I'm an apple fan forever, BUT I have to admit MSFT has a huge R&D department and invests in fundamental techs more than apple - example the huge effort and push to get F# out the door which for me is a huge step forward from C. Apple has been saving money modding open source stuff which is great for profits and compatibility but is not doing the dev world any favors. As a Software company that lives on how good 3rd party apps are apple should do everything in it's power to make it easier for them.
I have to admit my next dev effort will be F# - I can't afford the untold wasted hours on Xcode inefficiencies
Apple if you are the biggest in the world - you need to give back and assume the rolls that AT&T did of yesteryear - establish an Apple Research division which invests in fundamental technology - not just applied tech for the next year or two, and beef up those dev tools to be better than the competition!
I got a laugh out of this. So what's your point? How ineffectual MS is? It really doesn't surprise us, you know.
So, MS can tout how big their R&D dept is, how big their R&D budget is. I don't think I would brag about that. They have a load more employees than Apple too, but it still takes them 10 years to get an OS finished and out the door.
I think MS love their committees and marketers and psychotherapists and people who come up with their little dance numbers too much for Apple to be really worried. MS seems to pit different teams against each other, too. So, you have one example -- and that seems to show how MS is desperate to get new developers to look at the rest of their dinosaur tech as relevant and future-proof. Talk about distortion field!
Fundamental techs, like what? Firewire, next gen video codecs, network and printing protocols, USB, FlashRAM, universal connector thingy, computer in a pocket instead of in a bathtub, security, next UI paradigm, devices that are poised to revolutionize whole industries, what? Apple is leading in a lot of directions.
But hey, it's all about the numbers, isn't it: R&D dollars, R&D dept, MHz, Feature list, number of dance partners to stab in the back, whatever. Keep playing the game that Apple isn't.
Thats what I was trying to say, just having a larger market cap doesn't make you the "worlds largest tech company". Thats a ridiculous assertion.
That's not what they were implying. They were implying that Apple is the most valuable tech company. That's how I read it. We all know that Hp alone sells more than $125 billion a year, and that IBM is close to that, just to mention two very big concerns in the sector. But Apple is worth more than either.
Nokia has been sliding for several years now. RIM's growth has slowed. LG's marketshare is also down. Samsung is about even. MS's Win Mobile is going away fast, and there's no way to know if their new Win Phone 7 will catch on. Palm has no marketshare, and we'll have to see if Hp can do anything useful with them. Both Sony/Ericson and Motorola have lost big shares.
So where are we? Only the iPhone and Android based phones are showing smartphone growth. So, yes, Android has grown quickly. As I say, it's because they started with one carrier with one not very good phone (smallest carrier too!), and have expanded to all the carriers with better phones from a number of manufacturers.
I would have expected a lot of growth from all that. But where do they go from there? How much more growth will they get? Interesting that subscribers on Verizon and Sprint have said they would drop their Android phones for iPhone if thy were available on their carrier.
So what growth will Apple have if they become available on all four carriers? What will that do to Android's growth?
In every market where the iPhone went to all or several carriers they became the dominant smartphone. In Japan, on the smallest carrier, they are 72% of the smartphone market. Thats in a country that skeptics said they would never do well.
In S Korea, a country will 50 million people, they've sold over 700 thousand phones in six months, and the rare is increasing. It's the largest smartphone there now. Again, on the smaller carrier.
In China, it started off slowly, because it had no 3G, no WiFi, was selling for over $1,000, etc. But sales have moved up pretty well, and the new model is expected to do very well. Thats not with the biggest provider, which has stated recently that they want the phone.
So, we'll see.
I am not at all surprised by the observations, and am aware of them. I even followed, "Japanese hate the iPhone" report. As an Asian myself, I thought that was misleading. Similarly, there was a lot of reselling of the iPhone before it ever was sold in China.
There is a place for the iPhone in every market. However, unless Apple caters to the vast majority of the phone users, i.e., as to functionality or what people desires or expects of a phone, as Apple tried to do with the iPods, the "smartphone" iPhone will not be a phone for everyone.
This is akin to the PC market. Apple Macs do indeed have a significant share of the high end products, especially notebooks. But overall, Mac marketshare of the total PC market will remain smaller than the Wintel OS, even if Apple will continue to gain more converts.
I do not have a crystal ball, but individually there will be fluctuations of the phone manufacturers. Who would have thought for example, that Motorola, already forgotten for a bit, when iPhone vs RIM was the hot topic, suddenly came up with an Android phone. Nexus One was supposed to be the killer. But, HTC which I believe did not do well with its early versions of Android came up with what is considered even by some reviewers to be competitive.
The fact that the Android is a royalty free OS, makes it attractive, especially to Asian phone manufacturers and even those in Western countries. More than likely, India phone companies (which is an entirely different economic philosophy from other Asian countries) would likely base their phone products on the Android.
Each and everyone of these local or targeted Android OS adaptors can tailor and produce a plethora of Android phones to target specific consumer groups.
Android therefore can gain a total marketshare from the collective efforts of "increasing" phone manufacturer adaptors.
Will this happen? Or will everyone gravitate to the iPhone, based on the early trends noted about the iPhone, as it tries to penetrate individual markets?
We will really never know. And judgement is really a matrter of the time frame when we select the "temporal end" of a race.
Before Nokia, there was Motorola. Then RIM gained traction, especially in business, and the likes of people, like Obama. Until recently, who would have thought that Asian manufacturers would go beyond "contract manufacturers", and produce their own brand phones.
Just by its sheer size and protectionist policy, I would not be surprised if local Chinese phone manufacturers will comprise the lion's share of the local market.
There was a time that Japanese (then Korean) cars were considered inferior.
Fortunately, technology doesn't standstill. The next "Steve Jobs" may not even be an American, nor even a Westerner.
I got a laugh out of this. So what's your point? How ineffectual MS is? It really doesn't surprise us, you know.
So, MS can tout how big their R&D dept is, how big their R&D budget is. I don't think I would brag about that. They have a load more employees than Apple too, but it still takes them 10 years to get an OS finished and out the door.
I think MS love their committees and marketers and psychotherapists and people who come up with their little dance numbers too much for Apple to be really worried. They seem to pit different teams against each other, too.
Fundamental techs, like what? Firewire, next gen video codecs, network and printing protocols, USB, FlashRAM, universal connector thingy, computer in a pocket instead of in a bathtub, security, next UI paradigm, devices that are poised to revolutionize whole industries, what?
But hey, it's all about the numbers, isn't it: R&D dollars, R&D dept, MHz, Feature list, number of dance partners to stab in the back, whatever. Keep playing the game that Apple isn't.
