"The most we can say" about this subject should be limited to verifiable evidence, TenoBell. I did narrow the window to a single quarter but I can't accept making up numbers to support my position.
I agree we cannot make up numbers. But we also know more N95's have been sold over that time.
Quote:
Well, if you look at current Nokia products, they list 87 different phone models in Europe. 38 of those are 3G smartphones. They aren't trying to get everyone to buy a N95.
I agree, but many people from Europe have held up the N95 as the phone to beat. That is why the focus has been on that one phone.
Quote:
Second, it IS highly contradictory to claim something is 'crap' and then say that it sold boatloads.
The contradiction is more in claiming that Europe has a higher taste for phones than the US, but then say the top selling phones in Europe are crap. That is the exact same situation as the US.
For a N95-level feature set but a whole lot less teh ugly, the N82 is rumored to be out shortly.
Ooh, that looks a nice one. All the good points from the N95 but without the bulk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss
"The most we can say" about this subject should be limited to verifiable evidence, TenoBell. I did narrow the window to a single quarter but I can't accept making up numbers to support my position.
But that's exactly what you did do, and I corrected, and you've still not admitted you were wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss
The N95 was offered by another poster as the device with a feature list that "runs circles around the iPhone" (I believe that's how it was described), and it was claimed that EU sophistication demanded such features to capture market share. That's why the discussion shifted in that direction.
The N95 is currently Vodafone's 3rd best selling handset behind the Samsung G600 Ultraslim 5mp 3G phone and the more business like U700. It's Nokia's biggest seller on Vodafone.
I've not seen figures for other carriers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy
Aegis,
First, please be careful with your quotes. I believe that only the first quote is mine.
Sorry if I pasted the wrong line in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy
Second, it IS highly contradictory to claim something is 'crap' and then say that it sold boatloads. If there was only 1 product, that would be fine but I think we can all agree that there are choices in the mobile phone market so CRAP shouldn't sell. That is, unless, the definition of CRAP is just someone's opinion, and not the markets. What's really contradictory are the claims here that Europeans DEMAND all these features and WILL NOT BUY without them, and yet, in any number of cases quoted, best selling phones in Europe don't meeting these requirements. As I said, there seems to be a whole new RDF around European requirements.
Loads of products sell by the boatload but are still crap. eg. Windows v MacOSX.
Since I mentioned it in this thread, here's the top sellers...
I don't think so. McDonald's Big Mac, anyone? A more applicable example, maybe a RAZR?
I thought my RAZR was the best phone I've ever owned, and I've owned Treo's, Blackberries, etc. Dependable service, good battery life, it fit in my pocket without a bulge - it did what I wanted it to do, and it felt solid.
Quote:
But that's exactly what you did do, and I corrected, and you've still not admitted you were wrong.
I've not found any evidence supporting any sales volume for the N95 other than "1.5 Mil". It's the only solid number available. If you've got a better sales volume figure for the N95 than that, please link it.
I've not found any evidence supporting any sales volume for the N95 other than "1.5 Mil". It's the only solid number available. If you've got a better sales volume figure for the N95 than that, please link it.
I've linked to it already - Nokia's financial report. It clearly states it's 1.5 million just in Q2, not from March to date as you stated.
I would think most people know it's crap but that doesn't stop them buying it.
Exactly. I might still get one a few times a year, but I'm not confused to think it's a piece of quality. I'm also not confused to think that sub par products can't be high sellers.
Since I mentioned it in this thread, here's the top sellers...
That list of top sellers are better phones than an equivalent list from the US. But they all follow the same basic and flawed rules for functionality. The flaw in these rules is that as you add more functions to the phone, the entire phone becomes more difficult to use. The iPhone has improved on this and that is what sets it apart.
Quote:
With the iPhone though I think quite a few people will be surprised with what it doesn't do, unless they do their research beforehand.
The difference being the iPhone does everything its designed to do well. I think that is more important for many people. Than to have a phone that does more but is mediocre.
