or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Editorial: Apple's iOS is the new Windows
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Editorial: Apple's iOS is the new Windows - Page 2

post #41 of 201
Steve Jobs' observation about tech companies that attain monopolies (The Lost Interview, 24:20):
 
"It turns out the same thing can happen in technology companies that get monopolies, like, oh, IBM and Xerox.
 
"If you were a product person at IBM, or Xerox, so you make a better copier or a better computer, so what? When you have a monopoly market share the company's not any more successful.
 
"So the people that can make the company more successful are sales and marketing people, and they end up running the companies. And the product people get driven out of the decision making forums, and the companies forget what it means to make great products. Sort of the product sensibility - the product genius - that brought them to that monopolistic position - gets rotted out [...]"
post #42 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

"Fated to go the way of Windows"???

"Apple has a roadmap of do's and don'ts to follow"???

 

Ugh. The danger Apple faces isn't failing to defend the stickiness of their platform. That just doesn't work. Microsoft tries desperately during the 90s to make sure Windows remained sticky, and they identified two threats to that stickiness: the World Wide Web and Java. This was the era of "embrace, extend, extinguish" tactics. Microsoft pushed "Best Viewed in IE4" badges on Web sites, and tried to add Windows-only libraries to Java until Sun won a lawsuit against Microsoft that ground that to a halt.

 

Defending stickiness is NOT a long-term growth strategy. It's a short-term time-buying strategy. If you have to actively defend it, then market trends are making your platform irrelevant. The forces that make it irrelevant will reward (new) players who adapt, and wipe out those that try to oppose it. The forces that finally felled Windows are: fast ubiquitous 3G/4G Internet, touch screen phones and tablets (iPads, for the most part), and consumer appetite for using technology to access web services such as Facebook and Twitter and YouTube and Instagram and Pandora, more than to run Windows-specific applications. Ironically, one of Microsoft's technologies, XHR, helped make this possible (Microsoft may have originally wanted XHR to be Windows-specific, but they didn't stop anyone else from implementing it, thus seeding Windows' future doom). The shift to using technology to access Web services (from anywhere) with connected, always-on portable devices is what will decimate Windows and PCs in consumer markets. PCs will still be relevant on the content creation side for the foreseeable future.

 

For Apple, the threats to "iDevice" stickiness will be streaming media. The iPod (and later iPad) owes much of its popularity to the popularity of iTunes sourced content (which have grown from just songs to movies, TV, and books). If Spotify or Netflix (or Google Play or Amazon Instant MP3/Video) start to eat into that, that will be an early warning sign that Apple had better get on the winning side of that trend. Inflection points for new technology can flip perceptions and consumer market share in as little as two Christmases. If Apple is smart, they'll offer the best streaming music and/or video service before anyone else does. If you think about it, on demand streaming music (personal radio) is something that would even make iCloud irrelevant for media storage, because your music is already on a server. Higher wireless data caps and/or even better music compression could be a tipping point for this.

 

There might be other trends that'll make smartphones passé. Wearable computing is one of them (smart watch or Google Glass). Advanced natural language human interfaces (talking to your device as fluently as talking to another person), are all longer-term bets about the next big thing that'll replace the smartphone/tablet as the trending way to access data and services.

 

Apple shouldn't follow Microsoft's do's and don'ts, and I don't think they will. It's not in their DNA. Apple has to do two core thing right to stay on top:

1. See where maturing technologies are coming together in the future to form great new products and services

2. Don't be afraid to cannibalize your own markets.

 

You should read the article, not just glance over the subheads. There's no suggestion that Apple need "to defend the stickiness" of the platform, or needs to follow the decisions Microsoft made. The last section mentions avoiding problems Microsoft ran into, especially ignoring security (as Google is doing with Android) and letting years go by while ignoring your platform (Vista, just like Google's lost year of 2011 focused on tablets, a failure inside of a failure). 

 

The main problem Microsoft had was running the company as a series of fiefdoms, often at cross purposes. Apple runs itself like an army, shifting resources to whatever task the executive team plans out. I'm pretty sure any other tech company is run like that. 

