Last time I checked, microsoft has 90% of the OS market, yet macosx is far superior with none of its failings. Lets not forget which company is bigger in these modern times, yep, you guessed it, Apple.
Are you saying that OSX doesn't have any failings?
The 600,000 number (in the first month) came from Samsung themselves.
If you don't believe that, you might as well not believe Apple saying that they sold x million iphone in the opening weekend.
Please learn to read... Apple's sales for the iPhone are numbers from activations... and these numbers are in its quarterly report. By the way... please give me a breakdown of where Samsung sold the GT.
I want to see Samsung report it in its financials... just like Apple.
Please learn to read... Apple's sales for the iPhone are numbers from activations... and these numbers are in its quarterly report. By the way... please give me a breakdown of where Samsung sold the GT.
I want to see Samsung report it in its financials... just like Apple.
Apple's sales numbers are SHIPMENT numbers in the SEC filings.
Apple's first weekend opening numbers are not in the quarterly filings, they are just press releases.
Apple's sales numbers are SHIPMENT numbers in the SEC filings.
Apple's first weekend opening numbers are not in the quarterly filings, they are just press releases.
Well... if they are shipment numbers then I guess we have to fall back on activation numbers given out by the carriers... and AT&T supports those numbers... or are you going to dismiss those as well.
(... and Steve likes to talk smack about activation numbers and so far I haven't seen anybody prove him wrong)
Inventory is inventory --- they haven't been sold to end users yet. Instead of stuffing the official carrier channel, they are just stuffing the grey market channel.
You obviously don't understand distribution. Apple has a sales channel. When products are sold, by that channel, they are no longer in the channel -- cannot be returned for credit. They are gone from channel inventory.
Sure, anyone can buy large quantities at retail (or a small discount) and onesy-twosies and build a "private inventory" for whatever purposes.
But Apple, nor its channel partners have no access to that "private inventory" -- they can't see it, count it or sell it -- it's gone.
So, what's your point? Some speculator bought a lot of product hoping to make a kill in a supply-constrained market! He may (or may not) be successful when a legitimate channel arrives offering the product at the same price he paid for them.
Don't believe me? Go to any Rose Bowl, Super Bowl, etc. just before game time -- and watch the scalpers getting their asses scalped!
Didn't Steve say that their numbers come from activations not channel shipments? Not sure about iPad number since some don't need activation.
iPads must be plugged into iTunes and "activated" with Apple if not a carrier -- so, yes, Apple should be able to identify any iPad in the hands of an end user.
Well that comment was made before the Galaxy Tab was released. He was making a dispute about Android numbers compared to iOS numbers. I think his point was valid but there is no denying that Android is doing very well.
I used the Galaxy Tab this weekend there isn't anything great about it. Honestly I think Apple would put alot of this competition to rest if they simply allowed users to install 10.1 on their system if they wanted too, like Android.
There is no reason why the end user shouldn't have the option to install Flash if they desire. Ship it withtout it and let the user make the call if they want it or not. For the diehard Flash haters they never have to install it.
Do you actually believe that any significant number of iPad sales are lost because of the absence of Adobe Flash?
What number, 1,000? 300,000? 1,000,000? 10,000,000?
Well... if they are shipment numbers then I guess we have to fall back on activation numbers given out by the carriers... and AT&T supports those numbers... or are you going to dismiss those as well.
(... and Steve likes to talk smack about activation numbers and so far I haven't seen anybody prove him wrong)
Only AT&T gives out activation numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
You obviously don't understand distribution. Apple has a sales channel. When products are sold, by that channel, they are no longer in the channel -- cannot be returned for credit. They are gone from channel inventory.
Sure, anyone can buy large quantities at retail (or a small discount) and onesy-twosies and build a "private inventory" for whatever purposes.
But Apple, nor its channel partners have no access to that "private inventory" -- they can't see it, count it or sell it -- it's gone.
So, what's your point? Some speculator bought a lot of product hoping to make a kill in a supply-constrained market! He may (or may not) be successful when a legitimate channel arrives offering the product at the same price he paid for them.
