I am wondering what these researchers and most of the posters of this blog are thinking?
Steve announced on 1st September that they are now activating 230000 iOS devices each day. That results to a present run rate of 84 million per year !!!
That is about the double Gartner is estimating for 2010. So you can imagine how accurate and reasonable the numbers for 2014 are
To the degree that this isn't just a easily spouted truism about business in general (which is false in and of itself), it's the exact opposite of how Apple is set up. If you really believe this, then you don't know anything at all about Apple and how they operate.
But see I disagree with you here..... I think Apple like any other large corporation is very concerned about profits.....they have shareholders to attest to their financial statements.
But Apple has never been about being the top in market share. But don't get me wrong...they WANT their share of the market they are in but it doesn't consume them.
Apple is making more money then at any other time. They are having trouble keeping up with demand for their products. I don't think they are too worried about these numbers being reported on right now. They are concerned but it is not top priority for them....
They have records sales for their products and record net profits right now.
Their numbers will only improve with holiday sales and new carriers for the iPhone.
First off, I'm still a little skeptical Android has sold so many phones this year. I just don't see the phones. Everyone in my work, church, neighborhood, everywhere I go, people are using iPhones. I hardly ever see someone using an Android phone. It seems very strange to me. Where are all these supposed Android phones in the wild?......!
There in is the rub. iPhones look like iPhones. Pretty much all of them look and act exactly the same. So you see them all..... but each model of Android looks different. Sometimes a LOT different. Since they do not share a common bond, you do not see the "herd" only a few different cows.... as it were.
Also, Since Verizon does not like to play well with cell phone makers, especially Apple, I do not see Verizon selling a subsidized phone on Verizon. Now they might sell one with no plan but that will cost a lot more.
<But when you have a CEO with an ego as big as the North American continent you just don't do that.>
for those old enough to remember this analogy.
ted williams had an ego large enough to exceed the size of north america and he still managed to be one of the all time best ball players, ever! and that goes for practically every successful business person. they have egos that just wont quit.
I am wondering what these researchers and most of the posters of this blog are thinking?
Steve announced on 1st September that they are now activating 230000 iOS devices each day. That results to a present run rate of 84 million per year !!!
That is about the double Gartner is estimating for 2010. So you can imagine how accurate and reasonable the numbers for 2014 are
I am wondering what these researchers and most of the posters of this blog are thinking?
Steve announced on 1st September that they are now activating 230000 iOS devices each day. That results to a present run rate of 84 million per year !!!
That is about the double Gartner is estimating for 2010. So you can imagine how accurate and reasonable the numbers for 2014 are
just like with android, these numbers include OS upgrades as well as restores
just like with android, these numbers include OS upgrades as well as restores
No, they don't. (If you mean, Apple's 230,000 and Google's 200,000 per day; both Jobs and Schmidt specifically mentioned that these are new activations).
If you mean Gartner's numbers, yes, they presumably do, but that would make their Apple estimates (41.5M for 2010 and 70.7M for 2011) even more widely off the mark.
I am having trouble understanding Gartner's basic numbers, which show a 2010 forecast of 41.46M units of iOS devices sold.
The confusion, that AI seems to have exacerbated, is that when Gartner is talking about 'Mobile Devices" they are just talking about 'Smartphones'. They appear to have dropped the smartphone moniker a few quarters ago.
Before all the resident trolls start chipping in... it's quite clear from the figures quoted that Gartner is talking about iPhones only. (25 M sold last year, 41 M for this year)
this prediction is totally wrong. iOS will reach 70% marketshare just like the iPod. Android won't sustain this growth and will fight with HP/PALM, Windows and Symbian for the remaining 30%.
iPad, iPod and iPhone and iOS and iTunes are too far ahead of the competition and the Android experience can't compare.
This talk of market share reminds me of Sturgeon's second law:
"90 percent of everything is crap."
Worked for Microsoft, so maybe that's what Google is shooting for. As in flooding the market with just-barely-good-enough shovelware.
