Only the very youngest millennials are still teens, most are 20-30 or so.
The generation after millenials is being called "iGeneration". Look it up.
Yeah, "generations" are not precisely defined in starting & ending birth years, as demographers also look at the cultural and events in history. Millennials are broadly those born between early 1980's and early 2000's (those who started to come of age at the beginning of the millennium). So the youngest are late teens, but earliest are hitting mid-30s.
Generation-Z is what came after, although the "Z" is more of a placeholder until a new name - perhaps iGeneration will stick - comes along. This is the generation that is actually "growing up" with smartphones and tablets, as opposed to "PC's" (broad term).
Let's also remember that Apple needs to do more listening. Laptop magazine just show their latest satisfaction results. Apple came in fifth. Fifth! That's not good, folks.
I agree that Apple needs to do some more listening, but from what I read in that article some of the marking criteria seem downright odd and arbitrary (and clearly were not used in past when Apple was ranked higher). There is too much material to provide into one post, but I have linked to parts of the article for those looking for more.
For top spot Lenovo, outside of a few "2-in-1" / foldable units (quite expensive starting points), their products look like any PC laptop over the last 20 years (dark grey plastic, large bezels, stickers, etc). However, they were awarded a 14/15 in design. Apple was given a 13. Their innovations were touted as longer battery life (courtesy of a larger battery) and the rest to the Yoga Book. Which is a 2-in-1 which has a "halo keyboard" that allows stylus input - the keyboard is completely flat and operates like a touch screen keyboard. However, in the review it states that you can't really type well on it. In other words - a bit of a gimmick with potentially very limited market. However, they received a 10/10 in innovation. Apple a 7. Best Lenovo Laptops
The broad areas where Apple was "dinged" were covered in the article, and there is certainly merit to some of them. However, I think the big thing is that Apple was not given "credit" for what was new. TB3 has amazing speed and versatility, but MBP was only "dinged" for the lack of connector options. Apple has the fastest SSD read/write out there, but no mention of this. It was "dinged" in a review for not having the Kaby Lake processors, even though this was not available when the products were introduced, and no mention of how the faster storage makes the system fly. No credit at all for the great sound, and reduced fan noise. It is dinged very heavily for lack of price range, but is having a sub-$500 notebook really affecting what someone who is looking for a MBP wants? See Apple's Full Report Card
It is hard to read the Laptop Mag report without seeing that they were capitalizing on the MBP "controversy" from 2016. Simply read the language (oh how the mighty have fallen...)
Apple really pushed the boundaries with the 2016 MBP, trying to push it forward on the ports, new UI input, form factor. But it was jarring for many, and the price bump greatly aggravated it. Hopefully Apple takes 2017 to make some needed incremental improvements, reduce the price a bit (or offer more range).
So out of the total 41,731,000 teens in the US 75% of them already own an iPhone? hmmm.... With 90M total iPhone users in the US according to yet another survey it doesn't leave a lot of product for adults relatively speaking.
I suppose there's no reason to question the results, they came from analysts at Piper-Jaffray.
You're inventing statements never claimed in the source. It's 76% of the survey group, they never said or extrapolated to entire US teen population.
So out of the total 41,731,000 teens in the US 75% of them already own an iPhone? hmmm.... With 90M total iPhone users in the US according to yet another survey it doesn't leave a lot of product for adults relatively speaking.
I suppose there's no reason to question the results, they came from analysts at Piper-Jaffray.
You're inventing statements never claimed in the source. It's 76% of the survey group, they never said or extrapolated to entire US teen population.
Thwack thwack! Take that straw man!
So you're saying it's not a valid survey of teen interest in/use of iPhones in the first place, really doesn't say anything about whether teens overall are either more or less interested in an iPhone now than in the past? What then was its purpose in your view if the results aren't meant to infer what's being assumed they are?
While they don't explain their criteria very well, I would like to look at your numbers. Their average age of respondent is 16. Avg household income was 66,000 (62k was avg home with children) so it seems fairly representative.
