ekeefe41 - tenobell nailed it, but just to add... people will consider their cell phone a mini computer, and for most users, they will just want it to work and do what they need it to do (which is not a very high bar).
Geeks may want to open their phone up and add flux capacitors but most (a much larger global user base than PCs) want it to do the basic job they need it to do - phone, surf, media, few cool apps etc.
The history of the PC wars is not relevant. Apple had many opportunities to win and screwed the pooch every time. Apple may have run aground in the past but it is now on the crest of the wave in delivering that market-driven model in the iPhone and pretty well in the Mac too.
Many people who buy the iPhone do not even realize that it is a smart phone to begin with and think it's a cell phone as it is marketed. This accounts for a large part of the sales percentage of it to smart phones overall.
It should be really compared as a percentage of both cell phones and smart phones combined. And there the percentage is probably not that significant.
The real test is whether corporate America adopts it and this has yet to be witnessed.
Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.
The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's
The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's
The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.
Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.
"Price" lost the PC war. IBM almost went under too. That isn't going to happen with iPhone.
The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control.
It's funny that people to this day still think that was the cause of the Mac's tiny fraction of the market share, it is in fact a completely short-sighted and flawed assumption. The Mac, along with every other OS vendor; AmigaOS, NextStep, BeOS, DR-DOS, countless others, were shoved out of the market by Microsoft (IBM's Frankenstein's Monster) and it's unethical business practices.
At that point in history, it was about applications and compatibility. In this modern age it's all about the content (the data), which is now mostly open and cross-platform compatible thanks to the advent of the Internet and a need for standards. It doesn't matter how tight your control is over your own platform anymore as long as you support the standards that everyone else supports.
The market the Mac originated in is not at all anything like the market the iPhone is in. And to try and draw comparisons between the two platforms is a bit ridiculous.
Tell that to Steve Ballmer. See how he feels about that right now. On second thought, never mind. All you're likely to get out of him is "Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! I! LOVE! THIS! COMPANY! HEE-HAW!"
ekeefe41 - tenobell nailed it, but just to add... ....
I agree.
And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
The moral: this too shall change. The iPod might even become a bigger success.
And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
..and the complete and utter failure of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the AppleTV......
It seems apparent to me that a major reason for the dominance of PCs was/is customizability.
In the past, a basic computer was only suitable for the most mundane tasks. People had to consider their uses, then carefully pick-and-choose the hardware components to get the best bang for the buck. The typical user was tech-savvy, and was able and willing to do this. The openness of Windows supported this basic need, while few alternatives did. Apple struggled through those times.
I believe Apple's market share is rising largely due to the fact that a basic computer is now capable of doing what 80% of the market needs. There are still users that needs specialized hardware (gamers, etc), or people that are used to the status quo. The existence of the Mac Pro and calls for an xMac attest to this.
So, how does this apply to phones? Sure, some people need a basic phone, and others need a high-end smartphone. Android may allow the same OS to support a wide range of hardware - but is it going to enable the hardware customization of a Windows PC? No.
First, a modular phone would almost surely not be compact, light, and durable enough for actual use. You may have a few different handsets to choose from, but you won't be able to mix & match, or upgrade components individually.
Second, the phone companies are keeping tight control over the handsets. It is too much of a revenue stream, and a significant differentiator (ie, if you want an iphone, go to AT&T). They won't let generic modular phones happen.
If the iPhone does fail to Android, it won't be becuse of open-hardware "PC Phones".
And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
Funny, everyone i know hates that they are forced to use Itunes if they buy an ipod. I like Itunes....
Let me be clear, i am an Apple fan. I just think the smart cell phone industry will be the next big thing. If one OS could become the defacto OS for the industry.... well watch out.
RiM, Apple, Windows moble, Palm
Pick your poison.
Given Apple can only be installed on apple hardware....
And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
Both iPods and iPhones are successes due to their hardware more than anything else.
The futuristic white click-wheeled iPos and sleek glass iPhone are what really made the success more than anything else- the coolness factor.
These guys can't come up with anything more 21st century than f***ing desktop folder icons?