On the other hand, the Oracle lawsuit has merit and there is legal precedent in the Sun vs. Microsoft case. Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for violating the terms of the Java license agreement. But Larry Ellison doesn't want money. He wants blood, and he'll get it. Android software will be "impounded and destroyed." Maybe that's why there are so many 2-for-1 fire sales of Android handsets. To make hay while the sun still shines.
After Android is gone, we will see how well Chrome OS does against iOS. Unless, of course, Google has screwed up their Chrome OS implementation of some other open standard. And gets sued again.
Who cares if there are more Android devices than Apple!
Developers, mind share, momentum moving to Android should be a concern to Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brantdevlin
Most cheap people want to afford the Droid because it is cheaper plus they were/are giving one away with each one sold. How profitable is that?
This is not true. Its the same price to buy an iPhone 4, Droid Incredible and Droid X right now - $200. But with AT&T's plans, it is cheaper to pay for monthly service on an iPhone than the other two phones.
If you think they prioritize anything above maximizing profits, you have a very different understanding of Apple from its millions of owners.
They capitalize all this stuff. They don't do it to "deliver the best user experience possible". They do it to make money.
What you, and others, fail to grasp is .... what is the best way to make money?
There was a time in the past when " bean counters" ran the company .... almost all the way into the ground, in fact. The only thing that saved Apple was the return of Steve Jobs. There is no disputing that fact ... unless you're delusional.
There are many examples of companies run by people who like to "maximize profits". Just think back to the Ford Pinto, where people died because of decisions made by bean counters. http://www.engineering.com/Library/A...ord-Pinto.aspx
Does Apple want to make money ... of course, that's a given ... but, their philosophy is to, first of all, make sure the product user experience is as good as they can make it, and still be marketable.
Do you think that Acer builds the best computer they are capable of making ? ... Dell? All the others?
Apple's priority has been stated, on numerous occasions, by SJ .... to make "insanely great products". The fact is; you and others have a hard time accepting this because hardly any other company in the world practices this behavior constantly like Apple does.
The irony in all of this is ... that philosophy by Apple just happens to be leading the computing industry in profits, a fact not lost on by some competitors that are trying their damnedest to imitate Apple, usually without the same level of sucess.
It?s a great time to be an Apple OS user, when Apple?s big problem is having less than half the market
(Of course, the Android ?market? is a fragmented archipelago at best anyway. Lumping all Android devices together is interesting, but not in the same way as lumping all iOS devices together.)
I totally understand. I also drew great offense from your name calling of me a fanboi.
I hope that you will understand that I must also report you.
Thanks so much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh
My point is very simple. The iPhone has reached a saturation point. They are not going to sell a LOT more unless they open up to other carriers and try to rope in the fence sitters who don't want to be married to ATT for two years.
You called my response stupid. That's like calling me stupid. May I remind you that name calling is not allowed here. I'm afraid I'm going to have to report you.
Maybe Apple should start releasing more than one iPhone model a year and go the Samsung route with Galaxy S. Different iPhone flavors. Doubt it'll happen but just a thought.
iOS based iPod Nano is good indication they are headed in that direction. They have to get people used to the idea first that iOS isn't just a full fledged iPhone thing, that the software isn't really the dictator of device features. Once people get used to seeing iOS on just about every Apple device then they will stop trying to imagine Apple TVs that operate like iPhones connected to a TV, or iPods that always come with built in video capabilities just because they have a touch screen.
If Apple releases a lower-end phone it would most likely be something like an iPod Nano with phone capabilities. Something where the phone isn't expected to be either smart nor feature rich. Something where it does a few tasks, really well, and for a low price.
Does Apple want to make money ... of course, that's a given ... but, their philosophy is to, first of all, make sure the product user experience is as good as they can make it,
Why do they do that? Altruism?
Nope. They think that is the best means to their desired end: to maximize profits.
If having the best "product user experience" were an imperfect method of maximizing total profits, Apple would turn to a new strategy.
Comments
Steve announced on 1st September that they are now activating 230000 iOS devices each day. That results to a present run rate of 84 million per year !!!
That is about the double Gartner is estimating for 2010. So you can imagine how accurate and reasonable the numbers for 2014 are
This is completely inaccurate.
