Apple, while it has essentially one phone, has a platform that extends to other devices (computer, possible tablet). It's also important to remember they all share a common kernel and the iPhone is essentially a computer with a phone as an option.
Android is also scalable to tablets, netbooks, etc.
Android will overtake Apple's iPhone in terms of market share by 2012
Your talking about Android as if it's a phone when it's actually a software. So its really important to make the distinction here.
While i can accept that the amount of phones running Android will no doubt out number the amount of iPhones in the market place, the vast majority of Phone users don't care. I even bet most iPhone user's don't know it runs a version of OSX.
This is one of those rare occasions where I actually agree with TeckStud. I think people who are roundly dismissing Android are making a serious mistake, and I hope there aren't many of them sitting around inside 1 infinite loop.
There are many parallels between what is going on now in the smartphone space and what went on between Apple and M$ in the early years. Then Apple tied itself to one hardware manufacturer (itself) and they could never produce enough hardware to meet demand. Now the constraint is in provision of services their devices need to be useful / functional; the dependence upon AT&T cannot have any effect other than to limit market penetration, for obvious reasons. Recent experiences in markets where Apple is prohibited from exclusivity in contracts proves this point; in those markets Apple has surged when the artificial constraint of exclusivity has been removed.
Agreed. relying on a single carrier is a serious limitation for Apple. Whether it is the bad will that comes with AT&T or that every iPhone in the US runs on a helps saturate the single network or AT&T incompetence with their network in general.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tt92618
A second factor operating in the Android market is hardware innovation / cycles. No matter how hard Apple works to produce new and exciting hardware, Apple will never be able to keep up with 30 other companies all trying to bring product to market at the same time. It is almost inevitable that the iPhone will become stale in the minds of some consumers. In a market crowded with many devices of varying form factors, all of which provide a user experience that is close to Apple's, the value proposition that drives iPhone becomes less distinct. Thus far Apple has enjoyed having a very polished and integrated user experience that has surpassed everyone else by leaps and bounds. However, when the gap is narrowed, it is clear what happens; consumers become more influenced by other factors. This occurred after the introduction of Windows XP, which was 'close enough' to Mac OS that many consumers could not tell the difference. In that environment, they became influenced by other factors, factors like : 'gee, it costs more to buy that mac than a pc', and 'I can buy a pc at my local box store but I have to go to that weird mac dealer across town to get a mac', and 'there are 85 bajillion software apps for this PC here in this store, and only 10 for those macs.' In the absence of something compelling to convince the user to buy the mac, the purchase choice is obvious. If apple is not careful, the same logic will begin to emerge for iPhone.
Possibly, in general. But, in terms of product cycle/hardware innovation, it seems odd to think that Apple could not stay ahead of a multitude of companies. Those other companies are not working together, in general, so it isn't like their is any natural synergy of advances one makes spreading immediately to the others. Apple uses commodity parts, so as hardware in general advances, Apple benefits as much or more than the others. With the PA Semi acquisition, they should be able to get the best of both-commodity parts when suitable and custom parts when it sets them apart and makes them superior. Also, even in the PC space, Apple competes against numerous other hardware companies that do Windows and Apple manages to stay ahead of them fairly well.
Your point about the OS seems fair, however. As Android and pre improve and the user experience (OS and beyond) get closer to the iPhone, then the major advantage Apple owns is lessened...just as we saw happen with Windows-it got close enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tt92618
These factors all played a huge role in the M$ market victory over Apple. Don't cry foul - M$ did win in the market, which is why Apple has 10% and M$ has 90%. Apple is content to be the niche player now, but that is because Apple has reinvented itself to be that company. Apple was not always the market niche; it was the market leader, and it lost that lead to M$, and that is what we are talking about here. Apple presently enjoys a lead in software and in user experience. If Android manages to narrow the gap appreciably in user experience (and it is arguably true that it already has), then consumer logic will begin to be driven by other factors, some of which I mentioned above. As the resulting Android share grows, so will the Android software base. What will happen when Android is on 30 devices sold through every major carrier, and when the Android marketplace has 8 or 9 thousand apps? At that point, the iPhone value proposition will be dramatically less clear than it is now to the average consumer, and they will wonder 'why should I switch to AT&T when I can get three of these Android phones from my present carrier at the same price point?".
