Report downplays concerns over lack of 3G iPhone - Page 3

The stands of everyone here is biased in some way, including yours. you reasize that, f course. But, the reason why I get so energized sometimes is because I do have experience in areas that often those arguiung with me, don't.

For example, you say that those who manufacture those products would differ with me. Based on what knowledge? You can go read about it yourself, as I suggested, and then come and argue some more, if you find me to be wrong in this. There is nothing I'm saying that is so obscure that it isn't available, if you want to look.


Good points, but they still can't account for the vast difference in sales, just some of it. The phone plans in Europe are better of worse, it depends.


For a short while, yes. But people who want a phone aren't going to buy the iTouch. Compare the iTouch to the effect it had on music/video players better.


We'll see. That's not something you can quantify, because it hasn't happened yet, and the sales here will also rise because of that, so they could very well cancel out.

Tsk, tsk Teno, I think its been well-established to long time AI posters like yourself that Mel does have some experience in manufacturing and electronics... that has been his life's work, after all. He's not walking around all day in an Intel chip-fab bunny suit, but he obviously has a good idea of what he's talking about, certainly a lot more than the average person.



Fair comparison, shmair comparison. Apple has publicly stated that they want to sell 10 million iPhones a year. Europe is one of the three major markets in the world where they could do so, the others being the US and Asia.

The US and Asia can take up some of the slack for poor European sales (that is, assuming Asian sales are not just as dismal as Euro sales have been so far), but even so, it's just common sense that Apple wants to move at least a couple of million iPhones a year in Europe. And from what we're seeing so far, it doesn't look like they're hitting those kinds of numbers.



No, you just like to give the strong impression that so few sales are lost due to no 3G that it doesn't matter. Possibly in the US it hasn't been that big a deal (though even there, a good argument could be made that iPhone sales would be EVEN BETTER if the iPhone had 3G), but in Europe it definitely does seem to be biting Apple in the keister, in conjunction with the pricing issues.



Unfortunately, its not the same situation at all.

In the portable music player market, the established competition was either small and weak (Diamond, Creative) or extraordinarily incompetent (Sony, Compaq). In cell phones, this is not the case.

While the established players haven't been great at software, they are neither small, weak, or especially incompetent. Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, LG, etc are all huge, worldwide companies with tens of billions of dollars in yearly revenue (Nokia's worldwide revenue is about three times Apple's), and unlike, say, a Microsoft (who does cellphone software), they are quite focused on their cellphone business, as that is a core business for most of them. They have close relationships with all the major carriers (very important in this biz), and considerable resources to throw at making their own iPhone clones.

Not to take anything away from the iPod, but Apple was frankly facing either midgets or idiots in establishing that business. Comparing early-days iPod competitors to the established cellphone makers is like comparing a JV high school football team to Ohio State. They're still beatable, sure, but it's a lot harder.



As an Apple stockholder, I hope so, but problem is, Apple is actually the one playing catch up in some key areas. No 3G. No MMS. No GPS. No voice-dialing. Very crippled bluetooth functionality. Apple needs to get those weaknesses addressed, and soon, otherwise they're just giving away selling points to the competition.



Our minds are set on that simply because the evidence points that way. And I guess because we choose reality over your spin. Yes, the iPhone would be doing better in Europe if it had 3G, I don't think that's really debatable among reasonable people, in part because, as Aegis pointed out, Europe has awful GPRS for non-3G data in a lot of places, rather than the USA's semi-awful EDGE.

It's all about user experience, and GPRS provides a sh***y one, frankly.

You are correct in that sometime next year it'll no longer be an issue, but it shouldn't have been an issue to begin with, at least for Europe. Samsung has a 3G smartphone out with good battery life. Apple has access to most of the same chipsets and batteries, and, with their software prowess, is almost certainly better at power management than Samsung likely is. So they should be able to do it too. They just didn't, that's all, and they're paying for it, as Euro sales are bearing out.

There's no need to spin the reality of the situation, and I'm sure Apple isn't doing so either behind closed doors. Rather, they're very likely trying to fix the situation by burning the midnight oil to get a 3G iPhone out ASAP. That's great, but it is a bit late, and I think an overemphasis on certain design priorities and perhaps a touch of arrogance figured into that. Hopefully they will learn from the experience.

.

I'll put it this way. Someone can read general information about my profession on the internet. But that does not make them very knowledgeable or proficient in what I do everyday. They are not actively involved in the details and minutia and problem solving that I deal with. So they will not have earned the experience or knowledge base that I've earned from doing it everyday.

The person who works in flash or battery manufacture everyday will have experience and a knowledge base much richer and deeper than either of us will have from reading about it on the internet.


My point is that all of these factors collectively (including 3G) effect how the iPhone is received. Right now there is no hard evidence which may effect sales more than any other.


Right now we are only looking at sales for the month of November. The Touch provided people a choice. People who wanted a multi-touch device but did not want an iPhone have the choice to use a multi-touch device but keep their own phone.