That list of top sellers are better phones than an equivalent list from the US. But they all follow the same basic and flawed rules for functionality. The flaw in these rules is that as you add more functions to the phone, the entire phone becomes more difficult to use. The iPhone has improved on this and that is what sets it apart.
ok, but their basic functionality - phone, camera, text are all just as easy and running on better hardware for pretty much the entire list of phones there. Even the walkman phones in that list give the iPod interface a run for their money.
I guess the argument then is whether 'more difficult' is 'too difficult' and how much 'more' difficult they are. Personally, I've never found a phone 'too difficult' but some certainly aren't the fastest or easiest of things to use. Apple's iPhone UI is super lovely but I really just think it's spartan and simple because they've not implemented features yet rather than left them out deliberately. Time will tell. I think they'll add them.
On the opposite end, I'm sure some people find Apple's iPhone keyboard interface more difficult to use than a numberpad for texting. My partner has two daughters, 11 and 12. They both switch off T9 for texting on their phones. The predictive dictionary on the P990 I had (like Apple's) got in their way. But then the 12 year old knows how to download a song off the net, drop it into iTunes, show it in the Finder, open it in Audacity, reduce it to 64kbps mp3, edit it as a ringtone and send it to her phone via bluetooth. Then she sends it to her friends phones via bluetooth which they all have too. She did that without me telling her too - smartarse!
She's not interested in an iPhone because she can't do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
The difference being the iPhone does everything its designed to do well. I think that is more important for many people. Than to have a phone that does more but is mediocre.
So if Apple add video or MMS or Bluetooth file transfers in iPhone Firmware update 1.2 are you not going to upgrade because it destroys ease of use as originally designed?
When they add 3rd party apps, you're not going to install them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss
OK, so if you have more numbers to add to the sales volume figure for the N95, just link them.
What can I possibly link to that is better than Nokia's own financial results for completely destroying your assertion that they'd sold 1.5M to date ? You're fucking incredible man! Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society too?
Taskiss: The earth is flat
Me: No, it's a sphere. Here's a picture of it from space
Taskiss: Your picture is flat and proves my point. Find me a 3D image of it...
What can I possibly link to that is better than Nokia's own financial results for completely destroying your assertion that they'd sold 1.5M to date ? You're fucking incredible man! Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society too?.
The financial results didn't isolate N95 sales volumes except for 1.5 Mil in Q2. That's the only info about that particular model.
I didn't have a problem limiting the period when you pointed that out, I just have a problem with inflating the figures.
You don't seem to have a problem drawing a line with only one data point. I do.
So now that we've come full circle maybe we can come to a reasonable conclusion. Most of these types of threads have stated (paraphrased of course) " the iPhone won't sell in Europe because its 'crap' because it doesn't have feature x, y, z.... and sophisticated Europeans wont' put up with that." Now we add to that that 'crap' sells well , even in Europe (Big Mac, Razr, etc.).
So we have - the iPhone will sell well in Europe.
I agree (please don't point out the philosophical conundrums in the above, I do recognize them but sarcasm has its place in pointing toward truth)
The problem with 'crap' is that its in the eye of the beholder. I think Apple has found a large, 'new' market that thinks the current phones are 'crap' and the iPhone isn't. That's all.
ok, but their basic functionality - phone, camera, text are all just as easy and running on better hardware for pretty much the entire list of phones there. Even the walkman phones in that list give the iPod interface a run for their money.
Yes most of time the phone, camera, text have their own dedicated button and can be activated easily. But as you add more functions they cannot all have their own dedicated button. You get into menus and submenus. Much of the time its not clearly explained which submenu a function is under which causes people to hunt around and memorize where they are. Which subsequently make the full functionality of the phone more tedious.
With the iPhone there are no submenus. When you hit a button it opens new page and generally the function of that page is self explanatory.
Edit: I want to clarify. There are submenus in the iPhone, but mostly for settings and things you won't need to access very often. Most of the functions that are used everyday have their own easy to access page.
How do you define better hardware? None of those phones are running a desktop OS or desktop equivalent apps. Either Apple is very good at writing software or the iPhone must have very capable hardware.
Quote:
On the opposite end, I'm sure some people find Apple's iPhone keyboard interface more difficult to use than a numberpad for texting.