Your numbers are the ones that are suspect. It's interesting that you describe teenagers as 10-19 years of age. http://www.actforyouth.net/adolescence/demographics/ So the actual number is somewhere around 29 million, which means 21M iPhones are used by teens.
While they don't explain their criteria very well, I would like to look at your numbers. Their average age of respondent is 16. Avg household income was 66,000 (62k was avg home with children) so it seems fairly representative.
Your numbers are the ones that are suspect. It's interesting that you describe teenagers as 10-19 years of age. http://www.actforyouth.net/adolescence/demographics/ So the actual number is somewhere around 29 million, which means 21M iPhones are used by teens.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau estimates, there were 41,731,233 youth age 10-19 in the United States in 2015. No idea where you are getting 29 million unless you misreading the Piper Jaffray survey as counting ONLY 16 year olds and you've then made a guess as to that number in the US rather than properly reading PJ simply reporting the average age of the respondents as 16. So it's your 29M number that's questionable then.
Holy crap dude, please read what you yourself wrote. Do you really think that I think that 70% of 10-19 year olds are 16?
You: "According to the U.S. Census Bureau estimates, there were 41,731,233 youth age 10-19 in the United States in 2015. "
I unbolded the 19 and bolded the 10.
Teens are not 10. Nor are they 11, nor 12. So unless you proclaim that there are 0 10-12 year olds in the United States of America, your numbers are not just questionable, they are proven 100% wrong by the exact source that you quote. My 29M estimate is assuming an even distribution of 10-19 year olds into each age, and removing 30% (there are 3 years of 10-19 year olds that are not teens, and 10 years of age in that same group: 3/10=30%) of that number from your 41M. That is 29M. Is it exact? No, but I guarantee it's between 28 and 30.
The CIRP is talking estimates, which takes current numbers based on actual existing information, while your source uses the term "forecast". In the realm of population estimates and projections, this term (forecast) explicitly means they are talking about the future, which are less reliable than estimates, all else being equal. Of course, who knows which has better models, but one should always take estimates as more accurate than forecasts. Ever checked the population 5 years from a census year? The projections created are less reliable than estimates taken, even when just compared to a year ahead of the estimate. I should know, I used to create them.
So out of the total 41,731,000 teens in the US 75% of them already own an iPhone? hmmm.... With 90M total iPhone users in the US according to yet another survey it doesn't leave a lot of product for adults relatively speaking.
I suppose there's no reason to question the results, they came from analysts at Piper-Jaffray.
You're inventing statements never claimed in the source. It's 76% of the survey group, they never said or extrapolated to entire US teen population.
Thwack thwack! Take that straw man!
So you're saying it's not a valid survey of teen interest in/use of iPhones in the first place, really doesn't say anything about whether teens overall are either more or less interested in an iPhone now than in the past? What then was its purpose in your view if the results aren't meant to infer what's being assumed they are?
The purpose of a survey is to evaluate a thing and convey findings. The survey may in fact be accurate (as collected), and relevant (large enough sample size), but that still does not mean theyre claiming 76% of all US teens in fact have iphones. Unless they sampled all US teens they could never make that claim. That's why they didn't, but you did. Thus, straw man.
Holy crap dude, please read what you yourself wrote. Do you really think that I think that 70% of 10-19 year olds are 16?
You: "According to the U.S. Census Bureau estimates, there were 41,731,233 youth age 10-19 in the United States in 2015. "
I unbolded the 19 and bolded the 10.
Teens are not 10. Nor are they 11, nor 12. So unless you proclaim that there are 0 10-12 year olds in the United States of America, your numbers are not just questionable, they are proven 100% wrong by the exact source that you quote.
I missed what Piper Jaffray stated as the "teen" group. I guess you found it was only ages 13-19 surveyed? A link would be nice but if that's the claimed survey group I do understand what point you were attempting to make.
Holy crap dude, please read what you yourself wrote. Do you really think that I think that 70% of 10-19 year olds are 16?
You: "According to the U.S. Census Bureau estimates, there were 41,731,233 youth age 10-19 in the United States in 2015. "
I unbolded the 19 and bolded the 10.