Speaking of little dances, how's the Retail Store working out for you there MS?
I am not at all surprised by the observations, and am aware of them. I even followed, "Japanese hate the iPhone" report. As an Asian myself, I thought that was misleading. Similarly, there was a lot of reselling of the iPhone before it ever was sold in China.
There is a place for the iPhone in every market. However, unless Apple caters to the vast majority of the phone users, i.e., as to functionality or what people desires or expects of a phone, as Apple tried to do with the iPods, the "smartphone" iPhone will not be a phone for everyone.
This is akin to the PC market. Apple Macs do indeed have a significant share of the high end products, especially notebooks. But overall, Mac marketshare of the total PC market will remain smaller than the Wintel OS, even if Apple will continue to gain more converts.
I do not have a crystal ball, but individually there will be fluctuations of the phone manufacturers. Who would have thought for example, that Motorola, already forgotten for a bit, when iPhone vs RIM was the hot topic, suddenly came up with an Android phone. Nexus One was supposed to be the killer. But, HTC which I believe did not do well with its early versions of Android came up with what is considered even by some reviewers to be competitive.
The fact that the Android is a royalty free OS, makes it attractive, especially to Asian phone manufacturers and even those in Western countries. More than likely, India phone companies (which is an entirely different economic philosophy from other Asian countries) would likely base their phone products on the Android.
Each and everyone of these local or targeted Android OS adaptors can tailor and produce a plethora of Android phones to target specific consumer groups.
Android therefore can gain a total marketshare from the collective efforts of "increasing" phone manufacturer adaptors.
Will this happen? Or will everyone gravitate to the iPhone, based on the early trends noted about the iPhone, as it tries to penetrate individual markets?
We will really never know. And judgement is really a matrter of the time frame when we select the "temporal end" of a race.
Before Nokia, there was Motorola. Then RIM gained traction, especially in business, and the likes of people, like Obama. Until recently, who would have thought that Asian manufacturers would go beyond "contract manufacturers", and produce their own brand phones.
Just by its sheer size and protectionist policy, I would not be surprised if local Chinese phone manufacturers will comprise the lion's share of the local market.
There was a time that Japanese (then Korean) cars were considered inferior.
Fortunately, technology doesn't standstill. The next "Steve Jobs" may not even be an American, nor even a Westerner.
CGC
I think we can pretty much agree on most things here. You're right markets fluctuate over time. What was big, becomes small, and visa versa. Who ever thought that Motorola would drop to such a small marketshare? Ten years ago? No one!
I remember when Samsung had less that a 5% marketshare early in this century when I first bought their i300 color Palmphone. Who thought they would become one of the largest manufacturers?
With Apple vs Android, the picture is less clear. After all, Apple is a manufacturer of phones, and Google is a developer of a free OS. Very different. It's possible that at some point, Android will become the most widely used phone OS, but at what cost? Will it become so fractionated that it will no longer become Android in most peoples eyes? With manufacturers putting their own, often not compatible GUIs on their own phones, and giving them names, will people think of these phones as Android phones? Its possible they won't, especially since some of these companies are tarting their own app stores, and many apps may not crossover the lines of one phone to another.
So will a Samsung Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a BADA phone? Will an HTC Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a Sense phone, etc? Will Verizon limit Google marketplace sales in favor of it's own store and apps? I don't think we will know that for a couple more years.
That Apple can dominate in profitability without being the marketshare leader speaks volume.
They call this the "20-80" strategy. You only have to cater to the higher end of the market and still make profit.
In the case of the digital music market, Apple priced its iPods to cater to middle ground to expand its target, and yet remain highly profitable.
Apple is trying to repeat that also with the iPad, and so far, it is doing well. As important, the competition had to go back to the drawing board.
CGC
Very well said cg...I've heard it described in other ways, too. Profit Margin over Market Share. And I've certainly heard of the '80-20' rule, i.e., 20% of the population drink 80% of the beer! (Question: Who does Budweiser advertise too? Answer: Horses, specifically, Clydesdales!)
And I know although, ~70% of the US economy is driven by the 'consumer,' the top 10% of the US consumers drive 50% of the US economy. But I never thought to think of it as a "20-80" strategy" on the part of Apple. Spot on!
WOW! This just proves that Market Share is nothing when it comes to measuring company's success and power. I am actually really happy that Apple finally has this kind of power. 30 years later!
I think we can pretty much agree on most things here. You're right markets fluctuate over time. What was big, becomes small, and visa versa. Who ever thought that Motorola would drop to such a small marketshare? Ten years ago? No one!
I remember when Samsung had less that a 5% marketshare early in this century when I first bought their i300 color Palmphone. Who thought they would become one of the largest manufacturers?
With Apple vs Android, the picture is less clear. After all, Apple is a manufacturer of phones, and Google is a developer of a free OS. Very different. It's possible that at some point, Android will become the most widely used phone OS, but at what cost? Will it become so fractionated that it will no longer become Android in most peoples eyes? With manufacturers putting their own, often not compatible GUIs on their own phones, and giving them names, will people think of these phones as Android phones? Its possible they won't, especially since some of these companies are tarting their own app stores, and many apps may not crossover the lines of one phone to another.
So will a Samsung Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a BADA phone? Will an HTC Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a Sense phone, etc? Will Verizon limit Google marketplace sales in favor of it's own store and apps? I don't think we will know that for a couple more years.
Good analysis and good questions...my feeling is no. Does anyone outside this message board really think of 'Symbian?' Google is going down the road that MS did with their Windows OS...distribute a boatload and the 'user experience' be damned. Today's news confirms that's a flawed strategy! Again very thoughtful analysis, Mel!
Edit: Your word, 'fractionated' describes Google exactly...where, I believe, Apple is targeted, focused and therefore successful!
With Apple vs Android, the picture is less clear. After all, Apple is a manufacturer of phones, and Google is a developer of a free OS. Very different. It's possible that at some point, Android will become the most widely used phone OS, but at what cost? Will it become so fractionated that it will no longer become Android in most peoples eyes? With manufacturers putting their own, often not compatible GUIs on their own phones, and giving them names, will people think of these phones as Android phones? Its possible they won't, especially since some of these companies are tarting their own app stores, and many apps may not crossover the lines of one phone to another.
So will a Samsung Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a BADA phone? Will an HTC Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a Sense phone, etc? Will Verizon limit Google marketplace sales in favor of it's own store and apps? I don't think we will know that for a couple more years.
Very good questions.
It's not clear to me how many Android handsets would have to be sold for Google to have the same cash flow as Apple gets from selling one iPhone.
