This should probably be titled "Apple now the highest-revenue phone vendor on earth," or something like that. Because Nokia is a larger company and sells more phones, in terms of # of units. Apple just happens to make a lot more per phone.
I'm too lazy to look up the stats.
If you haven't noticed the goal of a company is to generate revenue.
If you can generate more revenue with fewer sales, you are better company.
"It thrills me when my young children pick up their iDevices and enjoy them, without asking for help, or need of a manual. To me that says it in a nutshell. The other day a friend mocked my iPad, "its a toy", you know why they say this, because its so easy t use, hence they get confused.
But hang on are not computers meant to be hard to use, this is serious stuff we are using, don't let your 7 year old touch it, they will break it.
So I think that the greatest accomplishment of Apple is that it has given computers to the masses, simple and elegant to use, underneath, amazing technology, much of it, leading-edge."
Well said!
I have been saying this to friends since the 80s and it seems now in the 21st century that the Apple 'vision' which the Steves dreamed of and strived towards from the 70s onwards, is finally coming true on a global scale, albeit not with the Mac as the champion product. Sure, it's a matter of choice and always has been, but too many people credit Bill Gates and Windows for the OS revolution forgetting the history of Windows origins. Also often forgotten is the simple reality that new computer users, such as children and the elderly are baffled by non-Apple approaches to user interaction and operating systems, in particular Windows. I like many others benefitted from using Apple computers through school and then university, choosing to ignore the awful Windows PCs that gathered dust in the corner, only to join the workforce and be forced to use Windows in the enterprise, which results in frustration and confusion until you decipher the non-user friendliness of the whole operation.
Sure, Windows has improved dramatically with the arrival of Windows 7, their most Apple like OS ever, but it has taken an apparent eternity to get there from the promises and hype of Windows 95.
Traditionally, non-Apple OSs make no logical sense to the new user, only to the Administrators who do it for a living or a time consuming hobby or both. It doesn't need to be like that, and it never has, but it has taken a quarter of a century and a number of revolutionary products for people to start realising this.
It is also interesting that many companies continue to dismiss Apple because of their "integrated" approach, prefering the so called "open" approach that Windows and now Android champions. But the end result is neither engages or provides any great benefit to the end user, and it is so easy to forget that end users make up 99% of the population, not administrators. Just my two cents.
"We have a relatively low share in the handset market. The handset market is well over 1 billion units a year, and the smartphone market is growing faster than a weed. And so there's enormous opportunity here, and we have incredible momentum in that space."
This does beg the question ... is there another handset on the horizon with a different form factor? iphone nano perhaps? 6 to 18 months down the track? It would be interesting to ponder as the iphone is now at a point in it's life cycle similar to the ipod, where the introduction of a second model may be seen as not cannabilizing existing iphone sales, but rather stealing more from Nokia's handset sales.
Perhaps a phone about 2/3rds the size, made up of just a touch screen, with 3x4 apps on the screen size, instead of the usual 4x5. Just pondering ... who knows the timing may be right ... remember all the talk about a iphone nano in recent years?
Part of me would like to see Apple now deliver a really cool dirt cheap basic phone with some extras like the touch screen from the shuffle, make it in nice clean third-world factories (other than China), and drive a stake through the heart of the competition. The evil part.
Part of me would rather keep things as they are. The virtuous part.
Closer to a dozen different SKU's. iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3Gs, iPhone 4, each offered in different capacities, sometimes with different colors, at different pricepoints.
This is such a technical victory though. Who cares? and more importantly, why write a story about it? "By revenue" is only important if you are concerned about how much money Apple is making and running the company. It doesn't even matter to investors.
"The worlds biggest cell phone maker" is the company that makes the most cellphones. Technical metrics like how much money they generate are just not relevant to "who's the biggest" for 99.9% of the population.
I feel so exclusive being in the .1% that simply thinks unit sales is by far the most useless metric for any business. It simply doesn't matter. High units for little revenue is a terrible business model, most if not all investors should care about that. The same is true of profitability.
