The fallacies of your arguments are that small children only use toys and that ToysRUs only sell Toys.
By your reasoning books, cups, paints and paper must be toys as small children use them.
By your reasoning nappy wipes and musical instruments are toys as ToysRUs sell those too.
I don't know this guy might have a point, the ratio of games and and other entertainment apps to productivity apps is pretty big. Even the so called iWork suite is dressed up to look play-full on the iPad, it looks more like a teenagers journal then a actual wordprocessor.
I can't wait to hear from all the Apple haters who insisted that it would be a failure because of the name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
Uh I don't think there is anyone on this planet that's saying that by Apple just calling it iPad and not iPad 3 will bring doom upon the house of Apple. That's just silly, even the biggest hater knows Apple will sell bagillion of these things.
There are PLENTY of people saying that the name will be a major factor in keeping most people from buying the "the new iPad".
This is a common attack on the simple naming system that SJ brought to Apple.
Just dig through technology sites, especially Apple focused ones, and see what was being said prior to, as well as after the release of the MacBook, MacBook Air, or far earlier to those, the iPod, iPhone, etc.
The doomsayers for anything Apple for any reason is hilarious!
Demand of Apple products are increasing day-by-day and that is unbelievable they capture the world in I.T. business..!
Remember what Steve said like 5 years ago.
"We don't offer stripped down, lousy products"
"We don't ship junk"
People like myself have been drawn to Apple because we see how happy Apple customers are. They are happy because they didn't buy shit. They have a great working phone, tablet, laptop and desktop.
What did the rest of us have? Android, HP, Dell, IBM, and plenty of other garbage brands that thrive on selling products that don't work especially well.
I think this is the number one reason demand for Apple has increased while everyone else is racing to the bottom.
Uh I don't think there is anyone on this planet that's saying that by Apple just calling it iPad and not iPad 3 will bring doom upon the house of Apple. That's just silly, even the biggest hater knows Apple will sell bagillion of these things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
That last link includes include a link to an even earlier citation for the name "iPad", an April Fools post linking to a nonexistent Apple "iPad" page. Except-- that link now goes to Apple's iPad page for the actual iPad. Weird!
It wasn't just about the iPad name which had in fact been loosely guessed at by a couple of other people beforehand, it's more about the physical description, the ways that it would be held, how it would be used and what for, and even the tiered price points $599/$799 that are within $100 of what actually became the iPad 7 years later.
I doubt the iPad would have sold very well if it was in the same price band as Apple's laptops.
Well they are already at 50% margin so I would have hope not and the price their charging for the 64GB variant is pretty extravagant. I would have been much more happy if Apple only had 3 models. 1 16GB iPad 2, 1 32 GB iPad 3 with MiniSD no LTE and 1 iPad 3 32 GB with MiniSD and LTE. It would have kept the prices down and probably would have made more money for Apple in the long run with branded MiniSD cards up to 64 GB.
Plus silenced me up as they would have to include a file manager for me to use the MiniSD. I don't understand it either as I can write things to a full size SD card via the terminal when the Photo expansion kit is attached. Granted you do need a Jail Broken iPad but if I can do it via the terminal I know Apple could make it work with a GUI. Someone mentioned that iOS has given up on normal file based system, wrong it's just like any other nix system just neutered in the GUI.
Oh one more thing you can only read/write to a SD card, after iOS 4 something Apple decreased the power outage of the expansion slot making most usb sticks impossible to write on. I keep getting a a low power error message when I try. If anybody has a work around or a hack to increase power that would be much appreciated.
It's very nice having all my movies on a external SD card, it's much easier copying data to a SD card then going threw that blasted iTunes to do it. Somebody needs to be shot over that debacle, the most retarded thing about the iPad.
UPDATE!! Oh my gosh I just rediscovered an App called iFile. I say rediscovered because before I jail broke my iPad you could only see certain directories. Now I see everything including my external SD card. Yay, no more terminal if I want to delete, move, create directory or play movies. Well this changes a lot, finally my iPad can do some of things that I have been taking for granted on my Android tablet, so happy right now.
All of which points to the old saying that 87% of all statistics are made up.
Personally, I grow weary of the "Apple only has XXX of market share, so they better watch out, by gosh" mentality that continues to make noise and confuse the consumer. The misinformation media has done much to make nothing out of something with regards to Apple for years and I do not see that changing anytime soon.
The result, some poor smuck buys another type of tablet because, you know, the iPad doesn't run flash; isn't compatible with Windows; isn't dumbed down enough for me to get it; etc. ad nauseum.
In another area, Wall Street folks continue to attack Apple simply because they don't offer a dividend on their stock. I find this one unbelievably absurd, as where is the same argument against Google? It boggles the mind.
Oh one more thing you can only read/write to a SD card, after iOS 4 something Apple decreased the power outage of the expansion slot making most usb sticks impossible to write on. I keep getting a a low power error message when I try. If anybody has a work around or a hack to increase power that would be much appreciated.
It's very nice having all my movies on a external SD card, it's much easier copying data to a SD card then going threw that blasted iTunes to do it. Somebody needs to be shot over that debacle, the most retarded thing about the iPad.
UPDATE!! Oh my gosh I just rediscovered an App called iFile. I say rediscovered because before I jail broke my iPad you could only see certain directories. Now I see everything including my external SD card. Yay, no more terminal if I want to delete, move, create directory or play movies. Well this changes a lot, finally my iPad can do some of things that I have been taking for granted on my Android tablet, so happy right now.