When the iPhone was launched in the US we did not have that choice.


Between the UK, France,a and Germany a couple hundred thousand iPhones over a months isn't a huge number of sales.

Now we have the luxury of looking in the past and knowing how it all turns out. A few years back people really predicted that Apple was messing up for this reason or that.

The complaints against the iPod were in the absence of the full vision Apple had for the future of the iPod. Now looking back most of those complaints look silly. Its more likely than not the complaints leveled against the iPhone are in the same information vacuum of not being able to see Apple's future vision.


There is no catching up because Apple is taking a different path. Apple doesn't want to be like the others, they want to completely surpass them in functionality. To accomplish this the current iPhone is the beginning of a new user interface foundation to build functionality upon.


This is undebatable because Aegis said so? No disrespect to Aegis but I would like to see a report from someone who has conducted a wider study on this matter.

So far in most of the reports from Europe that talk about iPhone sales I've seen, none specifically point out 3G as the sole problem.

The only European numbers we have to work with are activations from the first couple of weeks. We haven't heard anything since. We will have to wait until after the quarter is over to see how the iPhone is really performing in Europe.

Apple's 'vision' isn't what we're discussing; the level of competition they're facing while trying to implement said vision is. And there isn't much doubt that this time around, Apple is facing much stronger competition than they did during the iPod's early days.

It's terribly easy to sit back and go "Apple always knows best", but they don't, really. G4 Cube anyone? Apple TV? It's a bit sycophantic to believe that Apple will always win big in the end with every single product... because they haven't. Because no one can.

I love Apple, but no one bats a thousand, not even Steven J. Apple's success isn't pre-ordained, they need to fully understand what they're up against and do all the common sense things right while implementing their vision. Because Nokia et al are no Creative or Diamond or blundering Sony.




By not having features that many users insist upon as a precondition to actually buying an iPhone? Wow, that's sure some different path there.

It's not like the iPod, where having no voice recording or radio really wasn't that big a deal (and where Apple was dominant enough so that some missing features could easily be implemented via third-party aftermarket add-ons). It's a bit more like this:

UK guy: Ah, so there's the iPhone. Nice bit of kit, that.

UK guy #2: Yes. But no MMS.

UK guy: What?!? That's bollocks!

UK guy #2: And no 3G either.

UK guy: On a phone that expensive! What were they thinking?

UK guy #2: I don't know. But I'm thinking they can bloody well sod off.


You've got to put yourself in their shoes, Teno... the Euros have a lot of good alternatives when it comes to phones, and they've had those alternatives for quite some time. It's a sophisticated, well-established market. It isn't like digital music players, a very new category, where Apple could just walk in and write the rules. If the iPhone doesn't meet a certain expected minimum feature set, especially for its price range, prospective buyers across the pond just scratch their heads and go, "Very pretty UI" and then go buy something else. And that's exactly what they've been doing... voting with their feet.

But I guess every general tends to refight the last war. You (and Steve, apparently) seem to think that this particular war is called "iPod II". But it isn't, and if you try to wage it like it is, you won't do terribly well.



It's not debatable because GPRS undebatably sucks, and that's what much of Europe has to offer if your phone doesn't do 3G.

But hey, if you think 25-40 kbps delivers a simply terrific browsing experience, I have a 28.8 modem I'd be happy to sell you. How much are you willing to offer? I think I may be able to dig up an old black and white 13" CRT while I'm at it.



Does lack of 3G have to be the sole problem for it to be contributing significantly to Apple's slow Euro iPhone sales? No. Does it have to be the sole problem for Apple to place a very high priority on getting a 3G iPhone to market, stat? Nope. So I'm unsure what you're quibbling about here. I've said, and others have said, that price is part of the problem. But so is 3G, and you hear this again and again and again.

So what more is there to say? Fix it, Apple. It's not insurmountably difficult. Samsung has already released a 3G smartphone with good battery life. If they can do it, Apple can too.



Sorry, but if the launch numbers stink, the numbers following launch are even more unlikely to be satisfying. Are you hoping that the iPhone will suddenly 'catch a wave' and ramp up tremendously in popularity all of a sudden, automagically? Or is it much more likely that sales will slow after launch, as they did in the US? (which was ok here, as numbers were good in the US regardless).

The holidays may help a bit, but the problem with lackluster launches is, they brand a product as being "not all that". The Euros seem to be greeting the iPhone with a collective yawn, and first impressions matter quite a lot when trying to build brand. \

I dunno Teno, it seems like you're floating down the river Denial, whilst wishing upon a star. I'm sure it must be cool to be such a starry-eyed optimist, but back in the real world, I'm thinking Apple has to get off their can and start including some of the features that the Euros have been saying, again and again and again, are deal-breakers for them if they go missing, such as 3G and MMS. 'Vision' is great, but you also have to listen to your customers.

It's not a particularly romantic viewpoint, sure, but I'm a stockholder, not a dreamer.

.