People predicated this argument on the assumption that tiny QWERTY keyboards and numberpad texting were easy to use from the start. People had to learn to use them and became accustomed to them. People will learn to use virtual keyboards and become accustomed the same way. In landscape view the keys on the iPhone's virtual keyboard are larger than the keys on a Blackberry or Treo.
Quote:
So if Apple add video or MMS or Bluetooth file transfers in iPhone Firmware update 1.2 are you not going to upgrade because it destroys ease of use as originally designed?
I don't believe it will destroy the ease of use as originally designed.
So now that we've come full circle maybe we can come to a reasonable conclusion. Most of these types of threads have stated (paraphrased of course) " the iPhone won't sell in Europe because its 'crap' because it doesn't have feature x, y, z.... and sophisticated Europeans wont' put up with that."
I agree. According to some, the lack of 3G will kill the iPhone. All the phones over there are 3G if you listen to some... So, I looked and what did I find?
Quote:
Currently, the market demand for 3G services is still insufficient. Only some 6 percent of the mobile users have such demand.
The financial results didn't isolate N95 sales volumes except for 1.5 Mil in Q2. That's the only info about that particular model.
I didn't have a problem limiting the period when you pointed that out, I just have a problem with inflating the figures.
Other than having to explain it four times to you, no, you had no problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss
You don't seem to have a problem drawing a line with only one data point. I do.
Except I didn't. I took reasonable guesses based on other indicative datapoints, ie. that it was the 3rd top selling phone for Vodafone in the UK in October and Nokia's biggest seller for them AND that in Q3 Nokia reported sales of it's N series were up 23% even though they'd only had two new handsets in that series that quarter and one of them was an 8GB N95.
I don't have a problem with that as a reasonable guess, which is what I described it as.
So now that we've come full circle maybe we can come to a reasonable conclusion. Most of these types of threads have stated (paraphrased of course) " the iPhone won't sell in Europe because its 'crap' because it doesn't have feature x, y, z.... and sophisticated Europeans wont' put up with that." Now we add to that that 'crap' sells well , even in Europe (Big Mac, Razr, etc.).
So we have - the iPhone will sell well in Europe.
Get it right, it's 'expensive crap'.
I'm sure it'll sell loads despite the current limitations and price. It's got an Apple logo on it and costs way too much. Instant hit for that alone.
Incidentally, your examples of crap that sells well here are both American - go figure!
I agree. According to some, the lack of 3G will kill the iPhone. All the phones over there are 3G if you listen to some... So, I looked and what did I find?
"In the second quarter of 2007, for the first time, the majority of net additions were to W-CDMA services, with 8.0m of the 14.5m new connections made being 3G capable - a proportion of 55%."
And you also skipped my early post of Vodadone's top sellers which were all 3G enabled bar two cheaper, older phones?
And you've not spotted all other smartphones this year have been 3G?
And you missed Steve Jobs saying he was after 1% of the market?
And you missed the fact the iPhone's an expensive smartphone?
And you missed the fact we don't have an EDGE network because we all installed 3G towers here in Europe?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss
So you have somewhere between 6% and 8.7% of the people in Europe using 3G, but without it the iPhone is dead.
People have opinions and they consider them as valid as facts. Go figure.
Yet 55% of them are buying 3G handsets with many having no intention of using 3G data services. Do you think iPhone buyers will be in the 'likely to use data services' or the 'not likely to' section of the populace?
Incidentally, your examples of crap that sells well here are both American - go figure!
Yep, we American's aren't afraid to sell people what they really want in their heart of hearts, not only what they're supposed to want. And we aren't afraid to value-price
At the end of the second quarter 2007, 8.7% of mobile connections in Europe were 3G enabled.
Seems pretty cut and dried. These aren't new connections, upgrades, etc. It's the total percentage of all mobile connections. Yuppers, 8.7%. Get 1000 EU cell phone customers together, 87 have 3G. And if all those phones have 3G capability as you claim, you know what that means? Either 3G isn't available or 91.3% don't want it.
Pretty much of the rest of what you said follows your typical methodology:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
I took reasonable guesses...
Try dealing in just the facts. OR, you might drop the act where you toss around phrases like "I know introducing some reality to a true believer in the Jesus Phone is asking for trouble", either one.
