It is a viable strategy. Japanese auto manufacturers used it in the 1970's to enter the American market with their "rice burners". Now they sell lots of profitable cars here.
1) Rice burners is a pejorative oft considered racial slur against Asians or specifically the Japanese. I see that you put it in quotes but sometimes you need to qualify such comments more completely or you might get attributed with the slur directly.
2) I believe the Japanese tried decades earlier to enter the US market and failed because their autos were exceptionally inferior to the US. It was only after a complete retooling with help from the Japanese gov't. and Ford Auto were they able to successfully penetrate the US market with inexpensive but good cars. Later they tried to enter the high end of the market but their low-cost brands were not taken well until they created subsidiaries with new, premium branding which brought use Lexus, Infinity and Acura from Toyota, Nissan and Honda, respectively.
3) Top Gear from this past weekend detailed China's rapid adoption of the automobile. They shows how much the quality and consumer wants have changed in just five years, as well the knock offs they have. Apparently one company copied the BMW X5 to a tee and the Chinese court ruled against BMW. Samsung looks like an amateur in comparison.
Read the wording carefully. 13% of developers have made $100 K or more. If they've been selling the app for 10 years, that's only $10 K per year. And if they've been selling 10 apps for 10 years, that's only $1 K per app per year.
I'm not surprised that a small number of RIM developers make a huge amount of money. 13% making $100 K over multiple years may not be all that impressive.
I'd like to see a graph of those years's earnings over the entire period, I bet the line is on a pretty steep decline since the early years.
1) Rice burners is a pejorative oft considered racial slur against Asians or specifically the Japanese. I see that you put it in quotes but sometimes you need to qualify such comments more completely or you might get attributed with the slur directly.
AFAIK, a Rice burner is an underpowered Japanese CAR from the 1970's. Maybe I'm wrong? I'll look it up, given that words have meanings and I'd rather use them correctly. Hang on...
...
Rice burner is a pejorative describing Japanese-made?or by extension, Asian-made?motorcycles and automobiles. According to Wikipedia.
So the meaning is broader than I had thought, referring perhaps to all asian motorcycles and automobiles.
Nope. No slur against "Asians or specifically the Japanese". None intended, and none expressed. Please calm down.
You do realize that such comments make you sound like a troll, right? I understand that some people don't like it pointed it that they don't know something as well as others and get defensive about it but if you look at my comment you see that I didn't call you a racist, in fact I eluded to your comment as being innocently written. So tell me exactly what part of my comment was not calmly stated? What inflammatory language did I use to make you think I was not calm? If you wish me to never make such points to you I can't do that, but if you let me push your buttons I will most certainly do that.
You do realize that such comments make you sound like a troll, right? I understand that some people don't like it pointed it that they don't know something as well as others and get defensive about it but if you look at my comment you see that I didn't call you a racist, in fact I eluded to your comment as being innocently written. So tell me exactly what part of my comment was not calmly stated? What inflammatory language did I use to make you think I was not calm? If you wish me to never make such points to you I can't do that, but if you let me push your buttons I will most certainly do that.
You sound excited in this post. You ask the same basic questions repeatedly in different forms.
In the prior post ISTM that you were anxious to identify meanings which did not exist.
AFAIK, a Rice burner is an underpowered Japanese CAR from the 1970's. Maybe I'm wrong? I'll look it up, given that words have meanings and I'd rather use them correctly. Hang on...
...
Rice burner is a pejorative describing Japanese-made?or by extension, Asian-made?motorcycles and automobiles. According to Wikipedia.
So the meaning is broader than I had thought, referring perhaps to all asian motorcycles and automobiles.
Nope. No slur against "Asians or specifically the Japanese". None intended, and none expressed. Please calm down.
So you confirmed that "rice burner" is a pejorative term and yet you claim no slur was expressed? Unintended perhaps. But expressed? Oh yeah.
Blackberry (RIM actually) has a sound strategy for growth: copy Apple and hope all goes well. They can't keep doing whatever they were doing before, which was "stay the course and hope Apple doesn't enter the smartphone market with an innovative touch screen phone." The previous plan had a major flaw: Apple entered the smartphone market with the iPhone and turned their world upside down.
