or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's iPhone could be last standing in smartphone 'race to the bottom'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's iPhone could be last standing in smartphone 'race to the bottom'

post #1 of 48
Thread Starter 
Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 will compete for presence on handsets in a smartphone market "race to the bottom," one that could leave Apple's iPhone as the "last man standing," one prominent Wall Street analyst believes.

Charlie Wolf with Needham & Company issued a note to investors Friday in which he declared the "successful launch" of Windows Phone 7, the new mobile operating system from Microsoft. He expects Microsoft and Google to compete aggressively among the leading smartphone manufacturers, including HTC, Samsung, Motorola, LG and Sony Ericsson.

"In the short run, the turf war could put the smartphone manufacturers in the driver's seat," Wolf wrote. "Ultimately, however, commoditization, accompanied by deteriorating prices and gross margins, appears inevitable for licensees of the Android and Windows Phone 7 operating systems.

"With its growing brand equity, the iPhone could end up as the last man standing in this race to the bottom."

Wolf doesn't expect that much will change during the December quarter in terms of market share. But he believes the ramp of Windows Phone 7 in early 2011, along with the anticipated launch of the iPhone on the Verizon network, could result in a very different landscape come March.

Wolf noted that the Windows Phone Facebook app had just 135,000 active users as of Nov. 30, which could be an indication of how many handsets Microsoft has sold. While those sales are nowhere near the record sales pace of Apple's iPhone, Wolf believes Microsoft's company-wide $500 million marketing budget will play a major factor.

"We suspect the company will devote a material portion of it to buy the support of the leading smartphone manufacturers," Wolf wrote. "Indeed, if Windows Phone 7 is successful, it's difficult not to conclude that the Android platform will be impacted more than any other operating system because of the similarity of the two licensing models."



And if the iPhone does launch on the Verizon network in early 2011 as expected, Wolf believes that Android will suffer the most.

"Android benefitted from the absence of the iPhone on the Verizon network, because the carrier spent heavily to promote the platform as an alternative to the iPhone," he said. "Android effectively moved into a vacuum created by the implosion of Windows Mobile."
post #2 of 48
The article is probably not too far off, let them beat each other to death.
Mac Pro 5,1: 12 x 2.93GHz / 64 GB / ATI 5870 / 1.5+2+2+2+3TB / ACD 30" + 20"
Reply
Mac Pro 5,1: 12 x 2.93GHz / 64 GB / ATI 5870 / 1.5+2+2+2+3TB / ACD 30" + 20"
Reply
post #3 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkJones View Post

That means Apple would have to take a loss enough to make it unprofitable for Android devices to compete.

Google could start tapping their immense advertising revenue, much like Microsoft taps it's software revenue to compete the X-box against Sony's PS3 (which itself is being tapped by their entertainment arm)

No, Apple has no alternate revenue stream to compete. They will accept a minority share of the market and Android will rule the majority. Microsoft has already lost being so dam late to the game.

By then Apple will off making the next great thing anyway. Smart wrist watches. Opps..

I think you missed the point. As the other vendors sell 100s of different units and try to recover their investment with 1% of the market share for each new device, Apple's model of one (ok, really 3) SKUs for the iPhone means that their development effort is amortized over a much larger base AND their unit production costs are reduced based on the tremendous volume they have.
post #4 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkJones View Post

That means Apple would have to take a loss enough to make it unprofitable for Android devices to compete.

Google could start tapping their immense advertising revenue, much like Microsoft taps it's software revenue to compete the X-box against Sony's PS3 (which itself is being tapped by their entertainment arm)

No, Apple has no alternate revenue stream to compete. They will accept a minority share of the market and Android will rule the majority. Microsoft has already lost being so dam late to the game.

By then Apple will off making the next great thing anyway. Smart wrist watches. Opps..

