Could have been 10.5 million iPhones if Apple seized their surprise touchscreen advantage and invaded the business market.
Missed opportunity or deliberate avoidance, guess Apple doesn't deem themselves good enough for the enterprise space. Oh well, back to fruity phones, colorful icons and cheap games instead of serious business tools.
RIM needs to release an iPhone like OS in version 6.0 of the Blackberry OS. The Storm and Storm2 were ok but nothing that completed with the iPhone. I know they can do better.
Could have been 10.5 million iPhones if Apple seized their surprise touchscreen advantage and invaded the business market.
You don't even know how many iPhones were sold in the last quarter.
Quote:
Missed opportunity or deliberate avoidance, guess Apple doesn't deem themselves good enough for the enterprise space. Oh well, back to fruity phones, colorful icons and cheap games instead of serious business tools.
When you flood the market with a bunch of models (because you can't produce any ONE that is an iPhone-Killer) it's pretty easy to boost growth.
Come June, these also-rans will be in for quite a shock. Again.
Sorry, but I like to decide what form factor phone I have. Its nice to have a choice of a candybar style, flip, touchscreen and a high & low end full QWERTY. I'd hardly call it, "Flooding the market." They currently offer a choice of 5 of the 6 (no slider yet) form factors that cover pretty much every phone currently in production.
I don't know what "shock" you may be referring to because Apple will never beat RIM in North America unless they offer something in other form factors.
Why is the graph against the article's points? The article is about RIM loosing market share and that is clearly what the graph showed, right?
If you were referring to android vs iphone, the article does not even mentions android. All I see in that graph is that before the iphone there was not a viable way to surf the web on a mobile device. Now, there are 2, iphone and android. Hence the 50/50, but I can hardly read more than that. But that does not contradict the article, or does it?
Perhaps your point is that Android is growing. Well it better be! Imagine what a fiasco for google if it wasn't. How much have they invested on it? And they are giving it for free. It would be awfully embarrassing if it was not growing!
The iPhone is available in many countries for free. International sales now make up well over half of all iPhone sales. Since it's free, that means that there's effectively a "buy one get a billion free" offer on iPhones!
No, wait, that's stupid logic. You still have to pay the contract for several years. In both instances. Buy one get one free isn't. Remember those "total cost of ownership" graphs that Prince McLean used to trot out on a regular basis? Now he's using the opposite logic.
Your logic is completely flawed. BOGOF results in twice the handset "sales" for RIM. Most BOGOF deals are used to add another phone to a family/corporate plan so the incremental contract cost is about $10 per month.
Get one free with a contract is the same the world over (for BB too). However, "free" for an iPhone (or high end BB) is always at the expense of a very high tariff with a long contract lockin. It does not promote additional handset sales volume.
Not that all BBs were BOGOF but a reasonable number probably were.
Could have been 10.5 million iPhones if Apple seized their surprise touchscreen advantage and invaded the business market.
Missed opportunity or deliberate avoidance, guess Apple doesn't deem themselves good enough for the enterprise space. Oh well, back to fruity phones, colorful icons and cheap games instead of serious business tools.
It took BB years to cultivate the Enterprise market and they sold them the very expensive BES backends when there was no competitor. That and the OK keyboard were what BB innovated. Now, they are the MS of corporate communications - companies are amortizing their BES expenditures and prior BB spend.
Is it any wonder that Apple went over to the consumer side where there is a much more interesting diversity of apps and uses. The fact that iPhone sells so well to non-BES shops is a testament to how good it is. I work in a big corp where some roles get free BBs. Of the other people (like me), hardly anyone has a BB since we all see them for the highly limited devices they are. My friend with the BB Tour (VZW) always asks me to look things up via safari, IMDB app, fandango etc. All he does is gets email (rarely sends) and meeting alerts from his corporate calendar.
The iPhone is available in many countries for free. International sales now make up well over half of all iPhone sales. Since it's free, that means that there's effectively a "buy one get a billion free" offer on iPhones!
No, wait, that's stupid logic. You still have to pay the contract for several years. In both instances. Buy one get one free isn't. Remember those "total cost of ownership" graphs that Prince McLean used to trot out on a regular basis? Now he's using the opposite logic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Apple sells only two models.
