or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's smartphone-only lineup poised to pass Nokia in total mobile phone shipments
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's smartphone-only lineup poised to pass Nokia in total mobile phone shipments

post #1 of 33
Thread Starter 
Despite selling only a limited selection of high-end smartphones, Apple may soon ship more total handsets than Nokia -- which still offers more than two dozen models, including cheaper feature phones -- as the once-mighty Finnish company falls even further from its throne.




Nokia's mobile phone shipments dropped by 14.9 million units to just 47 million in the first quarter of 2014, according to new data from market research firm Strategy Analytics. Apple, in comparison, shipped 6.3 million more iPhones than it did the year before to end its own fiscal quarter with sales of 43.7 million devices.

That means Nokia's 50-year-old mobile business, which once had a near-monopoly on the handset market, finds itself in a dead heat with Apple and its own 7-year-old mobile platform. Nokia commands 11.5 percent of the global market compared to 10.7 percent for Apple's iPhone line.

"Apple has closed the marketshare gap on Nokia to just one point, and Nokia will have to fight hard to stay ahead in the second half of this year," Strategy Analytics senior analyst Ken Hyers said.

The news is particularly troubling for Nokia because the vast majority of the company's handset sales come in the developing world from feature phones and the low-cost Asha series. Nokia's 220 feature phone, for instance, costs just $60 even without carrier subsidies.

It is not yet known what Microsoft, which closed its acquisition of Nokia's handset business earlier this week, will do with the lower-tier handset divisions. Some believe the company may choose to shutter the feature phone business and focus solely on touchscreen devices running Windows Phone in a bid to counter Android's rapid proliferation in the low end of the market.
post #2 of 33
If anyone is seemingly doomed, it's Nokia.
post #3 of 33
Very sad for Nokia.
post #4 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

If anyone is seemingly doomed, it's Nokia.

According to MS there will be no longer a Nokia.
"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 #5 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


According to MS there will be no longer a Nokia.

Okay, "Microsoft Mobile" is doomed. ;)

post #6 of 33

I worked at Symbian when the iPhone came out. We had a company meeting about it, and a lot of people thought it wouldn't succeed because Nokia had the ecosystem and an established mobile business, and hey, everyone wants a physical keyboard, right?

 

Lots of ideas and talking points were raised, and the management did *nothing*.

 

I spent the next year working on a version of Symbian OS that was so very obviously years behind iPhone OS 1.

 

While I was there I watched Symbian go from a marketshare of about 74% to a little over 40%. Symbian messed up. Nokia messed up. I'm amazed Nokia are still selling their feature phones.

post #7 of 33
That would be impressive and pretty relevant historically.
post #8 of 33

Apple will be there one day. They all will. No one stays on top forever.

post #9 of 33
Micro/Nokia whistling in a dark alley, "I'm selling like nobody else..."

There must be something about living at the high latitudes that makes some companies scorn what is going on down in the lower lats... Perhaps it has to do with global warming, but whatever it is if it continues, Redmond is next... oh wait, it started in Redmond.
"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 #10 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirLance99 View Post

Apple will be there one day. They all will. No one stays on top forever.

Ever hear of Proctor and Gambles?
"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 #11 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkpaw View Post

I'm amazed Nokia are still selling their feature phones.

Strange article as technically now Nokia doesn't sell any phones
post #12 of 33

Nokia isn't selling phones anymore, so this article is titled incorrectly

post #13 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkpaw View Post
 

I worked at Symbian when the iPhone came out. We had a company meeting about it, and a lot of people thought it wouldn't succeed because Nokia had the ecosystem and an established mobile business, and hey, everyone wants a physical keyboard, right?

 

Lots of ideas and talking points were raised, and the management did *nothing*.

 

I spent the next year working on a version of Symbian OS that was so very obviously years behind iPhone OS 1.

 

While I was there I watched Symbian go from a marketshare of about 74% to a little over 40%. Symbian messed up. Nokia messed up. I'm amazed Nokia are still selling their feature phones.

Symbian should've followed Android way after 2007 and they would've been still in business: overhaul everything and remake the software "look" and "feel" like iOS. Too bad...their hard headed arrogant executives underestimated the power of iPhone and iOS. 

post #14 of 33
Wow in not a fan of the Samsung phones but selling more than Nokia and Apple combined is seriously impressive! 2 companies that together you would think would dominate from cheap to high end phones beaten by one company.
post #15 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post
 

Symbian should've followed Android way after 2007 and they would've been still in business: overhaul everything and remake the software "look" and "feel" like iOS. Too bad...their hard headed arrogant executives underestimated the power of iPhone and iOS. 

