I cannot beleive this is still being argued about. It's been beaten to death in thread after thread. It is quite clear now. The goal is 10,000,000 iPhones sold between Jan. 1 and Dec. 31, 2008.
The very idea that Apple is selling more phones with a single model deployed over a single carrier than other brands are with multiple models over multiple carriers is mind-bottling.
...which is obviously not true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Kaplan
Steve Jobs, speaking at Apple?s shareholder meeting, reiterated the company?s goal to sell 10 million iPhones by the end of the year.
That's not what he said.
He stood on stage at the iPhone launch and said it would be 10 million unit sales in calendar year 2008. Tim Cook and Peter Openheimer repeat it multiple times in the Q1 financials. A full transcript is at...
I have a few app ideas that really could make use of Bluetooth. More so it needs to be a complete Bluetooth. Or at least a BlueTooth that supports a few more profiles than what Apple currently supports.
Dave
No sign of Bluetooth in the SDK that I could find. I've helped develop the Wiimote (Bluetooth device) driver for the Mac and know where to find the Bluetooth framework; no Bluetooth framework mentioned in the iPhone SDK.
Apple does sell more with the iPhone alone than other manufacturers do with an entire line. You're assuming I wrote "ALL other", which was not the case.
The NPD Group pegs the Apple as the sixth largest brand by sales for CY 2007, behind Moto, Samsung, LG, Nokia and Sanyo. That isn't too bad, considering iPhone is a single model and didn't go on sale until mid-2007. The same survey lists the iPhone as the 5th best-selling model for Q407, behind two from Moto, and one each from Samsung and LG.
Behind Apple are established brands such as Palm, SonyEricsson, Pantech, Danger, HTC and others.
Given the fact that this was a debut product from a company with no history in this product category (the ROKR doesn't count), and that the product was widely viewed as too expensive when it was unveiled, those are remarkable accomplishments.
He stood on stage at the iPhone launch and said it would be 10 million unit sales in calendar year 2008. Tim Cook and Peter Openheimer repeat it multiple times in the Q1 financials. A full transcript is at...
Yes, I know. That is why I posted the quote (which confirms, not contradicts, what you're saying above). It was my faulty recollection of the launch, when Jobs said the goal was 10M by the end of this year.
They're not planning to hit 10M by June. It's 10M in 2008, ie. from Jan 1st 2008 to the end of 2008. However, there will be a decent sized pool of developers because traditionally Apple has attracted the small indie developers that can live off a small market. That's how it works with Macs and that's how it'll work with iPhone. It's very important to the success of the iPhone OS that it's almost an easy shoe-in for Mac OS developers to use the same tools and API as they're used to. Developing for other mobile platforms requires new tools and entirely new APIs.
Look at that picture again, it says market share. That is 10 million units for the full 18 months that the phone has been on sale. Not the 2008 sales expectation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
He stood on stage at the iPhone launch and said it would be 10 million unit sales in calendar year 2008. Tim Cook and Peter Openheimer repeat it multiple times in the Q1 financials. A full transcript is at...
I read through that full transcript and it's always "hitting the 10 million goal for 2008." And from the slide shown above I am assuming that are talking about market share, not 2008 sales.
An example of their responses to questions is:
Quote:
William Fearnley, FTN Midwest
One last, if I could. On the iPhone unit expectation for 2008, I mean are you guys providing any type of update on that today? Thanks.
Peter Oppenheimer, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
We remain very confident in hitting the 10 million goal for 2008.
No sign of Bluetooth in the SDK that I could find. I've helped develop the Wiimote (Bluetooth device) driver for the Mac and know where to find the Bluetooth framework; no Bluetooth framework mentioned in the iPhone SDK.
- Jasen.
Well not what I wanted to hear. In this case though I will simply state that we can always hope that this is something not ready for the beta.
I just find it hard to believe that Apple would go out of its way to leave a key component of the iPhone unaccessible. In any event I'm not concerned so much about custom drivers as I'm concerned about Apple supplying profiles to make use of common hardware already on the market.
Apple does sell more with the iPhone alone than other manufacturers do with an entire line. You're assuming I wrote "ALL other", which was not the case.
