or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Multi-phone Android platform seen overtaking iPhone by 2012
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Multi-phone Android platform seen overtaking iPhone by 2012 - Page 2

post #41 of 145
If the smart-phone market is indeed analogous of the PC market then I'd be inclined to agree. The market is becoming really fragmented since all the companies are trying different operating systems. Stylus reliant countries will also make up a good chunk of this market in the next few years. I highly doubt the iPhone will be as dominant as the iPod range - especially not with one model.

Apple will need to re-update more often to stay competitive. The industry moves quickly, and once a year isn't enough. There are so many updates coming out that people will be practically begging for a new iPhone plus OS 4.0 by next July. They have a huge edge due to the app store, which other companies are going to have a hard time replicating.
post #42 of 145
In just over two years on the market, Apple has 11% of the smartphone market and in 2 1/2 years it will only have another 2%; heck, the way that juggernaut is going, it will crack 13% next quarter

Still, Apple does have to shorten its product cycle, like release new models every 6 months, but other than that, I expect to see 100 million sold by the end of 2010 with at least 10 million tablets out the door as well. It'll be pitiful for the competition to scuffle over the remaining 30% market that APple will never own-- Like the 30% non-iPod MP3 player market--APple has the deep pockets for research on battery technology, on chips and a patent portfolio to match
post #43 of 145
I think most posts are missing the point. The article is not about Android v. iPhone. The analysis is about Android gaining at the expense RIM and Nokia. While the prediction of exact share could be obviously wrong, I think the directionality of the analysis is spot on.

Moreover, even if it only maintains share, the iPhone will continue to grow quite well since the segment itself is the fastest-growing. Additionally, the issue will not be just quantity sold and revenue, but the profits generated per-unit sold.
post #44 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robodude View Post

I highly doubt the iPhone will be as dominant as the iPod range - especially not with one model.

There are 3 models of iPhone currently on the market, with different processors, amounts of memory, etc.

It is a mistake, I think, to continue to think that smartphone manufacturers need to differentiate their models by making them vary in appearance and basic functionality. This is the old model that the iPhone has upset. The main thing that differentiates the iPhone from other phones is the software and the physical appearance doesn't need to change from model to model. Shopping for smartphones will become more and more like shopping for computers, where one looks at the OS, processor speed, memory, etc. as they become more and more powerful, and less like shopping for phones has been in the past.

However, it's exactly this old model that Android phone manufacturers are following and which will cause confusion in the marketplace and problems in the software development community, Windows Mobile providing a prime example of this.
post #45 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcsegenmd View Post

Still, Apple does have to shorten its product cycle, like release new models every 6 months, but other than that, I expect to see 100 million sold by the end of 2010 .......

Apple absolutely should not do that. It is simply a waste of investment and R&D dollars, lousy for the environment, confusing to customers, and most important, margin-reducing to shorten the product cycle any more than it is now.

Other than for a handful of geeks on boards like these, that is simply too rapid a cycle.

Who cares about whether Apple sells 100 million or 50 million. The key is what they will generate as cash flows from it, relative to competitors.
post #46 of 145
I gotta say this is a tough one to call, theoretically android biz model should 'win' out in terms of units sold. If this situation were to arise then it's my guess that apple retains the most profitable segment of the market much as they do now. Android is the new PC in my opinion, and will suffer from much the same problems.

However, it all depends on the moves made by Apple, if Apple play their cards right (which they seem to have a habit of doing), they should be able to hold on to the lead (units sold) for some considerable time.
post #47 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I think most posts are missing the point. The article is not about Android v. iPhone. The analysis is about Android gaining at the expense RIM and Nokia. While the prediction of exact share could be obviously wrong, I think the directionality of the analysis is spot on.

