Apple has not released a break down of computer sales (laptop/desktop) since 2005. They held back iPad sales for more than a quarter, there were plenty of articles that speculated slowing sales etc until Apple did. They, like Microsoft wanted to release a decent number. Why did Apple wait?
You always here good numbers from Apple, as in lots of info about iPhones, or total computer sales, but nothing negative.
I see you looked up one fact. Yes, Apple doesn't as I said, always break out some numbers. All companies hold some things back so their competitors don't know exactly how they're doing.
But they didn't hold anything back on iPad sales. nothing at all. They told us how many they pre-sold. They told us how many they sold in the first weekend or week, and they told us after the quarter was finished, after they got their numbers together for the filing, as they have to do. Don't forget, assuming you actually know, that there is a quiet period for a time before the filing is done.
But MS is just stalling. They wouldn't talk about KIN sales either. They still haven't released final numbers. It's like Amazon always talking about how well the Kindle sells, but never gives us numbers.
Man, three pages of bashing. Anyway I just took the plunge and bought a WP7. I had a 3G for almost 2.5 years and was ready for a change. My wife just upgraded to the iPhone 4 and she loves it. I figured I would take a different route. With the BOGO going on and a $100 upgrade credit from AT$T I got two for $99. Not bad. Anyway with just 4 days under my belt I have to say I really like it. I can't say it is better that an iPhone, it isn't, it is different. Different I like. The Facebook integration and Xbox live integration is first rate. If these are things someone uses allot (I do) then this phone is a no brainer. The way the WP7 integrates the cloud into one handheld is what makes this thing shine. Of course I had no idea it could do all this until I got my hands on it and I have no idea why MS doesn't push this information. An example of the cloud integration is pictures. When I open up my pictures it shows me my film roll, saved pictures and my Facebook friends shared albums, seamlessly. I can browse all of it and it is smooth. This type of thing carries over into everything. Hardware wise I picked up the Samsung Focus. The screen is awesome, I think even better than my wife's. It feels a bit cheap compared to my old iPhone so time will tell. As for apps, so far it had everything I wanted. Slacker radio, Ebay stuff like that. If people give it a chance they will like it. Have an open mind and you may be surprised.
Oh the wireless sync is cool. 10min after I plug the phone into AC power and it is on my network it is available to sync wirelessly. Pretty neat.
How about video? What can you see on various sites?
I played with one and found it good. I would rather have a WP7 than an Android. Android is annoying to me. WP7 was unfamiliar but decent. Things flowed well and what was there seemed to work well. The UI is very minimalist. I think that is a win for them. It also is not much like the iPhone and that is also good - good that they took off in a new direction.
Hard to say how well it will do. Zune was a decent effort but badly marketed. I went into Bestbuy several times looking for them and never found a working demo. The iPod touch was there, working, tons of apps. Zune had no chance even as a perfect device, and it was far from perfect.
I agree with the commentator who said that Microsoft will consider this strategic ground and will be ready to spend whatever it takes to hold the ground. That will mean paying developers if needed. Or putting incentives in the app store. They will also look for every point of integration with Windows, Office and Live that they can find. It might work, especially as an enterprise alternative to iPhone and Android. Don't forget, Apple's enterprise access depends on Exchange integration. That is a choke point for Microsoft. They will find ways to use it and fly below anti-trust scrutiny.
But they are going to have to pay developers, pay hardware makers and also cover the cost of development across the board. It is feasible and they have the cash, it's just a far cry from Apple's position or minting money on the iOS platform in many directions.
I am not sure with the greatest product Microsoft has brand permission to be something people carry around all the time and whip out in a social setting the way Apple and Android do. People associate MSFT with pain and compulsion, Apple with fun and some arrogance, Android with openness, defiance and some confusion. Of the three Microsoft's brand posture is the worst.
How many apps have you ever installed on your phone? Stats for the App Store show a majority of downloads are from the top few percent of the apps in the store.