Well be more careful next time. I assumed you meant ALL and not SOME. The fact they sell more iPhones than SOME brand nobody has heard of or who aren't widely available in the USA isn't very "mind-bottling" at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Kaplan
The NPD Group pegs the Apple as the sixth largest brand by sales for CY 2007, behind Moto, Samsung, LG, Nokia and Sanyo. That isn't too bad, considering iPhone is a single model and didn't go on sale until mid-2007. The same survey lists the iPhone as the 5th best-selling model for Q407, behind two from Moto, and one each from Samsung and LG.
...in the USA. I really don't think they have much competition in the USA so grabbing 2.5% of the market wasn't that difficult.
Behind Apple are established brands such as Palm, SonyEricsson, Pantech, Danger, HTC and others.
Pantech? Danger? Palm? HTC? Who?
Those guys are minnows worldwide. What surprises me more is that Nokia are still ahead. They just don't seem to be trying in the USA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Kaplan
Given the fact that this was a debut product from a company with no history in this product category (the ROKR doesn't count), and that the product was widely viewed as too expensive when it was unveiled, those are remarkable accomplishments.
I disagree. Paint a brick white and stick an Apple logo on it and some schmuck will buy it. The iPhone is far from being a painted brick but it certainly is perhaps the only phone that has new, shiny, coolness factor in a market largely bereft of design competence. It's not like they're an unknown brand or that they can't leverage their previous hits such as the iPod for cred. Apart from that they were entering a market where they had very little competition. Add it all up and even with a product that has limited tech specs but demos well and you've a hit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aresee
Look at that picture again, it says market share. That is 10 million units for the full 18 months that the phone has been on sale. Not the 2008 sales expectation.
No. The 1% = 10M in the slide is 1% of 2006's global phone sales of 957M. It's not 18 months of sales, it's a year. Really, I don't know how much more proof people need. Jobs stood on stage and said they were after 1% or 10M sales in the iPhone's first full year ie. in 2008. Not 18 months, not 12 months from launch. 10M in 2008.
It's since been reiterated many times in financial calls and interviews yet people still are saying otherwise.
Incidentally, the global market for phones in 2007 was 1.15bn phones so 1% is 11.5M phones. In 2008 Gartner are predicting a slight dip in sales so give or take a million and Apple might hit their 1%.
Because $99 will bankrupt most open source coders?
Depends. If you're giving code away for free, and you're not earning money through a service model, just what is your incentive to pay $99 to give stuff away?
It's obviously a disincentive to people who just give away code. It's also slightly more complex when working on a project with multiple coders - which of you owns the $99 App Store contract?
I don't think it's a major disincentive, but it's possibly a block for some and when you've free alternatives, why use the $99 service?
Depends. If you're giving code away for free, and you're not earning money through a service model, just what is your incentive to pay $99 to give stuff away?
If they didn't have to go via Apple's app-store, they would need somewhere to host the application. Are there places you can do that for free?
Because $99 will bankrupt most open source coders?
I don't see this at all. There is nothing to keep you from charging for your open source code. At least for most licenses, you just have to make the code available.
In many ways the iPhone is an ideal platform for open source code. Put your source code up on the web someplace and let the average user down load your app for $5 a crack. If the App is really good you will get a lot of users that simply don't care if it is open source as long as it installs and runs well on their Touch.
The good thing with Apple's program is that there is a disincentive for multiple builds of the same project. On top of that there is a big hurdle for the average user to jump over. These things combined should keep a project centered around a small development team.
In any event I see this as a great opportunity for open source. It is a way for developers to get a little return on their investment in time and effort but at the same time gain the benefit of exposing the code base to prying eyes. Even he $5 dollars mentioned above could be considered excessive, maybe pricing so that the first 200 downloads pays for the $99 dollar entry fee.
Paint a brick white and stick an Apple logo on it and some schmuck will buy it.
Hey, are they selling those yet? I heard they were comming but I just checked the Apple Store and couldn't find any. I was planning to wait for rev b, but I just gotta have my iSchmuckBrick Now!
If they didn't have to go via Apple's app-store, they would need somewhere to host the application. Are there places you can do that for free?
Sourceforge.net and Google Code being but two of many.
They also provide free web space, database, subversion repository, bug trackers, forums and more for your project.
The problem with the iPhone is you can't install apps other than from Apple's app store or if you've compiled it yourself through XCode and installed it using your developer licence. That's not a major problem since at least Apple realise they need to 'sell' apps for free but it's a pity you've got to pay $99 to Apple to do so and you can't host it elsewhere.
It'll be broken in a matter of weeks though and there will be an installer that lets you install any app without going through Apple I reckon so not a problem really.
