One positive thought (rumor?) from ConceivablyTech (here) is that Apple may have initially bagged the CDMA iPhone concept due to design complexity, but the increased pressure from Android may cause Apple to rethink it. Competition is good...
I think it's unlikely that Android is making Apple rethink its decision on cdma. Rather, it's the rumored availability of a dual network chip that meets their size and energy requirements that could change things. (not to mention, of course, the eventual expiration of the AT&T exclusive).
I think it's unlikely that Android is making Apple rethink its decision on cdma. Rather, it's the rumored availability of a dual network chip that meets their size and energy requirements that could change things. (not to mention, of course, the eventual expiration of the AT&T exclusive).
This has been widely debated, but it seems unlikely that Apple would pay CDMA royalties for all new iPhones when only a fraction of them would actually use CDMA.
There are many of us who won't give up Verizon because 90% of our friends and family have it and we can talk for free. Android, while neither perfect or an iPhone, makes that decision completely bearable. Apple would be a fool to ignore that...
Go to the Apple store, are you telling me they are only selling one iPhone? Because when I go to the Apple store they have two different models available, three if you include capacity.
And since Apple doesn't split sales by model, there is no why you can claim their sales numbers are due to one model.
Go to the Apple store, are you telling me they are only selling one iPhone? Because when I go to the Apple store they have two different models available, three if you include capacity.
And since Apple doesn't split sales by model, there is no why you can claim their sales numbers are due to one model.
Stop acting like an insufferable moron. You know the difference between a product, make and model.
Go to the Apple store, are you telling me they are only selling one iPhone? Because when I go to the Apple store they have two different models available, three if you include capacity.
And since Apple doesn't split sales by model, there is no why you can claim their sales numbers are due to one model.
You're not understanding the Apple fan dynamic, I'm afraid. If the argument isn't working out in Apple's favour, then you shift the terms of reference as often as you need to in order to make certain you can claim victory. And if that's not working out, you simply bring up some unrelated issue that you can claim Apple ascendency with. And to make the argument even stronger in Apple's favour, you claim that the opponent's data is BS. You do this last thing without any evidence to back it up, because you 'win' by simply doing so.
See how that works?
One thing I've learned about the Apple Faithful? is that there's a need to be willfully ignorant of what's really really happening if it doesn't show Apple in a good light.
Stop acting like an insufferable moron. You know the difference between a product, make and model.
Moron, you have the nerve to call me a moron. Wow, can't wait for the insult you think up of when you turn 13.
You are a very simple person to think all the different iPhones are infact one phone. Take off your shareholder glasses, they are making you look more dimwitted than normal.
The ipod did well because of itunes (the giftcards/syncing) not really because of the hardware itself. Most of the competitors saw just the device and tried marketing that. Only Microsoft tried to go after iTunes itself (with the Zune ecosystem) but this was too little to late, and they missed the window. To do the Mac Vs PC, this would be like Mac making the computers in different colors to compete with Windows Developer support.
But standalone MP3 players aren't going to be around for much longer.
Developers care about monetization. This is based off of marketshare, visibility, and ecosystem. Android now has a vibrant marketshare. Visibility is still an issue, and it took apple a LONG time to foster the ecosystem for their iphone (remember, when they announced it, it was said just to be the next step of itunes, which is why so many apps launched for .99) Once the visibility issue is fixed, the Ecosystem part will come.
There were other companies that tried to compete with iTunes (Napster, Rhapsody, etc.) and they all failed. Even so, it proves that Apple's ways aren't always destined for failure (and Apple's actual success with the Mac that the Android fanboys ignore proves that it wasn't a failure then either).
It's been two years since the App Store debuted and it wasn't long after it debuted that people saw it as a huge success; if that's a long time, then Android has been around for a long time as well. Considering that Android's supposedly outselling the iPhone and might even have a greater marketshare now, how much more visibility do they need? If tons of ads and higher marketshare isn't giving Android visibility, then I see no hope for the platform. Personally, I think it's that Android phones are merely seen as phones people bought either because of a BOGO deal, because they're kind of like iPhones, or because a salesperson was able to convince them to buy it. Meanwhile, everybody who has an iPhone went to the Apple Store or AT&T specifically to buy one.