Seems pretty cut and dried. These aren't new connections, upgrades, etc. It's the total percentage of all mobile connections. Yuppers, 8.7%. Get 1000 EU cell phone customers together, 87 have 3G. And if all those phones have 3G capability as you claim, you know what that means? Either 3G isn't available or 91.3% don't want it.
Or they've not had a phone yet that would make using it worthwhile? A phone which relies heavily on data services perhaps... Queue Apple...
Or they don't want a smartphone at all, which is most people frankly. The carriers spent a wad on 3G here then were late with phones and gave us crap like football highlights at exorbitant rates as a justification for having 3G. We didn't get decent email or web browsing... Queue Apple...
Doh!, Apple launches a 2G phone.
Fact still is, 55% of people are buying 3G phones NOW and 100% of European smartphones this past year have been 3G regardless of people wanting it or not. In the sector where it's actually useful, Apple launches a 2G phone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss
Try dealing in just the facts. OR, you might drop the act where you toss around phrases like "I know introducing some reality to a true believer in the Jesus Phone is asking for trouble", either one.
Why? I gave you facts. I gave you educated guesses. Can't you cope with both? I clearly stated which were which. It's patently obvious you had your facts wrong.
Comments
"The most we can say" about this subject should be limited to verifiable evidence, TenoBell. I did narrow the window to a single quarter but I can't accept making up numbers to support my position.
I agree we cannot make up numbers. But we also know more N95's have been sold over that time.
Well, if you look at current Nokia products, they list 87 different phone models in Europe. 38 of those are 3G smartphones. They aren't trying to get everyone to buy a N95.
I agree, but many people from Europe have held up the N95 as the phone to beat. That is why the focus has been on that one phone.
Second, it IS highly contradictory to claim something is 'crap' and then say that it sold boatloads.
The contradiction is more in claiming that Europe has a higher taste for phones than the US, but then say the top selling phones in Europe are crap. That is the exact same situation as the US.
For a N95-level feature set but a whole lot less teh ugly, the N82 is rumored to be out shortly.
Ooh, that looks a nice one. All the good points from the N95 but without the bulk.
"The most we can say" about this subject should be limited to verifiable evidence, TenoBell. I did narrow the window to a single quarter but I can't accept making up numbers to support my position.
But that's exactly what you did do, and I corrected, and you've still not admitted you were wrong.
The N95 was offered by another poster as the device with a feature list that "runs circles around the iPhone" (I believe that's how it was described), and it was claimed that EU sophistication demanded such features to capture market share. That's why the discussion shifted in that direction.
The N95 is currently Vodafone's 3rd best selling handset behind the Samsung G600 Ultraslim 5mp 3G phone and the more business like U700. It's Nokia's biggest seller on Vodafone.
I've not seen figures for other carriers.
Aegis,
First, please be careful with your quotes. I believe that only the first quote is mine.
Sorry if I pasted the wrong line in.
Second, it IS highly contradictory to claim something is 'crap' and then say that it sold boatloads. If there was only 1 product, that would be fine but I think we can all agree that there are choices in the mobile phone market so CRAP shouldn't sell. That is, unless, the definition of CRAP is just someone's opinion, and not the markets. What's really contradictory are the claims here that Europeans DEMAND all these features and WILL NOT BUY without them, and yet, in any number of cases quoted, best selling phones in Europe don't meeting these requirements. As I said, there seems to be a whole new RDF around European requirements.
Loads of products sell by the boatload but are still crap. eg. Windows v MacOSX.
Since I mentioned it in this thread, here's the top sellers...
April for entire UK carriers - http://www.intomobile.com/2007/04/30...nokia-top.html
October for Vodafone - http://mobilementalism.com/2007/10/0...s-for-october/
I don't think so. McDonald's Big Mac, anyone? A more applicable example, maybe a RAZR?
I thought my RAZR was the best phone I've ever owned, and I've owned Treo's, Blackberries, etc. Dependable service, good battery life, it fit in my pocket without a bulge - it did what I wanted it to do, and it felt solid.
But that's exactly what you did do, and I corrected, and you've still not admitted you were wrong.
