If Apple sold the iPhone 5 for $99 NO contract they could have sold 50 million more?
Apparently you'd rather not give your opinion. No biggie.
You seemed to be implying that it wouldn't financially benefit Apple to offer a larger display iPhone model. Personally I think it would. Since the discussion included some posters who desired such a smartphone and seem to feel it's unavailability might have some effect on iPhone demand it's seems more appropriate than a derailment. Your comment about reducing price is new to the thread tho.
Stock is up over $5 pre-market, mostly due to a good jobs report, but honestly I think stories like this are starting to have less effect. Because often times they're bogus or don't tell the whole story. I mean that WSJ report from back in January didnt beat itself out in any of the numbers Apple reported.
I would think that 99% of the time there bogus, and if they come from "digitimes" there 100% bogus.
[...] After the company out reduced orders from its largest customers
I have no idea what this sentence means. "Out reduced orders?" Is that some kind of jargon specific to financial circles?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Laird projects that its next June quarter will also see revenue decline.
Huh? So, June 2014? "Next quarter" or "June quarter" make sense in the context of this story, but why would they be talking about the NEXT June quarter now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Growth is expected to resume in the second half of the year; consequently, Apple is expected to revamp virtually its entire major product lineup this fall.
What?! "Consequently?" Laird expects growth next quarter, which will cause Apple to update its product lineup? Or does Sam mean "coincidentally?"
Honestly, the writing in these articles is getting to the point where I can't even understand them.
If you look at Google's numbers at http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards you see that the vast majority - 80% - of the installed base has "normal" sized screens. In fact, there are about as many "small" screens (9.8%) as there are "large & xlarge" screens put together (10.5%).
Google's definitions:
Small = < 3.5"
Normal is the range around iPhone 5
Large is +4 to 7"
X-Large = 7-10"
So according to Google, your extremely small sample size is not representative of the active installed base hitting Google Play.
That's a disingenuous claim and you know it.
The Google numbers did not break down as you describe. They had OVERLAPS in thresholds at critical sizes. By their count, SOME 4.5" screens were counted as "Large" while OTHER 4.5" screens were counted as "Normal" (insert "WTF?!" here). That obviously invalidates the entire report, as there's no way to know if the "normal" range was populated with mostly 3.9" devices or mostly 4.9". For all we know from that report, there may be millions and millions of phones between 4.5 and 4.9 inches that were not counted as large.
Bottom line: Google's report tells us nothing useful. We still have no idea how many "bigger phones" are actually out there and/or what percentage of the whole they make up.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryA
I think the screen size is causing a lot of average users to consider the other guys. I know I am, at least for the interim until iPhone 6.
So what?
Apple sold 10 million MORE iPhones and iPads in Q1 (YoY)
It's completely irrelevant what Samsung et all sold.
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
So what?
Apple sold 10 million MORE iPhones and iPads in Q1 (YoY)
It's completely irrelevant what Samsung et all sold.
If they offered a larger display model too could Apple have sold 15 million more instead of just 10?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
It's just one story among many, from various suppliers, all saying the same thing. How much evidence do you need before you form a pattern?
I haven't seen any objective evidence anywhere. The patterns you speak of are based on biased speculation and pointed assumption.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
If they offered a larger display model too could Apple have sold 15 million more instead of just 10?
If Apple sold the iPhone 5 for $99 NO contract they could have sold 50 million more?
What's your point, other than aiding and abetting yet another thread derailment?
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
If Apple sold the iPhone 5 for $99 NO contract they could have sold 50 million more?
Apparently you'd rather not give your opinion. No biggie.
You seemed to be implying that it wouldn't financially benefit Apple to offer a larger display iPhone model. Personally I think it would. Since the discussion included some posters who desired such a smartphone and seem to feel it's unavailability might have some effect on iPhone demand it's seems more appropriate than a derailment. Your comment about reducing price is new to the thread tho.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Apparently you'd rather not give your opinion. No biggie.
Apparently you still insist on sidetracking the thread!
Quote:
You seemed to be implying that it wouldn't financially benefit Apple to offer a larger display iPhone model.
No. Your inference is wrong
My original comment was really simple, to anyone paying attention. Apple sold more product in Q1 2013 than a year ago.
If you want to infer something from that... it should be "Why are all these analysts STILL suggesting that sales are dropping?'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Stock is up over $5 pre-market, mostly due to a good jobs report, but honestly I think stories like this are starting to have less effect. Because often times they're bogus or don't tell the whole story. I mean that WSJ report from back in January didnt beat itself out in any of the numbers Apple reported.
I would think that 99% of the time there bogus, and if they come from "digitimes" there 100% bogus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everett Ruess
I wish, iPad 5 should be fast fast fast & have same form as iPad mini?
Then it would be an iPad mini 2, not an iPad.
You mean Apple only use one supplier for each of the component that goes into making the iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
[...] After the company out reduced orders from its largest customers
I have no idea what this sentence means. "Out reduced orders?" Is that some kind of jargon specific to financial circles?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Laird projects that its next June quarter will also see revenue decline.
Huh? So, June 2014? "Next quarter" or "June quarter" make sense in the context of this story, but why would they be talking about the NEXT June quarter now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Growth is expected to resume in the second half of the year; consequently, Apple is expected to revamp virtually its entire major product lineup this fall.
What?! "Consequently?" Laird expects growth next quarter, which will cause Apple to update its product lineup? Or does Sam mean "coincidentally?"
Honestly, the writing in these articles is getting to the point where I can't even understand them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
If you look at Google's numbers at http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards you see that the vast majority - 80% - of the installed base has "normal" sized screens. In fact, there are about as many "small" screens (9.8%) as there are "large & xlarge" screens put together (10.5%).
Google's definitions:
Small = < 3.5"
Normal is the range around iPhone 5
Large is +4 to 7"
X-Large = 7-10"
So according to Google, your extremely small sample size is not representative of the active installed base hitting Google Play.
That's a disingenuous claim and you know it.
The Google numbers did not break down as you describe. They had OVERLAPS in thresholds at critical sizes. By their count, SOME 4.5" screens were counted as "Large" while OTHER 4.5" screens were counted as "Normal" (insert "WTF?!" here). That obviously invalidates the entire report, as there's no way to know if the "normal" range was populated with mostly 3.9" devices or mostly 4.9". For all we know from that report, there may be millions and millions of phones between 4.5 and 4.9 inches that were not counted as large.
Bottom line: Google's report tells us nothing useful. We still have no idea how many "bigger phones" are actually out there and/or what percentage of the whole they make up.