Don't believe me? Go to any Rose Bowl, Super Bowl, etc. just before game time -- and watch the scalpers getting their asses scalped!
My point is just to illustrate the presence of such grey market inventory --- nothing more, nothing less.
If a carrier has a "minimum order" requirement from Apple, then the carrier can't return the excess inventory and get credits from Apple. Russian iphone carriers are the perfect example of that --- they got their asses scalped.
You mean the 3.2 million activations they reported in that quarter... hmmmm... sounds like over a million sold to me.
Quote:
My point is just to illustrate the presence of such grey market inventory --- nothing more, nothing less.
If a carrier has a "minimum order" requirement from Apple, then the carrier can't return the excess inventory and get credits from Apple. Russian iphone carriers are the perfect example of that --- they got their asses scalped.
There may be a grey market inventory but it is no longer on Apple's books. It's sold, gonzo, outta there.
What you are trying to tell me is that if I'm a retailer and I sell an item to someone who is working in the grey market that I somehow or other still have that item on my shelves... that would be great for me because I could make twice as much on the item.
Android's ascendancy in Europe follows it surpassing the iPhone in the U.S. earlier this year. Google's free operating system is available to multiple hardware makers and device manufacturers who create smartphones and tablets in a variety of form factors, while iOS, which powers the iPhone and iPad, is restricted to hardware made by Apple.
.
That's because the iPhone is only available on one carrier, while the Android is available everywhere. And they wonder why Android is beating the iPhone?
Hey - but who is making the money? They gotta give those Androids away to get anybody (except fanboys) to use them. Can you say BOGO? I knew you could.
You mean the 3.2 million activations they reported in that quarter... hmmmm... sounds like over a million sold to me.
There may be a grey market inventory but it is no longer on Apple's books. It's sold, gonzo, outta there.
What you are trying to tell me is that if I'm a retailer and I sell an item to someone who is working in the grey market that I somehow or other still have that item on my shelves... that would be great for me because I could make twice as much on the item.
3.2 million activations with increasingly coming from upgrades --- not a good sign for AT&T, who published said data.
Inventory is inventory. I was just responding to your post questioning how many GT are ultimately "sold".
Do you actually believe that any significant number of iPad sales are lost because of the absence of Adobe Flash?
What number, 1,000? 300,000? 1,000,000? 10,000,000?
Well I'm not gonna guess any number here, but ya gotta realize that Europe and tech, especially here in Germany, moves VERY slow. They hate change. Almost every major site...on down to little known sites are still using Flash exclusively.
Sad to say, but again here in Germany, it's is the most complained "missing feature" with iPhone users. Also, why the tech pundits consistently berate the iPad.
Naturally another reason is that Android's App store is free. No paid apps in Europe (as far as I know). Also practically giving the phones away.
Anyway, I personally dislike Flash... however, I do think it should be an option to install. Also with a huge disclaimer from Apple, regarding security, battery, and possible "frying" of the iPhone or iPad. As with a Mac, I would suppose that Apple could see from internal logs what caused the problems, and refuse replacement... which they probably would do anyway though.
Inventory is inventory. I was just responding to your post questioning how many GT are ultimately "sold".
I believe the GT numbers are items sold into the channel... meaning still sitting on the retailers shelves (lots of anecdotal evidence to support that but nothing else).
The Apple sales that I'm talking about are items sold by the retailer (including the "sales" made to grey market "buyers").
[on edit: if anyone doubts Apple's numbers then consider this... if Apple says X number of an item has been sold and you are trying to say that they are still sitting in the channel then answer me this... why won't the retailer put the item on the shelves... because it sure seems to be as hard as hell (still) to pick up an iPad or an iPhone... which I can't say is true of the Galaxy Tab)
My point is just to illustrate the presence of such grey market inventory --- nothing more, nothing less.
If a carrier has a "minimum order" requirement from Apple, then the carrier can't return the excess inventory and get credits from Apple. Russian iphone carriers are the perfect example of that --- they got their asses scalped.