Any App Store only needs a few thousand "AAA" quality applications. The rest is just marketing bullshit.
I've got over a hundred. You miss the point completely. Thee are tens of millions of people who own an iPhone or an iTouch and now an iPad. There are are dozens, if not hundreds of subcategories of apps. There are no doubt thousands of differing interests that these tens of millions of people have. Even 300,000 apps isn't enough to cover them all. Do you speak Chinese? Do you read it? Have you noticed how many apps are in that language in the store? What about other languages? Do you expect these speakers to have just a few apps while English speakers have many? I hope not! That's one reason why there are so many apps.
What about travel apps and maps? There are thousands of cities in almost two hundred countries. Are you saying that we shouldn't have apps for those cities for maps, train and bus routes? No apps for places of interest to visit? That takes thousands of apps all by itself.
I suppose that if you've got a WP7 phone, and want a map for a city that isn't there, it would be ok, as long as there's a map for a bigger city close by.
Do you know that there are thousands of magazines? Do you know that there are about 10 million songs in the iTunes store? Are you aware that over 150,000 books are published each year?
Why should apps be any different? Because you can't possibly imagine that people have interests you don't even know about?
This is a wasteful argument. It's meaningless. Why isn't there just one or two cars in each category? Why would people need to choose from more? Or chairs, or Tv's. I mean, really, do you lack that much imagination?
I also have a Windows Phone 7, as I got it as a company phone and I have an iPhone 4. Like you, I've been pleasantly surprised by it. The thing I tell everyone who asks me if it's better than an iPhone is that no it isn't, but it definitely is different and in some ways better than an iPhone. I feel with some updates to the software and more time to mature it will be a great phone. Unfortunately, I have to give up my Samsung Focus and have my company phone for T-Mobile now instead, so I think I'll go for the Dell Venue Pro (as much as I hate dell). The OLED screen on the focus is so amazing for video and pictures, I would hate to have to go back to a regular old LCD.
Just don't expect an OLED screen to work outside in sunlight. Maybe someday.
I like to think of it in terms of shopping. If I need to buy a new suit I go to a shop and in that shop they have probably 100 or more suits. I might find a few that I like and i buy them. I didn't need 100 suits, but I needed 100 to choose from to find the few I liked.
It's the same with apps. I don't need 300000 apps, but I need there to be 300000 apps so that the odds of finding the 100 I need are in my favor.
If there are only 3000 apps then the chances of me finding the ones I need for my PVR, bank, airline, corporate citrix client etc would be very slim.
I really believe that the people making the argument about how so many apps is unimportant, would be saying the opposite if their favorite phone platform was the one with the most apps. It's interesting that iOS doesn't just have the most apps, but the best apps.
I played with one and found it good. I would rather have a WP7 than an Android. Android is annoying to me. WP7 was unfamiliar but decent. Things flowed well and what was there seemed to work well. The UI is very minimalist. I think that is a win for them. It also is not much like the iPhone and that is also good - good that they took off in a new direction.
Hard to say how well it will do. Zune was a decent effort but badly marketed. I went into Bestbuy several times looking for them and never found a working demo. The iPod touch was there, working, tons of apps. Zune had no chance even as a perfect device, and it was far from perfect.
I agree with the commentator who said that Microsoft will consider this strategic ground and will be ready to spend whatever it takes to hold the ground. That will mean paying developers if needed. Or putting incentives in the app store. They will also look for every point of integration with Windows, Office and Live that they can find. It might work, especially as an enterprise alternative to iPhone and Android. Don't forget, Apple's enterprise access depends on Exchange integration. That is a choke point for Microsoft. They will find ways to use it and fly below anti-trust scrutiny.
But they are going to have to pay developers, pay hardware makers and also cover the cost of development across the board. It is feasible and they have the cash, it's just a far cry from Apple's position or minting money on the iOS platform in many directions.