Numbers don't add up. They only have 60k apps, very few compared to Android and ios, and they are claiming 6 million downloads a day. So every single app they have is being downloaded 10 times a day, every single day, on average? Sounds a little fishy to me.
And they claim 2 billion downloads as of last month, while Apple which has more phones in the wild and 5 times more apps on has 3 billion. Sounds like some fibbing is going on at RIM.
Actually the 2 billion app download stat matches pretty well to Android's numbers.
Android hit 1 billion app download in July 2010 and hit 3 billion app download in March 2011. 2 months after the 1 billion app download announcement, Android announced that they had 80000 apps in September 2010.
RIM hit 1 billion app download sometime around July 2011 and hit 2 billion download in January 2012.
If you look at Android's chart, they probably hit 2 billion app download at around the end of November 2010 (maybe even December 2010). At the 1 billion app download starting mark --- Android had more apps than RIM, so naturally Android reached the 2 billion app download a couple of months earlier than RIM.
Android just announced 10 billion app download in December 2012, so they are about (edit) 2 years behind itunes app download. And RIM is about 1 year behind Android's numbers.
You're right - because 6,000,000 downloads divided by 60,000 apps is 100 per day, not 10. So every app, on average, is getting downloaded 100 times per day...?
The missing metric is across what base of users? If you have 1 million users then the 6M/day is a lot, if you have 100M users, it's not so much. Some apps could be downloaded 50,000 times a day if it's popular. What is the user base of BBs that can take the App-store Apps - All, some, BB5+, etc. I don't know. I think the installed base of BB is about 75M - not sure if they are all app-store capable.
Apple has seen probably over 25Bn downloads from the App store to date (extrapolating from the 18Bn downloaded by Oct 2011 shown on Wikipedia), and that is over 320M iOS devices (though fewer concurrent users). Probably running at 1.5Bn per month now (post 4S influx so that is nearly 9x the BB market. 9x the volume on probably about 5x the user base (let's say 50 vs. 250M current iOS users). iOS is the store to focus on under any metric.
Regardless of all the armchair quarterbacking that's been going on, I do think that RIM is on the only course that can save it- launch a new, compelling product as quickly as possible.
Unfortunately, that won't be until fall of this year. And that could well doom them, and there might not be anything they can do about it.
The parade has moved on,,, furthermore, won't the new BBs have a different OS requiring them to totally rebuild the BB app store?
Quote:
They're shedding marketshare every quarter to iOS and Andriod, and we've got at least 2 (if not 3) more quarters before RIM can release their new product. By then, Andriod manufactures will have released lots of new hardware (not sure what the development path is for post ICS Andriod OS), and Apple will have a new iPhone AND iOS6 out the door, perhaps several months in advance.
There's a threshold with any device or brand name where it fades out of public acclaim, and once the mojo is gone it's almost impossible to get it back. RIM may be there now. If not, then they're steadily moving closer every day up to the day they release BB10.
I think 2012 is the year their enterprise customers jump ship and swim to iOS. The world aint waiting for RIM or MS to get their collective acts together.
[/QUOTE] If they can pull out of this nosedive, it will be every bit as remarkable as Apple's turnaround in the late '90s. I just don't think they have the vision to make it happen.[/QUOTE]
I agree, they don't have the marketing smarts. Someone is going to buy RIM for the patents and their secure email system...maybe even for their engineering expertise but RIM's management will be kicked to the curb.
You're right - because 6,000,000 downloads divided by 60,000 apps is 100 per day, not 10. So every app, on average, is getting downloaded 100 times per day...?
The number of apps is irrelivant, its the number of phones being sold that count. Users tend to buy apps in the first 3 months of getting a smartphone, after that its a massive drop as they get board of actively looking for apps. People getting a new smartphone will also start looking at apps again but not to such a great extent. So the important figure is how many phones are being sold.
Also the figure is likely to include people downloading updates, so if 1 app has 5 million users then 4 updated a year is 20 million re-downloads. Apps that have a free and paid version are effectively doubling up on initial downloads if the person buys. So if you look at it like that the number could be right and is also completely irrelevant.