 

Also, the more you know about how Apple analyzes business opportunities and technologies, the less impress you are by startups and rival companies that pop up for a minute with a good idea and then fall apart before they can implement it.

post #43 of 201
Fantastic analysis. Such analytics are necessary to the survival of the IOS prlatform in general and Apple specifically. I believe and know the key is CONSISTENCY. Apple has now learned this too with Maps. I have said this before, Apple, like Disney, (which Steve Jobs didn't want to have happen) has lost its lightening rod leader. Tim Cook is a fantastic manager, good internal man, but not a lightening rod. I suppose he could be and is trying to be. But even now Disney sufferes, as Apple, with no lightening rod. The public and stock prices, rely on this signular person more than anything else in many ways. Perhaps this should have been part of the analysis of the brand.
post #44 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post


.... as does the Android supply-side ecosystem (which is, to a considerable extent the same as Apple's) profit from Android devices. Samsung is a vertically integrated company, so it is its own supplier, but other players in the market are not, and so their costs are other people's profits.

Other than the some of the semiconductors, what are the other significant components of Samsung's supply-side ecosystem? Where does it get its core operating software? Its glass? Plastic? Who does its assembly?

Also, given that Samsung mostly sells low-end stuff (look at its sad ASP), it needs to keep costs down as much as possible.
Edited by anantksundaram - 5/4/13 at 8:12pm
post #45 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Ah, the old Android expression is back once again: Soon. Soooooon. Sooooooooooooon Android will be profitable. Sooooooooooooooooooooooooon Android will not be fragmented. Soooooooooooooooooooooooooon Android will be the bestest in all the land.

Very much akin to the old sports adage "we'll get them next year"
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #46 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Other than the some of the semiconductors, what are the other significant components of Samsung's supply-side ecosystem? Where does it get its core operating software? Its glass? Plastic? Who does its assembly?

Also, given that Samsung mostly sells low-end stuff (look at their sad ASP), it needs to keep costs down as much as possible.

And how much is Google profiting from Android that would make the igriv state that Android has been profitable against the $13 billion plus investment from Google?

"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 #47 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Very much akin to the old sports adage "we'll get them next year"

I always think of Waiting for Godot.

"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 #48 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredD View Post

Recent research shows the Android platform already has more download potential for developers and revenue is I think less but also catching up. The revenue element is obviously most important, but that will very likely exceed the iOS platform by next year.

Eric Schmidt already said that. Last year. And the year before that.

Recall his laughable boast about Google and TVs?
post #49 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Recall his laughable boast about Google and TVs?

Weren't half of all TVs sold suppose to include GoogleTV a year ago? How is that going?¡

"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 #50 of 201
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
Weren't half of all TVs sold suppose to include GoogleTV a year ago? How is that going?¡

 

And this gem, from just two days ago:

 

YouTube has displaced TV.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #51 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And this gem, from just two days ago:

YouTube has displaced TV.

I'm not sure what to make of that. I can see how YouTube has more eyeballs and more total eyeball time than conventional TV viewing but I'm quite sure I agree with his "talks back" comment. There are a comments section and it's easier for the content owner to judge how the viewer reacts but I think his comment is still pretty weak.

"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 #52 of 201
iOS has been the new Windows without question. Sad to see how Microsoft dropped the ball.
Ios capabilities are endless and its good to see that people are finally realizing the reality
post #53 of 201
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
There are a comments section and it's easier for the content owner to judge how the viewer reacts…

 

Yep, no other visual medium affords you the ability to show the world your talents and get called a "gaywad" by a twelve year old. lol.gif

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #54 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Yep, no other visual medium affords you the ability to show the world your talents and get called a "gaywad" by a twelve year old. lol.gif

The flipside of that is me watching videos by 12 year olds on how to do specific things in Xcode/iOS. My self-confidence isn't helped by getting assistance kids whose voices haven't yet cracked.

"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 #55 of 201
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
The flipside of that is me watching videos by 12 year olds on how to do specific things in Xcode/iOS. My self-confidence isn't helped by getting assistance kids whose voices haven't yet cracked.

