What about ppl who would buy the iPhone, but don't because it cannot do this or that (meaning, 3G, GPS, MMS, voice-dialing, etc.)? Those folks wouldn't be counted in the stats.
The people you mention would not be counted because the survey polled people who own and use the iPhone.
Nearly all of the phones that do have 3G, GPS, MMS, and voice dialing received less than 50% satisfactory rating.
What about ppl who would buy the iPhone, but don't because it cannot do this or that (meaning, 3G, GPS, MMS, voice-dialing, etc.)? Those folks wouldn't be counted in the stats.
.
Ummm...... the story is not about wanna-be, could-be, may-be, ifthisthenImight-be folks, but actual "users?"
(Add: Oops... just saw that Taskiss and TenoBell made a similar point.... oh well, I'll leave it in.)
I just had FiOS TV and internet installed. Having Comcast before, FiOS beats the crap out of Comcast, hands down. First, for internet I got the 15 meg service. The wireless router came already WEP enabled and the admin interface for the router was custom made for/by Verizon. By FAR the most easiest to setup (none) and manage. Now to TV. The interface is amazing. When you search for movies they are shown by cover art like Front Row. You can pick a movie, see the actors in the movie, and then see all the shows currently available with that actor. The regular TV guide is so much more nice too. You can obviously tell Verizon spent a lot of time designing this whole package. After having both I will never go back to Comcast for either service if I have a choice.
If those people who don't have iPhones were thinking of buying a new phone, then their responses are captured in the future buying question.
Out of the future buying pool, 16% are thinking of iPhone (#1 answer). That might be not be "crushing", but it certainly shows Apple has equaled all their competitors.
Also, from Business Wire, ?The iPhone has become AT&T?s top selling device, commanding some 13 percent of AT&T?s overall handset sales, and the 4th top selling handset in the US market,? according to Barry Gilbert, VP of the Strategy Analytics BuyerTRAX programs. ?Although the iPhone hasn?t had an expansionary impact in the market, the iPhone has quickly assumed a leading market share position and raised the ante for smart devices,? according to Mr. Gilbert. ?The sales trajectory we are observing with the iPhone could make it the top selling device in the US over the next 1-2 quarters.?
That would explain why they aren't considered "customers" and why their opinion doesn't count .
People that can't justify canceling their present cellular plans, people that can't afford the device, etc., they're all perfectly valid people but their opinion about the device is meaningless,
Yeahhhh... that really ain't the way to gain marketshare.
I guess if Apple really felt as you stated, they would've gone, "Hey, gotta problem with the $600 price tag? Tough. We're not into 'woulda/coulda/shoulda" customers." But they didn't do that... they dropped that price hard, and they dropped it fast.
Trust me, Apple will eventually have a lot of the features whose lack are commonly cited as deal-breakers by many ppl, 'cuz they don't wanna be confined to just the hardcore "Appleista" corner of the market. 10 million in '08 is just the beginning.
Ummm...... the story is not about wanna-be, could-be, may-be, ifthisthenImight-be folks, but actual "users?"
It actually may be partly about such folks, if Mark2005 is correct:
If those people who don't have iPhones were thinking of buying a new phone, then their responses are captured in the future buying question.
I don't see why such folks' opinions would not be valuable... surely Apple wants to sell to more ppl than just people who have already bought an iPhone?
Nearly all of the phones that do have 3G, GPS, MMS, and voice dialing received less than 50% satisfactory rating.
Sure, but I very much doubt they received a less than 50% satisfactory rating because they had 3G, GPS, MMS, and/or voice-dialing.
That's kind of like saying a particular diesel pickup truck sucks because it has a diesel engine. Is it the engine that sucks, or is it the build quality, the reliability, the handling, the crashworthiness, etc. etc.? You get the point.
I don't see why such folks' opinions would not be valuable... surely Apple wants to sell to more ppl than just people who have already bought an iPhone?
The survey was aimed at customers.