I love Good Reader for iPad, it is a called the Swiss Army Knife of the iPad so it should appeal to you.
Apple's pricing of their products are for the more well-off individual, or someone willing to pay more for Apple than for the many MS hardware products. For the most part, then, Apple has a customer base that is not as price-driven or price sensitive as the base for PCs, and therefore more predictable.
But, I think Apple's customer base may also be different from the customer buying PCs. Apple customers are more comfortable with or prefer or desire less choice, allowing and trusting in Apple designers to make the good choices.
See Sheena Iyengar, Prof at Columbia Business School, her presentations at TED and her book The Art of Choosing. See also the works of Barry Schwartz and his book The Paradox of Choice (and TED lectures). See also Kahneman and Tversky works on choice. The former received the Nobel prize in Economics in 2002 for their work (Tversky had died prior so wasn't eligible).
I think it is so much more interesting to look that the above research on choice rather than continue the silliness of name-calling and shouts of fanboyisms and defenses thereof. It might just make the conversation a little more intelligent. According to this research on choice, Apple customers might be more driven by the desire to simplify and limit the anxiety caused by too many choices, and let the experts (in this case Apple designers) make the significant choices for them (us). This leaves the customer the time and resources to make the choices only he/she can make, leaving choices of computer hardware to Apple.
For these customers, Apple will continue to have loyal customers as long as Apple continues to make good choices in the design of their products.
What is so telling is the fact that so many of the companies offering alternatives to Apple's products and services do nothing but copy everything they can from Apple. Both hardware design and software concepts. So I think the premise you postulate is false. It seems most want want Apple's offerings but many choose cheap knock offs. So the apparent choice you refer to is between the genuine article or the ripp off. So the psychological dynamic at play here may not be as profound as you imply or at least very different.
I'm not sure if this has been widely reported but in the last quarter of 2011, iPad sales overtook iPod sales. This is huge, even if iPod numbers dropped a bit (possibly because some potential buyers shifted to iPhone, which also went up steeply). Apple has managed to morph the relatively inexpensive iPod into a higher-end gadget that's now outselling it.
I doubt very much Microsoft can catch up. The only other game in town is Android, and that attracts a different type of buyer, the one who buys on price and who likes the ability to brick the device.
Another interesting number in the last Q 2011 corporate reports: the one number in the same ballpark in Apple and Microsoft's reports in inventory. Given how much hardware Apple moves vs. Microsoft's product line, which is mostly software, that's pretty impressive. Apple's tight inventory is one of the biggest turnaround success stories in the industry, after their disasters in the late 1990s with warehouses full of unsaleable stock.
Girls in their 20s rarely ask me about anything these days except for directions
I got a good 5 years then its all downhill... I'm probably looking for a female companion in their 30s though. We'll see ha ha.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
It's amazing how some folks just cannot bring themselves to acknowledge that Apple is successful because they make great, durable products that work really well and provide excellent service after the sale.
Somehow it's always about marketing, RDF, sheep, brand snobbery, hipsterdom, etc. Anything but products. The weird thing is, as Apple continues to sell to more and more people, this theory is obliged to expand until we are required to believe that half the plant are poser rich assholes, or something. There's a fair amount of cognitive dissonance between the hated, niche Apple of old and the hated, wildly successful mass-market Apple of now.
Yeah, I got all that stuff thrown at me over the weekend, and upon reflection, boy, those people are losing out. Let them "fight the power" by buying Windows and Android. One of the guys was basically a decent guy but slightly immature. He saw Windows and Android as the new counter-culture, saving money while still sticking it to "the man". Kinda sad, really. And he wants to get into interactive media design and production. Yes, tons of people use PCs and produce great work, but the Apple ecosystem seems so much more fluid, productive, cost-effective, rewarding and pleasurable. After 20 years of using Windows I honestly see no more point for it, other than running IE7 to test websites. Particularly since, as I mention many times, I've stopped PC gaming, probably for good.
Yes, this could be construed as pompous, but I think, it's sad that (A) people think that Windows and Android is "the new hip" while berating Apple users as being hipsters, and (B) talented, intelligent people are missing out on a life-enriching experience.
All the folks who still use an iPad 1 like me, who passed on the iPad 2 are going to upgrade this year. Not to mention, all new folks will buy purchase a new iPad this year.
I wish I would have purchased Apple stock at 300. It is still a strong buy at 545!
Think how I feel, my son bought his at $40.00. I'm an idiot for not buying then.
Apple's pricing of their products are for the more well-off individual, or someone willing to pay more for Apple than for the many MS hardware products. For the most part, then, Apple has a customer base that is not as price-driven or price sensitive as the base for PCs, and therefore more predictable.
The 90's are calling and they want their 'wisdom' back.
Apple's products are largely competitive today.
- The iPad is priced at or below most 10" tablets
- The iPhone is priced well within range of comparable high end phones (some are higher, some are lower)
- The MBA is very competitive - most vendors are having to cut build quality or features just to match the MBA price point
- The iMac is competitive for an AIO. Where else can you get a 27" AIO for that price?
- The Mac Pro is competitive - if you compare equivalent products. Not cheap, cut-rate iSeries products, but solid, commercial quality Xeon computers. This is especially true for dual CPU systems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
It's amazing how some folks just cannot bring themselves to acknowledge that Apple is successful because they make great, durable products that work really well and provide excellent service after the sale.