Apple is the most valuable tech company the world, and the 2nd most valuable company in the world and you can actually called them a "niche company?? I can see I have been interacting with another troll. Welcome to my Ignore List!
Was about to say the same thing. You can also notice he is a troll because trolls and apple haters simply can't spell "Mac" right: it's always "MAC".
You're not understanding the Apple fan dynamic, I'm afraid. If the argument isn't working out in Apple's favour, then you shift the terms of reference as often as you need to in order to make certain you can claim victory. And if that's not working out, you simply bring up some unrelated issue that you can claim Apple ascendency with. And to make the argument even stronger in Apple's favour, you claim that the opponent's data is BS. You do this last thing without any evidence to back it up, because you 'win' by simply doing so.
Yes I know, unless you can break into their little dream world they just blast out the insults.
You're not understanding the Apple fan dynamic, I'm afraid. If the argument isn't working out in Apple's favour, then you shift the terms of reference as often as you need to in order to make certain you can claim victory...
One thing I've learned about the Apple Faithful? is that there's a need to be willfully ignorant of what's really really happening if it doesn't show Apple in a good light.
Fortunately, it's pretty easy these days to find terms of reference that make Apple look good.
The critics are getting desperate trying to shift terms of reference to make them look bad.
Fortunately, it's pretty easy these days to find terms of reference that make Apple look good.
The critics are getting desperate trying to shift terms of reference to make them look bad.
Apparently it's not as easy as you make out, given the convoluted gymnastics your fellow Apple Faithful? are having to go through in trying to make Apple look good. Maybe if they stuck to arguing Apple's case on its merits instead of spending their waking hours dreaming up desperate attacks on those criticising, they might look remotely credible?
Apparently it's not as easy as you make out, given the convoluted gymnastics your fellow Apple Faithful? are having to go through in trying to make Apple look good.
The only "convoluted gymnastics" are the continual correction of trolls and news organizations that go out of their way to paint Apple in a bad light.
If an iPhone wallpaper app came out that stole data like happened on Android, it would be all over the mainstream media so fast your head would spin.
Here's the real rub that must just cause people like yourself to just seethe internally - for all your baseless accusations, innuendo and downright ridicule Apple Keeps Growing.
It must just drive the haters absolutely batty. Antennagate does't appear to have made much of a dent - there are still delays and pre-orders. It's still darn near impossible to just walk in and get one and it's showing three weeks until shipping on the Apple web store. Yup, it was a real fatal flaw that took convoluted gymnastics to explain away
Bottom line - Apples continual success speaks far more than any "convoluted gymnastics". You can scoff all you want - just have fun being continually wrong.
I know but to retain some credibility people need to acknowledge others success.
Why? I certainly don't hold any ill-will towards Motorola but their success with Android means nothing to me.
And while they are moving units, what's it doing for their bottom line? Is it really successful? Like save the company successful? Because Motorola is in serious trouble. Pretty sad for such a formerly iconic American company. Talk about loosing your way
It's just not convenient to point out that Android as a platform was second behind RIM and Apple has slipped to third. And he certainly won't publish the fact that the iPhone sold just slightly more than one third of the smartphones that Nokia did in that quarter. And that Apple's share of the smartphone market has dropped from 17% to 14% over consecutive quarters.
In a quarter where people were waiting for the iPhone 4.
Comments
One positive thought (rumor?) from ConceivablyTech (here) is that Apple may have initially bagged the CDMA iPhone concept due to design complexity, but the increased pressure from Android may cause Apple to rethink it. Competition is good...
I think it's unlikely that Android is making Apple rethink its decision on cdma. Rather, it's the rumored availability of a dual network chip that meets their size and energy requirements that could change things. (not to mention, of course, the eventual expiration of the AT&T exclusive).
and checkout Fortune's front page cover. pretty harsh.
yep and Apple is Doomed! :-) LOL
I think it's unlikely that Android is making Apple rethink its decision on cdma. Rather, it's the rumored availability of a dual network chip that meets their size and energy requirements that could change things. (not to mention, of course, the eventual expiration of the AT&T exclusive).
