Is it even legal for Verizon and Apple to enter into some financial agreement to keep the iPhone away from other carriers? It sounds like this would be open to all sorts of legal challenges.
This is the dude that says apple will make TV sets ... right?
Absolutely. The current Apple TV $99 device will morph and merge into the Apple TV cinema display-like unit with a nice shiny metal Apple logo centered underneath the display. It'll be optimized for HD and internet and wifi (Air display) so that all content can flow to the TV from cable/broadband, and from the TV to your computer/mobile devices. My predicted introduction to market... 1H2013. Question is, what flavor(s) of unit size will it be and can it replace my 63" plasma now?
Rational buyers will opt for an Andriod tablet due to it's open nature.
Open for vendors, who can then lock it down in any way they wish, which includes, but is not limited to, added crapware that users can?t remove. Sounds like a winning plan.
Do you care to explain why those that buy iOS or WP7-based devices aren?t rational?
"Currently, Android phones outsell iPhones in the U.S., but we believe when Verizon gets the iPhone that trend could be reversed,"
Munster said. "As an example, in countries where the iPhone is available on multiple carriers and competes with Android, we see the iPhone outselling Android.
Is it even legal for Verizon and Apple to enter into some financial agreement to keep the iPhone away from other carriers? It sounds like this would be open to all sorts of legal challenges.
Yes it's totally legal. Happens with nearly every popular phone, every time it is released.
"Currently, Android phones outsell iPhones in the U.S., but we believe when Verizon gets the iPhone that trend could be reversed," Munster said. "As an example, in countries where the iPhone is available on multiple carriers and competes with Android, we see the iPhone outselling Android."
This is not true, at least not always. Android phones outsell the iPhone in parts of Europe e.g. UK where the iPhone is available on all carriers, albeit by a much smaller margin than in the USA.
Been using the Droid X since release, its a good phone but not as polished as the iPhone.
One thing I will miss by going back to iOS from Android is being able to drag and drop files onto the phone. But its a small price to pay.
iTunes 9.x and iOS 4.0 have drag-n-drop capabilities. It does require that you use iTunes as an intermediary, but compared to using Mac OS X Finder of Windows Explorer I?d say this is easier to deal with as it only shows the apps with developer set file storage. I use this feature for playing AVIs on my iPhone and iPad, without first needing to do a conversion to an MP4-based codec.
This is not true, at least not always. Android phones outsell the iPhone in parts of Europe e.g. UK where the iPhone is available on all carriers, albeit by a much smaller margin than in the USA.
Yet another analyst saying Android will be tested while ignoring the biggest test it will face over the next little while. That test is WP7, which directly competes against Android as a smartphone OS platform that manufacturers can make use of.
Android thrives on being available on a diverse selection of handsets. If WP7 doesn't flop, which it could, it will provide an alternative platform for manufacturers to use. If WP7 manages to split manufacturer interest between WP7 and Android, the diversity of available Android options will be diminished and growth will be slowed/stalled.
Look at it this way:
Apple produces their own phones and have carved out their piece of the smartphone market.
RIM produces their own phones and have carved out their piece of the smartphone market.
Nokia makes their own phones, but have never really penetrated the North American smartphone market.
Google relies on third party manufacturers for their share of the smartphone market and WP7 presents an alternative to Android for those manufacturers to use.
Will Verizon getting the iPhone help Apples sales and market share? Most definitely. Will it hurt Android? Not that much. The real threats to Android are operating systems that target the same piece of the pie that Android occupies (devices made by manufacturers that do not supply their own OS). Android represents the best OS available to these manufacturers, if that ever changes, Androids marketshare will tank. I'm not suggesting WP7 is better in any way, or that Androids marketshare is going to tank, but WP7 does represent a competitor for manufacturer interest which makes it a much larger potential threat than Apple. I guess WP7 vs Android doesn't make for good headlines though.
We can look to the articles that show that Android's growth has already slowed or possibly stopped. In August, Schmitt stated that there were more than 200,000 new Android phone activations a day. Now, they just released that Android "devices", including tablets such as the Samsung Galaxy, have an activation of 1.5 million a week, or about 214,000 a day.
That's no growth at all. It's also strange. I've been expecting Android's growth to slow for some time, but not this much, and not this soon. Assuming the numbers are correct, and since they were released by Google, they should be, the release of the iPhone on Verizon, when it happens, should result in a decrease in Android sales. This is surprising, and interesting. Has Android hit its peak so soon?