When you flood the market with a bunch of models (because you can't produce any ONE that is an iPhone-Killer) it's pretty easy to boost growth.
Come June, these also-rans will be in for quite a shock. Again.
Do not feed RIM Trolls. Everyone knows Apple's iPhone has all necessary patents and only releases functions once they have been perfected. That is why we don't mind waiting because Apple always does it better.
Blackberry won't be as dominant as they were in the past, but I don't see them being anything but a major player for years to come. It's different enough from the iPhone that many will still prefer it, much as some prefer sports cars others prefer sedans or SUVs. For instance, iPhone was built from the ground up as a consumer phone with enterprise features bolted on as an afterthought. Blackberry was built from the ground up as an enterprise phone - that's its specialty, with consumer features thrown in as an afterthought. The Blackberry's key differentiation is its keyboard. Plenty of people would rather use a tactile input device. I find the iPhone's keyboard unusable without autocorrect, even after two years of use. Not that I wish my iPhone had a real keyboard, but I can definitely see how some would prefer it.
Blackberry won't be as dominant as they were in the past, but I don't see them being anything but a major player for years to come. It's different enough from the iPhone that many will still prefer it, much as some prefer sports cars others prefer sedans or SUVs. For instance, iPhone was built from the ground up as a consumer phone with enterprise features bolted on as an afterthought. Blackberry was built from the ground up as an enterprise phone - that's its specialty, with consumer features thrown in as an afterthought. The Blackberry's key differentiation is its keyboard. Plenty of people would rather use a tactile input device. I find the iPhone's keyboard unusable without autocorrect, even after two years of use. Not that I wish my iPhone had a real keyboard, but I can definitely see how some would prefer it.
I don't entirely disagree with you estimation of RIM, but I think it's a mistake to think of the iPhone as a consumer phone with "enterprise features bolted on as an afterthought."
The iPhone is a very small computer with a touch interface. Outside of a physical keyboard (which is a UI philosophical choice and by no means a settled issue with regards to business use), there's nothing specifically "consumer" about the iPhone. It's all a matter of software.
Which is in direct contrast to the average Blackberry, which really does have "business" permanently designed into its hardware and for which consumer friendly touches actually do feel "bolted on."
That's kind of the point: by making the screen the UI and giving it an extensible, desktop derived OS, Apple made the iPhone (and the iPad) into ideally morph-able devices. There's nothing "bolted on" about adding software functionality, it's part and parcel of how it's supposed to work. It would be kind of like imagining that I'm bolting on 3D modeling functionality onto a MacBookPro once a new software package becomes available.
For years Apple stock was punished whenever they did something good. Could never quite figure that out. Only recently has it bucked that trend. When I read the headline of this article I could only smile.
Let's look at the US market to see why that chart is the way it is...
Here are the top 4 carriers which make up 257.8M of the ????? subscribers in the US. (corrected)
1. Verizon — 91.2
2. AT&T Mobility — 85.1
3. Sprint/Nextel — 48.1
4. T-Mobile USA — 33.4
Apples iPhone is only made available to 85.1m users (AT&T).
If I'm not mistaken, Android is now available to... all 257.8M customers... (perhaps more)
AT&T only just now (I think) started offering Android based phones but the other providers not counting AT&T total up to 172.7 potential customers none of whom can readily get an iPhone. It's no wonder that Android has reached such a level of success... When you have NO competition it's not really a hard race to win.
Now clearly this is Apples decision and bragging or crying doesn't really make a difference.
Android has a possible market of 257.8M US customers and is marketed by MANY different manufacturers ALL paying for their OWN advertisements and/or getting the carriers to foot the bill for ADs marketing the Android platform.
The iPhone is a single device manufactured by a single company and if I'm not mistaken ALL the ADs selling the device are created AND paid for by Apple. Something you may or may not have noticed is most (maybe ALL?) of the AT&T ADs do NOT even mention the iPhone unless its very quickly and simply stating they are the exclusive provider for the iPhone. Not sure if others noticed that but I sure find it interesting and at the same time totally expected... Apple wants total control and it's about to let any carrier speak for the iPhone.
