or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Big phones, phablets & tablets account for just 10% of Android's installed base
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Big phones, phablets & tablets account for just 10% of Android's installed base - Page 2

post #41 of 92

Will Apple go full phablet?

 

The phrasing here reminds me of that offensive image of Robert Downey Jr. from whatever that movie is. 

 

I agree with the sentiment of that meme in this case. 

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #42 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Normal goes more like 3.5" to 4.8". The charts are tricky to read, and more importantly, each manufacturer sets what category their device displays by default.

So despite the curly brackets being off in the chart as you claim normal goes to 4.8" it's not Google's fault, but AppleInsider's? And if each manufacturer can set their labels arbitrarily then what is the point of anything else you wrote as a vendor can make 1" Large normal and 10" Small. You jump on any little thing out of place or confusing with Apple but with this you defend as if Google doesn't have actual numbers of actual display sizes, resolutions, and every other important aspect of the HW to share with developers.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #43 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

It's no big secret that the overwhelming majority of Android products sold are of the ultra bargain variety, catering to the financially disadvantaged and the more technologically ignorant members of our society, basically people who don't mind using junk. This also explains why Android is so under represented on web usage stats, because of the fact that Android users aren't really using their devices that much as smart devices, even though their devices are ironically designated as "smart devices". Does anybody actually expect these penny pinching individuals to spend much money for internet data or to pay to be online when taking a flight?

 

It's good to see that all of the stats, reports and surveys coming out back up what I have been saying for years now about Android, Android usage and their user base.

 

I've said this before too, but Android's marketshare importance is highly exaggerated. Who cares about Android's marketshare, when the majority of the users can be categorized as third world consumers, even the ones who happen to live in the first world? One Apple user is probably worth at least 5-10 Android users, if not more, and I am highly suspicious of certain analysts and others who attempt to compare marketshare numbers without giving any consideration to numerous other factors which are far more important and relevant than marketshare.

 

Let's be realistic here. Do you want another Mac Vs windows situation?
 
Yes, the Mac is awesome and is better than everything else on the other side. But, this time, Apple can have it all!! Apple, the ones innovating and pushing things forward, can have it all!
Isn't that much better?
 
Shut up, then.
post #44 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
Will Apple go full phablet?
 

 

(at risk of getting banned, I'll let RDJ answer this in his very NSFW way)

 

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 #45 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

Samsung's 100,000,000 Galaxy S models sold.

 

Schmidt's 1 Billion Android devices sold.

 

Are they lying, or what?

Oh, so apparently "flagship" phone means only Galaxy S. You better exclude HTC, Sony, Motorola, LG, etc. because none of them have made "flagship" phones.

 

100 million Galaxy S phones. You can't arbitrarily take out the original Galaxy S phone, because it "looked like" the 3gs, because at the time, it was a 4" phone, quite a bit larger than the 3gs. Apple didn't even catch up to that til 2 years later, when they increased the size of their phones. Like they said they never would.

 

So that's 100 million phones larger than Apple ever said they'd need. Then, add in all of the HTC, Sony, Motorola, LG phones that are >4" and have top of the line specs for when they were released. 

 

That is substantially more than 10%. I'd have to say closer on to 40-50%.

 

Forgive my math, but if you can spitball bullshit like that, I figure I can spitball a bit too.

post #46 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

How?

 

The most popular Android models are cheaper, smaller screened handsets which totally dominate sales with a 90% share.

 

For each "flagship" phone, there are nine lower end phones being sold.

 

Google's figures bear out the estimate I made months ago.

To add to what you're saying, the next time Android's global share numbers are trotted out, can the Fandroids here agree that the share truly comparable to Apple's is 10% of the reported number? In other words, the next time we hear "Android has 55% share and Apple 30%", they really mean "Android has 5.5% share and Apple 30% in comparable high-end segments. The other 49.5% is low-end cr4p"? lol.gif

post #47 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

So despite the curly brackets being off in the chart as you claim normal goes to 4.8" it's not Google's fault, but AppleInsider's? 