This is a pretty irrational comment, totally at odds with reality. So, Google is going to start subsidizing handset manufacturers, long-term, to make Android financially viable? Totally at odds with their business model, and not really a viable strategy for them over the long haul. No other revenue streams at Apple? Maybe you haven't heard of the Mac? The iPod? Plus, what do they need with other revenue streams, iOS is and will remain the the cash cow of mobile. And, of course, the main point of the article: Apple doesn't need to take a loss to make it unprofitable for others to compete, it already is that way, the situation the article is based on.
post #5 of 48
This guy is dumb. Even though Microsoft has a giant marketing budget in place, that doesn't mean consumers are going to buy. People want quality. The iPhone provides that.


By the way, I can't help but to laugh every time I see a Windows phone commercial because they don't actually show any of the features. The just show the home screen! The hardware! What a horrible way to advertise, in my opinion.
Macbook 2.2GHz (2007)
Mac Mini - 2.4 Ghz (2010)
Reply
Macbook 2.2GHz (2007)
Mac Mini - 2.4 Ghz (2010)
Reply
post #6 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkJones View Post

That means Apple would have to take a loss enough to make it unprofitable for Android devices to compete.

...

My reading of the article is that the "Race to the Bottom" is between Microsoft Windows Phone 7 and Google Android. The iPhone would be the last man standing because the competition will have run themselves out of business.
post #7 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve's son View Post

This guy is dumb. Even though Microsoft has a giant marketing budget in place, that doesn't mean consumers are going to buy. People want quality. The iPhone provides that.

But he said that Microsoft's WinMob 7 launch was "successful".

I guess that means that they sold both of the phones that were produced.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #8 of 48
Fast forward to this time next year when the margins and average selling prices for both Windows and Android phones will still be pitiful compared to iPhones. Wolf has the competitive landscape nailed.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #9 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Me View Post

My reading of the article is that the "Race to the Bottom" is between Microsoft Windows Phone 7 and Google Android. The iPhone would be the last man standing because the competition will have run themselves out of business.

my understanding was they were looking at Apple as the "hardware manufacturer" and not as the "software provider" (even though they are both). It's identical to the PC market - Apple makes the hardware AND the software, and thus enjoys fat margins while HP, Dell, and the rest enjoy huge volume but pathetic margins. The same will happen in mobile. Android will most likely become the most prevalent mobile OS, but the hardware partners will suffer. That is what this article is talking about.
post #10 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkJones View Post

That means Apple would have to take a loss enough to make it unprofitable for Android devices to compete.

Google could start tapping their immense advertising revenue, much like Microsoft taps it's software revenue to compete the X-box against Sony's PS3 (which itself is being tapped by their entertainment arm)

No, Apple has no alternate revenue stream to compete. They will accept a minority share of the market and Android will rule the majority. Microsoft has already lost being so dam late to the game.

By then Apple will off making the next great thing anyway. Smart wrist watches. Opps..


Jeez! I hope you're not drawing a salary as a busines analyst.
post #11 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkJones View Post

That means Apple would have to take a loss enough to make it unprofitable for Android devices to compete.

I will pile on and say that you totally misunderstood the article or are unaware of the distribution of industry profits in the personal computer market. Apple doesn't have to take a loss to remain the last man standing. They have never had to deploy such a strategy and never will. Jobs would rather exit the market than do an XBox billions-down-the-toilet play.

The article is saying that Windows Phone and Android hardware manufacturers will compete fiercely against each other driving down their margins to near zero while Apple goes merrily along with fat margins due to a. economies of scale and b. iPhone buyers don't consider Android and WinPho as equal-price substitutes. Which is basically what's going on in the Mac v. Windows race right now. Windows outsells Macs but the lion's share of industry profits go to Apple. In fact it's already going on in the smart phone market even before WinPho's release; the competition among the Android mfrs alone is already very intense. It'll just get worse as WinPho gets (or tries to get) deeper penetration.