To the degree that this isn't just a easily spouted truism about business in general (which is false in and of itself), it's the exact opposite of how Apple is set up. If you really believe this, then you don't know anything at all about Apple and how they operate.
But see I disagree with you here..... I think Apple like any other large corporation is very concerned about profits.....they have shareholders to attest to their financial statements.
But Apple has never been about being the top in market share. But don't get me wrong...they WANT their share of the market they are in but it doesn't consume them.
Apple is making more money then at any other time. They are having trouble keeping up with demand for their products. I don't think they are too worried about these numbers being reported on right now. They are concerned but it is not top priority for them....
They have records sales for their products and record net profits right now.
Their numbers will only improve with holiday sales and new carriers for the iPhone.
Gartner is way off on this one.
First off, I'm still a little skeptical Android has sold so many phones this year. I just don't see the phones. Everyone in my work, church, neighborhood, everywhere I go, people are using iPhones. I hardly ever see someone using an Android phone. It seems very strange to me. Where are all these supposed Android phones in the wild?......!
There in is the rub. iPhones look like iPhones. Pretty much all of them look and act exactly the same. So you see them all..... but each model of Android looks different. Sometimes a LOT different. Since they do not share a common bond, you do not see the "herd" only a few different cows.... as it were.
Also, Since Verizon does not like to play well with cell phone makers, especially Apple, I do not see Verizon selling a subsidized phone on Verizon. Now they might sell one with no plan but that will cost a lot more.
Just a thought,
en
Most cheap people want to afford the Droid because it is cheaper plus they were/are giving one away with each one sold. How profitable is that?
Motorola's Second-Quarter Profit Tops Estimates on Droid Sales
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-0...oid-sales.html
for those old enough to remember this analogy.
ted williams had an ego large enough to exceed the size of north america and he still managed to be one of the all time best ball players, ever! and that goes for practically every successful business person. they have egos that just wont quit.
I am wondering what these researchers and most of the posters of this blog are thinking?
Steve announced on 1st September that they are now activating 230000 iOS devices each day. That results to a present run rate of 84 million per year !!!
That is about the double Gartner is estimating for 2010. So you can imagine how accurate and reasonable the numbers for 2014 are
Hmmm..... see post #23 above.....
This "analysis" is already worthless because it doesn't account for Windows Phone 7 at all.
Gartner HAS accounted for Windows Phone. They obviously think that it's not going to do very well.
I am wondering what these researchers and most of the posters of this blog are thinking?
Steve announced on 1st September that they are now activating 230000 iOS devices each day. That results to a present run rate of 84 million per year !!!
That is about the double Gartner is estimating for 2010. So you can imagine how accurate and reasonable the numbers for 2014 are
just like with android, these numbers include OS upgrades as well as restores
just like with android, these numbers include OS upgrades as well as restores
No, they don't. (If you mean, Apple's 230,000 and Google's 200,000 per day; both Jobs and Schmidt specifically mentioned that these are new activations).
If you mean Gartner's numbers, yes, they presumably do, but that would make their Apple estimates (41.5M for 2010 and 70.7M for 2011) even more widely off the mark.
I am having trouble understanding Gartner's basic numbers, which show a 2010 forecast of 41.46M units of iOS devices sold.
The confusion, that AI seems to have exacerbated, is that when Gartner is talking about 'Mobile Devices" they are just talking about 'Smartphones'. They appear to have dropped the smartphone moniker a few quarters ago.
Before all the resident trolls start chipping in... it's quite clear from the figures quoted that Gartner is talking about iPhones only. (25 M sold last year, 41 M for this year)
iPad, iPod and iPhone and iOS and iTunes are too far ahead of the competition and the Android experience can't compare.
"90 percent of everything is crap."
Worked for Microsoft, so maybe that's what Google is shooting for. As in flooding the market with just-barely-good-enough shovelware.