Teens are not 10. Nor are they 11, nor 12. So unless you proclaim that there are 0 10-12 year olds in the United States of America, your numbers are not just questionable, they are proven 100% wrong by the exact source that you quote.
I missed what Piper Jaffray stated as the "teen" group. I guess you found it was only ages 13-19 surveyed? A link would be nice but if that's the claimed survey group I do understand what point you were attempting to make.
I'm not sure that Piper Jaffray's Teen survey specifies that it samples 13-19 year olds, but it doesn't really need to. A teen is someone from 13 to 19 years of age. And the average age for its survey is typically 16.0 years or above. If it was sampling people 10-19 years old, we'd expect that average to be lower.
You're basically right about the point of such a survey though. It's meant to represent the specified population (e.g. U.S. teens or, at least, U.S. teens from the surveyed states (which is most of them)). As with all sample surveys, how well it does that depends on, e.g., the size of the sample and the methodology used. But assuming Piper Jaffray used decent methodology, we wouldn't expect the reality for the full reference population to vary too much from the results of the sample survey - maybe 5%, but not 20%.
Holy crap dude, please read what you yourself wrote. Do you really think that I think that 70% of 10-19 year olds are 16?
You: "According to the U.S. Census Bureau estimates, there were 41,731,233 youth age 10-19 in the United States in 2015. "
I unbolded the 19 and bolded the 10.
Teens are not 10. Nor are they 11, nor 12. So unless you proclaim that there are 0 10-12 year olds in the United States of America, your numbers are not just questionable, they are proven 100% wrong by the exact source that you quote.
I missed what Piper Jaffray stated as the "teen" group. I guess you found it was only ages 13-19 surveyed? A link would be nice but if that's the claimed survey group I do understand what point you were attempting to make.
I'm not sure that Piper Jaffray's Teen survey specifies that it samples 13-19 year olds, but it doesn't really need to. A teen is someone from 13 to 19 years of age. And the average age for its survey is typically 16.0 years or above. If it was sampling people 10-19 years old, we'd expect that average to be lower.
You're basically right about the point of such a survey though. It's meant to represent the specified population (e.g. U.S. teens or, at least, U.S. teens from the surveyed states (which is most of them)). As with all sample surveys, how well it does that depends on, e.g., the size of the sample and the methodology used. But assuming Piper Jaffray used decent methodology, we wouldn't expect the reality for the full reference population to vary too much from the results of the sample survey - maybe 5%, but not 20%.
The more I've considered this the more unlikely the survey group was a representative one IMHO. Perhaps they survey employees children, They don't say how those teens were included. But say for argument that their methodology was meant to result in a survey that could be extrapolated to US "teens" as a whole. We'll go with the low end you mentioned and say 70% of all teens now own an iPhone. Since simple observation would show that a not insignificant number of them own a smartphone that is NOT an iPhone the PJ results would suggest that nearly every single US teen owns a smartphone already which is not a reasonable result IMO.
Comments
Generation-Z is what came after, although the "Z" is more of a placeholder until a new name - perhaps iGeneration will stick - comes along. This is the generation that is actually "growing up" with smartphones and tablets, as opposed to "PC's" (broad term).
I agree that Apple needs to do some more listening, but from what I read in that article some of the marking criteria seem downright odd and arbitrary (and clearly were not used in past when Apple was ranked higher). There is too much material to provide into one post, but I have linked to parts of the article for those looking for more.
For top spot Lenovo, outside of a few "2-in-1" / foldable units (quite expensive starting points), their products look like any PC laptop over the last 20 years (dark grey plastic, large bezels, stickers, etc). However, they were awarded a 14/15 in design. Apple was given a 13. Their innovations were touted as longer battery life (courtesy of a larger battery) and the rest to the Yoga Book. Which is a 2-in-1 which has a "halo keyboard" that allows stylus input - the keyboard is completely flat and operates like a touch screen keyboard. However, in the review it states that you can't really type well on it. In other words - a bit of a gimmick with potentially very limited market. However, they received a 10/10 in innovation. Apple a 7.