[QUOTE=TenoBell;1186705]I'll put it this way. Someone can read general information about my profession on the internet. But that does not make them very knowledgeable or proficient in what I do everyday. They are not actively involved in the details and minutia and problem solving that I deal with. So they will not have earned the experience or knowledge base that I've earned from doing it everyday.

The person who works in flash or battery manufacture everyday will have experience and a knowledge base much richer and deeper than either of us will have from reading about it on the internet.

That's very true. But even without experience in the industry, articles in journals such as:

http://www.eetimes.com/

will tell you all you NEED to know, to understand what's happening. there are others as well. You don't need to know the minutia of the technology, all you need to know is the business aspect, and a basic understanding of the technologies.


Nothing hard right now. I'll grant that, but it does point that way. i'm just saying that it accounts for a large portions of the loss in sales, possibly the largest. Therefore, it's the most significant. It's one that Apple can address, and could have.


True again, I won't argue these points, but I don't believe they make up as much of the difference you do.


Well, yes, that's what I'm saying.

iPod sales were good from day one. Back then, the NYTimes had a section in their Monday business section that included a box with reports about electronics sales. there were four catagories. each rotated one week over the month.

One of those catagories was digital music players. Shortly after the iPod arrived, it made it to the list. I watched the percentages creep up each month. It was pretty exciting!

By the time Apple set up the iTunes store, it was at 38% of HDD based players. This was even before the official Windows model.

I also remember Jobs saying that it would be a nice little product for Apple when they first introduced it. I truly believe that he had NO idea it would become such a big thing.

As far as activations and iPhone sales in Europe go. It's not too much to expect that, as in the US, sales will go down after the first surge in sales. The holiday may bring that up, but that will happen in parallel here as well. It's the proportion that we're concerned with.

At the very least they face much more entrenched competition. How good their competition is will be determined in the future. So far no other company has enter the mobile phone market this late in the race and caused such a stir in the industry.

I understand Baggins they don't run their multi-billion dollar company the way you would run yours. But their isn't much we can do about that.


I never said Apple knows best, or that the iPhone is ordained to be a big hit. I've just said that Apple has a vision. That vision follows a different path than others have taken. We will have to wait to see what that vision will produce and how it will be accepted.

I'm saying people have doubted Apple's choices before. For the most part things have worked out so far.


At the time quite a few thought these were features people would demand. Now we can look back and see they were no big deal.


Well yeah, what rule says that all of the iPhones that will ever be sold will have to be sold in its first few weeks and then people stop buying them. No one would expect a Nokia phone to sell most of what it will sell in its first few weeks and then people stop buying them.

The numbers only stink because they are being compared to the US numbers which the Euro numbers were never going to be. People had stratospheric expectations. The Euro launch was more in line with how mobile phones generally sell. I cannot think of any other phone that sold 200,000 units in two days, its an unrealistic expectation. As contracts run out and people look for new phones the iPhone will be an option they can choose.

Still no one knew the iPod was going to be what it has become today. People did make dire prediction about what the iPod was missing and how competitors were going to make cheaper mp3's that were good enough to stop the iPod.


The iPhone's initial surge was larger than just about every other phone. Even if it was smaller in Europe than in the US its a good start. Euro iPhone sales are slow in comparison to its own US sales not in comparison to rival smartphone sales.

It's what I said. No one knew. At least Jobs didn't seem to have a clue.

But that was also an also ran business (that of digital music players, that is). Apple's new player, and later iTunes, the store, helped to bring it up for everyone, even those who have lagged far behind. Even they are selling far more players than they did before as the industry matured.

But the cellphone industry was mature by the time Apple's phone was introduced. Apple could not make its own technological standards, or pricing for services that everyone else had to follow.

About the only thing they could do was to come up with a nice form factor, and excellent software, well thought out. Not that it doesn't mean anything, but there are technologies that Apple simply hasn't bothered with, that many people willing to spend more for a phone have come to expect.

And Apple has also tripped on the software front as well. What's with the lack of editing? The lack of global delete for mail? How come no horizontal keyboard, except for Safari? As well as others, such as lack of MMS, IM, etc?

Oversight? I don't think so. Jobs even gave a very poor reason why the keyboard isn't horizontal as well.


The iPhone has been one of the most hyped of all phones as well, and Apple is hot, as Moto wasn't when the Razr came out. That's most of the reason.

The difference between this and the iPod is that Apple is taking on a mature market and mature competition along with it, whereas they weren't when they were establishing the iPod. And while hype has been good for Apple, the worrying aspect is that despite said HUGE hype, the iPhone still isn't doing well in Europe. \



It isn't a matter of them doing it 'my way', as Sinatra would say. It's a matter of them listening to their customers, or not. Call me crazy, but I think doing the former just might help.