Quote:
I guess if Apple really felt as you stated, they would've gone, "Hey, gotta problem with the $600 price tag? Tough. We're not into 'woulda/coulda/shoulda" customers." But they didn't do that... they dropped that price hard, and they dropped it fast.
Sure did, dropped it all he way to $400... 4 times the price I paid for my kid's phone - the #1 best seller.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005's link
?The typical iPhone buyer is upwardly mobile, college educated with a six-figure household income,? according to David Kerr, Vice President of the Strategy Analytics Global Wireless Practice. ?While the largest percentage of iPhone buyers is between 20-30 years old, the fact that nearly 25 percent were between 50-60 years old demonstrates that the device attracts buyers across a broad age spectrum.? Thus far, iPhone users are quite satisfied with phone design and features, however, they are slightly less enamored of actual iPhone reliability, battery life, documentation and customer support.
Sure, but I very much doubt they received a less than 50% satisfactory rating because they had 3G, GPS, MMS, and/or voice-dialing.
I didn't say (or imply) their satisfactory rating was that low because of those features. Their satisfactory level was that low because the phones are difficult to use.
My point is that you don't automatically receive a high satisfactory rating for simply having a long feature list.
Now, if we can just fix all the problems with AT&T and their crappy little network, we'll be in good shape. We'll have a super nice cellphone and a good network to match. Don't believe their ads -- AT&T has a crappy network. Lots to be improved upon there.
Yup... as was the planned future cell phone purchase question in said survey. The ppl responding to that one are customers as well... just future customers, that's all.
Quote:
Sure did, dropped it all he way to $400... 4 times the price I paid for my kid's phone - the #1 best seller.
Well, your kid's phone being the #1 seller at $100* does seem to confirm that lower prices = bigger sales (in # of units, anyway). But even if it didn't, it wouldn't change the fact that Apple felt that the iPhone would sell better at $400 than $600. And all else being equal, there's no doubt it will.
It's a shrewd move by Apple, really. They obviously took account of what the fence-sitters were saying, and did what they could to move them over to the 'buy' column. No need to disparage the 'coulda, woulda, shoulda' customer... the smart play is to do what it takes, within reason, to turn them into buyers.
* your kid's phone prolly doesn't really cost $100 retail, there's likely a good-sized carrier subsidy involved
I didn't say (or imply) their satisfactory rating was that low because of those features. Their satisfactory level was that low because the phones are difficult to use.
My point is that you don't automatically receive a high satisfactory rating for simply having a long feature list.
And I would agree with that. But, imagine if you had a phone that was easy to use and had 3G, GPS, MMS, and voice-dialing... would that not rock greatly?
Apple will likely get there eventually... it's just gonna take some time. It should happen for the Asian launch and 'iPhone 2.0'.
Yup... as was the planned future cell phone purchase question in said survey. The ppl responding to that one are customers as well... just future customers, that's all.
Well, your kid's phone being the #1 seller at $100* does seem to confirm that lower prices = bigger sales (in # of units, anyway). But even if it didn't, it wouldn't change the fact that Apple felt that the iPhone would sell better at $400 than $600. And all else being equal, there's no doubt it will.
It's a shrewd move by Apple, really. They obviously took account of what the fence-sitters were saying, and did what they could to move them over to the 'buy' column. No need to disparage the 'coulda, woulda, shoulda' customer... the smart play is to do what it takes, within reason, to turn them into buyers.
* your kid's phone prolly doesn't really cost $100 retail, there's likely a good-sized carrier subsidy involved
.
Sure there's a carrier subsidy - the carrier is paying the phone manufacturer, same as AT&T is paying Apple. Factor that in and I think the iPhone might just be the most costly communications device offered to consumers. It's obvious that there's a target demographic for the device and it's NOT targeted at everyone at this time. When the iPhone shuttle comes along, well, then I'd agree with you. 'Till then, the iPhone product line is specifically marketed at a particular demographic and within that demographic those who bought the device are enjoying a 82% customer satisfaction rating - the highest in the industry by a very wide margin. Other opinions need not apply.