I want to agree with you but it's really rediculous. 21st century technology is folder icons. I would rather have the folder then flip through 100 unlabeled homescreens with no option of a different backround. I would love copy/paste but guess what. iPhone has been out for a year and a half and it's still not happened. Everyone complains about vista I don't have it personally but I wouldn't mind it. I know like 20 people with it and none of them complain. I have only heard people who have macs complain about vista lol so funny. Google phone platform may be good may not be who knows but the iPhone is very very lacking in very east to fix subjects. I know because I have the 3g and my lady has the 1st gen.
Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1
Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.
The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's
The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's
The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.
Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.
It will fail just like the iPod, right? This isn't 1985 and the board of Apple is moronic and allows Jobs to be just the Chairman while they find someone to run the company as CEO.
This is 2008 and Steve knows how to run Apple and basically an OS company better than anyone else on the planet.
Microsoft would never have become the 800lb gorilla if Apple wasn't so retarded as to listening to a former CEO of Pepsi convince them to oust Jobs. In hindsight, NeXT was formed along-side PIXAR so the world has received much more due to their ignorance--it just took a damn long time to drudge through crap to get to where we now stand.
..and the complete and utter failure of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the AppleTV......
Care to explain why/how AppleTv is a "...complete and utter failure"? Compared to what?
(FWIW, I've now had @TV for about 6 months, and I have to say that my overall experience with it has been fantastic: It has amazingly simplified my multimedia life at home. Do you own/use it?)
The ability to install the windows OS on and hardware made for competition.
Competition breeds price drops.
Competition also breeds also new developments.
This all still fits my point...
Apple=Socialist Computing
Windows=Free market computing
Again the iphone business model looks the same to me.
Economy of scale breeds price drops, too. And that's why Apple can make an iPod cheaper than anyone else. The fact that they can also sell an iPod for more than most others is also interesting, and why their margins remain so insanely high. But if it came to a pure MP3 player price war, Apple could win. By the time Android comes around, Apple will also be buying all the phone parts in bulk and have suppliers locked in for long term cheap parts.
And when it comes to building an iPod, it's all about Han Hai's ability to compete in a free market, not Apple's. Apple bids out manufacturing to low bidders, who are competing with each other to build their device cheaper.
There are a lot of interesting questions if you want to make these comparisons. Will Android software purchased for a T-Mobile phone run on a Verizon Android phone? What about operating system updates? I feel like Google is basically just another MontaVista, WindRiver, or RedHat playing at the Apple game.
So, how does this apply to phones? Sure, some people need a basic phone, and others need a high-end smartphone. Android may allow the same OS to support a wide range of hardware - but is it going to enable the hardware customization of a Windows PC? No.
Ahhhh... yes it does.
Different hardware company will make different competing hardware with different configurations and options.
What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???
6.1%
They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)
You are working on old assumption and business logic from the 90's. Marketshare is important to a degree, but certainly not the entire story.
Apple's current ability to sell computers over $1000. Apple's revenue, profit, stock price, and market valuation. Versus Dell and HP go to show that their are other factors just as important as market share.
You've missed how Windows need to be everything to everybody has proven to be a liability. Windows is not able to have the ability to change the way Apple can change Mac OS.
Care to explain why/how AppleTv is a "...complete and utter failure"? Compared to what?
(FWIW, I've now had @TV for about 6 months, and I have to say that my overall experience with it has been fantastic: It has amazingly simplified my multimedia life at home. Do you own/use it?)
Compared to ? Nothing- it doesn't matter. Nobody talks about it anymore . It has no buzz. It's relegated to the back of the store. I could go on and on. It's a joke.
Yes I own it- rarely use it- and I should have bought a MiniMac instead. At least then I could do 100 times more functions with it than the Apple TV.
I feel that the Apple TV is nothing more than an iTunes digital jukebox- put $'s in it to rent or buy more from Apple.
However, I've learned a BIG lesson- never buy first G anything again.
Comments
ekeefe41 - tenobell nailed it, but just to add... people will consider their cell phone a mini computer, and for most users, they will just want it to work and do what they need it to do (which is not a very high bar).
Geeks may want to open their phone up and add flux capacitors but most (a much larger global user base than PCs) want it to do the basic job they need it to do - phone, surf, media, few cool apps etc.
The history of the PC wars is not relevant. Apple had many opportunities to win and screwed the pooch every time. Apple may have run aground in the past but it is now on the crest of the wave in delivering that market-driven model in the iPhone and pretty well in the Mac too.