I'd 'trust in Apple' on faith a lot more if they were doing more of the basic things they need to do to crack the Euro market. But who knows, maybe deep in the bowels of Fortress Cupertino, Steve has finally gotten the message and is screaming at his lieutenants to get him a 3G iPhone with all the trimmings.. stat! Or maybe his head is still buried in the sand and he still thinks he can wait until late '08... we'll see. I guess it'll all come down to how many Euro sales he's willing to lose, since he knows that he has to have a 3G iPhone for Asia.



Again, you're refighting the iPod war, and its not the same situation. That was a new market, the cellphone market is an established and mature one. Customers have many alternatives to the iPhone, and as has been pointed out repeatedly to you, GPRS for data simply stinks as a user experience. Apple shouldn't be thinking, "Well, we got to write the rulebook for the mp3 player market, why should this be any different", they need to recognize that this is a very different pond they're swimming in, with much bigger fish.



There's no rule, but let's face it, when you hype something to hell like Apple has, you expect a great launch, and steady but lower numbers after that. Only the Euro launch hasn't gone well. So now the numbers after that are supposed to be great? Get real.

But hey, you know what might just make the numbers great? Giving the Euro customers the kind of product they've been asking for...



I actually partially agree with you, the iPhone was never going to sell quite as well as it did in the US, simply because the average Euro customer is more sophisticated and demanding than the average US customer, the alternative phones are better, and because US EDGE provides a better (though still slow) browsing experience than ghastly Euro GPRS. That said, the launch numbers in the UK and Germany are low enough to be disappointing EVEN WITH one taking that into account.

And regarding Apple thinking Euro GPRS would be 'good enough' as a user experience for browsing... what were they thinking?!?

It's hard to feel sorry for them on this one, they seem to have definitely miscalculated, and when competing in a mature market against large, entrenched competitors, there are consequences for doing so. As Apple is understanding better by now.

.

Are you kidding? I've NEVER had a phone that has gotten even half the quoted battery life. Battery life quotes are a complete scam.

They aren't a scam. It's just that people want to know specific numbers that aren't realistic in actual use.

For example talk time. If you took your phone and just talked through the entire time, you'd probably come to around the rated talk time. But, when you don't do that (and who does?) then talk time will be derated by the other activities you use the phone for. Even just not using the phone, but leaving it on will derate the talktime, because the receiver is on.

So each of the parts of the ratings are listed as though it's the only thing that will be done, which is never the case.

And people seem to forget that they are doing other things that run the battery down.

Actually, the LG cellphone I have routinely beats the published batt life specs by a bit... the specs are actually a little conservative.

Ditto for the Samsung Blackjack I... Samsung claimed 3 hours talk time for that one in the specs, but AnandTech did a study where it actually got 4 hours, 11 minutes of talk time. Yes, with 3G on.

There are always exceptions... I believe that the Motorola Q failed to get its claimed battery life until some software updates came out for it. But by and large, companies don't like to miss their batt life specs by a mile, because no one likes their product to be known as "that sh**y phone that has crappy battery life." \

It's simply so easy to return a phone within the 30 day guarantee period that most (US) carriers have these days, and phones with unexpectedly short batt life tend to come back. But if you personally have had a run of bad luck, I feel for ya, though you can always return the phone in that time period if you're unhappy with it.


.

Yeah, the lack of a landscape virtual keyboard, except in Safari, has really bothered me as well. I don't have particularly large fingers, but even I find typing accurately on the teensy tiny keys on the portrait keyboard to be a royal pain.

I hear it gets better after you 'get used to it' (I've only borrowed iPhones for short periods of time or played with them in stores), but somehow, I don't really see it getting that much better. It's just tooooo small. The landscape vboard in comparison seems like a lot less hassle.

Bums me out that Steve apparently thinks that the current setup is the way to go, but somehow it doesn't totally surprise me. \

.

I certainly hope to see these functions added in the near future. To the fact that none of us were in the room when these decisions were made the reasons to their absence is only conjecture. There is no way for us to know if it was oversight or by design.



The iPhone Isn't selling well in Europe based on what measurement? Is it being outsold by every other smartphone available? Is it not making a profit for Apple?


I'm not directly comparing the mp3 and mobile phone markets. Obviously they are very different. I'm comparing the way people have doubted Apple and its direction vs what the results have been in the past.


Once again they are not running their multi-billion dollar company the way you would run yours. As far as I can tell nothing is wrong with that.

Glad you agree there. It'll definitely improve the user experience.



I dunno... sales, maybe?



And I'm saying that the past isn't a reliable indicator in that regard, due to the fact that its a very different fight and a very different market this time around, and, as Mel pointed out, Apple does not necessarily have the entire future laid out. Sometimes a good product just takes off in a way you didn't anticipate (iPod), sometimes you put a good product out there and it still fails. Apple does what any good company does... it makes a good product, positions and markets it as well as it can (usually), and hopes it does well.

Nothing is pre-ordained. One could argue that the G4 Cube and Apple TV were/are actually good products, but for various reasons they failed to take off. No 'crystal ball' there. So all you can really do is try to do all the right things, in order to improve your chances.