$5 less than Comcast for just FiOS. TV packages are close but I dropped comcast in favor of FiOS and Dish so I don't know what the FiOS TV packages cost. Needed some international packages for the in-laws that didn't exist outside of satellite.
Should be competitive. The triple play for both Comcast and Verizon is $99 or so.
And I would agree with that. But, imagine if you had a phone that was easy to use and had 3G, GPS, MMS, and voice-dialing... would that not rock greatly? Apple will likely get there eventually... it's just gonna take some time.
Now you are willing to show some patience? This is what many of us have been saying to people complaining about features.
No one has yet figured out how to make a phone with a long feature list and have all of those features easy to use. Usually some features are easy to access and use at the expense of other features being difficult to access and use.
Apple prioritized the features it felt were most important and that would allow one feature to not compromise the usability of another.
I can't help but remember Palm's CEO talking about how Apple wasn't going to walk in and just "figure it out" because making a smartphone is a really complicated thing.
Well based on these satisfaction ratings, I'd say they've done just that. One of the keys to Apple's success is their laser sharp focus. Most cell phone manufacturers release 10-40 new models every year while Apple will release 1-3 new models per year. With other manufacturers you have a dizzying amount of choices but they are all quite mediocre. Apple takes it's time, studies the problem and slowly but steadily puts the pieces together to solve those problems and make a simple product family that is compelling.
The PC and cell phone manufacturers are all focusing on profits for the next quarter and are being very short sighted. Apple clearly has had a long term strategy that we are seeing slowly unfurling.
Sure there's a carrier subsidy - the carrier is paying the phone manufacturer, same as AT&T is paying Apple.
Yep... but in the iPhone's case, its questionable whether that money is really defraying the cost to the customer much, as is usually the case. More likely its going towards Apple making very high margins, when all is taken into account, on the iPhone.
Getting back to your typical '$100 with a 2-yr contract' phone, those tend to retail for around $220 or so, with the carrier subsidizing the difference.
Quote:
Factor that in and I think the iPhone might just be the most costly communications device offered to consumers.
Probably not. Even among reasonably high volume phones, the LG Prada retailed for $900, and there are also some very low volume, very high end phone makers like the Vertu* out there, who have models that have gone for as high as $300K(!).
Of course, no one's ever heard of Vertu, but ppl have heard of LG.
Quote:
It's obvious that there's a target demographic for the device and it's NOT targeted at everyone at this time.
Sure, but with the big price drop, its certainly targeted at more ppl than it was initially.
* props to Vinea for alerting me to their existence
Now you are willing to show some patience? This is what many of us have been saying to people complaining about features.
No... what you originally said was that the iPhone could take 2-3 years or longer to go 3G, and that that would be just fine. Obviously, that time table was way too long.
Apple will without a doubt be going 3G for the Asian launch, next year. And even that may be too much patience, if the feedback from our Euro friends on this forum is any indication. I mean... GPRS for data in most areas with the O2 network in the UK? 30 kbps??? What is it, 1995?
So yeah, they'll get there... more quickly than you anticipated, and more slowly than and I and a lot of others would like.
Quote:
No one has yet figured out how to make a phone with a long feature list and have all of those features easy to use. Usually some features are easy to access and use at the expense of other features being difficult to access and use.
Few of the features mentioned are particularly complex or difficult. It's easy to send picture messages already, even on el cheapo phones. Voice-dialing? Okay, its possible Apple has a fresh take on that, I'll try to give 'em the benefit of the doubt, but there are existing voice dialing systems that work fairly well. GPS? Looots of phones have this, why doesn't the iPhone? 3G? Steve claims its a battery life issue (though ppl think he's exaggerating), it certainly doesn't have to do with ease of use.
It's just funny... all the stuff mentioned is pretty much standard for high-end phones nowadays, heck even midrange phones, yet Apple didn't bother to include it. They eventually will, but some of the features they chose to have be MIA for iPhone 1.0 were just unusual choices, to say the least.