This has been widely debated, but it seems unlikely that Apple would pay CDMA royalties for all new iPhones when only a fraction of them would actually use CDMA.
There are many of us who won't give up Verizon because 90% of our friends and family have it and we can talk for free. Android, while neither perfect or an iPhone, makes that decision completely bearable. Apple would be a fool to ignore that...
Yes it is.
Go to the Apple store, are you telling me they are only selling one iPhone? Because when I go to the Apple store they have two different models available, three if you include capacity.
And since Apple doesn't split sales by model, there is no why you can claim their sales numbers are due to one model.
Go to the Apple store, are you telling me they are only selling one iPhone? Because when I go to the Apple store they have two different models available, three if you include capacity.
And since Apple doesn't split sales by model, there is no why you can claim their sales numbers are due to one model.
Stop acting like an insufferable moron. You know the difference between a product, make and model.
Motorola reported a phenomenal 600 percent leap in earnings this quarter,
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Sounds impressive, but earnings of 1 cent up to 7 cents is an improvement, but not really phenomenal.
Go to the Apple store, are you telling me they are only selling one iPhone? Because when I go to the Apple store they have two different models available, three if you include capacity.
And since Apple doesn't split sales by model, there is no why you can claim their sales numbers are due to one model.
You're not understanding the Apple fan dynamic, I'm afraid. If the argument isn't working out in Apple's favour, then you shift the terms of reference as often as you need to in order to make certain you can claim victory. And if that's not working out, you simply bring up some unrelated issue that you can claim Apple ascendency with. And to make the argument even stronger in Apple's favour, you claim that the opponent's data is BS. You do this last thing without any evidence to back it up, because you 'win' by simply doing so.
See how that works?
One thing I've learned about the Apple Faithful? is that there's a need to be willfully ignorant of what's really really happening if it doesn't show Apple in a good light.
BTW, I take it that you're a Kiwi also?
Stop acting like an insufferable moron. You know the difference between a product, make and model.
Moron, you have the nerve to call me a moron. Wow, can't wait for the insult you think up of when you turn 13.
You are a very simple person to think all the different iPhones are infact one phone. Take off your shareholder glasses, they are making you look more dimwitted than normal.
The ipod did well because of itunes (the giftcards/syncing) not really because of the hardware itself. Most of the competitors saw just the device and tried marketing that. Only Microsoft tried to go after iTunes itself (with the Zune ecosystem) but this was too little to late, and they missed the window. To do the Mac Vs PC, this would be like Mac making the computers in different colors to compete with Windows Developer support.
But standalone MP3 players aren't going to be around for much longer.
Developers care about monetization. This is based off of marketshare, visibility, and ecosystem. Android now has a vibrant marketshare. Visibility is still an issue, and it took apple a LONG time to foster the ecosystem for their iphone (remember, when they announced it, it was said just to be the next step of itunes, which is why so many apps launched for .99) Once the visibility issue is fixed, the Ecosystem part will come.
There were other companies that tried to compete with iTunes (Napster, Rhapsody, etc.) and they all failed. Even so, it proves that Apple's ways aren't always destined for failure (and Apple's actual success with the Mac that the Android fanboys ignore proves that it wasn't a failure then either).
It's been two years since the App Store debuted and it wasn't long after it debuted that people saw it as a huge success; if that's a long time, then Android has been around for a long time as well. Considering that Android's supposedly outselling the iPhone and might even have a greater marketshare now, how much more visibility do they need? If tons of ads and higher marketshare isn't giving Android visibility, then I see no hope for the platform. Personally, I think it's that Android phones are merely seen as phones people bought either because of a BOGO deal, because they're kind of like iPhones, or because a salesperson was able to convince them to buy it. Meanwhile, everybody who has an iPhone went to the Apple Store or AT&T specifically to buy one.