Somehow it's always about marketing, RDF, sheep, brand snobbery, hipsterdom, etc. Anything but products. The weird thing is, as Apple continues to sell to more and more people, this theory is obliged to expand until we are required to believe that half the plant are poser rich assholes, or something. There's a fair amount of cognitive dissonance between the hated, niche Apple of old and the hated, wildly successful mass-market Apple of now.
Well said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I would call it a subcategory of the notebook category but even excluding it there are plenty of sub-$500 notebooks in the US and they are likely cheaper in many other countries. But then you need to consider the iPad's ARP being in the $6xx range and that the iPad goes as high as $829. That last value is important because the ARP for non-Mac PCs are apparently in the $7xx range.
I bought a $500 laptop for my daughter a couple of years ago and it's junk. I've bought a lot of computers for work- and every time we tried to buy a 'bargain' laptop, it was junk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
The car would be an insult if the person could not even afford a full tank of gas as the totally broke younger brother scenario however the shares are always new, not used and discarded, so that would be a nice gift as long as it was appropriate for the relationship and the circumstance.
So if you didn't have any money for gas, you wouldn't accept a gift of a used Bentley Continental GT? Did it ever occur to you that you could sell it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
Interesting...
Analysts quote "shipments" for the quarter... because manufacturers rarely provide a definite number of sales to consumers. The manufacturers usually talk about "channel shipments" whenever they issue a press release.
So where is this market share data coming from?
If I wanted to know how many Xyboards that Motorola sold to consumers last quarter... where can I find this information?
And Amazon NEVER shares its sales data at all...
Where exactly can I read about each manufacturers' sales to consumers?
If you're right... and market share is, in fact, the number of tablets purchased by the consumer... I'd like to see each and every Android tablet manufacturer publish their end-user sales numbers.
I haven't yet seen enough data to show that 39% of tablets sold to consumers last quarter were Android tablets...
EDIT: SolipsismX below has some insight. "Market share" is any and all units on the market... sold or unsold.
The correct term for the number of units purchased by consumers is "installed base"
You are wrong. Installed base is the number of units still in use - no matter when they were sold. Market share is the percentage sold for each supplier for a given time period.
For any given time period, the market share is the percentage of units sold that some from a given supplier (or given product). Unsold units are not counted.
Now, it is possible to argue that 'sold to a distributor' should be considered sold, but that is generally not done. Until the unit is actually sold to the end user, the unit could be returned to the vendor and would then have to be subtracted from the total. When you think about it, that makes sense. Why would someone be concerned about market share? Because they want to better understand consumer buying habits. A million tablets sitting on a shelf has no impact on consumer buying habits, so is not a useful piece of information.
The reason that you see so many different measures of market share is that it's difficult to know how many are in consumers' hands. That's why 'shipments to distributors' is sometimes used as a proxy for 'sold to consumers'. It's why you see all these estimates based on web browsing history and so on. But those are only proxies - not the real thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I don't think that's accurate. Market share, obviously refers to the share of the market. The market being how many units within a market are sold within a set time frame. That sale doesn't have to be and end user, it can be a retailer or some other intermediary that buys and pays for the product from the vendor.
Installed base is a measure of the units in consumers hands and still actively used at a given time.
Right?
The latter is correct. Installed base is the number in use at a given time (one could argue that it doesn't have to be actively in use). If HP sold a billion touch pads and every one ended up in the trash the next day, then their installed base the day after that would be zero - even though their market share would be very high for that period.
The former is misleading. Market share is the percentage of units sold. But, it's a term that is used for marketing purposes. That means understanding consumer behavior and therefore, the units in customers' hands would be the important thing.
Ultimately, the numbers even out. If Samsung sells a million Tabs to distributors, those will eventually have to be sold (perhaps at a heavy discount) or returned to Samsung (in which case they'd be subtracted from the shipments figure). So, over a period of time, the two numbers will eventually equalize. That's why 'shipments' is often used as a proxy for 'sales to consumers'. Over time, the numbers equalize.
That highlights the big problems of determining market share:
- It is difficult to know the sales to consumers. If HP ships 500,000 Touchpads to Best Buy, how many of those get into consumers' hands? And when? Because of that, it's most common to use some kind of proxy measurement to determine market share.
- Defining the market is not easy. Is a Kindle Fire in the same market as an iPad? For some purposes, it is. For others, it is not. And to complicate matters, if the original iPad is now priced at $249 refurbished, does that make it the same market as the Fire?
- Time period matters. If you look at shipments and consumer sales, they could give different results depending on the time period. For example, the quarter that HP shipped half a million Touchpads to Best Buy, their market share was very high from a shipments measurement, but low from a consumer measurement. Over time, of course, that evens out, but it can lead to inaccurate short term conclusions. The further the proxy is from reality, the worse this is (for example, the oft-cited use of browser hits to measure 'market share').
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj
Two problems with that.
First, I doubt Tim Cook talks to a lot of people who are looking to make a decision about which tablet to buy. I am POSITIVE that he talks to a lot of people whose income goes up with Apple's stock goes up though.
Second, do you seriously believe everything you hear from someone with a vested interest? Pretty dumb. Here's a tip - company executives say positive things when asked questions about the company. Duh.