Many people who buy the iPhone do not even realize that it is a smart phone to begin with and think it's a cell phone as it is marketed. This accounts for a large part of the sales percentage of it to smart phones overall.
It should be really compared as a percentage of both cell phones and smart phones combined. And there the percentage is probably not that significant.
The real test is whether corporate America adopts it and this has yet to be witnessed.
Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.
The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's
The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's
The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.
Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.
"Price" lost the PC war. IBM almost went under too. That isn't going to happen with iPhone.
The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control.
It's funny that people to this day still think that was the cause of the Mac's tiny fraction of the market share, it is in fact a completely short-sighted and flawed assumption. The Mac, along with every other OS vendor; AmigaOS, NextStep, BeOS, DR-DOS, countless others, were shoved out of the market by Microsoft (IBM's Frankenstein's Monster) and it's unethical business practices.
At that point in history, it was about applications and compatibility. In this modern age it's all about the content (the data), which is now mostly open and cross-platform compatible thanks to the advent of the Internet and a need for standards. It doesn't matter how tight your control is over your own platform anymore as long as you support the standards that everyone else supports.
The market the Mac originated in is not at all anything like the market the iPhone is in. And to try and draw comparisons between the two platforms is a bit ridiculous.
They did loose the PC war you know.
Tell that to Steve Ballmer. See how he feels about that right now. On second thought, never mind. All you're likely to get out of him is "Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! I! LOVE! THIS! COMPANY! HEE-HAW!"
Well what caused the price difference?
The ability to install the windows OS on and hardware made for competition.
Competition breeds price drops.
Competition also breeds also new developments.
This all still fits my point...
Apple=Socialist Computing
Windows=Free market computing
Again the iphone business model looks the same to me.
ekeefe41 - tenobell nailed it, but just to add... ....
I agree.
And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
The moral: this too shall change. The iPod might even become a bigger success.
I agree.
And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
..and the complete and utter failure of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the AppleTV......
In the past, a basic computer was only suitable for the most mundane tasks. People had to consider their uses, then carefully pick-and-choose the hardware components to get the best bang for the buck. The typical user was tech-savvy, and was able and willing to do this. The openness of Windows supported this basic need, while few alternatives did. Apple struggled through those times.
I believe Apple's market share is rising largely due to the fact that a basic computer is now capable of doing what 80% of the market needs. There are still users that needs specialized hardware (gamers, etc), or people that are used to the status quo. The existence of the Mac Pro and calls for an xMac attest to this.
So, how does this apply to phones? Sure, some people need a basic phone, and others need a high-end smartphone. Android may allow the same OS to support a wide range of hardware - but is it going to enable the hardware customization of a Windows PC? No.
First, a modular phone would almost surely not be compact, light, and durable enough for actual use. You may have a few different handsets to choose from, but you won't be able to mix & match, or upgrade components individually.
Second, the phone companies are keeping tight control over the handsets. It is too much of a revenue stream, and a significant differentiator (ie, if you want an iphone, go to AT&T). They won't let generic modular phones happen.
If the iPhone does fail to Android, it won't be becuse of open-hardware "PC Phones".
I agree.
And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
Funny, everyone i know hates that they are forced to use Itunes if they buy an ipod. I like Itunes....
Let me be clear, i am an Apple fan. I just think the smart cell phone industry will be the next big thing. If one OS could become the defacto OS for the industry.... well watch out.
RiM, Apple, Windows moble, Palm
Pick your poison.
Given Apple can only be installed on apple hardware....
Well... make your own assumptions.
I agree.
And, I'd like to add another counterargument to ekeefe41: Look at the runaway success of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the iPod......
Both iPods and iPhones are successes due to their hardware more than anything else.
The futuristic white click-wheeled iPos and sleek glass iPhone are what really made the success more than anything else- the coolness factor.
That's what Gates said about Windows.
These guys can't come up with anything more 21st century than f***ing desktop folder icons?
I want to agree with you but it's really rediculous. 21st century technology is folder icons. I would rather have the folder then flip through 100 unlabeled homescreens with no option of a different backround. I would love copy/paste but guess what. iPhone has been out for a year and a half and it's still not happened. Everyone complains about vista I don't have it personally but I wouldn't mind it. I know like 20 people with it and none of them complain. I have only heard people who have macs complain about vista lol so funny. Google phone platform may be good may not be who knows but the iPhone is very very lacking in very east to fix subjects. I know because I have the 3g and my lady has the 1st gen.
Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1
Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.
The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's
The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's
The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.
Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.
It will fail just like the iPod, right? This isn't 1985 and the board of Apple is moronic and allows Jobs to be just the Chairman while they find someone to run the company as CEO.
This is 2008 and Steve knows how to run Apple and basically an OS company better than anyone else on the planet.
Microsoft would never have become the 800lb gorilla if Apple wasn't so retarded as to listening to a former CEO of Pepsi convince them to oust Jobs. In hindsight, NeXT was formed along-side PIXAR so the world has received much more due to their ignorance--it just took a damn long time to drudge through crap to get to where we now stand.
..and the complete and utter failure of the "tightly controlled software+hardware" device (and ecosystem) known as the AppleTV......
Care to explain why/how AppleTv is a "...complete and utter failure"? Compared to what?
(FWIW, I've now had @TV for about 6 months, and I have to say that my overall experience with it has been fantastic: It has amazingly simplified my multimedia life at home. Do you own/use it?)
Funny, everyone i know hates that they are forced to use Itunes if they buy an ipod.......
Wow, and yet, it has a 75% market share in the US.
(This is what economists call "cheap talk.")
All you guys are saying "price won the PC war".
Well what caused the price difference?
The ability to install the windows OS on and hardware made for competition.
Competition breeds price drops.
Competition also breeds also new developments.
This all still fits my point...
Apple=Socialist Computing
Windows=Free market computing
Again the iphone business model looks the same to me.
Economy of scale breeds price drops, too. And that's why Apple can make an iPod cheaper than anyone else. The fact that they can also sell an iPod for more than most others is also interesting, and why their margins remain so insanely high. But if it came to a pure MP3 player price war, Apple could win. By the time Android comes around, Apple will also be buying all the phone parts in bulk and have suppliers locked in for long term cheap parts.
And when it comes to building an iPod, it's all about Han Hai's ability to compete in a free market, not Apple's. Apple bids out manufacturing to low bidders, who are competing with each other to build their device cheaper.
There are a lot of interesting questions if you want to make these comparisons. Will Android software purchased for a T-Mobile phone run on a Verizon Android phone? What about operating system updates? I feel like Google is basically just another MontaVista, WindRiver, or RedHat playing at the Apple game.
So, how does this apply to phones? Sure, some people need a basic phone, and others need a high-end smartphone. Android may allow the same OS to support a wide range of hardware - but is it going to enable the hardware customization of a Windows PC? No.
Ahhhh... yes it does.
Different hardware company will make different competing hardware with different configurations and options.
Samsung will make a different phone than HTC....
What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???
6.1%
They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)
You are working on old assumption and business logic from the 90's. Marketshare is important to a degree, but certainly not the entire story.
Apple's current ability to sell computers over $1000. Apple's revenue, profit, stock price, and market valuation. Versus Dell and HP go to show that their are other factors just as important as market share.
You've missed how Windows need to be everything to everybody has proven to be a liability. Windows is not able to have the ability to change the way Apple can change Mac OS.
Wow, and yet, it has a 75% market share in the US.
(This is what economists call "cheap talk.")
I didn't say people didn't buy them, i said people didn't like it....
Most Windows users if given the opportunity would cut the ties of Itunes and Ipod.
Just ask someone who uses windows. You may have a hard time finding one. Only like 90% of people that have a PC use windows.
Care to explain why/how AppleTv is a "...complete and utter failure"? Compared to what?
(FWIW, I've now had @TV for about 6 months, and I have to say that my overall experience with it has been fantastic: It has amazingly simplified my multimedia life at home. Do you own/use it?)
Compared to ? Nothing- it doesn't matter. Nobody talks about it anymore . It has no buzz. It's relegated to the back of the store. I could go on and on. It's a joke.
Yes I own it- rarely use it- and I should have bought a MiniMac instead. At least then I could do 100 times more functions with it than the Apple TV.
I feel that the Apple TV is nothing more than an iTunes digital jukebox- put $'s in it to rent or buy more from Apple.
However, I've learned a BIG lesson- never buy first G anything again.