Again, you do not understand distribution -- especially Apple distribution. My company was an Apple reseller for more than 11 years.
To qualify as an Apple reseller you must:
-- satisfy minimum financial and legal requirements
-- agree to certain terms and conditions *
-- place an initial minimum order **
-- place a series of follow-on orders and forecasts for the next quarter, or quarters **
-- report al least monthly ** on your sell-through
-- update at least monthly ** your orders and forecasts for the next quarter, or quarters
* you cannot transship inventory to anyone without permission -- you sell what you have, keep it, or return it to Apple with a restocking charge.
** If you do not perform well in sales, forecasts, and returns your profit margins will be reduced to the point where it is not profitable for you or Apple -- and you will not be re-authorized
Just as with everything else, Apple is interested in a vibrant, profitable, well-funded reseller channel. It's Apple's football, you play their game. The reporting assures that Apple knows what inventory is in the channel and what is being sold.
Certainly, there are exceptions -- resellers break the rules, lose their authorization, etc. and dispose of their Apple inventory as best they can. But, the channel cleanses itself.
3.2 million activations with increasingly coming from upgrades --- not a good sign for AT&T, who published said data. ...
Well, considering that they added more new subscribers than Verizon last quarter, and the quarter before that, and the quarter before that, ...*, I think they're probably doing OK. You really are the king of data misrepresentation, samab.
Comments
What the others don't understand is that Apple has reported its numbers in a quarterly filing. I have yet to see any actual numbers from Samsung.
The 600,000 number (in the first month) came from Samsung themselves.
If you don't believe that, you might as well not believe Apple saying that they sold x million iphone in the opening weekend.
Last time I checked, microsoft has 90% of the OS market, yet macosx is far superior with none of its failings. Lets not forget which company is bigger in these modern times, yep, you guessed it, Apple.
Are you saying that OSX doesn't have any failings?
The 600,000 number (in the first month) came from Samsung themselves.
If you don't believe that, you might as well not believe Apple saying that they sold x million iphone in the opening weekend.
Please learn to read... Apple's sales for the iPhone are numbers from activations... and these numbers are in its quarterly report. By the way... please give me a breakdown of where Samsung sold the GT.
I want to see Samsung report it in its financials... just like Apple.
What the others don't understand is that Apple has reported its numbers in a quarterly filing. I have yet to see any actual numbers from Samsung.
Samsung does not offer quarterly reports only annually the latest being 2009 which is available here .
Samsung audit committee
Other documents here
Please learn to read... Apple's sales for the iPhone are numbers from activations... and these numbers are in its quarterly report. By the way... please give me a breakdown of where Samsung sold the GT.
I want to see Samsung report it in its financials... just like Apple.
Apple's sales numbers are SHIPMENT numbers in the SEC filings.
Apple's first weekend opening numbers are not in the quarterly filings, they are just press releases.
Samsung does not offer quarterly reports only annually the latest being 2009 which is available here for anyone too lazy to Google it.
Samsung audit committee
Any company that pays taxes does not want to report more sales than were actually sold... maybe things are different in Korea... not sure.
Apple's sales numbers are SHIPMENT numbers in the SEC filings.
Apple's first weekend opening numbers are not in the quarterly filings, they are just press releases.
Well... if they are shipment numbers then I guess we have to fall back on activation numbers given out by the carriers... and AT&T supports those numbers... or are you going to dismiss those as well.
(... and Steve likes to talk smack about activation numbers and so far I haven't seen anybody prove him wrong)
Inventory is inventory --- they haven't been sold to end users yet. Instead of stuffing the official carrier channel, they are just stuffing the grey market channel.
You obviously don't understand distribution. Apple has a sales channel. When products are sold, by that channel, they are no longer in the channel -- cannot be returned for credit. They are gone from channel inventory.
Sure, anyone can buy large quantities at retail (or a small discount) and onesy-twosies and build a "private inventory" for whatever purposes.
But Apple, nor its channel partners have no access to that "private inventory" -- they can't see it, count it or sell it -- it's gone.