Once again, its not about them doing things my way, its about them listening to their customers. If they did a bit better in that regard, their chances of success would definitely increase.

Just common sense, eh?


.

If it was simple oversight, or lack of time, they have had plenty of it by now, with all of the complaints on every site I've ever been to that discussed the iPhone, which were otherwise favorable.


You're beating a dead horse here.

Knowing Apple they are waiting to release a major software update with subsequent media fanfare.


Its a fair question that no one has directly answered. Its unrealistic and untrue to say the iPhone has to sell 200,000 in two days to be a success. The iPhone won't sell 200,000 its first two days in Asian either. Does that mean its a failure in Asia? Its likely half of worldwide iPhone sales will be in the US. Does that make the other half of sales a failure?


I've never said I didn't think Apple needed to add the functionality. I'm saying I can understand the design model they are following. Most mobile companies pile in features with little though to the ease of use. For Apple ease of use is just as if not more important than a long feature list. Features will be added as Apple figures out how to add them without sacrificing ease of use. It requires us to have patience but in the end if it all works better its worth the wait.


The mp3 market in general was new at the same time the iPod was new. So no one knew for sure how it was all going to work out. But I don't think it was an accident that everything with the iPod worked out so well. The fact that it has continued to work out well and none of Apple's competitors have even come close.

When the iPhone launched Steve Jobs said that Apple was already designing the next version and they are already thinking about the version after that. They are at least two to three years ahead of what we currently have.


They both failed to take off because Apple did not give them what they needed to succeed. Apple TV still has a chance if Apple allows it to grow. So far the iPhone is not in the same position and has room to grow.

We can all hope for that.


We answered it, at least I tried to, as best as possible, from knowing what we do know.

I never said that 200,000 sales in two days was required. To my thinking, if the numbers were double what they were, it would have been pretty good. As they are, they are disappointing. I simply think that Apple and the operators are putting a good face on it., I'm not saying that it's a disaster either.

"When you wish... upon a staaaaar... doesn't matter.... who you aaaare...."

Seriously though, while I'd like to be as much the starry-eyed optimist here as you, its just as likely that Stevie J has decided something along the lines of, "E-mail is the way to send pics, MMS is just so outdated. I've decided we don't need it anymore, so I'll set a new trend!". And so forth.

So, we may just as likely be waiting an awfully loooong time for some of those very basic features that Apple omitted (which'll show up only after Apple finally wakes up and understands that they can't Jedi mind-trick cellphone buyers into wanting what Steve thinks they should want). And while we're waitin', many potential iPhone buyers will simply scratch their heads and go buy something else, until and unless Apple figures it out. Wheee. \



Sigh. Don't know how many times you need to be told this Teno, but:

While Apple hasn't released official numbers on early sales of its iPhone in the UK, new reports suggest the company may face difficulty replicating the level of success it experienced with the US launch of the handset back in June.

According to a recent report by the Register citing reliable channel sources, exclusive UK iPhone carrier O2 has activated just 26,500 iPhones since its launch two weeks ago, well below expectations of about 100,000 units.

"Carphone Warehouse, the main retail outlet for Apple's hot item [in the UK], had taken stock of 50,000 iPhones, but had only managed to shift around 11,000 in the first weekend," the report states. "O2 has over 400 stores and Apple just 12 in the UK. Phone industry sources estimated that 25,000 units might have shifted in that first weekend - but that now seems optimistic."

and

While T-Mobile's initial launch saw only 10,000 iPhones sold in Germany on the first day, many of the carrier's 700 retail stores continue to reflect a "solid" demand of 15-20 iPhones sold per week, Abramsky says.

It's not worth beating the dead horse anymore Teno... spin is pointless. Apple did not have a good European launch, except in France. So why argue on and on and on when it's obvious that no one is buying what you're spinning? \



I agree that cramming silly or useless features in for the sake of having more features is counterproductive. Unfortunately, that's not what we're talking about here.

We're talking about features - like 3G, MMS, GPS, voice-dialing, a reasonable Bluetooth stack - that are considered BASIC and EXPECTED by most prospective buyers looking at a phone in the iPhone's price range. Tell me, would most people these days purchase a reasonably expensive computer that only did dial-up networking? Had a black-and-white screen? Or would those be 'deal-breakers' for you? Starting to understand the difference between a superfluous feature and one you really do need to compete well in a tough market? Alrighty then.



That makes sense... oh wait, no, it doesn't. Because 3G isn't an ease-of-use issue at all, it's just a faster way to transmit data. And because most of the other features mentioned are already quite easy to use.




Reading these two quotes back-to-back, they appear to contradict each other. On the one hand, we have Teno saying " I don't think it was an accident that everything with the iPod worked out so well", meaning Apple is halfway to being a tech Nostradamus and can see the future accurately.

BUT, at the same time, we have Teno saying, "[the G4 Cube and Apple TV] both failed to take off because Apple did not give them what they needed to succeed." But HOW is that possible, Teno, if Apple is psychic and far-seeing enough to work out the entire arc of the iPod's success, hmmm?