Hey, are they selling those yet? I heard they were comming but I just checked the Apple Store and couldn't find any. I was planning to wait for rev b, but I just gotta have my iSchmuckBrick Now!
You should probably wait for the iSchmuckBrickPro model in Aluminium. I can tell you're that kind of guy.
Depends. If you're giving code away for free, and you're not earning money through a service model, just what is your incentive to pay $99 to give stuff away?
It's obviously a disincentive to people who just give away code. It's also slightly more complex when working on a project with multiple coders - which of you owns the $99 App Store contract?
I don't think it's a major disincentive, but it's possibly a block for some and when you've free alternatives, why use the $99 service?
Its a disincentive to clutter up the store with apps that don't have some minimal commitment behind it. How many sourceforge projects are stuck in limbo?
Multiple coders is an issue for apps sold for money regardless of which storefront or sale methodology you use. If the sale price is $0 then it doesn't matter who owns the contract. Whomever fronts the $99 seems reasonable.
It's since been reiterated many times in financial calls and interviews yet people still are saying otherwise.
Exactly. There are people who disagree with your interpretation. There is anything but a consensus on the whole "10M in 2008" thing. But does it really matter?
Sourceforge.net and Google Code being but two of many.
They also provide free web space, database, subversion repository, bug trackers, forums and more for your project.
The problem with the iPhone is you can't install apps other than from Apple's app store or if you've compiled it yourself through XCode and installed it using your developer licence. That's not a major problem since at least Apple realise they need to 'sell' apps for free but it's a pity you've got to pay $99 to Apple to do so and you can't host it elsewhere.
And this isn't SourceForge but a store front. If you don't need to someone to collect payment for you then the $99 is simply for marketing your project to a lot of eyeballs.
Personally, once this goes live I see zero need to jailbreak just to run some dubious app from some random dev that can't fork over $99.
Comments
A single model? They sold 12M Pearls?
You said...
The very idea that Apple is selling more phones with a single model deployed over a single carrier than other brands are with multiple models over multiple carriers is mind-bottling.
...which is obviously not true.
Steve Jobs, speaking at Apple?s shareholder meeting, reiterated the company?s goal to sell 10 million iPhones by the end of the year.
That's not what he said.
He stood on stage at the iPhone launch and said it would be 10 million unit sales in calendar year 2008. Tim Cook and Peter Openheimer repeat it multiple times in the Q1 financials. A full transcript is at...
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/0...gs-transcript/
A very good question - Thank You!
I have a few app ideas that really could make use of Bluetooth. More so it needs to be a complete Bluetooth. Or at least a BlueTooth that supports a few more profiles than what Apple currently supports.
Dave
No sign of Bluetooth in the SDK that I could find. I've helped develop the Wiimote (Bluetooth device) driver for the Mac and know where to find the Bluetooth framework; no Bluetooth framework mentioned in the iPhone SDK.
- Jasen.
You said...
...which is obviously not true.
No, its true.
Apple does sell more with the iPhone alone than other manufacturers do with an entire line. You're assuming I wrote "ALL other", which was not the case.
The NPD Group pegs the Apple as the sixth largest brand by sales for CY 2007, behind Moto, Samsung, LG, Nokia and Sanyo. That isn't too bad, considering iPhone is a single model and didn't go on sale until mid-2007. The same survey lists the iPhone as the 5th best-selling model for Q407, behind two from Moto, and one each from Samsung and LG.
Behind Apple are established brands such as Palm, SonyEricsson, Pantech, Danger, HTC and others.
Given the fact that this was a debut product from a company with no history in this product category (the ROKR doesn't count), and that the product was widely viewed as too expensive when it was unveiled, those are remarkable accomplishments.
That's not what he said.
He stood on stage at the iPhone launch and said it would be 10 million unit sales in calendar year 2008. Tim Cook and Peter Openheimer repeat it multiple times in the Q1 financials. A full transcript is at...
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/0...gs-transcript/
Yes, I know. That is why I posted the quote (which confirms, not contradicts, what you're saying above). It was my faulty recollection of the launch, when Jobs said the goal was 10M by the end of this year.
They're not planning to hit 10M by June. It's 10M in 2008, ie. from Jan 1st 2008 to the end of 2008. However, there will be a decent sized pool of developers because traditionally Apple has attracted the small indie developers that can live off a small market. That's how it works with Macs and that's how it'll work with iPhone. It's very important to the success of the iPhone OS that it's almost an easy shoe-in for Mac OS developers to use the same tools and API as they're used to. Developing for other mobile platforms requires new tools and entirely new APIs.
