Ok thanks for clearing that up but an asterisk and an elaboration at the bottom would be nice especially for such well known companies being in that list.
I stand by the first paragraph.
I definitely agree with your first paragraph. I meant to exclude it. I just wanted to point out that 'others' included some well known companies that were once major players, and with Samsung on the way down could find themselves listed with the heavy hitters in the near future.
from a short term investment perspective and long term viability, yes.
But there is such a thing called critical mass. Apple has reached a critical mass in networking functional baseline (common capabilities that have palpable value to devs and users), developers, and end users. We've assumed Samsung has the possibility of doing it, but we are seeing they are cratering.
sacrificing profit for marketshare is a short term win IFF you have a method to retain stickiness. But if you're being sold as a flavor of the month by a carrier or a big-box retail, and that's it, you'll death spiral eventually. If you can 'hold their attention' then you can establish a foothold by which you can then start cranking the margin once your product has value that differentiates your 'ecosystem' from all others. We've seen that Samsung had one trick pony... size... Which can't be patented;-) Apple comes out with a fleet of sizes (4 4.7 5 8 10 11 13 15 21 24 27) and an ecosystem that ties them all together, and a link into the economic engine of the world (point of sale enablement), Samsung pales in comparison.
The bigger issue: The threat is never the one you're chasing.
Think Blackberry(Apple) and Nokia(Samsung). Apple( Xiaomi) comes in. The world laughs at the upstart, saying they don't know the smartphone world. Small doesn't mean non competitive.
Xiaomi has cachet in China. China is where consumer growth is greatest (China is where the US was in the 50/60s, Japan was in the 70s/80s).
The question is whether or not Xiaomi can develop an ecosystem that can 'lock-in' the chinese market. It may not impact Apple that much, but it may create a dual ecosystem world that in the end, Apple would lose, because they won't partner with other handset makers. Xiaomi may.
If you are not a stakeholder, being happy for huge Apple (or Google or any other big corp) profits is like being happy for the big ransom of your kidnapper, it's a technological version of Stockholm syndrome.
Actually, there's a vested interest in having local companies succeed since it brings prosperity to the area.
I live halfway between Google's headquarters and Apple's (closer to Google actually) and the local property values have increased over the years due to high demand. (Disclaimer: I own shares in both companies, although more in AAPL than GOOG/GOOGL.)
Remember that these are multi-national corporations with branches all over the world. Apple's success influences people in Austin, TX and Tel Aviv, Israel. Moreover, these companies influence the success of others (like parts suppliers for Apple).
Plus, why wouldn't you want to be happy for a company whose products and services you enjoy? It promises future new products and services, as well as the hope that the company will maintain a healthy existence for years to come.
Lastly, you don't have to love the companies you invest it, and you don't need to invest in the companies you love.
Your comment is blind in the global worldview of multinational corporations.
Wait, IDC was actually able to read apple's quarterly report and copy the number correctly this time. What happen, did that fire the old analyst who failed high school math. Or may be the really got the number wrong this time and they fix it next time.
Nah, the regular guy was sick, an intern filed the report.
Any report or chart focusing on marketshare is just for crap hit sake. If you include profit, then it starts to become meaningful.
Too many people buy a cheap 45$ tablet, then leave it to their kids to destroy as the sure do not use it to connect to the the internet.
To be clear, I think cheap tablets for very simple specific purposes are great. And they are throw-a-way. The better tablets get used and they last 3-5 years. Just saying.
Any report or chart focusing on marketshare is just for crap hit sake. If you include profit, then it starts to become meaningful.
Too many people buy a cheap 45$ tablet, then leave it to their kids to destroy as the sure do not use it to connect to the the internet.
To be clear, I think cheap tablets for very simple specific purposes are great. And they are throw-a-way. The better tablets get used and they last 3-5 years.
Just saying.
If the market share for a platform becomes too low, then third-parties abandon it. The Wii U is struggling with third-party support despite Nintendo is churning a profit now.
For anybody curious, here is the latest year-over-year smartphone OS market share global breakdown for September:
If you are not a stakeholder, being happy for huge Apple (or Google or any other big corp) profits is like being happy for the big ransom of your kidnapper, it's a technological version of Stockholm syndrome.
Companies need profits to stay in business and to keep making products.
Look at how many PC manufacturers are either gone or who have been absorbed by other struggling companies.