Sorry, but I think YOU are missing the point. Gartner made headlines with the prediction that Android will surpass iPhone OS, and the numbers are really, really strange. How he got the magic sales numbers 71.51 for Apple and 75.69 for Android? It's clear that this kind of precision for a relatively long-term prediction is meaningless, but it's the Android will surpass iPhone OS statement that makes the headlines. So, we are not missing the point.
post #48 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wings View Post

Dan has an excellent piece about this fantasy story here:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/1...r-in-2012-why/
He makes a whole lot of sense, explaining why Gartner's shill income is about to evaporate from WinMo and has to look elsewhere for FUD dollars.

WOW, what a great article, many leads, good analysis, and insight, great links a must read, thanks for the find
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #49 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

There are 3 models of iPhone currently on the market, with different processors, amounts of memory, etc.

Not true- there are 2 and one is over a year old. The original is off the market. One is available with 2 different hard drive capacities- both are a 3GS.
post #50 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow View Post

Sorry, but I think YOU are missing the point. Gartner made headlines with the prediction that Android will surpass iPhone OS, and the numbers are really, really strange. How he got the magic sales numbers 71.51 for Apple and 75.69 for Android? It's clear that this kind of precision for a relatively long-term prediction is meaningless, but it's the Android will surpass iPhone OS statement that makes the headlines. So, we are not missing the point.

Ah, the headline, not the content.

Now I understand why we live in a soundbite world.
post #51 of 145
Wouldn't cars work much better and be of higher quality if buyers were allowed to pick their own parts?

Battery by this company; doors by that one; engine by another.

It's cool that Android runs on myriad hardware platforms. That's much better than a piece of software designed to work on spec hardware, like the iPhone.

If you look at Windows PCs, for example, their quality is impeccable because there are so many different hardware configurations, and the Windows OS is adept at recognizing these difference pieces, installing the correct driver, and making things silky smooth from the get-go.

That's why I look forward to these Android phones. They will be solid pieces of equipment due to their nebulous design and ability to run on any and all hardware platforms.

Sarcasm brought to you by Amway.
post #52 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Not true- there are 2 and one is over a year old. The original is off the market. One is available with 2 different hard drive capacities- both are a 3GS.

Oh, TS...
  1. 8GB 3G
  2. 16GB 3GS
  3. 32GB 3GS


None of these has a "hard drive". 1 is differentiated from 2 & 3 by processor and other features, including memory. 2 & 3 are differentiated by memory alone. Three distinct models, three distinct prices. The fact that 2 & 3 share the 3GS moniker doesn't make them the same model. The 3G and 3GS labels are family names, much like iMac and Mac Pro, not model names.

Edit: You might have an argument if 2 could be "field upgraded" to 3 by adding memory, but it can't be.
post #53 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Ah, the headline, not the content.

Now I understand why we live in a soundbite world.

Couldn't agree with you more. The concept is really simple. Other handset manufacturers cannot use iPhone OS, so they will use the best available and it looks like Android is expected to fill that role at the expense of Symbian and Windows Mobile. Device manufacturers are expected to flood the market with android phones available on virtually all carriers (CDMA and GSM) and at many different price points including $0 with a contract. Whether or not Android succeeds is almost solely based on its relative strength against the other available phone operating systems (in the eyes of both consumers and device manufacturers). Including the iPhone in the headline simply ensures that the article will get a ton of readers.

Of course the numbers could be wrong (and probably are), but the concept is correct. Also, the iPhone achieving iPod like success would be terrible for us all, we need competition to keep things moving forward.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #54 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Wrong- look to the RAZR which shows why relying on one phone will eventually do you in. The cell phone market is a highly fickle market. 3 years into the market and the fact is Apple has only 1 cellphone available and to the general public, it's getting stale. Where is the Nano version?
Also, this will be played out much differently than the PC game of the 1980's because here you have a very important deciding factor - AT&T which is getting slammed almost daily now. Funny how no posts are factoring in AT&T's badwill.