Wow! This is utterly amazing! I know it's competition and good for the consumer, but schmidt/google really screwed over Stevo by getting the inside scoop while sitting on apple's board. Just think how much apple would've sold without android phones pretending to be just as good as the iPhone? Oh well, I know I should just get over it and move on. But it was a dirty deal none the less!
As for for larger, who measures a company?s success by units? if that was the measure then no one, not even Apple, would be making expensive devices. I suppose we?re going to make odd comparison to larger we should go by employee numbers or indoor square footage.
Anyone selling commodities, or advertising. For example, Google is not interested in the revenue or profits from the sales of Android phones, they don't get any of it. They do care about unit sales of Android because that drives ad impressions and use of Google search and other products, which in turn is a revenue driver for Google.
For customers it just means they're paying more than anyone else, but Apple customers welcome the opportunity to reach into their pockets to help out Steve.
Why don't you go buy a 599? N7 to help out Nokia?
How much is that in real dollars. I can't be bothered looking.
This is such a technical victory though. Who cares? and more importantly, why write a story about it? "By revenue" is only important if you are concerned about how much money Apple is making and running the company. It doesn't even matter to investors.
"The worlds biggest cell phone maker" is the company that makes the most cellphones. Technical metrics like how much money they generate are just not relevant to "who's the biggest" for 99.9% of the population.
Did you forget you sarcasm quotes?????? The only thing that matters to investors is how much money a company is making - its why then invest. Small unit count with high ROI is much much much (put as many as you like) more interesting to investors than high unit count with low ROI.
Investors that put money into 'eyeballs' or 'clicks' only do so because they believe the business model will eventually turn those into large ROIs. If it doesn't say bye-bye to your money.
...Also often forgotten is the simple reality that new computer users, such as children and the elderly are baffled by non-Apple approaches to user interaction and operating systems, in particular Windows.
... only to join the workforce and be forced to use Windows in the enterprise, which results in frustration and confusion until you decipher the non-user friendliness of the whole operation.
A generation of people have now been brought up on iPhones, iPads, and Macs, and will expect nothing less. Most of this generation will be entering the workforce and IT world. Some of them will make purchase recommendations and decisions. None of them will tolerate the unproductive, needlessly support-intensive infrastructure upon which Microsoft has built its empire.
Quote:
It is also interesting that many companies continue to dismiss Apple because of their "integrated" approach, prefering the so called "open" approach that Windows and now Android champions. But the end result is neither engages or provides any great benefit to the end user, and it is so easy to forget that end users make up 99% of the population, not administrators.
I don't understand the "open" complaint. All that Windows' "openness" has provided is the ability to write malware or simply utter crap that buggers up your system. At best this "open" approach results in a woefully inconsistent UI with one program looking and working entirely differently than another.
Microsoft can't even handle its monopoly effectively. Its flagship Office suite has become needlessly complicated bloatware that changes with every release. Major Windows updates break hardware, sending perfectly good PCs to the junk heap. Meanwhile I've lost count of the number of major OS releases my Macs have lived through.
Eventually, people making major IT purchase decisions will catch on. In the late 70s, the saying went "no one ever got fired for specifying IBM" when it came to buying computers or other business equipment. Similarly, Microsoft has been the "safe" choice too. That won't last forever.
I Have to say that I would love to give all these Apple head guru's a pat on the back for freaking making some of the best products out there, have some the highest customer satisfaction ratings, and are the most profitable devices sold because they are high end. I love the fact Apple has never competed in the shit low end market and yet they still WOLLOP the competition. Great Job Apple...my hats off to you....Get well soon S.J.
Yes - the WSJ's headline (which I usually include) said that.
The US market climate is no longer attractive for them. The question is, when will that climate spread to the rest of the world (or Earth if you prefer )?