That would make Apple's job tough - to follow two patent trials. Not good !!!

post #16 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkpaw View Post
 

I worked at Symbian when the iPhone came out. We had a company meeting about it, and a lot of people thought it wouldn't succeed because Nokia had the ecosystem and an established mobile business, and hey, everyone wants a physical keyboard, right?

 

Lots of ideas and talking points were raised, and the management did *nothing*.

 

I spent the next year working on a version of Symbian OS that was so very obviously years behind iPhone OS 1.

 

While I was there I watched Symbian go from a marketshare of about 74% to a little over 40%. Symbian messed up. Nokia messed up. I'm amazed Nokia are still selling their feature phones.

 

"Weak minds are denied the fruits of observation."

 

When I saw that first iPhone keynote, I was rather stunned over how difficult it was going to be for the competition to meet or beat it.

 

But now, seven years later, I'm a bit saddened that seemingly *on one* has really stepped up to the plate with an honest and viable response.

 

The Nokia/Symbian people have apparently demonstrated their "weaknesses of mind."

Daniel Swanson

Reply

Daniel Swanson

Reply
post #17 of 33

Isn't this the very last quarter of Nokia phones before the phone brand rides off into the sunset?

post #18 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post

But now, seven years later, I'm a bit saddened that seemingly *on one* has really stepped up to the plate with an honest and viable response.

What are you expecting? Sometimes a design is the best it can get. How many things do you use daily whose design is pretty much the same for the last 100 years?
"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 #19 of 33
Apple is doomed!
post #20 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


Strange article as technically now Nokia doesn't sell any phones

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emes View Post
 

Nokia isn't selling phones anymore, so this article is titled incorrectly

 

This story covers the last quarter of sales, January to the end of March when Nokia was still selling phones. After the end of March Microsoft will take over and rebrand the phones with some really stupid name and do to Nokia what Google did to MotoMo... I hear a big lumbering aircraft going into a power dive...do you hear it too? God! The dynamic forces are incredible! Will it crash and burn or just break up in the air? It's a race to lose altitude... will Blackberry smack the dirt first? Or will Microsoft get there first? Stay tuned.

 

My money's on Blackberry crashing and burning first, only because they had a head start, but Microsoft has experience at this, they may use it to beat Blackberry to the "FINISHED" line.

 

However this ends up Google's stock will rise and Apple's will fall, because that's just the way the game is played.

"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 #21 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


What are you expecting? Sometimes a design is the best it can get. How many things do you use daily whose design is pretty much the same for the last 100 years?

 

Sometimes a design is only the best anyone can imagine it can get...

     Sometimes a design is changed badly - change for change's sake...

          And sometimes a design is a disruptor, and nothing after that is ever the same...

"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 #22 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Wow in not a fan of the Samsung phones but selling more than Nokia and Apple combined is seriously impressive! 2 companies that together you would think would dominate from cheap to high end phones beaten by one company.

 

Apple made more money than Samsung and Nokia combined... I think that's the metric that counts, especially when Apple is not trying for market share but dominance at the high end with only three phones - two of which continue to out-sell any other smart phone on the market.

 

The real test is whether Samsung would switch their sales numbers for Apple's profits...?

"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 #23 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Wow in not a fan of the Samsung phones but selling more than Nokia and Apple combined is seriously impressive! 2 companies that together you would think would dominate from cheap to high end phones beaten by one company.

Apple makes more in profit than Samsung (all divisions and products) and Nokia do combined.

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply
post #24 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post
 

 

Apple made more money than Samsung and Nokia combined... I think that's the metric that counts, especially when Apple is not trying for market share but dominance at the high end with only three phones - two of which continue to out-sell any other smart phone on the market.

 

The real test is whether Samsung would switch their sales numbers for Apple's profits...?


Depends on what each of their aims are. For the last few years Nokia have been spending to try and come in just under break even. Profit hasn't been a large aim of theirs as they need to get market share back on an upward trajectory and to do that they need to invest everything they can.