It's because they didn't make enough profit.
I agree that maybe people shouldn't celebrate when companies make "too much" profit... but are they allowed to be sad or pissed off when they don't make "enough" profit and they vanish?
I guess it's a delicate balance... companies have to make enough money to stay afloat.... but not so much money that it arouses the fanboys.
If the market share for a platform becomes too low, then third-parties abandon it.
You also have to remember that market share is a percentage based on the size of the entire market at any given time.
Apple's quarterly market share may go down... but they actually end up selling more phones. Weird, huh.
Plus... while the iPhone only has 12% quarterly market share today... there are also about 500 million iPhones out in the world. And those iPhone owners tend to spend money.
Would any sane developer abandon the iPhone at this point?
That's why you can't get too wrapped up in "quarterly market share" without also considering "installed base"
Frankly... I would laugh in any developer's face if they decided not to develop for the iPhone because its market share is "too low"
Again... "market share" only refers to the iPhones sold over the last 3 months... while "installed base" is ALL the iPhones in use today.
I bought my iPhone 5S a year ago... so my iPhone is not part of the current market share.
But I'm part of the installed base... and I can (and do) buy apps.
You also have to remember that market share is a percentage based on the size of the entire market at any given time.
Apple's quarterly market share may go down... but they actually end up selling more phones. Weird, huh.
It is hardly weird since I understand how percentages and market share work. My previous company was heavily interested in their own market share pertaining to software.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
You also have to remember that market share is a percentage based on the size of the entire market at any given time.
Apple's quarterly market share may go down... but they actually end up selling more phones. Weird, huh.
Plus... while the iPhone only has 12% quarterly market share today... there are also about 500 million iPhones out in the world. And those iPhone owners tend to spend money.
Would any sane developer abandon the iPhone at this point?
That's why you can't get too wrapped up in "quarterly market share" without also considering "installed base"
Frankly... I would laugh in any developer's face if they decided not to develop for the iPhone because its market share is "too low"
Again... "market share" only refers to the iPhones sold over the last 3 months... while "installed base" is ALL the iPhones in use today.
I bought my iPhone 5S a year ago... so my iPhone is not part of the current market share.
But I'm part of the installed base... and I can (and do) buy apps.
It would be ludicrous to abandon iOS given it has a sizable install base and it is the second largest platform next to Android. By supporting both platforms (Android and iOS) somebody could support up to 90% of the latest market share. Not too shabby.
However, I tend to look at the quarterly market share as a trend with buyers and future -- not present -- health. Is the market swaying one direction or another? And Apple is not being complacent. I believe Apple's change of heart to release 4.7 and 5.5" phones was a reaction to purchasing trends.
Apple's quarterly market share may go down... but they actually end up selling more phones. Weird, huh.
That just means that market growth outpaced the sales of iPhones. We saw that several times with the iPad, market share down, but sales considerably higher.
It is hardly weird since I understand how percentages and market share work. My previous company was heavily interested in their own market share pertaining to software.
Yep!
It's interesting though. There are companies who solely make software for the Mac... even though the Mac has never, and will never, have a meaningful amount of market share or installed base.
But that doesn't bother those developers... they know exactly who they want to target... even if it's not the dominant platform.
It would be ludicrous to abandon iOS given it has a sizable install base and it is the second largest platform next to Android. By supporting both platforms (Android and iOS) somebody could support up to 90% of the latest market share. Not too shabby.
However, I tend to look at the quarterly market share as a trend with buyers and future -- not present -- health. Is the market swaying one direction or another? And Apple is not being complacent. I believe Apple's change of heart to release 4.7 and 5.5" phones was a reaction to purchasing trends.
Agreed.
The trend is that more people are buying phones running some version of Android... and it will remain like that for the foreseeable future.
That's really not surprising though. There are 50 companies selling Android phones... and only one company selling iPhones.
I'm glad Apple finally made some bigger phones... but I don't expect their market share to shift radically. There are simply too many Android "units" being sold for that to make a difference.
But I have a feeling Apple never really cared where they fall on a market share chart. They just want to make good products... and they happen to sell quite a few of them.
That just means that market growth outpaced the sales of iPhones. We saw that several times with the iPad, market share down, but sales considerably higher.
Of course.
I was just trying to point out that falling market share isn't a death sentence... especially when you actually sell more units.