 

The chart clearly says that "figures are not exact".  

 

Furthermore, this topic has been explained here before, and you even said:

Quote:
"I thought that went against the chart I used for my posting but upon looking again I guess up to 5" could be considered "normal" by Google's standards, if you want to call it a standard since it overlap with large by about a full inch."  - SolipsismX

 

Even then, I pointed out THE ACTUAL VALUES BEING USED for devices that are hitting the Market, not what someone guessed at to fit their agenda.

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
And if each manufacturer can set their labels arbitrarily then what is the point of anything else you wrote as a vendor can make 1" Large normal and 10" Small.

 

Now you're just being silly.  Nobody said they were set totally arbitrarily.  I said they got to set what their default was.  Obviously they do so within reason, with the eye towards most apps looking good on their screens.

 

Quote:
You jump on any little thing out of place or confusing with Apple but with this you defend as if Google doesn't have actual numbers of actual display sizes, resolutions, and every other important aspect of the HW to share with developers

 

Which was my whole point.... these Android dashboard charts cannot be used to reliably determine sales amounts (low or high) any more than web usage or ad view charts can.  

 

That's not pro or anti Apple or Google.  It simply is what it is -- the article was based on several misconceptions.


Edited by KDarling - 5/3/13 at 2:39pm
post #48 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


Yeah, that's stupid. Sure, that distinction might be a benefit to devs, but then, not really in the absence of dpi factoring, which still works back into inches anyway because the constraint is still fingertips and eyes.
That's insane.

They make the data insane because that makes it easier to argue anything you want based on the data, or, conversely, to dispute anything you want. That's how Google rolls.
post #49 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by harharhar View Post

Forgive my math, but if you can spitball bullshit like that, I figure I can spitball a bit too.

 

The "bullshit" comes from what is released by the manufacturers.

 

If you want less "bullshit" demand real figures because "bullshit" is all Android manufacturers want people to play with.

 

Google obscures the real figures.

 

Samsung obscures the real figures.

 

Other Android manufacturers obscure the real figures.

 

When you take out all the "bull" all you are left with is "shit" an apt description of Android.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #50 of 92
Obviously normal is most common whith a size of 3.5 to 4.5 inches which is apples market, where Steve's goal was for a large display(compared to 2 inches at the time) to replace a seperate keyboard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

10% now. The key word being 'now'. I'd say it'll be a bigger number by 2014.
They have been like this since they were released 2-3 years ago, I know company like Samsung have them now, but what about the fact that smaller devices have stayed.
post #51 of 92
So there's a big market for cheap smartphones; who would have guessed?

I think the size chart is misleading as most large Android devices could fall into the "normal" category including the Nexus 4, HTC One family and Galaxy SIII.

What's more telling is the prevalence of xhdpi phones: over 25% and growing. Manufacturers aren't using those high res displays in small cheap phones, but in flagship models and there isn't a flagship Android phone under 4.7".

Even the "free with contract" phones are getting bigger. I quickly checked one of the big Canadian carriers and found both the LG Optimus G and HTC OneX available for free on any contract of $50/mo or more.
post #52 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

The part I find most depressing is simply how vanilla Google's own stats are that they can't be more exact regarding screen sizes, resolutions, and pixel densities to developers.

I could not agree with you more Googles own stats on screen size areas are so vague that there really not worth posting.  Its just like the "shipped" numbers from android manufacturers, they really dont mean anything when compared to actual "sold" numbers we get from apple.  

 

One other edit:  I think the numbers are vague on purpose as well.

 

post #53 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

I don't get how describing sizes in this way is even slightly helpful (or tells us anything).  

 

A "small" appears to be 2" to 3.5", whereas a "normal" appears to be 3" to 5", but a "large" is 4" to 7"?  How does that work?  If it's a 4.5" phone is it a "normal" or a "large"?  How does one decide which category to put a device in if it falls into one of the overlapping areas?  

 

The overlapping definitions create confusion at the exact point where most of the devices actually fall on the scale. Most phones cluster around the 4.5"-5" area and most tablets cluster around the 7"-8" area.  