 

Didn't Apple bring a kid up on stage once to demo how easy it was to code in a language they'd created? Maybe that was NeXT…

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #56 of 201
Android is very profitable.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
for Microsoft. BAZINGA

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #57 of 201
So great an article that I can't help reading for it several times.
post #58 of 201
I am not even going to bother reading the article because the title doesn't make sense at all - You cannot buy "iOS" just like you cannot buy "Andriod OS" - But, yes you can buy Window OS. So, please go fix your title and possibly your article also, as I bet it is comparing Apple and Oranges.
post #59 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by oomu View Post

"Apple is losing market share worldwide and sales (numbers) are not growing at the pace of others. "

it's usual business for Apple.

-

anyway, the new Windows is Android. Same business, Same road, Same boring stuff.

In a way you are correct, but you have to factor that not all versions of Android are equal as they all get modified to a certain degree so Samsung's version of Android is different than HTC's versions.  Plus, both Windows and Android are probably fragmented whereas Apple is less fragmented as to which version is actually used.  Apple gets their user base up to the latest version MUCH faster than both Windows and Android.  I guess since Android is the King of malware for mobile OSs, and Windows was/is the King of malware for a desktop OS, they share that same ability.  Plus Android is OEM'd OS whereas iOS isn't.  The thing is, Apple is STILL opening up new markets, they JUST started shipping to T-Mobile customers, so that's going to represent an increase in customer base, they plan on opening up US Cellular, which should open up another few million users.  They STILL have to sign on China Mobile which will represent hundreds of millions of users over the span of a few years. So, Apple hasn't opened up all of the markets that Android has.  So, Apple does have a lot of growth potential in the next few years just by signing more carriers.

 

Either way, Apple just needs to get some added features and enhancements.  Once Apple gets a larger screen size going and figures out how they want to approach the lower end market, they'll do just fine, even if they don't own 93% market share.  Apple still has lots of stuff planned to keep them healthy with a substantial market share.

post #60 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

1. No one but Apple has made money selling iDevices.

2. As for Android not being profitable, I didn't realize that charity was such a strong motivating factor for hardware companies. My opinion of human nature is increased.
Android is free.
Other companies are trying to make money with android but they're failing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Silly of you to take my comment arguing for a more affordable iPhone as "cheap" as in low quality. You know exactly what I meant so why not rebut my actual point instead of debating a straw man that doesn't exist  Apple can make a more affordable iPhone without making a "cheap" low quality version and still make a nice profit. Better to make a slightly lower profit margin than lose the customer to another company completely.  Cheaper doesn't mean cheap and Apple are perfectly capable of making a high quality lower priced iPhone and still make a nice profit. Besides which the existence of products like the Mac Mini, Nano, and Shuffle prove your assertion is just factually wrong.

How can Apple make a low cost iPhone without sacrificing the "iPhone"?

Mac mini doesn't come with anything. Does Apple want an iPhone with no screen?
Mini and nano are smaller iPods. How can you shrink the iPhone? Might as well use the 4.
Shuffle has no screen and limited functionality. Definitely not the way for the iPhone.
post #61 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by radster360 View Post

I am not even going to bother reading the article because the title doesn't make sense at all - You cannot buy "iOS" just like you cannot buy "Andriod OS" - But, yes you can buy Window OS. So, please go fix your title and possibly your article also, as I bet it is comparing Apple and Oranges.

Well if you don't read it, how can you complain about it?
post #62 of 201
iOS will never reach the sort of ubiquity that Windows represents because Apple does not license iOS. Because of this, the platform is limited by the form factors that Apple feels are in its best interest to produce. In pure numbers Apple will be overwhelmed by Android. Android holds something like 70% of the smartphone market. Apple is more profitable, and will continue to thrive, but it ain't no monopoly.
post #63 of 201
Originally Posted by graxspoo View Post
Android holds something like 70% of the smartphone market.