 

Who knows what Samsung targets are, at the end of the day though they've built their share of the market up to be bigger then Nokia, Apple and LG combined. And its not like they've done it by having cheaper phones, there all similarly priced and that is seriously impressive.

post #25 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post
Who knows what Samsung targets are, at the end of the day though they've built their share of the market up to be bigger then Nokia, Apple and LG combined. And its not like they've done it by having cheaper phones, there all similarly priced and that is seriously impressive.

 

According to most evaluators, Samsung's smart phones are cheaper then Apple's 5c and HTC's M8, even if they cost the end user about the same.

"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 #26 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post
 

 

According to most evaluators, Samsung's smart phones are cheaper then Apple's 5c and HTC's M8, even if they cost the end user about the same.

What do you mean by cheaper if your not talking about what the end user pays. Do you mean manufacturing cost or the price a retailer pays Samsung for them?

post #27 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post
 

What do you mean by cheaper if your not talking about what the end user pays. Do you mean manufacturing cost or the price a retailer pays Samsung for them?

 

People who compare products find that Samsung's products are made crappier and are not as durable as Apple and HTC's products. A good part of Samsung's cell phone cost is advertizing and kickbacks to the sales force of Verizon, AT&T, et al. Over ten billion USD went to this use instead of improving the product. So much so, that Samsung damn near reported a loss on the division this last quarter.

"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 #28 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkpaw View Post

I worked at Symbian when the iPhone came out. We had a company meeting about it, and a lot of people thought it wouldn't succeed because Nokia had the ecosystem and an established mobile business, and hey, everyone wants a physical keyboard, right?

Lots of ideas and talking points were raised, and the management did *nothing*.

I spent the next year working on a version of Symbian OS that was so very obviously years behind iPhone OS 1.

While I was there I watched Symbian go from a marketshare of about 74% to a little over 40%. Symbian messed up. Nokia messed up. I'm amazed Nokia are still selling their feature phones.

The Symbian "ecosystem" was rife with piracy, there was tons of ok software, the problem was no one wanted to pay for it.

Paying for things was one of the things Nokia's substantial fan base at the time, used to deride the iPhone.

When the App Store came along and developers started making some serious coin, Symbian became the burning platform Nokia had to leap from.

That and Symbian was like DOS, a lurching stumbling platform with so much tacked on and shoehorned in order to compete with more modern operating systems it eventually fell over.

Nokia's early touchscreen phones, the N97 and N97 Mini, the 5800, the N8 were absolutely awful.

The Apple hating Nokia fanboys drifted to Samsung...

...and that my friend, is now ancient history.
Edited by hill60 - 4/30/14 at 4:51am
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 #29 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkpaw View Post

I worked at Symbian when the iPhone came out. We had a company meeting about it, and a lot of people thought it wouldn't succeed because Nokia had the ecosystem and an established mobile business, and hey, everyone wants a physical keyboard, right?

Lots of ideas and talking points were raised, and the management did *nothing*.

I spent the next year working on a version of Symbian OS that was so very obviously years behind iPhone OS 1.

While I was there I watched Symbian go from a marketshare of about 74% to a little over 40%. Symbian messed up. Nokia messed up. I'm amazed Nokia are still selling their feature phones.

Thx for sharing. Very interesting to get first hand perspective. Sad for Nokia. But as u say, they were complacent. 1smile.gif
post #30 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post
 

 

Apple made more money than Samsung and Nokia combined... I think that's the metric that counts, especially when Apple is not trying for market share but dominance at the high end with only three phones - two of which continue to out-sell any other smart phone on the market.

 

The real test is whether Samsung would switch their sales numbers for Apple's profits...?


So, here's the problem with that:  Apple was here before.

 

Back in the early '80s, Apple had damn close to 50% marketshare in microcomputers.  But this funny thing happened, prices for other computers started dropping.  Apple said "that's ok, we'll take the high end" and kept prices high.  By the late '80s, Apple was building the best, most innovative computers out there, and losing marketshare like crazy.  People weren't only ok with "good enough", they were buying absolutely unusable garbage, because you could get a PC clone for under $2k, but the cheapest Mac was nearly $3k.  And they bought a lot of that unusable garbage.  When we hit the mid '90s, it was even worse.  Apple had moved to the PowerPC, had the best operating system out there, and marketshare had dropped like a rock.  "Apple is dying" articles were everywhere, you could spend over $2k on an entry-level Mac system or under $1k on a PC. 