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Slowing is to be expecting, but peaking isn’t. Something seems very odd about a free smartphone OS found on dozens of selling models worldwide for a great range of price plateauing when the smartphone market still moving fast. Weren’t the Black Friday reports showing strong smartphone sales, maybe these activations aren’t going to show up until after Christmas. I feel some key info is missing.
Yeah, something seems to be wrong with those numbers. Especially if you include the Galaxy Tab selling 1 million units in 60 days == 16,667 per day.
If that is true, then Android phone activations have actual fallen from 214,000 per day to 197,333 per day.
That doesn't seem possible without some headlines from gadfly analysts saying that Android is doomed.
Rational buyers will opt for an Andriod tablet due to it's open nature.
Andy Rubin of Google defends the craplets that manufacturers and carriers install on Android devices that can't be removed.
"That?s the nature of open," Rubin said. "That?s actually a feature of Android."
It's been widely reported. Just Google (oh the irony) "Rubin defends craplets".
Oh, and don't try to change the subject. We're talking about iPhone on Verizon here. iPhone is set to invade Android's protected VZ enclave (walled weedpatch?) And it's going to hurt Android. Of course iPhone won't "kill" Android entirely. It will, however, drastically cut Android sales.
The Oracle lawsuit will do the actual killing of Android. It has merit (clear violation of the Java license agreement, not just patent mudslinging), there is legal precedent (Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for a similarly open-and-shut violation), and Larry Ellison has zero interest in making a few bucks with an out-of-court settlement. No, he's seeking an injunction against any and all devices that run Android. In the language of the lawsuit, they will be "impounded and destroyed."
Andy Rubin of Google defends the craplets that manufacturers and carriers install on Android devices that can't be removed.
"That?s the nature of open," Rubin said. "That?s actually a feature of Android."
It's been widely reported. Just Google (oh the irony) "Rubin defends craplets".
Oh, and don't try to change the subject. We're talking about iPhone on Verizon here. iPhone is set to invade Android's protected VZ enclave (walled weedpatch?) And it's going to hurt Android. Of course iPhone won't "kill" Android entirely. It will, however, drastically cut Android sales.
The Oracle lawsuit will do the actual killing of Android. It has merit (clear violation of the Java license agreement, not just patent mudslinging), there is legal precedent (Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for a similarly open-and-shut violation), and Larry Ellison has zero interest in making a few bucks with an out-of-court settlement. No, he's seeking an injunction against any and all devices that run Android. In the language of the lawsuit, they will be "impounded and destroyed."
Andy Rubin of Google defends the craplets that manufacturers and carriers install on Android devices that can't be removed.
"That?s the nature of open," Rubin said. "That?s actually a feature of Android."
It's been widely reported. Just Google (oh the irony) "Rubin defends craplets".
Oh, and don't try to change the subject. We're talking about iPhone on Verizon here. iPhone is set to invade Android's protected VZ enclave (walled weedpatch?) And it's going to hurt Android. Of course iPhone won't "kill" Android entirely. It will, however, drastically cut Android sales.
The Oracle lawsuit will do the actual killing of Android. It has merit (clear violation of the Java license agreement, not just patent mudslinging), there is legal precedent (Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for a similarly open-and-shut violation), and Larry Ellison has zero interest in making a few bucks with an out-of-court settlement. No, he's seeking an injunction against any and all devices that run Android. In the language of the lawsuit, they will be "impounded and destroyed."
Andy Rubin of Google defends the craplets that manufacturers and carriers install on Android devices that can't be removed.
"That?s the nature of open," Rubin said. "That?s actually a feature of Android."
It's been widely reported. Just Google (oh the irony) "Rubin defends craplets".
Oh, and don't try to change the subject. We're talking about iPhone on Verizon here. iPhone is set to invade Android's protected VZ enclave (walled weedpatch?) And it's going to hurt Android. Of course iPhone won't "kill" Android entirely. It will, however, drastically cut Android sales.
The Oracle lawsuit will do the actual killing of Android. It has merit (clear violation of the Java license agreement, not just patent mudslinging), there is legal precedent (Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for a similarly open-and-shut violation), and Larry Ellison has zero interest in making a few bucks with an out-of-court settlement. No, he's seeking an injunction against any and all devices that run Android. In the language of the lawsuit, they will be "impounded and destroyed."
If the iPhone does indeed go to Verizon wireless or any other carrier, expect to see some really long lines. The demand will be so huge that you might be on the waiting list for quite some time. The average consumer might get inpatient and go buy another phone instead since Apple can't keep with the demand.