Am I wrong about AT&T commercials not advertising the iPhone? I might be... but for the life of me, I can't remember a single AT&T developed AD bragging about the iPhone. ADs that mention some phones on their network have access to over 100k APPS ... I do remember that commercial but I just watched it again and the iPhone name wasn't even put in the fine print. I'm also speaking mostly about TV based ADs. Perhaps print ADs run by AT&T do 'advertise' the iPhone.
So again... the numbers might be interesting really don't paint an actual picture. Clearly due to Apples exclusive with AT&T but none the less it artificially props up Android sales.
For years Apple stock was punished whenever they did something good. Could never quite figure that out. Only recently has it bucked that trend. When I read the headline of this article I could only smile.
Right?! They did a great job besting the year prior but some douche bag street estimate is too high and they slammed for it. They still haven't reached the level of beating the street and still seeing the stock drop yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee
Let's look at the US market to see why that chart is the way it is...
Here are the top 4 carriers which make up 222.1M of the 260.7M subscribers in the US.
1. AT&T Mobility ? 71.3 million
2. Verizon ? 67.2
3. Sprint/Nextel ? 52.8
4. T-Mobile USA ? 30.8
Apples iPhone is only made available to 71.3m users (AT&T).
I think it's Verizon that has about 5M more subs than AT&T. Where did you get those numbers?
Right?! They did a great job besting the year prior but some douche bag street estimate is too high and they slammed for it. They still haven't reached the level of beating the street and still seeing the stock drop yet.
I think it's Verizon that has about 5M more subs than AT&T. Where did you get those numbers?
There could be a lesson of caution here, esp. given the high profit margins.
I worry a bit that Apple's share price could similarly be in the 'expectations are out of hand' territory ...... perhaps not so out-of-hand to fall to the 100s*, but a 7% drop is definitely not implausible when the iPad numbers come out (I am guessing 300-400K, but I think expectations are much higher).
Comments
Could have been 10.5 million iPhones if Apple seized their surprise touchscreen advantage and invaded the business market.
Missed opportunity or deliberate avoidance, guess Apple doesn't deem themselves good enough for the enterprise space. Oh well, back to fruity phones, colorful icons and cheap games instead of serious business tools.
Whatever
I've read this post several times now, and still can't discern its meaning.
Take two aspirin and call me in the morning.
Could have been 10.5 million iPhones if Apple seized their surprise touchscreen advantage and invaded the business market.
You don't even know how many iPhones were sold in the last quarter.
Missed opportunity or deliberate avoidance, guess Apple doesn't deem themselves good enough for the enterprise space. Oh well, back to fruity phones, colorful icons and cheap games instead of serious business tools.
Perhaps you ought to stick to posting recipes?
Apple sells only two models.
When you flood the market with a bunch of models (because you can't produce any ONE that is an iPhone-Killer) it's pretty easy to boost growth.
Come June, these also-rans will be in for quite a shock. Again.
Sorry, but I like to decide what form factor phone I have. Its nice to have a choice of a candybar style, flip, touchscreen and a high & low end full QWERTY. I'd hardly call it, "Flooding the market." They currently offer a choice of 5 of the 6 (no slider yet) form factors that cover pretty much every phone currently in production.
I don't know what "shock" you may be referring to because Apple will never beat RIM in North America unless they offer something in other form factors.
Yes, people still use iPhones. But the market is dramatically changing. Here is what Prince McLean doesn't want you to know: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...the-way-up.ars (the first chart).
Why is the graph against the article's points? The article is about RIM loosing market share and that is clearly what the graph showed, right?
If you were referring to android vs iphone, the article does not even mentions android. All I see in that graph is that before the iphone there was not a viable way to surf the web on a mobile device. Now, there are 2, iphone and android. Hence the 50/50, but I can hardly read more than that. But that does not contradict the article, or does it?
Perhaps your point is that Android is growing. Well it better be! Imagine what a fiasco for google if it wasn't. How much have they invested on it? And they are giving it for free. It would be awfully embarrassing if it was not growing!
I'm mystified by your posts.
Perhaps you ought to stick to posting recipes?
A bit dismissive, but funny as hell!
Take two aspirin and call me in the morning.