Seems like quite a contradiction there. So maybe, just maybe, it might be more logical to subscribe to the notion that Apple simply takes their best shot at making a good product, like everyone else, and much of the result is still up to things like chance, timing, the competition, etc?

Sorry Teno, I don't believe in Stevie J's crystal ball. I think his instincts and taste are quite good, better than most of his competitors most of the time, but far from infallible. And since Steve doesn't really have a hotline to the spirit of Nostradamus, things like execution, and listening to customers (and well) will continue to matter a very great deal.

Not that that's not patently self-evident, right? So why quibble about it? \



Agreed, that's pretty much the way things stand. Hopefully Apple can price drop and/or feature upgrade in Europe sooner rather than later. If they do, I believe things will turn around for them there quite significantly.

.

I don't see any precedent outside of the US iPhone launch, that a phone must launch a certain amount of units to be proven a long term sales success. The sales numbers may be a media disappointment proportionate to the hype Apple has built for it. But I doubt it is a financial disappointment for Apple or its partners. For them that is what most matters.


Those are arbitrary numbers with little context. All those quotes say is that the Euro launch sales were less than the US launch sales. That has no bearing on the real profitability of the iPhone or how well it competes against its competition.


I never said any of those were superfluous. Windows Media phones have all of these functions you describe. The iPhone has outsold them all in its first quarter of US sales.

Those features are not necessarily easy to use on every phone. Generally as more are added they get piled into sub-menus.


I've never said Apple was infallible. Nor have I ever predicted the success of the iPhone. I've only pointed out how arm chair quarterbacks can criticize Apple strategies that end up working phenomenally well.

Apple could have easily repositioned the Cube. Killing it shows Apple likely had no future plans for the Cube.

If the movie studios and television networks had signed on to iTunes the way music had, Apple TV would be a different story today. What Apple TV lacks is a wide variety of easily accessible content. There are several ways Apple could change that situation. I agree attempting to tie it to iTunes like the iPod is mistake.

oh, good job ! hot

We can only go by what we've seen before, and what we're told is good.

If you simply don't want to think that this was disappointing, then fine,

But just realize that you have nothing to back up your contention that the sales were good. At least we're using numbers, you're not.

Somehow you want to think it's all just dandy.

That's what I'm getting at. I cannot see where a benchmark has been set for what is good and what is bad. It has only been said that what the iPhone sold is bad. Besides the US iPhone launch they did not cite any other phone with good sales to give context to why the iPhone sales are bad.

That's generally what you do to qualify bad sales. You look at what competing products are doing and you look to see if the product is making a profit. That is missing from these numbers.


Actually I've never given an opinion to whether Euro iPhone sales were good or bad. I've challenged those who said they were bad. I've said because the launch was weeks before Christmas we have to wait for the end of the quarter to get a clear picture to how it is going.

LOL. While its been a bit tragicomic to see you lurch from justification to justification over Apple's lackluster Euro launch ("The numbers will improve!"... "Apple was never going to sell that many iPhones in Europe anyway!".... "Half of worldwide sales will come from the US anyway!".... "The numbers aren't actually bad!"... "We'll still be profitable!"), fact is, Teno, the Euro launch numbers are disappointing, no matter how you slice it.

The rest coming from you, as usual, is just...







Wow, what a low bar to set. Windows mobile has 6% of the smartphone market, and 0.6% of the overall cellphone market. Wheeee. \ Oh, and I'm sure WM devices are doing that poorly because they include useful features that people want, like 3G and MMS, rather than it being due to the mediocrity that is Windows Mobile. /end sarcasm



Don't be silly. Let's take the two most cited missing features, 3G and MMS, for example.

3G isn't even an ease-of-use issue, as you've been told before. Its just a faster way to transmit data. Next.

Now, MMS? Easy to use already. The process on my nothing-special midrange phone:

- Open pic
- Select Options. The very first option? 'Send'.
- Select Picture Message.
- Select the sendee
- Type in your accompanying text (optional)
- Hit Send.

WOW, so very difficult!

Teno, the Euros aren't saying "Oh Apple, please SAVE US from the tyrannical maze that is sending an MMS message!". They know how to MMS, its easy and they've been doing it for years on their current phones. No, they just want to be ABLE TO MMS on the iPhone, and they CAN'T because IT'S NOT THERE as a feature.

Get it? Got it? Good.



Stop refighting the iPod War, Teno. It's just not that helpful here. It's counterproductive actually, because if Apple starts believing their own press clippings, they're going to have a very long, hard time of it with the iPhone overseas.



So much for your 'Apple as Nostradamus' theory then. Apple should've been that one coming, rather than pushing a dead-end product.



Coulda, shoulda, woulda. Face it, Apple TV can't really take off, because the one piece of functionality that would allow it do so (DVR) can't be included because it'd cannibalize iTunes Store sales and also piss off the very content providers who are vital to the iTunes Store.