I am not sure with the greatest product Microsoft has brand permission to be something people carry around all the time and whip out in a social setting the way Apple and Android do. People associate MSFT with pain and compulsion, Apple with fun and some arrogance, Android with openness, defiance and some confusion. Of the three Microsoft's brand posture is the worst.
The biggest problem MS has with this is that they're only getting about $8 per license. If they don't get a lot of licenses out there quickly, they will have no chance of breaking even. They just spent $500 million on an Ad campaign - their numbers. It must have cost how much for development? $100 million? How much will they have to spend every year for development and marketing? At least a couple hundred million. They need 25 million licenses a year to equal that layout. How many more before a profit? This is minuscule in light of their other major businesses. And it could cost a lot more. It may be a losing proposition.
Even Microsoft's ads for WP7 are lame. "Our phones have no compelling features. You'll want to use them as little as possible."
LOL. And hardly any apps. All of the "try it" games weren't working when I was playing with a friend's WP7 phone. You tap on the tile and nothing happened. Talk about user feedback fail...not even an error message? Microsoft's has had a lot of practice at non-responsive user interfaces
And no, the tile ("Metro") interface, while aesthetically pleasing, it not very useful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid
If I were a mobile developer, I'd wait a year to see if WP7 phones have enough market share to make a difference. By next winter, if WP7 doesn't have at least 8% to 10% of the smartphone market, I would ignore it and just let it die. Or wait until Microsoft gets it right, which is very unlikely. (For reference, Apple had 24% and Android had 17% of the smartphone market in September 2010.)
Of course, Microsoft has not shown that they can "get it right" in the mobile space. If I had developed for WinCE aka PocketPC aka Windows Mobile, I would be extremely unhappy that Microsoft just suddenly killed off the platform. With no plans for WinMo app support in WP7.
MS chose the easiest path: throw away everything they have done before, then start from scratch. Because the old OS was simply not worth updating with modern features. If MS (and Palm, by the way) had looked far enough ahead, they could have evolved their legacy OSes or planned a migration path from the old OS to the new OS. They could have beaten Apple to market with a multi-touch mobile OS.
But no, MS and Palm simply milked their existing customer bases. They just kept hacking the old OS with new features instead of moving ahead to the next mobile computing paradigm. It's as if they were just waiting for Apple to do something so they could copy Apple's ideas.
If I recall, Palm OS was king of the PDA market at one point, around the time Windows CE 1.0 hit the market. Microsoft wanted the "PocketPC" PDAs to eventually win market share away from Palm, and they did it, eventually, by steadily ramping up feature after feature until Palm OS looked dated in comparison (and it was because Palm was reluctant to change). This is Microsoft's way of doing things: get into the market, and 3 versions later, they've hopefully beaten their main competitor by piling on feature after feature. Right, Netscape?
With good reason. Last night I already saw BOGO for ATT and Windows 7 phones. Its really amazing to me how MS just simply can't get anything right.
It doesn't really amaze me that MS can't get anything right. They have been almost totally losing out in just about every catogory of device/hardware/ software for many years. Microsoft is pretty much irrelevent nowadays because most innovation is happening at other companies. They are a dinasaur. The only question now is how long before it has to go before it has to undergo major restructuring?
I've got over a hundred. You miss the point completely. Thee are tens of millions of people who own an iPhone or an iTouch and now an iPad. There are are dozens, if not hundreds of subcategories of apps. There are no doubt thousands of differing interests that these tens of millions of people have.
And yet just about all downloads are from a handful of top applications.
It's those top applications that define the application store. The rest might be a nice idea, but they don't count jack toward the success of the store.
And yet just about all downloads are from a handful of top applications.
It's those top applications that define the application store. The rest might be a nice idea, but they don't count jack toward the success of the store.
I don't believe that "just about all" of the downloads from the App Store are from a "handful" of apps. Where are you getting your stats?
I like to think of it in terms of shopping. If I need to buy a new suit I go to a shop and in that shop they have probably 100 or more suits. I might find a few that I like and i buy them. I didn't need 100 suits, but I needed 100 to choose from to find the few I liked.