 

What turned Apple around wasn't just innovative design and the best operating system out there, it was price cuts, especially at the entry level.  The iMac sold for as little as $699, and the iMac was a complete system.  A G4 tower started at about $1500, and outran anything x86.  Apple computers were not only reasonable, they were a great value.  Sure, you could spend more on a high end machine, but the low end was there, and was accessible.

 

Today we're dealing with the too expensive problem again.  Apple could sell a $300 phone, and could do it easily.  Apple could sell a $1000 tower Macintosh, and could do it easily (I know that one with absolute certainty, since I've built nice Hackintoshes for less.  Apple can get much better part prices than I could ever hope to get buying retail).  But Apple can't see the long term importance of marketshare, even though it damn near destroyed the company once.

post #31 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader View Post


So, here's the problem with that:  Apple was here before.

Back in the early '80s, Apple had damn close to 50% marketshare in microcomputers.  But this funny thing happened, prices for other computers started dropping.  Apple said "that's ok, we'll take the high end" and kept prices high.  By the late '80s, Apple was building the best, most innovative computers out there, and losing marketshare like crazy.  People weren't only ok with "good enough", they were buying absolutely unusable garbage, because you could get a PC clone for under $2k, but the cheapest Mac was nearly $3k.  And they bought a lot of that unusable garbage.  When we hit the mid '90s, it was even worse.  Apple had moved to the PowerPC, had the best operating system out there, and marketshare had dropped like a rock.  "Apple is dying" articles were everywhere, you could spend over $2k on an entry-level Mac system or under $1k on a PC. 

What turned Apple around wasn't just innovative design and the best operating system out there, it was price cuts, especially at the entry level.  The iMac sold for as little as $699, and the iMac was a complete system.  A G4 tower started at about $1500, and outran anything x86.  Apple computers were not only reasonable, they were a great value.  Sure, you could spend more on a high end machine, but the low end was there, and was accessible.

Today we're dealing with the too expensive problem again.  Apple could sell a $300 phone, and could do it easily.  Apple could sell a $1000 tower Macintosh, and could do it easily (I know that one with absolute certainty, since I've built nice Hackintoshes for less.  Apple can get much better part prices than I could ever hope to get buying retail).  But Apple can't see the long term importance of marketshare, even though it damn near destroyed the company once.

Except that the market share in the 80s wasn't of millions upon millions of devices. Very few people had a use for a computer back then.

If their market share is shrinking now it's not because they're selling less but because the market has out paced them in growth. Yes many people are settling for 'good enough', but that hasn't hurt Apple in any way. What happened in one era doesn’t necessarily mean it'll happen in another.
"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 #32 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader View Post
 


So, here's the problem with that:  Apple was here before.

 

Back in the early '80s, Apple had damn close to 50% marketshare in microcomputers.  But this funny thing happened, prices for other computers started dropping.  Apple said "that's ok, we'll take the high end" and kept prices high.  By the late '80s, Apple was building the best, most innovative computers out there, and losing marketshare like crazy.  People weren't only ok with "good enough", they were buying absolutely unusable garbage, because you could get a PC clone for under $2k, but the cheapest Mac was nearly $3k.  And they bought a lot of that unusable garbage.  When we hit the mid '90s, it was even worse.  Apple had moved to the PowerPC, had the best operating system out there, and marketshare had dropped like a rock.  "Apple is dying" articles were everywhere, you could spend over $2k on an entry-level Mac system or under $1k on a PC. 

 

What turned Apple around wasn't just innovative design and the best operating system out there, it was price cuts, especially at the entry level.  The iMac sold for as little as $699, and the iMac was a complete system.  A G4 tower started at about $1500, and outran anything x86.  Apple computers were not only reasonable, they were a great value.  Sure, you could spend more on a high end machine, but the low end was there, and was accessible.

 

Today we're dealing with the too expensive problem again.  Apple could sell a $300 phone, and could do it easily.  Apple could sell a $1000 tower Macintosh, and could do it easily (I know that one with absolute certainty, since I've built nice Hackintoshes for less.  Apple can get much better part prices than I could ever hope to get buying retail).  But Apple can't see the long term importance of marketshare, even though it damn near destroyed the company once.

 

In the 80's I spent $3000 on a 20 MB hard drive now I could buy hundreds of Terabytes.

 

Times change.

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 #33 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader View Post


So, here's the problem with that:  Apple was here before.