What would that multiple be? Even if it's in the upper single digits, could Google ever achieve that kind of share? And, even if it does, will it simply be a volume play (like PCs) than a value play (like Macs)?
It's not clear to me how many Android handsets would have to be sold for Google to have the same cash flow as Apple gets from selling one iPhone. ?
Excellent take on things! When they fire What's-his-dick' from Google, you should apply for the job! And 'partner' with Apple the way it should have been done in the first place!
Google has proven they can make a boatload of money from 'pennies-a-click' advertising, though!
Seriously, you're right and I never considered it. Apple needs to get into 'Search' and the advertising revenue quickly! And with MS on the ropes, as it were, there's an opportunity for Apple to do Bling right and tell Google to 'take a right at the light into the night!'
This way Apple will have all the bases covered.
Apple has beaten MS in the OS wars, beaten RIM and everyone else in the Smartphone wars, beaten Sony, Dell, MS (zune) in the MP3 player wars, beaten Walmart, Target, Best Buy and everyone in the music wars and beaten everyone in the 'retail stores' ($/SF) business, now they need to take on that evil Google in search....
...Google is putting out subpar software williy-nilly, mobile phones, TV, Office, photo management, etc., etc, products for a fractionated user experience!
Apple have the 'loyal' users (not the best description) that are a huge percentage, albeit the PC to Mac group is swelling the ranks. Almost all 'long term' users are fully aware of UNIX, as aware as the Intel switch and OS X. There are millions of we older 'wiser' users still in the installed user base.
And we couldn't be happier BTW
EDIT: well maybe a little bit happier - richer, more wise or both?
Maybe in your circles, they do. But mostly, overwhelmingly, they neither know nor care.
Maybe in your circles, they do. But mostly, overwhelmingly, they neither know nor care.
Have to agree with you there....my estimate is 80% (probably way more) of the users of all 'computer' devices are using email, web access/search, text messaging and maybe a little word processing! And that's just about it!
Most don't know of Symbian, unix, linux, redhat, etc., etc.
Those criticizing Apple (and Apple supporters) tend to think that Apple supporters are being inconsistent; as in this instance, we are lauding Apple growth (in share price, or market share or what have you), but seem to be saying that it isn't important when others show a growth in numbers? Apparently, Apple supporters are fickle hypocrites? Sounds like that is your feeling too, when you ask what the counter would be?
For the record, I have only bought Apple computers since 1988 for my personal use. Before that, I was initiated in the environment of Ataris, Commodores and the Apple II's. The Apple IIs was what started me with Apple.
Even before the portable computers, I had to struggle with relics of all sorts of huge computers used in school research laboratories, including a prototype of the Unix computer.
My succeeding computers were all Macs, the iMac and the iBook. My next computer is definitely going to be a Mac.
When I am in a position to decide, at work, I prefer scientific/research products that would be run by an Apple product. Unfortunately, not all scientific instruments are run by Mac computers. I insisted that my computer at work was a Mac, one was worth $5000 in 1994 as opposed to $1000 or so for Dell computers, at the time.
Computer prices have since gone down.
My family is planning a business in California. If that will be realized the facility(ies) will use Macs, iPhones and iPads, and even Mac-based server(s) to integrate them. The business rep in Boston already gave a decent discount, and will continue to coordinate until transition when the business starts.
During the dark days when there was a buzz that Apple was about to become "extinct", I even bought a "second Mac" to ensure I have a spare computer for a long time, in case Apple did go bankrupt.
Fortunately, Apple overcame its difficulties. I wish Steve Jobs will "live forever", but that is unrealistic. I am sure Apple will survive even after Steve Jobs leaves the helm. I read some blogs ones speculating about "company culture" infused by its founder(s), that will live on. I hope something like that happens with Apple.
The Mac community then were more close, Since we did not have much support from IT, the people especially in universities, helped each other. At the time, the Mac communities I had been involved with never spent any time lambasting PC products. like the "favorite sports" today. We are, after all PC users, since we have to work with all sorts of equipment in the laboratory, many of them are Wintel PC based.
When any of the people I know ask me about my computer preference/ I tell them why I use Macs. But, I don't disparage any of them prefer a Wintel PC. My enthusiasm with Apple products eventually persuaded a frient to buy an iPhone whcih in turn persuaded others to buy one. Those that could not have the iPhone because they are so wedded with their RIM phones, some bought the iPod Touch.
It goes without saying that I am not an Apple hater.
I only made a wager to TechStud, when he claimed that he did not know anyone who was interested with the iPad and implied that it would be of interest to Apple "fanbois". He declined.
The wager posted here, similarly was intend exclusively for solipsim, partly triggered by long standing differences about some issues about the iPhone with respect to other phones and mobile OS.
One last thing, however much I disagree with a person, I try to avoid using terms, like tiresome, or whatever. I simply place a cut-off when the exchanges get too long.
I'm an apple fan forever, BUT I have to admit MSFT has a huge R&D department and invests in fundamental techs more than apple - example the huge effort and push to get F# out the door which for me is a huge step forward from C. Apple has been saving money modding open source stuff which is great for profits and compatibility but is not doing the dev world any favors. As a Software company that lives on how good 3rd party apps are apple should do everything in it's power to make it easier for them.
I have to admit my next dev effort will be F# - I can't afford the untold wasted hours on Xcode inefficiencies
Apple if you are the biggest in the world - you need to give back and assume the rolls that AT&T did of yesteryear - establish an Apple Research division which invests in fundamental technology - not just applied tech for the next year or two, and beef up those dev tools to be better than the competition!
The only problem with an Apple Labs is that Apple has been there, done that, and almost went tits up! When Steve came back apple had almost completely lost the ability to push and ship a product out the door. I really doubt in the near future that Apple will do much more then modest increases in R&D budget.
For the record, I have only bought Apple computers since 1988 for my personal use. Before that, I was initiated in the environment of Ataris, Commodores and the Apple II's. The Apple IIs was what started me with Apple.
Even before the portable computers, I had to struggle with relics of all sorts of huge computers used in school research laboratories, including a prototype of the Unix computer.
My succeeding computers were all Macs, the iMac and the iBook. My next computer is definitely going to be a Mac.
When I am in a position to decide, at work, I prefer scientific/research products that would be run by an Apple product. Unfortunately, not all scientific instruments are run by Mac computers. I insisted that my computer at work was a Mac, one was worth $5000 in 1994 as opposed to $1000 or so for Dell computers, at the time.
Computer prices have since gone down.
My family is planning a business in California. If that will be realized the facility(ies) will use Macs, iPhones and iPads, and even Mac-based server(s) to integrate them. The business rep in Boston already gave a decent discount, and will continue to coordinate until transition when the business starts.
