Google makes money via advertising revenue is a fact, but yur argument is a fallacy because you've failed to show where Google makes a profit on Android's advertising revenue via apps and the browser. They've never released it and in the last quarterly they barely even mention this wonderful, profitable, all powerful OS. Why would they do that, ya' think?
Google is an advertising company.
Google sells advertisements. They sell ads that they include on their search results. They sell ads that they include in your email. They sell ads that run on websites you visit. They sell ads that show up in the apps that you run. Google sells ads.
To sell ads you have to match advertisers with potential customers. The better you can do this -- the more relevant the ad is to the person viewing the ad -- the more likely that customer would be to act on that ad.
That's why they don't need to sell the hardware to make money. They're just getting the OS to spread like a virus. Which has worked as it's now the most popular phone OS.
And it's paying off. They have over 10 billion per year in income and over 57 billion in assets.
They chose a different business model and it's working.
He believes the appeal of the iPad could be extended to more PC users if Apple were to extend keyboard options with touchpads, in addition to the touchscreen interface on the iPad itself.
What?! This guy is delusional... What's next? Maybe he'll suggest they add a plastic keyboard and scroll ball to the iPhone.
There are plenty of $99.00 smart phones out there running android, but people are lining up in the millions around the world for an iPhone 4S. Say what you want about price, quality will always trump that.
My guess is that the FreeGS will "sell" more than ever before in its history, and set new records.
Cheap does indeed sell. The Fire will indeed eat away at some iPad sales. But cheap is not sufficient to disrupt an established market. Cheap must come along with the necessary bells and whistles to make the disruption viable, and the Fire does not fit the bill. Additionally, Amazon's business model for the Fire will be based on recuperating loss (or generating profit) on a device which does not account for this at the time of sale. This will translate into innovation shortfalls. Some people have eloquently expressed a few of the problems the Fire faces in disrupting the iPad. All I could find was one good article by Horace Deidu.
Look at what Walmart has done to a lot of established markets. I view Amazon as somewhat like Walmart. They sell just about everything and usually at as good a price you can find and with no sales tax.
The iPad has the market because they are all there was.
Decades of effort into tablets. Dozens of tablets at CES weeks before the Apple tablet was rumoured to debut.
Quote:
If it can get a foot hold in the market it will put a nice dent in iPad sales.
That's not necessarily true. It's only true if the customer was going to buy an iPad but instead decided to buy a Kindle Fire. I don't that scenario has being very common and just as dumb(cheap)phone users are moving to smartphones I think it's likely many of these dumb(cheap)tablet buyers will eventually want a smart-tablet. Amazon's tablet is fine for 7" because it's a much simpler device, but they will need a larger tablet if they want to take the iPad head one, where it's profit could actually be hurt.
The point is so far missed here I am not even sure where to start. 1 - Any sale that goes to the Fire that could have gone to the iPad is a disruption to the iPad. 2 - Amazon is not trying to make money on this device, they are making money on content, period. Same with the Kindle. They know this and am pretty sure are accounting for it. 3 - If Amazon succeeds anywhere near the level it does with Kindle it will chizzle a nice little hole in iPads market share. Once that nut is cracked, others will follow further chizziling away at iPad sales. All of this is a major threat to Apple and they know it.
You are not misunderstood; you are disagreed with.
If you'd like to disagree with the argument and article I presented to you I can share some thoughts, but as it stands, all you did was reiterate your belief.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheShepherd
Look at what Walmart has done to a lot of established markets. I view Amazon as somewhat like Walmart. They sell just about everything and usually at as good a price you can find and with no sales tax.
There is a lot of truth to this, but I'm not sure how it applies to Apple. Apple is not, say, Circuit City. Maybe you can elaborate? In the markets where Apple participates they're either the price-competitive large content solution company (e.g. music) [compare to Walmart or Amazon], or they're well established (e.g. Macs are high-end products and are growing in market share faster than Windows; the iPhone and iPad are competitively priced premium products which provide a premium experience and are doing very well in their individual categories). The modern-day smartphone and tablet markets are still maturing so there is plenty of opportunity for another company to disrupt Apple, but they are at the top of their game, and are the leading innovators in both of these markets, so it isn't going to be a trivial matter.