I agree that having only one model is not a great idea in the long run. The iPhone is still a novelty but this will wear off and people will want different models, even if only cosmetically. I really think Apple can own this market if they want to, however. I hope they will bring out different models such as a nano phone, but most of all different form factors. Another thing they could do (not sure how possible) is allow for more software visual customization in the form of skins. As Android matures and other phone makers bring out funky looking phones the allure of the iPhone will wane. There are other elements such as iTunes, iPhoto etc, but for most people those things aren't enough. People are fickle, they want variety and choice as far as phones go. Computers, not so much, perhaps.
Re the AT&T badwill - in more and more countries the iPhone is carried by multiple carriers. I am sure Apple is dying for Verizon to carry the phone and it will happen as soon as Verizon can prove they have viable coverage. In Canada, where Rogers was the only GSM carrier when I got my iPhone a year or so ago, two other carriers have suddenly popped up and announced that they too will carry the iPhone. I am amazed at how quickly they have got new network technology up and running.
post #55 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow View Post

You re-itterate Palm's argument which did not work for them. This was the case in pre-iPhone era: all phones were getting a bug-fixing firmware upgrade at best. All new features and functionality were coming with new phones.

Apple was the first to draw 3 major OS releases for it's first iPhone. There is a reason: they are building a platform. Abandoning a platform is not as easy as changing the phone.

Oh, in many European countries you can get fully unlocked iPhone (no carrier or country lock) with no contract whatsoever. You can use it with any SIM card, including post-paid ones. So, please forget those "2 years", this is US only and it can go away as soon as Apple decides to drop it.

and how many people complained when OS 3 came out and didn't offer much new functionality for older iphones?

for android, there are constant OS updates as well that work on older phones. and since android is not as mature they offer new functionality for older phones. last year's T-Mo Android phone started on Android v1 and they are on 1.6 now
post #56 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Not true- there are 2 and one is over a year old. The original is off the market. One is available with 2 different hard drive capacities- both are a 3GS.

For many people, if not most, there are two models. A white one and a black one.
post #57 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe in miami View Post

I don't know a single person who has an android phone. This story is utterly bullshit.

Did you even read the article?

They are very clear that Android has very, very low market acceptance and penetration right now. The Gartner report is a forecast.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #58 of 145
This guy does not have a clue as to how important being first is.

He also does not understand that Apple learned well from losing with the Apple II to the PC.
Apple has shown that well with its handling of the iPod.

Barry Gamble
post #59 of 145
This story is hilarious.

The only leaping the Android is going to do is right over the "never made it" ledge of the nearest building.
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #60 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

There are 3 models of iPhone currently on the market, with different processors, amounts of memory, etc.

It is a mistake, I think, to continue to think that smartphone manufacturers need to differentiate their models by making them vary in appearance and basic functionality. This is the old model that the iPhone has upset. The main thing that differentiates the iPhone from other phones is the software and the physical appearance doesn't need to change from model to model. Shopping for smartphones will become more and more like shopping for computers, where one looks at the OS, processor speed, memory, etc. as they become more and more powerful, and less like shopping for phones has been in the past.

However, it's exactly this old model that Android phone manufacturers are following and which will cause confusion in the marketplace and problems in the software development community, Windows Mobile providing a prime example of this.

One size doesn't fit all:
1. Asian markets like the stylus for characters
2. Some users prefer physical keys

One person stated that the iPhone would have the 70%+ market share enjoyed by the iPod and I am saying I don't think this would have been possible for the iPod if Apple stuck with one model. The market for mp3 players is less differentiated than that for smart phones, there are more needs to be catered to especially with these phones becoming more like computers.

Also, the sheer variety of operating systems means people are less likely to look at processor speed and memory. In fact people look at 'features' like camera quality (and, yes, megapixels ) and various other bells and whistles - Apple is hardly leading the way here. With over 5 operating systems and even more user interfaces the products are really differentiated. I just can't see Apple consolidating this market quickly, if at all.
post #61 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronart View Post

This guy does not have a clue as to how important being first is.

He also does not understand that Apple learned well from losing with the Apple II to the PC.
Apple has shown that well with its handling of the iPod.

Barry Gamble

Apple weren't first, so this point is moot.
post #62 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by justflybob View Post

This story is hilarious.