Look at that picture again, it says market share. That is 10 million units for the full 18 months that the phone has been on sale. Not the 2008 sales expectation.
He stood on stage at the iPhone launch and said it would be 10 million unit sales in calendar year 2008. Tim Cook and Peter Openheimer repeat it multiple times in the Q1 financials. A full transcript is at...
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/0...gs-transcript/
I read through that full transcript and it's always "hitting the 10 million goal for 2008." And from the slide shown above I am assuming that are talking about market share, not 2008 sales.
An example of their responses to questions is:
William Fearnley, FTN Midwest
One last, if I could. On the iPhone unit expectation for 2008, I mean are you guys providing any type of update on that today? Thanks.
Peter Oppenheimer, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
We remain very confident in hitting the 10 million goal for 2008.
No sign of Bluetooth in the SDK that I could find. I've helped develop the Wiimote (Bluetooth device) driver for the Mac and know where to find the Bluetooth framework; no Bluetooth framework mentioned in the iPhone SDK.
- Jasen.
Well not what I wanted to hear. In this case though I will simply state that we can always hope that this is something not ready for the beta.
I just find it hard to believe that Apple would go out of its way to leave a key component of the iPhone unaccessible. In any event I'm not concerned so much about custom drivers as I'm concerned about Apple supplying profiles to make use of common hardware already on the market.
Dave
.
Apple does sell more with the iPhone alone than other manufacturers do with an entire line. You're assuming I wrote "ALL other", which was not the case.
Well be more careful next time. I assumed you meant ALL and not SOME. The fact they sell more iPhones than SOME brand nobody has heard of or who aren't widely available in the USA isn't very "mind-bottling" at all.
The NPD Group pegs the Apple as the sixth largest brand by sales for CY 2007, behind Moto, Samsung, LG, Nokia and Sanyo. That isn't too bad, considering iPhone is a single model and didn't go on sale until mid-2007. The same survey lists the iPhone as the 5th best-selling model for Q407, behind two from Moto, and one each from Samsung and LG.
...in the USA. I really don't think they have much competition in the USA so grabbing 2.5% of the market wasn't that difficult.
Worldwide the picture is very different.
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=612207
Behind Apple are established brands such as Palm, SonyEricsson, Pantech, Danger, HTC and others.
Pantech? Danger? Palm? HTC? Who?
Those guys are minnows worldwide. What surprises me more is that Nokia are still ahead. They just don't seem to be trying in the USA.
Given the fact that this was a debut product from a company with no history in this product category (the ROKR doesn't count), and that the product was widely viewed as too expensive when it was unveiled, those are remarkable accomplishments.
I disagree. Paint a brick white and stick an Apple logo on it and some schmuck will buy it. The iPhone is far from being a painted brick but it certainly is perhaps the only phone that has new, shiny, coolness factor in a market largely bereft of design competence. It's not like they're an unknown brand or that they can't leverage their previous hits such as the iPod for cred. Apart from that they were entering a market where they had very little competition. Add it all up and even with a product that has limited tech specs but demos well and you've a hit.
Look at that picture again, it says market share. That is 10 million units for the full 18 months that the phone has been on sale. Not the 2008 sales expectation.
No. The 1% = 10M in the slide is 1% of 2006's global phone sales of 957M. It's not 18 months of sales, it's a year. Really, I don't know how much more proof people need. Jobs stood on stage and said they were after 1% or 10M sales in the iPhone's first full year ie. in 2008. Not 18 months, not 12 months from launch. 10M in 2008.
It's since been reiterated many times in financial calls and interviews yet people still are saying otherwise.
Incidentally, the global market for phones in 2007 was 1.15bn phones so 1% is 11.5M phones. In 2008 Gartner are predicting a slight dip in sales so give or take a million and Apple might hit their 1%.
A 10% growth rate would mean 1.265 billion mobile phones in 2008.
Gartner only said that GROWTH will decelerate to 10% in 2008.
A 10% growth rate would mean 1.265 billion mobile phones in 2008.
I thought it was a bit unlikely when I typed it. Serves me right for skimming. So, Apple has to hit 12.6M iPhones in 2008 for 1%.