Brit friends I know just shake their heads and laugh at the missing pic messaging, and yeah, the no 3G. \
Comments
What about ppl who would buy the iPhone, but don't because it cannot do this or that (meaning, 3G, GPS, MMS, voice-dialing, etc.)? Those folks wouldn't be counted in the stats.
The people you mention would not be counted because the survey polled people who own and use the iPhone.
Nearly all of the phones that do have 3G, GPS, MMS, and voice dialing received less than 50% satisfactory rating.
Can we save this for those who think there are a significant number of iPhone users who are angry that the iPhone cannot do this or that.
What about ppl who would buy the iPhone, but don't because it cannot do this or that (meaning, 3G, GPS, MMS, voice-dialing, etc.)? Those folks wouldn't be counted in the stats.
.
Ummm...... the story is not about wanna-be, could-be, may-be, ifthisthenImight-be folks, but actual "users?"
(Add: Oops... just saw that Taskiss and TenoBell made a similar point.... oh well, I'll leave it in.)
I just had FiOS TV and internet installed. Having Comcast before, FiOS beats the crap out of Comcast, hands down. First, for internet I got the 15 meg service. The wireless router came already WEP enabled and the admin interface for the router was custom made for/by Verizon. By FAR the most easiest to setup (none) and manage. Now to TV. The interface is amazing. When you search for movies they are shown by cover art like Front Row. You can pick a movie, see the actors in the movie, and then see all the shows currently available with that actor. The regular TV guide is so much more nice too. You can obviously tell Verizon spent a lot of time designing this whole package. After having both I will never go back to Comcast for either service if I have a choice.
Very curious: how much does it cost?
Out of the future buying pool, 16% are thinking of iPhone (#1 answer). That might be not be "crushing", but it certainly shows Apple has equaled all their competitors.
Also, from Business Wire, ?The iPhone has become AT&T?s top selling device, commanding some 13 percent of AT&T?s overall handset sales, and the 4th top selling handset in the US market,? according to Barry Gilbert, VP of the Strategy Analytics BuyerTRAX programs. ?Although the iPhone hasn?t had an expansionary impact in the market, the iPhone has quickly assumed a leading market share position and raised the ante for smart devices,? according to Mr. Gilbert. ?The sales trajectory we are observing with the iPhone could make it the top selling device in the US over the next 1-2 quarters.?
More at http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...ews_view_popup
That would explain why they aren't considered "customers" and why their opinion doesn't count .
People that can't justify canceling their present cellular plans, people that can't afford the device, etc., they're all perfectly valid people but their opinion about the device is meaningless,
Yeahhhh... that really ain't the way to gain marketshare.
I guess if Apple really felt as you stated, they would've gone, "Hey, gotta problem with the $600 price tag? Tough. We're not into 'woulda/coulda/shoulda" customers." But they didn't do that... they dropped that price hard, and they dropped it fast.
Trust me, Apple will eventually have a lot of the features whose lack are commonly cited as deal-breakers by many ppl, 'cuz they don't wanna be confined to just the hardcore "Appleista" corner of the market. 10 million in '08 is just the beginning.
.
Ummm...... the story is not about wanna-be, could-be, may-be, ifthisthenImight-be folks, but actual "users?"
It actually may be partly about such folks, if Mark2005 is correct:
If those people who don't have iPhones were thinking of buying a new phone, then their responses are captured in the future buying question.
I don't see why such folks' opinions would not be valuable... surely Apple wants to sell to more ppl than just people who have already bought an iPhone?
.
Nearly all of the phones that do have 3G, GPS, MMS, and voice dialing received less than 50% satisfactory rating.
Sure, but I very much doubt they received a less than 50% satisfactory rating because they had 3G, GPS, MMS, and/or voice-dialing.
That's kind of like saying a particular diesel pickup truck sucks because it has a diesel engine. Is it the engine that sucks, or is it the build quality, the reliability, the handling, the crashworthiness, etc. etc.? You get the point.
.
I don't see why such folks' opinions would not be valuable... surely Apple wants to sell to more ppl than just people who have already bought an iPhone?
The survey was aimed at customers.
