Apple CEO Tim Cook on Android growth: 'Success is not making the most'

15791011

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 201


    So unconcerned about marketshare?


     


    Why did they so successfully bring iPods in at every price bracket they could?


     


    It was a bet that saved the company and propelled it to where it is now.


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.


     


    ...along with the cheap plastic crap imacs at the time...

  • Reply 122 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post


     


    No he is not right as he intends Apple to be something they are not. Sure, they have had product failures and many HUGE successes. 


     


    You can't take the iPod family and call on, just because it is smaller, cheaper and made for mass consumption. The iPod family, over time, grew into segments of usability. Some people wanted smaller iPods to use while running, or larger ones for more capacity. It was never to be cheaper and reach more people in that sense. 


     


    The iPhone has already grown a size and may over time have different sizes (as well as colors), but NEVER to meet the demands of mass production, and always to meet the demands of user experience. 


     


    I doubt the iPhone / iPad will have many colors as people tend to get cases for such products. You don't get a case, often, for your iPod. Plus the iPod is more of a 'fun', or youthful, product and therefore colorful by nature, although it did not start out that way. 


     


    As the largest company in the world with over $140 Billion in Cash reserves, I think Apple does quite well with their own thinking and their success shows it. 


     


    [edited: removed most of Lemon's quoted comment to save thread space] 



     


     


    Yes you can.


     


    They already have.


     


    They may do quality.  But they are concerned with marketshare as well.  


     


    They have hundreds of Apple stores.  They have thousands of avenues for iPhone consumption.


     


    Does quite well...can become 'complacent.'


     


    We'll see.


     


    When people use the word 'doubt' Apple often surprises them.


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.

  • Reply 123 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


     


    People using pay as you go are not looking for smart phones?


     


    That right?


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.


     


    PS.  Don't want to sell cheap plastic crap?  Didn't stop them before with the iMac or iBook?  Or the G3 tower? :P



     


     


    Yes, that is right. People using pay as you go are most often just in need (and thankful) to have any working phone. Their budgets are such that high tech is not tops of their list. 


     


    I never considered any of my plastic Macs as cheap as they were all VERY well made. You know the low end cheap PCees I am referring to that go after the bottom demographic market. 

  • Reply 124 of 201
    Hey guys, what is 802.11ac?
    It would've been quicker for you to look it up yourself than do a quote-reply. I just hope you missed the /s tag.
  • Reply 125 of 201

    Quote:


     It was never to be cheaper and reach more people in that sense. 



     


    ...and why would they make a product for 'some' people?


     


    The shuffle was undoubtably to be 'cheaper.'


     


    They hoovered the mp3 player market dry.


     


    My person opinion, after the iPod success, they thought they had to 'turn up.'


     


    It's done great.  But 1 size fits all?


     


    Hubris.


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.

  • Reply 126 of 201
    If you cut the PX of the iPad mini, you would cut your margins by at least 50%. Then you have to sell 2X the phones to make the same profits (actually more than 2X because your distribution costs go up. It costs the same yo ship a $199 mini as a $399 mini. In addition, you would see greater cannibalization of the iPad. Besides in the short run it is not easy to double production.

    Many of those who buy Android tablets will not be able to update thier software and have few options for return repair.

    I woud rather see Apple frow 10% with thier current line plus new prduct categoroes than 30% with low margin junk.
  • Reply 127 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    Eh...yes.


     


    We DO realise they're a luxury brand.


     


    So how come they make a sub £100 ipod?


     


    Or a £100+ iPod Nano?


     


    or a £250 touch? or iPad Mini?  


     


    These are affordable?  Are they cheap crap or luxury.  The latter we know.


     


    *shrugs.


     


    But they do make expensive crap.  aka the Mac Pro at £2000+.  Now that one is luxury crap.


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.



     


     


    Once again: iPod size is for user experience, and NOT to save money. Smaller, less capacity saves money, yes, but the purpose of these products is to meet a Use, not a Segment of people. 

  • Reply 128 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post


     


     


    Yes, that is right. People using pay as you go are most often just in need (and thankful) to have any working phone. Their budgets are such that high tech is not tops of their list. 