So, what's your point? Some speculator bought a lot of product hoping to make a kill in a supply-constrained market! He may (or may not) be successful when a legitimate channel arrives offering the product at the same price he paid for them.
Don't believe me? Go to any Rose Bowl, Super Bowl, etc. just before game time -- and watch the scalpers getting their asses scalped!
Didn't Steve say that their numbers come from activations not channel shipments? Not sure about iPad number since some don't need activation.
iPads must be plugged into iTunes and "activated" with Apple if not a carrier -- so, yes, Apple should be able to identify any iPad in the hands of an end user.
Well that comment was made before the Galaxy Tab was released. He was making a dispute about Android numbers compared to iOS numbers. I think his point was valid but there is no denying that Android is doing very well.
I used the Galaxy Tab this weekend there isn't anything great about it. Honestly I think Apple would put alot of this competition to rest if they simply allowed users to install 10.1 on their system if they wanted too, like Android.
There is no reason why the end user shouldn't have the option to install Flash if they desire. Ship it withtout it and let the user make the call if they want it or not. For the diehard Flash haters they never have to install it.
Do you actually believe that any significant number of iPad sales are lost because of the absence of Adobe Flash?
What number, 1,000? 300,000? 1,000,000? 10,000,000?
Well... if they are shipment numbers then I guess we have to fall back on activation numbers given out by the carriers... and AT&T supports those numbers... or are you going to dismiss those as well.
(... and Steve likes to talk smack about activation numbers and so far I haven't seen anybody prove him wrong)
Only AT&T gives out activation numbers.
You obviously don't understand distribution. Apple has a sales channel. When products are sold, by that channel, they are no longer in the channel -- cannot be returned for credit. They are gone from channel inventory.
Sure, anyone can buy large quantities at retail (or a small discount) and onesy-twosies and build a "private inventory" for whatever purposes.
But Apple, nor its channel partners have no access to that "private inventory" -- they can't see it, count it or sell it -- it's gone.
So, what's your point? Some speculator bought a lot of product hoping to make a kill in a supply-constrained market! He may (or may not) be successful when a legitimate channel arrives offering the product at the same price he paid for them.
Don't believe me? Go to any Rose Bowl, Super Bowl, etc. just before game time -- and watch the scalpers getting their asses scalped!
My point is just to illustrate the presence of such grey market inventory --- nothing more, nothing less.
If a carrier has a "minimum order" requirement from Apple, then the carrier can't return the excess inventory and get credits from Apple. Russian iphone carriers are the perfect example of that --- they got their asses scalped.
Only AT&T gives out activation numbers..
You mean the 3.2 million activations they reported in that quarter... hmmmm... sounds like over a million sold to me.
My point is just to illustrate the presence of such grey market inventory --- nothing more, nothing less.
If a carrier has a "minimum order" requirement from Apple, then the carrier can't return the excess inventory and get credits from Apple. Russian iphone carriers are the perfect example of that --- they got their asses scalped.
There may be a grey market inventory but it is no longer on Apple's books. It's sold, gonzo, outta there.
What you are trying to tell me is that if I'm a retailer and I sell an item to someone who is working in the grey market that I somehow or other still have that item on my shelves... that would be great for me because I could make twice as much on the item.
Android's ascendancy in Europe follows it surpassing the iPhone in the U.S. earlier this year. Google's free operating system is available to multiple hardware makers and device manufacturers who create smartphones and tablets in a variety of form factors, while iOS, which powers the iPhone and iPad, is restricted to hardware made by Apple.
.
That's because the iPhone is only available on one carrier, while the Android is available everywhere. And they wonder why Android is beating the iPhone?
Hey - but who is making the money? They gotta give those Androids away to get anybody (except fanboys) to use them. Can you say BOGO? I knew you could.
Nobody gives away iPhones for free. Nobody.
You mean the 3.2 million activations they reported in that quarter... hmmmm... sounds like over a million sold to me.
There may be a grey market inventory but it is no longer on Apple's books. It's sold, gonzo, outta there.