So Apple will be the last man standing in the smart phone business in terms of profitability, not necessarily in unit sales. Although they already are the largest single smart phone hardware seller and I expect they'll stay that way. (Nokia's old gen smart phones don't count.)
post #12 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve's son View Post

This guy is dumb. Even though Microsoft has a giant marketing budget in place, that doesn't mean consumers are going to buy. People want quality. The iPhone provides that.


By the way, I can't help but to laugh every time I see a Windows phone commercial because they don't actually show any of the features. The just show the home screen! The hardware! What a horrible way to advertise, in my opinion.

You completely misread what he said. He said that MS'es giant marketing budget (1/2 Bn $) will be used to convince HANDSET MAKERS (not consumers) to use Windows Phone 7 instead of Android. Manufacturers switching, not consumers, will hurt Android a ton. This is a reasonable strain of argument, considering MS has done this before (IE, DOS).

The other problem is when the iPhone is available on Verizon, and Samsung, MOT, etc. see their Android sales DROP. They will be like, we gotta try something new, and jump onto the MS bandwagon.
post #13 of 48
...the other day, I was shocked how confusing and over 'swipy' it was. Although anything that replaces the desktop metaphor is welcome, this was really just not working out. Further, the lack of multitasking and frequent hang ups made it unusable. I gave up, leaving two HTC WM7 phones frozen in the Carphone Warehouse store.

I do agree, and blogged or tweeted on this ages ago that WM7 is a threat to Android, if it is successful. Google have such a lead and a powerful backend in their Google.com services that MS will have to create something a lot more compelling to stand a chance against anyone.

I think the new Sony Ericsson 'PSP' Android phone is going to hit WM7 hard as it will appeal to a large proportion of the youthful male demographic, leaving WM7 to the ladeez.
post #14 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2 cents View Post

Jeez! I hope you're not drawing a salary as a busines analyst.

Why not he is about as accurate as most analysts.

....meaning has no real clue either
post #15 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oflife View Post

...the other day, I was shocked how confusing and over 'swipy' it was.

I completely agree with this regarding WP7. The swiping gesture is amongst my least favorite on the iPhone (it takes far longer than a simple tap). And WP7 requires you to swipe to essentially get anywhere.

Additionally, its extremely difficult to keep track of where you are. In the iPhone, its quite easy, and anytime you have any trouble knowing what status you are in, you always have the big hardware Home button to bail you out.
post #16 of 48
"Race to the bottom"

This phrase literally has no meaning, literally or metaphorically, when applied to smartphones.

In terms of quality, consumer demand determines sales. Both advertising and quality play the biggest roles in determining demand. Android sales are topping 300k a month. Apple iOS devices in total are 275k/month. Android outsells iPads, iPhones, and iPod combined. Now it would be hard to argue that Apple doesn't possess the strongest brand image in the industry. So its clear consumers see higher quality in Android devices than they do in the iPhone line, as the Price is nearly the same: The top selling android devices are the galaxy S ($200-$300) the Droid X ($200), droid 2 ($150) compared to the $200-$300 iPhone 4 and $99 iPhone 3GS. Despite Apple's advantage in advertising, Android is beating them in sales.

Facebook app activates don't equal sale, as most windows phones include facebook integration built in. But its clear consumers don't trust the windows brand when it comes to mobile computing. Windows is going for the enterprise, where RIM still is the only to provide certain features, but at a high cost.

In terms of profit, sure Apple enjoys huge margins on all their products. But again Apple is a vertically oriented company. Naturally they're going to have high margins compared to just the software developer like Google. However manufacturers of phones like the Droid X and Galaxy S enjoy almost the same profit margins and markup as Apple does on the iPhone. Look at tear downs of parts and its clear that Android phones are marked up almost as high as iOS devices. That combined with the shear volume of sales and I'd say android manufactures are in a good business. The only difference is they have to keep innovating to stay relevant while Apple can release the same copied features.