I guess if Apple really felt as you stated, they would've gone, "Hey, gotta problem with the $600 price tag? Tough. We're not into 'woulda/coulda/shoulda" customers." But they didn't do that... they dropped that price hard, and they dropped it fast.
Sure did, dropped it all he way to $400... 4 times the price I paid for my kid's phone - the #1 best seller.
?The typical iPhone buyer is upwardly mobile, college educated with a six-figure household income,? according to David Kerr, Vice President of the Strategy Analytics Global Wireless Practice. ?While the largest percentage of iPhone buyers is between 20-30 years old, the fact that nearly 25 percent were between 50-60 years old demonstrates that the device attracts buyers across a broad age spectrum.? Thus far, iPhone users are quite satisfied with phone design and features, however, they are slightly less enamored of actual iPhone reliability, battery life, documentation and customer support.
Sure, but I very much doubt they received a less than 50% satisfactory rating because they had 3G, GPS, MMS, and/or voice-dialing.
I didn't say (or imply) their satisfactory rating was that low because of those features. Their satisfactory level was that low because the phones are difficult to use.
My point is that you don't automatically receive a high satisfactory rating for simply having a long feature list.
Now, if we can just fix all the problems with AT&T and their crappy little network, we'll be in good shape. We'll have a super nice cellphone and a good network to match. Don't believe their ads -- AT&T has a crappy network. Lots to be improved upon there.
Can you be more specific?
The survey was aimed at customers.
Yup... as was the planned future cell phone purchase question in said survey. The ppl responding to that one are customers as well... just future customers, that's all.
Sure did, dropped it all he way to $400... 4 times the price I paid for my kid's phone - the #1 best seller.
Well, your kid's phone being the #1 seller at $100* does seem to confirm that lower prices = bigger sales (in # of units, anyway). But even if it didn't, it wouldn't change the fact that Apple felt that the iPhone would sell better at $400 than $600. And all else being equal, there's no doubt it will.
It's a shrewd move by Apple, really. They obviously took account of what the fence-sitters were saying, and did what they could to move them over to the 'buy' column. No need to disparage the 'coulda, woulda, shoulda' customer... the smart play is to do what it takes, within reason, to turn them into buyers.
* your kid's phone prolly doesn't really cost $100 retail, there's likely a good-sized carrier subsidy involved
.
I didn't say (or imply) their satisfactory rating was that low because of those features. Their satisfactory level was that low because the phones are difficult to use.
My point is that you don't automatically receive a high satisfactory rating for simply having a long feature list.
And I would agree with that. But, imagine if you had a phone that was easy to use and had 3G, GPS, MMS, and voice-dialing... would that not rock greatly?
Apple will likely get there eventually... it's just gonna take some time. It should happen for the Asian launch and 'iPhone 2.0'.
.
Yup... as was the planned future cell phone purchase question in said survey. The ppl responding to that one are customers as well... just future customers, that's all.
Well, your kid's phone being the #1 seller at $100* does seem to confirm that lower prices = bigger sales (in # of units, anyway). But even if it didn't, it wouldn't change the fact that Apple felt that the iPhone would sell better at $400 than $600. And all else being equal, there's no doubt it will.
It's a shrewd move by Apple, really. They obviously took account of what the fence-sitters were saying, and did what they could to move them over to the 'buy' column. No need to disparage the 'coulda, woulda, shoulda' customer... the smart play is to do what it takes, within reason, to turn them into buyers.
* your kid's phone prolly doesn't really cost $100 retail, there's likely a good-sized carrier subsidy involved
.
Sure there's a carrier subsidy - the carrier is paying the phone manufacturer, same as AT&T is paying Apple. Factor that in and I think the iPhone might just be the most costly communications device offered to consumers. It's obvious that there's a target demographic for the device and it's NOT targeted at everyone at this time. When the iPhone shuttle comes along, well, then I'd agree with you. 'Till then, the iPhone product line is specifically marketed at a particular demographic and within that demographic those who bought the device are enjoying a 82% customer satisfaction rating - the highest in the industry by a very wide margin. Other opinions need not apply.