 

I thought Apple had 40 and climbing.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #64 of 201

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57569402-94/android-ios-combine-for-91-percent-of-market/

 

Android went from about 53% market share q4 2011 to 70% market share q4 2012. Huge growth.

 

"Android boasted a broad selection of smartphones, and an equally deep list of smartphone vendor partners. Finding an Android smartphone for nearly any budget, taste, size, and price was all but guaranteed during 2012. As a result, Android was rewarded with market-beating growth."
 

Apple has a great product, no doubt, but one company simply can not hit as many price points and form factors as the combined might of the entire rest of the industry.

 

This is why comparing iOS to Windows is way off the mark. Clueless consumers will tend to buy Android phones because there are simply more of them, and they are (and probably will continue to be) cheaper than the iPhone. This is especially true now with the trend towards pre-paid service, because the true cost of the phone is becoming more obvious.

 

The Mac/PC era is over. It has been replaced by the cloud era. Operating systems are becoming less important because everything is now expected to inter-operate via the internet. 

 

So, if the internet is like a highway, in that it gives access to information, and operating systems/platforms are like cars, then Apple is perhaps like BMW or maybe Acura. High quality, very successful, not going anywhere. Not a monopoly.

post #65 of 201

You were probably thinking of "tablet" market share. Apple's share is actually slipping.

 

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24093213

 

Apple's share of the tablet market slipped from just under 60% to just under 40% between 2011 and 2012. This is mostly because Android tablets that people actually want to use are finally coming to market. And again there are many different form factors, price points and "methods of monetization" being explored by all of Apple's competitors. For example, the Kindle Fire, which is essentially an Android tablet, is sold at a loss with the expectation that Amazon will make money on media sales. There are also a ton of "white box" no-name brand Android tablets hitting the markets from China.

 

In the end, the OS doesn't really matter. No one is making money from sales of Android or of iOS. Hardware manufacturers (which Apple very much is) make money from selling hardware. The only concern would be if iOS became such a minor player that developers stopped writing apps for it. This is highly unlikely because there's a huge installed base, and the existence cross-platform app frameworks based on web technology.
 

post #66 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

Linux "occupies every form and price range under the sun" but did not ever become as "dominant or as ubiquitous as Windows."

The thing is tho, Linux is useful for specific tasks where you want flexibility you hand craft (servers, dedicated devices) and you don't want to pay for somebody else's integration. Linux hasn't become very popular on PCs because the integration work Microsoft did was more valuable than the ~$15 it charged OEMs.

In smartphones, the integration work Apple does is generating far greater profits. That model is also supporting Mac sales, which are holding up a lot better than Windows PCs and not losing any ground to Linux. In fact, if you want to do Linuxy things, you can buy a Mac and use the command line for your technical needs, then return to a well mannered desktop to run apps and games. Once that became a reality, the Linux PC market essentially disappeared. Nobody want to fiddle with a desktop PC, and certainly not a notebook, running DIY software.


In mobile devices, Apple's integration is even more valuable. Android offers very little price competition on comparable hardware to end users, and to licensees, the additional fees paid patent holders who own the IP Google casually appropriated means that using Android isn't free at all. 

If Linux couldn't gain traction on the PC where it offered a significant savings over paying Microsoft for Windows, how is Android going suddenly start allowing OEMs to make any profits now that its more expensive than ever?


Also, do a mental comparison between the profitability of generic PC makers selling against the Mac and generic phone makers selling against the iPhone and iPad. 

Furthermore android can easily be forked so the android found in many devices may not be the one developed by google.

I believe in time to come those who forked android will continued to improve their branch for their devices.
post #67 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by graxspoo View Post

You were probably thinking of "tablet" market share. Apple's share is actually slipping.

 

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24093213

 

Apple's share of the tablet market slipped from just under 60% to just under 40% between 2011 and 2012. This is mostly because there are so many Android tablets finally coming to market. 

Fixed that for you...

post #68 of 201
The analogy is false. The Windows platform always meant cut-throat competition both for hardware and for software. Hardware and software vendors had to struggle to make a profit, while users got a large number of hardware and software offerings to choose from. For better or worse, Android is clearly the new Windows.
post #69 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredD View Post

Recent research shows the Android platform already has more download potential for developers and revenue is I think less but also catching up. The revenue element is obviously most important, but that will very likely exceed the iOS platform by next year.