Do you realize that intentionally lying about a material matter is a felony? So if you have evidence that Tim Cook is lying, why haven't you reported him to the SEC? I really love the "Apple is lying" mentality from people who have no concept what it means for a company to publicly lie about something like this.
Furthermore, are you really implying that Tim Cook relies solely on people he talks to himself to reach conclusions like that? The concept of him having people doing market research honestly never crossed your mind?
The fact is that the best information about the impact of the Fire on iPad sales is undoubtedly coming from Apple. No one else would have the information needed to do that.
Now, Amazon could come close. If Amazon surveyed their Fire purchasers and determined that x% bought a Fire instead of an iPad, that might be useful. However, it would not tell them how many people went into the store to buy a Fire and bought an iPad, instead.
A third party survey which contacted a representative sample of both Fire and iPad purchasers might be able to sort it out, but that hasn't been done. So the best information today is Apple's public statement.
For starters Apple doesn't seem to have an extra large stock pile of iPads to sell. Second, I have trouble seeing how someone who is looking at a $199 Kindle with 8GB storage and very limited HW features would also be considering an iPad that costs from 2.5x to over 4x as much. It's like wondering about going to Ruth Chris's for filet mignon or hitting Taco Bell drive thru for a Doritos taco. Both are fine in their own right, but when you plan to get one you aren't likely considering the other.
Of course Amazon wants you to compare the Kindle Fire to the iPad. The iPad is a hot device. I think only the iPhone outsells it. By making an association you try to feed off it's prestige, it's popularity. In fact, from a marketing perspective you ONLY do it when the product you are comparing to has taken a huge tumble in popularity (like when Apple finally started using Window Vista in adds specifically instead of just saying PC) or when your product is clearly inferior and needs the association bump. If it were truly a competitor in size, capabilities and price against a product with that much mindshare it likely hurt them.
I don't disagree with your comments about comparing the kindle fire to the iPad. It is misplaced.
I do know a couple of people who bought the Kindle though becaus they could/would not spend the extra $ to get the iPad so they can browse the web and use a couple of apps. It may be a missed opportunity for Apple to ignore that segment of the market, but then they are doing so well it probably won't matter.
I don't disagree with your comments about comparing the kindle fire to the iPad. It is misplaced.
I do know a couple of people who bought the Kindle though becaus they could/would not spend the extra $ to get the iPad so they can browse the web and use a couple of apps. It may be a missed opportunity for Apple to ignore that segment of the market, but then they are doing so well it probably won't matter.
If those people never considered buying an iPad, then Apple didn't lose a customer to the Kindle. It is only a loss of a customer if the customer was ready and able to buy both products.
When someone buys a Honda Civic CRX instead of a Ferrari, it was probably not a lost sale for Ferrari. OTOH, when they buy a Maserati instead of a Ferrari, it was.
Now, it may be a lost opportunity, but that's a different matter. That raises the question of "can we produce an iPad that meets our standards and can sell for $200" which is an entirely different question.
Now, it is possible to argue that 'sold to a distributor' should be considered sold, but that is generally not done.
Of course it is. If the distributor paid for them, which he almost certainly did as Apple states to the SEC, then Apple would count it as a sale following Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) just like most others reporting to the SEC. It matters not if Best Buy or you personally paid Apple. Their 10-K is clear about that.
If you have doubts "that's the way it's done" do a little research on it. The statement Apple makes in it's 10-K on how it recognizes revenue is pretty much boiler-plate wording. It's common.
Of course it is. If the distributor paid for them, which he almost certainly did as Apple states to the SEC, then Apple would count it as a sale following Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) just like most others reporting to the SEC. It matters not if Best Buy or you personally paid Apple. Their 10-K is clear about that.
If you have doubts "that's the way it's done" do a little research on it. The statement Apple makes in it's 10-K on how it recognizes revenue is pretty much boiler-plate wording. It's common.
You're talking about something different.
If you're worried about finances, then it's considered sold. But when you talk about market share, you are interested in what's in the hands of the consumer.
If those people never considered buying an iPad, then Apple didn't lose a customer to the Kindle. It is only a loss of a customer if the customer was ready and able to buy both products.
When someone buys a Honda Civic CRX instead of a Ferrari, it was probably not a lost sale for Ferrari. OTOH, when they buy a Maserati instead of a Ferrari, it was.
Now, it may be a lost opportunity, but that's a different matter. That raises the question of "can we produce an iPad that meets our standards and can sell for $200" which is an entirely different question.
What's crazy is it only costs Apple an additional $120.03 over the price Amazon pays to get the Kindle built. The margin on the iPad is huge, 50% and we keep forking out the money, absolutely amazing. It's funny too the new Motorola Xoom 2 actually cost more to make, we all know which one we would prefer though. Although the new Xoom 2 is waterproof.
iPad 3 base model $326.60
Amazon Kindle $206.63
So in reality the iPad 3 is still a Honda CRX but with a V8 bolted to the body.
If you're worried about finances, then it's considered sold. But when you talk about market share, you are interested in what's in the hands of the consumer.
Don't confuse unrelated issues.
Apple doesn't report the number of iPads sold to an end-user. They give various figures that can allow for a pretty good educated guess on the actual consumer sales, but Apple does not report a specific number AFAIK. As far as what they legally report to the SEC (and therefor investors) their revenue (sales) figures can include those to a reseller just as well as an end-user.