The other alternative is to make Apple TV cheap enough so that its price is in line with its limited functionality, but then Apple wouldn't get their fat margins on it and they'd kill it. Game over. \

.

Yup. And sadly for Teno, spin isn't what's needed here. Companies believing their own spin is actually what gets many of them in trouble.

Much more often, what works best is a sober, realistic assessment of both what's going well and what's not, and some timely adjustments in strategy where needed. But to do that, you first have to be willing to acknowledge that things are less than hunky-dory across the board.

Otherwise, you become the proverbial 'dinosaur' of the corporate world... you get whacked in the tail, and then a few months later your brain goes, "Ouch". Often too late to respond effectively. \

.

Except for the Razr, no other phone has received so much press before it came out. Apple's products are now expected to do much better than expectations, or they are a failure.

I read an article that said that Apple has received, this year, enough free press to equal $700 million in advertising. This lifts those expectations sky high. If the product doesn't meet those expectations, it's no good.

We just had our big holiday party Monday, and a friend had bought an iPhone a month ago. He loves the phone, except for the lack of 3G—way too slow, he says, and the vertical keyboard. He's a big guy, with big fingers.

These are two areas Apple has to fix. Europeans aren't stupid. They know what they want, and they're willing, for the most part, to wait for it.

My hope is that they aren't passing on the phone for others that do have what they want now.


Well, your posts don't come across that way. you read like a cheerleader for sure.

Instead of sticking with the substance of what I say you attempt to come up with these obviously sensational over the top versions of what I've said. It doesn't really help your argument.

A lot of people loved the Cube, it would have sold well had Apple repositioned it, I'm sure most company would want to have that type of failure. I'm sure there is an interesting story as to what happened with the Cube, hopefully one day someone from Apple will tell it.


You posted numbers that had no correlation to the wider mobile phone sales or gave any evidence if those sales are profitable for Apple or its partners. Taking all of that into account is a sober realistic assessment.

Looking at sales numbers and comparing that to the unusually high sales that same product had in another market to justify calling it a failure is not a sober realistic assessment.



That is all purely hype and no substance. What the press says has no relation to how well Apple products are selling or how profitable they are. Seeing as Apple stock has continued to do well the street is paying this no attention.


We don't have enough evidence to say how well the phone is doing. I'm actually surprised Mel you will take these sensationalist reports for real data. I'm surprised you don't agree that we should wait till the end of the quarter to get the real picture.

That's ridiculous, of course it does. People don't buy in a vacuum. Enormous press, when it's good, has a very large influence on what people buy. Apple knows this quite well. so do those in the industry who have expressed admiration for Apple in being able to garner it.

But, it can't guarantee sales. We also don't know what the press is in other markets. I'd e curious as to what it has been in Europe.


I'm just using the numbers that we all have before us.

When the iPhone sold so well here for the first three days, those numbers were used as evidence that the phone did very well.

The numbers in Europe can also be used as evidence that it didn't do as well there.

Of course we need to see later figures as well, but if the original figures were better, then we would all be jumping up and down.

Not if you're aged 11 and 13 and want bluetooth transfers and MMS NOW.

Bought them a Sony Ericsson W580i and an S500. Both fab phones, especially the W580i. Both about £100 unlocked, no contract.

Well, 11 and 13 year olds aren't patient about anything. Thank heavens my daughter is now 16. It gets better slowly, but it does get better.

You took that in a different way than I'd intended. There is always good and bad press written about Apple's products. Of course all of the media attention (good or bad) helps bring attention. I would say for the most part Apple products have been successful because they work well. Good press wouldn't help much if the product was crap.


Here are some new numbers.

Financial Times: iPhone key to O2 growth

Matthew Key the incoming chief executive of O2 Europe says 200,000 iPhones should be sold in the UK by early January, which is in line with his expectations since the November 9 launch, although some analysts claim his target is conservative. Gartner, the research firm, says sales of up to 400,000 should be possible.

In the near term, the iPhone may help Mr Key in the tough task of trying to maintain O2’s position as the UK’s largest mobile operator. Vodafone is resurgent, but Mr Key highlights how the iPhone is enabling O2 to steal customers from rivals. About 60 per cent of iPhone users are new to O2.


Again I would say they did not give sales of other phones to help give the iPhone numbers a context, but O2 sounds pleased.


Financial Times: iPhone users raise network hopes

Buyers of Apple’s iPhone have turned out to be voracious users of electronic mail and other data services, giving network operators hope that the much-hyped device will finally unlock billions of dollars in mobile advertising revenue.

After years of false dawns for operators, the use of mobile phones for web surfing is on the verge of becoming widespread in Europe and the US, and iPhone research by O2 shows the device is acting as an important catalyst for such activity.

Matthew Key, who becomes chief executive of O2 Europe next month, told the Financial Times that 60 per cent of the company’s iPhone customers in the UK were sending or receiving more than 25 megabytes of data a month, the equivalent of 7,500 e-mails without attachments or 25 YouTube videos. By comparison, less than 2 per cent of O2’s other UK customers on monthly payment contracts use more than 25MB a month.