Android users spend very little money on apps, compared to iOS users. Furthermore, the high number (over 1000) of Android display sizes, DPIs, and H to W ratios make for some ugly-looking apps. If that's not enough the developers have to write for an OS that's a couple years old since a huge portion of the available users are not able to upgrade their OS. Finally, now we learn that Samsung's prime new phone has a terrible limit on RAM for storing apps. No matter how you slice it, the Android platform is not attractive to developers.

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #70 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by twebpass View Post

The analogy is false. The Windows platform always meant cut-throat competition both for hardware and for software. Hardware and software vendors had to struggle to make a profit, while users got a large number of hardware and software offerings to choose from. For better or worse, Android is clearly the new Windows.

Competition on the App Store is pretty fierce isn't it?

post #71 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by graxspoo View Post

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57569402-94/android-ios-combine-for-91-percent-of-market/

 

Android went from about 53% market share q4 2011 to 70% market share q4 2012. Huge growth.

 

"Android boasted a broad selection of smartphones, and an equally deep list of smartphone vendor partners. Finding an Android smartphone for nearly any budget, taste, size, and price was all but guaranteed during 2012. As a result, Android was rewarded with market-beating growth."
 

Apple has a great product, no doubt, but one company simply can not hit as many price points and form factors as the combined might of the entire rest of the industry.

 

This is why comparing iOS to Windows is way off the mark. Clueless consumers will tend to buy Android phones because there are simply more of them, and they are (and probably will continue to be) cheaper than the iPhone. This is especially true now with the trend towards pre-paid service, because the true cost of the phone is becoming more obvious.

 

The Mac/PC era is over. It has been replaced by the cloud era. Operating systems are becoming less important because everything is now expected to inter-operate via the internet. 

 

So, if the internet is like a highway, in that it gives access to information, and operating systems/platforms are like cars, then Apple is perhaps like BMW or maybe Acura. High quality, very successful, not going anywhere. Not a monopoly.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by graxspoo View Post

You were probably thinking of "tablet" market share. Apple's share is actually slipping.

 

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24093213

 

Apple's share of the tablet market slipped from just under 60% to just under 40% between 2011 and 2012. This is mostly because Android tablets that people actually want to use are finally coming to market. And again there are many different form factors, price points and "methods of monetization" being explored by all of Apple's competitors. For example, the Kindle Fire, which is essentially an Android tablet, is sold at a loss with the expectation that Amazon will make money on media sales. There are also a ton of "white box" no-name brand Android tablets hitting the markets from China.

 

In the end, the OS doesn't really matter. No one is making money from sales of Android or of iOS. Hardware manufacturers (which Apple very much is) make money from selling hardware. The only concern would be if iOS became such a minor player that developers stopped writing apps for it. This is highly unlikely because there's a huge installed base, and the existence cross-platform app frameworks based on web technology.
 

 

You made so many false assertions that I won't even try to refute them.

 

I think of Android being like Windows in that it is hard to do things on it. Even finding an app that runs well on the hardware of choice is no fun. And then there's that malware that often comes free with most purchases... just like Windows.

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #72 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

 

Also, the more you know about how Apple analyzes business opportunities and technologies, the less impress you are by startups and rival companies that pop up for a minute with a good idea and then fall apart before they can implement it.

 

Many of those startup stay around just long enough for Google to waste some tens of millions buying them up. :-)

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #73 of 201

>You made so many false assertions that I won't even try to refute them.

 

Well, that's not going to make for much of a conversation then.

post #74 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Fixed that for you...

 


You probably haven't been following the market, but the Nexus tablets are actually quite nice, and cheaper than an iPad mini. If I were shopping for a tablet, I'd seriously consider one of those, or the new tablets from Samsung. The Kindle Fire has been beefed up, and if you're mostly into Amazon content, it's definitely worth considering. The point is, for a long time iPad was really the only game in town. That's no longer the case, and Apple's share of the tablet market has slipped below 50%.