Also the figure is likely to include people downloading updates, so if 1 app has 5 million users then 4 updated a year is 20 million re-downloads. Apps that have a free and paid version are effectively doubling up on initial downloads if the person buys. So if you look at it like that the number could be right and is also completely irrelevant.
Download numbers for Apple don't include updates. I doubt it would for the others... if so, it would be a massive con.
The number of apps is irrelivant, its the number of phones being sold that count. Users tend to buy apps in the first 3 months of getting a smartphone, after that its a massive drop as they get board of actively looking for apps. People getting a new smartphone will also start looking at apps again but not to such a great extent. So the important figure is how many phones are being sold.
Also the figure is likely to include people downloading updates, so if 1 app has 5 million users then 4 updated a year is 20 million re-downloads. Apps that have a free and paid version are effectively doubling up on initial downloads if the person buys. So if you look at it like that the number could be right and is also completely irrelevant.
This is the exact opposite of the argument made when talking about Android vs iOS. Paid App downloads per device matter to people selling the apps. If people buy 3 times as much on the iPhone then market share matters less. Same with the BB.
No idea about the stats. But we have exactly one smartphone on our family plan, and after two Blackberries fell apart due to simple hardware/manufacturing issues (not including replacements for broken trackball on each one) she's on an iPhone now. I doubt she really cares which ecosystem she's on, and I haven't heard about anything not working yet.
I always feel a little bad for the guys at RIM! It is the classic case of "kick them when they are down." The standard line of thinking is that they screwed up, didn't innovate, and if they could just find the right CEO things might get better.
Things might get better if they brought in Steve Jobs, but finding someone like that probably isn't likely. Even amoung all of the monday morning quarterbacks. Apple had years of experience building computers and an ecosystem. All they had to do was to down it. That is a lot easier than up sizing a pager to a mobile computer.
Sure, they didn't see the iPhone coming, but who did? RIM is a lost cause, but I really don't think anyone can do better with the hand they have been delt.
I always feel a little bad for the guys at RIM! It is the classic case of "kick them when they are down." The standard line of thinking is that they screwed up, didn't innovate, and if they could just find the right CEO things might get better.
Things might get better if they brought in Steve Jobs, but finding someone like that probably isn't likely. Even amoung all of the monday morning quarterbacks. Apple had years of experience building computers and an ecosystem. All they had to do was to down it. That is a lot easier than up sizing a pager to a mobile computer.
Sure, they didn't see the iPhone coming, but who did? RIM is a lost cause, but I really don't think anyone can do better with the hand they have been delt.
Interesting how RIM becomes AI news, though.
Didn't RIM have an ecosystem? They had a decade's worth of mind share as well. They were the must-have device a decade ago. That nobody saw Apple coming is one thing, but one could say that RIM rested on their laurels, and they left the consumer market open for the taking.
That they originally tried to lock the Playbooks to only work with a Blackberry was a pretty serious blunder too, that really raised the barrier for entry for anyone that wanted to give it an honest try.
But you're right in suggesting that a new CEO probably isn't going to work magic, even Apple took years to turn around, and that was with a raggressive and risky corporate shake-up.
RIM news has been reported on AI for as long as Apple has been selling phones. Sometimes competitor news is significant.
That they originally tried to lock the Playbooks to only work with a Blackberry was a pretty serious blunder too, that really raised the barrier for entry for anyone that wanted to give it an honest try.
RIM news has been reported on AI for as long as Apple has been selling phones. Sometimes competitor news is significant.
Well, RIM seemed to have some simple apps, and some accessories, but Apple brings new meaning to the word ECOSYSTEM. Computers, music downloads with millions of customers, iWorks, iLife, movie downloads, and most of all, serious software/hardware experience with a fully developed OS to draw from.
Apple has actually made some pretty serious blunders, which don't get a lot of play. When they alone had the iPhone with multitouch they were completely arrogant. They thought they would charge an arm and a leg for it, it was also probably stupid to show it 6 months before release. That, and the months of over pricing meant that Google had nearly a year to move Android into multi touch before the iPhone sales hit high volume. Also, they probably shouldn't have hung with AT&T so long, although I respect that they were being loyal to a company which gave them an unheard of carrier deal.
