This is all about network externalities (if you ask me).
MS are well aware that they won't ship 30 m phones by the end of 2011. They probably think that they will sell about 3-10 million phones.
The phones today are not,however, only judged upon their interface and their ease of use but more and more on the amount of third-party applications available.
So if you as a developer knows that this platform will only have between 3-10 mio users by the end of 2011 you would rather develop to either iPhone/iPad or Android. And when the consumers realize this they are less eager to buy a phone from the MS platform.
In short: The more users the more phones they will sell.
MS knows this and that's why they say they will sell 30 m phones well knowing that they won't. But it is all about luring developers and user and thereby attracting more users and developers to the platform
I think you got it wrong. There's steep growth in the smartphone market. It's on its way to reach well over 200 million this year and might reach 300 million units in 2011, so Microsoft would aim for "only" 10 % market share.
I also beg to differ with the claim that they only have 4 quarters to reach their goal. The first Windows Phones are scheduled for September, so they'll clearly have 5 quarters. This fact tunes their market share goal down to 8 % (30 of 370 million), which is ambitious, but possible.
In the end, it all hinges on the quality of their OS.
Why are people so obsessed with those "free" phones? Hello, there's still a $2000 contract attached to each "free" phone!
I find this a complete non-issue, especially in a worldwide perspective. €1, £1 etc. iPhones have been offered in Europe for 2 years now. And in much of the developing world, customers are paying full price upfront for their phones, that is $300 for the cheapest smartphone and $600++ for an iPhone.
Taking the US subsidized price as gospel is complete nonsense. This is a temporary local issue for Apple to solve in the US, where AT&T currently offers a $400 subsidy which is effectively blocking Apple from price drops. If they want to drop the iPhone price much lower than it is now, they have to persuade AT&T to drop their subsidy across all smartphones to say $200 and offer custumers cheaper monthly rates in return. Maybe introduce a $15 data plan with bandwidth cap, like on the iPad. Or something else. One will have to see how Apple plays it.
In all seriousness, I think that WP7 has potential, but there's no way that it will be anywhere near RIM, iPhone, Nokia, and Android in sales, at least not for the first few years.
Why are people so obsessed with those "free" phones? Hello, there's still a $2000 contract attached to each "free" phone!
You speak the tooth. To me, the most important price is outright/unlocked. I will never be tied down to a contract, never, particularly not in Canada because they are 3-years long!!!
I think you got it wrong. There's steep growth in the smartphone market. It's on its way to reach well over 200 million this year and might reach 300 million units in 2011, so Microsoft would aim for "only" 10 % market share.
I totally agree.
The smartphone market is still expanding at a rapid rate. Prince McLean is totally wrong when he says that Microsoft will need to outsell Apple and Google to reach its 30 million target. Both Apple and Google will be selling many more than 30 million phones per year in 2011 at current growth rates.
Anything less than 30 million and Windows Phone 7 will be an utter failure.
Why are people so obsessed with those "free" phones? Hello, there's still a $2000 contract attached to each "free" phone!
I totally agree, and so do most people here (at least I think so). The thing however is that you have people that think about this kind of argument, and those that don't think about it. As most people don't, they see the initial price, and that is what is important to them. So if you take two equal phones, one subsidised with a higher price-plan and 1$, and one less subsidised, but with a lower price-plan, where the overall cost is cheaper for the one with a higher entry price, I will guarantee you that most people would buy the 1$ phone.
It's just they way things are. I for one will buy an iPhone in the UK for probably 300£ and a 24 months subscription of 25£/month. Overall cost is about 900£ over two years, and it suits my needs (there aren't that many minutes and texts, but I'm interested in the internet connection, and the iPhone of cours ). But how many people do consider the overall cost of the phone plus plan when buying it? I don't know any.
You speak the tooth. To me, the most important price is outright/unlocked. I will never be tied down to a contract, never, particularly not in Canada because they are 3-years long!!!
Do you get sim-only prices or do you have to pay subsidised price anyway?
This is delusional at best and only doable if they are dirt cheap, i.e. sold at a loss most likely after carrier subsidies. My guess is Microsoft's market cap will be $150 Billion and falling in 2011. At some point Ballmer will be carried out of a shareholders meeting on the end of a pitchfork
Wish in one hand and crap in the other ....... see which one fills up first. You have to wonder what's in the water in Redmond Washington.
knowone knows 100% what's going down. The
To happen but the new gui looks great and if released with all the major player vs just one, anything is possible. But they need s great app store to succeed.
Most of the hardware partners MS would have are all making Android phones and those sales are going pretty decent so how many are going to put a full on press in regards to Windows Mobile 7 phones?
And I am assuming MS is going to charge for the OS while Android is free for them.
Ballmer thinks they'll do that without multitasking, when every other major smartphone platform has it???
Well, MS does have a lot of its own fanbois.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Win Phone has very limited multi-tasking just as the iPhone will later this year. Neither actually has true multi-tasking. If you want that, you'll have to get a Windows Mobile device, or make due with Androids better but still not perfect multi-tasking.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Win Phone has very limited multi-tasking just as the iPhone will later this year. Neither actually has true multi-tasking. If you want that, you'll have to get a Windows Mobile device, or make due with Androids better but still not perfect multi-tasking.
I gather Palm OS has decent multi-tasking too.
Without wanting to start a classic discussion about the multi-tasking issue, what do you think misses in apples implementation? Any examples of usage where apple limits you?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Win Phone has very limited multi-tasking just as the iPhone will later this year. Neither actually has true multi-tasking. If you want that, you'll have to get a Windows Mobile device, or make due with Androids better but still not perfect multi-tasking.
I gather Palm OS has decent multi-tasking too.