The only leaping the Android is going to do is right over the "never made it" ledge of the nearest building.

Heh, heh... The real advantage Android offers is to Google, the handset manufacturer, and not the user. Users would get a superior interface with an iPhone, but Android is a step above the crap UI most cell phone companies offer, so it has the net effect of eliminating differentiating advantages between non-Apple manufacturers. This could also be a very bad thing for these other companies as it may knock more players out of the market, since they will be left to compete solely on price. Not a good time to be an Apple competitor.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #63 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Oh, TS...
  1. 8GB 3G
  2. 16GB 3GS
  3. 32GB 3GS


None of these has a "hard drive". 1 is differentiated from 2 & 3 by processor and other features, including memory. 2 & 3 are differentiated by memory alone. Three distinct models, three distinct prices. The fact that 2 & 3 share the 3GS moniker doesn't make them the same model. The 3G and 3GS labels are family names, much like iMac and Mac Pro, not model names.

Edit: You might have an argument if 2 could be "field upgraded" to 3 by adding memory, but it can't be.

Then you might as well bring colour into the mix too.

I am not taking sides in this ridiculous discussion on the accuracy of forecasts or what other market is the best analogy for the smart phone market, but this post is just silly.

Apple quite clearly differentiates their iPhones by major model designation. iPhone, iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS. Capacity, as with colour, are simply options within in each model line. The models themselves are differentiated by functionality, features and capability. I suppose if you really wanted to be picky and further separate the model lines for some reason, then you could use capacity as a qualification...but you could just as easily use colour, since they also result in different model numbers/skus.

For the argument that teckstud was making, it is pretty obvious that one would have to be intentionally obtuse to bring in capacity (or colour) as a model differentiator to argue against it.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #64 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronart View Post

This guy does not have a clue as to how important being first is.

Barry Gamble

In which product was Apple the first mover?
post #65 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Did you even read the article?

They are very clear that Android has very, very low market acceptance and penetration right now. The Gartner report is a forecast.


Firstly, Gartner does not work for free. Somebody is paying for this report. Secondly, a typical Gartner research report costs around $1,500 to buy and $50K to $100K to commission (so there's big money behind it). Thirdly, a forecast has to be based on some form of assumptions & metrics (which were not explained here). Fourthly, this is based on assumption that Apple will be standing still in a very dynamic market.
In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Reply
In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Reply
post #66 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robodude View Post

If the smart-phone market is indeed analogous of the PC market then I'd be inclined to agree. The market is becoming really fragmented since all the companies are trying different operating systems. Stylus reliant countries will also make up a good chunk of this market in the next few years. I highly doubt the iPhone will be as dominant as the iPod range - especially not with one model.

Apple will need to re-update more often to stay competitive. The industry moves quickly, and once a year isn't enough. There are so many updates coming out that people will be practically begging for a new iPhone plus OS 4.0 by next July. They have a huge edge due to the app store, which other companies are going to have a hard time replicating.

There's nothing sillier than companies releasing new form factors just to keep looking different. Apple's focus will continue to be on the software, and the internals, not on bolting on useless external features. The dock connector APIs will suffice for that.
Apple has latched on to the winning form factor. They'll stay with it and can now leverage that consistency to dominate the software.
post #67 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

I guess the assumption is Apple's iPhone development will remain flat?

development no, but growth in share is -- according to this fellow -- going to taper off and even dip a little

And I put forth the question, is this a bad thing.

Remember that on the computer side, Apple can do what it does in terms of tying because of a lack of share. I suspect the phone side is the same (so long as they can argue that the phone and the rest of the ipods are two different markets).

If Apple were to gain the top spot in the market they would be at risk of anti-trust claims (depending on how far above the rest they are). But if they remain #3 or even 4 that is less likely. So for now, they might be okay with that position.