Comments
The fallacies of your arguments are that small children only use toys and that ToysRUs only sell Toys.
By your reasoning books, cups, paints and paper must be toys as small children use them.
By your reasoning nappy wipes and musical instruments are toys as ToysRUs sell those too.
I don't know this guy might have a point, the ratio of games and and other entertainment apps to productivity apps is pretty big. Even the so called iWork suite is dressed up to look play-full on the iPad, it looks more like a teenagers journal then a actual wordprocessor.
I can't wait to hear from all the Apple haters who insisted that it would be a failure because of the name.
Uh I don't think there is anyone on this planet that's saying that by Apple just calling it iPad and not iPad 3 will bring doom upon the house of Apple. That's just silly, even the biggest hater knows Apple will sell bagillion of these things.
There are PLENTY of people saying that the name will be a major factor in keeping most people from buying the "the new iPad".
This is a common attack on the simple naming system that SJ brought to Apple.
Just dig through technology sites, especially Apple focused ones, and see what was being said prior to, as well as after the release of the MacBook, MacBook Air, or far earlier to those, the iPod, iPhone, etc.
The doomsayers for anything Apple for any reason is hilarious!
Demand of Apple products are increasing day-by-day and that is unbelievable they capture the world in I.T. business..!
Remember what Steve said like 5 years ago.
"We don't offer stripped down, lousy products"
"We don't ship junk"
People like myself have been drawn to Apple because we see how happy Apple customers are. They are happy because they didn't buy shit. They have a great working phone, tablet, laptop and desktop.
What did the rest of us have? Android, HP, Dell, IBM, and plenty of other garbage brands that thrive on selling products that don't work especially well.
I think this is the number one reason demand for Apple has increased while everyone else is racing to the bottom.
Uh I don't think there is anyone on this planet that's saying that by Apple just calling it iPad and not iPad 3 will bring doom upon the house of Apple. That's just silly, even the biggest hater knows Apple will sell bagillion of these things.
That last link includes include a link to an even earlier citation for the name "iPad", an April Fools post linking to a nonexistent Apple "iPad" page. Except-- that link now goes to Apple's iPad page for the actual iPad. Weird!
It wasn't just about the iPad name which had in fact been loosely guessed at by a couple of other people beforehand, it's more about the physical description, the ways that it would be held, how it would be used and what for, and even the tiered price points $599/$799 that are within $100 of what actually became the iPad 7 years later.
I doubt the iPad would have sold very well if it was in the same price band as Apple's laptops.
Well they are already at 50% margin so I would have hope not and the price their charging for the 64GB variant is pretty extravagant. I would have been much more happy if Apple only had 3 models. 1 16GB iPad 2, 1 32 GB iPad 3 with MiniSD no LTE and 1 iPad 3 32 GB with MiniSD and LTE. It would have kept the prices down and probably would have made more money for Apple in the long run with branded MiniSD cards up to 64 GB.
Plus silenced me up as they would have to include a file manager for me to use the MiniSD. I don't understand it either as I can write things to a full size SD card via the terminal when the Photo expansion kit is attached. Granted you do need a Jail Broken iPad but if I can do it via the terminal I know Apple could make it work with a GUI. Someone mentioned that iOS has given up on normal file based system, wrong it's just like any other nix system just neutered in the GUI.
It's very nice having all my movies on a external SD card, it's much easier copying data to a SD card then going threw that blasted iTunes to do it. Somebody needs to be shot over that debacle, the most retarded thing about the iPad.
UPDATE!! Oh my gosh I just rediscovered an App called iFile. I say rediscovered because before I jail broke my iPad you could only see certain directories. Now I see everything including my external SD card. Yay, no more terminal if I want to delete, move, create directory or play movies. Well this changes a lot, finally my iPad can do some of things that I have been taking for granted on my Android tablet, so happy right now.
All of which points to the old saying that 87% of all statistics are made up.
Personally, I grow weary of the "Apple only has XXX of market share, so they better watch out, by gosh" mentality that continues to make noise and confuse the consumer. The misinformation media has done much to make nothing out of something with regards to Apple for years and I do not see that changing anytime soon.
The result, some poor smuck buys another type of tablet because, you know, the iPad doesn't run flash; isn't compatible with Windows; isn't dumbed down enough for me to get it; etc. ad nauseum.
In another area, Wall Street folks continue to attack Apple simply because they don't offer a dividend on their stock. I find this one unbelievably absurd, as where is the same argument against Google? It boggles the mind.
But hey, carry on!
Excellently said!
Oh one more thing you can only read/write to a SD card, after iOS 4 something Apple decreased the power outage of the expansion slot making most usb sticks impossible to write on. I keep getting a a low power error message when I try. If anybody has a work around or a hack to increase power that would be much appreciated.
It's very nice having all my movies on a external SD card, it's much easier copying data to a SD card then going threw that blasted iTunes to do it. Somebody needs to be shot over that debacle, the most retarded thing about the iPad.
UPDATE!! Oh my gosh I just rediscovered an App called iFile. I say rediscovered because before I jail broke my iPad you could only see certain directories. Now I see everything including my external SD card. Yay, no more terminal if I want to delete, move, create directory or play movies. Well this changes a lot, finally my iPad can do some of things that I have been taking for granted on my Android tablet, so happy right now.
I love Good Reader for iPad, it is a called the Swiss Army Knife of the iPad so it should appeal to you.