Comments
This is the dude that says apple will make TV sets ... right?
Absolutely. The current Apple TV $99 device will morph and merge into the Apple TV cinema display-like unit with a nice shiny metal Apple logo centered underneath the display. It'll be optimized for HD and internet and wifi (Air display) so that all content can flow to the TV from cable/broadband, and from the TV to your computer/mobile devices. My predicted introduction to market... 1H2013. Question is, what flavor(s) of unit size will it be and can it replace my 63" plasma now?
Rational buyers will opt for an Andriod tablet due to it's open nature.
Open for vendors, who can then lock it down in any way they wish, which includes, but is not limited to, added crapware that users can?t remove. Sounds like a winning plan.
Do you care to explain why those that buy iOS or WP7-based devices aren?t rational?
Been using the Droid X since release, its a good phone but not as polished as the iPhone.
One thing I will miss by going back to iOS from Android is being able to drag and drop files onto the phone. But its a small price to pay.
Munster said. "As an example, in countries where the iPhone is available on multiple carriers and competes with Android, we see the iPhone outselling Android.
Is it even legal for Verizon and Apple to enter into some financial agreement to keep the iPhone away from other carriers? It sounds like this would be open to all sorts of legal challenges.
Yes it's totally legal. Happens with nearly every popular phone, every time it is released.
"Currently, Android phones outsell iPhones in the U.S., but we believe when Verizon gets the iPhone that trend could be reversed," Munster said. "As an example, in countries where the iPhone is available on multiple carriers and competes with Android, we see the iPhone outselling Android."
This is not true, at least not always. Android phones outsell the iPhone in parts of Europe e.g. UK where the iPhone is available on all carriers, albeit by a much smaller margin than in the USA.
I am ready for a VZW iPhone.
Been using the Droid X since release, its a good phone but not as polished as the iPhone.
One thing I will miss by going back to iOS from Android is being able to drag and drop files onto the phone. But its a small price to pay.
iTunes 9.x and iOS 4.0 have drag-n-drop capabilities. It does require that you use iTunes as an intermediary, but compared to using Mac OS X Finder of Windows Explorer I?d say this is easier to deal with as it only shows the apps with developer set file storage. I use this feature for playing AVIs on my iPhone and iPad, without first needing to do a conversion to an MP4-based codec.
This is not true, at least not always. Android phones outsell the iPhone in parts of Europe e.g. UK where the iPhone is available on all carriers, albeit by a much smaller margin than in the USA.
I need to see some proof.
Android thrives on being available on a diverse selection of handsets. If WP7 doesn't flop, which it could, it will provide an alternative platform for manufacturers to use. If WP7 manages to split manufacturer interest between WP7 and Android, the diversity of available Android options will be diminished and growth will be slowed/stalled.
Look at it this way:
Apple produces their own phones and have carved out their piece of the smartphone market.
RIM produces their own phones and have carved out their piece of the smartphone market.
Nokia makes their own phones, but have never really penetrated the North American smartphone market.
Google relies on third party manufacturers for their share of the smartphone market and WP7 presents an alternative to Android for those manufacturers to use.
Will Verizon getting the iPhone help Apples sales and market share? Most definitely. Will it hurt Android? Not that much. The real threats to Android are operating systems that target the same piece of the pie that Android occupies (devices made by manufacturers that do not supply their own OS). Android represents the best OS available to these manufacturers, if that ever changes, Androids marketshare will tank. I'm not suggesting WP7 is better in any way, or that Androids marketshare is going to tank, but WP7 does represent a competitor for manufacturer interest which makes it a much larger potential threat than Apple. I guess WP7 vs Android doesn't make for good headlines though.
We can look to the articles that show that Android's growth has already slowed or possibly stopped. In August, Schmitt stated that there were more than 200,000 new Android phone activations a day. Now, they just released that Android "devices", including tablets such as the Samsung Galaxy, have an activation of 1.5 million a week, or about 214,000 a day.
That's no growth at all. It's also strange. I've been expecting Android's growth to slow for some time, but not this much, and not this soon. Assuming the numbers are correct, and since they were released by Google, they should be, the release of the iPhone on Verizon, when it happens, should result in a decrease in Android sales. This is surprising, and interesting. Has Android hit its peak so soon?
Slowing is to be expecting, but peaking isn’t. Something seems very odd about a free smartphone OS found on dozens of selling models worldwide for a great range of price plateauing when the smartphone market still moving fast. Weren’t the Black Friday reports showing strong smartphone sales, maybe these activations aren’t going to show up until after Christmas. I feel some key info is missing.