Also, this analyst is forgetting to factor in carriers. that Apple is on one service while these other manufacturers are spread around could also be telling. When Apple goes to an unlocked model in the US, the game could change.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

3 years into the market and the fact is Apple has only 1 cellphone available and to the general public, it's getting stale.

you got some numbers to back that up. Or are you talking to the guy in the mirror again.

Quote:
Where is the Nano version?

that version has never been even hinted at by Apple. it exists only in the fantasies of geeks like yourself. Do yourself a favor. Go tell the guy in the mirror that there is no Nano Phone, never was, never will be. And then maybe both of you can get over your disappointment.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #68 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robodude View Post

One size doesn't fit all:
1. Asian markets like the stylus for characters
2. Some users prefer physical keys

[...]

Also, the sheer variety of operating systems means people are less likely to look at processor speed and memory. In fact people look at 'features' like camera quality (and, yes, megapixels ) and various other bells and whistles - Apple is hardly leading the way here. With over 5 operating systems and even more user interfaces the products are really differentiated. I just can't see Apple consolidating this market quickly, if at all.

1. Despite which, the iPhone seems to be doing fairly well in Asian markets.

2. The "preference" for physical keys is not one that I believe is persistent. People voice a preference for physical keys because it's what they are used to, yet Pre and Android users have clamored for virtual keyboards because the physical keyboards were inconvenient to use. Screen real estate is what matters, and the only way to have screen real estate and physical keys is for the physical keys to be inconvenient to use. Virtual keyboards are the future and will become the preferred input method across all mobile platforms.


The smartphone market is becoming more and more like the personal computer market, where the OS and Apps are the primary considerations. Apple has a major lead in this regard. Secondary considerations are specific hardware considerations. I doubt very much that evidence can be produced that the camera capabilities (megapixels, whatever) have been a significant factor for a significant number of people in their choice of smartphone. Likewise for other features like accelerometers and other bells and whistles that most people aren't even sure exactly what they are. More important features are how well the touchscreen operates, which is to some extent OS driven.

However, yes, I think it unlikely that the iPhone will shortly have a 70+% share of the smartphone market. I also think it's unlikely that RIM will fare as poorly as predicted in this period. People will cling to their Blackberrys out of resistance to change, if for no other reason. (Well, and also their installed corporate base, which is somewhat related to the "clinging".)

But, I think the primary ridiculousness of this article is:

Quote:
"Android rises to number two simply because, unlike Apple, they license their OS to multiple OEMs,"

If this were the case -- i.e., that it's "simply" a matter of licensing to "multiple OEMs" -- why wouldn't Windows Mobile fare just as well as Android. Gartner, as usual, tosses logic out the window to make exactly the point that they decided on before they began their "analysis", which in this case, as historically, consists of constructing seemingly plausible arguments to support a biased prediction.
post #69 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

For the argument that teckstud was making, it is pretty obvious that one would have to be intentionally obtuse to bring in capacity (or colour) as a model differentiator to argue against it.

I don't see why. One (capacity) has a discernible effect on the phones capabilities (how much media, etc. you can load onto it), while the other (color) does not affect the function of the device in any way, but is merely an entirely superficial cosmetic difference. Now, which position seems more obtuse?

However, I'd be willing to change my position to state that Apple offers 5 models of the iPhone, differentiated by color and capacity.
  1. 8GB 3G Black
  2. 16GB 3GS Black
  3. 16GB 3GS White
  4. 32GB 3GS Black
  5. 32GB 3GS White

But, to not differentiate by capacity, or to equate color and capacity as differences, is simply ridiculous.
post #70 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

There's nothing sillier than companies releasing new form factors just to keep looking different. Apple's focus will continue to be on the software, and the internals, not on bolting on useless external features. The dock connector APIs will suffice for that.
Apple has latched on to the winning form factor. They'll stay with it and can now leverage that consistency to dominate the software.