     


    I never considered any of my plastic Macs as cheap as they were all VERY well made. You know the low end cheap PCees I am referring to that go after the bottom demographic market. 



    Are they?  So I'm grateful for a PAY as you  GO from Apple, eh?  Did you do a survey?  Why wasn't I consulted? :P


     


    Presumptious on both counts.


     


    Your 2nd paragraph.


     


    My point entirely.


     


    Who's saying 'bottom' demographic.  What do we 'mean' by that? :P  How much is the 'bottom?'  


     


    Did you read any of my other posts?


     


    Who's arguing for razor think 7% margins?


     


    But 40% plus?  That's quite a desparity.


     


    An iMac for £595 that YOU didn't consider cheap plastic crap (heh...) vs the current £1165 entry iMac.


     


    That's quite a difference...and that's just one example of many.


     


    Mel' is still  correct.


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.

  • Reply 129 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


     


    ...and why would they make a product for 'some' people?


     


    The shuffle was undoubtably to be 'cheaper.'


     


    They hoovered the mp3 player market dry.


     


    My person opinion, after the iPod success, they thought they had to 'turn up.'


     


    It's done great.  But 1 size fits all?


     


    Hubris.


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.



     


     


    OH MY GOSH!! REALLY!! 


     


    Size does not equate to an attempt to be cheaper or reach more people based on price. Size/Shape/Capacity in the iPod is to reach a user experience. From 'Take all my songs' to 'Hide it in my pocket'. Small for running, larger for capacity. 


     


    I don't know what that is so hard to see or understand!!! 

  • Reply 130 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post


     


     


    Once again: iPod size is for user experience, and NOT to save money. Smaller, less capacity saves money, yes, but the purpose of these products is to meet a Use, not a Segment of people. 



    And yet again, who says so?  You?  Lol.  Of course they have to meet a segment of people.   What's technology with art...for people.  But which people.  That's the crux.  Jobs said himself, 'affordable.'  He even cut the price of the iPhone himself...because he realised it was out of reach for 'more' people.


     


    it still is for the 'more.'


     


    How many more can they reach?  The same more they reached with the iPod family.  Same thing with phone radios in.


     


    Yet iPods cross the boundaries of price and category and market.  Something they're failing to do with the iPhone.


     


    You can't have it both ways.


     


    My bet is they can (oh they can...) and will make a more affordable phone for the PAY as you GO and emerging markets.  They have products in the £250 area already.  


     


    They don't have to press buttons and have hundreds of products or cheap crap.


     


    But they have gaping holes in the iPhone market.  Above and below it.


     


    I guess you don't agree.


     


    We'll see. :P


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.

  • Reply 131 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post


     


     


    OH MY GOSH!! REALLY!! 


     


    Size does not equate to an attempt to be cheaper or reach more people based on price. Size/Shape/Capacity in the iPod is to reach a user experience. From 'Take all my songs' to 'Hide it in my pocket'. Small for running, larger for capacity. 


     


    I don't know what that is so hard to see or understand!!! 



    Really.


     


    It's only harder for you to understand that Apple actually does make affordable products and it was their choice to do so.  I guess they really 'oh gosh' made a shuffle for 'some' runners...


     


    Evnin' all. :D


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.

  • Reply 132 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    Are they?  So I'm grateful for a PAY as you  GO from Apple, eh?  Did you do a survey?  Why wasn't I consulted? :P


     


    Presumptious on both counts.


     


    Your 2nd paragraph.


     


    My point entirely.


     


    Who's saying 'bottom' demographic.  What do we 'mean' by that? :P  How much is the 'bottom?'  


     


    Did you read any of my other posts?


     


    Who's arguing for razor think 7% margins?


     


    But 40% plus?  That's quite a desparity.


     


    An iMac for £595 that YOU didn't consider cheap plastic crap (heh...) vs the current £1165 entry iMac.


     


    That's quite a difference...and that's just one example of many.


     


    Mel' is still  correct.


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.



     


    What? You have a pay as you go phone by Apple? 