Some companies can increase their market share and sell more units.
Apple doesn't fall into that category at the moment... but I'm sure they're thrilled with the increased number of iPhones sold this quarter over last year at this time.
And from a developer's standpoint... that's more iPhones added to an already huge (and lucrative) installed base.
Comments
I definitely agree with your first paragraph. I meant to exclude it. I just wanted to point out that 'others' included some well known companies that were once major players, and with Samsung on the way down could find themselves listed with the heavy hitters in the near future.
Meaningless really without net profit data.
from a short term investment perspective and long term viability, yes.
But there is such a thing called critical mass. Apple has reached a critical mass in networking functional baseline (common capabilities that have palpable value to devs and users), developers, and end users. We've assumed Samsung has the possibility of doing it, but we are seeing they are cratering.
sacrificing profit for marketshare is a short term win IFF you have a method to retain stickiness. But if you're being sold as a flavor of the month by a carrier or a big-box retail, and that's it, you'll death spiral eventually. If you can 'hold their attention' then you can establish a foothold by which you can then start cranking the margin once your product has value that differentiates your 'ecosystem' from all others. We've seen that Samsung had one trick pony... size... Which can't be patented;-) Apple comes out with a fleet of sizes (4 4.7 5 8 10 11 13 15 21 24 27) and an ecosystem that ties them all together, and a link into the economic engine of the world (point of sale enablement), Samsung pales in comparison.
The bigger issue: The threat is never the one you're chasing.
Think Blackberry(Apple) and Nokia(Samsung). Apple( Xiaomi) comes in. The world laughs at the upstart, saying they don't know the smartphone world. Small doesn't mean non competitive.
Xiaomi has cachet in China. China is where consumer growth is greatest (China is where the US was in the 50/60s, Japan was in the 70s/80s).
The question is whether or not Xiaomi can develop an ecosystem that can 'lock-in' the chinese market. It may not impact Apple that much, but it may create a dual ecosystem world that in the end, Apple would lose, because they won't partner with other handset makers. Xiaomi may.
If you are not a stakeholder, being happy for huge Apple (or Google or any other big corp) profits is like being happy for the big ransom of your kidnapper, it's a technological version of Stockholm syndrome.
Actually, there's a vested interest in having local companies succeed since it brings prosperity to the area.
I live halfway between Google's headquarters and Apple's (closer to Google actually) and the local property values have increased over the years due to high demand. (Disclaimer: I own shares in both companies, although more in AAPL than GOOG/GOOGL.)
Remember that these are multi-national corporations with branches all over the world. Apple's success influences people in Austin, TX and Tel Aviv, Israel. Moreover, these companies influence the success of others (like parts suppliers for Apple).
Plus, why wouldn't you want to be happy for a company whose products and services you enjoy? It promises future new products and services, as well as the hope that the company will maintain a healthy existence for years to come.
Lastly, you don't have to love the companies you invest it, and you don't need to invest in the companies you love.
Your comment is blind in the global worldview of multinational corporations.
Wait, IDC was actually able to read apple's quarterly report and copy the number correctly this time. What happen, did that fire the old analyst who failed high school math. Or may be the really got the number wrong this time and they fix it next time.
Nah, the regular guy was sick, an intern filed the report.
Nah, the regular guy was sick, an intern filed the report.
yeah and he will be fired promptly since their customer will be happy.
Too many people buy a cheap 45$ tablet, then leave it to their kids to destroy as the sure do not use it to connect to the the internet.
To be clear, I think cheap tablets for very simple specific purposes are great. And they are throw-a-way. The better tablets get used and they last 3-5 years.
Just saying.
That entire scene is masterfully done. The tension!
You eventually figure that the driver was never in the diner, but not before you're frantically examining everyone right along with him.
Any report or chart focusing on marketshare is just for crap hit sake. If you include profit, then it starts to become meaningful.
Too many people buy a cheap 45$ tablet, then leave it to their kids to destroy as the sure do not use it to connect to the the internet.
To be clear, I think cheap tablets for very simple specific purposes are great. And they are throw-a-way. The better tablets get used and they last 3-5 years.
Just saying.
If the market share for a platform becomes too low, then third-parties abandon it. The Wii U is struggling with third-party support despite Nintendo is churning a profit now.
For anybody curious, here is the latest year-over-year smartphone OS market share global breakdown for September:
http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/29/kantar-september-2014/
Companies need profits to stay in business and to keep making products.