Wow! This is utterly amazing! I know it's competition and good for the consumer, but schmidt/google really screwed over Stevo by getting the inside scoop while sitting on apple's board. Just think how much apple would've sold without android phones pretending to be just as good as the iPhone? Oh well, I know I should just get over it and move on. But it was a dirty deal none the less!
That's why it would be cool if Steve pulled a Google and gave away a really "Apple" take on an entry level phone. I can't think of a more worthy way to use some of that pile of money than to set up Apple owned factories in places like Tanzania or Bangladesh where a really simple but very well designed phone was made using as much local material as possible. Dorms for workers, schools for kids (hell, get Oprah involved!). What a legacy.
"It thrills me when my young children pick up their iDevices and enjoy them, without asking for help, or need of a manual. To me that says it in a nutshell. The other day a friend mocked my iPad, "its a toy", you know why they say this, because its so easy t use, hence they get confused.
But hang on are not computers meant to be hard to use, this is serious stuff we are using, don't let your 7 year old touch it, they will break it.
So I think that the greatest accomplishment of Apple is that it has given computers to the masses, simple and elegant to use, underneath, amazing technology, much of it, leading-edge."
Well said!
I have been saying this to friends since the 80s and it seems now in the 21st century that the Apple 'vision' which the Steves dreamed of and strived towards from the 70s onwards, is finally coming true on a global scale, albeit not with the Mac as the champion product. Sure, it's a matter of choice and always has been, but too many people credit Bill Gates and Windows for the OS revolution forgetting the history of Windows origins. Also often forgotten is the simple reality that new computer users, such as children and the elderly are baffled by non-Apple approaches to user interaction and operating systems, in particular Windows. I like many others benefitted from using Apple computers through school and then university, choosing to ignore the awful Windows PCs that gathered dust in the corner, only to join the workforce and be forced to use Windows in the enterprise, which results in frustration and confusion until you decipher the non-user friendliness of the whole operation.
Sure, Windows has improved dramatically with the arrival of Windows 7, their most Apple like OS ever, but it has taken an apparent eternity to get there from the promises and hype of Windows 95.
Traditionally, non-Apple OSs make no logical sense to the new user, only to the Administrators who do it for a living or a time consuming hobby or both. It doesn't need to be like that, and it never has, but it has taken a quarter of a century and a number of revolutionary products for people to start realising this.
It is also interesting that many companies continue to dismiss Apple because of their "integrated" approach, prefering the so called "open" approach that Windows and now Android champions. But the end result is neither engages or provides any great benefit to the end user, and it is so easy to forget that end users make up 99% of the population, not administrators. Just my two cents.
Thanks for the comment on my post.
Yes, what you also wrote is too true, but slowly, although gathering much pace, the worm turns, and it is Apple leading the way.
I have to use a PC at work, here is how a typical days goes by:
1. Boot up (with a few minutes)
2. Okay, Outlook is down for the zillionith time, re-boot
3. Still down, notify help desk, "yes we know there is a proble, looking into it:
4. Communicator is down, when its not, get missed calls, ghosts at the other end
Maybe I'm holding the receiver wrong lol !
5. If I'm call that week, I lug the wonderful brilliant and amazing Dell laptop home
"Dad why are you bringing that piece of crap (our code for PCs) into our home ? The kids ask
6. It takes 5 mins and 7 secs to boot the Dell (my 10 year old G4 takes 15 secs) and my
5 year old MBP takes about 45 secs, go figure ?
I HATE everything M$, why ? Because they make garbage its that simple, and most people are sucked into a vacuum of zero class, poor design, crappy quality, non-existant support, and an OS that was devised by a person in a straight jacket.
I'm am SO HAPPY when I can use my Macs, the same sentiment from my high school son, as the school mainly has PCs that either don't work, or are so full of M$ rot, that they need to be thrown out. Why oh why are schools in Australia purchasing windoze machines, when Macs are MUCH cheaper over time. No windoze rot, no viruses, better security, brilliant UI, robust design - perfect for kids, elegant, ease of use, hold their resell value much better, and last far longer than PCs. I am still amazed and frustrated with schools.