 

Now, if Apple had licensed their OS for a reasonable price, this would all be different. But, Apple is not interested in "market domination" based on pure share. Apple is interested in maximizing profits while remaining true to their creative goals, so for them closed systems make the most sense, even if that means a smaller overall share of sales.

post #75 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

 PCs will still be relevant on the content creation side for the foreseeable future.

 

For Apple, the threats to "iDevice" stickiness will be streaming media. The iPod (and later iPad) owes much of its popularity to the popularity of iTunes sourced content (which have grown from just songs to movies, TV, and books). If Spotify or Netflix (or Google Play or Amazon Instant MP3/Video) start to eat into that, that will be an early warning sign that Apple had better get on the winning side of that trend. Inflection points for new technology can flip perceptions and consumer market share in as little as two Christmases. If Apple is smart, they'll offer the best streaming music and/or video service before anyone else does. If you think about it, on demand streaming music (personal radio) is something that would even make iCloud irrelevant for media storage, because your music is already on a server. Higher wireless data caps and/or even better music compression could be a tipping point for this.

 

 

Very astute comments.

 

I think, despite all the howls to the contrary, that Apple is lacking imagination. Tim Cook is a very capable, traditional business operator.  Apple didn't get where it is being lead by a traditional business operative. I have read all the pro-Cook arguments on here and I don't agree with them. Perhaps Apple should try and hire Neal Stephenson as an innovation consultant.

 

I have said this previously, but I think what Apple should have done with that enormous pile of cash they literally have little idea what to do with, is build and deploy a world spanning network of satellites capable of delivering high bandwidth data to Apple devices.  They could use this to leverage an eco-system advantage that Android couldn't begin to touch, not to mention the scope this would provide for really taking over the living room.

 

Mobile data might be cheap in the US, but I don't think it is worldwide, nor is it likely to become so.  I got a txt message offer from Vodafone less than week ago - 150 Mb, valid for one week, for €3 ($3.90) - no thanks.  If Apple could provide cheap high speed two-way data to iOS devices world-wide, the world would be their oyster.

post #76 of 201

Why are Apple's competitors not beating back its advances?

 

Lex Luthor: 'All I ask you to do is to kill Superman, and you can't even do that one, simple thing.'

post #77 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macdaddyimac View Post

Interesting article.

 

It goes to show the market is dynamic, and it's a matter of innovation.  10 years ago who would believe that M$ no longer is the dominant company, let alone being beat by a company that was ready to bankrupt at any moment?

 

Also, "Source: Reddit User Submission"?? Could you not attribute it to the actual reddit user?

 

http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1cbken/1993_vs_2013/

 

10 years? You missed it by quite some years, my friend. Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy back in 1996, but has had a tremendous rise since that time. But I guess there are many new iOS-fans around that doesn't know the history ;)

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 #78 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

Apple is losing market share worldwide and sales (numbers) are not growing at the pace of others. 

 

Samsung's global mobile-handset shipments rose to 42.6 million units in the third quarter, up 13.9 percent from 37.4 million in the second quarter. Compared to the third quarter of 2006, Samsung's shipments rose by 38.8 percent, the highest rate of all the Top-5 mobile-handset makers.

 

Source

 

So, umm how many handsets are Samsung selling these days?

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 #79 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

You know when someone keeps repeating things over and over, they not trying to convince someone else but themselves of it.

Does it look like they care? Just like Steve Jobs said in the interview alongside Bill Gates, Apple didn't need to beat Microsoft, Apple had to remember who Apple was!
post #80 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by radster360 View Post

I am not even going to bother reading the article because the title doesn't make sense at all - You cannot buy "iOS" just like you cannot buy "Andriod OS" - But, yes you can buy Window OS. So, please go fix your title and possibly your article also, as I bet it is comparing Apple and Oranges.

Apples and oranges are both fruit so yes they can be compared, and if opinions and aholes can be compared so can iOS and Windows.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Editorial: Apple's iOS is the new Windows