 

If one can simply pick and choose which category these phones and tablets go into because of the overlapping definitions, then all the information here is pure BS.  

 

 

You said it lol the whole chart is a waste of time  "BS"1biggrin.gif
post #54 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

The "bullshit" comes from what is released by the manufacturers.

 

If you want less "bullshit" demand real figures because "bullshit" is all Android manufacturers want people to play with.

 

Google obscures the real figures.

 

Samsung obscures the real figures.

 

Other Android manufacturers obscure the real figures.

 

When you take out all the "bull" all you are left with is "shit" an apt description of Android.

LOL1biggrin.gif  I concur.

post #55 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

It's no big secret that the overwhelming majority of Android products sold are of the ultra bargain variety, catering to the financially disadvantaged and the more technologically ignorant members of our society, basically people who don't mind using junk. This also explains why Android is so under represented on web usage stats, because of the fact that Android users aren't really using their devices that much as smart devices, even though their devices are ironically designated as "smart devices". Does anybody actually expect these penny pinching individuals to spend much money for internet data or to pay to be online when taking a flight?

 

It's good to see that all of the stats, reports and surveys coming out back up what I have been saying for years now about Android, Android usage and their user base.

 

I've said this before too, but Android's marketshare importance is highly exaggerated. Who cares about Android's marketshare, when the majority of the users can be categorized as third world consumers, even the ones who happen to live in the first world? One Apple user is probably worth at least 5-10 Android users, if not more, and I am highly suspicious of certain analysts and others who attempt to compare marketshare numbers without giving any consideration to numerous other factors which are far more important and relevant than marketshare.

 

Thank you!

 

This always bugs me...

 

Unit market share = 1 metric

Revenue share = 1 metric (and by deduction, revenue per unit)

Profit pool share = 1 metric (and by deduction, profit percentage)

Installed base = 1 metric

Customer satisfaction/loyalty = 1 metric

Real world device usage = 1 metric

Brand recognition/value = 1 metric

Marketing strategy, alliances and deals = 1 metric

and so on...

 

If these other guys are doing so well, why the hell are we only hearing about "unit market share". I mean, they should be bragging about these other metrics if they were so much on top of things. So that makes me come to the conclusion that they don’t really have anything to brag about except units shipped/unit market share.

post #56 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Remember when the iPhone was being lambasted for it's "huge" size, back when Nokia was still king?

Was that only five years ago?

Regarding the second part it would be helpful if Google and the companies selling Android handsets released actual figures instead of muddying the waters with fudged up numbers.

Obviously they do this as they want the misperceptions they are probably paying bloggers to misrepresent, to persist.

Yes, and iPad was ridiculed for being just "a large iPhone "
post #57 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

What's more telling is the prevalence of xhdpi phones: over 25% and growing. Manufacturers aren't using those high res displays in small cheap phones, but in flagship models and there isn't a flagship Android phone under 4.7".

Even the "free with contract" phones are getting bigger. I quickly checked one of the big Canadian carriers and found both the LG Optimus G and HTC OneX available for free on any contract of $50/mo or more.

 

That is closer to what the article should've been talking about:

 

What are the most popular screen sizes in the price range that Apple would want to fit in, especially to gain sales outside of the US, where Android dominates?

 

I.e. Apple probably doesn't want to sell in the very low price ranges.  Most people think they'd be after the $300-$400 market.  So what screen size dominates there?   That's what should be researched. 

post #58 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Most people think they'd be after the $300-$400 market.  So what screen size dominates there?   That's what should be researched. 

Um... you think Apple wouldn't know this?

post #59 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

That is closer to what the article should've been talking about:

 

What are the most popular screen sizes in the price range that Apple would want to fit in, especially to gain sales outside of the US, where Android dominates?

 

I.e. Apple probably doesn't want to sell in the very low price ranges.  Most people think they'd be after the $300-$400 market.  So what screen size dominates there?   That's what should be researched. 

 

Why?