That's not necessarily true. It's only true if the customer was going to buy an iPad but instead decided to buy a Kindle Fire. I don't that scenario has being very common and just as dumb(cheap)phone users are moving to smartphones I think it's likely many of these dumb(cheap)tablet buyers will eventually want a smart-tablet. Amazon's tablet is fine for 7" because it's a much simpler device, but they will need a larger tablet if they want to take the iPad head one, where it's profit could actually be hurt.
The Kindle Fire, at the current rate at which it is selling, will have 2.5 million preorders in 12 days.
And you think that's not going to put a dent in ipad sales?
The Kindle Fire, at the current rate at which it is selling, will have 2.5 million preorders in 12 days.
And you think that's not going to put a dent in ipad sales?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that statistic was based on sustaining the initial rate of pre-orders from the initial launch up until the release date. Not only is much of that left to assumption and numbers which did not come from Amazon, I'm not sure where the 12 days thing came from? Are you referring to the release date?
I don't think it can be argued that the Kindle Fire is not going to cannibalize any iPad sales?it will. I just don't see any strong arguments for it disrupting the iPad, and that's a very different thing. And we're talking about two very different devices.
as a new ipad 2 owner and android owner i must say..
grow up kids... they are both great devices. In practicality Fragmentation doesn't really mean shit to me. My 2 yo galaxy S can still play all the games and apps.
And the more I use the ipad, I am beginning to realize what this "walled garden" everyone is talking about. I can't even rearrange my icons my way... REALLY? WTF. That's just one of many issues in android, I can solve easily.
At this point, it's Windows for PC Android for Phones and Ipads for a tablet.
you speaking about your own setup or people in general? frankly i don't like malware, annoyware, viruses, patches-never-ending that always require a reboot, bizarre spinning lasso that won't stop, slow response times and the general 'let's sell 'passable' sh*t to anyone we can sucker into it' that MS deals in.
I don't see what this has to do with fragmentation at all though. The nook color didn't "fragment" the platform.
It does in as much as the original nook will not likely ever be a ICS device. Hopefully the Nook 2 might be.
Amazon forked android with the Fire. It's a modified 2.x codebase. As devs move to the 4.x platform for tablets you'll see a need to support two tablet versions despite the fact that essentially you can ignore 3.x tablets since they hardly sold and more will likely upgrade to 4.x.
Quote:
Pre-orders for the Kindle Fire were through the roof. In the first 5 days pre-orders were available, 250,000 Kindle Fires were sold. That's 2k per hour. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see this outsell the ipad2
I would. I doubt Amazon will make as many in the same timeframe. If they are making money it's not much on each unit and they don't have the same economies of scale or supply chain that Apple enjoys. Quanta isn't a charity and they have their own bottom line to look after.
I just want to comment on the analyst's 30 million iPhone est for the quarter....
This is going to be a HUGE HUGE quarter. There is a good chance revenues will exceed $40B and profit of $10B. The rollout of the 4S across so many countries so fast is an amazing feat. The backlog of phones in the US is easily 2 to 3 weeks based on my experiences
Apple has a shot at shipping 50MM iOS devices in the quarter. Pretty amazing
Then there is Amazon, with it's 115 PE Ratio. Barely profitable the last two years. They are pretty much fucked if this Fire bet does not work. It will set them back another two years
Bezos is Jobs without the product ability or consumer sense. God, just look at the Amazon.com website design if you want to puke
I'm curious, is Amazon going to way of gaming consoles with the Kindle Fire, taking a loss on the hardware but make up for with the content purchased afterwards?
I'm curious, is Amazon going to way of gaming consoles with the Kindle Fire, taking a loss on the hardware but make up for with the content purchased afterwards?
You are not misunderstood; you are disagreed with.
If you'd like to disagree with the argument and article I presented to you I can share some thoughts, but as it stands, all you did was reiterate your belief.
There is a lot of truth to this, but I'm not sure how it applies to Apple. Apple is not, say, Circuit City. Maybe you can elaborate? In the markets where Apple participates they're either the price-competitive large content solution company (e.g. music) [compare to Walmart or Amazon], or they're well established (e.g. Macs are high-end products and are growing in market share faster than Windows; the iPhone and iPad are competitively priced premium products which provide a premium experience and are doing very well in their individual categories). The modern-day smartphone and tablet markets are still maturing so there is plenty of opportunity for another company to disrupt Apple, but they are at the top of their game, and are the leading innovators in both of these markets, so it isn't going to be a trivial matter.