Yeah, something seems to be wrong with those numbers. Especially if you include the Galaxy Tab selling 1 million units in 60 days == 16,667 per day.
If that is true, then Android phone activations have actual fallen from 214,000 per day to 197,333 per day.
That doesn't seem possible without some headlines from gadfly analysts saying that Android is doomed.
.
my prediction is that people with an iphone on at&t that will switch to an iphone on verizon will eventually realize how good they had it on at&t
Rational buyers will opt for an Andriod tablet due to it's open nature.
Andy Rubin of Google defends the craplets that manufacturers and carriers install on Android devices that can't be removed.
"That?s the nature of open," Rubin said. "That?s actually a feature of Android."
It's been widely reported. Just Google (oh the irony) "Rubin defends craplets".
Oh, and don't try to change the subject. We're talking about iPhone on Verizon here. iPhone is set to invade Android's protected VZ enclave (walled weedpatch?) And it's going to hurt Android. Of course iPhone won't "kill" Android entirely. It will, however, drastically cut Android sales.
The Oracle lawsuit will do the actual killing of Android. It has merit (clear violation of the Java license agreement, not just patent mudslinging), there is legal precedent (Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for a similarly open-and-shut violation), and Larry Ellison has zero interest in making a few bucks with an out-of-court settlement. No, he's seeking an injunction against any and all devices that run Android. In the language of the lawsuit, they will be "impounded and destroyed."
Andy Rubin of Google defends the craplets that manufacturers and carriers install on Android devices that can't be removed.
"That?s the nature of open," Rubin said. "That?s actually a feature of Android."
It's been widely reported. Just Google (oh the irony) "Rubin defends craplets".
Oh, and don't try to change the subject. We're talking about iPhone on Verizon here. iPhone is set to invade Android's protected VZ enclave (walled weedpatch?) And it's going to hurt Android. Of course iPhone won't "kill" Android entirely. It will, however, drastically cut Android sales.
The Oracle lawsuit will do the actual killing of Android. It has merit (clear violation of the Java license agreement, not just patent mudslinging), there is legal precedent (Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for a similarly open-and-shut violation), and Larry Ellison has zero interest in making a few bucks with an out-of-court settlement. No, he's seeking an injunction against any and all devices that run Android. In the language of the lawsuit, they will be "impounded and destroyed."
My... My, you do sound angry.
Andy Rubin of Google defends the craplets that manufacturers and carriers install on Android devices that can't be removed.
"That?s the nature of open," Rubin said. "That?s actually a feature of Android."
It's been widely reported. Just Google (oh the irony) "Rubin defends craplets".
Oh, and don't try to change the subject. We're talking about iPhone on Verizon here. iPhone is set to invade Android's protected VZ enclave (walled weedpatch?) And it's going to hurt Android. Of course iPhone won't "kill" Android entirely. It will, however, drastically cut Android sales.
The Oracle lawsuit will do the actual killing of Android. It has merit (clear violation of the Java license agreement, not just patent mudslinging), there is legal precedent (Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for a similarly open-and-shut violation), and Larry Ellison has zero interest in making a few bucks with an out-of-court settlement. No, he's seeking an injunction against any and all devices that run Android. In the language of the lawsuit, they will be "impounded and destroyed."
hah! nice!
Andy Rubin of Google defends the craplets that manufacturers and carriers install on Android devices that can't be removed.
"That?s the nature of open," Rubin said. "That?s actually a feature of Android."
It's been widely reported. Just Google (oh the irony) "Rubin defends craplets".
Oh, and don't try to change the subject. We're talking about iPhone on Verizon here. iPhone is set to invade Android's protected VZ enclave (walled weedpatch?) And it's going to hurt Android. Of course iPhone won't "kill" Android entirely. It will, however, drastically cut Android sales.
The Oracle lawsuit will do the actual killing of Android. It has merit (clear violation of the Java license agreement, not just patent mudslinging), there is legal precedent (Microsoft paid Sun $20 million for a similarly open-and-shut violation), and Larry Ellison has zero interest in making a few bucks with an out-of-court settlement. No, he's seeking an injunction against any and all devices that run Android. In the language of the lawsuit, they will be "impounded and destroyed."
Good post.
Andy Rubin of Google defends the craplets that manufacturers and carriers install on Android devices that can't be removed.
"That?s the nature of open," Rubin said. "That?s actually a feature of Android."
They can be removed. You have to jump through a few hoops, but you can get rid of the software. It sucks lol