If you think the iPhone's multitasking is in anyway limited, then you know absolutely nothing about it.
Comments
MS are well aware that they won't ship 30 m phones by the end of 2011. They probably think that they will sell about 3-10 million phones.
The phones today are not,however, only judged upon their interface and their ease of use but more and more on the amount of third-party applications available.
So if you as a developer knows that this platform will only have between 3-10 mio users by the end of 2011 you would rather develop to either iPhone/iPad or Android. And when the consumers realize this they are less eager to buy a phone from the MS platform.
In short: The more users the more phones they will sell.
MS knows this and that's why they say they will sell 30 m phones well knowing that they won't. But it is all about luring developers and user and thereby attracting more users and developers to the platform
I also beg to differ with the claim that they only have 4 quarters to reach their goal. The first Windows Phones are scheduled for September, so they'll clearly have 5 quarters. This fact tunes their market share goal down to 8 % (30 of 370 million), which is ambitious, but possible.
In the end, it all hinges on the quality of their OS.
In the end, it all hinges on the quality of their OS.
We are talking about M$ here, and as far as I remember Windows was never any good
(I'm just kidding here, please don't start any serious discussion on this comment)
I find this a complete non-issue, especially in a worldwide perspective. €1, £1 etc. iPhones have been offered in Europe for 2 years now. And in much of the developing world, customers are paying full price upfront for their phones, that is $300 for the cheapest smartphone and $600++ for an iPhone.
Taking the US subsidized price as gospel is complete nonsense. This is a temporary local issue for Apple to solve in the US, where AT&T currently offers a $400 subsidy which is effectively blocking Apple from price drops. If they want to drop the iPhone price much lower than it is now, they have to persuade AT&T to drop their subsidy across all smartphones to say $200 and offer custumers cheaper monthly rates in return. Maybe introduce a $15 data plan with bandwidth cap, like on the iPad. Or something else. One will have to see how Apple plays it.
In all seriousness, I think that WP7 has potential, but there's no way that it will be anywhere near RIM, iPhone, Nokia, and Android in sales, at least not for the first few years.
Why are people so obsessed with those "free" phones? Hello, there's still a $2000 contract attached to each "free" phone!
You speak the tooth. To me, the most important price is outright/unlocked. I will never be tied down to a contract, never, particularly not in Canada because they are 3-years long!!!
I think you got it wrong. There's steep growth in the smartphone market. It's on its way to reach well over 200 million this year and might reach 300 million units in 2011, so Microsoft would aim for "only" 10 % market share.
I totally agree.
The smartphone market is still expanding at a rapid rate. Prince McLean is totally wrong when he says that Microsoft will need to outsell Apple and Google to reach its 30 million target. Both Apple and Google will be selling many more than 30 million phones per year in 2011 at current growth rates.
Anything less than 30 million and Windows Phone 7 will be an utter failure.
Why are people so obsessed with those "free" phones? Hello, there's still a $2000 contract attached to each "free" phone!
I totally agree, and so do most people here (at least I think so). The thing however is that you have people that think about this kind of argument, and those that don't think about it. As most people don't, they see the initial price, and that is what is important to them. So if you take two equal phones, one subsidised with a higher price-plan and 1$, and one less subsidised, but with a lower price-plan, where the overall cost is cheaper for the one with a higher entry price, I will guarantee you that most people would buy the 1$ phone.
It's just they way things are. I for one will buy an iPhone in the UK for probably 300£ and a 24 months subscription of 25£/month. Overall cost is about 900£ over two years, and it suits my needs (there aren't that many minutes and texts, but I'm interested in the internet connection, and the iPhone of cours
You speak the tooth. To me, the most important price is outright/unlocked. I will never be tied down to a contract, never, particularly not in Canada because they are 3-years long!!!
Do you get sim-only prices or do you have to pay subsidised price anyway?
We are talking about M$ here, and as far as I remember Windows was never any good
(I'm just kidding here, please don't start any serious discussion on this comment)
I was with you all the way until the part about kidding!
Wish in one hand and crap in the other ....... see which one fills up first. You have to wonder what's in the water in Redmond Washington.
knowone knows 100% what's going down. The
To happen but the new gui looks great and if released with all the major player vs just one, anything is possible. But they need s great app store to succeed.
Oh that means being innovative ? ok, so option 2 is?
Skip
And I am assuming MS is going to charge for the OS while Android is free for them.
More profit.
Ballmer thinks they'll do that without multitasking, when every other major smartphone platform has it???
Well, MS does have a lot of its own fanbois.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Win Phone has very limited multi-tasking just as the iPhone will later this year. Neither actually has true multi-tasking. If you want that, you'll have to get a Windows Mobile device, or make due with Androids better but still not perfect multi-tasking.
I gather Palm OS has decent multi-tasking too.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Win Phone has very limited multi-tasking just as the iPhone will later this year. Neither actually has true multi-tasking. If you want that, you'll have to get a Windows Mobile device, or make due with Androids better but still not perfect multi-tasking.
I gather Palm OS has decent multi-tasking too.
Without wanting to start a classic discussion about the multi-tasking issue, what do you think misses in apples implementation? Any examples of usage where apple limits you?
(I'm really curious, no bad intentions here)
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Win Phone has very limited multi-tasking just as the iPhone will later this year. Neither actually has true multi-tasking. If you want that, you'll have to get a Windows Mobile device, or make due with Androids better but still not perfect multi-tasking.
I gather Palm OS has decent multi-tasking too.
If you think the iPhone's multitasking is in anyway limited, then you know absolutely nothing about it.
April Fools!!!! hahaha
That would fit for Microsoft with respect to always being late.