Comments
i preferred "on earth"
"in the universe" or "in the Milky Way Galaxy" has a nice ring to it too.
This should probably be titled "Apple now the highest-revenue phone vendor on earth," or something like that. Because Nokia is a larger company and sells more phones, in terms of # of units. Apple just happens to make a lot more per phone.
I'm too lazy to look up the stats.
If you haven't noticed the goal of a company is to generate revenue.
If you can generate more revenue with fewer sales, you are better company.
But hang on are not computers meant to be hard to use, this is serious stuff we are using, don't let your 7 year old touch it, they will break it.
So I think that the greatest accomplishment of Apple is that it has given computers to the masses, simple and elegant to use, underneath, amazing technology, much of it, leading-edge."
Well said!
I have been saying this to friends since the 80s and it seems now in the 21st century that the Apple 'vision' which the Steves dreamed of and strived towards from the 70s onwards, is finally coming true on a global scale, albeit not with the Mac as the champion product. Sure, it's a matter of choice and always has been, but too many people credit Bill Gates and Windows for the OS revolution forgetting the history of Windows origins. Also often forgotten is the simple reality that new computer users, such as children and the elderly are baffled by non-Apple approaches to user interaction and operating systems, in particular Windows. I like many others benefitted from using Apple computers through school and then university, choosing to ignore the awful Windows PCs that gathered dust in the corner, only to join the workforce and be forced to use Windows in the enterprise, which results in frustration and confusion until you decipher the non-user friendliness of the whole operation.
Sure, Windows has improved dramatically with the arrival of Windows 7, their most Apple like OS ever, but it has taken an apparent eternity to get there from the promises and hype of Windows 95.
Traditionally, non-Apple OSs make no logical sense to the new user, only to the Administrators who do it for a living or a time consuming hobby or both. It doesn't need to be like that, and it never has, but it has taken a quarter of a century and a number of revolutionary products for people to start realising this.
It is also interesting that many companies continue to dismiss Apple because of their "integrated" approach, prefering the so called "open" approach that Windows and now Android champions. But the end result is neither engages or provides any great benefit to the end user, and it is so easy to forget that end users make up 99% of the population, not administrators. Just my two cents.
This does beg the question ... is there another handset on the horizon with a different form factor? iphone nano perhaps? 6 to 18 months down the track? It would be interesting to ponder as the iphone is now at a point in it's life cycle similar to the ipod, where the introduction of a second model may be seen as not cannabilizing existing iphone sales, but rather stealing more from Nokia's handset sales.
Perhaps a phone about 2/3rds the size, made up of just a touch screen, with 3x4 apps on the screen size, instead of the usual 4x5. Just pondering ... who knows the timing may be right ... remember all the talk about a iphone nano in recent years?
Daniel, the term is: "in the world". Not: "on earth".
Sorry, I dozed off. Is it bag on Daniel time again already?
"in the universe" or "in the Milky Way Galaxy" has a nice ring to it too.
I prefer The Verse. Ohh, I think I?ll start referring to trolls as Reavers.
Amazing that they did this with a single phone!
Part of me would like to see Apple now deliver a really cool dirt cheap basic phone with some extras like the touch screen from the shuffle, make it in nice clean third-world factories (other than China), and drive a stake through the heart of the competition. The evil part.
Part of me would rather keep things as they are. The virtuous part.
Amazing that they did this with a single phone!
Closer to a dozen different SKU's. iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3Gs, iPhone 4, each offered in different capacities, sometimes with different colors, at different pricepoints.
Not postponed, but canceled:
Only is the US.
This is such a technical victory though. Who cares? and more importantly, why write a story about it? "By revenue" is only important if you are concerned about how much money Apple is making and running the company. It doesn't even matter to investors.
"The worlds biggest cell phone maker" is the company that makes the most cellphones. Technical metrics like how much money they generate are just not relevant to "who's the biggest" for 99.9% of the population.