Hindsight is always 20/20 so it is really easy to now say what people should have done.
I really have no love for RIM and have never used their devices, it is just hard to think of how they can get out of the hole they are in, and I doubt opening up Playbook would have produced better results.
If they want to post RIM news, fine, but I don't see RIM as Apple's competition in anyway.
Comments
It is a viable strategy. Japanese auto manufacturers used it in the 1970's to enter the American market with their "rice burners". Now they sell lots of profitable cars here.
1) Rice burners is a pejorative oft considered racial slur against Asians or specifically the Japanese. I see that you put it in quotes but sometimes you need to qualify such comments more completely or you might get attributed with the slur directly.
2) I believe the Japanese tried decades earlier to enter the US market and failed because their autos were exceptionally inferior to the US. It was only after a complete retooling with help from the Japanese gov't. and Ford Auto were they able to successfully penetrate the US market with inexpensive but good cars. Later they tried to enter the high end of the market but their low-cost brands were not taken well until they created subsidiaries with new, premium branding which brought use Lexus, Infinity and Acura from Toyota, Nissan and Honda, respectively.
3) Top Gear from this past weekend detailed China's rapid adoption of the automobile. They shows how much the quality and consumer wants have changed in just five years, as well the knock offs they have. Apparently one company copied the BMW X5 to a tee and the Chinese court ruled against BMW. Samsung looks like an amateur in comparison.
Read the wording carefully. 13% of developers have made $100 K or more. If they've been selling the app for 10 years, that's only $10 K per year. And if they've been selling 10 apps for 10 years, that's only $1 K per app per year.
I'm not surprised that a small number of RIM developers make a huge amount of money. 13% making $100 K over multiple years may not be all that impressive.
I'd like to see a graph of those years's earnings over the entire period, I bet the line is on a pretty steep decline since the early years.
1) Rice burners is a pejorative oft considered racial slur against Asians or specifically the Japanese. I see that you put it in quotes but sometimes you need to qualify such comments more completely or you might get attributed with the slur directly.
AFAIK, a Rice burner is an underpowered Japanese CAR from the 1970's. Maybe I'm wrong? I'll look it up, given that words have meanings and I'd rather use them correctly. Hang on...
...
Rice burner is a pejorative describing Japanese-made?or by extension, Asian-made?motorcycles and automobiles. According to Wikipedia.
So the meaning is broader than I had thought, referring perhaps to all asian motorcycles and automobiles.
Nope. No slur against "Asians or specifically the Japanese". None intended, and none expressed. Please calm down.
Please calm down.
You do realize that such comments make you sound like a troll, right? I understand that some people don't like it pointed it that they don't know something as well as others and get defensive about it but if you look at my comment you see that I didn't call you a racist, in fact I eluded to your comment as being innocently written. So tell me exactly what part of my comment was not calmly stated? What inflammatory language did I use to make you think I was not calm? If you wish me to never make such points to you I can't do that, but if you let me push your buttons I will most certainly do that.
You do realize that such comments make you sound like a troll, right? I understand that some people don't like it pointed it that they don't know something as well as others and get defensive about it but if you look at my comment you see that I didn't call you a racist, in fact I eluded to your comment as being innocently written. So tell me exactly what part of my comment was not calmly stated? What inflammatory language did I use to make you think I was not calm? If you wish me to never make such points to you I can't do that, but if you let me push your buttons I will most certainly do that.
You sound excited in this post. You ask the same basic questions repeatedly in different forms.
In the prior post ISTM that you were anxious to identify meanings which did not exist.
Please.
AFAIK, a Rice burner is an underpowered Japanese CAR from the 1970's. Maybe I'm wrong? I'll look it up, given that words have meanings and I'd rather use them correctly. Hang on...
...
Rice burner is a pejorative describing Japanese-made?or by extension, Asian-made?motorcycles and automobiles. According to Wikipedia.
So the meaning is broader than I had thought, referring perhaps to all asian motorcycles and automobiles.
Nope. No slur against "Asians or specifically the Japanese". None intended, and none expressed. Please calm down.
So you confirmed that "rice burner" is a pejorative term and yet you claim no slur was expressed? Unintended perhaps. But expressed? Oh yeah.