Don't bother with the fandroid marketing trolls. They will soon disappear with the sales numbers come out showing Kindle Fire has failed miserably. Amazon has no clue how to do software, no one wants a seven inch ipad clone, the processor and graphics are very weak, there is no software available in the amazon itunes clone app store, and good luck getting support on these cheapo cloner tablets.
"While the pricing at $199 looks disruptive for what seems to be the iPad's most important rising challenge, the Amazon Fire -- it is important to note that it could fuel further fragmentation in the tablet market -- given it represents yet another platform," Reitzes wrote. "While compatible with Android, the Apps work with Amazon products.
Fix your title AI and learn how to read!!
Apple said it "...could fuel further fragmentation in the tablet market..." Not "..will further fragment Android."
I think the Kindle Fire will either further fragment Android, or give Android a tweaked Operating system that will be widely used.
1. it would give a minimum spec to a form of Android
2. it would (if Fire's marketshare is over 25% soon) encourage other manufactures to try to use the Kindle version of Android
3. It would let Android manufactures (the large ones; HTC/Motorola/Samsung/etc) say that they are not fragmenting in tablets
i *think* that Amazon (given the above three become true) would willingly let other manufactures use there tweaked version of Android (required to have Amazon store!). This is, they can make money from Amazon store, and not lose money (or barely make any) on making cheap tablets.
on to my rants about keyboard...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sipadan
Enough already with the keyboards, why should Apple take a leap in the past, to please who exactly? The analysts?
Keyboards are a dying breed, just like the users they supposedly would please...
well, i don't know about you, or anyone else, but: a keyboard (that's good!) is far superior to any touchscreen based device for serious typing...
Until you see a touchscreen keyboard that
1. has a good feel
2. can be used for multiple hours
While i would love to be able to get rid of keyboards and be able to type as efficiently, the technology is not there to do it.
Please tell me what (major) type intensive workload keyboards are dying in...
Comments
Google makes money via advertising revenue is a fact, but yur argument is a fallacy because you've failed to show where Google makes a profit on Android's advertising revenue via apps and the browser. They've never released it and in the last quarterly they barely even mention this wonderful, profitable, all powerful OS. Why would they do that, ya' think?
Google is an advertising company.
Google sells advertisements. They sell ads that they include on their search results. They sell ads that they include in your email. They sell ads that run on websites you visit. They sell ads that show up in the apps that you run. Google sells ads.
To sell ads you have to match advertisers with potential customers. The better you can do this -- the more relevant the ad is to the person viewing the ad -- the more likely that customer would be to act on that ad.
That's why they don't need to sell the hardware to make money. They're just getting the OS to spread like a virus. Which has worked as it's now the most popular phone OS.
And it's paying off. They have over 10 billion per year in income and over 57 billion in assets.
They chose a different business model and it's working.
He believes the appeal of the iPad could be extended to more PC users if Apple were to extend keyboard options with touchpads, in addition to the touchscreen interface on the iPad itself.
What?! This guy is delusional... What's next? Maybe he'll suggest they add a plastic keyboard and scroll ball to the iPhone.
There are plenty of $99.00 smart phones out there running android, but people are lining up in the millions around the world for an iPhone 4S. Say what you want about price, quality will always trump that.
My guess is that the FreeGS will "sell" more than ever before in its history, and set new records.
Cheap does indeed sell. The Fire will indeed eat away at some iPad sales. But cheap is not sufficient to disrupt an established market. Cheap must come along with the necessary bells and whistles to make the disruption viable, and the Fire does not fit the bill. Additionally, Amazon's business model for the Fire will be based on recuperating loss (or generating profit) on a device which does not account for this at the time of sale. This will translate into innovation shortfalls. Some people have eloquently expressed a few of the problems the Fire faces in disrupting the iPad. All I could find was one good article by Horace Deidu.
Look at what Walmart has done to a lot of established markets. I view Amazon as somewhat like Walmart. They sell just about everything and usually at as good a price you can find and with no sales tax.
Sure... let me break it to you that 50% of native English speakers have below average intellectual abilities.
I never knew it was that widespread!