The Android strategy is not that different from the M$ strategy in the 80's and 90's, and Apple's position with iPhone is not that different from their position with MacOS then. I really hope someone at Apple is looking at these parallels and thinking about how they can break out of the pattern this time and avoid the results.
I am sure they are paying attention, even if some here think they can just coast.
that version has never been even hinted at by Apple. it exists only in the fantasies of geeks like yourself. Do yourself a favor. Go tell the guy in the mirror that there is no Nano Phone, never was, never will be. And then maybe both of you can get over your disappointment.
you are a ludeite . APPLE NEVER EVER HINTS
the nanenite nano phone will debut with 75 million in sales by the second yr
750 million sales by yr 6/7
a nano phone that does some of what big brother phone does and sells with out a stupid contact but instead lets poorer people chose AT what monthly spending level they want . . If this happens then it will be the largest selling product ever in its price class. LARGEST selling product ever .
MVDO SW by apple will enable a carrier less system the free's us for ever from contracts and will enable apple to act on our behalf and buy our voice and data minutes in billion dollar pre paid blocks .
and the carriers win because all there under utilized systems would now get much more billable minutes .
APPLE'S nano phone will change the world once again.
every product apple ever sold combined in money and numbers will bow to the nano phone
dick tracey will come alive with video calls standard fare
Model line, family, your argument degenerates into a semantic quibble. They offer iPhones with 3 distinct capabilities. I think they qualify as distinct models. If you prefer to apply a different word, fine. It's still iPhones with 3 distinct capabilities.
Who cares if it is FUD. It may be. It may be completely accurate or completely wrong or maybe even underestimating the success of Android. It doesn't matter.
The forecast is clear that the main reason the see the sort of growth for Android is the number of manufacturers. It is the same with the desktop, laptop and SmartPhone markets. Apple sells a unified model while others all sell variations of another platform. But who makes the most profit in those markets? At least on the mid-high end range for laptops and certainly in the smart phone market, Apple takes the lion share of the profit.
Let the others splinter and try to scavenge for scraps from Android sales, just as the PC guys just kill each other competing for the lowest common denominator of Windows sales. The same thing will happen here. Apple will take the cream and the others can fight over the scraps.
Model line, family, your argument degenerates into a semantic quibble. They offer iPhones with 3 distinct capabilities. I think they qualify as distinct models. If you prefer to apply a different word, fine. It's still iPhones with 3 distinct capabilities.
The discussion degenerated as soon as someone disingenuously tried to expand the number of models offered by using options available as model differentiators to make some random counter argument to a simple, factual statement. It was another pointless tangent from the beginning.
Edit: Also, what distinct capabilities do you claim the large capacity creates...besides, i don't know, more capacity?
I agree that having only one model is not a great idea in the long run. The iPhone is still a novelty but this will wear off and people will want different models, even if only cosmetically. I really think Apple can own this market if they want to, however. I hope they will bring out different models such as a nano phone, but most of all different form factors. Another thing they could do (not sure how possible) is allow for more software visual customization in the form of skins. As Android matures and other phone makers bring out funky looking phones the allure of the iPhone will wane. There are other elements such as iTunes, iPhoto etc, but for most people those things aren't enough. People are fickle, they want variety and choice as far as phones go. Computers, not so much, perhaps.
Re the AT&T badwill - in more and more countries the iPhone is carried by multiple carriers. I am sure Apple is dying for Verizon to carry the phone and it will happen as soon as Verizon can prove they have viable coverage. In Canada, where Rogers was the only GSM carrier when I got my iPhone a year or so ago, two other carriers have suddenly popped up and announced that they too will carry the iPhone. I am amazed at how quickly they have got new network technology up and running.
Right. I'm so tired of that stale old car look of 4 tires, gas pedal to the right of the brake and steering wheel instead of joystick. I want a new car every 6 months with everything shuffled simply to keep the 'short attention span theatre' folks entertained.