 

Apple is already selling the number one smartphone, worldwide.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #60 of 92
Post removed. I misread the post to which I was replying. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Edited by v5v - 5/3/13 at 3:51pm
post #61 of 92

Or to put it more simply: phones smaller than the iPhone outsell phones larger than the iPhone.

post #62 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Um... you think Apple wouldn't know this?

 

What an odd question.  What Apple knows doesn't matter, since they're not going to tell us :)  Everything discussed here is obviously for our own entertainment and benefit.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

Or to put it more simply: phones smaller than the iPhone outsell phones larger than the iPhone.

 

First, I presume you meant smartphones.  Second, did you mean 3.5 "or 4.0" iPhone screen?  (Half of iPhone sales are each size.)

 

Size sales ratio is a topic that no one has satisfactorily answered yet.   However, I'm not sure that a claim, that more are sold that are smaller than a 3.5" iPhone, would pan out.

 

Specs for even fairly cheap phones have changed radically in the past year.

 

According to a recent price range chart (see below), the overwhelming majority of sales are above $200.  At $150, many have at least a 3.5" screen.  By ~$220, we begin to see 4" or larger screens.

 

 

What we need is a reporter who actually will take the time to look up all models of all prices, then correlate their estimated sales with the above chart, and see what screen sizes actually show up where.

post #63 of 92

So this settles it.  Apple should continue to make only phones with tiny screens.

post #64 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Why?

Apple is already selling the number one smartphone, worldwide.

Actually, Apple is selling the number one, number two and number three smartphones, worldwide.
post #65 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Um... you think Apple wouldn't know this?

 

What an odd question.  What Apple knows doesn't matter....

Regardless of what you think, since Apple is the one that needs to make the decision to introduce such a phone, you can bet it matters. 

 

So, I'll repeat the question: do you (seriously) think they wouldn't know? (I notice that, predictably, you almost never provide a straight answer to a question).

post #66 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I don't get how describing sizes in this way is even slightly helpful (or tells us anything).  

A "small" appears to be 2" to 3.5", whereas a "normal" appears to be 3" to 5", but a "large" is 4" to 7"?  How does that work?  If it's a 4.5" phone is it a "normal" or a "large"?  How does one decide which category to put a device in if it falls into one of the overlapping areas?  

The overlapping definitions create confusion at the exact point where most of the devices actually fall on the scale. Most phones cluster around the 4.5"-5" area and most tablets cluster around the 7"-8" area.  

If one can simply pick and choose which category these phones and tablets go into because of the overlapping definitions, then all the information here is pure BS.  
Normal IMO is 4" small is 3.5", very big difference between a 4" & 5" phone
post #67 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

When mixed in with Samsung's claims of the number of Galaxy S models sold, they do.

Yes samsung is paying to make millions of Galaxy S phones just to say they sold them. What are you thinking!!! No company does anything like that. Samsung makes phones and sells most of them. If they said 40 million shipped you do know that at least 90% of them are sold. Why else would they bother to spend the money to make 40 million phones. Bragging about sells is not worth that much as you can see no company that is struggling is bragging about sells. You don't see Blackberry touting they shipped 30 million z10s just to say it. 

post #68 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

Yes samsung is paying to make millions of Galaxy S phones just to say they sold them. What are you thinking!!! No company does anything like that. Samsung makes phones and sells most of them. If they said 40 million shipped you do know that at least 90% of them are sold. Why else would they bother to spend the money to make 40 million phones. Bragging about sells is not worth that much as you can see no company that is struggling is bragging about sells. You don't see Blackberry touting they shipped 30 million z10s just to say it. 

 

Have you ever noticed how when you walk into a bookstore -- OK, that might be a bit retro for our younger viewers, but hang with me -- and you see an entire floor-to-cieling display of some new book?  There's also a table near the cash-out with tons of this same book.  But no matter how many times you go in there to get a latte and read for free, the number of books never seems to change?  You ask the nice lady at cash-out if it's selling, and she says, "Not really.  A few here, a few there."