I feel so exclusive being in the .1% that simply thinks unit sales is by far the most useless metric for any business. It simply doesn't matter. High units for little revenue is a terrible business model, most if not all investors should care about that. The same is true of profitability.
As for for larger, who measures a company?s success by units? if that was the measure then no one, not even Apple, would be making expensive devices. I suppose we?re going to make odd comparison to larger we should go by employee numbers or indoor square footage.
Anyone selling commodities, or advertising. For example, Google is not interested in the revenue or profits from the sales of Android phones, they don't get any of it. They do care about unit sales of Android because that drives ad impressions and use of Google search and other products, which in turn is a revenue driver for Google.
For customers it just means they're paying more than anyone else, but Apple customers welcome the opportunity to reach into their pockets to help out Steve.
Why don't you go buy a 599? N7 to help out Nokia?
How much is that in real dollars. I can't be bothered looking.
This is such a technical victory though. Who cares? and more importantly, why write a story about it? "By revenue" is only important if you are concerned about how much money Apple is making and running the company. It doesn't even matter to investors.
"The worlds biggest cell phone maker" is the company that makes the most cellphones. Technical metrics like how much money they generate are just not relevant to "who's the biggest" for 99.9% of the population.
Did you forget you sarcasm quotes?????? The only thing that matters to investors is how much money a company is making - its why then invest. Small unit count with high ROI is much much much (put as many as you like) more interesting to investors than high unit count with low ROI.
Investors that put money into 'eyeballs' or 'clicks' only do so because they believe the business model will eventually turn those into large ROIs. If it doesn't say bye-bye to your money.
"in the universe" or "in the Milky Way Galaxy" has a nice ring to it too.
...Also often forgotten is the simple reality that new computer users, such as children and the elderly are baffled by non-Apple approaches to user interaction and operating systems, in particular Windows.
... only to join the workforce and be forced to use Windows in the enterprise, which results in frustration and confusion until you decipher the non-user friendliness of the whole operation.
A generation of people have now been brought up on iPhones, iPads, and Macs, and will expect nothing less. Most of this generation will be entering the workforce and IT world. Some of them will make purchase recommendations and decisions. None of them will tolerate the unproductive, needlessly support-intensive infrastructure upon which Microsoft has built its empire.
It is also interesting that many companies continue to dismiss Apple because of their "integrated" approach, prefering the so called "open" approach that Windows and now Android champions. But the end result is neither engages or provides any great benefit to the end user, and it is so easy to forget that end users make up 99% of the population, not administrators.
I don't understand the "open" complaint. All that Windows' "openness" has provided is the ability to write malware or simply utter crap that buggers up your system. At best this "open" approach results in a woefully inconsistent UI with one program looking and working entirely differently than another.
Microsoft can't even handle its monopoly effectively. Its flagship Office suite has become needlessly complicated bloatware that changes with every release. Major Windows updates break hardware, sending perfectly good PCs to the junk heap. Meanwhile I've lost count of the number of major OS releases my Macs have lived through.
Eventually, people making major IT purchase decisions will catch on. In the late 70s, the saying went "no one ever got fired for specifying IBM" when it came to buying computers or other business equipment. Similarly, Microsoft has been the "safe" choice too. That won't last forever.
I Have to say that I would love to give all these Apple head guru's a pat on the back for freaking making some of the best products out there, have some the highest customer satisfaction ratings, and are the most profitable devices sold because they are high end. I love the fact Apple has never competed in the shit low end market and yet they still WOLLOP the competition. Great Job Apple...my hats off to you....Get well soon S.J.
Great post!
Only is the US.
Yes - the WSJ's headline (which I usually include) said that.
The US market climate is no longer attractive for them. The question is, when will that climate spread to the rest of the world (or Earth if you prefer
Wow! This is utterly amazing! I know it's competition and good for the consumer, but schmidt/google really screwed over Stevo by getting the inside scoop while sitting on apple's board. Just think how much apple would've sold without android phones pretending to be just as good as the iPhone? Oh well, I know I should just get over it and move on. But it was a dirty deal none the less!