So if I were to predict a winner in the "race to the bottom" I would actually choose Apple, in market share, quality, and innovation. The only place they really win is mark up, so they'll always be able to make a good profit off a small niche. Naturally such a huge company like Apple (2nd most valuable in the world) will always win when compared to other competitors. Even so only a monopoly, or a socialistic country, would describe a competitive market as a "race to the bottom."
post #17 of 48
MS is charging manufacturers for their os. Until thart stops, there is no race to the bottom. Google doesn't even make money off android except indirectly through search. The second "insight" about android losing customers on Verizon when Verizon gets the iphone was about as insightful as predicting the sun will rise.
post #18 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99 View Post

MS is charging manufacturers for their os. Until thart stops, there is no race to the bottom. Google doesn't even make money off android except indirectly through search. The second "insight" about android losing customers on Verizon when Verizon gets the iphone was about as insightful as predicting the sun will rise.

I have noticed that a lot of people are saying that MS has already lost or that they aren't a player because of X factor... my opinion... Don't Count Them Out!

MS has a lot of bucks and at some point or other (probably when they fire Ballmer) they might just wake up and turn the industry on its ear... Netscape comes to mind.
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #19 of 48
innovation is apple's strong suit. and the rest are basically trolls.

last week apple patented what i consider a spectacular game changer. watching 3d movies and television without wearing special glasses. just imagine the impact as the others strain to try and circumvent the patents.

3d television is just starting. watching it without special glasses will usher in a new paradigm.
post #20 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by bongo View Post

"Race to the bottom"

This phrase literally has no meaning, literally or metaphorically, when applied to smartphones.

In terms of quality, consumer demand determines sales. Both advertising and quality play the biggest roles in determining demand. Android sales are topping 300k a month. Apple iOS devices in total are 275k/month. Android outsells iPads, iPhones, and iPod combined. Now it would be hard to argue that Apple doesn't possess the strongest brand image in the industry. So its clear consumers see higher quality in Android devices than they do in the iPhone line, as the Price is nearly the same: The top selling android devices are the galaxy S ($200-$300) the Droid X ($200), droid 2 ($150) compared to the $200-$300 iPhone 4 and $99 iPhone 3GS. Despite Apple's advantage in advertising, Android is beating them in sales.

Facebook app activates don't equal sale, as most windows phones include facebook integration built in. But its clear consumers don't trust the windows brand when it comes to mobile computing. Windows is going for the enterprise, where RIM still is the only to provide certain features, but at a high cost.

In terms of profit, sure Apple enjoys huge margins on all their products. But again Apple is a vertically oriented company. Naturally they're going to have high margins compared to just the software developer like Google. However manufacturers of phones like the Droid X and Galaxy S enjoy almost the same profit margins and markup as Apple does on the iPhone. Look at tear downs of parts and its clear that Android phones are marked up almost as high as iOS devices. That combined with the shear volume of sales and I'd say android manufactures are in a good business. The only difference is they have to keep innovating to stay relevant while Apple can release the same copied features.

So if I were to predict a winner in the "race to the bottom" I would actually choose Apple, in market share, quality, and innovation. The only place they really win is mark up, so they'll always be able to make a good profit off a small niche. Naturally such a huge company like Apple (2nd most valuable in the world) will always win when compared to other competitors. Even so only a monopoly, or a socialistic country, would describe a competitive market as a "race to the bottom."

What reality are you living in? Obviously not this one!

"Now it would be hard to argue that Apple doesn't possess the strongest brand image in the industry. So its clear consumers see higher quality in Android devices than they do in the iPhone line, as the Price is nearly the same"

Apple has no brand Image? Android devices are perceived as Higher Quality? That may be true in Bizarro world but not here. The main reason they sell what they do is due to the fact that the iPhone isn't on Verizon yet.

"The top selling android devices are the galaxy S ($200-$300) the Droid X ($200), droid 2 ($150) compared to the $200-$300 iPhone 4 and $99 iPhone 3GS."