I've not found any evidence supporting any sales volume for the N95 other than "1.5 Mil". It's the only solid number available. If you've got a better sales volume figure for the N95 than that, please link it.
No, the Big Mac is 'crap' to only a portion of the population
I would think most people know it's crap but that doesn't stop them buying it. At least you know what you're getting.
With the iPhone though I think quite a few people will be surprised with what it doesn't do, unless they do their research beforehand.
I've not found any evidence supporting any sales volume for the N95 other than "1.5 Mil". It's the only solid number available. If you've got a better sales volume figure for the N95 than that, please link it.
I've linked to it already - Nokia's financial report. It clearly states it's 1.5 million just in Q2, not from March to date as you stated.
I would think most people know it's crap but that doesn't stop them buying it.
Exactly. I might still get one a few times a year, but I'm not confused to think it's a piece of quality. I'm also not confused to think that sub par products can't be high sellers.
Since I mentioned it in this thread, here's the top sellers...
That list of top sellers are better phones than an equivalent list from the US. But they all follow the same basic and flawed rules for functionality. The flaw in these rules is that as you add more functions to the phone, the entire phone becomes more difficult to use. The iPhone has improved on this and that is what sets it apart.
With the iPhone though I think quite a few people will be surprised with what it doesn't do, unless they do their research beforehand.
The difference being the iPhone does everything its designed to do well. I think that is more important for many people. Than to have a phone that does more but is mediocre.
I've linked to it already - Nokia's financial report. It clearly states it's 1.5 million just in Q2, not from March to date as you stated.
OK, so if you have more numbers to add to the sales volume figure for the N95, just link them.
That list of top sellers are better phones than an equivalent list from the US. But they all follow the same basic and flawed rules for functionality. The flaw in these rules is that as you add more functions to the phone, the entire phone becomes more difficult to use. The iPhone has improved on this and that is what sets it apart.
ok, but their basic functionality - phone, camera, text are all just as easy and running on better hardware for pretty much the entire list of phones there. Even the walkman phones in that list give the iPod interface a run for their money.
I guess the argument then is whether 'more difficult' is 'too difficult' and how much 'more' difficult they are. Personally, I've never found a phone 'too difficult' but some certainly aren't the fastest or easiest of things to use. Apple's iPhone UI is super lovely but I really just think it's spartan and simple because they've not implemented features yet rather than left them out deliberately. Time will tell. I think they'll add them.
On the opposite end, I'm sure some people find Apple's iPhone keyboard interface more difficult to use than a numberpad for texting. My partner has two daughters, 11 and 12. They both switch off T9 for texting on their phones. The predictive dictionary on the P990 I had (like Apple's) got in their way. But then the 12 year old knows how to download a song off the net, drop it into iTunes, show it in the Finder, open it in Audacity, reduce it to 64kbps mp3, edit it as a ringtone and send it to her phone via bluetooth. Then she sends it to her friends phones via bluetooth which they all have too. She did that without me telling her too - smartarse!
She's not interested in an iPhone because she can't do that.
The difference being the iPhone does everything its designed to do well. I think that is more important for many people. Than to have a phone that does more but is mediocre.
So if Apple add video or MMS or Bluetooth file transfers in iPhone Firmware update 1.2 are you not going to upgrade because it destroys ease of use as originally designed?
When they add 3rd party apps, you're not going to install them?
OK, so if you have more numbers to add to the sales volume figure for the N95, just link them.
What can I possibly link to that is better than Nokia's own financial results for completely destroying your assertion that they'd sold 1.5M to date ? You're fucking incredible man! Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society too?
Taskiss: The earth is flat
Me: No, it's a sphere. Here's a picture of it from space
Taskiss: Your picture is flat and proves my point. Find me a 3D image of it...
What can I possibly link to that is better than Nokia's own financial results for completely destroying your assertion that they'd sold 1.5M to date ? You're fucking incredible man! Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society too?.
The financial results didn't isolate N95 sales volumes except for 1.5 Mil in Q2. That's the only info about that particular model.
I didn't have a problem limiting the period when you pointed that out, I just have a problem with inflating the figures.
You don't seem to have a problem drawing a line with only one data point. I do.
Loads of products sell by the boatload but are still crap. eg. Windows v MacOSX.