It's the same with apps. I don't need 300000 apps, but I need there to be 300000 apps so that the odds of finding the 100 I need are in my favor.
What about if after looking at the 100 suits 99% of customers purchased one of the same 10 suits? To be a successful shop wouldn't they only need those 10 suits?
And yet just about all downloads are from a handful of top applications.
It's those top applications that define the application store. The rest might be a nice idea, but they don't count jack toward the success of the store.
It doesn't matter. There are people getting many of those apps. They don't have to sell in the hundreds of thousands.
Apple has not released a break down of computer sales (laptop/desktop) since 2005. They held back iPad sales for more than a quarter, there were plenty of articles that speculated slowing sales etc until Apple did. They, like Microsoft wanted to release a decent number. Why did Apple wait?
You always here good numbers from Apple, as in lots of info about iPhones, or total computer sales, but nothing negative.
I love it when people talk, just to talk. \
April 8 (Bloomberg) -- Apple Inc.?s Steve Jobs said the company sold more than 450,000 iPad tablet computers in less than a week and unveiled new software designed to make the iPhone more appealing to mobile users and developers.
The problem with Microsoft is their leaders (used loosely) don't have a clue. They have sat and watched as their mobile market share has been destroyed. Now, it's too little, too late.
They aren't withholding developer checks. AI made that bit up.
No. That's been stated elsewhere. AI doesn't make things up. Sometimes the writers give their opinions on how they feel about something, but no deliberate falsehoods.
Developers are going to be Microsoft's biggest problem. With limited resources, they are going to focus on what pays the bills. Right now, that's iOS and Android.
The best thing Microsoft could do is to pour a lot of money into paying developers. In 2007, Apple didn't really have anyone to worry about. They had plenty of time to develop their ecosystem. Microsoft doesn't have that luxury. Ballmer just doesn't seem to understand how this works.
Comments
Apple has not released a break down of computer sales (laptop/desktop) since 2005. They held back iPad sales for more than a quarter, there were plenty of articles that speculated slowing sales etc until Apple did. They, like Microsoft wanted to release a decent number. Why did Apple wait?
You always here good numbers from Apple, as in lots of info about iPhones, or total computer sales, but nothing negative.
I see you looked up one fact. Yes, Apple doesn't as I said, always break out some numbers. All companies hold some things back so their competitors don't know exactly how they're doing.
But they didn't hold anything back on iPad sales. nothing at all. They told us how many they pre-sold. They told us how many they sold in the first weekend or week, and they told us after the quarter was finished, after they got their numbers together for the filing, as they have to do. Don't forget, assuming you actually know, that there is a quiet period for a time before the filing is done.
But MS is just stalling. They wouldn't talk about KIN sales either. They still haven't released final numbers. It's like Amazon always talking about how well the Kindle sells, but never gives us numbers.
Man, three pages of bashing. Anyway I just took the plunge and bought a WP7. I had a 3G for almost 2.5 years and was ready for a change. My wife just upgraded to the iPhone 4 and she loves it. I figured I would take a different route. With the BOGO going on and a $100 upgrade credit from AT$T I got two for $99. Not bad. Anyway with just 4 days under my belt I have to say I really like it. I can't say it is better that an iPhone, it isn't, it is different. Different I like. The Facebook integration and Xbox live integration is first rate. If these are things someone uses allot (I do) then this phone is a no brainer. The way the WP7 integrates the cloud into one handheld is what makes this thing shine. Of course I had no idea it could do all this until I got my hands on it and I have no idea why MS doesn't push this information. An example of the cloud integration is pictures. When I open up my pictures it shows me my film roll, saved pictures and my Facebook friends shared albums, seamlessly. I can browse all of it and it is smooth. This type of thing carries over into everything. Hardware wise I picked up the Samsung Focus. The screen is awesome, I think even better than my wife's. It feels a bit cheap compared to my old iPhone so time will tell. As for apps, so far it had everything I wanted. Slacker radio, Ebay stuff like that. If people give it a chance they will like it. Have an open mind and you may be surprised.