I didn't mention the form factor. I'd recommend updating the software and internals often, not that it needs to be now, but 3G, copy and paste and MMS were all quite late to the party.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

1. Despite which, the iPhone seems to be doing fairly well in Asian markets. [/snip] .

I agree, my points were meant to show that the smartphone industry is pretty fragmented and while cameras, physical keyboards and styluses aren't massive factors they are obstacles to an Apple dominant (and quite uniform) smartphone market.
post #71 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

or face being a niche player again

you assume that Apple thinks being a niche player is a bad thing. Maybe they don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

What will happen next June if iPhone remains only on AT&T and all these new phones and OS are offered elsewhere? Will people stay? 4.0 will need to be a major upgrade.

upgrades of that nature are predicated on there being something major to upgrade. something from the carriers in particular. If no one is ready to have 4g live at that point then guess what, a spec bump and/or price drop is all there will be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Assuming it remains on AT&T and doesn't go to Verizon

Verizon was deemed the wrong choice 3 years ago when all this started. What has changed since then to make it a right choice.

Nothing.

Ergo, logic tells us that the assumption is that the iphone will not go to Verizon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

Besides, there're rumors --- and I'm inclined to find them quite credible --- Sprint will get iPhone soon.

same question as the Verizon one. Sprint was not the choice 3 years ago, what major change makes it the option now. Sprint is CDMA, not GSM as Apple choose to use in their device. Also, in terms of 4G,Sprint has chosen to go Wimax and not LTE like the rest are using. So even there, Sprint will not, technologically, be able to handle the iphone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

The iPhone is still a novelty but this will wear off and people will want different models, even if only cosmetically.

I have had a cosmetically different phone 6 times in the last 2 years. It's called buying a different case.

Quote:
Another thing they could do (not sure how possible) is allow for more software visual customization in the form of skins.

a cute stunt that appeals only to the nerds and geeks. general users would rather have a phone that works. that they can change the colors of the buttons and such doesn't really matter that much if the phone is crashing, dropping calls, battery blows etc.

Quote:
I am sure Apple is dying for Verizon to carry the phone and it will happen as soon as Verizon can prove they have viable coverage.

I'm sure they are not and it will not. At this point, being on Verizon would mean altering the phone to something they choose in the beginning not to use. As I asked before, given that was the choice before, what would make them change it now. What would make them spend the money to alter the internals of the phone. They would be total morons to go from one exclusive contract to another (meaning that Verizon would likely demand no GSM in the phones cause that would invite unlocking by end users). Why would they voluntarily spend the time to add CDMA to the phones.

Now unlocking the phones to be used on any GSM carrier, sure. And when LTE is a viable format, having it in the phones as well, sure. But until then, Verizon is not a choice.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #72 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

I have had a cosmetically different phone 6 times in the last 2 years. It's called buying a different case.

Nice one!
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #73 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe in miami View Post

Firstly, Gartner does not work for free. Somebody is paying for this report. Secondly, a typical Gartner research report costs around $1,500 to buy and $50K to $100K to commission (so there's big money behind it). Thirdly, a forecast has to be based on some form of assumptions & metrics (which were not explained here). Fourthly, this is based on assumption that Apple will be standing still in a very dynamic market.

OK. and fifthly cows have 4 legs.

....And all of that has anything at all to do with writing off the forecast because he doesn't know anyone with an Android at this moment in time?

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #74 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post

It is good that Apple cannot rest on their laurels. If they don't innovate they perish.

Who is the "they" in your sentence ending 'they perish'? Is it Apple? How many times have columnists written Apple's obituary?

Or, is it the other tech companies that may have some talent but are extremely lacking on the visionary front?

Would Windows have Aero if Apple didn't have Aqua?

Would Windows have Gadgets if Apple didn't have Widgets?

Would MS have the Zune if Apple didn't have the iPod?

Would HTC "touchscreen" have created the firestorm if Apple didn't have the iPhone?

Would all the other phone manufacturers and cell carriers have an App Store if Apple didn't have the App Store?

Would Palm's PRE find some other way to sync if Apple didn't have the ITMS?