During the dark days when there was a buzz that Apple was about to become "extinct", I even bought a "second Mac" to ensure I have a spare computer for a long time, in case Apple did go bankrupt.
Fortunately, Apple overcame its difficulties. I wish Steve Jobs will "live forever", but that is unrealistic. I am sure Apple will survive even after Steve Jobs leaves the helm. I read some blogs ones speculating about "company culture" infused by its founder(s), that will live on. I hope something like that happens with Apple.
The Mac community then were more close, Since we did not have much support from IT, the people especially in universities, helped each other. At the time, the Mac communities I had been involved with never spent any time lambasting PC products. like the "favorite sports" today. We are, after all PC users, since we have to work with all sorts of equipment in the laboratory, many of them are Wintel PC based.
When any of the people I know ask me about my computer preference/ I tell them why I use Macs. But, I don't disparage any of them prefer a Wintel PC. My enthusiasm with Apple products eventually persuaded a frient to buy an iPhone whcih in turn persuaded others to buy one. Those that could not have the iPhone because they are so wedded with their RIM phones, some bought the iPod Touch.
It goes without saying that I am not an Apple hater.
I only made a wager to TechStud, when he claimed that he did not know anyone who was interested with the iPad and implied that it would be of interest to Apple "fanbois". He declined.
The wager posted here, similarly was intend exclusively for solipsim, partly triggered by long standing differences about some issues about the iPhone with respect to other phones and mobile OS.
One last thing, however much I disagree with a person, I try to avoid using terms, like tiresome, or whatever. I simply place a cut-off when the exchanges get too long.
CGC
Very thoughtful CG...to pick up on one of your points...I too started very early with macs. A classic with a 4-6" screen. I made flow charts and reports that 'wowed' my executive staff...even in black and white....go figure!
I too flirted with moving to PC's in the dark days of Apple's troubles....I remember distinctly standing in a CompUSA (remember them? They could've been the Apple stores of today!) next to a German engineer consulting here in the US. And he said to me, 'I don't know what you get paid an hour, but I get paid $300/hr and I don't want to spend it dicking around with Windows rebooting, reinstalling, downloading fixes, etc., etc.' In other words, even then the upfront investment for an Apple was worth it. And he was right! I never looked back! I 'pay' for the latest OS updates, the latest HD, the latest iPhone, etc., etc. For the productivity aspect!
I agree. This more indicates that Apple is the world's most valuable tech company. After all, what's the "size" of a company worth? Its expenses? "Large" and "great" often mean two different things to any stakeholder.
Any way you slice it, helluva job, Apple.
Also, P/E and market share are incredibly relevant, particularly in relation to each other. Apple's slightly high P/E would be problematic if they'd already saturated the market. Perhaps counterintuitively to some, 20 is a very low P/E for a company with Apple's sustainable growth record and future growth prospects as evidenced by massively improvable market share in most of its lines.
I'd call it a bargain anywhere under $400. And I believe Apple's market cap will easily exceed Exxon-Mobil's by year-end.
Right! Compared to my company...Apple is in a different universe! Good show, Stevo!
And what will be your counter when some other company outpaces the growth of Apple with respect to the industries growth?
Using the last year-over-year quarter growth, Android outpaced the growth of Apple iPhone (the phone component worldwide): 807% vs. 117%, respectively.
When Apple tried to counter the trend in the US market, it raised the situation worldwide. Sure, Apple was ahead by several millions or so, 5.4M Androids vs 8.5M iPhones. But, RIM could make the same argument in terms of marketshare (10.5M). In terms of growth rate, Apple may overtake RIM, but Android, at the pace indicated may trounce the iPhone.
If you want to wager***, I would predict that by next year, the Android would surpass Apple iPhone (the phone component) in terms of marketshare. And base from their stage in the sigmoidal growth curve, I would predict Android still would maintain higher growth rate than Apple but at a slower pace of growth rate.
However they define smartphone, Nokia remains the uncontested leader followed a distant second by RIM in terms of marketshare.
So where is Apple "product ... outpacing the industries growth"?
I did not include the profitability factor because it has always been the focus of Apple once it decided to cater to a more discriminating crowd. And, if profitability is the focus, the strategy about all these ephemeral and neverending "races" would require different propaganda strategies. A good example of that propaganda to win consumers is the Mac vs PC ads -- in a PC market where Mac computers has lost the marketshare race several decades ago.
Does this strategy mean that Apple is aversed to low profit margin or to reach the lower end market? Not exactly.
It sold cheaper models of the iPods to ensure its dominance in the digital music market.
Apple did reduce the prices of its Mac products.
And did the same for the iPhone.
The back to school sale with free iPod (or $199) is another significant reduction in price to protect Apple's share in education.
Apple similarly priced the iPad, much lower than analysts estimates to increase reception of what was then a product that was not known to be a definite winner.
Tim Cook, I believe was very forceful that they will do what it takes to price their product more competitively.
Apple is winning against the competition because of its diverse and well-integrated ecosystem and continue to culture that diversity with innovation. It would be fascinating to see process progress as the Apple "walled garden" compete with an almost opposite type of strategy, the more open "Android ecosystem.
CGC
***Wager
The one who loses will not post in any Mac or mobile computing site for a year.
You have set the terms of the wager entirely in your favor, 1 free OS with several phone models and manufacturers versus 1 manufacturer's OS and models, and yet you still could possibly lose.
BTW You obviously still don't get it, this is all about profitability not market share.
Good analysis and good questions...my feeling is no. Does anyone outside this message board really think of 'Symbian?' Google is going down the road that MS did with their Windows OS...distribute a boatload and the 'user experience' be damned. Today's news confirms that's a flawed strategy! Again very thoughtful analysis, Mel!
Edit: Your word, 'fractionated' describes Google exactly...where, I believe, Apple is targeted, focused and therefore successful!
Thanks. Nokia is trying, with Symbian, to make it relevant again. I don't think it will happen. Especially when you consider that they've effectively written it off by first going to their linux based Meamo, and now to the Nokia/Intel MeeGo (if I spelled those two correctly) for their higher end phones and tablets. That will kill Symbian off in the bettr smartphone race. As MeeGo moves down the line (assuming that IT will be successful), along with Meamo, where does that leave Symbian, and who will want it other than for cheap phones? Eventually, it will disappear.
Comments
I'm an apple fan forever, BUT I have to admit MSFT has a huge R&D department and invests in fundamental techs more than apple - example the huge effort and push to get F# out the door which for me is a huge step forward from C. Apple has been saving money modding open source stuff which is great for profits and compatibility but is not doing the dev world any favors. As a Software company that lives on how good 3rd party apps are apple should do everything in it's power to make it easier for them.