Oh the wireless sync is cool. 10min after I plug the phone into AC power and it is on my network it is available to sync wirelessly. Pretty neat.
How about video? What can you see on various sites?
Hard to say how well it will do. Zune was a decent effort but badly marketed. I went into Bestbuy several times looking for them and never found a working demo. The iPod touch was there, working, tons of apps. Zune had no chance even as a perfect device, and it was far from perfect.
I agree with the commentator who said that Microsoft will consider this strategic ground and will be ready to spend whatever it takes to hold the ground. That will mean paying developers if needed. Or putting incentives in the app store. They will also look for every point of integration with Windows, Office and Live that they can find. It might work, especially as an enterprise alternative to iPhone and Android. Don't forget, Apple's enterprise access depends on Exchange integration. That is a choke point for Microsoft. They will find ways to use it and fly below anti-trust scrutiny.
But they are going to have to pay developers, pay hardware makers and also cover the cost of development across the board. It is feasible and they have the cash, it's just a far cry from Apple's position or minting money on the iOS platform in many directions.
I am not sure with the greatest product Microsoft has brand permission to be something people carry around all the time and whip out in a social setting the way Apple and Android do. People associate MSFT with pain and compulsion, Apple with fun and some arrogance, Android with openness, defiance and some confusion. Of the three Microsoft's brand posture is the worst.
How many apps have you ever installed on your phone? Stats for the App Store show a majority of downloads are from the top few percent of the apps in the store.
Any App Store only needs a few thousand "AAA" quality applications. The rest is just marketing bullshit.
I've got over a hundred. You miss the point completely. Thee are tens of millions of people who own an iPhone or an iTouch and now an iPad. There are are dozens, if not hundreds of subcategories of apps. There are no doubt thousands of differing interests that these tens of millions of people have. Even 300,000 apps isn't enough to cover them all. Do you speak Chinese? Do you read it? Have you noticed how many apps are in that language in the store? What about other languages? Do you expect these speakers to have just a few apps while English speakers have many? I hope not! That's one reason why there are so many apps.
What about travel apps and maps? There are thousands of cities in almost two hundred countries. Are you saying that we shouldn't have apps for those cities for maps, train and bus routes? No apps for places of interest to visit? That takes thousands of apps all by itself.
I suppose that if you've got a WP7 phone, and want a map for a city that isn't there, it would be ok, as long as there's a map for a bigger city close by.
Do you know that there are thousands of magazines? Do you know that there are about 10 million songs in the iTunes store? Are you aware that over 150,000 books are published each year?
Why should apps be any different? Because you can't possibly imagine that people have interests you don't even know about?
This is a wasteful argument. It's meaningless. Why isn't there just one or two cars in each category? Why would people need to choose from more? Or chairs, or Tv's. I mean, really, do you lack that much imagination?
I also have a Windows Phone 7, as I got it as a company phone and I have an iPhone 4. Like you, I've been pleasantly surprised by it. The thing I tell everyone who asks me if it's better than an iPhone is that no it isn't, but it definitely is different and in some ways better than an iPhone. I feel with some updates to the software and more time to mature it will be a great phone. Unfortunately, I have to give up my Samsung Focus and have my company phone for T-Mobile now instead, so I think I'll go for the Dell Venue Pro (as much as I hate dell). The OLED screen on the focus is so amazing for video and pictures, I would hate to have to go back to a regular old LCD.
Just don't expect an OLED screen to work outside in sunlight. Maybe someday.
I like to think of it in terms of shopping. If I need to buy a new suit I go to a shop and in that shop they have probably 100 or more suits. I might find a few that I like and i buy them. I didn't need 100 suits, but I needed 100 to choose from to find the few I liked.
It's the same with apps. I don't need 300000 apps, but I need there to be 300000 apps so that the odds of finding the 100 I need are in my favor.