I'm not saying Apple is the end all be all for computers, operating systems, music players with download stores and iPhones with app stores, etc. but they, in some areas, certainly had the visionary foresight that proved to be very rewarding, to which everybody and their cousin jumped on the Apple bandwagon!

If those early calls for Apple to sell the company and give the shareholders their money back and the obituaries of Apple's premature death were true, what would the computer and electronics world look like today?! Would it still be like it is? Would it be stagnant? Would it have improved somewhat but not as elegant and to the degree of usability as it is today? Would mp3 manufacturers be inventing Dell's Jukebox killers? Would the Zune be prominent and instead of the lexicon "Podcasts" would we be calling them "Zunecasts" or "Squirtcasts"? So many questions... where is Clarence when you need him?

Start at 4:51... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h39Ap...eature=related

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 #75 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I don't see why. One (capacity) has a discernible effect on the phones capabilities (how much media, etc. you can load onto it), while the other (color) does not affect the function of the device in any way, but is merely an entirely superficial cosmetic difference. Now, which position seems more obtuse?

However, I'd be willing to change my position to state that Apple offers 5 models of the iPhone, differentiated by color and capacity.
  1. 8GB 3G Black
  2. 16GB 3GS Black
  3. 16GB 3GS White
  4. 32GB 3GS Black
  5. 32GB 3GS White

But, to not differentiate by capacity, or to equate color and capacity as differences, is simply ridiculous.

Adding capacity has one discernible effect....access to more capacity.

Yes, quite obviously, you can differentiate within the models, based on colour or capacity. The options do result in different model numbers, whether colour or capacity. It doesn't make them different model. When Apple introduced the iPhone 3G, as a model they didn't say, 4 new models. They introduced 1 new model in two colour and two capacity options. They are options you may choose of the model.

No one said you couldn't differentiate within the models. Are they different (capacity)? Sure, even with different model numbers. But, they are the same model line, however. The 3GS is a different model than the 3G. The black 3G is the same model as the white 3G.

Maybe I was wrong about being intentionally obtuse. Perhaps it cannot be helped.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #76 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

Fake Steve pretty well nails it on this one...
http://www.fakesteve.net/2009/10/so-...h-android.html

Good point.
post #77 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Wrong- look to the RAZR which shows why relying on one phone will eventually do you in. The cell phone market is a highly fickle market. 3 years into the market and the fact is Apple has only 1 cellphone available and to the general public, it's getting stale. Where is the Nano version?
Also, this will be played out much differently than the PC game of the 1980's because here you have a very important deciding factor - AT&T which is getting slammed almost daily now. Funny how no posts are factoring in AT&T's badwill.

This is one of those rare occasions where I actually agree with TeckStud. I think people who are roundly dismissing Android are making a serious mistake, and I hope there aren't many of them sitting around inside 1 infinite loop.

There are many parallels between what is going on now in the smartphone space and what went on between Apple and M$ in the early years. Then Apple tied itself to one hardware manufacturer (itself) and they could never produce enough hardware to meet demand. Now the constraint is in provision of services their devices need to be useful / functional; the dependence upon AT&T cannot have any effect other than to limit market penetration, for obvious reasons. Recent experiences in markets where Apple is prohibited from exclusivity in contracts proves this point; in those markets Apple has surged when the artificial constraint of exclusivity has been removed.

A second factor operating in the Android market is hardware innovation / cycles. No matter how hard Apple works to produce new and exciting hardware, Apple will never be able to keep up with 30 other companies all trying to bring product to market at the same time. It is almost inevitable that the iPhone will become stale in the minds of some consumers. In a market crowded with many devices of varying form factors, all of which provide a user experience that is close to Apple's, the value proposition that drives iPhone becomes less distinct. Thus far Apple has enjoyed having a very polished and integrated user experience that has surpassed everyone else by leaps and bounds. However, when the gap is narrowed, it is clear what happens; consumers become more influenced by other factors. This occurred after the introduction of Windows XP, which was 'close enough' to Mac OS that many consumers could not tell the difference. In that environment, they became influenced by other factors, factors like : 'gee, it costs more to buy that mac than a pc', and 'I can buy a pc at my local box store but I have to go to that weird mac dealer across town to get a mac', and 'there are 85 bajillion software apps for this PC here in this store, and only 10 for those macs.' In the absence of something compelling to convince the user to buy the mac, the purchase choice is obvious. If apple is not careful, the same logic will begin to emerge for iPhone.