... There is a reason: they (Apple) are building a platform. Abandoning a platform is not as easy as changing the phone.
I think you've underscored their differentiator; and, Apple has been successful at maintaining their focus on differentiation (platform and business model). Other companies suffer from me-too and other distractions. The next phase in their roadmap should be interesting.
... Gartner, as usual, tosses logic out the window to make exactly the point that they decided on before they began their "analysis", which in this case, as historically, consists of constructing seemingly plausible arguments to support a biased prediction.
Permit me to append a clause to your statement, " ... particularly in support of their largest accounts."
Right. I'm so tired of that stale old car look of 4 tires, gas pedal to the right of the brake and steering wheel instead of joystick. I want a new car every 6 months with everything shuffled simply to keep the 'short attention span theatre' folks entertained.
This makes no sense. You can't compare the form factor of a car to that of a phone. Talking about 'short attention span theatre' in regards to the technology industry gave me a chuckle though.
Very few people other than hi-tech gadget freaks will research the actual differences between the iPhone and Android. Whether or not Android overtakes iPhone is a function of how many regular people buy into the sales pitch: "just as good as an iPhone but cheaper" or "Better than an iPhone because it has _______ (insert obscure feature)"
This was already discussed. Your question however is equivalent to asking, "What distinct capabilities does 3G create, besides, I don't know, 3G?"
No. Adding a 3G antenna makes it a 3G model. The capability this adds is the ability to use the 3G network...i.e. a new functionality...new capability.
No. Adding a 3G antenna makes it a 3G model. The capability this adds is the ability to use the 3G network...i.e. a new functionality...new capability.
I think you've gotten in over your head, again, by making thoughtless arguments, again. Persistence in admirable, but no so much when you are clearly shown to be wrong. Again.
Comments
Apple, while it has essentially one phone, has a platform that extends to other devices (computer, possible tablet). It's also important to remember they all share a common kernel and the iPhone is essentially a computer with a phone as an option.
Android is also scalable to tablets, netbooks, etc.
Android will overtake Apple's iPhone in terms of market share by 2012
Your talking about Android as if it's a phone when it's actually a software. So its really important to make the distinction here.
While i can accept that the amount of phones running Android will no doubt out number the amount of iPhones in the market place, the vast majority of Phone users don't care. I even bet most iPhone user's don't know it runs a version of OSX.
Dweeb 1, Oh what phone do you have?
Dweeb 2, Oh i use a symbian
Dweeb 1, Really, i use the "Android
Not!!!!
GB
This is one of those rare occasions where I actually agree with TeckStud. I think people who are roundly dismissing Android are making a serious mistake, and I hope there aren't many of them sitting around inside 1 infinite loop.
There are many parallels between what is going on now in the smartphone space and what went on between Apple and M$ in the early years. Then Apple tied itself to one hardware manufacturer (itself) and they could never produce enough hardware to meet demand. Now the constraint is in provision of services their devices need to be useful / functional; the dependence upon AT&T cannot have any effect other than to limit market penetration, for obvious reasons. Recent experiences in markets where Apple is prohibited from exclusivity in contracts proves this point; in those markets Apple has surged when the artificial constraint of exclusivity has been removed.
Agreed. relying on a single carrier is a serious limitation for Apple. Whether it is the bad will that comes with AT&T or that every iPhone in the US runs on a helps saturate the single network or AT&T incompetence with their network in general.
A second factor operating in the Android market is hardware innovation / cycles. No matter how hard Apple works to produce new and exciting hardware, Apple will never be able to keep up with 30 other companies all trying to bring product to market at the same time. It is almost inevitable that the iPhone will become stale in the minds of some consumers. In a market crowded with many devices of varying form factors, all of which provide a user experience that is close to Apple's, the value proposition that drives iPhone becomes less distinct. Thus far Apple has enjoyed having a very polished and integrated user experience that has surpassed everyone else by leaps and bounds. However, when the gap is narrowed, it is clear what happens; consumers become more influenced by other factors. This occurred after the introduction of Windows XP, which was 'close enough' to Mac OS that many consumers could not tell the difference. In that environment, they became influenced by other factors, factors like : 'gee, it costs more to buy that mac than a pc', and 'I can buy a pc at my local box store but I have to go to that weird mac dealer across town to get a mac', and 'there are 85 bajillion software apps for this PC here in this store, and only 10 for those macs.' In the absence of something compelling to convince the user to buy the mac, the purchase choice is obvious. If apple is not careful, the same logic will begin to emerge for iPhone.