Although it is $99 more than Google Code or Sourceforge.net.
The $99 deal is damned good if you want to sell closed source apps. It's not so good if you have an open source model.
Because $99 will bankrupt most open source coders?
Because $99 will bankrupt most open source coders?
Depends. If you're giving code away for free, and you're not earning money through a service model, just what is your incentive to pay $99 to give stuff away?
It's obviously a disincentive to people who just give away code. It's also slightly more complex when working on a project with multiple coders - which of you owns the $99 App Store contract?
I don't think it's a major disincentive, but it's possibly a block for some and when you've free alternatives, why use the $99 service?
Depends. If you're giving code away for free, and you're not earning money through a service model, just what is your incentive to pay $99 to give stuff away?
If they didn't have to go via Apple's app-store, they would need somewhere to host the application. Are there places you can do that for free?
Because $99 will bankrupt most open source coders?
I don't see this at all. There is nothing to keep you from charging for your open source code. At least for most licenses, you just have to make the code available.
In many ways the iPhone is an ideal platform for open source code. Put your source code up on the web someplace and let the average user down load your app for $5 a crack. If the App is really good you will get a lot of users that simply don't care if it is open source as long as it installs and runs well on their Touch.
The good thing with Apple's program is that there is a disincentive for multiple builds of the same project. On top of that there is a big hurdle for the average user to jump over. These things combined should keep a project centered around a small development team.
In any event I see this as a great opportunity for open source. It is a way for developers to get a little return on their investment in time and effort but at the same time gain the benefit of exposing the code base to prying eyes. Even he $5 dollars mentioned above could be considered excessive, maybe pricing so that the first 200 downloads pays for the $99 dollar entry fee.
Dave
Paint a brick white and stick an Apple logo on it and some schmuck will buy it.
Hey, are they selling those yet? I heard they were comming but I just checked the Apple Store and couldn't find any. I was planning to wait for rev b, but I just gotta have my iSchmuckBrick Now!
If they didn't have to go via Apple's app-store, they would need somewhere to host the application. Are there places you can do that for free?
Sourceforge.net and Google Code being but two of many.
They also provide free web space, database, subversion repository, bug trackers, forums and more for your project.
The problem with the iPhone is you can't install apps other than from Apple's app store or if you've compiled it yourself through XCode and installed it using your developer licence. That's not a major problem since at least Apple realise they need to 'sell' apps for free but it's a pity you've got to pay $99 to Apple to do so and you can't host it elsewhere.
It'll be broken in a matter of weeks though and there will be an installer that lets you install any app without going through Apple I reckon so not a problem really.
Hey, are they selling those yet? I heard they were comming but I just checked the Apple Store and couldn't find any. I was planning to wait for rev b, but I just gotta have my iSchmuckBrick Now!
You should probably wait for the iSchmuckBrickPro model in Aluminium. I can tell you're that kind of guy.
Depends. If you're giving code away for free, and you're not earning money through a service model, just what is your incentive to pay $99 to give stuff away?
It's obviously a disincentive to people who just give away code. It's also slightly more complex when working on a project with multiple coders - which of you owns the $99 App Store contract?
I don't think it's a major disincentive, but it's possibly a block for some and when you've free alternatives, why use the $99 service?
Its a disincentive to clutter up the store with apps that don't have some minimal commitment behind it. How many sourceforge projects are stuck in limbo?
Multiple coders is an issue for apps sold for money regardless of which storefront or sale methodology you use. If the sale price is $0 then it doesn't matter who owns the contract. Whomever fronts the $99 seems reasonable.
It's since been reiterated many times in financial calls and interviews yet people still are saying otherwise.
Exactly. There are people who disagree with your interpretation. There is anything but a consensus on the whole "10M in 2008" thing. But does it really matter?
Sourceforge.net and Google Code being but two of many.
They also provide free web space, database, subversion repository, bug trackers, forums and more for your project.
The problem with the iPhone is you can't install apps other than from Apple's app store or if you've compiled it yourself through XCode and installed it using your developer licence. That's not a major problem since at least Apple realise they need to 'sell' apps for free but it's a pity you've got to pay $99 to Apple to do so and you can't host it elsewhere.
And this isn't SourceForge but a store front. If you don't need to someone to collect payment for you then the $99 is simply for marketing your project to a lot of eyeballs.
Personally, once this goes live I see zero need to jailbreak just to run some dubious app from some random dev that can't fork over $99.