That's why it would be cool if Steve pulled a Google and gave away a really "Apple" take on an entry level phone. I can't think of a more worthy way to use some of that pile of money than to set up Apple owned factories in places like Tanzania or Bangladesh where a really simple but very well designed phone was made using as much local material as possible. Dorms for workers, schools for kids (hell, get Oprah involved!). What a legacy.
Daydreaming is fun.
"It thrills me when my young children pick up their iDevices and enjoy them, without asking for help, or need of a manual. To me that says it in a nutshell. The other day a friend mocked my iPad, "its a toy", you know why they say this, because its so easy t use, hence they get confused.
But hang on are not computers meant to be hard to use, this is serious stuff we are using, don't let your 7 year old touch it, they will break it.
So I think that the greatest accomplishment of Apple is that it has given computers to the masses, simple and elegant to use, underneath, amazing technology, much of it, leading-edge."
Well said!
I have been saying this to friends since the 80s and it seems now in the 21st century that the Apple 'vision' which the Steves dreamed of and strived towards from the 70s onwards, is finally coming true on a global scale, albeit not with the Mac as the champion product. Sure, it's a matter of choice and always has been, but too many people credit Bill Gates and Windows for the OS revolution forgetting the history of Windows origins. Also often forgotten is the simple reality that new computer users, such as children and the elderly are baffled by non-Apple approaches to user interaction and operating systems, in particular Windows. I like many others benefitted from using Apple computers through school and then university, choosing to ignore the awful Windows PCs that gathered dust in the corner, only to join the workforce and be forced to use Windows in the enterprise, which results in frustration and confusion until you decipher the non-user friendliness of the whole operation.
Sure, Windows has improved dramatically with the arrival of Windows 7, their most Apple like OS ever, but it has taken an apparent eternity to get there from the promises and hype of Windows 95.
Traditionally, non-Apple OSs make no logical sense to the new user, only to the Administrators who do it for a living or a time consuming hobby or both. It doesn't need to be like that, and it never has, but it has taken a quarter of a century and a number of revolutionary products for people to start realising this.
It is also interesting that many companies continue to dismiss Apple because of their "integrated" approach, prefering the so called "open" approach that Windows and now Android champions. But the end result is neither engages or provides any great benefit to the end user, and it is so easy to forget that end users make up 99% of the population, not administrators. Just my two cents.
Thanks for the comment on my post.
Yes, what you also wrote is too true, but slowly, although gathering much pace, the worm turns, and it is Apple leading the way.
I have to use a PC at work, here is how a typical days goes by:
1. Boot up (with a few minutes)
2. Okay, Outlook is down for the zillionith time, re-boot
3. Still down, notify help desk, "yes we know there is a proble, looking into it:
4. Communicator is down, when its not, get missed calls, ghosts at the other end
Maybe I'm holding the receiver wrong lol !
5. If I'm call that week, I lug the wonderful brilliant and amazing Dell laptop home
"Dad why are you bringing that piece of crap (our code for PCs) into our home ? The kids ask
6. It takes 5 mins and 7 secs to boot the Dell (my 10 year old G4 takes 15 secs) and my
5 year old MBP takes about 45 secs, go figure ?
I HATE everything M$, why ? Because they make garbage its that simple, and most people are sucked into a vacuum of zero class, poor design, crappy quality, non-existant support, and an OS that was devised by a person in a straight jacket.
I'm am SO HAPPY when I can use my Macs, the same sentiment from my high school son, as the school mainly has PCs that either don't work, or are so full of M$ rot, that they need to be thrown out. Why oh why are schools in Australia purchasing windoze machines, when Macs are MUCH cheaper over time. No windoze rot, no viruses, better security, brilliant UI, robust design - perfect for kids, elegant, ease of use, hold their resell value much better, and last far longer than PCs. I am still amazed and frustrated with schools.