Possibly, in general. But, in terms of product cycle/hardware innovation, it seems odd to think that Apple could not stay ahead of a multitude of companies. Those other companies are not working together, in general, so it isn't like their is any natural synergy of advances one makes spreading immediately to the others. Apple uses commodity parts, so as hardware in general advances, Apple benefits as much or more than the others. With the PA Semi acquisition, they should be able to get the best of both-commodity parts when suitable and custom parts when it sets them apart and makes them superior. Also, even in the PC space, Apple competes against numerous other hardware companies that do Windows and Apple manages to stay ahead of them fairly well.
Your point about the OS seems fair, however. As Android and pre improve and the user experience (OS and beyond) get closer to the iPhone, then the major advantage Apple owns is lessened...just as we saw happen with Windows-it got close enough.
These factors all played a huge role in the M$ market victory over Apple. Don't cry foul - M$ did win in the market, which is why Apple has 10% and M$ has 90%. Apple is content to be the niche player now, but that is because Apple has reinvented itself to be that company. Apple was not always the market niche; it was the market leader, and it lost that lead to M$, and that is what we are talking about here. Apple presently enjoys a lead in software and in user experience. If Android manages to narrow the gap appreciably in user experience (and it is arguably true that it already has), then consumer logic will begin to be driven by other factors, some of which I mentioned above. As the resulting Android share grows, so will the Android software base. What will happen when Android is on 30 devices sold through every major carrier, and when the Android marketplace has 8 or 9 thousand apps? At that point, the iPhone value proposition will be dramatically less clear than it is now to the average consumer, and they will wonder 'why should I switch to AT&T when I can get three of these Android phones from my present carrier at the same price point?".
The Android strategy is not that different from the M$ strategy in the 80's and 90's, and Apple's position with iPhone is not that different from their position with MacOS then. I really hope someone at Apple is looking at these parallels and thinking about how they can break out of the pattern this time and avoid the results.
I am sure they are paying attention, even if some here think they can just coast.
dev
that version has never been even hinted at by Apple. it exists only in the fantasies of geeks like yourself. Do yourself a favor. Go tell the guy in the mirror that there is no Nano Phone, never was, never will be. And then maybe both of you can get over your disappointment.
you are a ludeite . APPLE NEVER EVER HINTS
the nanenite nano phone will debut with 75 million in sales by the second yr
750 million sales by yr 6/7
a nano phone that does some of what big brother phone does and sells with out a stupid contact but instead lets poorer people chose AT what monthly spending level they want . . If this happens then it will be the largest selling product ever in its price class. LARGEST selling product ever .
MVDO SW by apple will enable a carrier less system the free's us for ever from contracts and will enable apple to act on our behalf and buy our voice and data minutes in billion dollar pre paid blocks .
and the carriers win because all there under utilized systems would now get much more billable minutes .
APPLE'S nano phone will change the world once again.
every product apple ever sold combined in money and numbers will bow to the nano phone
dick tracey will come alive with video calls standard fare
peace
9
But, they are the same model line
Model line, family, your argument degenerates into a semantic quibble. They offer iPhones with 3 distinct capabilities. I think they qualify as distinct models. If you prefer to apply a different word, fine. It's still iPhones with 3 distinct capabilities.
http://www.minyanville.com/articles/...862/from/yahoo
Both articles make some good points but I think the other article wins the day.
Gartner = FUD spreader. 'nuff said.
GB
Who cares if it is FUD. It may be. It may be completely accurate or completely wrong or maybe even underestimating the success of Android. It doesn't matter.
The forecast is clear that the main reason the see the sort of growth for Android is the number of manufacturers. It is the same with the desktop, laptop and SmartPhone markets. Apple sells a unified model while others all sell variations of another platform. But who makes the most profit in those markets? At least on the mid-high end range for laptops and certainly in the smart phone market, Apple takes the lion share of the profit.