T Today there aren't very many profitable ? and I mean technically ? vendors who use Android OS.
And yet, smartphone sales are one of the few bright rays of sunlight in Samsung's latest earnings report.
The iPad has the market because they are all there was.
Decades of effort into tablets. Dozens of tablets at CES weeks before the Apple tablet was rumoured to debut.
If it can get a foot hold in the market it will put a nice dent in iPad sales.
That's not necessarily true. It's only true if the customer was going to buy an iPad but instead decided to buy a Kindle Fire. I don't that scenario has being very common and just as dumb(cheap)phone users are moving to smartphones I think it's likely many of these dumb(cheap)tablet buyers will eventually want a smart-tablet. Amazon's tablet is fine for 7" because it's a much simpler device, but they will need a larger tablet if they want to take the iPad head one, where it's profit could actually be hurt.
The point is so far missed here I am not even sure where to start. 1 - Any sale that goes to the Fire that could have gone to the iPad is a disruption to the iPad. 2 - Amazon is not trying to make money on this device, they are making money on content, period. Same with the Kindle. They know this and am pretty sure are accounting for it. 3 - If Amazon succeeds anywhere near the level it does with Kindle it will chizzle a nice little hole in iPads market share. Once that nut is cracked, others will follow further chizziling away at iPad sales. All of this is a major threat to Apple and they know it.
You are not misunderstood; you are disagreed with.
If you'd like to disagree with the argument and article I presented to you I can share some thoughts, but as it stands, all you did was reiterate your belief.
Look at what Walmart has done to a lot of established markets. I view Amazon as somewhat like Walmart. They sell just about everything and usually at as good a price you can find and with no sales tax.
There is a lot of truth to this, but I'm not sure how it applies to Apple. Apple is not, say, Circuit City. Maybe you can elaborate? In the markets where Apple participates they're either the price-competitive large content solution company (e.g. music) [compare to Walmart or Amazon], or they're well established (e.g. Macs are high-end products and are growing in market share faster than Windows; the iPhone and iPad are competitively priced premium products which provide a premium experience and are doing very well in their individual categories). The modern-day smartphone and tablet markets are still maturing so there is plenty of opportunity for another company to disrupt Apple, but they are at the top of their game, and are the leading innovators in both of these markets, so it isn't going to be a trivial matter.
That's not necessarily true. It's only true if the customer was going to buy an iPad but instead decided to buy a Kindle Fire. I don't that scenario has being very common and just as dumb(cheap)phone users are moving to smartphones I think it's likely many of these dumb(cheap)tablet buyers will eventually want a smart-tablet. Amazon's tablet is fine for 7" because it's a much simpler device, but they will need a larger tablet if they want to take the iPad head one, where it's profit could actually be hurt.
The Kindle Fire, at the current rate at which it is selling, will have 2.5 million preorders in 12 days.
And you think that's not going to put a dent in ipad sales?
The Kindle Fire, at the current rate at which it is selling, will have 2.5 million preorders in 12 days.
And you think that's not going to put a dent in ipad sales?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that statistic was based on sustaining the initial rate of pre-orders from the initial launch up until the release date. Not only is much of that left to assumption and numbers which did not come from Amazon, I'm not sure where the 12 days thing came from? Are you referring to the release date?
I don't think it can be argued that the Kindle Fire is not going to cannibalize any iPad sales?it will. I just don't see any strong arguments for it disrupting the iPad, and that's a very different thing. And we're talking about two very different devices.
Unless Chevrolet pulled a Samsung.
Hyundai does fairly regularly...
as a new ipad 2 owner and android owner i must say..
grow up kids... they are both great devices. In practicality Fragmentation doesn't really mean shit to me. My 2 yo galaxy S can still play all the games and apps.
And the more I use the ipad, I am beginning to realize what this "walled garden" everyone is talking about. I can't even rearrange my icons my way... REALLY? WTF. That's just one of many issues in android, I can solve easily.
At this point, it's Windows for PC Android for Phones and Ipads for a tablet.
you speaking about your own setup or people in general? frankly i don't like malware, annoyware, viruses, patches-never-ending that always require a reboot, bizarre spinning lasso that won't stop, slow response times and the general 'let's sell 'passable' sh*t to anyone we can sucker into it' that MS deals in.