Apple is the most valuable tech company the world, and the 2nd most valuable company in the world and you can actually called them a "niche company?? I can see I have been interacting with another troll. Welcome to my Ignore List!
Was about to say the same thing. You can also notice he is a troll because trolls and apple haters simply can't spell "Mac" right: it's always "MAC".
You're not understanding the Apple fan dynamic, I'm afraid. If the argument isn't working out in Apple's favour, then you shift the terms of reference as often as you need to in order to make certain you can claim victory. And if that's not working out, you simply bring up some unrelated issue that you can claim Apple ascendency with. And to make the argument even stronger in Apple's favour, you claim that the opponent's data is BS. You do this last thing without any evidence to back it up, because you 'win' by simply doing so.
Yes I know, unless you can break into their little dream world they just blast out the insults.
BTW, I take it that you're a Kiwi also?
Yip I am
You're not understanding the Apple fan dynamic, I'm afraid. If the argument isn't working out in Apple's favour, then you shift the terms of reference as often as you need to in order to make certain you can claim victory...
One thing I've learned about the Apple Faithful? is that there's a need to be willfully ignorant of what's really really happening if it doesn't show Apple in a good light.
Fortunately, it's pretty easy these days to find terms of reference that make Apple look good.
The critics are getting desperate trying to shift terms of reference to make them look bad.
Fortunately, it's pretty easy these days to find terms of reference that make Apple look good.
The critics are getting desperate trying to shift terms of reference to make them look bad.
Apparently it's not as easy as you make out, given the convoluted gymnastics your fellow Apple Faithful? are having to go through in trying to make Apple look good. Maybe if they stuck to arguing Apple's case on its merits instead of spending their waking hours dreaming up desperate attacks on those criticising, they might look remotely credible?
A long shot, but I live in hope.
Can we not see some congratulations for how well Motorola have done? Why is it only posts about Apples success that are met with rapturous applause?
Watch Apple's 1984 commercial, switch the face on the big screen to Jobs. Now it's all clear.
Can we not see some congratulations for how well Motorola have done? Why is it only posts about Apples success that are met with rapturous applause?
I dunno, your on a Pro-Apple site?
I'm sure there's an "Android Insider" somewhere that you will find your rapturous applause at. Have at it if that floats your boat.
I dunno, your on a Pro-Apple site?
I'm sure there's an "Android Insider" somewhere that you will find your rapturous applause at. Have at it if that floats your boat.
I know but to retain some credibility people need to acknowledge others success.
Apparently it's not as easy as you make out, given the convoluted gymnastics your fellow Apple Faithful? are having to go through in trying to make Apple look good.
The only "convoluted gymnastics" are the continual correction of trolls and news organizations that go out of their way to paint Apple in a bad light.
If an iPhone wallpaper app came out that stole data like happened on Android, it would be all over the mainstream media so fast your head would spin.
Here's the real rub that must just cause people like yourself to just seethe internally - for all your baseless accusations, innuendo and downright ridicule Apple Keeps Growing.
It must just drive the haters absolutely batty. Antennagate does't appear to have made much of a dent - there are still delays and pre-orders. It's still darn near impossible to just walk in and get one and it's showing three weeks until shipping on the Apple web store. Yup, it was a real fatal flaw that took convoluted gymnastics to explain away
Bottom line - Apples continual success speaks far more than any "convoluted gymnastics". You can scoff all you want - just have fun being continually wrong.
I know but to retain some credibility people need to acknowledge others success.
Why? I certainly don't hold any ill-will towards Motorola but their success with Android means nothing to me.
And while they are moving units, what's it doing for their bottom line? Is it really successful? Like save the company successful? Because Motorola is in serious trouble. Pretty sad for such a formerly iconic American company. Talk about loosing your way
It's just not convenient to point out that Android as a platform was second behind RIM and Apple has slipped to third. And he certainly won't publish the fact that the iPhone sold just slightly more than one third of the smartphones that Nokia did in that quarter. And that Apple's share of the smartphone market has dropped from 17% to 14% over consecutive quarters.
In a quarter where people were waiting for the iPhone 4.