Apple's pricing of their products are for the more well-off individual, or someone willing to pay more for Apple than for the many MS hardware products. For the most part, then, Apple has a customer base that is not as price-driven or price sensitive as the base for PCs, and therefore more predictable.
But, I think Apple's customer base may also be different from the customer buying PCs. Apple customers are more comfortable with or prefer or desire less choice, allowing and trusting in Apple designers to make the good choices.
See Sheena Iyengar, Prof at Columbia Business School, her presentations at TED and her book The Art of Choosing. See also the works of Barry Schwartz and his book The Paradox of Choice (and TED lectures). See also Kahneman and Tversky works on choice. The former received the Nobel prize in Economics in 2002 for their work (Tversky had died prior so wasn't eligible).
I think it is so much more interesting to look that the above research on choice rather than continue the silliness of name-calling and shouts of fanboyisms and defenses thereof. It might just make the conversation a little more intelligent. According to this research on choice, Apple customers might be more driven by the desire to simplify and limit the anxiety caused by too many choices, and let the experts (in this case Apple designers) make the significant choices for them (us). This leaves the customer the time and resources to make the choices only he/she can make, leaving choices of computer hardware to Apple.
For these customers, Apple will continue to have loyal customers as long as Apple continues to make good choices in the design of their products.
What is so telling is the fact that so many of the companies offering alternatives to Apple's products and services do nothing but copy everything they can from Apple. Both hardware design and software concepts. So I think the premise you postulate is false. It seems most want want Apple's offerings but many choose cheap knock offs. So the apparent choice you refer to is between the genuine article or the ripp off. So the psychological dynamic at play here may not be as profound as you imply or at least very different.
I doubt very much Microsoft can catch up. The only other game in town is Android, and that attracts a different type of buyer, the one who buys on price and who likes the ability to brick the device.
Another interesting number in the last Q 2011 corporate reports: the one number in the same ballpark in Apple and Microsoft's reports in inventory. Given how much hardware Apple moves vs. Microsoft's product line, which is mostly software, that's pretty impressive. Apple's tight inventory is one of the biggest turnaround success stories in the industry, after their disasters in the late 1990s with warehouses full of unsaleable stock.
Girls in their 20s rarely ask me about anything these days except for directions
It's amazing how some folks just cannot bring themselves to acknowledge that Apple is successful because they make great, durable products that work really well and provide excellent service after the sale.
Somehow it's always about marketing, RDF, sheep, brand snobbery, hipsterdom, etc. Anything but products. The weird thing is, as Apple continues to sell to more and more people, this theory is obliged to expand until we are required to believe that half the plant are poser rich assholes, or something. There's a fair amount of cognitive dissonance between the hated, niche Apple of old and the hated, wildly successful mass-market Apple of now.
Yeah, I got all that stuff thrown at me over the weekend, and upon reflection, boy, those people are losing out. Let them "fight the power" by buying Windows and Android. One of the guys was basically a decent guy but slightly immature. He saw Windows and Android as the new counter-culture, saving money while still sticking it to "the man". Kinda sad, really. And he wants to get into interactive media design and production. Yes, tons of people use PCs and produce great work, but the Apple ecosystem seems so much more fluid, productive, cost-effective, rewarding and pleasurable. After 20 years of using Windows I honestly see no more point for it, other than running IE7 to test websites. Particularly since, as I mention many times, I've stopped PC gaming, probably for good.
Yes, this could be construed as pompous, but I think, it's sad that (A) people think that Windows and Android is "the new hip" while berating Apple users as being hipsters, and (B) talented, intelligent people are missing out on a life-enriching experience.
As they say, "water will find its own level".
All the folks who still use an iPad 1 like me, who passed on the iPad 2 are going to upgrade this year. Not to mention, all new folks will buy purchase a new iPad this year.
I wish I would have purchased Apple stock at 300. It is still a strong buy at 545!
Think how I feel, my son bought his at $40.00. I'm an idiot for not buying then.
Apple's pricing of their products are for the more well-off individual, or someone willing to pay more for Apple than for the many MS hardware products. For the most part, then, Apple has a customer base that is not as price-driven or price sensitive as the base for PCs, and therefore more predictable.
The 90's are calling and they want their 'wisdom' back.
Apple's products are largely competitive today.
- The iPad is priced at or below most 10" tablets
- The iPhone is priced well within range of comparable high end phones (some are higher, some are lower)
- The MBA is very competitive - most vendors are having to cut build quality or features just to match the MBA price point
- The iMac is competitive for an AIO. Where else can you get a 27" AIO for that price?
- The Mac Pro is competitive - if you compare equivalent products. Not cheap, cut-rate iSeries products, but solid, commercial quality Xeon computers. This is especially true for dual CPU systems.
It's amazing how some folks just cannot bring themselves to acknowledge that Apple is successful because they make great, durable products that work really well and provide excellent service after the sale.
Somehow it's always about marketing, RDF, sheep, brand snobbery, hipsterdom, etc. Anything but products. The weird thing is, as Apple continues to sell to more and more people, this theory is obliged to expand until we are required to believe that half the plant are poser rich assholes, or something. There's a fair amount of cognitive dissonance between the hated, niche Apple of old and the hated, wildly successful mass-market Apple of now.
Well said.