What you are trying to tell me is that if I'm a retailer and I sell an item to someone who is working in the grey market that I somehow or other still have that item on my shelves... that would be great for me because I could make twice as much on the item.
3.2 million activations with increasingly coming from upgrades --- not a good sign for AT&T, who published said data.
Inventory is inventory. I was just responding to your post questioning how many GT are ultimately "sold".
They give Android phones away for free where I live and "sales" are through the roof, but I still rarely see anyone using one on the train.
Same with me. An iPhone, even halfway down the car, immediately catches my eye. But I just ignore the vast majority of the phones I see.
See no BOGO, Hear no BOGO, Speak no BOGO!!!!
Okay so whats BS. Is Android growing? The answer is yes in some cases by over 800%. .
But nobody is making any money with Android. That is why everyone likes the iPhone better.
Do you actually believe that any significant number of iPad sales are lost because of the absence of Adobe Flash?
What number, 1,000? 300,000? 1,000,000? 10,000,000?
Well I'm not gonna guess any number here, but ya gotta realize that Europe and tech, especially here in Germany, moves VERY slow. They hate change. Almost every major site...on down to little known sites are still using Flash exclusively.
Sad to say, but again here in Germany, it's is the most complained "missing feature" with iPhone users. Also, why the tech pundits consistently berate the iPad.
Naturally another reason is that Android's App store is free. No paid apps in Europe (as far as I know). Also practically giving the phones away.
Anyway, I personally dislike Flash... however, I do think it should be an option to install. Also with a huge disclaimer from Apple, regarding security, battery, and possible "frying" of the iPhone or iPad. As with a Mac, I would suppose that Apple could see from internal logs what caused the problems, and refuse replacement... which they probably would do anyway though.
Inventory is inventory. I was just responding to your post questioning how many GT are ultimately "sold".
I believe the GT numbers are items sold into the channel... meaning still sitting on the retailers shelves (lots of anecdotal evidence to support that but nothing else).
The Apple sales that I'm talking about are items sold by the retailer (including the "sales" made to grey market "buyers").
[on edit: if anyone doubts Apple's numbers then consider this... if Apple says X number of an item has been sold and you are trying to say that they are still sitting in the channel then answer me this... why won't the retailer put the item on the shelves... because it sure seems to be as hard as hell (still) to pick up an iPad or an iPhone... which I can't say is true of the Galaxy Tab)
My point is just to illustrate the presence of such grey market inventory --- nothing more, nothing less.
If a carrier has a "minimum order" requirement from Apple, then the carrier can't return the excess inventory and get credits from Apple. Russian iphone carriers are the perfect example of that --- they got their asses scalped.
Again, you do not understand distribution -- especially Apple distribution. My company was an Apple reseller for more than 11 years.
To qualify as an Apple reseller you must:
-- satisfy minimum financial and legal requirements
-- agree to certain terms and conditions *
-- place an initial minimum order **
-- place a series of follow-on orders and forecasts for the next quarter, or quarters **
-- report al least monthly ** on your sell-through
-- update at least monthly ** your orders and forecasts for the next quarter, or quarters
* you cannot transship inventory to anyone without permission -- you sell what you have, keep it, or return it to Apple with a restocking charge.
** If you do not perform well in sales, forecasts, and returns your profit margins will be reduced to the point where it is not profitable for you or Apple -- and you will not be re-authorized
Just as with everything else, Apple is interested in a vibrant, profitable, well-funded reseller channel. It's Apple's football, you play their game. The reporting assures that Apple knows what inventory is in the channel and what is being sold.
Certainly, there are exceptions -- resellers break the rules, lose their authorization, etc. and dispose of their Apple inventory as best they can. But, the channel cleanses itself.
.
3.2 million activations with increasingly coming from upgrades --- not a good sign for AT&T, who published said data. ...
Well, considering that they added more new subscribers than Verizon last quarter, and the quarter before that, and the quarter before that, ...*, I think they're probably doing OK. You really are the king of data misrepresentation, samab.
* http://www.businessinsider.com/chart...uarter-2010-10