Since I mentioned it in this thread, here's the top sellers...
April for entire UK carriers - http://www.intomobile.com/2007/04/30...nokia-top.html
October for Vodafone - http://mobilementalism.com/2007/10/0...s-for-october/
So now that we've come full circle maybe we can come to a reasonable conclusion. Most of these types of threads have stated (paraphrased of course) " the iPhone won't sell in Europe because its 'crap' because it doesn't have feature x, y, z.... and sophisticated Europeans wont' put up with that." Now we add to that that 'crap' sells well , even in Europe (Big Mac, Razr, etc.).
So we have - the iPhone will sell well in Europe.
I agree
The problem with 'crap' is that its in the eye of the beholder. I think Apple has found a large, 'new' market that thinks the current phones are 'crap' and the iPhone isn't. That's all.
ok, but their basic functionality - phone, camera, text are all just as easy and running on better hardware for pretty much the entire list of phones there. Even the walkman phones in that list give the iPod interface a run for their money.
Yes most of time the phone, camera, text have their own dedicated button and can be activated easily. But as you add more functions they cannot all have their own dedicated button. You get into menus and submenus. Much of the time its not clearly explained which submenu a function is under which causes people to hunt around and memorize where they are. Which subsequently make the full functionality of the phone more tedious.
With the iPhone there are no submenus. When you hit a button it opens new page and generally the function of that page is self explanatory.
Edit: I want to clarify. There are submenus in the iPhone, but mostly for settings and things you won't need to access very often. Most of the functions that are used everyday have their own easy to access page.
How do you define better hardware? None of those phones are running a desktop OS or desktop equivalent apps. Either Apple is very good at writing software or the iPhone must have very capable hardware.
On the opposite end, I'm sure some people find Apple's iPhone keyboard interface more difficult to use than a numberpad for texting.
People predicated this argument on the assumption that tiny QWERTY keyboards and numberpad texting were easy to use from the start. People had to learn to use them and became accustomed to them. People will learn to use virtual keyboards and become accustomed the same way. In landscape view the keys on the iPhone's virtual keyboard are larger than the keys on a Blackberry or Treo.
So if Apple add video or MMS or Bluetooth file transfers in iPhone Firmware update 1.2 are you not going to upgrade because it destroys ease of use as originally designed?
I don't believe it will destroy the ease of use as originally designed.
So now that we've come full circle maybe we can come to a reasonable conclusion. Most of these types of threads have stated (paraphrased of course) " the iPhone won't sell in Europe because its 'crap' because it doesn't have feature x, y, z.... and sophisticated Europeans wont' put up with that."
I agree. According to some, the lack of 3G will kill the iPhone. All the phones over there are 3G if you listen to some... So, I looked and what did I find?
Currently, the market demand for 3G services is still insufficient. Only some 6 percent of the mobile users have such demand.
http://www.eetasia.com/ART_880046568...T_007c553c.HTM
And another like that shows 7.7%
http://www.mmetrics.com/press/PressR...207-eurolaunch
And here is data from the end of Q2 2007 - 8.7% of mobile connections in Europe were 3G enabled
http://www.cellular-news.com/story/26266.php
So you have somewhere between 6% and 8.7% of the people in Europe using 3G, but without it the iPhone is dead.
People have opinions and they consider them as valid as facts. Go figure.
The financial results didn't isolate N95 sales volumes except for 1.5 Mil in Q2. That's the only info about that particular model.
I didn't have a problem limiting the period when you pointed that out, I just have a problem with inflating the figures.
Other than having to explain it four times to you, no, you had no problem.
You don't seem to have a problem drawing a line with only one data point. I do.
Except I didn't. I took reasonable guesses based on other indicative datapoints, ie. that it was the 3rd top selling phone for Vodafone in the UK in October and Nokia's biggest seller for them AND that in Q3 Nokia reported sales of it's N series were up 23% even though they'd only had two new handsets in that series that quarter and one of them was an 8GB N95.
I don't have a problem with that as a reasonable guess, which is what I described it as.