I would call it a subcategory of the notebook category but even excluding it there are plenty of sub-$500 notebooks in the US and they are likely cheaper in many other countries. But then you need to consider the iPad's ARP being in the $6xx range and that the iPad goes as high as $829. That last value is important because the ARP for non-Mac PCs are apparently in the $7xx range.
I bought a $500 laptop for my daughter a couple of years ago and it's junk. I've bought a lot of computers for work- and every time we tried to buy a 'bargain' laptop, it was junk.
The car would be an insult if the person could not even afford a full tank of gas as the totally broke younger brother scenario however the shares are always new, not used and discarded, so that would be a nice gift as long as it was appropriate for the relationship and the circumstance.
So if you didn't have any money for gas, you wouldn't accept a gift of a used Bentley Continental GT? Did it ever occur to you that you could sell it?
Interesting...
Analysts quote "shipments" for the quarter... because manufacturers rarely provide a definite number of sales to consumers. The manufacturers usually talk about "channel shipments" whenever they issue a press release.
So where is this market share data coming from?
If I wanted to know how many Xyboards that Motorola sold to consumers last quarter... where can I find this information?
And Amazon NEVER shares its sales data at all...
Where exactly can I read about each manufacturers' sales to consumers?
If you're right... and market share is, in fact, the number of tablets purchased by the consumer... I'd like to see each and every Android tablet manufacturer publish their end-user sales numbers.
I haven't yet seen enough data to show that 39% of tablets sold to consumers last quarter were Android tablets...
EDIT: SolipsismX below has some insight. "Market share" is any and all units on the market... sold or unsold.
The correct term for the number of units purchased by consumers is "installed base"
You are wrong. Installed base is the number of units still in use - no matter when they were sold. Market share is the percentage sold for each supplier for a given time period.
Here's a definition of market share:
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketshare.asp
For any given time period, the market share is the percentage of units sold that some from a given supplier (or given product). Unsold units are not counted.
Now, it is possible to argue that 'sold to a distributor' should be considered sold, but that is generally not done. Until the unit is actually sold to the end user, the unit could be returned to the vendor and would then have to be subtracted from the total. When you think about it, that makes sense. Why would someone be concerned about market share? Because they want to better understand consumer buying habits. A million tablets sitting on a shelf has no impact on consumer buying habits, so is not a useful piece of information.
The reason that you see so many different measures of market share is that it's difficult to know how many are in consumers' hands. That's why 'shipments to distributors' is sometimes used as a proxy for 'sold to consumers'. It's why you see all these estimates based on web browsing history and so on. But those are only proxies - not the real thing.
I don't think that's accurate. Market share, obviously refers to the share of the market. The market being how many units within a market are sold within a set time frame. That sale doesn't have to be and end user, it can be a retailer or some other intermediary that buys and pays for the product from the vendor.
Installed base is a measure of the units in consumers hands and still actively used at a given time.
Right?
The latter is correct. Installed base is the number in use at a given time (one could argue that it doesn't have to be actively in use). If HP sold a billion touch pads and every one ended up in the trash the next day, then their installed base the day after that would be zero - even though their market share would be very high for that period.
The former is misleading. Market share is the percentage of units sold. But, it's a term that is used for marketing purposes. That means understanding consumer behavior and therefore, the units in customers' hands would be the important thing.
Ultimately, the numbers even out. If Samsung sells a million Tabs to distributors, those will eventually have to be sold (perhaps at a heavy discount) or returned to Samsung (in which case they'd be subtracted from the shipments figure). So, over a period of time, the two numbers will eventually equalize. That's why 'shipments' is often used as a proxy for 'sales to consumers'. Over time, the numbers equalize.
That highlights the big problems of determining market share:
- It is difficult to know the sales to consumers. If HP ships 500,000 Touchpads to Best Buy, how many of those get into consumers' hands? And when? Because of that, it's most common to use some kind of proxy measurement to determine market share.
- Defining the market is not easy. Is a Kindle Fire in the same market as an iPad? For some purposes, it is. For others, it is not. And to complicate matters, if the original iPad is now priced at $249 refurbished, does that make it the same market as the Fire?
- Time period matters. If you look at shipments and consumer sales, they could give different results depending on the time period. For example, the quarter that HP shipped half a million Touchpads to Best Buy, their market share was very high from a shipments measurement, but low from a consumer measurement. Over time, of course, that evens out, but it can lead to inaccurate short term conclusions. The further the proxy is from reality, the worse this is (for example, the oft-cited use of browser hits to measure 'market share').
Two problems with that.
First, I doubt Tim Cook talks to a lot of people who are looking to make a decision about which tablet to buy. I am POSITIVE that he talks to a lot of people whose income goes up with Apple's stock goes up though.
Second, do you seriously believe everything you hear from someone with a vested interest? Pretty dumb. Here's a tip - company executives say positive things when asked questions about the company. Duh.
Do you realize that intentionally lying about a material matter is a felony? So if you have evidence that Tim Cook is lying, why haven't you reported him to the SEC? I really love the "Apple is lying" mentality from people who have no concept what it means for a company to publicly lie about something like this.
Furthermore, are you really implying that Tim Cook relies solely on people he talks to himself to reach conclusions like that? The concept of him having people doing market research honestly never crossed your mind?
The fact is that the best information about the impact of the Fire on iPad sales is undoubtedly coming from Apple. No one else would have the information needed to do that.