Two shots of bourbon might help more.
Holy shit, not that retarded argument again.
The iPhone is available in many countries for free. International sales now make up well over half of all iPhone sales. Since it's free, that means that there's effectively a "buy one get a billion free" offer on iPhones!
No, wait, that's stupid logic. You still have to pay the contract for several years. In both instances. Buy one get one free isn't. Remember those "total cost of ownership" graphs that Prince McLean used to trot out on a regular basis? Now he's using the opposite logic.
Your logic is completely flawed. BOGOF results in twice the handset "sales" for RIM. Most BOGOF deals are used to add another phone to a family/corporate plan so the incremental contract cost is about $10 per month.
Get one free with a contract is the same the world over (for BB too). However, "free" for an iPhone (or high end BB) is always at the expense of a very high tariff with a long contract lockin. It does not promote additional handset sales volume.
Not that all BBs were BOGOF but a reasonable number probably were.
Could have been 10.5 million iPhones if Apple seized their surprise touchscreen advantage and invaded the business market.
Missed opportunity or deliberate avoidance, guess Apple doesn't deem themselves good enough for the enterprise space. Oh well, back to fruity phones, colorful icons and cheap games instead of serious business tools.
It took BB years to cultivate the Enterprise market and they sold them the very expensive BES backends when there was no competitor. That and the OK keyboard were what BB innovated. Now, they are the MS of corporate communications - companies are amortizing their BES expenditures and prior BB spend.
Is it any wonder that Apple went over to the consumer side where there is a much more interesting diversity of apps and uses. The fact that iPhone sells so well to non-BES shops is a testament to how good it is. I work in a big corp where some roles get free BBs. Of the other people (like me), hardly anyone has a BB since we all see them for the highly limited devices they are. My friend with the BB Tour (VZW) always asks me to look things up via safari, IMDB app, fandango etc. All he does is gets email (rarely sends) and meeting alerts from his corporate calendar.
It's foregone conclusion that Android will surpass the iPhone is ad stats, mobile site stats, and unit sales.
No way. Apple is number one in every one of those, and Apple will always be number one. Especially in unit sales!
Holy shit, not that retarded argument again.
The iPhone is available in many countries for free. International sales now make up well over half of all iPhone sales. Since it's free, that means that there's effectively a "buy one get a billion free" offer on iPhones!
No, wait, that's stupid logic. You still have to pay the contract for several years. In both instances. Buy one get one free isn't. Remember those "total cost of ownership" graphs that Prince McLean used to trot out on a regular basis? Now he's using the opposite logic.
Apple sells only two models.
When you flood the market with a bunch of models (because you can't produce any ONE that is an iPhone-Killer) it's pretty easy to boost growth.
Come June, these also-rans will be in for quite a shock. Again.
Do not feed RIM Trolls. Everyone knows Apple's iPhone has all necessary patents and only releases functions once they have been perfected. That is why we don't mind waiting because Apple always does it better.
Blackberry won't be as dominant as they were in the past, but I don't see them being anything but a major player for years to come. It's different enough from the iPhone that many will still prefer it, much as some prefer sports cars others prefer sedans or SUVs. For instance, iPhone was built from the ground up as a consumer phone with enterprise features bolted on as an afterthought. Blackberry was built from the ground up as an enterprise phone - that's its specialty, with consumer features thrown in as an afterthought. The Blackberry's key differentiation is its keyboard. Plenty of people would rather use a tactile input device. I find the iPhone's keyboard unusable without autocorrect, even after two years of use. Not that I wish my iPhone had a real keyboard, but I can definitely see how some would prefer it.
I don't entirely disagree with you estimation of RIM, but I think it's a mistake to think of the iPhone as a consumer phone with "enterprise features bolted on as an afterthought."
The iPhone is a very small computer with a touch interface. Outside of a physical keyboard (which is a UI philosophical choice and by no means a settled issue with regards to business use), there's nothing specifically "consumer" about the iPhone. It's all a matter of software.
Which is in direct contrast to the average Blackberry, which really does have "business" permanently designed into its hardware and for which consumer friendly touches actually do feel "bolted on."
