had bought my daughter a featurephone, a Sanyo, though I on't remember the model, when we were on Sprint. It cost $400. That was the subsidized price. It could do a lot, even download a few programs directly from sprint. She could subscribe to various content. It had a camera. But it didn't have an alphanumeric keyboard, and you couldn't get more than those few programs from Sprint. It didn't connect to a computer for back-up, or downloading, or adding data, or programs, or content.

My Treo 700p, could do all of that. It was a smartphone.

We will have low end smartphones, mid range smartphones, and high end smartphones. Just like computers. No one calls even the most sophisticated electronic calculator a computer, even if it can be programed.

And featurephones are just featurephones. They will disappear after ten years.
post #40 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

No one calls even the most sophisticated electronic calculator a computer, even if it can be programed.

Open up dictionary and type in "Computer". Just because the use of the world has changed to a more generalised one these days doesn't distract from the fact that a calculator is a computer
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › U.S. carries most of iPhone, iPod touch market, for now - report