Best Lenovo Laptops
The broad areas where Apple was "dinged" were covered in the article, and there is certainly merit to some of them. However, I think the big thing is that Apple was not given "credit" for what was new. TB3 has amazing speed and versatility, but MBP was only "dinged" for the lack of connector options. Apple has the fastest SSD read/write out there, but no mention of this. It was "dinged" in a review for not having the Kaby Lake processors, even though this was not available when the products were introduced, and no mention of how the faster storage makes the system fly. No credit at all for the great sound, and reduced fan noise. It is dinged very heavily for lack of price range, but is having a sub-$500 notebook really affecting what someone who is looking for a MBP wants?
See Apple's Full Report Card
It is hard to read the Laptop Mag report without seeing that they were capitalizing on the MBP "controversy" from 2016. Simply read the language (oh how the mighty have fallen...)
Apple really pushed the boundaries with the 2016 MBP, trying to push it forward on the ports, new UI input, form factor. But it was jarring for many, and the price bump greatly aggravated it. Hopefully Apple takes 2017 to make some needed incremental improvements, reduce the price a bit (or offer more range).
Thwack thwack! Take that straw man!
Your numbers are the ones that are suspect.
It's interesting that you describe teenagers as 10-19 years of age.
http://www.actforyouth.net/adolescence/demographics/
So the actual number is somewhere around 29 million, which means 21M iPhones are used by teens.
And according to this very website:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/11/19/of-101m-iphones-now-in-us-installed-base-62-are-iphone-6-models-with-apple-pay-support
the installed base is 101M, so that is about 80M used by adults.
So, yeah, I can believe that.
ps: they have done this 33 times, so I would be willing to bet they have the statistical sampling down pretty well.
Anyway there were a reported 90.1 active iPhones in the US in 2016
https://www.statista.com/statistics/232790/forecast-of-apple-users-in-the-us/
Both of those sources have some experience with numbers
You: "According to the U.S. Census Bureau estimates, there were 41,731,233 youth age 10-19 in the United States in 2015. "
I unbolded the 19 and bolded the 10.
Teens are not 10. Nor are they 11, nor 12. So unless you proclaim that there are 0 10-12 year olds in the United States of America, your numbers are not just questionable, they are proven 100% wrong by the exact source that you quote. My 29M estimate is assuming an even distribution of 10-19 year olds into each age, and removing 30% (there are 3 years of 10-19 year olds that are not teens, and 10 years of age in that same group: 3/10=30%) of that number from your 41M. That is 29M. Is it exact? No, but I guarantee it's between 28 and 30.
Second: There are a reported 101M active iPhones in the US according to Consumer Intelligence Research Partners:
http://files.ctctcdn.com/150f9af2201/14c7ae08-3800-4083-9528-7ed752432545.pdf
The CIRP is talking estimates, which takes current numbers based on actual existing information, while your source uses the term "forecast". In the realm of population estimates and projections, this term (forecast) explicitly means they are talking about the future, which are less reliable than estimates, all else being equal.
Of course, who knows which has better models, but one should always take estimates as more accurate than forecasts.
Ever checked the population 5 years from a census year? The projections created are less reliable than estimates taken, even when just compared to a year ahead of the estimate. I should know, I used to create them.
http://files.constantcontact.com/150f9af2201/5796ae92-e4a1-4185-939b-895807ee2284.pdf
BMO Capital Markets estimate that the worldwide installed base is between 700 and 750M, with 200M being older phone models.
http://fortune.com/2017/03/06/apple-iphone-use-worldwide/
You're basically right about the point of such a survey though. It's meant to represent the specified population (e.g. U.S. teens or, at least, U.S. teens from the surveyed states (which is most of them)). As with all sample surveys, how well it does that depends on, e.g., the size of the sample and the methodology used. But assuming Piper Jaffray used decent methodology, we wouldn't expect the reality for the full reference population to vary too much from the results of the sample survey - maybe 5%, but not 20%.