So now that we've come full circle maybe we can come to a reasonable conclusion. Most of these types of threads have stated (paraphrased of course) " the iPhone won't sell in Europe because its 'crap' because it doesn't have feature x, y, z.... and sophisticated Europeans wont' put up with that." Now we add to that that 'crap' sells well , even in Europe (Big Mac, Razr, etc.).
So we have - the iPhone will sell well in Europe.
Get it right, it's 'expensive crap'.
I'm sure it'll sell loads despite the current limitations and price. It's got an Apple logo on it and costs way too much. Instant hit for that alone.
Incidentally, your examples of crap that sells well here are both American - go figure!
I agree. According to some, the lack of 3G will kill the iPhone. All the phones over there are 3G if you listen to some... So, I looked and what did I find?
http://www.eetasia.com/ART_880046568...T_007c553c.HTM
Couldn't read it without logging in. Sorry, not worth the effort.
And another like that shows 7.7%
http://www.mmetrics.com/press/PressR...207-eurolaunch
Dated February 2006. Come on...
And here is data from the end of Q2 2007 - 8.7% of mobile connections in Europe were 3G enabled
http://www.cellular-news.com/story/26266.php
So you skipped the point of the article that...
"In the second quarter of 2007, for the first time, the majority of net additions were to W-CDMA services, with 8.0m of the 14.5m new connections made being 3G capable - a proportion of 55%."
And you also skipped my early post of Vodadone's top sellers which were all 3G enabled bar two cheaper, older phones?
And you've not spotted all other smartphones this year have been 3G?
And you missed Steve Jobs saying he was after 1% of the market?
And you missed the fact the iPhone's an expensive smartphone?
And you missed the fact we don't have an EDGE network because we all installed 3G towers here in Europe?
So you have somewhere between 6% and 8.7% of the people in Europe using 3G, but without it the iPhone is dead.
People have opinions and they consider them as valid as facts. Go figure.
Yet 55% of them are buying 3G handsets with many having no intention of using 3G data services. Do you think iPhone buyers will be in the 'likely to use data services' or the 'not likely to' section of the populace?
G
Incidentally, your examples of crap that sells well here are both American - go figure!
Yep, we American's aren't afraid to sell people what they really want in their heart of hearts, not only what they're supposed to want.
At the end of the second quarter 2007, 8.7% of mobile connections in Europe were 3G enabled.
Seems pretty cut and dried. These aren't new connections, upgrades, etc. It's the total percentage of all mobile connections. Yuppers, 8.7%. Get 1000 EU cell phone customers together, 87 have 3G. And if all those phones have 3G capability as you claim, you know what that means? Either 3G isn't available or 91.3% don't want it.
Pretty much of the rest of what you said follows your typical methodology:
I took reasonable guesses...
Try dealing in just the facts. OR, you might drop the act where you toss around phrases like "I know introducing some reality to a true believer in the Jesus Phone is asking for trouble", either one.
Seems pretty cut and dried. These aren't new connections, upgrades, etc. It's the total percentage of all mobile connections. Yuppers, 8.7%. Get 1000 EU cell phone customers together, 87 have 3G. And if all those phones have 3G capability as you claim, you know what that means? Either 3G isn't available or 91.3% don't want it.
Or they've not had a phone yet that would make using it worthwhile? A phone which relies heavily on data services perhaps... Queue Apple...
Or they don't want a smartphone at all, which is most people frankly. The carriers spent a wad on 3G here then were late with phones and gave us crap like football highlights at exorbitant rates as a justification for having 3G. We didn't get decent email or web browsing... Queue Apple...
Doh!, Apple launches a 2G phone.
Fact still is, 55% of people are buying 3G phones NOW and 100% of European smartphones this past year have been 3G regardless of people wanting it or not. In the sector where it's actually useful, Apple launches a 2G phone.
Try dealing in just the facts. OR, you might drop the act where you toss around phrases like "I know introducing some reality to a true believer in the Jesus Phone is asking for trouble", either one.
Why? I gave you facts. I gave you educated guesses. Can't you cope with both? I clearly stated which were which. It's patently obvious you had your facts wrong.
I think iPhone is great as a device but O2's contracts are too expensive for how much calling & texting I do, and their customer service is crap.
I'd rather pay say £20 a month to someone else like VF