Yeah when the android phones aren't discounted to a penny with buy one get one free. Maybe the manuufacturers are still getting the full amount of the phone but the consumer is buying due to the give aways.

Sorry if I missed the sarcasm tag but this is really so far from reality it's laughable.
post #21 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Charlie Wolf with Needham & Company issued a note to investors Friday in which he declared the "successful launch" of Windows Phone 7, the new mobile operating system from Microsoft.

I approve of quote marks around that phrase. I understand that there wasn't any pent up demand unleashed that day. It's clear that Microsoft is going to pour their attention into this segment and any success is going to be measured in the long run.

Definitely agreed about commoditization as well. It was clear with the old WinMo phones. Either price phones cheaply to increase sales volume, use cheaper materials to maintain margins, or both.

Android phones don't seem to be suffering from "race to the bottom" pricing yet but it's not hard to envision. There will always be many carriers and manufacturers using pricing aggressively to win share. That's not as apparent yet though IMO. Microsoft is putting their partners in the same scenario, too. Manufacturers will have to use prices (in addition to features) to draw buyers.

Having no competition for selling an iOS phone puts Apple in a great, great position. Others are rightfully green with envy.
post #22 of 48
Google made Android open source ie they give it away for free. They aren't racing to the bottom - they started at the bottom.
post #23 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve's son View Post

This guy is dumb. Even though Microsoft has a giant marketing budget in place, that doesn't mean consumers are going to buy. ....

Actually, people generally buy what they are told to buy. History shows quite clearly that advertising sells product irrespective of the quality or the utility of said product.

The intelligence and "free will" of the consumer is vastly over-rated and every ad exec knows that people will buy anything if it's presented to them in the right way.
post #24 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"We suspect the company will devote a material portion of it to buy the support of the leading smartphone manufacturers," Wolf wrote. "Indeed, if Windows Phone 7 is successful, it's difficult not to conclude that the Android platform will be impacted more than any other operating system because of the similarity of the two licensing models."

It's about time an "analyst" pointed this obvious point out. Most seem to miss it.
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 #25 of 48
No mention of RIM? Nokia? Palm?
post #26 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

No mention of RIM? Nokia? Palm?

RIM might yet hold on to its profitable enterprise niche and stay out of the "race to the bottom" (in price and profits, if that wasn't clear to some commenters here). HP/Palm - we don't know what market segment they are targeting yet (do they?), so can't say.

and Nokia - look for MS to make a deal with Elop early next year for a new Nokia line running WP7.
post #27 of 48
I have no doubt whatsoever that Windows will see a lot of success in the corporate market. I work in a large corporation, and our computer department vehemently fights any leakage out of the Microsoft universe.
Given Microsoft's corporate history I expect that many companies will gravitate to Windows for their phones.
post #28 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve's son View Post

This guy is dumb. Even though Microsoft has a giant marketing budget in place, that doesn't mean consumers are going to buy. People want quality. The iPhone provides that.

Marketing works.
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
post #29 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPT View Post

I have no doubt whatsoever that Windows will see a lot of success in the corporate market. I work in a large corporation, and our computer department vehemently fights any leakage out of the Microsoft universe.
Given Microsoft's corporate history I expect that many companies will gravitate to Windows for their phones.

The days of a blanket corporate Microsoft universe look less likely. IT are seeing their workplace bringing in more external devices, fixes and ideas that haven't come from MS than ever before. The computer department can fight it but they rescinded some of that right when they failed to lead. A few years back they could fold their arms and say it's not allowed and there's no support. Now the response is deal with it.
post #30 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande View Post

Marketing works.

I prefer the much more indicative word that really describes what the term MARKETING really means:

PROGRAMMING

oh yes TV does the same thing!~

Most of these ad agencies , the workers sit in their New York conference rooms having meetings every morning then afterwards go back to their cubes trying to figure out how to put lipstick on a pig. They don't even know it. But they have to believe their own hyperbole.