That's kind of the point: by making the screen the UI and giving it an extensible, desktop derived OS, Apple made the iPhone (and the iPad) into ideally morph-able devices. There's nothing "bolted on" about adding software functionality, it's part and parcel of how it's supposed to work. It would be kind of like imagining that I'm bolting on 3D modeling functionality onto a MacBookPro once a new software package becomes available.
Yes, people still use iPhones. But the market is dramatically changing. Here is what Prince McLean doesn't want you to know: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...the-way-up.ars (the first chart).
Let's look at the US market to see why that chart is the way it is...
Here are the top 4 carriers which make up 257.8M of the ????? subscribers in the US. (corrected)
1. Verizon — 91.2
2. AT&T Mobility — 85.1
3. Sprint/Nextel — 48.1
4. T-Mobile USA — 33.4
Apples iPhone is only made available to 85.1m users (AT&T).
If I'm not mistaken, Android is now available to... all 257.8M customers... (perhaps more)
AT&T only just now (I think) started offering Android based phones but the other providers not counting AT&T total up to 172.7 potential customers none of whom can readily get an iPhone. It's no wonder that Android has reached such a level of success... When you have NO competition it's not really a hard race to win.
Now clearly this is Apples decision and bragging or crying doesn't really make a difference.
Android has a possible market of 257.8M US customers and is marketed by MANY different manufacturers ALL paying for their OWN advertisements and/or getting the carriers to foot the bill for ADs marketing the Android platform.
The iPhone is a single device manufactured by a single company and if I'm not mistaken ALL the ADs selling the device are created AND paid for by Apple. Something you may or may not have noticed is most (maybe ALL?) of the AT&T ADs do NOT even mention the iPhone unless its very quickly and simply stating they are the exclusive provider for the iPhone. Not sure if others noticed that but I sure find it interesting and at the same time totally expected... Apple wants total control and it's about to let any carrier speak for the iPhone.
Am I wrong about AT&T commercials not advertising the iPhone? I might be... but for the life of me, I can't remember a single AT&T developed AD bragging about the iPhone. ADs that mention some phones on their network have access to over 100k APPS ... I do remember that commercial but I just watched it again and the iPhone name wasn't even put in the fine print. I'm also speaking mostly about TV based ADs. Perhaps print ADs run by AT&T do 'advertise' the iPhone.
So again... the numbers might be interesting really don't paint an actual picture. Clearly due to Apples exclusive with AT&T but none the less it artificially props up Android sales.
Perhaps you ought to stick to posting recipes?
Perhaps you ought to stick your tongue to a flag post.
You really miss Teckstud don't you?
For years Apple stock was punished whenever they did something good. Could never quite figure that out. Only recently has it bucked that trend. When I read the headline of this article I could only smile.
Right?! They did a great job besting the year prior but some douche bag street estimate is too high and they slammed for it. They still haven't reached the level of beating the street and still seeing the stock drop yet.
Let's look at the US market to see why that chart is the way it is...
Here are the top 4 carriers which make up 222.1M of the 260.7M subscribers in the US.
1. AT&T Mobility ? 71.3 million
2. Verizon ? 67.2
3. Sprint/Nextel ? 52.8
4. T-Mobile USA ? 30.8
Apples iPhone is only made available to 71.3m users (AT&T).
I think it's Verizon that has about 5M more subs than AT&T. Where did you get those numbers?
Right?! They did a great job besting the year prior but some douche bag street estimate is too high and they slammed for it. They still haven't reached the level of beating the street and still seeing the stock drop yet.
I think it's Verizon that has about 5M more subs than AT&T. Where did you get those numbers?
Perhaps... here was the source...
http://www.textmessageblog.mobi/2008...lular-carrier/
Oh and I now notice they were from summer of 08... /slap but for some reason finding any official source isn't working for me... Google DOES SUCK!
I've changed my post with more current numbers as found on WIKI (for what those are worth...)
I worry a bit that Apple's share price could similarly be in the 'expectations are out of hand' territory ...... perhaps not so out-of-hand to fall to the 100s*, but a 7% drop is definitely not implausible when the iPad numbers come out (I am guessing 300-400K, but I think expectations are much higher).
*If that happens, I'll probably be buying.....