Very curious: how much does it cost?
$5 less than Comcast for just FiOS. TV packages are close but I dropped comcast in favor of FiOS and Dish so I don't know what the FiOS TV packages cost. Needed some international packages for the in-laws that didn't exist outside of satellite.
Should be competitive. The triple play for both Comcast and Verizon is $99 or so.
And I would agree with that. But, imagine if you had a phone that was easy to use and had 3G, GPS, MMS, and voice-dialing... would that not rock greatly? Apple will likely get there eventually... it's just gonna take some time.
Now you are willing to show some patience? This is what many of us have been saying to people complaining about features.
No one has yet figured out how to make a phone with a long feature list and have all of those features easy to use. Usually some features are easy to access and use at the expense of other features being difficult to access and use.
Apple prioritized the features it felt were most important and that would allow one feature to not compromise the usability of another.
Well based on these satisfaction ratings, I'd say they've done just that. One of the keys to Apple's success is their laser sharp focus. Most cell phone manufacturers release 10-40 new models every year while Apple will release 1-3 new models per year. With other manufacturers you have a dizzying amount of choices but they are all quite mediocre. Apple takes it's time, studies the problem and slowly but steadily puts the pieces together to solve those problems and make a simple product family that is compelling.
The PC and cell phone manufacturers are all focusing on profits for the next quarter and are being very short sighted. Apple clearly has had a long term strategy that we are seeing slowly unfurling.
Sure there's a carrier subsidy - the carrier is paying the phone manufacturer, same as AT&T is paying Apple.
Yep... but in the iPhone's case, its questionable whether that money is really defraying the cost to the customer much, as is usually the case. More likely its going towards Apple making very high margins, when all is taken into account, on the iPhone.
Getting back to your typical '$100 with a 2-yr contract' phone, those tend to retail for around $220 or so, with the carrier subsidizing the difference.
Factor that in and I think the iPhone might just be the most costly communications device offered to consumers.
Probably not. Even among reasonably high volume phones, the LG Prada retailed for $900, and there are also some very low volume, very high end phone makers like the Vertu* out there, who have models that have gone for as high as $300K(!).
Of course, no one's ever heard of Vertu, but ppl have heard of LG.
It's obvious that there's a target demographic for the device and it's NOT targeted at everyone at this time.
Sure, but with the big price drop, its certainly targeted at more ppl than it was initially.
* props to Vinea for alerting me to their existence
.
Now you are willing to show some patience? This is what many of us have been saying to people complaining about features.
No... what you originally said was that the iPhone could take 2-3 years or longer to go 3G, and that that would be just fine. Obviously, that time table was way too long.
Apple will without a doubt be going 3G for the Asian launch, next year. And even that may be too much patience, if the feedback from our Euro friends on this forum is any indication. I mean... GPRS for data in most areas with the O2 network in the UK? 30 kbps??? What is it, 1995?
So yeah, they'll get there... more quickly than you anticipated, and more slowly than and I and a lot of others would like.
No one has yet figured out how to make a phone with a long feature list and have all of those features easy to use. Usually some features are easy to access and use at the expense of other features being difficult to access and use.
Few of the features mentioned are particularly complex or difficult. It's easy to send picture messages already, even on el cheapo phones. Voice-dialing? Okay, its possible Apple has a fresh take on that, I'll try to give 'em the benefit of the doubt, but there are existing voice dialing systems that work fairly well. GPS? Looots of phones have this, why doesn't the iPhone? 3G? Steve claims its a battery life issue (though ppl think he's exaggerating), it certainly doesn't have to do with ease of use.
It's just funny... all the stuff mentioned is pretty much standard for high-end phones nowadays, heck even midrange phones, yet Apple didn't bother to include it. They eventually will, but some of the features they chose to have be MIA for iPhone 1.0 were just unusual choices, to say the least.
Brit friends I know just shake their heads and laugh at the missing pic messaging, and yeah, the no 3G.
.