Let the others splinter and try to scavenge for scraps from Android sales, just as the PC guys just kill each other competing for the lowest common denominator of Windows sales. The same thing will happen here. Apple will take the cream and the others can fight over the scraps.
Model line, family, your argument degenerates into a semantic quibble. They offer iPhones with 3 distinct capabilities. I think they qualify as distinct models. If you prefer to apply a different word, fine. It's still iPhones with 3 distinct capabilities.
The discussion degenerated as soon as someone disingenuously tried to expand the number of models offered by using options available as model differentiators to make some random counter argument to a simple, factual statement. It was another pointless tangent from the beginning.
Edit: Also, what distinct capabilities do you claim the large capacity creates...besides, i don't know, more capacity?
I agree that having only one model is not a great idea in the long run. The iPhone is still a novelty but this will wear off and people will want different models, even if only cosmetically. I really think Apple can own this market if they want to, however. I hope they will bring out different models such as a nano phone, but most of all different form factors. Another thing they could do (not sure how possible) is allow for more software visual customization in the form of skins. As Android matures and other phone makers bring out funky looking phones the allure of the iPhone will wane. There are other elements such as iTunes, iPhoto etc, but for most people those things aren't enough. People are fickle, they want variety and choice as far as phones go. Computers, not so much, perhaps.
Re the AT&T badwill - in more and more countries the iPhone is carried by multiple carriers. I am sure Apple is dying for Verizon to carry the phone and it will happen as soon as Verizon can prove they have viable coverage. In Canada, where Rogers was the only GSM carrier when I got my iPhone a year or so ago, two other carriers have suddenly popped up and announced that they too will carry the iPhone. I am amazed at how quickly they have got new network technology up and running.
Right. I'm so tired of that stale old car look of 4 tires, gas pedal to the right of the brake and steering wheel instead of joystick. I want a new car every 6 months with everything shuffled simply to keep the 'short attention span theatre' folks entertained.
Not bad for stale.
... There is a reason: they (Apple) are building a platform. Abandoning a platform is not as easy as changing the phone.
I think you've underscored their differentiator; and, Apple has been successful at maintaining their focus on differentiation (platform and business model). Other companies suffer from me-too and other distractions. The next phase in their roadmap should be interesting.
... Gartner, as usual, tosses logic out the window to make exactly the point that they decided on before they began their "analysis", which in this case, as historically, consists of constructing seemingly plausible arguments to support a biased prediction.
Permit me to append a clause to your statement, " ... particularly in support of their largest accounts."
Right. I'm so tired of that stale old car look of 4 tires, gas pedal to the right of the brake and steering wheel instead of joystick. I want a new car every 6 months with everything shuffled simply to keep the 'short attention span theatre' folks entertained.
This makes no sense. You can't compare the form factor of a car to that of a phone. Talking about 'short attention span theatre' in regards to the technology industry gave me a chuckle though.
http://www.macdailynews.com/index.ph...faction_again/
Not bad for stale.
People actually have to buy the phone before they can be satisfied
Edit: Also, what distinct capabilities do you claim the large capacity creates...besides, i don't know, more capacity?
This was already discussed. Your question however is equivalent to asking, "What distinct capabilities does 3G create, besides, I don't know, 3G?"
People actually have to buy the phone before they can be satisfied
I'm not sure what you mean by this.
This was already discussed. Your question however is equivalent to asking, "What distinct capabilities does 3G create, besides, I don't know, 3G?"
No. Adding a 3G antenna makes it a 3G model. The capability this adds is the ability to use the 3G network...i.e. a new functionality...new capability.
Adding capacity gives you capacity.
No. Adding a 3G antenna makes it a 3G model. The capability this adds is the ability to use the 3G network...i.e. a new functionality...new capability.
Adding capacity gives you capacity.
I think you've jumped the shark.
I think you've jumped the shark.
I think you've gotten in over your head, again, by making thoughtless arguments, again. Persistence in admirable, but no so much when you are clearly shown to be wrong. Again.