Back in the early '80s, Apple had damn close to 50% marketshare in microcomputers.  But this funny thing happened, prices for other computers started dropping.  Apple said "that's ok, we'll take the high end" and kept prices high. 

Actually Apple had close to 100% of the microcomputer market share in the very early '80s with the Apple Iie. THEN what happened was IBM entered the microcomputer business. The general saying back then was "No one ever got fired for buying IBM." The name IBM was spoken with a bit of awe in one's voice. The IBM PC was 16-bit to Apple's 8-bit architecture and could address more RAM... but most of all the outside of the box said IBM. The price was didn't begin until (1) Brand X computers became IBM-compatible, and (2) brand X computers began to outperform IMB computers, and (3) a price war broke out among Brand X computer vendors. The big problem with Apple was that they had nothing that was IBM compatible. It didn't matter what the price was, overnight Apple wasn't compatible. Then, during the IBM-compatible cat fight there was no advantage to building a computer that was as fully tricked out as a basic Mac. Everything was priced bare bones, and then plus a sound card, plus a hard disc, plus this and plus that.
Quote:
By the late '80s, Apple was building the best, most innovative computers out there, and losing marketshare like crazy.  People weren't only ok with "good enough", they were buying absolutely unusable garbage, because you could get a PC clone for under $2k, but the cheapest Mac was nearly $3k.  And they bought a lot of that unusable garbage.  When we hit the mid '90s, it was even worse.  Apple had moved to the PowerPC, had the best operating system out there, and marketshare had dropped like a rock.  "Apple is dying" articles were everywhere, you could spend over $2k on an entry-level Mac system or under $1k on a PC. 

Thank God for the education market, because Apple's networking could be set up and maintained by a classroom school teacher... not so with the IBM-compatible. The school system saw the advantage of the Mac and has been fairly loyal to the brand. Even today, the mac is easier to set up and run on a network than a current IBM-compatible. The difference in cost of the hardware was more then saved by not requiring an IT person on every site. (IT kingdom-building was rampant in the corporate world and aided by Microsoft's buggy networking software, is still a safe profession)
Quote:
What turned Apple around wasn't just innovative design and the best operating system out there, it was price cuts, especially at the entry level.  The iMac sold for as little as $699, and the iMac was a complete system.  A G4 tower started at about $1500, and outran anything x86.  Apple computers were not only reasonable, they were a great value.  Sure, you could spend more on a high end machine, but the low end was there, and was accessible.

No, no, a thousand times, NO. Hardware costs never was a saving aspect of Apple's success. It was the COST of ownership and the EASE of setup and use. The tag-line, "It just works," was what was Apple's constant user experience... and STILL is. Yes, Apple makes a headless Mac Mini, which is especially useful for users coming over from the dark side and want to use their monitor and keyboard from their old system, but long-time Ma users will buy the all-in-one iMac or a Mac Pro if they don't buy an Apple laptop of one kind or other. Apple's never been the low-price hardware leader in portable computers — ever.
Quote:
Today we're dealing with the too expensive problem again.  Apple could sell a $300 phone, and could do it easily.  Apple could sell a $1000 tower Macintosh, and could do it easily (I know that one with absolute certainty, since I've built nice Hackintoshes for less.  Apple can get much better part prices than I could ever hope to get buying retail).  But Apple can't see the long term importance of marketshare, even though it damn near destroyed the company once.

You are only partially correct here. Apple's price keeps them from having more of the market then they now have. I don't argue that. However, Apple's prices also prevents their iDevices from being thought of as a "commodity" product. Apple is clearly thought of as a prestige product (Prestige refers to of a good reputation or of high esteem) by it's customers and of the general population. A company can't buy that mantle but a company can sure lose it by letting their brand stand for cheep in price or quality.

What we've seen happening since 2007 is that ALL of Apple's products carry the aura of a prestige product, so while the PC industry sales have been in a tail spin, Apple's Mac sales have generally increased. Price has not been a driver to Apple's sales numbers, people buy Apple products because they have an expectation of having a better experience. As a long-term Apple customer I have been bewildered by the kinds of problems PC owners are faced with regularly. Even very experienced PC owners fussing over their recalcitrant PC which suddenly stopped recognizing to a printer it can see attached to itself.
"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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple's smartphone-only lineup poised to pass Nokia in total mobile phone shipments
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's smartphone-only lineup poised to pass Nokia in total mobile phone shipments