Look at how many PC manufacturers are either gone or who have been absorbed by other struggling companies.
It's because they didn't make enough profit.
I agree that maybe people shouldn't celebrate when companies make "too much" profit... but are they allowed to be sad or pissed off when they don't make "enough" profit and they vanish?
I guess it's a delicate balance... companies have to make enough money to stay afloat.... but not so much money that it arouses the fanboys.
Or you can just let people be.
You're right... it's not all companies we've never heard of. But there are certainly companies on the list that we don't usually talk about.
There are dozens of "Other" smartphone manufacturers around the world... primarily in China and India. Here's a sample:
Airtyme
Celkon
Gionee
Idea
Intex
Lava
Lemon
Maxx
Obi
Salora
Spice
Swipe
Xolo
Yota
Zen
You also have to remember that market share is a percentage based on the size of the entire market at any given time.
Apple's quarterly market share may go down... but they actually end up selling more phones. Weird, huh.
Plus... while the iPhone only has 12% quarterly market share today... there are also about 500 million iPhones out in the world. And those iPhone owners tend to spend money.
Would any sane developer abandon the iPhone at this point?
That's why you can't get too wrapped up in "quarterly market share" without also considering "installed base"
Frankly... I would laugh in any developer's face if they decided not to develop for the iPhone because its market share is "too low"
Again... "market share" only refers to the iPhones sold over the last 3 months... while "installed base" is ALL the iPhones in use today.
I bought my iPhone 5S a year ago... so my iPhone is not part of the current market share.
But I'm part of the installed base... and I can (and do) buy apps.
You also have to remember that market share is a percentage based on the size of the entire market at any given time.
Apple's quarterly market share may go down... but they actually end up selling more phones. Weird, huh.
It is hardly weird since I understand how percentages and market share work. My previous company was heavily interested in their own market share pertaining to software.
Quote:
You also have to remember that market share is a percentage based on the size of the entire market at any given time.
Apple's quarterly market share may go down... but they actually end up selling more phones. Weird, huh.
Plus... while the iPhone only has 12% quarterly market share today... there are also about 500 million iPhones out in the world. And those iPhone owners tend to spend money.
Would any sane developer abandon the iPhone at this point?
That's why you can't get too wrapped up in "quarterly market share" without also considering "installed base"
Frankly... I would laugh in any developer's face if they decided not to develop for the iPhone because its market share is "too low"
Again... "market share" only refers to the iPhones sold over the last 3 months... while "installed base" is ALL the iPhones in use today.
I bought my iPhone 5S a year ago... so my iPhone is not part of the current market share.
But I'm part of the installed base... and I can (and do) buy apps.
It would be ludicrous to abandon iOS given it has a sizable install base and it is the second largest platform next to Android. By supporting both platforms (Android and iOS) somebody could support up to 90% of the latest market share. Not too shabby.
However, I tend to look at the quarterly market share as a trend with buyers and future -- not present -- health. Is the market swaying one direction or another? And Apple is not being complacent. I believe Apple's change of heart to release 4.7 and 5.5" phones was a reaction to purchasing trends.
That just means that market growth outpaced the sales of iPhones. We saw that several times with the iPad, market share down, but sales considerably higher.
Yep!
It's interesting though. There are companies who solely make software for the Mac... even though the Mac has never, and will never, have a meaningful amount of market share or installed base.
But that doesn't bother those developers... they know exactly who they want to target... even if it's not the dominant platform.
Agreed.
The trend is that more people are buying phones running some version of Android... and it will remain like that for the foreseeable future.
That's really not surprising though. There are 50 companies selling Android phones... and only one company selling iPhones.
I'm glad Apple finally made some bigger phones... but I don't expect their market share to shift radically. There are simply too many Android "units" being sold for that to make a difference.
But I have a feeling Apple never really cared where they fall on a market share chart. They just want to make good products... and they happen to sell quite a few of them.
Of course.
I was just trying to point out that falling market share isn't a death sentence... especially when you actually sell more units.
Some companies can increase their market share and sell more units.
Apple doesn't fall into that category at the moment... but I'm sure they're thrilled with the increased number of iPhones sold this quarter over last year at this time.
And from a developer's standpoint... that's more iPhones added to an already huge (and lucrative) installed base.