 

One day you open the NYT and see it's the #1 "Best Seller."  It's sort of like that.

 

Look at Amazon and the Kindle Fire.  They sell it at a loss, hoping for backdoor profits through their ecosystem.

 

Now, I don't know what Samsung does or doesn't do with their numbers.  But they certainly aren't making anywhere near the amount of profits that Apple makes from the iPhone.  So, if they are "selling" more than Apple worldwide then there are two possibilities:

 

1) They really are selling these units to consumers, but they have a very small (almost non-existent) margin.

 

2) They aren't really selling them at all, but their shipment numbers are very high compared to their sales numbers.

 

If I'm wrong, and you can think of a third way to explain this situation, I'd be more than happy to hear it.  Thanks.

post #69 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Regardless of what you think, since Apple is the one that needs to make the decision to introduce such a phone, you can bet it matters. 

 

So, I'll repeat the question: do you (seriously) think they wouldn't know? (I notice that, predictably, you almost never provide a straight answer to a question).

 

Of course it matters to Apple, but I can't speak for what Apple actually knows or doesn't know.  I don't think they have magic powers.  I'm sure they have to guesstimate some info just like everyone else.

 

Why don't you just say, that YOU believe that Apple knows what the most popular screen sizes are in every price range.

 

Which brings up the interesting question as to how you think they know that info.  Do they use IDC figures?  Other analysts?  Factory spies?  Supplier inside info?   Store exit polls in every country?  In other words, what info do you think they'd have that others do not have.   Seriously.  Thanks!
 

post #70 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

Yes samsung is paying to make millions of Galaxy S phones just to say they sold them. What are you thinking!!! No company does anything like that. Samsung makes phones and sells most of them. If they said 40 million shipped you do know that at least 90% of them are sold. Why else would they bother to spend the money to make 40 million phones. Bragging about sells is not worth that much as you can see no company that is struggling is bragging about sells. You don't see Blackberry touting they shipped 30 million z10s just to say it. 

 

That is not many of the one billion that Schmidt claims to have been sold.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #71 of 92
What are all the Android users doing if they're not downloading apps on Google Play or browsing the web (web usage data)?

Just using their phone and SMS? Then why not buy a dumb phone? Or is it that the browsing and app offerings are so sucky that people don't do it as much as on iPhone?
post #72 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

That is not many of the one billion that Schmidt claims to have been sold.

 

"One billion" is six to nine months from now, and includes every Android device activated since 2008.  We need recent trends instead.

 

IDC says that out of 216 million smartphones sold last quarter, there were 70 million Samsung, 37 million Apple, 10 million LG, 10 million Huawei, 9 million ZTE, 79 million "other".

 

Earlier this year, Morgan Stanley put out this history and estimate of Samsung high end sales:

 

It estimates for the past quarter (1Q13e) that there would be 24 million Galaxies of all types sold.

 

Using those numbers, 24/70 = 34% of Samsung smartphone sales were large (4"-5") screened phones.

 

It's the weekend and I'm going outside.  If someone has differing figures, please post them.  Thanks!

post #73 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.metcalf View Post

What are all the Android users doing if they're not downloading apps on Google Play or browsing the web (web usage data)?

 

Actually, when they leave out tablets, ad reports say that PHONE web usage is the same.

 

E.g.  "While third-party and our own observations have pegged smartphone Web traffic share as a near-tie, Apple has a decided advantage in the tablet market, ..."  - Chitika

 

This critical little fact has been left out of most fansite articles.

 

Moreover, the stats that lean towards iOS come from North America alone.  Get outside of NA, and the stats lean towards Android, as would be expected.


The upshot is, while the groups do use their smartphones for slightly different purposes (IIRC, Android users tend towards social apps, while iOS users tend towards games -- this seems to be age related), but there's no huge (or inexplicable) difference going on.

post #74 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

Yes samsung is paying to make millions of Galaxy S phones just to say they sold them. What are you thinking!!! No company does anything like that. Samsung makes phones and sells most of them. If they said 40 million shipped you do know that at least 90% of them are sold. Why else would they bother to spend the money to make 40 million phones. Bragging about sells is not worth that much as you can see no company that is struggling is bragging about sells. You don't see Blackberry touting they shipped 30 million z10s just to say it. 