I have to admit my next dev effort will be F# - I can't afford the untold wasted hours on Xcode inefficiencies
Apple if you are the biggest in the world - you need to give back and assume the rolls that AT&T did of yesteryear - establish an Apple Research division which invests in fundamental technology - not just applied tech for the next year or two, and beef up those dev tools to be better than the competition!
I got a laugh out of this. So what's your point? How ineffectual MS is? It really doesn't surprise us, you know.
So, MS can tout how big their R&D dept is, how big their R&D budget is. I don't think I would brag about that. They have a load more employees than Apple too, but it still takes them 10 years to get an OS finished and out the door.
I think MS love their committees and marketers and psychotherapists and people who come up with their little dance numbers too much for Apple to be really worried. MS seems to pit different teams against each other, too. So, you have one example -- and that seems to show how MS is desperate to get new developers to look at the rest of their dinosaur tech as relevant and future-proof. Talk about distortion field!
Fundamental techs, like what? Firewire, next gen video codecs, network and printing protocols, USB, FlashRAM, universal connector thingy, computer in a pocket instead of in a bathtub, security, next UI paradigm, devices that are poised to revolutionize whole industries, what? Apple is leading in a lot of directions.
But hey, it's all about the numbers, isn't it: R&D dollars, R&D dept, MHz, Feature list, number of dance partners to stab in the back, whatever. Keep playing the game that Apple isn't.
Thats what I was trying to say, just having a larger market cap doesn't make you the "worlds largest tech company". Thats a ridiculous assertion.
That's not what they were implying. They were implying that Apple is the most valuable tech company. That's how I read it. We all know that Hp alone sells more than $125 billion a year, and that IBM is close to that, just to mention two very big concerns in the sector. But Apple is worth more than either.
Nokia has been sliding for several years now. RIM's growth has slowed. LG's marketshare is also down. Samsung is about even. MS's Win Mobile is going away fast, and there's no way to know if their new Win Phone 7 will catch on. Palm has no marketshare, and we'll have to see if Hp can do anything useful with them. Both Sony/Ericson and Motorola have lost big shares.
So where are we? Only the iPhone and Android based phones are showing smartphone growth. So, yes, Android has grown quickly. As I say, it's because they started with one carrier with one not very good phone (smallest carrier too!), and have expanded to all the carriers with better phones from a number of manufacturers.
I would have expected a lot of growth from all that. But where do they go from there? How much more growth will they get? Interesting that subscribers on Verizon and Sprint have said they would drop their Android phones for iPhone if thy were available on their carrier.
So what growth will Apple have if they become available on all four carriers? What will that do to Android's growth?
In every market where the iPhone went to all or several carriers they became the dominant smartphone. In Japan, on the smallest carrier, they are 72% of the smartphone market. Thats in a country that skeptics said they would never do well.
In S Korea, a country will 50 million people, they've sold over 700 thousand phones in six months, and the rare is increasing. It's the largest smartphone there now. Again, on the smaller carrier.
In China, it started off slowly, because it had no 3G, no WiFi, was selling for over $1,000, etc. But sales have moved up pretty well, and the new model is expected to do very well. Thats not with the biggest provider, which has stated recently that they want the phone.
So, we'll see.
I am not at all surprised by the observations, and am aware of them. I even followed, "Japanese hate the iPhone" report. As an Asian myself, I thought that was misleading. Similarly, there was a lot of reselling of the iPhone before it ever was sold in China.
There is a place for the iPhone in every market. However, unless Apple caters to the vast majority of the phone users, i.e., as to functionality or what people desires or expects of a phone, as Apple tried to do with the iPods, the "smartphone" iPhone will not be a phone for everyone.
This is akin to the PC market. Apple Macs do indeed have a significant share of the high end products, especially notebooks. But overall, Mac marketshare of the total PC market will remain smaller than the Wintel OS, even if Apple will continue to gain more converts.
I do not have a crystal ball, but individually there will be fluctuations of the phone manufacturers. Who would have thought for example, that Motorola, already forgotten for a bit, when iPhone vs RIM was the hot topic, suddenly came up with an Android phone. Nexus One was supposed to be the killer. But, HTC which I believe did not do well with its early versions of Android came up with what is considered even by some reviewers to be competitive.
The fact that the Android is a royalty free OS, makes it attractive, especially to Asian phone manufacturers and even those in Western countries. More than likely, India phone companies (which is an entirely different economic philosophy from other Asian countries) would likely base their phone products on the Android.
Each and everyone of these local or targeted Android OS adaptors can tailor and produce a plethora of Android phones to target specific consumer groups.
Android therefore can gain a total marketshare from the collective efforts of "increasing" phone manufacturer adaptors.
Will this happen? Or will everyone gravitate to the iPhone, based on the early trends noted about the iPhone, as it tries to penetrate individual markets?
We will really never know. And judgement is really a matrter of the time frame when we select the "temporal end" of a race.
Before Nokia, there was Motorola. Then RIM gained traction, especially in business, and the likes of people, like Obama. Until recently, who would have thought that Asian manufacturers would go beyond "contract manufacturers", and produce their own brand phones.
Just by its sheer size and protectionist policy, I would not be surprised if local Chinese phone manufacturers will comprise the lion's share of the local market.
There was a time that Japanese (then Korean) cars were considered inferior.
Fortunately, technology doesn't standstill. The next "Steve Jobs" may not even be an American, nor even a Westerner.
CGC
I got a laugh out of this. So what's your point? How ineffectual MS is? It really doesn't surprise us, you know.
So, MS can tout how big their R&D dept is, how big their R&D budget is. I don't think I would brag about that. They have a load more employees than Apple too, but it still takes them 10 years to get an OS finished and out the door.
I think MS love their committees and marketers and psychotherapists and people who come up with their little dance numbers too much for Apple to be really worried. They seem to pit different teams against each other, too.
Fundamental techs, like what? Firewire, next gen video codecs, network and printing protocols, USB, FlashRAM, universal connector thingy, computer in a pocket instead of in a bathtub, security, next UI paradigm, devices that are poised to revolutionize whole industries, what?
But hey, it's all about the numbers, isn't it: R&D dollars, R&D dept, MHz, Feature list, number of dance partners to stab in the back, whatever. Keep playing the game that Apple isn't.
Speaking of little dances, how's the Retail Store working out for you there MS?
"What I can?t figure out is why he (Steve Jobs) is even trying (to be the CEO of Apple)? He knows he can?t win."
- Bill Gates, June 1998
(AUDIO)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_533817.html
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...omments/25385/
http://www.cringely.com/2010/04/masters-tournament/
Wow! Thanks for that Dave!