     


    I know several people who has/had pay as you go and none of them were concerned about full featured phones. 


     


    Developing nations who can't afford a FREE phone would be way on the bottom. 


     


    Luxury brands warrant higher margins, and so what? Are you saying Apple should only make 30 points just so you can afford their phone? Please! 


     


    A) Never said Apple did not make some dumb products in their time or any that did not live up to the normal standard. What I did say is that my white iMac was not cheaply made even though it was made with plastic. Unlike so many PCees that are plastic and you can crack them just by looking at them. 


     


    You might think he is, but Apple does not. Enough said! 

  • Reply 133 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    Really.


     


    It's only harder for you to understand that Apple actually does make affordable products and it was their choice to do so.  I guess they really 'oh gosh' made a shuffle for 'some' runners...


     


    Evnin' all. :D


     


    Lemon Bon Bon.



     


     


    :sigh: I don't know to explain it any better, perhaps someone else can dumb this down a bit further. 

  • Reply 134 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post


     


     


    :sigh: I don't know to explain it any better, perhaps someone else can dumb this down a bit further. 



     


    iPod Classic 160GB $249 (capacity)


    iPod Touch 32GB $299 (full gaming unit and music player)


    iPad Nano 16GB $149 (small, but still has a screen)


    iPad Shuffle 2GB $49 (very small, no screen)


     


    As you can hopefully see, the price comes down due to features and each iPod is for a particular segment. You can purchase cheaper MP3 Players (Walmart has one for $14) 


     


    So when you take away capacity, capability, and screens, the price lowers naturally. It is NOT an attempt on Apple's part to make cheaper iPods, but to make different iPods for different lifestyles. 

  • Reply 135 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    The largest market segment that remains untapped is the developing world, but let's ignore that since we only want to build luxury products. We'll come back and take another look at China in 20 years or so when they might be able to afford our bling. Of course in the mean time that market will be completely dominated by Samsung and Android.


     


    I know it is sort of cliché but it does seem like déjà vu all over again. Mac was elegant and sophisticated in the 80s especially when compared to DOS but by the time Windows 95 came along with most of the same qualities, the Internet, Photoshop and Office, Dell's were generally perceived as just as good but less costly than Macs. It was game over.


     


    So yes it did work out well for Dell...for awhile, but they were unable to adapt to a changing market place. If Apple fails to recognize the changing landscape, the same fate awaits them.


     


    I would hate to see that happen again, which it very well could if Apple loses in China.



     


     


    You do realize that Apple *IS* a luxury brand, right? 


     


    Do you go around to all the luxury brand websites and tell them they need to sell cheaper products to the developing nations? 


     


    What is your hatred with Apple being who they are? They ARE a luxury brand. Always have been, always will be. Get over it. 





    Who are you kidding with that luxury brand bullshit ? Apple has long since become a mass market commodity producer.

  • Reply 136 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Taniwha View Post




    Who are you kidding with that luxury brand bullshit ? Apple has long since become a mass market commodity producer.



     


    Just because they sell huge quantities of a product does not make them less of a luxury brand. Talk about your bull! 

  • Reply 137 of 201
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    No.  That's not what I said. :P

    That's what you think.  And that's what you 'think' I said.

    Try again, Soli.

    Mel' was right.

    Lemon Bon Bon.

    You write in a very fractured way that doesn't lend to easy reading so I've reposted two of your posts in full and have bolded the comments from each that support my original comment.

    Melgross is right.

    (Not something I've said often.)

    But he is.

    Apple are in danger of being consumed by their 'cool' hubris.

    Have they so soon forgotten candy coloured iMacs? Pushing the fashion failure of the Cube. (That it failed isn't the point.)

    The $1599 dollar G3 Tower (the best one they ever released under Jobs in my view...) - Remember the Performance, expandable, affordable etc. ? Whatever happened to the affordable?

    How come you now can't get a desktop for less than £1000 UK smackers? WITH a screen? Is this the same company that USED to give us a fully featured iMac with screen and keyboard/mouse for £595 UK inc VAT!!!?