Now, Amazon could come close. If Amazon surveyed their Fire purchasers and determined that x% bought a Fire instead of an iPad, that might be useful. However, it would not tell them how many people went into the store to buy a Fire and bought an iPad, instead.
A third party survey which contacted a representative sample of both Fire and iPad purchasers might be able to sort it out, but that hasn't been done. So the best information today is Apple's public statement.
For starters Apple doesn't seem to have an extra large stock pile of iPads to sell. Second, I have trouble seeing how someone who is looking at a $199 Kindle with 8GB storage and very limited HW features would also be considering an iPad that costs from 2.5x to over 4x as much. It's like wondering about going to Ruth Chris's for filet mignon or hitting Taco Bell drive thru for a Doritos taco. Both are fine in their own right, but when you plan to get one you aren't likely considering the other.
Of course Amazon wants you to compare the Kindle Fire to the iPad. The iPad is a hot device. I think only the iPhone outsells it. By making an association you try to feed off it's prestige, it's popularity. In fact, from a marketing perspective you ONLY do it when the product you are comparing to has taken a huge tumble in popularity (like when Apple finally started using Window Vista in adds specifically instead of just saying PC) or when your product is clearly inferior and needs the association bump. If it were truly a competitor in size, capabilities and price against a product with that much mindshare it likely hurt them.
I don't disagree with your comments about comparing the kindle fire to the iPad. It is misplaced.
I do know a couple of people who bought the Kindle though becaus they could/would not spend the extra $ to get the iPad so they can browse the web and use a couple of apps. It may be a missed opportunity for Apple to ignore that segment of the market, but then they are doing so well it probably won't matter.
I don't disagree with your comments about comparing the kindle fire to the iPad. It is misplaced.
I do know a couple of people who bought the Kindle though becaus they could/would not spend the extra $ to get the iPad so they can browse the web and use a couple of apps. It may be a missed opportunity for Apple to ignore that segment of the market, but then they are doing so well it probably won't matter.
If those people never considered buying an iPad, then Apple didn't lose a customer to the Kindle. It is only a loss of a customer if the customer was ready and able to buy both products.
When someone buys a Honda Civic CRX instead of a Ferrari, it was probably not a lost sale for Ferrari. OTOH, when they buy a Maserati instead of a Ferrari, it was.
Now, it may be a lost opportunity, but that's a different matter. That raises the question of "can we produce an iPad that meets our standards and can sell for $200" which is an entirely different question.
Now, it is possible to argue that 'sold to a distributor' should be considered sold, but that is generally not done.
Of course it is. If the distributor paid for them, which he almost certainly did as Apple states to the SEC, then Apple would count it as a sale following Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) just like most others reporting to the SEC. It matters not if Best Buy or you personally paid Apple. Their 10-K is clear about that.
If you have doubts "that's the way it's done" do a little research on it. The statement Apple makes in it's 10-K on how it recognizes revenue is pretty much boiler-plate wording. It's common.
Of course it is. If the distributor paid for them, which he almost certainly did as Apple states to the SEC, then Apple would count it as a sale following Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) just like most others reporting to the SEC. It matters not if Best Buy or you personally paid Apple. Their 10-K is clear about that.
If you have doubts "that's the way it's done" do a little research on it. The statement Apple makes in it's 10-K on how it recognizes revenue is pretty much boiler-plate wording. It's common.
You're talking about something different.
If you're worried about finances, then it's considered sold. But when you talk about market share, you are interested in what's in the hands of the consumer.
Don't confuse unrelated issues.
It helps to remember your correct password.
Anyway....welcome back.
Yeah, well there's that!
I mean really I am older, but if Dick Applebaum can remember his, then I would imagine someone slightly younger could remember their own!
Actually though, it was a lot more complicated, and I have no idea why.
I kept entering my last known password, only to have it rejected.
OK, got it. Change my password, right?
Wrong! No matter what I chose, it would first accept the change, but then when I went to log in? Bingo. No dice.
Anyway, glad to be back. Now I know that at least ONE poster doesn't have me on their "ignore" list.
If those people never considered buying an iPad, then Apple didn't lose a customer to the Kindle. It is only a loss of a customer if the customer was ready and able to buy both products.
When someone buys a Honda Civic CRX instead of a Ferrari, it was probably not a lost sale for Ferrari. OTOH, when they buy a Maserati instead of a Ferrari, it was.
Now, it may be a lost opportunity, but that's a different matter. That raises the question of "can we produce an iPad that meets our standards and can sell for $200" which is an entirely different question.
What's crazy is it only costs Apple an additional $120.03 over the price Amazon pays to get the Kindle built. The margin on the iPad is huge, 50% and we keep forking out the money, absolutely amazing. It's funny too the new Motorola Xoom 2 actually cost more to make, we all know which one we would prefer though. Although the new Xoom 2 is waterproof.
iPad 3 base model $326.60
Amazon Kindle $206.63
So in reality the iPad 3 is still a Honda CRX but with a V8 bolted to the body.
You're talking about something different.
If you're worried about finances, then it's considered sold. But when you talk about market share, you are interested in what's in the hands of the consumer.
Don't confuse unrelated issues.
Apple doesn't report the number of iPads sold to an end-user. They give various figures that can allow for a pretty good educated guess on the actual consumer sales, but Apple does not report a specific number AFAIK. As far as what they legally report to the SEC (and therefor investors) their revenue (sales) figures can include those to a reseller just as well as an end-user.