I'm not taking sides here, but just sayin'
Numbers don't add up. They only have 60k apps, very few compared to Android and ios, and they are claiming 6 million downloads a day. So every single app they have is being downloaded 10 times a day, every single day, on average? Sounds a little fishy to me.
And they claim 2 billion downloads as of last month, while Apple which has more phones in the wild and 5 times more apps on has 3 billion. Sounds like some fibbing is going on at RIM.
Actually the 2 billion app download stat matches pretty well to Android's numbers.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/...loads-and.html
Android hit 1 billion app download in July 2010 and hit 3 billion app download in March 2011. 2 months after the 1 billion app download announcement, Android announced that they had 80000 apps in September 2010.
RIM hit 1 billion app download sometime around July 2011 and hit 2 billion download in January 2012.
If you look at Android's chart, they probably hit 2 billion app download at around the end of November 2010 (maybe even December 2010). At the 1 billion app download starting mark --- Android had more apps than RIM, so naturally Android reached the 2 billion app download a couple of months earlier than RIM.
Android just announced 10 billion app download in December 2012, so they are about (edit) 2 years behind itunes app download. And RIM is about 1 year behind Android's numbers.
You're right - because 6,000,000 downloads divided by 60,000 apps is 100 per day, not 10. So every app, on average, is getting downloaded 100 times per day...?
The missing metric is across what base of users? If you have 1 million users then the 6M/day is a lot, if you have 100M users, it's not so much. Some apps could be downloaded 50,000 times a day if it's popular. What is the user base of BBs that can take the App-store Apps - All, some, BB5+, etc. I don't know. I think the installed base of BB is about 75M - not sure if they are all app-store capable.
Apple has seen probably over 25Bn downloads from the App store to date (extrapolating from the 18Bn downloaded by Oct 2011 shown on Wikipedia), and that is over 320M iOS devices (though fewer concurrent users). Probably running at 1.5Bn per month now (post 4S influx so that is nearly 9x the BB market. 9x the volume on probably about 5x the user base (let's say 50 vs. 250M current iOS users). iOS is the store to focus on under any metric.
Regardless of all the armchair quarterbacking that's been going on, I do think that RIM is on the only course that can save it- launch a new, compelling product as quickly as possible.
Unfortunately, that won't be until fall of this year. And that could well doom them, and there might not be anything they can do about it.
The parade has moved on,,, furthermore, won't the new BBs have a different OS requiring them to totally rebuild the BB app store?
They're shedding marketshare every quarter to iOS and Andriod, and we've got at least 2 (if not 3) more quarters before RIM can release their new product. By then, Andriod manufactures will have released lots of new hardware (not sure what the development path is for post ICS Andriod OS), and Apple will have a new iPhone AND iOS6 out the door, perhaps several months in advance.
There's a threshold with any device or brand name where it fades out of public acclaim, and once the mojo is gone it's almost impossible to get it back. RIM may be there now. If not, then they're steadily moving closer every day up to the day they release BB10.
I think 2012 is the year their enterprise customers jump ship and swim to iOS. The world aint waiting for RIM or MS to get their collective acts together.
[/QUOTE] If they can pull out of this nosedive, it will be every bit as remarkable as Apple's turnaround in the late '90s. I just don't think they have the vision to make it happen.[/QUOTE]
I agree, they don't have the marketing smarts. Someone is going to buy RIM for the patents and their secure email system...maybe even for their engineering expertise but RIM's management will be kicked to the curb.
You're right - because 6,000,000 downloads divided by 60,000 apps is 100 per day, not 10. So every app, on average, is getting downloaded 100 times per day...?
The number of apps is irrelivant, its the number of phones being sold that count. Users tend to buy apps in the first 3 months of getting a smartphone, after that its a massive drop as they get board of actively looking for apps. People getting a new smartphone will also start looking at apps again but not to such a great extent. So the important figure is how many phones are being sold.
Also the figure is likely to include people downloading updates, so if 1 app has 5 million users then 4 updated a year is 20 million re-downloads. Apps that have a free and paid version are effectively doubling up on initial downloads if the person buys. So if you look at it like that the number could be right and is also completely irrelevant.