I am not at all surprised by the observations, and am aware of them. I even followed, "Japanese hate the iPhone" report. As an Asian myself, I thought that was misleading. Similarly, there was a lot of reselling of the iPhone before it ever was sold in China.
There is a place for the iPhone in every market. However, unless Apple caters to the vast majority of the phone users, i.e., as to functionality or what people desires or expects of a phone, as Apple tried to do with the iPods, the "smartphone" iPhone will not be a phone for everyone.
This is akin to the PC market. Apple Macs do indeed have a significant share of the high end products, especially notebooks. But overall, Mac marketshare of the total PC market will remain smaller than the Wintel OS, even if Apple will continue to gain more converts.
I do not have a crystal ball, but individually there will be fluctuations of the phone manufacturers. Who would have thought for example, that Motorola, already forgotten for a bit, when iPhone vs RIM was the hot topic, suddenly came up with an Android phone. Nexus One was supposed to be the killer. But, HTC which I believe did not do well with its early versions of Android came up with what is considered even by some reviewers to be competitive.
The fact that the Android is a royalty free OS, makes it attractive, especially to Asian phone manufacturers and even those in Western countries. More than likely, India phone companies (which is an entirely different economic philosophy from other Asian countries) would likely base their phone products on the Android.
Each and everyone of these local or targeted Android OS adaptors can tailor and produce a plethora of Android phones to target specific consumer groups.
Android therefore can gain a total marketshare from the collective efforts of "increasing" phone manufacturer adaptors.
Will this happen? Or will everyone gravitate to the iPhone, based on the early trends noted about the iPhone, as it tries to penetrate individual markets?
We will really never know. And judgement is really a matrter of the time frame when we select the "temporal end" of a race.
Before Nokia, there was Motorola. Then RIM gained traction, especially in business, and the likes of people, like Obama. Until recently, who would have thought that Asian manufacturers would go beyond "contract manufacturers", and produce their own brand phones.
Just by its sheer size and protectionist policy, I would not be surprised if local Chinese phone manufacturers will comprise the lion's share of the local market.
There was a time that Japanese (then Korean) cars were considered inferior.
Fortunately, technology doesn't standstill. The next "Steve Jobs" may not even be an American, nor even a Westerner.
CGC
I think we can pretty much agree on most things here. You're right markets fluctuate over time. What was big, becomes small, and visa versa. Who ever thought that Motorola would drop to such a small marketshare? Ten years ago? No one!
I remember when Samsung had less that a 5% marketshare early in this century when I first bought their i300 color Palmphone. Who thought they would become one of the largest manufacturers?
With Apple vs Android, the picture is less clear. After all, Apple is a manufacturer of phones, and Google is a developer of a free OS. Very different. It's possible that at some point, Android will become the most widely used phone OS, but at what cost? Will it become so fractionated that it will no longer become Android in most peoples eyes? With manufacturers putting their own, often not compatible GUIs on their own phones, and giving them names, will people think of these phones as Android phones? Its possible they won't, especially since some of these companies are tarting their own app stores, and many apps may not crossover the lines of one phone to another.
So will a Samsung Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a BADA phone? Will an HTC Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a Sense phone, etc? Will Verizon limit Google marketplace sales in favor of it's own store and apps? I don't think we will know that for a couple more years.
That Apple can dominate in profitability without being the marketshare leader speaks volume.
They call this the "20-80" strategy. You only have to cater to the higher end of the market and still make profit.
In the case of the digital music market, Apple priced its iPods to cater to middle ground to expand its target, and yet remain highly profitable.
Apple is trying to repeat that also with the iPad, and so far, it is doing well. As important, the competition had to go back to the drawing board.
CGC
Very well said cg...I've heard it described in other ways, too. Profit Margin over Market Share. And I've certainly heard of the '80-20' rule, i.e., 20% of the population drink 80% of the beer! (Question: Who does Budweiser advertise too? Answer: Horses, specifically, Clydesdales!)
And I know although, ~70% of the US economy is driven by the 'consumer,' the top 10% of the US consumers drive 50% of the US economy. But I never thought to think of it as a "20-80" strategy" on the part of Apple. Spot on!
Best
WOW! This just proves that Market Share is nothing when it comes to measuring company's success and power. I am actually really happy that Apple finally has this kind of power. 30 years later!
Again! Well said iVlad
I think we can pretty much agree on most things here. You're right markets fluctuate over time. What was big, becomes small, and visa versa. Who ever thought that Motorola would drop to such a small marketshare? Ten years ago? No one!
I remember when Samsung had less that a 5% marketshare early in this century when I first bought their i300 color Palmphone. Who thought they would become one of the largest manufacturers?
With Apple vs Android, the picture is less clear. After all, Apple is a manufacturer of phones, and Google is a developer of a free OS. Very different. It's possible that at some point, Android will become the most widely used phone OS, but at what cost? Will it become so fractionated that it will no longer become Android in most peoples eyes? With manufacturers putting their own, often not compatible GUIs on their own phones, and giving them names, will people think of these phones as Android phones? Its possible they won't, especially since some of these companies are tarting their own app stores, and many apps may not crossover the lines of one phone to another.
So will a Samsung Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a BADA phone? Will an HTC Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a Sense phone, etc? Will Verizon limit Google marketplace sales in favor of it's own store and apps? I don't think we will know that for a couple more years.
Good analysis and good questions...my feeling is no. Does anyone outside this message board really think of 'Symbian?' Google is going down the road that MS did with their Windows OS...distribute a boatload and the 'user experience' be damned. Today's news confirms that's a flawed strategy! Again very thoughtful analysis, Mel!
Edit: Your word, 'fractionated' describes Google exactly...where, I believe, Apple is targeted, focused and therefore successful!
With Apple vs Android, the picture is less clear. After all, Apple is a manufacturer of phones, and Google is a developer of a free OS. Very different. It's possible that at some point, Android will become the most widely used phone OS, but at what cost? Will it become so fractionated that it will no longer become Android in most peoples eyes? With manufacturers putting their own, often not compatible GUIs on their own phones, and giving them names, will people think of these phones as Android phones? Its possible they won't, especially since some of these companies are tarting their own app stores, and many apps may not crossover the lines of one phone to another.
So will a Samsung Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a BADA phone? Will an HTC Android phone be known as an Android phone, or as a Sense phone, etc? Will Verizon limit Google marketplace sales in favor of it's own store and apps? I don't think we will know that for a couple more years.
Very good questions.
It's not clear to me how many Android handsets would have to be sold for Google to have the same cash flow as Apple gets from selling one iPhone.