Almost every ad on TV - I imagine some poor slave who came up with the idea and the rest of the ants turning it into programming that you and I watch or read or hear.

There's a reason why the industry calls TV/Rado "programming" because it's purpose is.....to fill our heads with what the sellers want us to think . In reality - We don't have an independent thought in our heads at all, And the irony is either do they. And so it continues day after day ....

and that my dear friends is our world, don't you just love it?

Originally by Rickers - 2014 : Cook & will bury Apple.  They can only ride Steve's ghost so long.


History reduce Apple Watch.... to a footnote in the annals of technology - Benjamin Frost Dec 2014



Reply

Originally by Rickers - 2014 : Cook & will bury Apple.  They can only ride Steve's ghost so long.


History reduce Apple Watch.... to a footnote in the annals of technology - Benjamin Frost Dec 2014



Reply
post #31 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkJones View Post

That means Apple would have to take a loss enough to make it unprofitable for Android devices to compete.

Nah, it is more likely that Apple would maintain their high margins and let their competitors fight tooth and claw for the low-end of the smartphone market. Apple would eat up most of the industry's profits.

That's the way they've handled the PC market. Go for profits, not market share.

Apple's profit margin is over 21% while HP has 7%. Dell is running thin at 3.36%. Don't know about the Asian manufacturers, however I expect them to be in the range around HP and Dell.
post #32 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

... "Android effectively moved into a vacuum created by the implosion of Windows Mobile." ...

A competitor's implosion is also a factor in iPhone's success. Palm had a huge lead in the smartphone market, then did almost everything possible to blow it. They spun off the Palm OS group into PalmSource, hedged their bets with WinMob models, PalmSource sold themselves to ACCESS, Palm changed their name to palmOne, bought the rights to PalmOS back from ACCESS, changed their name back to Palm, ad nauseam. The only thing they didn't do was burn down their own headquarters building.

Easy to look back and find fault now, but the damage has been done. Who knows how much development time, money, and mindshare all those shenanigans cost Palm? If they hadn't blown it, they could have released the Pre and webOS years ago. Didn't happen, they blew the trust of consumers and enterprise.

So who benefited the most from Palm's implosion? Apple and iPhone. If the Pre and webOS had been released before iPhone, the smartphone world would be very different now. We'll never know how different.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #33 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

... "Ultimately, however, commoditization, accompanied by deteriorating prices and gross margins, appears inevitable for licensees of the Android and Windows Phone 7 operating systems."...

And it's not just competition between Android manufacturers on one side and WPee 7 manufacturers on the other. All the running dog Android manufacturers are competing against each other, tweaking the OS and loading it up with craplets and trying to offer software and hardware value-add while cutting corners and trying to reduce their costs.

Same with the Wpee 7 manufacturers. By pitting HTC, Dell, Samsung, and LG against each other, Ballmer has triggered another race to the bottom just among competing Wpee 7 phone builders. They will cut corners with the best of them, lowering the quality of their handsets, and Microsoft won't be able to do anything about it. Exactly the same as happened in the Windows pee cee industry.

Android and Wpee 7 makers will all be trying to push each other off the low-price cliff. But what about Nokia? Well, they need to build an Android or Wpee 7 phone. Or both. Either way, they'll be standing on the edge of the same low-price cliff as all the others. By using a commodity OS, Nokia loses their software differentiation.

Yes, Nokia's strength has always been their hardware. But no, great hardware alone isn't enough to sell smartphones. To continue in the smartphone market, Nokia will need to get used to razor thin margins just like HTC, LG, and all the others. They'll become just another running dog too.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #34 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

A competitor's implosion is also a factor in iPhone's success. Palm had a huge lead in the smartphone market, then did almost everything possible to blow it. They spun off the Palm OS group into PalmSource, hedged their bets with WinMob models, PalmSource sold themselves to ACCESS, Palm changed their name to palmOne, bought the rights to PalmOS back from ACCESS, changed their name back to Palm, ad nauseam. The only thing they didn't do was burn down their own headquarters building.