If there are only 3000 apps then the chances of me finding the ones I need for my PVR, bank, airline, corporate citrix client etc would be very slim.
I really believe that the people making the argument about how so many apps is unimportant, would be saying the opposite if their favorite phone platform was the one with the most apps. It's interesting that iOS doesn't just have the most apps, but the best apps.
I played with one and found it good. I would rather have a WP7 than an Android. Android is annoying to me. WP7 was unfamiliar but decent. Things flowed well and what was there seemed to work well. The UI is very minimalist. I think that is a win for them. It also is not much like the iPhone and that is also good - good that they took off in a new direction.
Hard to say how well it will do. Zune was a decent effort but badly marketed. I went into Bestbuy several times looking for them and never found a working demo. The iPod touch was there, working, tons of apps. Zune had no chance even as a perfect device, and it was far from perfect.
I agree with the commentator who said that Microsoft will consider this strategic ground and will be ready to spend whatever it takes to hold the ground. That will mean paying developers if needed. Or putting incentives in the app store. They will also look for every point of integration with Windows, Office and Live that they can find. It might work, especially as an enterprise alternative to iPhone and Android. Don't forget, Apple's enterprise access depends on Exchange integration. That is a choke point for Microsoft. They will find ways to use it and fly below anti-trust scrutiny.
But they are going to have to pay developers, pay hardware makers and also cover the cost of development across the board. It is feasible and they have the cash, it's just a far cry from Apple's position or minting money on the iOS platform in many directions.
I am not sure with the greatest product Microsoft has brand permission to be something people carry around all the time and whip out in a social setting the way Apple and Android do. People associate MSFT with pain and compulsion, Apple with fun and some arrogance, Android with openness, defiance and some confusion. Of the three Microsoft's brand posture is the worst.
The biggest problem MS has with this is that they're only getting about $8 per license. If they don't get a lot of licenses out there quickly, they will have no chance of breaking even. They just spent $500 million on an Ad campaign - their numbers. It must have cost how much for development? $100 million? How much will they have to spend every year for development and marketing? At least a couple hundred million. They need 25 million licenses a year to equal that layout. How many more before a profit? This is minuscule in light of their other major businesses. And it could cost a lot more. It may be a losing proposition.
Even Microsoft's ads for WP7 are lame. "Our phones have no compelling features. You'll want to use them as little as possible."
LOL. And hardly any apps. All of the "try it" games weren't working when I was playing with a friend's WP7 phone. You tap on the tile and nothing happened. Talk about user feedback fail...not even an error message? Microsoft's has had a lot of practice at non-responsive user interfaces
And no, the tile ("Metro") interface, while aesthetically pleasing, it not very useful.
If I were a mobile developer, I'd wait a year to see if WP7 phones have enough market share to make a difference. By next winter, if WP7 doesn't have at least 8% to 10% of the smartphone market, I would ignore it and just let it die. Or wait until Microsoft gets it right, which is very unlikely. (For reference, Apple had 24% and Android had 17% of the smartphone market in September 2010.)
Of course, Microsoft has not shown that they can "get it right" in the mobile space. If I had developed for WinCE aka PocketPC aka Windows Mobile, I would be extremely unhappy that Microsoft just suddenly killed off the platform. With no plans for WinMo app support in WP7.
MS chose the easiest path: throw away everything they have done before, then start from scratch. Because the old OS was simply not worth updating with modern features. If MS (and Palm, by the way) had looked far enough ahead, they could have evolved their legacy OSes or planned a migration path from the old OS to the new OS. They could have beaten Apple to market with a multi-touch mobile OS.
But no, MS and Palm simply milked their existing customer bases. They just kept hacking the old OS with new features instead of moving ahead to the next mobile computing paradigm. It's as if they were just waiting for Apple to do something so they could copy Apple's ideas.