I don't see what this has to do with fragmentation at all though. The nook color didn't "fragment" the platform.
It does in as much as the original nook will not likely ever be a ICS device. Hopefully the Nook 2 might be.
Amazon forked android with the Fire. It's a modified 2.x codebase. As devs move to the 4.x platform for tablets you'll see a need to support two tablet versions despite the fact that essentially you can ignore 3.x tablets since they hardly sold and more will likely upgrade to 4.x.
Pre-orders for the Kindle Fire were through the roof. In the first 5 days pre-orders were available, 250,000 Kindle Fires were sold. That's 2k per hour. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see this outsell the ipad2
I would. I doubt Amazon will make as many in the same timeframe. If they are making money it's not much on each unit and they don't have the same economies of scale or supply chain that Apple enjoys. Quanta isn't a charity and they have their own bottom line to look after.
This is going to be a HUGE HUGE quarter. There is a good chance revenues will exceed $40B and profit of $10B. The rollout of the 4S across so many countries so fast is an amazing feat. The backlog of phones in the US is easily 2 to 3 weeks based on my experiences
Apple has a shot at shipping 50MM iOS devices in the quarter. Pretty amazing
Then there is Amazon, with it's 115 PE Ratio. Barely profitable the last two years. They are pretty much fucked if this Fire bet does not work. It will set them back another two years
Bezos is Jobs without the product ability or consumer sense. God, just look at the Amazon.com website design if you want to puke
I'm going to need a larger screen iPad then...
Don?t worry, inertial scrolling has you covered.
I'm curious, is Amazon going to way of gaming consoles with the Kindle Fire, taking a loss on the hardware but make up for with the content purchased afterwards?
I'd certainly say so, yeah.
You are not misunderstood; you are disagreed with.
If you'd like to disagree with the argument and article I presented to you I can share some thoughts, but as it stands, all you did was reiterate your belief.
There is a lot of truth to this, but I'm not sure how it applies to Apple. Apple is not, say, Circuit City. Maybe you can elaborate? In the markets where Apple participates they're either the price-competitive large content solution company (e.g. music) [compare to Walmart or Amazon], or they're well established (e.g. Macs are high-end products and are growing in market share faster than Windows; the iPhone and iPad are competitively priced premium products which provide a premium experience and are doing very well in their individual categories). The modern-day smartphone and tablet markets are still maturing so there is plenty of opportunity for another company to disrupt Apple, but they are at the top of their game, and are the leading innovators in both of these markets, so it isn't going to be a trivial matter.
Don't bother with the fandroid marketing trolls. They will soon disappear with the sales numbers come out showing Kindle Fire has failed miserably. Amazon has no clue how to do software, no one wants a seven inch ipad clone, the processor and graphics are very weak, there is no software available in the amazon itunes clone app store, and good luck getting support on these cheapo cloner tablets.
"While the pricing at $199 looks disruptive for what seems to be the iPad's most important rising challenge, the Amazon Fire -- it is important to note that it could fuel further fragmentation in the tablet market -- given it represents yet another platform," Reitzes wrote. "While compatible with Android, the Apps work with Amazon products.
Fix your title AI and learn how to read!!
Apple said it "...could fuel further fragmentation in the tablet market..." Not "..will further fragment Android."
1. it would give a minimum spec to a form of Android
2. it would (if Fire's marketshare is over 25% soon) encourage other manufactures to try to use the Kindle version of Android
3. It would let Android manufactures (the large ones; HTC/Motorola/Samsung/etc) say that they are not fragmenting in tablets
i *think* that Amazon (given the above three become true) would willingly let other manufactures use there tweaked version of Android (required to have Amazon store!). This is, they can make money from Amazon store, and not lose money (or barely make any) on making cheap tablets.
on to my rants about keyboard...
Enough already with the keyboards, why should Apple take a leap in the past, to please who exactly? The analysts?
Keyboards are a dying breed, just like the users they supposedly would please...
well, i don't know about you, or anyone else, but: a keyboard (that's good!) is far superior to any touchscreen based device for serious typing...
Until you see a touchscreen keyboard that
1. has a good feel
2. can be used for multiple hours
While i would love to be able to get rid of keyboards and be able to type as efficiently, the technology is not there to do it.
Please tell me what (major) type intensive workload keyboards are dying in...