Easy to look back and find fault now, but the damage has been done. Who knows how much development time, money, and mindshare all those shenanigans cost Palm? If they hadn't blown it, they could have released the Pre and webOS years ago. Didn't happen, they blew the trust of consumers and enterprise.

Palm never had smartphone sales anywhere near the magnitude of iPhone sales. The iPhone didn't fill a void in the market, it expanded it dramatically. Palm failing is not why the iPhone succeeded. If that was the reason, the market wouldn't have grown, and Apple would have just taken over Palms sales. Thanks to the iPhone (and Android) the smartphone market is still expanding today.

The void Android filled was not one in the consumer market, it was a void in manufacturers needs. The likes of HTC, Motorola, LG, Samsung, etc don't have their own smartphone OS. Before Android, their best option was Windows Mobile which couldn't stack up against iOS and was not designed with touch screens in mind. Manufacturers needed a better OS and Google provided one. Now Microsoft is back with WP7 and wants to win that manufacturer support back.

Quote:
So who benefited the most from Palm's implosion? Apple and iPhone. If the Pre and webOS had been released before iPhone, the smartphone world would be very different now. We'll never know how different.

I doubt the Pre and WebOS would have ever existed without the iPhone. It's best to not get into what if scenarios. Palm had been doing smartphones and PDA's for years, yet WebOS came well after the iPhone. I think they needed a little inspiration.
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 #35 of 48
I see Android failing due to an open App market in which malware and viruses can run rampant. You'll need McAfee and Norton for your phone soon.
post #36 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkJones View Post

Apple ... will accept a minority share of the market and Android will rule the majority.

As in PCs, Apple will have the minority share in terms of units... but as the "last man standing" profit-wise, they will rake in the majority of the revenues.

Android phones are the "commodity PCs" of the market place. Carriers will give them away, and manufacturers will fight over who gets the most nickels and dimes.
post #37 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezduzit View Post

innovation is apple's strong suit. and the rest are basically trolls.

last week apple patented what i consider a spectacular game changer. watching 3d movies and television without wearing special glasses. just imagine the impact as the others strain to try and circumvent the patents.

3d television is just starting. watching it without special glasses will usher in a new paradigm.

Amazing game changer by the innovators at apple.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20018421-17.html
post #38 of 48
[QUOTE]Amazing game changer by the innovators at apple.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20...17.html/QUOTE]

Sounds like Apple just got the patent, so I'd say innovators indeed.
post #39 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

Palm had a huge lead in the smartphone market, then did almost everything possible to blow it.

If by "blow it" you mean "failed to innovate", you're correct. Palm enjoyed basking in past glories, and believed more in doing one thing and one thing only.

Again, and again, and again, Palm has trailed behind the technology curve. Look how long it took them in the PDA market just to add a color screen to the silly thing. Their reason? People will prefer battery life over fancy graphics. Guess what? They didn't.

And finally, you're wrong about Palm and Apple.

Why? Because Palm lost the market to RIM and the Blackberry LONG before the iPhone ever hit the market.
post #40 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Actually, people generally buy what they are told to buy. History shows quite clearly that advertising sells product irrespective of the quality or the utility of said product.

The intelligence and "free will" of the consumer is vastly over-rated and every ad exec knows that people will buy anything if it's presented to them in the right way.

Professor, you have nailed it! Agreed 100%. [Hint: look no further than how the GOP manages to convince people that cutting Social Security benefits and giving tax cuts to the super-rich will reduce the deficit. /off my soap box ]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple's iPhone could be last standing in smartphone 'race to the bottom'
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's iPhone could be last standing in smartphone 'race to the bottom'