Also the figure is likely to include people downloading updates, so if 1 app has 5 million users then 4 updated a year is 20 million re-downloads. Apps that have a free and paid version are effectively doubling up on initial downloads if the person buys. So if you look at it like that the number could be right and is also completely irrelevant.
Download numbers for Apple don't include updates. I doubt it would for the others... if so, it would be a massive con.
The number of apps is irrelivant, its the number of phones being sold that count. Users tend to buy apps in the first 3 months of getting a smartphone, after that its a massive drop as they get board of actively looking for apps. People getting a new smartphone will also start looking at apps again but not to such a great extent. So the important figure is how many phones are being sold.
Also the figure is likely to include people downloading updates, so if 1 app has 5 million users then 4 updated a year is 20 million re-downloads. Apps that have a free and paid version are effectively doubling up on initial downloads if the person buys. So if you look at it like that the number could be right and is also completely irrelevant.
This is the exact opposite of the argument made when talking about Android vs iOS. Paid App downloads per device matter to people selling the apps. If people buy 3 times as much on the iPhone then market share matters less. Same with the BB.
Things might get better if they brought in Steve Jobs, but finding someone like that probably isn't likely. Even amoung all of the monday morning quarterbacks. Apple had years of experience building computers and an ecosystem. All they had to do was to down it. That is a lot easier than up sizing a pager to a mobile computer.
Sure, they didn't see the iPhone coming, but who did? RIM is a lost cause, but I really don't think anyone can do better with the hand they have been delt.
Interesting how RIM becomes AI news, though.
I always feel a little bad for the guys at RIM! It is the classic case of "kick them when they are down." The standard line of thinking is that they screwed up, didn't innovate, and if they could just find the right CEO things might get better.
Things might get better if they brought in Steve Jobs, but finding someone like that probably isn't likely. Even amoung all of the monday morning quarterbacks. Apple had years of experience building computers and an ecosystem. All they had to do was to down it. That is a lot easier than up sizing a pager to a mobile computer.
Sure, they didn't see the iPhone coming, but who did? RIM is a lost cause, but I really don't think anyone can do better with the hand they have been delt.
Interesting how RIM becomes AI news, though.
Didn't RIM have an ecosystem? They had a decade's worth of mind share as well. They were the must-have device a decade ago. That nobody saw Apple coming is one thing, but one could say that RIM rested on their laurels, and they left the consumer market open for the taking.
That they originally tried to lock the Playbooks to only work with a Blackberry was a pretty serious blunder too, that really raised the barrier for entry for anyone that wanted to give it an honest try.
But you're right in suggesting that a new CEO probably isn't going to work magic, even Apple took years to turn around, and that was with a raggressive and risky corporate shake-up.
RIM news has been reported on AI for as long as Apple has been selling phones. Sometimes competitor news is significant.
Didn't RIM have an ecosystem?
That they originally tried to lock the Playbooks to only work with a Blackberry was a pretty serious blunder too, that really raised the barrier for entry for anyone that wanted to give it an honest try.
RIM news has been reported on AI for as long as Apple has been selling phones. Sometimes competitor news is significant.
Well, RIM seemed to have some simple apps, and some accessories, but Apple brings new meaning to the word ECOSYSTEM. Computers, music downloads with millions of customers, iWorks, iLife, movie downloads, and most of all, serious software/hardware experience with a fully developed OS to draw from.
Apple has actually made some pretty serious blunders, which don't get a lot of play. When they alone had the iPhone with multitouch they were completely arrogant. They thought they would charge an arm and a leg for it, it was also probably stupid to show it 6 months before release. That, and the months of over pricing meant that Google had nearly a year to move Android into multi touch before the iPhone sales hit high volume. Also, they probably shouldn't have hung with AT&T so long, although I respect that they were being loyal to a company which gave them an unheard of carrier deal.
Hindsight is always 20/20 so it is really easy to now say what people should have done.
I really have no love for RIM and have never used their devices, it is just hard to think of how they can get out of the hole they are in, and I doubt opening up Playbook would have produced better results.
If they want to post RIM news, fine, but I don't see RIM as Apple's competition in anyway.