If I recall, Palm OS was king of the PDA market at one point, around the time Windows CE 1.0 hit the market. Microsoft wanted the "PocketPC" PDAs to eventually win market share away from Palm, and they did it, eventually, by steadily ramping up feature after feature until Palm OS looked dated in comparison (and it was because Palm was reluctant to change). This is Microsoft's way of doing things: get into the market, and 3 versions later, they've hopefully beaten their main competitor by piling on feature after feature. Right, Netscape?
With good reason. Last night I already saw BOGO for ATT and Windows 7 phones. Its really amazing to me how MS just simply can't get anything right.
It doesn't really amaze me that MS can't get anything right. They have been almost totally losing out in just about every catogory of device/hardware/ software for many years. Microsoft is pretty much irrelevent nowadays because most innovation is happening at other companies. They are a dinasaur. The only question now is how long before it has to go before it has to undergo major restructuring?
I've got over a hundred. You miss the point completely. Thee are tens of millions of people who own an iPhone or an iTouch and now an iPad. There are are dozens, if not hundreds of subcategories of apps. There are no doubt thousands of differing interests that these tens of millions of people have.
And yet just about all downloads are from a handful of top applications.
It's those top applications that define the application store. The rest might be a nice idea, but they don't count jack toward the success of the store.
wow. i can't believe ms goes as far as withholding payment checks to developers
They aren't withholding developer checks. AI made that bit up.
And yet just about all downloads are from a handful of top applications.
It's those top applications that define the application store. The rest might be a nice idea, but they don't count jack toward the success of the store.
I don't believe that "just about all" of the downloads from the App Store are from a "handful" of apps. Where are you getting your stats?
I like to think of it in terms of shopping. If I need to buy a new suit I go to a shop and in that shop they have probably 100 or more suits. I might find a few that I like and i buy them. I didn't need 100 suits, but I needed 100 to choose from to find the few I liked.
It's the same with apps. I don't need 300000 apps, but I need there to be 300000 apps so that the odds of finding the 100 I need are in my favor.
What about if after looking at the 100 suits 99% of customers purchased one of the same 10 suits? To be a successful shop wouldn't they only need those 10 suits?
And yet just about all downloads are from a handful of top applications.
It's those top applications that define the application store. The rest might be a nice idea, but they don't count jack toward the success of the store.
It doesn't matter. There are people getting many of those apps. They don't have to sell in the hundreds of thousands.
Apple has not released a break down of computer sales (laptop/desktop) since 2005. They held back iPad sales for more than a quarter, there were plenty of articles that speculated slowing sales etc until Apple did. They, like Microsoft wanted to release a decent number. Why did Apple wait?
You always here good numbers from Apple, as in lots of info about iPhones, or total computer sales, but nothing negative.
I love it when people talk, just to talk.
April 8 (Bloomberg) -- Apple Inc.?s Steve Jobs said the company sold more than 450,000 iPad tablet computers in less than a week and unveiled new software designed to make the iPhone more appealing to mobile users and developers.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...-update1-.html
?One million iPads in 28 days ? that?s less than half of the 74 days it took to achieve this milestone with iPhone,? said Apple CEO Steve Jobs
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/...ast-as-iphone/
The problem with Microsoft is their leaders (used loosely) don't have a clue. They have sat and watched as their mobile market share has been destroyed. Now, it's too little, too late.
They aren't withholding developer checks. AI made that bit up.
No. That's been stated elsewhere. AI doesn't make things up. Sometimes the writers give their opinions on how they feel about something, but no deliberate falsehoods.
The best thing Microsoft could do is to pour a lot of money into paying developers. In 2007, Apple didn't really have anyone to worry about. They had plenty of time to develop their ecosystem. Microsoft doesn't have that luxury. Ballmer just doesn't seem to understand how this works.
Just don't expect an OLED screen to work outside in sunlight. Maybe someday.
So far It's worked fine outside, maybe it's a SAMOLD or whatever samsungs are?
So far It's worked fine outside, maybe it's a SAMOLD or whatever samsungs are?
I havev't seen a single review of any OLED phone, including the new Samsung's with their new screens, that worked in direct sunlight.