What would that multiple be? Even if it's in the upper single digits, could Google ever achieve that kind of share? And, even if it does, will it simply be a volume play (like PCs) than a value play (like Macs)?
Very good questions.
It's not clear to me how many Android handsets would have to be sold for Google to have the same cash flow as Apple gets from selling one iPhone. ?
Excellent take on things! When they fire What's-his-dick' from Google, you should apply for the job! And 'partner' with Apple the way it should have been done in the first place!
Google has proven they can make a boatload of money from 'pennies-a-click' advertising, though!
Seriously, you're right and I never considered it. Apple needs to get into 'Search' and the advertising revenue quickly! And with MS on the ropes, as it were, there's an opportunity for Apple to do Bling right and tell Google to 'take a right at the light into the night!'
This way Apple will have all the bases covered.
Apple has beaten MS in the OS wars, beaten RIM and everyone else in the Smartphone wars, beaten Sony, Dell, MS (zune) in the MP3 player wars, beaten Walmart, Target, Best Buy and everyone in the music wars and beaten everyone in the 'retail stores' ($/SF) business, now they need to take on that evil Google in search....
...Google is putting out subpar software williy-nilly, mobile phones, TV, Office, photo management, etc., etc, products for a fractionated user experience!
Nope, have to disagree there.
Apple have the 'loyal' users (not the best description) that are a huge percentage, albeit the PC to Mac group is swelling the ranks. Almost all 'long term' users are fully aware of UNIX, as aware as the Intel switch and OS X. There are millions of we older 'wiser' users still in the installed user base.
And we couldn't be happier BTW
EDIT: well maybe a little bit happier - richer, more wise or both?
Maybe in your circles, they do. But mostly, overwhelmingly, they neither know nor care.
Maybe in your circles, they do. But mostly, overwhelmingly, they neither know nor care.
Have to agree with you there....my estimate is 80% (probably way more) of the users of all 'computer' devices are using email, web access/search, text messaging and maybe a little word processing! And that's just about it!
Most don't know of Symbian, unix, linux, redhat, etc., etc.
Those criticizing Apple (and Apple supporters) tend to think that Apple supporters are being inconsistent; as in this instance, we are lauding Apple growth (in share price, or market share or what have you), but seem to be saying that it isn't important when others show a growth in numbers? Apparently, Apple supporters are fickle hypocrites? Sounds like that is your feeling too, when you ask what the counter would be?
For the record, I have only bought Apple computers since 1988 for my personal use. Before that, I was initiated in the environment of Ataris, Commodores and the Apple II's. The Apple IIs was what started me with Apple.
Even before the portable computers, I had to struggle with relics of all sorts of huge computers used in school research laboratories, including a prototype of the Unix computer.
My succeeding computers were all Macs, the iMac and the iBook. My next computer is definitely going to be a Mac.
When I am in a position to decide, at work, I prefer scientific/research products that would be run by an Apple product. Unfortunately, not all scientific instruments are run by Mac computers. I insisted that my computer at work was a Mac, one was worth $5000 in 1994 as opposed to $1000 or so for Dell computers, at the time.
Computer prices have since gone down.
My family is planning a business in California. If that will be realized the facility(ies) will use Macs, iPhones and iPads, and even Mac-based server(s) to integrate them. The business rep in Boston already gave a decent discount, and will continue to coordinate until transition when the business starts.
During the dark days when there was a buzz that Apple was about to become "extinct", I even bought a "second Mac" to ensure I have a spare computer for a long time, in case Apple did go bankrupt.
Fortunately, Apple overcame its difficulties. I wish Steve Jobs will "live forever", but that is unrealistic. I am sure Apple will survive even after Steve Jobs leaves the helm. I read some blogs ones speculating about "company culture" infused by its founder(s), that will live on. I hope something like that happens with Apple.
The Mac community then were more close, Since we did not have much support from IT, the people especially in universities, helped each other. At the time, the Mac communities I had been involved with never spent any time lambasting PC products. like the "favorite sports" today. We are, after all PC users, since we have to work with all sorts of equipment in the laboratory, many of them are Wintel PC based.
When any of the people I know ask me about my computer preference/ I tell them why I use Macs. But, I don't disparage any of them prefer a Wintel PC. My enthusiasm with Apple products eventually persuaded a frient to buy an iPhone whcih in turn persuaded others to buy one. Those that could not have the iPhone because they are so wedded with their RIM phones, some bought the iPod Touch.
It goes without saying that I am not an Apple hater.
I only made a wager to TechStud, when he claimed that he did not know anyone who was interested with the iPad and implied that it would be of interest to Apple "fanbois". He declined.
The wager posted here, similarly was intend exclusively for solipsim, partly triggered by long standing differences about some issues about the iPhone with respect to other phones and mobile OS.
One last thing, however much I disagree with a person, I try to avoid using terms, like tiresome, or whatever. I simply place a cut-off when the exchanges get too long.
CGC
I'm an apple fan forever, BUT I have to admit MSFT has a huge R&D department and invests in fundamental techs more than apple - example the huge effort and push to get F# out the door which for me is a huge step forward from C. Apple has been saving money modding open source stuff which is great for profits and compatibility but is not doing the dev world any favors. As a Software company that lives on how good 3rd party apps are apple should do everything in it's power to make it easier for them.
I have to admit my next dev effort will be F# - I can't afford the untold wasted hours on Xcode inefficiencies
Apple if you are the biggest in the world - you need to give back and assume the rolls that AT&T did of yesteryear - establish an Apple Research division which invests in fundamental technology - not just applied tech for the next year or two, and beef up those dev tools to be better than the competition!
The only problem with an Apple Labs is that Apple has been there, done that, and almost went tits up! When Steve came back apple had almost completely lost the ability to push and ship a product out the door. I really doubt in the near future that Apple will do much more then modest increases in R&D budget.
For the record, I have only bought Apple computers since 1988 for my personal use. Before that, I was initiated in the environment of Ataris, Commodores and the Apple II's. The Apple IIs was what started me with Apple.
Even before the portable computers, I had to struggle with relics of all sorts of huge computers used in school research laboratories, including a prototype of the Unix computer.
My succeeding computers were all Macs, the iMac and the iBook. My next computer is definitely going to be a Mac.
When I am in a position to decide, at work, I prefer scientific/research products that would be run by an Apple product. Unfortunately, not all scientific instruments are run by Mac computers. I insisted that my computer at work was a Mac, one was worth $5000 in 1994 as opposed to $1000 or so for Dell computers, at the time.
Computer prices have since gone down.