BOGO sales and free Sammy with furniture or new car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Actually, when they leave out tablets, ad reports say that PHONE web usage is the same.


E.g.  "While third-party and our own observations have pegged smartphone Web traffic share as a near-tie, Apple has a decided advantage in the tablet market, ..."  - Chitika


This critical little fact has been left out of most fansite articles.

Moreover, the stats that lean towards iOS come from North America alone.  Get outside of NA, and the stats lean towards Android, as would be expected.


The upshot is, while the groups do use their smartphones for slightly different purposes (IIRC, Android users tend towards social apps, while iOS users tend towards games -- this seems to be age related), but there's no huge (or inexplicable) difference going on.

Whe that may be true, doesn't android dominate with phone market share. You would think it'll dominate with web share too.
post #75 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

That is not many of the one billion that Schmidt claims to have been sold.
You didn't bother to actually read what he said did you, even after I told you that's not what was said. Don't let facts get in the way of some good stories Hill.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #76 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

.... I can't speak for what Apple actually knows or doesn't know.  I don't think they have magic powers.  I'm sure they have to guesstimate some info .....

Nah.... it's called marketing research. Most firms do it (and although Apple claims not to, that's not believable).

post #77 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Which brings up the interesting question as to how you think they know that info.  Do they use IDC figures?  Other analysts?  Factory spies?  Supplier inside info?   Store exit polls in every country?  In other words, what info do you think they'd have that others do not have.   Seriously.  Thanks!
 

Oops... forgot to answer this part.

 

I doubt they use crappy figures like the one that IDC et. al put out. As I said above, they likely do their own solid internal marketing research. There are outstanding firms that you can hire to do that (they're not cheap or off-the-shelf), and they keep their mouths shut.

 

Does Apple use "factory spies" (ahem, "business intelligence consultants")? Many companies indeed do. But if any company does not need to, I'd guess it's Apple. Both on the supply chain end (since, having done this for three decades, they seem to know how to do it and seem to be able to drive manufacturing methods, specifications, and quality rather well) and on the customer chain side (since they seem to do a decent job of creating new markets), without seeming to have to resort to underhanded methods. Moreover, their remarkably small number of products (and SKUs) probably mitigates the need for a lot of "spying" on competitors.

 

Who can Apple learn from, and what, in your view?

post #78 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Nah.... it's called marketing research. Most firms do it (and although Apple claims not to, that's not believable).

Apple never claimed to not do market research. They just don't have focus groups to review products.
post #79 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Apple never claimed to not do market research. They just don't have focus groups to review products.

Apparently Steve Jobs did claim they don't do market research. To be fair it's never been easy to tell which Apple statements are true and which are marketing-speak.

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/fortune/0803/gallery.jobsqna.fortune/3.html

 

....but they reportedly do put together what are essentially "focus groups".

http://appleinsider.com/articles/11/05/05/apple_initiates_customer_pulse_market_research_focus_group.html

 

By the way there's an interesting read here on "Why you can't innovate like Apple". One of the points it makes is Apple does "leak" potential products/features on occasion to gage consumer interest prior to committing to them. 

http://www.pragmaticmarketing.com/resources/You-Cant-Innovate-Like-Apple


Edited by Gatorguy - 5/4/13 at 3:17pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #80 of 92

SVP Phil Schiller also gave this testimony during last year's trial in California:

 

"We don't use any customer surveys, focus groups, or typical things of that nature. That plays no role in the creation of the products."

 

However, that was last year.

 

I could be very wrong, but Tim Cook strikes me as someone who would desire to know what people want.  He can't afford a flop, and so might tend to take a safer path than Jobs would've.

 

Again, just a feeling, so contrary opinions are welcome.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Big phones, phablets & tablets account for just 10% of Android's installed base
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Big phones, phablets & tablets account for just 10% of Android's installed base