These factors all played a huge role in the M$ market victory over Apple. Don't cry foul - M$ did win in the market, which is why Apple has 10% and M$ has 90%. Apple is content to be the niche player now, but that is because Apple has reinvented itself to be that company. Apple was not always the market niche; it was the market leader, and it lost that lead to M$, and that is what we are talking about here. Apple presently enjoys a lead in software and in user experience. If Android manages to narrow the gap appreciably in user experience (and it is arguably true that it already has), then consumer logic will begin to be driven by other factors, some of which I mentioned above. As the resulting Android share grows, so will the Android software base. What will happen when Android is on 30 devices sold through every major carrier, and when the Android marketplace has 8 or 9 thousand apps? At that point, the iPhone value proposition will be dramatically less clear than it is now to the average consumer, and they will wonder 'why should I switch to AT&T when I can get three of these Android phones from my present carrier at the same price point?".

The Android strategy is not that different from the M$ strategy in the 80's and 90's, and Apple's position with iPhone is not that different from their position with MacOS then. I really hope someone at Apple is looking at these parallels and thinking about how they can break out of the pattern this time and avoid the results.
post #78 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

same question as the Verizon one.

Absolutely not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Sprint was not the choice 3 years ago, what major change makes it the option now.

iPhone is now ready for multi-carrier distribution. Apple has huge experience in selling iPhones via all kinds of carriers. The success of iPhone launch on the Sprint's network doesn't really matter anymore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Sprint is CDMA, not GSM as Apple choose to use in their device.

"Ah bon?!?" How come: "The good: The HTC Snap for Sprint offers robust e-mail support, including HTC's Inner Circle feature for prioritizing messages...Specifications: Band / mode: WCDMA (UMTS) / GSM 850/900/1800/1900 ..."?

Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Also, in terms of 4G,Sprint has chosen to go Wimax and not LTE like the rest are using. So even there, Sprint will not, technologically, be able to handle the iphone.

They were probing all options and experimenting with LTE last spring. When exactly have they come to final decision?

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #79 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Verizon was deemed the wrong choice 3 years ago when all this started. What has changed since then to make it a right choice.

Nothing.

Ergo, logic tells us that the assumption is that the iphone will not go to Verizon.

Not arguing against your premise, but this is wrong. Verizon was not deemed to be the wrong choice. They deemed the iPhone to be the wrong choice for them. Apple went to them first and were turned down.

What might have changed since then? What hasn't. The revenue sharing and prohibited subsidies that Apple required, which were the most likely reason for Verizon turning them down, are no longer an issue. The iPhone is now a proven success instead of an unknown commodity from a company with no cell phone experience. Verizon has lost customers to AT&T because of the iPhone.

So, logic does not tell us that the iPhone will not go to Verizon. It doesn't actually tell us anything in this matter. It will come down to business decisions on the part of both companies, based on revenue, expense and perhaps (misplaced?) loyalty to AT&T for taking a chance with Apple. Personalities of the leaders of Apple and Verizon might also be a factor as well as external factors like Android.

There are a few reasons I can see for Verizon not to want the iPhone now. 1) The App Store would take away their free ride on app income and control. 2) The propensity of iPhone users to actually use their devices and use them a lot might show that their network is not as superior to AT&T as they like to claim when under that sort of load. 3) Cost of the subsidy.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #80 of 145
Apple, while it has essentially one phone, has a platform that extends to other devices (computer, possible tablet). It's also important to remember they all share a common kernel and the iPhone is essentially a computer with a phone as an option.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Multi-phone Android platform seen overtaking iPhone by 2012