My family is planning a business in California. If that will be realized the facility(ies) will use Macs, iPhones and iPads, and even Mac-based server(s) to integrate them. The business rep in Boston already gave a decent discount, and will continue to coordinate until transition when the business starts.
During the dark days when there was a buzz that Apple was about to become "extinct", I even bought a "second Mac" to ensure I have a spare computer for a long time, in case Apple did go bankrupt.
Fortunately, Apple overcame its difficulties. I wish Steve Jobs will "live forever", but that is unrealistic. I am sure Apple will survive even after Steve Jobs leaves the helm. I read some blogs ones speculating about "company culture" infused by its founder(s), that will live on. I hope something like that happens with Apple.
The Mac community then were more close, Since we did not have much support from IT, the people especially in universities, helped each other. At the time, the Mac communities I had been involved with never spent any time lambasting PC products. like the "favorite sports" today. We are, after all PC users, since we have to work with all sorts of equipment in the laboratory, many of them are Wintel PC based.
When any of the people I know ask me about my computer preference/ I tell them why I use Macs. But, I don't disparage any of them prefer a Wintel PC. My enthusiasm with Apple products eventually persuaded a frient to buy an iPhone whcih in turn persuaded others to buy one. Those that could not have the iPhone because they are so wedded with their RIM phones, some bought the iPod Touch.
It goes without saying that I am not an Apple hater.
I only made a wager to TechStud, when he claimed that he did not know anyone who was interested with the iPad and implied that it would be of interest to Apple "fanbois". He declined.
The wager posted here, similarly was intend exclusively for solipsim, partly triggered by long standing differences about some issues about the iPhone with respect to other phones and mobile OS.
One last thing, however much I disagree with a person, I try to avoid using terms, like tiresome, or whatever. I simply place a cut-off when the exchanges get too long.
CGC
Very thoughtful CG...to pick up on one of your points...I too started very early with macs. A classic with a 4-6" screen. I made flow charts and reports that 'wowed' my executive staff...even in black and white....go figure!
I too flirted with moving to PC's in the dark days of Apple's troubles....I remember distinctly standing in a CompUSA (remember them? They could've been the Apple stores of today!) next to a German engineer consulting here in the US. And he said to me, 'I don't know what you get paid an hour, but I get paid $300/hr and I don't want to spend it dicking around with Windows rebooting, reinstalling, downloading fixes, etc., etc.' In other words, even then the upfront investment for an Apple was worth it. And he was right! I never looked back! I 'pay' for the latest OS updates, the latest HD, the latest iPhone, etc., etc. For the productivity aspect!
Speaking of little dances, how's the Retail Store working out for you there MS?
Jeez, Oz...I haven't thought of that in ages! Very Good! I think this is what they mean by a 'poignant' remark! Yours, not mine!
I agree. This more indicates that Apple is the world's most valuable tech company. After all, what's the "size" of a company worth? Its expenses? "Large" and "great" often mean two different things to any stakeholder.
Any way you slice it, helluva job, Apple.
Also, P/E and market share are incredibly relevant, particularly in relation to each other. Apple's slightly high P/E would be problematic if they'd already saturated the market. Perhaps counterintuitively to some, 20 is a very low P/E for a company with Apple's sustainable growth record and future growth prospects as evidenced by massively improvable market share in most of its lines.
I'd call it a bargain anywhere under $400. And I believe Apple's market cap will easily exceed Exxon-Mobil's by year-end.
Right! Compared to my company...Apple is in a different universe! Good show, Stevo!
And what will be your counter when some other company outpaces the growth of Apple with respect to the industries growth?
Using the last year-over-year quarter growth, Android outpaced the growth of Apple iPhone (the phone component worldwide): 807% vs. 117%, respectively.
When Apple tried to counter the trend in the US market, it raised the situation worldwide. Sure, Apple was ahead by several millions or so, 5.4M Androids vs 8.5M iPhones. But, RIM could make the same argument in terms of marketshare (10.5M). In terms of growth rate, Apple may overtake RIM, but Android, at the pace indicated may trounce the iPhone.
If you want to wager***, I would predict that by next year, the Android would surpass Apple iPhone (the phone component) in terms of marketshare. And base from their stage in the sigmoidal growth curve, I would predict Android still would maintain higher growth rate than Apple but at a slower pace of growth rate.
However they define smartphone, Nokia remains the uncontested leader followed a distant second by RIM in terms of marketshare.
So where is Apple "product ... outpacing the industries growth"?
I did not include the profitability factor because it has always been the focus of Apple once it decided to cater to a more discriminating crowd. And, if profitability is the focus, the strategy about all these ephemeral and neverending "races" would require different propaganda strategies. A good example of that propaganda to win consumers is the Mac vs PC ads -- in a PC market where Mac computers has lost the marketshare race several decades ago.
Does this strategy mean that Apple is aversed to low profit margin or to reach the lower end market? Not exactly.
- It sold cheaper models of the iPods to ensure its dominance in the digital music market.
- Apple did reduce the prices of its Mac products.
- And did the same for the iPhone.
- The back to school sale with free iPod (or $199) is another significant reduction in price to protect Apple's share in education.
- Apple similarly priced the iPad, much lower than analysts estimates to increase reception of what was then a product that was not known to be a definite winner.
Tim Cook, I believe was very forceful that they will do what it takes to price their product more competitively.Apple is winning against the competition because of its diverse and well-integrated ecosystem and continue to culture that diversity with innovation. It would be fascinating to see process progress as the Apple "walled garden" compete with an almost opposite type of strategy, the more open "Android ecosystem.
CGC
***Wager
The one who loses will not post in any Mac or mobile computing site for a year.
You have set the terms of the wager entirely in your favor, 1 free OS with several phone models and manufacturers versus 1 manufacturer's OS and models, and yet you still could possibly lose.
BTW You obviously still don't get it, this is all about profitability not market share.
Good analysis and good questions...my feeling is no. Does anyone outside this message board really think of 'Symbian?' Google is going down the road that MS did with their Windows OS...distribute a boatload and the 'user experience' be damned. Today's news confirms that's a flawed strategy! Again very thoughtful analysis, Mel!
Edit: Your word, 'fractionated' describes Google exactly...where, I believe, Apple is targeted, focused and therefore successful!
Thanks. Nokia is trying, with Symbian, to make it relevant again. I don't think it will happen. Especially when you consider that they've effectively written it off by first going to their linux based Meamo, and now to the Nokia/Intel MeeGo (if I spelled those two correctly) for their higher end phones and tablets. That will kill Symbian off in the bettr smartphone race. As MeeGo moves down the line (assuming that IT will be successful), along with Meamo, where does that leave Symbian, and who will want it other than for cheap phones? Eventually, it will disappear.