    They SAT on the iPhone 4 design and then 'evolved' it into the iPhone 5. Undeniably the iPhone 5 is a great phone. The best on the market.

    But 'one size fits all?' Really? From the company that gave us the iPod 'premium' at all segments?

    The classic devolved into the shuffle, nano and the Touch. All affordable. All premium. All value. They sucked the life out of the competition. So you could get an 'iPod' at £45? £100ish. £200 ish. Recognise anything? All Apple. All value. All quality.

    Apple used to have a UK tower at £1055 there abouts. Now you have to £2000+ for one with a crappy quad core and a crappy gpu. And because Apple have a 'one size' fits all monitor range it costs you £899 inc vat to get a display? Really?

    What happened to affordability, Apple?

    I'm an Apple guy. But I aint drinking the cool aid of the price hikes since 2008.

    It's a joke that you can't get an iMac any cheaper than the original launch price from its debut. £1099 without DVD (add £65 and Fusion which should be standard...it's how much for a 128 SSD?) and you're looking at £165 more than the old entry and £365 more for what they 'should' have included if you count Fusion. Little cost for Apple. Alot extra for the consumer. They used to have a model in 2008 £695 entry level iMac. It's now £405 more pricey. The Mac Pro £1000 more pricey to get on the ladder. The mini used to be 'almost' compelling at under £495. Seriously, they can't included a mouse and keyboard? (And the latest iMac keyboard feels 'cheaper' with it's pressed plastic than the last generation's keyboard...)

    Imac? £200 price drop minimum across the board. They're desktops. Should be cheaper than Airs?

    The Air? Needs a cheaper model.

    Basically what Mel' said.

    As for the iPad Mini. Intro' the retina...but keep the old non retina model and drop the price on it.

    iPhone? Follow the iPod strategy.

    Nuclear on Samsung.

    Go iPhone shuffle with siri.
    Go iPhone Nano with colours. Cheaper. Plastic if necessary.
    Go iPhone classic as is...with colours. (Take your iPod touch streamline the design, add radio...and annodized colours. Price trim.) The iPod touch is a better design than the iPhone 5. It just is.
    Go iPhone +. 4.8-5 inches. No home button...no border. All front surface glass. Tear drop design. Super sexy.

    You blow Samsung away. Suck air out of Android and take on the Indian, China markets, Brazil HEAD ON!

    You get the £50, £100+, £250+ £350+ £500+ markets nailed.

    If you're going to cannibalise, do it to your own product...before Android does.

    I think Mel' is right on the money.

    Apple could easily make a more affordable tower while their at it.Let the tower and iMac fight it out. But there's plenty of Windows users who would like a tower. But start at £999 and offer a sane display to go with it.

    Apple as Mel said? Have done it in the past.

    Plus the market share gains will sex up the stock value.

    Get the iWatch out.
    Get the aTV out.

    Growth.

    That's my multiprong zietgheist.

    Get the 'Air' to where the 'iBook' used to be on price.

    Cheaper ticket price for upsell.

    Come on Apple. You're making hard work of it.

    Hubris and all that. Until people wake up and realise cool aint worth the posterior reaming extra.

    Nobody is saying they have to do cheap crap. They never have.

    Was the iMac 'cheap crap' when Apple offered it for £595? Was the Shuffe 'cheap crap' when it took the iPod sub £100? No. Apple were desperate to corner the MP3 market.

    Sure, there is a premium profit in the Phone market profits are with them. But with £150 Billion in emerging world market smart phones share to be had...the ball is in Apple's court.

    I hope Tim is listening. People who can't afford non contract phones...find £500+ way too much.

    Figure it out. If they can Mini the iPad...they can go Nano and + with the iPhone, do colours, do annodized...give people choice. 1 choice is ridiculous no matter how good it is.

    It's indefensible.

    Lemon Bon Bon.

    = = = = = = = = = =

    Yes. And you can put an affordable consumer tower in that category along with a Pro redesign for 'mortals' who want to bootcamp with Apple.