On the other hand, the Oracle lawsuit has merit and there is legal precedent in the Sun vs. Microsoft case. Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for violating the terms of the Java license agreement. But Larry Ellison doesn't want money. He wants blood, and he'll get it. Android software will be "impounded and destroyed." Maybe that's why there are so many 2-for-1 fire sales of Android handsets. To make hay while the sun still shines.
After Android is gone, we will see how well Chrome OS does against iOS. Unless, of course, Google has screwed up their Chrome OS implementation of some other open standard. And gets sued again.
Who cares if there are more Android devices than Apple!
Developers, mind share, momentum moving to Android should be a concern to Apple.
Most cheap people want to afford the Droid because it is cheaper plus they were/are giving one away with each one sold. How profitable is that?
This is not true. Its the same price to buy an iPhone 4, Droid Incredible and Droid X right now - $200. But with AT&T's plans, it is cheaper to pay for monthly service on an iPhone than the other two phones.
If you think they prioritize anything above maximizing profits, you have a very different understanding of Apple from its millions of owners.
They capitalize all this stuff. They don't do it to "deliver the best user experience possible". They do it to make money.
What you, and others, fail to grasp is .... what is the best way to make money?
There was a time in the past when " bean counters" ran the company .... almost all the way into the ground, in fact. The only thing that saved Apple was the return of Steve Jobs. There is no disputing that fact ... unless you're delusional.
There are many examples of companies run by people who like to "maximize profits". Just think back to the Ford Pinto, where people died because of decisions made by bean counters. http://www.engineering.com/Library/A...ord-Pinto.aspx
Does Apple want to make money ... of course, that's a given ... but, their philosophy is to, first of all, make sure the product user experience is as good as they can make it, and still be marketable.
Do you think that Acer builds the best computer they are capable of making ? ... Dell? All the others?
Apple's priority has been stated, on numerous occasions, by SJ .... to make "insanely great products". The fact is; you and others have a hard time accepting this because hardly any other company in the world practices this behavior constantly like Apple does.
The irony in all of this is ... that philosophy by Apple just happens to be leading the computing industry in profits, a fact not lost on by some competitors that are trying their damnedest to imitate Apple, usually without the same level of sucess.
just like with android, these numbers include OS upgrades as well as restores
Rubbish!
Steve Jobs was quite clear that these were new device activations.
230K per day is around 21 million per quarter.
Estimate iOS sales this quarter.
iPhone: 11.5 M
iPod Touch: 6.5 M
iPad: 4.5 M
(Of course, the Android ?market? is a fragmented archipelago at best anyway. Lumping all Android devices together is interesting, but not in the same way as lumping all iOS devices together.)
Let?s hope for a viable third touch OS next!
I hope that you will understand that I must also report you.
Thanks so much.
My point is very simple. The iPhone has reached a saturation point. They are not going to sell a LOT more unless they open up to other carriers and try to rope in the fence sitters who don't want to be married to ATT for two years.
You called my response stupid. That's like calling me stupid. May I remind you that name calling is not allowed here. I'm afraid I'm going to have to report you.
What you, and others, fail to grasp is .... what is the best way to make money?
That is not the point.
Maybe Apple should start releasing more than one iPhone model a year and go the Samsung route with Galaxy S. Different iPhone flavors. Doubt it'll happen but just a thought.
iOS based iPod Nano is good indication they are headed in that direction. They have to get people used to the idea first that iOS isn't just a full fledged iPhone thing, that the software isn't really the dictator of device features. Once people get used to seeing iOS on just about every Apple device then they will stop trying to imagine Apple TVs that operate like iPhones connected to a TV, or iPods that always come with built in video capabilities just because they have a touch screen.
If Apple releases a lower-end phone it would most likely be something like an iPod Nano with phone capabilities. Something where the phone isn't expected to be either smart nor feature rich. Something where it does a few tasks, really well, and for a low price.
Does Apple want to make money ... of course, that's a given ... but, their philosophy is to, first of all, make sure the product user experience is as good as they can make it,
Why do they do that? Altruism?
Nope. They think that is the best means to their desired end: to maximize profits.
If having the best "product user experience" were an imperfect method of maximizing total profits, Apple would turn to a new strategy.