However, the O2 research found that customers who have Nokia’s N95, the Finnish handset maker’s nearest equivalent to the iPhone, which runs on 3G networks, access markedly less data compared with those using the Apple device.

“Here’s absolute proof that if you get the proposition right, customers will use data,” said Mr Key, who reached a deal with Apple for O2 to be the exclusive UK network operator for the iPhone.


60% of O2 iPhone users are downloading more than 25Mb a month with EDGE and WiFi. While less than 2% of O2's other smartphone users download the equivalent with 3G phones.

I've already read all that stuff. We'll se when it happens.

If Apple can achieve 400 thousand phone sales there by then that's good. If it's only 200 thousand, it's ok.

But, what the users do with the phones when they get them may be good for the companies selling them, IF it leads to more services being bought from them, but it doesn't say anything about sales itself.

Keep in mind too that these are activations reported by O2. Between UK, France, Germany we should at least see 1 million activations. Without a doubt there are some number of people in Italy, Spain, Ireland, Austria, and the other 41 Euro countries have bought iPhones to be unlocked. As well as the wider world grey market.


This goes to the argument of people not buying the iPhone because of 3G. According to O2 iPhone users are downloading far more data on EDGE and WiFi than all other phones with 3G.

Those numbers were sales, I believe. The amount of activations vs sales won't be known until both O2 and Apple report their figures, right now, the numbers are no more than a guess.

And now, you are the one making number out of thin air. At least I'm trying to go by reports.


That doesn't mean much. The people buying the iPhone are buying it BECAUSE they want to go online. Users of other phones may not care as much. That still doesn't mean that lack of 3g hasn't prevented many more sales.

Its a guess but its not an unrealistic stretch by any means.


Now you are just being stubborn Mel. Pretty much the only advantage of 3G is sending data and the internet. Calling and texting don't require that much bandwidth. There is no other purpose to 3G outside of saying you have a 3G phone but rarely use it.

I'm sure their are a number of people who will not buy an iPhone until it has 3G, just as their are a number who will. People who have 3G but rarely use it will notice that people with iPhones are actually using all of its features.

What this does mean is that even on a slower network or one that isn't as ubiquitous people are actually getting more real use out of data and internet than they previously had.

The smartphones that have 3G have many other features as well. People don't have to want to use their internet services all the time to want those phones. Better screens, better keyboards, third party programs. Those are just some of the other reasons to buy a phone that also has 3G. And just because people may not have bought a phone specifically to go surfing doesn't mean that when they want to do it, they want to slog along as slowly as possible. With my phone, I want to get in and out quickly.


I'm sure their are a number of people who will not buy an iPhone until it has 3G, just as their are a number who will. People who have 3G but rarely use it will notice that people with iPhones are actually using all of its features. [/quote]

A fairly good number.


One reason is because for many of them, even with Apple's cut adding to the cost, it's still a lower cost service than they've seen before.

So people buy 3G phones not only for 3G but for screens, keyboards, third party apps. The iPhone has a better screen than most phones, the keyboard in horizontal view has larger keys than mechanical phones, apps are designed to have similar functionality of desktop apps, websites designed specifically for the iPhone UI. In-spite of this a great number of people want 3G even if they won't often use it.


I doubt the advanced people of the UK would have the patience to use over 25Mb if they were slogging as slowly as possible. I also doubt people in the US would use mobile safari more than all windows phones combined if they had to slog as slowly as possible. Google mobile apps saw a 50% spike in use after the June iPhone launch.

Nice spin but that's not what the article says. It's less than 2% of all monthly contract phones on O2 including non-smartphones and non-3G. Even still, 2% of O2's monthly contract users is probably still more than all iPhone users. Not all of the other phones will be 3G either. Many will be wifi enabled too.

A secondary point is O2's data charges which prior to the iPhone were very expensive bolt on extras. They're cheaper now but optional still. Not everyone with a contract will bolt on data, want it or indeed need it. With the iPhone you've no choice - you've paid for it - may as well use it even if it's slow.

It's entirely possible there's still more users with 3G data phones accessing more than 25Mb a month than iPhone users. On the other hand the big screen on the iphone probably makes wanting to use data more likely. Imagine what it'd be like if it had 3G.



I'd be surprised if they see 1 million in Europe personally. The figures weren't sales or activations, they were sales projections.



I'm not sure how they'd even measure wifi data unless it's through the Cloud hotspots. EDGE access barely exists outside London. Again, it's an interesting datapoint but without context it's useless.


Exactly.



Exactly. And, many people just buy contract phones to get an expensive phone for free even if they aren't going to use half the features.


You have to be of a particular customer type for it to be worthwhile. If you don't talk much, don't text much, don't have home/office wifi, don't mind slow internet, don't tether your phone as a modem and live near a Cloud hotspot then the service is quite good value.