    Just watched teh G3 tower intro'. Amazed at how affordable they were back then...complete with Quake 3 demo... And decent GPUs. Those were teh days. The tower/desktop appears a dwindling market...but how they've treated it...sums it all up. They're selling an out of date 'workstation' not worth the money. Along with Monitor choice. Totalitarian 'one size' fits all. Are Apple becoming the 'big brother' of the 1984 advert?

    Time for a reality check on your prices Apple as we hit a triple dip recession. Meanwhile, you have 145 billion in the bank.

    And you're nickle and diming us for Fusion drives, hiking iMac prices (2nd time they've done that in a recession...) and charging us for dropped features aka DVD drive.

    They've now got enough in the bank to put the opposition to the sword. They have the stores. They have the reach.

    Forget the share price. Nobody is asking for 7% profit margins and unrealistic volumes in shrinking markets. But going from £1045 to £2000 plus?

    Going from £595 to £1160?

    As the iPod market dissolves...we go from an affordable shuffle of £50+ to an iPhone of £500+

    An iBook that used to be £695 to the Air's price?

    Hubris.

    Or Greed?

    Or both?

    Affordability. That was one of the things Jobs said in his keynote...back THEN when he launched the G3 Tower's blue and white design. Power and affordability.

    Discuss.

    Lemon Bon Bon.

    None of this makes much sense but your underlying comment is consistently that Apple is doing it wrong despite leading in every HW category they are in. That makes your complaints null and void right there but you also contradict yourself with complaint about Fusion Drive not being standard and keeping the ODD and then later talking about dropping the price so they can do an upsell.

    Finally and most egregious, is your comments about the iPhone following the iPod model of a larger HDD-based device, a small screened device, and a no screen device that only uses Siri to communicate without any consideration for the App Store ecosystem that is a huge part of the success for the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. There are two display sizes for the IPhone just as there are 2 display sizes for the iPod Touch, and uncoincidently the 3.5" apps fit on the 4" iPhone pixel for pixel, just as an 10" iPad app fit on the 8" iPad display pixel for pixel, albeit for different reasons.

    This is all by design and this is why they are winning, not in spite of.


    PS: I think there is nothing cooler in the tech world right now than my new 27" iMac.
  • Reply 138 of 201


    What this comes down to is for all the haters and shareholder complainers; own enough shares to matter and you can change whatever you want. 


     


    Until then, Apple is one of the largest companies in the world with huge cash reserves and #1 user experience, and market dominance for most of their products that they don't need advise from any of us, me especially :) 

  • Reply 139 of 201

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    This is all by design and this is why they are winning, not in spite of.





    PS: I think there is nothing cooler in the tech world right now than my new 27" iMac.


     


    So that is what they mean by 'Designed by Apple' :P 


     


     


    I agree, Apple's 27" all in one iMac is in a class all by itself. I have a little 24" iMac that still gets raves when people see it's size and beauty. 

  • Reply 140 of 201


    Looking at Samsung, they sold the most phone because of so many Galaxy  phone line up.  Last year Samsung push out low-end, mid-range, and high-end smartphone every month. What sold the most for Samsung was the Galaxy S, a high-end smartphone.


     


    Last year Samsung Galaxy line up


























































































    January 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Y Pro Duos[36]

     

    January 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Ace Plus[37]

     

    February 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Ace 2[38]

     

    February 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Mini 2[38]

     

    February 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Beam (i8520)[39]

     

    March 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Pocket[40]

     

    April 2012

    Samsung Galaxy S Advance[41]

     

    May 2012

    Samsung Galaxy S III (GT-i9300)[42]

     

    May 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Appeal (SGH-I827)

     

    July 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Stellar (SCH-I200)

     

    August 2012

    Samsung Galaxy S Duos

     

    September 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Victory 4G LTE (SPH-L300)

     

    September 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Reverb (SPH-M950)

     

    September 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Rush (SPH-M830)

     

    October 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Express (SGH-I437)

     

    October 2012

    Samsung Galaxy Rugby Pro (SGH-I547)

     

    November 2012

    Samsung Galaxy S III Mini (GT-I8190)[43]


     


     


    Imagine if Apple strategy was like that, there would be an outrage and lawsuit flying toward Apple. 

Sign In or Register to comment.